REG - First Tin PLC - Taronga Tin Project – Drilling Update
26/08/2025 07:00
For best results when printing this announcement, please click on link below:
https://newsfile.refinitiv.com/getnewsfile/v1/story?guid=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20250826:nRSZ4862Wa&default-theme=true
RNS Number : 4862W First Tin PLC 26 August 2025
26 August 2025
First Tin PLC
("First Tin" or "the Company")
Taronga Tin Project - Drilling Update
First Tin PLC, a tin development company with advanced, low capex projects in
Germany and Australia, is pleased to announce that its 100% owned subsidiary,
Taronga Mines Pty Ltd ("TMPL"), has received encouraging first tin assay
results from its ongoing infill and extension drilling programme in progress
at Taronga.
The drilling is designed to convert Inferred resources to Indicated status and
to test several interpreted zones of mineralisation close to the proposed pits
(refer to RNS dated 24(th) December 2024).
As of 18(th) August, a total of 2,780m of RC drilling has been completed in 39
drill-holes as part of the resource drilling programme.
In addition, 384m of PQ diamond drilling has been completed in 3 drill-holes
to collect samples for additional mineral processing testwork. These samples
have now been dispatched to a mineral processing laboratory in Perth,
Australia.
Assay results from the first 4 drill-holes have been received, and these
confirm similar grade tin mineralisation to that in the current resource and
reserve including:
· TMTARC044 23m @ 0.13% Sn from 30m including 12m @ 0.17%
Sn from 36m
· TMTARC045 10m @ 0.06% Sn from 17m including 2m @ 0.14%
Sn from 17m
· TMTARC047 17m @ 0.13% Sn from 43m including 5m @ 0.20%
Sn from 43m
· TMTARC048 17m @ 0.13% Sn from 0m including 6m @ 0.16%
Sn from 2m
All of the results returned to date are from the northern part of the proposed
South Pit (Figure 1). This drilling was designed to convert Inferred resources
at the Hillside Extended zone into Indicated resources, and to extend this
zone to the northeast within the current pit outline.
Drilling has confirmed this interpretation and has shown that mineralisation
is present within the South Pit in areas that were previously classified as
waste rock.
Drilling is continuing and results will be reported regularly as work
progresses.
Details of all drilling completed to date are shown in Figure 1 and Table 1.
First Tin CEO, Bill Scotting, commented:
"These first results validate our interpretation that additional
mineralisation exists within and adjacent to the current pit outlines. The
grades and widths intercepted are consistent with existing quantified
resources and are expected to result in additional resources being added
within the current South Pit outline. Results from the remainder of the
programme are eagerly awaited and will be reported as they are received."
Figure 1: Taronga Tin Project 2025 Drilling Summary Plan Showing Holes
Completed
Table 1: Drilling Summary - Holes Completed to 18/08/2025
Competent Person Statement
Information in this announcement that relates to exploration results, data
quality and geological interpretations is based on information compiled by Mr
Antony Truelove. Mr Truelove is a Member of the Australian Institute of
Geoscientists (AIG) and the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
(AusIMM). Mr Truelove has sufficient experience relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activities
undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of
the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Australasian Code for Reporting of
Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Truelove is Chief
Operating Officer of First Tin Plc and consents to the inclusion in this
announcement of the matters based on this information in the form and context
in which it appears.
Enquiries:
First Tin Via SEC Newgate below
Bill Scotting - Chief Executive Officer
Arlington Group Asset Management Limited (Financial Advisor and Joint Broker)
Simon Catt 020 7389 5016
Zeus Capital Limited (Joint Broker)
Harry Ansell / Dan Bristowe / Katy Mitchell 020 3829 5000
SEC Newgate (Financial Communications)
Molly Gretton / Gwen Samuel 07970664807
Notes to Editors
First Tin PLC is an ethical, reliable, and sustainable tin production company
led by a team of renowned tin specialists. The Company is focused on becoming
a tin supplier in conflict-free, low political risk jurisdictions through the
rapid development of high value, low capex tin assets in Germany and
Australia, which have been de-risked significantly, with extensive work
undertaken to date.
Tin is a critical metal, vital in any plan to decarbonise and electrify the
world, yet Europe and North America have very little supply. Rising demand,
together with shortages, is expected to lead tin to experience sustained
deficit markets for the foreseeable future.
First Tin's goal is to use best-in-class environmental standards to bring two
tin mines into production in three years, providing provenance of supply to
support the current global clean energy and technological revolutions.
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 Taronga Tin Project (TMPL)
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 (eg cut channels, random chips, or · Sampling consisted of three surface drilling phases: Newmont 1979
specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the to 1982, Taronga Mines Pty Ltd (TMPL) 2022 to 2023, and Taronga Mines Pty Ltd
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF 2025 (current programme).
instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad
meaning of sampling. · Diamond drilling (DD) was used to obtain 1m samples of NQ3/HQ3 core
which was sawn in half longitudinally. The half core was bagged and sent to a
· Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity commercial laboratory for sample prep and assay. This is industry standard
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. work.
· Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to · The 2025 diamond drilling was large diameter (PQ) core to collect
the Public Report. samples for mineral processing testwork.
· In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be · The Newmont open hole percussion (OHP) and JACRO percussion
relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m drilling was used to obtain 1m samples. (a JACRO percussion rig was used to
samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire sample shallow areas with shallow angled drillholes).
assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there
is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or · The TMPL Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling was used to obtain 1m
mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed samples from a 4.5 inch diameter drill hole. This is industry standard work.
information.
