19 March
2024
Further Broad and High-Grade
Drill Intersections
Resource
Extension Drilling Results
Ewoyaa Lithium
Project, Ghana, West Africa
69m at
1.25% Li2O from 45m returned at Dog-Leg target, outside
of current MRE1
Atlantic Lithium Limited (AIM: ALL, ASX: A11, OTCQX: ALLIF,
"Atlantic Lithium" or the "Company"), the African-focused lithium
exploration and development company targeting to deliver Ghana's
first lithium mine, is pleased to announce further broad and
high-grade assay results from resource drilling completed at the
Company's flagship Ewoyaa Lithium Project ("Ewoyaa" or the
"Project") in Ghana, West Africa.
Highlights:
- Further
assay results received for 2,514m of extensional resource reverse
circulation ("RC") drilling completed at the Dog-Leg target,
representing the final results from drilling undertaken in 2023,
with a total of 25,898m drilled throughout the year.
- Multiple
high-grade and broad extensional drill intersections reported at
the new Dog-Leg target outside of the current 35.3Mt @ 1.25%
Li2O JORC (2012) compliant Ewoyaa Mineral Resource
Estimate1 ("MRE" or the "Resource"), including
highlights at a 0.4% Li2O cut-off and a maximum 4m of
internal dilution of:
o GRC1024: 69m at 1.25% Li2O
from 45m
o GRC1027: 34m at 1.02% Li2O
from 160m
o GRC1024: 22m at 0.85% Li2O
from 141m
o GRC1030: 16m at 1.08% Li2O
from 111m
o GRC1032: 12m at 1.11% Li2O
from 83m
- Results
at Dog-Leg are significant; drilling has intersected shallow
dipping, near surface mineralised pegmatite bodies with true
thicknesses up to 35m outside of the MRE1, proving
potential for significant resource growth.
-
The Company is advancing the
drilling programme to be undertaken in 2024:
o Plant site sterilisation drilling now completed
for a total of 3,177m in 21 holes, with no mineralisation
intersected, providing confidence in the proposed plant site
location.
o A
further 804m of RC drilling and 70m of diamond core drilling
recently completed at Dog-Leg, with assay results
pending.
o Further resource extension and exploration
drilling planned alongside ongoing regional exploration.
-
MRE upgrade, for both lithium and
feldspar, to incorporate all 2023 and 2024 drilling, targeted for
H2 2024.
Commenting on the Company's latest progress, Neil Herbert,
Executive Chairman of Atlantic Lithium,
said:
"The final assay results from drilling completed in 2023 have
again delivered impressive intersections, providing further
confidence in the growth potential of the current 35.3Mt @ 1.25%
Li2O Resource at the Ewoyaa Lithium
Project.
"These results are from the new mineralised area at the
Dog-Leg target, located on the northern tip of the Ewoyaa Main
deposit, outside of the current MRE, where drilling has returned
multiple high-grade and broad near surface extensional
intersections, including 69m at 1.25% Li2O from 45m.
This follows the intersection of 83m at 1% Li2O from 36m
in hole GRC1020 reported at Dog-Leg last month.
"On
the back of the encouraging results delivered from drilling
completed in 2023 at Dog-Leg, we are excited to have recently
completed a further 874m of resource extension drilling at the
target as part of our resource growth programme for 2024. We look
forward to receiving further drilling results and delivering a MRE
upgrade for the Project, targeted for H2 2024. The MRE upgrade will
include updates to both the lithium and feldspar and incorporate
all of the results received from drilling completed in 2023 and
results pending for 2024.
"In
addition, we are pleased to have recently completed the plant site
sterilisation programme without any surprises, allowing us to
continue with our mine site designs and
permitting.
"We
look forward to updating shareholders on our ongoing
progress."
New Drilling Results
Further and final assay results have been received for
2,514m of RC drilling from drilling completed in 2023 at the Ewoyaa
Lithium Project. A total of 25,898m of drilling in 157 holes were
completed throughout the year; all of which have now been reported.
In these latest results, broad high-grade and near surface
extensional drilling results have been reported at the new Dog-Leg
target. The reported results sit outside of the current
MRE1 (refer
Table 1, Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Appendix 1 and Appendix 2).
Drilling aimed to intersect mineralised pegmatite
bodies perpendicular to strike and dip to approximate true width.
This is not always achieved due to the variable nature of
pegmatites or challenging drill access, with some drill
intersections drilled down-dip as apparent widths. Accordingly,
estimated true widths are included in the intersections table in
Appendix 1.
