ECOGRAF LIMITED • Latest drill results again surpass all the recently announced intersections with 53m at
14.0%TGC and 54m at 8.6%TGC, including 19m at 10.4% TGC.• JORC Mineral Resource upgrade close to completion.
• Diamond drilling to commence shortly with aim to further optimise processing flowsheet
Kibaran Resources Limited (ASX: KNL) is pleased to report the final batch of results from the recent Reverse Circulation (RC) drill programme at its Epanko deposit within the Mahenge Graphite Project in Tanzania.All drill holes again intersected high-grade, premium large flake graphite mineralisation, with the majority encountering graphite mineralisation from surface to the end of hole. The latest results complement earlier assays that delivered significant intersections and high-grade graphite with intersected grades as high as 20.1% Total Graphitic Carbon (TGC). The drill programme doubled the strike length of Epanko graphite mineralisation to more than one kilometre providing significant upside potential to the size of the deposit.
An upgrade of the existing JORC Inferred Mineral Resource [14.9Mt at 10.5% Total Graphitic Carbon (TGC) for
1,560,000t of contained graphite] to an Indicated/Measured category is underway (refer figure 1 and note 1).
Standout RC drill results include:- 30m at 8.2% TGC from 8m (MHRC062), including
8m at 12.2% TGC- 54m at 8.6% TGC from 9m (MHRC063), including
19m at 10.4% TGC- 53m at 14.0% TGC from 15m (MHRC064), including;
[Full results are outlined in Table 1]
Kibaran's Executive Director, Andrew Spinks commented:
"These final results have again met Kibaran's expectations in respect of graphite quality. Importantly, they allow the geological modelling to be completed in terms of grade estimation and the subsequent delivery of the resource upgrade and scoping study.
The Company is now initiating a diamond drilling program for the purpose of providing larger scale samples for further metallurgical test work to further define the optimum processing flowsheet. Testwork will include comminution tests to determine work indexes for crushing and milling sizing and design as well as provide geomechanical information for pit design: the results of which will be ultimately used in the Epanko Feasibility Study."
The latest results support previous intersections that include:
- 78m at 8.0% TGC from surface (MHRC036), including;
42m at 10.2% TGC- 39m at 11.3% TGC from 2m (MHRC048), including;
12m at 14.5% TGC- 40m at 9.2% TGC from 8m (MHRC050), including;
13m at 11.4% TGC- 28m at 13.8% TGC from 14m (MHRC052), including;
18m at 17.0% TGC 7m at 20.1% TGC- 22m at 12.3% TGC from 12m (MHRC053), including
12m at 15.5% TGC(Refer ASX announcements dated 18 June, 30 June, 14 July and 21 July 2014)
Page 1
Page 2
Hole_ID N E Dip Azi Depth (m) From
(m)
To
(m)
Interval (m) Grade (%TGC)MHRC031 | 904328 | 9035506 | -60 | 270 | 80 | 0 | 80 | 80 | 5.3 |
MHRC032 | 904222 | 9035151 | -60 | 270 | 50 | 0 | 18 | 18 | 9.7 |
MHRC033 | 904225 | 9035150 | -70 | 90 | 50 | 0 | 32 | 32 | 9.3 |
Includes | 14 | 30 | 16 | 10.3 | |||||
MHRC034 | 904227 | 9035197 | -60 | 270 | 41 | 0 | 16 | 16 | 10.3 |
MHRC035 | 904232 | 9035198 | -90 | 90 | 65 | 0 | 56 | 56 | 8.8 |
Includes | 6 | 13 | 7 | 10.3 | |||||
Includes | 18 |
MHRC058 904283 9035101 -60 270 50 0 52 | 52 6.6 |
Includes 12 38 | 26 7.6 |
MHRC059 904265 9034952 -60 270 50 0 40 | 40 7.1 |
MHRC060 904360 9034380 -60 270 60 24 55 | 31 5.0 |
MHRC061 904410 9034380 -60 270 120 44 87 | 43 4.9 |
and 106 124 | 18 7.3 |
MHRC062 904260 9035451 -60 270 50 8 38 | 30 8.2 |
Includes 8 16 | 8 12.2 |
MHRC063 905044 9035789 -90 270 71 9 63 | 54 8.6 |
Includes 9 28 | 19 10.4 |
MHRC064 905044 9035738 -90 270 65 15 68 | 53 14.0 |
Notes for Table 1
All total graphite carbon ("TGC") analysis undertaken by LECO at independent commercial laboratory SGS in
Johannesburg, South Africa. RC Samples collected over 1 metre intervals using an industry standard 3 tier riffle splitter. Minimum intersection width 2 metres with internal waste of no more than 2 metres. Downhole lengths are reported, as true width is unknown. Azimuths are referenced to local grid. No top cut has been applied and intersection grade rounded to 1 decimal figure. Drill hole coordinates referenced to local grid WGS84 UTM36S.