· To ensure sample representivity all diamond drilling was triple
tube.
· To ensure sample representivity appropriate compressors were used
for the OHP/JACRO/RC drilling to lift all the sample and prevent water
inflows.
· Mineralisation is characterised as sheeted quartz veins with minor
cassiterite, arsenopyrite and chalcopyrite in hornfelsed metasediments. Veins
are often hairline fractures and there is no obviously visible pervasive
alteration associated with the hornfelsing. No discrete boundaries to the
mineralisation are known to exist. All drilling samples were analysed and
hence no prior determination of mineralisation was made.
· Laboratory sample prep involved industry standard drying, weighing
and crushing followed by splitting (where sample size was too large) and
pulverising. For Newmont this was completed on site with analysis at a
commercial laboratory, whilst for TMPL the sample prep and analysis was
completed at a commercial laboratory. The subsequent pulp sample was analysed
by an appropriate industry standard method for the time.
Drilling techniques · Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary · Details of drilling for the general area:
air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or
Company Type No of Holes Metres
standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, Newmont DD 173 25,718.8
whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). OHP 81 5,573.5
JACRO 97 3,771.0
Total 351 35,063.3
TMPL (pre 2025) Type No of Holes Metres
DD 13 1,619.2
RC 46 4,714.0
Total 59 6,333.2
Combined (pre 2025) Type No of Holes Metres
DD 186 27,338.0
OHP 81 5,573.5
RC 46 4,714.0
JACRO 97 3,771.0
Total 410 41,396.5
TMPL (this program) Type No of Holes Metres
DD 3 384
RC 39 2780
Newmont
· DD were collared HQ or with OHP, reducing to NQ triple tube once
solid ground was met. Triple tube drilling was employed to maximise core
recovery and minimise the loss of cassiterite. Core was not oriented.
· OHP drilling was originally undertaken using a high pressure Schramm
rig. Later percussion drilling, including all drillholes in the PG 400 series,
used a high pressure T-3 rig with a 140mm tungsten bit. The rig was equipped
with a primary cyclone connected to a manifold at the collar for sample
recovery. A secondary Donaldson filter was attached to the outlet of the
primary cyclone to collect minus 5 micrometre dust.
· A modified JACRO percussion rig equipped with a vacuum sample
recovery system was used exclusively for Newmont's shallow angle drilling.
TMPL
· Diamond drilling was undertaken using an HQ bit with a soft matrix.
Triple tube drill rods were used to ensure good core recovery and avoid
washing out of cassiterite. Core was not oriented. The 2025 drilling was PQ
core to obtain as much sample as possible for mineral processing testwork.
· Percussion drilling was undertaken using a face sampling 4.5 inch
"Black Diamond" hammer, 137mm PED (polycarbonate diamond) bit and a 4.5 inch,
6m stainless steel rod. A tight shroud (3mm gap) ensured the holes remained
as straight as possible. A 350psi, 900cfm compressor was used to keep holes
dry and ensure all heavy minerals such as cassiterite are recovered.
Drill sample recovery · Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and · All core intervals are measured and compared with the drillers marks
results assessed. to determine actual recovery. Recovery was generally 100% apart from isolated
intervals with poor ground conditions, generally either near surface or in
· Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative fault zones. Average recovery for Newmont DD is 97.3% with average recovery
nature of the samples. for TMPL DD of 96.8%
· Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and · All RC and OHP samples were weighed at site. This gives a good idea
whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of as to recovery for the 1m intervals sampled as the density does not vary
fine/coarse material. significantly. Recovery for the OHP was estimated to be very good in
general. Semi quantitative analysis of the TMPL weighed RC samples indicated
an average recovery >90%.
· No information on the JACRO holes' recovery was available.
· All diamond drilling used triple tube rods to maximise sample
recovery.
· There is some speculation by TMPL that the drilling and core cutting
processes may have resulted in small scale loss of tin through washout
associated with the vein margins and very small vughs in the tin-bearing
veins. Conclusive evidence for this is lacking.
· For the percussion drilling a high pressure and volume compressor was
used to ensure good sample return and to keep holes dry. No significant water
was encountered meaning sample quality was good. The hole was cleaned out with
compressed air after every rod change and no significant volume of material
was returned via this process.
· No relationship can be seen between recovery and tin grade. No sample
bias is noted.
· Previous work by Mining One suggested that there was downhole
smearing of tin grade associated with the JACRO drilling based on
geostatistical work, but a review of the Newmont JACRO/DD twin hole drilling
indicated no bias; check modelling without the JACRO drilling indicated no
difference in global block grades. Visual inspection might suggest possible
smearing but it is difficult to be certain. The JACRO holes were included in
the Mineral Resource estimate.
Logging · Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and · All samples have been geologically logged to a level of detail to
geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral support appropriate mineral estimation, mining, and metallurgical studies.
Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.
· The TMPL diamond holes have been geotechnically logged to a level of
· Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or detail to support appropriate mineral estimation, mining, and metallurgical
costean, channel, etc) photography. studies
· The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. · All drill core logging is both qualitative and quantitative in
nature, with the TMPL logging following a strict set of guidelines. The entire
length each hole has been logged.
· The Newmont drilling was completed as hardcopy logsheets which were
transcribed into a digital format in 2013. All TMPL core was digitally logged
and has been photographed.