Table 1:
Drill intersection highlights at greater than 5 Li x m, reported at
a 0.4% Li2O cut-off and maximum of 4m of
internal dilution
|
Hole_ID
|
From_m
|
To_m
|
Interval_m
|
Hole
depth_m
|
Li2O%
|
Intersection
|
metal content Li x
m
|
Hole
Purpose
|
Deposit
|
|
GRC1024
|
45
|
114
|
69
|
250
|
1.25
|
GRC1024:
69m at 1.25% Li2O from 45m
|
86.25
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
160
|
194
|
34
|
230
|
1.02
|
GRC1027:
34m at 1.02% Li2O from 160m
|
34.68
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
141
|
163
|
22
|
250
|
0.85
|
GRC1024:
22m at 0.85% Li2O from 141m
|
18.78
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1030
|
111
|
127
|
16
|
200
|
1.08
|
GRC1030:
16m at 1.08% Li2O from 111m
|
17.27
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1032
|
83
|
95
|
12
|
180
|
1.11
|
GRC1032:
12m at 1.11% Li2O from 83m
|
13.29
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1033
|
113
|
126
|
13
|
160
|
0.65
|
GRC1033:
13m at 0.65% Li2O from 113m
|
8.48
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
122
|
127
|
5
|
250
|
1.31
|
GRC1025: 5m
at 1.31% Li2O from 122m
|
6.54
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
123
|
129
|
6
|
250
|
1.00
|
GRC1024: 6m
at 1% Li2O from 123m
|
6.00
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
203
|
208
|
5
|
230
|
1.13
|
GRC1027: 5m
at 1.13% Li2O from 203m
|
5.65
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
138
|
143
|
5
|
180
|
1.07
|
GRC1031: 5m
at 1.07% Li2O from 138m
|
5.35
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
45
|
114
|
69
|
250
|
1.25
|
GRC1024:
69m at 1.25% Li2O from 45m
|
86.25
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
160
|
194
|
34
|
230
|
1.02
|
GRC1027:
34m at 1.02% Li2O from 160m
|
34.68
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
141
|
163
|
22
|
250
|
0.85
|
GRC1024:
22m at 0.85% Li2O from 141m
|
18.78
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1030
|
111
|
127
|
16
|
200
|
1.08
|
GRC1030:
16m at 1.08% Li2O from 111m
|
17.27
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1032
|
83
|
95
|
12
|
180
|
1.11
|
GRC1032:
12m at 1.11% Li2O from 83m
|
13.29
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
Note:
Metal content is
based on intercept rather than estimated true
width
New drilling at the Dog-Leg target (refer announcement of 28 November 2023) has delivered
broad and high-grade drill intersections, some of which occur near
surface and all occurring outside of the current MRE1.
Highlights include hole GRC1024: 69m at 1.25% Li2O from
45m and hole GRC1027: 34m at 1.02% Li2O from 160m (refer
Figure 1,
Figure 2 and
Figure 3).
The results are significant in that an apparent
shallow dipping mineralised pegmatite body has been intersected in
multiple drill holes with true widths of 20m to 35m which has the
potential to add significant near surface resource tonnes.
Figure 1: Location of reported assay results with
highlight drill intersections on transparent topography
background
Figure 2: Cross-section A-A' showing assay results
received for holes GRC1024, GRC1025, GRC1026, GRC1027 and GRC1028
at the Dog-Leg target
Figure 3: Cross-section B-B' showing assay results
received for holes GRC1030, GRC1031, GRC1032, GRC1033 and GRC1035
at the Dog-Leg target
Additionally, the Company has completed 3,177m of
sterilisation drilling in 21 holes at the proposed plant site. No
significant mineralisation was observed in drilling, providing
confidence in the proposed plant site location.
The Company has also completed a further 804m of RC
drilling and 70m of diamond resource extension drilling at the
Dog-Leg target with assays pending. The rig has now been
demobilised, with drilling planned to recommence in H2 2024.
Meanwhile, regional exploration programmes will
continue to advance the exploration project pipeline. The Company
will incorporate the results of drilling completed in 2023 and
results pending for 2024 into a MRE upgrade for the Project,
targeted during H2 2024.
Sample preparation was completed by Intertek Ghana and
assay by Intertek Perth, with all reported results passing QA/QC
protocols, providing confidence in reported results.
End note
1 Ore Reserves, Mineral
Resources and Production Targets
The information in this announcement
that relates to Ore Reserves, Mineral Resources and Production
Targets complies with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves (JORC Code). The information in this announcement relating
to the Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") of 35.3Mt @ 1.25%
Li2O for Ewoyaa is extracted from the Company's
announcement dated 1 February 2023, which is available at
atlanticlithium.com.au.
The MRE includes a total of 3.5Mt @ 1.37% Li2O in the
Measured category, 24.5Mt @ 1.25% Li2O in the Indicated
category and 7.4Mt @ 1.16% Li2O in the Inferred
category. The Company confirms that all material assumptions and
technical parameters underpinning the Mineral Resource Estimate
continue to apply. Material assumptions for the Project have been
revised on grant of the Mining Lease for the Project, announced by
the Company on 20 October 2023. The Company it is not aware of any
new information or data that materially affects the information
included in this announcement or the announcements dated 1 February
2023 and 20 October 2023.