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
Sampling techniques | • Nature and quality of sampling (eg 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 (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g 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 (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. | • The Epanko deposit was sampled by reverse circulation (RC) holes. • Sampling is guided by Kibaran's protocols and QA/QC procedures • RC samples are collected by a riffle splitter using a face sampling hammer diameter approximately 140 mm. • All samples were sent SGS labora- tory in Johannesburg for prepara- tion and LECO analyses. • All samples are crushed using LM2 mill to -4 mm and pulverised to nominal 80% passing -75 μm. • Diamond core (if competent) is cut using a core saw. Where the mate- rial is too soft it is left in the tray and a knife is used to quarter the core for sampling. • Trenches were sampled at 0.5m intervals, these intervals were speared and submitted for anal- yses. |
Drilling techniques | • Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg 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). | • RC holes were drilled in a direction so as to hit the mineralisation or- thogonally. Face sample hammers were used and all samples collect- ed dry and riffle split after passing through the cyclone. • Diamond drilling was drilled as triple Tubed HQ diameter core. |
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. | • The RC rig sampling systems are routinely cleaned to minimize the opportunity for contamination; drill- ing methods are focused on sample quality. • The selection of RC drilling compa- ny, having a water drilling back- ground enables far greater control on any water present in the system, ensuring wet samples were kept to a minimum. |
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. | • Geological logging is completed for all holes and representative across the deposit. • Logged data is both qualitative and quantitative depending on field be- ing logged. • All drill holes are logged. |
Sub-sampling techniques and | • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. | • All RC samples are split using a riffle splitter mounted under the cy- |
Page 4
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
sample preparation
• 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.
clone, RC samples are drilled dry.
• A small fraction of samples re- turned to the surface wet. All sam- ples were submitted for assay
• Diamond core was cut on core saw and quarter core submitted for analyses.
• Sample preparation at the SGS laboratory involves the original sample being dried at 80° for up to
24 hours and weighed on submis-
sion to laboratory. Crushing to nom- inal -4 mm. Sample is split to less than 2 kg through linear splitter and excess retained. Sample splits are weighed at a frequency of 1/20 and entered into the job results file. Pul- verising is completed using LM2
mill to 90% passing -75 μm.
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 determin- ing the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.
• Drill samples were sent to the SGS Laboratory at Mwanza (Tanzania) for sample preparation, with the pulps sent to SGS Johannesburg for assaying. The following meth- odology is used by SGS for Total Graphitic Carbon (TGC) analyses.
• Total carbon is measured using LECO technique. The sample is combusted in the oxygen atmos- phere and the IR used to measure the amount of CO2 produced. The calibration of the LECO instrument is done by using certified reference materials.
• For the analysis of Graphitic Car- bon, a 0.3g sample is weighed and roasted at 550oC to remove any organic carbon. The sample is then heated with diluted hydrochloric ac- id to remove carbonates. After cool- ing the sample is filtered and the residue rinsed and dried at 75oC prior to analysis by the LECO in- strument. The analyses by LECO are done by total combustion of sample in the oxygen atmosphere and using IR absorption from the resulting CO2 produced.
• Laboratory certificates were sent via email from the assay laboratory to Kibaran. The assay data was provided to CSA in the form of Mi- crosoft XL files and assay laborato- ry certificates. The files were im- ported into Datamine.
• Standards are inserted at approxi- mately a 10% frequency rate. In addition, field duplicates, laboratory duplicates are collectively inserted at a rate of 10% QAQC data analy- sis has been completed to industry standards. .
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.
• Senior Kibaran geological person- nel supervised the sampling, and alternative personnel verified the sampling locations.
• Previous drilling has twinned holes
• Primary data are captured on paper in the field and then re-entered into spreadsheet format by the super- vising geologist, to then be loaded into the company's database.