· All RC, OHP and JACRO logging is semi-quantitative in nature, with
the TMPL RC drilling following a strict set of guidelines, with percentage
estimates made. Representative sub-samples were collected, sieved and
selectively panned to visually estimate heavy mineral content. A sub-set of
rock chips for each RC sample are kept in chip-trays for reference and stored
on site.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation · If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core Newmont drilling sample prep
taken.
· NQ core was sawn in half longitudinally at 1m intervals with one half
· If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and dispatched to Analabs Pty Limited ("Analabs") in Perth, Australia for assay.
whether sampled wet or dry. The half core selected for assay was crushed (size unknown) then ground to 500
microns from which a 100g sample was split and pulverized to less than 75
· For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the microns. A lab duplicate of each tenth sample was split and pulverised to
sample preparation technique. check sample preparation and assaying reliability. These were appropriate,
industry standard, sampling and sample preparation techniques for the time.
· Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
maximise representivity of samples. · All 1m percussion drill samples were prepared for assay on site using
four stages of size reduction comprising jaw crusher, rolls crusher, disc
· Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the grinder and ring grinder (pulveriser), with sample splitting between stages in
in situ material collected, including for instance results for field accord with Pierre Gy's "Particulate Sampling Procedures". The pulverised
duplicate/second-half sampling. material was dispatched to Analabs in Perth for assay.
· Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the · A duplicate of each tenth sample was split and pulverised to check
material being sampled. sample preparation and assaying reliability. These were appropriate, industry
standard, sampling and sample preparation techniques at the time.
· Duplicate samples showed that a majority of duplicate Sn assays
deviated by less than 2.5% relative to perfect correlation.
TMPL drilling sample prep
· HQ core was sawn in half longitudinally after fitting together of
core across drillers breaks and a reference line marked on the core. A
consistent side of the core is taken for sampling with the samples sent to the
ALS laboratory in Brisbane, Australia.
· All RC cuttings were weighed then riffle split on site to obtain
between 3kg and 5kg of sample. All samples are dry. The sub-sample is sent to
the ALS laboratory in Brisbane.
· Core and RC chip sample prep consists of crushing to 70% passing 6mm
with splitting used if crushed sample is over 3kg. The entire sample or
sub-sample is then pulverized in a mill to 85% finer than 75µm.
· Prior to dispatch of samples, the following QAQC samples are added:
o Field duplicates are added at the rate of 1 in 20 samples for RC.
These are riffle split from the original sample on site.
o For diamond drilling, the half core is split into two quarter cores
every 1 in 20 samples and these are sent as field duplicates.
· Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the material being
sampled as the tin mineralisation occurs as cassiterite (SnO(2)) within
sub-vertical veins that are between 0.05mm and 0.5cm wide (rarely to 5cm) and
cassiterite crystals are smaller than the vein width. Vein density varies from
about 5/m to greater than 20/m and hence several veins are sampled in each
metre. This compares favourably with the sample size that is approximately
10,000 cm(3) for RC and 3,200cm(3) for HQ core before sub-sampling.
· No independent sizing checks were completed. The ALS Lab completed
its own internal checks and reported the results.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests · The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and Newmont
laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or
total. · All Sn assays were performed by taking 10g samples from the 100g
pulverised samples. The samples were analysed for Sn using pressed powder
· For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, X-ray fluorescence at Analabs. Pressed powder X-ray fluorescence was the
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and industry standard for Sn analysis at the time.
model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
· Comparison of Sn assays of samples from diamond drill and percussion
· Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, holes was good and no bias between the two sets of analyses is evident.
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of
accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. · For every 30 samples, four standards were inserted on rotation. In
addition, every tenth sample was lab duplicate assayed.
· Selected samples were check assayed at other laboratories and using
other assay methods, including an XRF method developed by Cleveland Tin
Limited in Tasmania which was a significant Australian tin producer at the
time. The checks confirmed that Analab's procedures were satisfactory and that
sample preparation and assay quality were consistently maintained by Analabs.
TMPL
· All Sn assays were performed on a 0.1g sub-sample of the pulverised
and mixed material, which was taken and fused with lithium borate. The fused
bead is then analysed by a mass spectrometer using method ME-MS85 which
reports Sn, W, Ta and Nb. This returns a total tin content, including tin as
cassiterite. Over limit assays of tin are re-analysed using method ME-XRF15b
which involves fusion with lithium metaborate with a lithium tetraborate flux
containing 20% NaNO(3) with an XRF finish.
· Other elements are analysed by method ME-ICP61 using a 0.25g
sub-sample. This involves a 4 acid digest with an ICP-AES finish. This is an
industry standard technique for a suite of 34 elements, including tin, copper,
arsenic, sulphur and silver. The tin assay is only acid soluble tin and thus
can be subtracted from the fusion tin assays to obtain tin as cassiterite.
Acid soluble tin is generally associated with stannite and in the lattice of
silicates. The acid soluble tin is generally insignificant in relation to tin
as cassiterite at Taronga.
· Prior to dispatch of samples, the following QAQC samples were added:
o 3 Certified Reference Materials, representative of the expected grades
were inserted into the sample suite at the rate of 1 in 40 samples.
o Coarse Blanks were inserted at the rate of 1 in 40 samples.
· If results for the CRMs indicated a >5% assay error, the sample
was compared with other CRMs in the same batch. If other CRMs indicated
similar errors the lab was contacted to review.
· All QAQC data is within acceptable limits.
Verification of sampling and assaying · The verification of significant intersections by either independent Newmont
or alternative company personnel.