Competent Persons
Information in this report relating
to the exploration results is based on data reviewed by Mr Lennard
Kolff (MEcon. Geol., BSc. Hons ARSM), Chief Geologist of the
Company. Mr Kolff is a Member of the Australian Institute of
Geoscientists who has in excess of 20 years' experience in mineral
exploration and is a Qualified Person under the AIM Rules. Mr Kolff
consents to the inclusion of the information in the form and
context in which it appears.
Information in this report relating
to Mineral Resources was compiled by Shaun Searle, a Member of the
Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Searle has
sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the
activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as
defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting
of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves' and is
a Qualified Person under the AIM Rules. Mr Searle is a director of
Ashmore. Ashmore and the Competent Person are independent of the
Company and other than being paid fees for services in compiling
this report, neither has any financial interest (direct or
contingent) in the Company. Mr Searle consents to the inclusion in
the report of the matters based upon the information in the form
and context in which it appears.
This announcement contains inside
information for the purposes of Article 7 of the Market Abuse
Regulation (EU) 596/2014 as it forms part of UK domestic law by
virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 ("MAR"), and is
disclosed in accordance with the Company's obligations under
Article 17 of MAR.
For any further information, please
contact:
Atlantic Lithium Limited
Neil Herbert (Executive Chairman)
Amanda Harsas (Finance Director and Company
Secretary)
|
|
www.atlanticlithium.com.au
|
|
|
IR@atlanticlithium.com.au
|
|
|
Tel: +61 2 8072
0640
|
|
SP
Angel Corporate Finance LLP
Nominated Adviser
Jeff Keating
Charlie Bouverat
Tel: +44 (0)20 3470 0470
|
Yellow Jersey PR Limited
Charles
Goodwin
Bessie
Elliot
atlantic@yellowjerseypr.com
Tel: +44 (0)20 3004
9512
|
Canaccord Genuity Limited
Financial Adviser:
Raj Khatri (UK) /
Duncan St John, Christian
Calabrese (Australia)
Corporate Broking:
James
Asensio
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7523
4500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to Editors:
About Atlantic
Lithium
www.atlanticlithium.com.au
Atlantic Lithium is an AIM and ASX-listed lithium
company advancing its flagship project, the Ewoyaa Lithium Project,
a significant lithium spodumene pegmatite discovery in Ghana,
through to production to become the country's first
lithium-producing mine.
The Definitive Feasibility Study for the Project
indicates the production of 3.6Mt of spodumene concentrate over a
12-year mine life, making it one of the largest spodumene
concentrate mines in the world.
The Project, which was awarded a Mining Lease in
October 2023, is being developed under an earn-in agreement with
Piedmont Lithium Inc.
Atlantic Lithium holds a portfolio of lithium projects
within 509km2 and 774km2 of granted and
under-application tenure across Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire
respectively, which, in addition to the Project, comprises
significantly under-explored, highly prospective licences.
Appendix 1 New drill
intersections reported in hole ID order, reported at a 0.4%
Li2O cut-off and maximum
4m of internal dilution
|
Hole_ID
|
From_m
|
To_m
|
Interval_m
|
Est. true
thick_m
|
Hole
depth_m
|
Li2O%
|
Intersection
|
Comment
|
metal content Li x
m
|
Hole
Purpose
|
Deposit
|
|
GRC1024
|
0
|
45
|
45
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
45
|
114
|
69
|
35
|
250
|
1.25
|
GRC1024:
69m at 1.25% Li2O from 45m
|
|
86.25
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
114
|
116
|
2
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
120
|
123
|
3
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
123
|
129
|
6
|
3
|
250
|
1.00
|
GRC1024: 6m
at 1% Li2O from 123m
|
|
6.00
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
129
|
136
|
7
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
141
|
163
|
22
|
10
|
250
|
0.85
|
GRC1024:
22m at 0.85% Li2O from 141m
|
|
18.78
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
163
|
167
|
4
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
168
|
170
|
2
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1024
|
186
|
189
|
3
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
2
|
23
|
21
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
23
|
24
|
1
|
-
|
250
|
0.45
|
GRC1025: 1m
at 0.45% Li2O from 23m
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
0.45
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
24
|
45
|
21
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
45
|
47
|
2
|
-
|
250
|
0.79
|
GRC1025: 2m
at 0.79% Li2O from 45m
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
1.57
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
47
|
52
|
5
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
96
|
100
|
4
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
103
|
104
|
1
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
104
|
107
|
3
|
-
|
250
|
0.72
|
GRC1025: 3m
at 0.72% Li2O from 104m
|
|
2.16
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
107
|
111
|
4
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
112
|
122
|
10
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
122
|
127
|
5
|
2
|
250
|
1.31
|
GRC1025: 5m
at 1.31% Li2O from 122m
|
|
6.54
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
127
|
130
|
3
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
155
|
156
|
1
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
157
|
160
|
3
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
160
|
162
|
2
|
-
|
250
|
0.73
|
GRC1025: 2m
at 0.73% Li2O from 160m
|
|
1.46
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
170
|
174
|
4
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
178
|
180
|
2
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
180
|
182
|
2
|
-
|
250
|
0.48
|
GRC1025: 2m
at 0.48% Li2O from 180m
|
|
0.95
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
195
|
198
|
3
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
208
|
218
|
10
|
-
|
250
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
9
|
14
|
5
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
16
|
18
|
2
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