• No adjustments are made to any assay data.
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.
• Sample locations pickedup by hand held GPS.
• WGS84 Zone 36 South
• No coordinate transformation was applied to the data.
• Downhole surveys collected by multi-shot camera,
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 classifica-
Page 5
• Spacings are sufficient for Mineral Resource has been estimated with the available data.
• Drill hole locations are at a nominal
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
tions applied.
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
50 m (Y) by 25 m (X) spacings.
• Data spacing and distribution are sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity.
• No compositing has been applied to exploration data.
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.
• All holes have been orientated towards an azimuth so as to be able intersect the graphitic mineral- isation in a perpendicular manner.
• RC holes were drilled at variable dips to define the geology and con- tacts of the deposit.
• Some holes were dtrilled vertical to test contact positions.
Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. • Samples were stored at the com- pany's secure field camp prior to dispatch to the prep lab by contact- ed transport company, who main- tained security of the samples.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • No audits or reviews of sampling or results have been conducted to date.
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
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, wil- derness 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 tenements are 100% owned by Kibaran wholly owned subsidiary and are within granted and live pro- specting licenses. • The Mahenge project consists of PL 8204/2012 |
Exploration done by other parties | • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. | • Historical reports exist for the project area as the region was first recognised for graphite potential in 1914 and 1959. • No recent information exists. |
Geology | • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. | • The Mahange Project is hosted within a quartz-feldspar-carbonate graphitic schist, part of a Neoprote- rozoic metasediment package, in- cluding marble and gneissic units. two zones of graphitic schist have been mapped. |
Drill hole Information | • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabula- tion of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o 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. | • Sample and drill hole coordinates are provided in body of report. |
Data aggregation methods | • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg 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. | • No high-grade cuts were neces- sary. • Aggregating was made for intervals that reported over 1% TGC (Total graphitic carbon). The purpose of this is to report intervals that may be significant to future metallurgical work. • There is no implication about economic significance. Intervals re- porting above 8% TGC are intend- ed to highlight a significant higher grade component of graphite, there is no implication of economic signif- icance. • No equivalents were used. |
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 down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known'). | • All RC holes have been orientated towards an azimuth so as to be able intersect the graphitic mineral- isation orthogonally • Given dip variations are mapped down hole length are reported, true |
Page 6
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
width not known'
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.
• See main body of report.
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.
• Results presented in report.
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 charac- teristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
• Field mapping was conducted first to define the geological boundaries of the graphitic schist with other geological formations.
Further work • The nature and scale of planned further work (eg 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 interpreta- tions and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.
• Diamond drilling is planned to be completed for further metallurgical testwork
About Kibaran Resources Limited:
Kibaran Resources Limited (ASX: KNL or "Kibaran") is an exploration company with highly prospective graphite and nickel projects located in Tanzania.
The Company's primary focus is on its 100%-owned Epanko deposit, located within the Mahenge Graphite Project. Epanko currently has an Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate of 14.9Mt, grading 10.5% TGC, for 1.56Mt of contained graphite, defined in accordance with the JORC Code. This initial estimate only covers 20% of the project area. Metallurgy has found Epanko graphite to be large flake and expandable in nature.
Kibaran also has rights to the Merelani-Arusha Graphite Project, located in the north-east of Tanzania. Merelani- Arusha is also considered to be highly prospective for commercial graphite.
Graphite is regarded as a critical material for future global industrial growth, destined for industrial and technology applications including nuclear reactors, lithium-ion battery manufacturing and a source of graphene.
In addition, the Kagera Nickel Project remains underexplored and is located along strike of the Kabanga nickel deposit, owned be Xstrata, which is considered to be the largest undeveloped, high grade nickel sulphide deposit in the world.
1 "This information was prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported."
For further information, please contact: Company Secretary Robert Hodby Kibaran ResourcesP: + 61 8 6380 1003
Investor/Media Relations Rebecca Lawson M&C PartnersP: +61 2 8916 6124
E: rebecca.lawson@mcpartners.com.au
The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results, Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Mr Andrew Spinks, who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy included in a list promulgated by the ASX from time to time. Andrew Spinks is a director of Kibaran Resources Limited and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2004 and 2012 Edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves". Andrew Spinks consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.
Page 7
|
distributed by
|