· There is no information on any verification of significant
· The use of twinned holes. intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.
· Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data · Geological interpretations were made using cross-sections and level
verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. plans. Mining One accepted the Northern Zone 101 and the Southern Zones of
Payback, Payback Extended, Hillside and Hillside Extended were interpreted on
· Discuss any adjustment to assay data. cross-sections as reported in a Pre-feasibility Study prepared by Newmont
Holdings Pty Ltd in 1982.
· A small number of twinned holes (10 pairs) were completed by Newmont
and comparison of length weighted intercepts indicated no obvious bias.
· There is no information available on documentation of primary data,
data entry procedures, data verification, data storage. It is assumed all data
was paper copies subsequently transcribed by AusTinMining using a data entry
bureau service.
· There are no reports of any adjustments made to the assay data,
although it appears that some transcribed assay data was limited to 2 decimal
places rendering very low grade data as zeroes.
TMPL
· Simon Tear, a director of independent consultants H&S Consultants
Pty Ltd, has viewed and verified all core from 6 DD holes.
· Twinning of previous Newmont drillholes has included:
o 11 TMPL DD twins of Newmont DD Holes
o 2 TMPL DD twins of Newmont OPH holes
o 5 TMPL RC twins of Newmont OPH holes
· Twin holes were selected to represent all zones of mineralisation and
the length of the known deposit.
· All results are within acceptable limits taking into account any
possible nugget effect resulting from coarse cassiterite (noticed in three
drill intersections). Due to the small number of high grade veins, top cutting
of the high grade assays has a negligible effect on the overall grade.
· All data is recorded on site in MSExcel spreadsheets and this is
later transferred to an MSAccess database - the main data repository via cut
and paste. Detailed protocols for data recording, logging codes etc are used.
The assay data is received from the laboratory (ALS) via csv and pdf files
with attached certificates. This may also be downloaded directly from the ALS
website by the senior project geologist. The assay data is then merged using
sample number. Detailed protocols for data recording, logging codes etc are
used.
· Assays below lower detection limits were substituted with half lower
detection limit.
Location of data points · Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar Newmont
and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in
Mineral Resource estimation. · Drill hole collars were located by theodolite traverses by qualified
surveyors.
· Specification of the grid system used.
· A local grid parallel to the strike of the mineralisation was used.
· Quality and adequacy of topographic control. Local grid north has a bearing of 055.103(O) true. A 3.5km baseline was
surveyed with surveyed cross-lines at 100m intervals.
· Holes were surveyed down-hole for azimuth and dip using down-hole
cameras with a range of downhole depths from 15m to 50m. Given the generally
non-magnetic nature of the mineralisation and the host rocks, this was a
reasonable survey method.
· Topographic maps at 1:1000 scale were prepared by Australian Aerial
Mapping. The maps were related to the local grid.
TMPL
· All hole collars are accurately surveyed post drilling with a RTK GPS
(+/-0.1m accuracy).
· All DD are surveyed downhole at 30m intervals using Axis Champ
Gyroscope.
· All RC holes are surveyed at 30m intervals using a Trushot Digital
survey tool.
· The grid system used is GDA94, zone 56.
· Topography is obtained via a LiDAR survey flown in late 2022 and is
to sub-10cm accuracy.
· All data was converted to local grid by H&SC for resource
estimation work.
· H&SC undertook field measurement of 20 drill collars from both
phases using a hand held GPS. Average discrepancy was 0.5m in the easting
and 0.5m in the northing.
· The 2025 programme is in progress and only hand-held GPS coordinates
have been collected to date. DGPS co-ordinates will be collected at the end
of the programme.
Data spacing and distribution · Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. · The Newmont drilling was nominally on a 50m by 50m pattern with 25m
infill drilling in some areas.
· Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish
the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral · The TMPL drilling completed in 2022/3 was nominally at the same 50m
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. by 50m spacing.
· Whether sample compositing has been applied. · Virtually all downhole sampling was 1m intervals from surface.
· Data spacing is sufficient to establish the geological and grade
continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource estimation and classification
procedures applied for this report.
· No sample compositing has been applied.
· The 2025 drilling is on a nominal 50m x 50m spacing but is broader in
some areas.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure · Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of · The drilling is oriented at 90° to the strike of the sheeted vein
possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the system.
deposit type.
· The vein system is sub-vertical and the drilling is angled between
· If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the -25° and -60° to be as close as possible to cutting across the veins at
orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a 90°. Due to difficulties drilling at very shallow angles, especially with RC,
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. a default angle of -60° was adopted for the later TMPL drillholes.
· As drilling was designed to cut the main sheeted vein system at as
high an angle as possible, the potential for any introduced sampling bias is
considered minor.
Sample security · The measures taken to ensure sample security. · Samples of Newmont drill core and percussion chips were bagged and
tagged and shipped to the assay laboratory by independent third party
transport. No further information is available.
· A chain of custody was maintained for all TMPL drilling.
· TMPL samples were placed in calico bags in groups of seven which were
then wrapped in opaque polyweave bags, stacked on a palette and wrapped with
pallet wrap and tape.
· Samples sent to the lab via registered courier with tracking
capabilities.
· Samples arrive at the lab and were cross checked with a separate
despatch form (electronically sent to ALS).
Audits or reviews · The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. · A review of sampling procedures and protocols was completed by Simon
Tear of independent consultants H&S Consultants Pty Ltd whilst drilling
was in progress, with some recommendations.