47
|
48
|
1
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
90
|
93
|
3
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
93
|
97
|
4
|
|
284
|
0.74
|
GRC1026: 4m
at 0.74% Li2O from 93m
|
|
2.95
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
97
|
102
|
5
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
102
|
108
|
6
|
3
|
284
|
0.68
|
GRC1026: 6m
at 0.68% Li2O from 102m
|
|
4.07
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
108
|
110
|
2
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
136
|
140
|
4
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
143
|
144
|
1
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
224
|
232
|
8
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
262
|
268
|
6
|
-
|
284
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
122
|
134
|
12
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
134
|
136
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
0.47
|
GRC1027: 2m
at 0.47% Li2O from 134m
|
|
0.93
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
136
|
137
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
139
|
141
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
141
|
142
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
0.52
|
GRC1027: 1m
at 0.52% Li2O from 141m
|
|
0.52
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
142
|
145
|
3
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
148
|
149
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
0.80
|
GRC1027: 1m
at 0.8% Li2O from 148m
|
|
0.80
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
149
|
154
|
5
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
154
|
155
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
0.73
|
GRC1027: 1m
at 0.73% Li2O from 154m
|
|
0.73
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
155
|
160
|
5
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
160
|
194
|
34
|
25
|
230
|
1.02
|
GRC1027:
34m at 1.02% Li2O from 160m
|
|
34.68
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
201
|
203
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
203
|
208
|
5
|
2.5
|
230
|
1.13
|
GRC1027: 5m
at 1.13% Li2O from 203m
|
|
5.65
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
208
|
210
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
214
|
215
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
217
|
219
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
122
|
128
|
6
|
3
|
200
|
0.44
|
GRC1028: 6m
at 0.44% Li2O from 122m
|
|
2.64
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
128
|
131
|
3
|
-
|
200
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
160
|
161
|
1
|
-
|
200
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
168
|
170
|
2
|
-
|
200
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
170
|
171
|
1
|
-
|
200
|
0.54
|
GRC1028: 1m
at 0.54% Li2O from 170m
|
|
0.54
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
171
|
186
|
15
|
-
|
200
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
21
|
39
|
18
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
40
|
42
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
43
|
44
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
44
|
45
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
0.83
|
GRC1029: 1m
at 0.83% Li2O from 44m
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
0.83
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
45
|
52
|
7
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
54
|
55
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
56
|
59
|
3
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
62
|
65
|
3
|
-
|
230
|
1.25
|
GRC1029: 3m
at 1.25% Li2O from 62m
|
|
3.76
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
68
|
70
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
71
|
76
|
5
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
76
|
77
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
0.70
|
GRC1029: 1m
at 0.7% Li2O from 76m
|
|
0.70
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
77
|
78
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
85
|
86
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
125
|
126
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
157
|
160
|
3
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
164
|
167
|
3
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
171
|
173
|
2
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
176
|
177
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
200
|
204
|
4
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
207
|
208
|
1
|
-
|
230
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1030
|
111
|
127
|
16
|
8
|
200
|
1.08
|
GRC1030:
16m at 1.08% Li2O from 111m
|
|
17.27
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1030
|
127
|
133
|
6
|
-
|
200
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
126
|
127
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
127
|
130
|
3
|
-
|
180
|
1.10
|
GRC1031: 3m
at 1.1% Li2O from 127m
|
|
3.29
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
130
|
131
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
132
|
138
|
6
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
138
|
143
|
5
|
2.5
|
180
|
1.07
|
GRC1031: 5m
at 1.07% Li2O from 138m
|
|
5.35
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
145
|
147
|
2
|
-
|
180
|
0.88
|
GRC1031: 2m
at 0.88% Li2O from 145m
|
|
1.76
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
147
|
148
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1032
|
83
|
95
|
12
|
6
|
180
|
1.11
|
GRC1032:
12m at 1.11% Li2O from 83m
|
|
13.29
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1032
|
95
|
98
|
3
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1032
|
99
|
100
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1033
|
72
|
73
|
1
|
-
|
160
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1033
|
111
|
113
|
2
|
-
|
160
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1033
|
113
|
126
|
13
|
10
|
160
|
0.65
|
GRC1033:
13m at 0.65% Li2O from 113m
|
|
8.48
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1033
|
126
|
129
|
3
|
-
|
160
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
67
|
70
|
3
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
84
|
86
|
2
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
114
|
115
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
144
|
145
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