Newmont
· DD were collared HQ or with OHP, reducing to NQ triple tube once
solid ground was met. Triple tube drilling was employed to maximise core
recovery and minimise the loss of cassiterite. Core was not oriented.
· OHP drilling was originally undertaken using a high pressure Schramm
rig. Later percussion drilling, including all drillholes in the PG 400 series,
used a high pressure T-3 rig with a 140mm tungsten bit. The rig was equipped
with a primary cyclone connected to a manifold at the collar for sample
recovery. A secondary Donaldson filter was attached to the outlet of the
primary cyclone to collect minus 5 micrometre dust.
· A modified JACRO percussion rig equipped with a vacuum sample
recovery system was used exclusively for Newmont's shallow angle drilling.
TMPL
· Diamond drilling was undertaken using an HQ bit with a soft matrix.
Triple tube drill rods were used to ensure good core recovery and avoid
washing out of cassiterite. Core was not oriented. The 2025 drilling was PQ
core to obtain as much sample as possible for mineral processing testwork.
· Percussion drilling was undertaken using a face sampling 4.5 inch
"Black Diamond" hammer, 137mm PED (polycarbonate diamond) bit and a 4.5 inch,
6m stainless steel rod. A tight shroud (3mm gap) ensured the holes remained
as straight as possible. A 350psi, 900cfm compressor was used to keep holes
dry and ensure all heavy minerals such as cassiterite are recovered.
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.
· All core intervals are measured and compared with the drillers marks
to determine actual recovery. Recovery was generally 100% apart from isolated
intervals with poor ground conditions, generally either near surface or in
fault zones. Average recovery for Newmont DD is 97.3% with average recovery
for TMPL DD of 96.8%
· All RC and OHP samples were weighed at site. This gives a good idea
as to recovery for the 1m intervals sampled as the density does not vary
significantly. Recovery for the OHP was estimated to be very good in
general. Semi quantitative analysis of the TMPL weighed RC samples indicated
an average recovery >90%.
· No information on the JACRO holes' recovery was available.
· All diamond drilling used triple tube rods to maximise sample
recovery.
· There is some speculation by TMPL that the drilling and core cutting
processes may have resulted in small scale loss of tin through washout
associated with the vein margins and very small vughs in the tin-bearing
veins. Conclusive evidence for this is lacking.
· For the percussion drilling a high pressure and volume compressor was
used to ensure good sample return and to keep holes dry. No significant water
was encountered meaning sample quality was good. The hole was cleaned out with
compressed air after every rod change and no significant volume of material
was returned via this process.
· No relationship can be seen between recovery and tin grade. No sample
bias is noted.
· Previous work by Mining One suggested that there was downhole
smearing of tin grade associated with the JACRO drilling based on
geostatistical work, but a review of the Newmont JACRO/DD twin hole drilling
indicated no bias; check modelling without the JACRO drilling indicated no
difference in global block grades. Visual inspection might suggest possible
smearing but it is difficult to be certain. The JACRO holes were included in
the Mineral Resource estimate.
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 samples have been geologically logged to a level of detail to
support appropriate mineral estimation, mining, and metallurgical studies.
· The TMPL diamond holes have been geotechnically logged to a level of
detail to support appropriate mineral estimation, mining, and metallurgical
studies
· All drill core logging is both qualitative and quantitative in
nature, with the TMPL logging following a strict set of guidelines. The entire
length each hole has been logged.
· The Newmont drilling was completed as hardcopy logsheets which were
transcribed into a digital format in 2013. All TMPL core was digitally logged
and has been photographed.
· All RC, OHP and JACRO logging is semi-quantitative in nature, with
the TMPL RC drilling following a strict set of guidelines, with percentage
estimates made. Representative sub-samples were collected, sieved and
selectively panned to visually estimate heavy mineral content. A sub-set of
rock chips for each RC sample are kept in chip-trays for reference and stored
on site.
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.
Newmont drilling sample prep
· NQ core was sawn in half longitudinally at 1m intervals with one half
dispatched to Analabs Pty Limited ("Analabs") in Perth, Australia for assay.
The half core selected for assay was crushed (size unknown) then ground to 500
microns from which a 100g sample was split and pulverized to less than 75
microns. A lab duplicate of each tenth sample was split and pulverised to
check sample preparation and assaying reliability. These were appropriate,
industry standard, sampling and sample preparation techniques for the time.
· All 1m percussion drill samples were prepared for assay on site using
four stages of size reduction comprising jaw crusher, rolls crusher, disc
grinder and ring grinder (pulveriser), with sample splitting between stages in
accord with Pierre Gy's "Particulate Sampling Procedures". The pulverised
material was dispatched to Analabs in Perth for assay.
· A duplicate of each tenth sample was split and pulverised to check
sample preparation and assaying reliability. These were appropriate, industry
standard, sampling and sample preparation techniques at the time.
· Duplicate samples showed that a majority of duplicate Sn assays
deviated by less than 2.5% relative to perfect correlation.
TMPL drilling sample prep
· HQ core was sawn in half longitudinally after fitting together of
core across drillers breaks and a reference line marked on the core. A
consistent side of the core is taken for sampling with the samples sent to the
ALS laboratory in Brisbane, Australia.
· All RC cuttings were weighed then riffle split on site to obtain
between 3kg and 5kg of sample. All samples are dry. The sub-sample is sent to
the ALS laboratory in Brisbane.
· Core and RC chip sample prep consists of crushing to 70% passing 6mm
with splitting used if crushed sample is over 3kg. The entire sample or
sub-sample is then pulverized in a mill to 85% finer than 75µm.
· Prior to dispatch of samples, the following QAQC samples are added:
o Field duplicates are added at the rate of 1 in 20 samples for RC.
These are riffle split from the original sample on site.
o For diamond drilling, the half core is split into two quarter cores
every 1 in 20 samples and these are sent as field duplicates.
· Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the material being
sampled as the tin mineralisation occurs as cassiterite (SnO(2)) within
sub-vertical veins that are between 0.05mm and 0.5cm wide (rarely to 5cm) and
cassiterite crystals are smaller than the vein width. Vein density varies from
about 5/m to greater than 20/m and hence several veins are sampled in each
metre. This compares favourably with the sample size that is approximately
10,000 cm(3) for RC and 3,200cm(3) for HQ core before sub-sampling.
· No independent sizing checks were completed. The ALS Lab completed
its own internal checks and reported the results.
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 (eg standards, blanks,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of
accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.
Newmont
· All Sn assays were performed by taking 10g samples from the 100g
pulverised samples. The samples were analysed for Sn using pressed powder
X-ray fluorescence at Analabs. Pressed powder X-ray fluorescence was the
industry standard for Sn analysis at the time.
· Comparison of Sn assays of samples from diamond drill and percussion
holes was good and no bias between the two sets of analyses is evident.
· For every 30 samples, four standards were inserted on rotation. In
addition, every tenth sample was lab duplicate assayed.
· Selected samples were check assayed at other laboratories and using
other assay methods, including an XRF method developed by Cleveland Tin
Limited in Tasmania which was a significant Australian tin producer at the
time. The checks confirmed that Analab's procedures were satisfactory and that
sample preparation and assay quality were consistently maintained by Analabs.
TMPL
· All Sn assays were performed on a 0.1g sub-sample of the pulverised
and mixed material, which was taken and fused with lithium borate. The fused
bead is then analysed by a mass spectrometer using method ME-MS85 which
reports Sn, W, Ta and Nb. This returns a total tin content, including tin as
cassiterite. Over limit assays of tin are re-analysed using method ME-XRF15b
which involves fusion with lithium metaborate with a lithium tetraborate flux
containing 20% NaNO(3) with an XRF finish.
· Other elements are analysed by method ME-ICP61 using a 0.25g
sub-sample. This involves a 4 acid digest with an ICP-AES finish. This is an
industry standard technique for a suite of 34 elements, including tin, copper,
arsenic, sulphur and silver. The tin assay is only acid soluble tin and thus
can be subtracted from the fusion tin assays to obtain tin as cassiterite.
Acid soluble tin is generally associated with stannite and in the lattice of
silicates. The acid soluble tin is generally insignificant in relation to tin
as cassiterite at Taronga.
· Prior to dispatch of samples, the following QAQC samples were added:
o 3 Certified Reference Materials, representative of the expected grades
were inserted into the sample suite at the rate of 1 in 40 samples.
o Coarse Blanks were inserted at the rate of 1 in 40 samples.
· If results for the CRMs indicated a >5% assay error, the sample
was compared with other CRMs in the same batch. If other CRMs indicated
similar errors the lab was contacted to review.
· All QAQC data is within acceptable limits.
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.
Newmont
· There is no information on any verification of significant
intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.
· Geological interpretations were made using cross-sections and level
plans. Mining One accepted the Northern Zone 101 and the Southern Zones of
Payback, Payback Extended, Hillside and Hillside Extended were interpreted on
cross-sections as reported in a Pre-feasibility Study prepared by Newmont
Holdings Pty Ltd in 1982.
· A small number of twinned holes (10 pairs) were completed by Newmont
and comparison of length weighted intercepts indicated no obvious bias.
· There is no information available on documentation of primary data,
data entry procedures, data verification, data storage. It is assumed all data
was paper copies subsequently transcribed by AusTinMining using a data entry
bureau service.
· There are no reports of any adjustments made to the assay data,
although it appears that some transcribed assay data was limited to 2 decimal
places rendering very low grade data as zeroes.
TMPL
· Simon Tear, a director of independent consultants H&S Consultants
Pty Ltd, has viewed and verified all core from 6 DD holes.
· Twinning of previous Newmont drillholes has included:
o 11 TMPL DD twins of Newmont DD Holes
o 2 TMPL DD twins of Newmont OPH holes
o 5 TMPL RC twins of Newmont OPH holes
· Twin holes were selected to represent all zones of mineralisation and
the length of the known deposit.
· All results are within acceptable limits taking into account any
possible nugget effect resulting from coarse cassiterite (noticed in three
drill intersections). Due to the small number of high grade veins, top cutting
of the high grade assays has a negligible effect on the overall grade.
· All data is recorded on site in MSExcel spreadsheets and this is
later transferred to an MSAccess database - the main data repository via cut
and paste. Detailed protocols for data recording, logging codes etc are used.
The assay data is received from the laboratory (ALS) via csv and pdf files
with attached certificates. This may also be downloaded directly from the ALS
website by the senior project geologist. The assay data is then merged using
sample number. Detailed protocols for data recording, logging codes etc are
used.
· Assays below lower detection limits were substituted with half lower
detection limit.
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.
Newmont
· Drill hole collars were located by theodolite traverses by qualified
surveyors.
· A local grid parallel to the strike of the mineralisation was used.