145
|
146
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
0.46
|
GRC1034: 1m
at 0.46% Li2O from 145m
|
|
0.46
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
146
|
147
|
1
|
-
|
180
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
30
|
32
|
2
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
33
|
36
|
3
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
36
|
37
|
1
|
-
|
170
|
0.43
|
GRC1035: 1m
at 0.43% Li2O from 36m
|
weathered
pegmatite
|
0.43
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
40
|
44
|
4
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
44
|
45
|
1
|
-
|
170
|
1.13
|
GRC1035: 1m
at 1.13% Li2O from 44m
|
|
1.13
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
45
|
46
|
1
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
84
|
86
|
2
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
137
|
138
|
1
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
138
|
139
|
1
|
-
|
170
|
0.68
|
GRC1035: 1m
at 0.68% Li2O from 138m
|
|
0.68
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
139
|
140
|
1
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
141
|
145
|
4
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
153
|
155
|
2
|
-
|
170
|
|
no
significant intersections
|
|
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
Note
1: Metal content is based on
intercept rather than estimated true width
Note 2: Estimated true width only
included for mineralised intersections greater than
4m
Appendix 2 Newly reported drill hole
collar locations
|
Hole_ID
|
Hole
depth_m
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
Elevation
|
Dip
|
Hole
Azimuth
|
Hole
Purpose
|
Deposit
|
|
GRC1024
|
250
|
715754
|
579714
|
25.64
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1025
|
250
|
715785
|
579698
|
30.57
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1026
|
284
|
715726
|
579741
|
25.43
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1027
|
230
|
715687
|
579761
|
26.74
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1028
|
200
|
715660
|
579780
|
29.24
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1029
|
230
|
715697
|
579682
|
31.12
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1030
|
200
|
715768
|
579856
|
46.48
|
-50
|
125
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1031
|
180
|
715838
|
579832
|
34.80
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1032
|
180
|
715835
|
579826
|
35.20
|
-90
|
0
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1033
|
160
|
715765
|
579858
|
46.30
|
-90
|
0
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1034
|
180
|
715787
|
579897
|
47.15
|
-90
|
0
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
|
GRC1035
|
170
|
715679
|
579886
|
35.09
|
-50
|
305
|
Resource
Drilling
|
Dog-Leg
|
Note:
Grid references
reported in projection UTM, WGS84, Zone 30N
The following extract from the JORC Code 2012 Table 1
is provided for compliance with the Code requirements for the
reporting of Exploration Results.
JORC Code Table 1: Section 1 Sampling Techniques and
Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding
sections).
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Sampling
techniques
|
· Nature and quality of
sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised
industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals
under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld
XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as
limiting the broad meaning of sampling.
· Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample
representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement
tools or systems used.
· Aspects of the
determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public
Report.
· In cases where
'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively
simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1m
samples from which 3kg was pulverised to produce a 30g charge for
fire assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such
as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine
nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
|
· RC drill holes were
routinely sampled at 1m intervals with a nominal 3-6kg sub-sample
split off for assay using a rig-mounted cone splitter at 1m
intervals.
· DD holes were quarter
core sampled at 1m intervals or to geological contacts for
geochemical analysis.
· For assaying, splits
from all prospective ore zones (i.e. logged pegmatites +/-
interburden) were sent for assay. Outside of these zones, the
splits were composited to 4m using a portable riffle splitter.
· Holes without pegmatite
were not assayed.
· Approximately 5% of all
samples submitted were standards and coarse blanks. Blanks were
typically inserted with the interpreted ore zones after the
drilling was completed.
· Approximately 2.5% of
samples submitted were duplicate samples collected after logging
using a riffle splitter and sent to an umpire laboratory. This
ensured zones of interest were duplicated and not missed during
alternative routine splitting of the primary sample.
· Prior to the December
2018 - SGS Tarkwa was used for sample preparation (PRP100) and
subsequently forwarded to SGS Johannesburg for analysis; and later
SGS Vancouver for analysis (ICP90A).
· Post December 2018 to
present - Intertek Tarkwa was used for sample preparation
(SP02/SP12) and subsequently forwarded to Intertek Perth for
analysis (FP6/MS/OES - 21 element combination
Na2O2 fusion with combination OES/MS).
· ALS Laboratory in
Brisbane was used for the Company's initial due diligence work
programmes and was selected as the umpire laboratory since Phase 1.
ALS conducts ME-ICP89, with a Sodium Peroxide Fusion.
Detection limits for lithium are 0.01-10%. Sodium Peroxide fusion
is considered a "total" assay technique for lithium. In addition,
22 additional elements assayed with Na2O2
fusion, and combination MS/ICP analysis.
|
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Drilling
techniques
|
· Drill type (e.g. core,
reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger,
Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or
standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other
type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method,
etc.).
|
· Six phases of drilling
were undertaken at the Project using RC and DD techniques.
All the RC drilling used face sampling hammers.