Local grid north has a bearing of 055.103(O) true. A 3.5km baseline was
surveyed with surveyed cross-lines at 100m intervals.
· Holes were surveyed down-hole for azimuth and dip using down-hole
cameras with a range of downhole depths from 15m to 50m. Given the generally
non-magnetic nature of the mineralisation and the host rocks, this was a
reasonable survey method.
· Topographic maps at 1:1000 scale were prepared by Australian Aerial
Mapping. The maps were related to the local grid.
TMPL
· All hole collars are accurately surveyed post drilling with a RTK GPS
(+/-0.1m accuracy).
· All DD are surveyed downhole at 30m intervals using Axis Champ
Gyroscope.
· All RC holes are surveyed at 30m intervals using a Trushot Digital
survey tool.
· The grid system used is GDA94, zone 56.
· Topography is obtained via a LiDAR survey flown in late 2022 and is
to sub-10cm accuracy.
· All data was converted to local grid by H&SC for resource
estimation work.
· H&SC undertook field measurement of 20 drill collars from both
phases using a hand held GPS. Average discrepancy was 0.5m in the easting
and 0.5m in the northing.
· The 2025 programme is in progress and only hand-held GPS coordinates
have been collected to date. DGPS co-ordinates will be collected at the end
of the programme.
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 Newmont drilling was nominally on a 50m by 50m pattern with 25m
infill drilling in some areas.
· The TMPL drilling completed in 2022/3 was nominally at the same 50m
by 50m spacing.
· Virtually all downhole sampling was 1m intervals from surface.
· Data spacing is sufficient to establish the geological and grade
continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource estimation and classification
procedures applied for this report.
· No sample compositing has been applied.
· The 2025 drilling is on a nominal 50m x 50m spacing but is broader in
some areas.
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 drilling is oriented at 90° to the strike of the sheeted vein
system.
· The vein system is sub-vertical and the drilling is angled between
-25° and -60° to be as close as possible to cutting across the veins at
90°. Due to difficulties drilling at very shallow angles, especially with RC,
a default angle of -60° was adopted for the later TMPL drillholes.
· As drilling was designed to cut the main sheeted vein system at as
high an angle as possible, the potential for any introduced sampling bias is
considered minor.
Sample security
· The measures taken to ensure sample security.
· Samples of Newmont drill core and percussion chips were bagged and
tagged and shipped to the assay laboratory by independent third party
transport. No further information is available.
· A chain of custody was maintained for all TMPL drilling.
· TMPL samples were placed in calico bags in groups of seven which were
then wrapped in opaque polyweave bags, stacked on a palette and wrapped with
pallet wrap and tape.
· Samples sent to the lab via registered courier with tracking
capabilities.
· Samples arrive at the lab and were cross checked with a separate
despatch form (electronically sent to ALS).
Audits or reviews
· The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.
· A review of sampling procedures and protocols was completed by Simon
Tear of independent consultants H&S Consultants Pty Ltd whilst drilling
was in progress, with some recommendations.
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 · The project is secured by two granted tenements: EL8407 and ML 1774,
agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, both of which are currently in good standing. These are held 100% by TMPL.
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites,
wilderness or national park and environmental settings. · No joint ventures or other encumbrances are known. The underlying
properties are freehold land owned 100% by TMPL apart from a block of Crown
· The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with Land that covers part of the southern deposit area as defined by Newmont.
any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
· The Crown Land is the only land subject to Native Title. No Native
Title claims existed at the time the tenements were granted.
· No national parks, historical sites or environmental constraints are
known. Recent surveys have identified the "vulnerable" flora species Velvet
Wattle. This is currently being avoided as much as possible and is not
considered to be a major constraint moving forward.
· The only royalty is the state of NSW royalty of 4% on tin mined.
Exploration done by other parties · Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other · Detailed exploration and feasibility studies were undertaken by
parties. Newmont between 1979 and 1984. These have been used where applicable.
· This work was undertaken to a high standard and all data is
considered to be usable.
Geology · Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. · The tin deposit is a sheeted vein style +/- copper-silver with
horizontally and vertically extensive veins of
quartz-mica-cassiterite-sulphide +/-fluorite-topaz occurring over a combined
area of up to 2,700m by 270m.
· The veins vary in thickness from less than 0.5mm to 100mm but are
generally between 1mm and 10mm thick and average about 20 veins per metre.
· The host rock is hornfels derived by contact metamorphism of Permian
aged metasediments by Triassic-aged granites.
· The source of mineralising fluids is interpreted to be an underlying
intrusion of the Triassic Mole Leucogranite, a reduced, highly fractionated, A
to I type granite. The metals of interest (Sn, Cu, Ag) are interpreted to have
been enriched in the late magmatic fluid of this granite via enrichment of
incompatible elements during fractional crystallisation. Breaching of the
magma chamber during brittle faulting in an ENE orientation, a structural
corridor, has tapped these enriched fluids which have subsequently deposited
the metals due to changing temperature and pressure conditions and/or mixing
with meteoric fluids.
Drill hole Information · A summary of all information material to the understanding of the · The current programme is resource definition with limited exploration
exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for of soil anomalies and lode extensions. Details of drilling completed to date
all Material drill holes: are shown in the Table below and Table 1 and Figure 1 of the main text.