· Phase 1 and 2
programmes used a 5.25 inch hammers while Phase 3 used a 5.75-inch
hammer.
· All DD holes were
completed using PQ and HQ core from surface (85mm and 63.5mm).
· All DD holes were
drilled in conjunction with a Reflex ACT II tool; to provide an
accurate determination of the bottom-of-hole orientation.
· All fresh core was
orientated to allow for geological, structural and geotechnical
logging by a Company geologist.
|
|
Drill sample
recovery
|
· Method of recording and
assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.
· Measures taken to
maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the
samples.
· Whether a relationship
exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias
may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse
material.
|
· A semi-quantitative
estimate of sample recovery was completed for the vast majority of
drilling. This involved weighing both the bulk samples and
splits and calculating theoretical recoveries using assumed
densities. Where samples were not weighed, qualitative descriptions
of the sample size were recorded. Some sample loss was
recorded in the collaring of the RC drill holes.
· DD recoveries were
measured and recorded. Recoveries in excess of 95.8% have
been achieved for the DD drilling programme. Drill sample recovery
and quality is adequate for the drilling technique employed.
· The DD twin programme
has identified a positive grade bias for iron in the RC compared to
the DD results.
|
|
Logging
|
· Whether core and chip
samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level
of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation,
mining studies and metallurgical studies.
· Whether logging is
qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel,
etc.) photography.
· The total length and
percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
|
· All drill sample
intervals were geologically logged by Company geologists.
· Where appropriate,
geological logging recorded the abundance of specific minerals,
rock types and weathering using a standardised logging system that
captured preliminary metallurgical domains.
· All logging is
qualitative, except for the systematic collection of magnetic
susceptibility data which could be considered semi
quantitative.
· Strip logs have been
generated for each drill hole to cross-check geochemical data with
geological logging.
· A small sample of
washed RC drill material was retained in chip trays for future
reference and validation of geological logging, and sample reject
materials from the laboratory are stored at the Company's field
office.
· All drill holes have
been logged and reviewed by Company technical staff.
· The logging is of
sufficient detail to support the current reporting of a Mineral
Resource.
|
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Sub-sampling techniques and
sample preparation
|
· If core, whether cut or
sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.
· If non-core, whether
riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether sampled wet
or dry.
· For all sample types,
the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation
technique.
· Quality control
procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise
representivity of samples.
· Measures taken to
ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material
collected, including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
· Whether sample sizes
are appropriate to the grain size of the material being
sampled.
|
· RC samples were cone
split at the drill rig. For interpreted waste zones the 1 or
2m rig splits were later composited using a riffle splitter into 4m
composite samples.
· DD core was cut with a
core saw and selected half core samples dispatched to Nagrom
Laboratory in Perth for preliminary metallurgical test
work.
· The other half of the
core, including the bottom-of-hole orientation line, was retained
for geological reference.
· The remaining DD core
was quarter cored for geochemical analysis.
· Since December 2018,
samples were submitted to Intertek Tarkwa (SP02/SP12) for sample
preparation. Samples were weighed, dried and crushed to -2mm in a
Boyd crusher with an 800-1,200g rotary split, producing a nominal
1,500g split crushed sample; which was subsequently pulverised in a
LM2 ring mill. Samples were pulverised to a nominal 85%
passing 75µm. All the preparation equipment was flushed with
barren material prior to the commencement of the job. Coarse
reject material was kept in the original bag. Lab sizing
analysis was undertaken on a nominal 1:25 basis. Final pulverised
samples (20g) were airfreighted to Intertek in Perth for
assaying.
· The vast majority of
samples were drilled dry. Moisture content was logged
qualitatively. All intersections of the water table were
recorded in the database.
· Field sample duplicates
were taken to evaluate whether samples were representative and
understand repeatability, with good repeatability.
· Sample sizes and
laboratory preparation techniques were appropriate and industry
standard.
|
|
Quality of assay data and
laboratory tests
|
· The nature, quality and
appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and
whether the technique is considered partial or total.
· For geophysical tools,
spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., the parameters used
in determining the analysis including instrument make and model,
reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation,
etc.
· Nature of quality
control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates,
external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of
accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been
established.
|
· Analysis for lithium
and a suite of other elements for Phase 1 drilling was undertaken
at SGS Johannesburg / Vancouver by ICP-OES after Sodium Peroxide
Fusion. Detection limits for lithium (10ppm - 100,000ppm). Sodium
Peroxide fusion is considered a "total" assay technique for
lithium.
· Review of standards and
blanks from the initial submission to Johannesburg identified
failures (multiple standards reporting outside control limits). A
decision was made to resubmit this batch and all subsequent batches
to SGS Vancouver - a laboratory considered to have more experience
with this method of analysis and sample type.