Hole Number Easting Northing Dip Azimuth Depth (m) From (m) To (m) % Sn Notes
o easting and northing of the drill hole collar TMTARC044 358642 6748009 -60° 145° 70 30 53 0.13 incl. 12m @ 0.17% Sn from 36m
TMTARC045 358692 6748026 -60° 145° 50 17 27 0.06 incl. 2m @ 0.14% Sn from 17m
o elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the TMTARC046 358575 6747956 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
drill hole collar TMTARC047 358569 6748024 -60° 145° 80 43 60 0.16 incl. 5m @ 0.20% Sn from 43m
TMTARC048 358560 6747972 -60° 145° 50 0 17 0.13 incl. 6m @ 0.16% Sn from 2m
o dip and azimuth of the hole TMTARC049 358098 6747562 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC050 358043 6747539 -60° 145° 80 assays awaited
o down hole length and interception depth TMTARC051 358060 6747522 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC052 357981 6747462 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
o hole length. TMTARC053 359260 6748390 -60° 145° 140 assays awaited
TMTARC054 359174 6748354 -60° 145° 90 assays awaited
· If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that TMTARC055 359863 6748574 -60° 145° 120 assays awaited
the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the TMTARC056 359916 6748602 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why TMTARC057 359660 6748617 -60° 145° 100 assays awaited
this is the case. TMTARC058 359234 6748189 -60° 145° 100 assays awaited
TMTARC059 359563 6748492 -60° 145° 100 assays awaited
TMTARC060 359477 6748447 -60° 145° 90 assays awaited
TMTARC061 359441 6748405 -60° 145° 80 assays awaited
TMTARC062 359323 6748306 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
TMTARC063 359190 6748174 -60° 145° 80 assays awaited
TMTARC064 358663 6747981 -60° 145° 70 assays awaited
TMTARC065 359478 6747891 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
TMTARC066 358661 6748070 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
TMTARC067 358750 6748035 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
TMTARC068 359496 6748406 -60° 145° 80 assays awaited
TMTARC069 359580 6748460 -60° 145° 70 assays awaited
TMTARC070 359748 6748581 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
TMTARC071 359552 6748586 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC072 359286 6748353 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC073 359376 6748393 -60° 145° 100 assays awaited
TMTARC074 359125 6748241 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC075 359110 6748261 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC076 359097 6748278 -60° 145° 60 assays awaited
TMTARC077 359067 6748312 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
TMTARC078 359008 6748283 -60° 145° 80 assays awaited
TMTARC079 358601 6747981 -60° 145° 100 assays awaited
TMTARC080 357913 6747433 -60° 145° 40 assays awaited
TMTARC081 358173 6747464 -60° 145° 80 assays awaited
TMTARC082 358425 6747458 -60° 145° 50 assays awaited
Data aggregation methods · In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, · Intercepts are reported based on a 0.05% Sn lower cut-off using
maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and simple weighted averaging. Sub-intercepts are based on a 0.10% Sn lower
cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. cut-off. In both cases, internal waste is included if average grade remains
above cut-off.
· 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.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths · These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of · As mineralisation is sub-vertical and while holes dip at between
Exploration Results. -25° and -60°, actual true widths vary from 88% to 50% of interval widths.
· If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole · No Exploration Results are being reported.
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').
Diagrams · Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of · Figure 1 shows relationship of drilling to known mineralisation.
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.
Balanced reporting · Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not · All exploration results are reported.
practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or
widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
Other substantive exploration data · Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be · A detailed feasibility study was completed in 2024. Bulk samples
reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical have been collected for metallurgical testwork and the testwork has shown that
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of a saleable concentrate can be produced at reasonable recovery using simple off
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical the shelf gravity techniques.
and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
Further work · The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral · A definitive feasibility study has been completed. This programme
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). is aimed at defining Inferred mineralisation to Indicated status and closing
off the extremities of the mineralisation.
· Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,
provided this information is not commercially sensitive.
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.
· Intercepts are reported based on a 0.05% Sn lower cut-off using
simple weighted averaging. Sub-intercepts are based on a 0.10% Sn lower
cut-off. In both cases, internal waste is included if average grade remains
above cut-off.
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').
· As mineralisation is sub-vertical and while holes dip at between
-25° and -60°, actual true widths vary from 88% to 50% of interval widths.
· No Exploration Results are being reported.
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.
· Figure 1 shows relationship of drilling to known mineralisation.
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 exploration results are 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.
· A detailed feasibility study was completed in 2024. Bulk samples
have been collected for metallurgical testwork and the testwork has shown that
a saleable concentrate can be produced at reasonable recovery using simple off
the shelf gravity techniques.
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 interpretations and future drilling areas,
provided this information is not commercially sensitive.
· A definitive feasibility study has been completed. This programme
is aimed at defining Inferred mineralisation to Indicated status and closing
off the extremities of the mineralisation.
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact
rns@lseg.com (mailto:rns@lseg.com)
or visit
www.rns.com (http://www.rns.com/)
.
RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services. For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange use the personal data you provide us, please see our
Privacy Policy (https://www.lseg.com/privacy-and-cookie-policy)
. END DRLPTMJTMTMTBMARecent news on First Tin
See all newsREG - First Tin PLC - Taronga Tin Project – Drilling Update
AnnouncementREG - First Tin PLC - Taronga Mine Camp Agreement with Council
AnnouncementREG - First Tin PLC - Director/PDMR Shareholding
AnnouncementREG - First Tin PLC - Auersberg & Gottesberg Project Exploration Update
AnnouncementREG - First Tin PLC - Holding(s) in Company
Announcement