· Results of analyses for
field sample duplicates are consistent with the style of
mineralisation and considered to be representative. Internal
laboratory QAQC checks are reported by the laboratory, including
sizing analysis to monitor preparation and internal laboratory
QA/QC. These were reviewed and retained in the company drill hole
database.
· 155 samples were sent
to an umpire laboratory (ALS) and/assayed using equivalent
techniques, with results demonstrating good repeatability.
· Atlantic Lithium's
review of QAQC suggests the SGS Vancouver and Intertek Perth
laboratories performed within acceptable limits.
· No geophysical methods
or hand-held XRF units have been used for determination of grades
in the Mineral Resource.
|
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Verification of sampling and
assaying
|
· The verification of
significant intersections by either independent or alternative
company personnel.
· The use of twinned
holes.
· Documentation of
primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data
storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
· Discuss any adjustment
to assay data.
|
· Significant
intersections were visually field verified by company geologists
and Shaun Searle of Ashmore during the 2019 site visit.
· Drill hole data was
compiled and digitally captured by Company geologists in the field.
Where hand-written information was recorded, all hardcopy records
were kept and archived after digitising.
· Phase 1 and 2 drilling
programmes were captured on paper or locked excel templates and
migrated to an MS Access database and then into Datashed (industry
standard drill hole database management software). The Phase
3 to 6 programmes were captured using LogChief which has inbuilt
data validation protocols. All analytical results were
transferred digitally and loaded into the database by a Datashed
consultant.
· The data was audited,
and any discrepancies checked by the Company personnel before being
updated in the database.
· Twin DD holes were
drilled to verify results of the RC drilling programmes. Results
indicate that there is iron contamination in the RC drilling
process.
· Reported drill hole
intercepts were compiled by the Chief Geologist.
· Adjustments to the
original assay data included converting Li ppm to
Li2O%.
|
|
Location of data
points
|
· Accuracy and quality of
surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys),
trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral
Resource estimation.
· Specification of the
grid system used.
· Quality and adequacy of
topographic control.
|
· The collar locations
were surveyed in WGS84 Zone 30 North using DGPS survey equipment,
which is accurate to 0.11mm in both horizontal and vertical
directions. All holes were surveyed by qualified
surveyors. Once validated, the survey data was uploaded into
Datashed.
· RC drill holes were
routinely down hole surveyed every 6m using a combination of EZ
TRAC 1.5 (single shot) and Reflex Gyroscopic tools.
· After the tenth drill
hole, the survey method was changed to Reflex Gyro survey with 6m
down hole data points measured during an end-of-hole survey.
· All Phase 2 and 3 drill
holes were surveyed initially using the Reflex Gyro tool, but later
using the more efficient Reflex SPRINT tool. Phase 4 and 5 drill
holes were surveyed using a Reflex SPRINT tool.
· LiDAR survey Southern
Mapping to produce rectified colour images and a digital terrain
model (DTM) 32km2, Aircraft C206 aircraft-mounted LiDAR
Riegl Q780 Camera Hasselblad H5Dc with 50mm Fixfocus lens.
· Coordinate system:
WGS84 UTM30N with accuracy to ±0.04.
· The topographic survey
and photo mosaic output from the survey is accurate to 20mm.
· Locational accuracy at
collar and down the drill hole is considered appropriate for
resource estimation purposes.
|
|
Data spacing and
distribution
|
· Data spacing for
reporting of Exploration Results.
· Whether the data
spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of
geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
· Whether sample
compositing has been applied.
|
· The RC holes were
initially drilled on 100m spaced sections and 50m hole spacings
orientated at 300° or 330° with dips ranging from -50° to -60°.
Planned hole orientations/dips were occasionally adjusted due to
pad and/or access constraints.
· Hole spacing was
reduced to predominantly 40m spaced sections and 40m hole spacings,
with infill to 20m by 15m in the upper portions of the Ewoyaa Main
deposit. Holes are generally angled perpendicular to interpreted
mineralisation orientations at the Project.
· Samples were composited
to 1m intervals prior to estimation.
|
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Orientation of data in
relation to geological structure
|
· Whether the orientation
of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and
the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit
type.
· If the relationship
between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key
mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling
bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
|
· The drill line and
drill hole orientation are oriented as close as practicable to
perpendicular to the orientation of the general mineralised
orientation.
· Most of the drilling
intersects the mineralisation at close to 90 degrees ensuring
intersections are representative of true widths. It is possible
that new geological interpretations and/or infill drilling
requirements may result in changes to drill orientations on future
programmes.
· No orientation based
sampling bias has been identified in the data.
|
|
Sample
security
|
· The measures taken to
ensure sample security.
|
· Samples were stored on
site prior to road transportation by Company personnel to the SGS
preparation laboratory.
· With the change of
laboratory to Intertek, samples were picked up by the contractor
and transported to the sample preparation facility in Tarkwa.
|
|
Audits or
reviews
|
· The results of any
audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.
|
· Prior to the drilling
programme, a third-party Project review was completed by an
independent consultant experienced with the style of
mineralisation.
· In addition, Shaun
Searle of Ashmore reviewed drilling and sampling procedures during
the 2019 site visit and found that all procedures and practices
conform to industry standards.
|
'JORC Code 2012 Table 1' Section 2 Reporting of Exploration
Results
(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply
to this section).
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Mineral tenement and land
tenure status
|
· Type, reference
name/number, location and ownership including agreements or
material issues with third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,
historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental
settings.
· The security of the
tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known
impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
|
· The Project covers two
contiguous licences the Mankessim (RL 3/55) and Mankessim South
(PL3/109) licence.
· The Mankessim is a
joint-venture, with the licence in the name of the joint-venture
party (Barari DV Ghana Limited). Document number: 0853652-18.
· The Project occurs
within a Mineral Prospecting licence and was renewed on the 27 July
2021 for a further three-year period, valid until 27 July 2024.
· The Mankessim South
licence is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Green Metals
Resources. The Mineral Prospecting licence renewal was
submitted in Nov 2022 for a further three-year period.
· The tenement is in good
standing with no known impediments.
· Mining Lease granted in
respect of the Project for a period of 15 years, effective 20
October 2023 until 19 October 2038, file number APL-M-93.
|
|
Exploration done by other
parties
|
· Acknowledgment and
appraisal of exploration by other parties.
|
· Historical trenching
and mapping were completed by the Ghana Geological survey during
the 1960s. But for some poorly referenced historical maps,
none of the technical data from this work was located. Many of the
historical trenches were located, cleaned and re-logged. No
historical drilling was completed.
|
|
Geology
|
· Deposit type,
geological setting and style of mineralisation.
|
· Pegmatite-hosted
lithium deposits are the target for exploration. This style of
mineralisation typically forms as dykes and sills intruding or in
proximity to granite source rocks.
· Surface geology within
the Project area typically consists of sequences of staurolite and
garnet-bearing pelitic schist and granite with lesser pegmatite and
mafic intrusives. Outcrops are typically sparse and confined to
ridge tops with colluvium and mottled laterite blanketing much of
the undulating terrain making geological mapping challenging.
The hills are often separated by broad, sandy drainages.
|
|
Drillhole
Information
|
· A summary of all
information material to the understanding of the exploration
results including a tabulation of the following information for all
Material drill holes:
· easting and northing of
the drill hole collar
· elevation or RL
(Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill
hole collar
· dip and azimuth of the
hole
· downhole length and
interception depth
· hole length
· If the exclusion of
this information is justified on the basis that the information is
not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly
explain why this is the case.
|
· No exploration results
are being reported.
· All information was
included in the appendices (of the Mineral Resource report). No
drill hole information were excluded (from the Mineral Resource
report).
|
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Data aggregation
methods
|
· In reporting
Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or
minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off
grades are usually Material and should be stated.
· Where aggregate
intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and
longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such
aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
· The assumptions used
for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly
stated.
|
· Exploration results are
not being reported.
· Not applicable as a
Mineral Resource is being reported.
· No metal equivalent
values are being reported.
|
|
Relationship between
mineralisation widths and intercept lengths
|
· These relationships are
particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.
· If the geometry of the
mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its
nature should be reported.
· If it is not known and
only the downhole lengths are reported, there should be a clear
statement to this effect (e.g. 'downhole length, true width not
known').
|
· The drill line and
drill hole orientation are oriented as close to 90° degrees to the
orientation of the anticipated mineralised orientation as
practicable.
· The majority of the
drilling intersects the mineralisation between 60° and 80°
degrees.
|
|
Diagrams
|
· Appropriate maps and
sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be
included for any significant discovery being reported. These should
include, but not be limited to, a plan view of drill hole collar
locations and appropriate sectional views.
|
· Relevant diagrams have
been included within the Mineral Resource report 'Ewoyaa Lithium
Project Mineral Resource Estimate' dated 25 March 2023.
|
|
Balanced
reporting
|
· Where comprehensive
reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable,
representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths
should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
|
· All hole collars were
surveyed WGS84 Zone 30 North grid using a differential GPS. All RC
and DD holes were down-hole surveyed with a north-seeking
gyroscopic tool.
· Exploration results are
not being reported.
|
|
Other substantive exploration
data
|
· Other exploration data,
if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not
limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results;
geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater,
geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or
contaminating substances.
|
· Results were estimated
from drill hole assay data, with geological logging used to aid
interpretation of mineralised contact positions.
· Geological observations
are included in the report.
|
|
Further
work
|
· The nature and scale of
planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth
extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).
· Diagrams clearly
highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main
geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this
information is not commercially sensitive.
|
· Follow up RC and DD
drilling may be undertaken.
· Further metallurgical
test work may be required as the Project progresses through the
study stages.
· Drill spacing is
currently considered adequate for the current level of
interrogation of the Project.
|
~end~