REG - First Tin PLC - Taronga Tin Project – Drilling Update
Tue 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:20250923:nRSW3395Aa&default-theme=true
RNS Number : 3395A First Tin PLC 23 September 2025
23 September 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 additional tin assay results from
its infill and extension drilling programme currently in progress at the
Taronga tin project (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 17(th) December 2024).
As of 12(th) September, a total 5,111m of RC drilling has been completed in 69
drill-holes as part of the resource drilling programme (Table 1).
Assay results from the first 4 drill-holes were reported in the RNS dated 26
August 2025. Results of the next 14 drill holes have now been received, and
these continue to confirm similar grade tin mineralisation to that in the
current resource and reserve including:
· TMTARC046 8m @ 0.13% Sn from 24m
· TMTARC049 13m @ 0.19% Sn from 8m including 4m @ 0.35%
Sn from 14m
· TMTARC050 14m @ 0.06% Sn from 32m
· TMTARC051 9m @ 0.13% Sn from 0m followed by 7m @ 0.14%
Sn from 40m
· TMTARC053 62m @ 0.10% Sn from 6m including 12m @ 0.14%
Sn from 35m
· TMTARC054 19m @ 0.12% Sn from 54m including 6m @ 0.18%
Sn from 58m
· TMTARC055 71m @ 0.09% Sn from 0m including 9m @ 0.15%
Sn from 11m
· TMTARC056 20m @ 0.12% Sn from 0m followed by 3m @ 0.32%
Sn from 33m
· TMTARC058 13m @ 0.13% Sn from 0m including 8m @ 0.17%
Sn from 0m
· TMTARC059 76m @ 0.08% Sn from 20m including 17m @ 0.11%
Sn from 20m
· TMTARC060 25m @ 0.13% Sn from 54m including 10m @ 0.21%
Sn from 61m
· TMTARC061 21m @ 0.07% Sn from 0m followed by 15m @
0.11% Sn from 65m
All results are presented in Table 1. Intercepts are shown at a 0.05% Sn
cut-off with internal dilution included if it carries the minimum grade
requirements. This is the cut-off used in the previously announced resource
estimate (RNS dated 14(th) September 2023). Higher grade intervals noted
within the main intercepts are quoted to a 0.10% Sn cut-off.
Significant widths of mineralisation, at grades close to the average resource
grade, have been identified within or immediately adjacent to the current pit
outlines, in areas that are currently classified as waste rock. It is
anticipated that this will have the effect of increasing the overall resource
and reserve base as well as lowering the strip ratio within the current pit
outlines.
Consistent with the current model, the following points are noted:
· Only one drillhole to date failed to intersect significant
mineralisation (TMTARC057) and this is well outside the current pit limits,
targeting a previously untested soil anomaly.
· Mineralisation extensions to the northeast of the North Pit have
been confirmed.
· Broad zones of low grade mineralisation with higher grade cores have
been confirmed in the Hillside Extended zone within the North Pit area. This
zone was largely inferred and this drilling should result in a significant
portion of this zone being converted to indicated status.
· The northeastern extensions of the Hillside Extended zone have
been confirmed in the South Pit area.
· Extensions of the Hillside Zone to the southwest have been
confirmed in the South Pit area.
The drilling to date has been very successful in confirming the extent of
Inferred mineralisation within the current pit outlines as well as extending
mineralisation to the northeast and southwest. Remaining results will be
reported as they are received.
First Tin CEO, Bill Scotting, commented:
"These results continue to 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 pit outlines, including converting current Inferred
Resources to Indicated status.
The broad zones of mineralisation intersected are better than anticipated and
will likely result in conversion of current areas of waste rock within the pit
outlines to ore. This will have the added effect of reducing the strip ratio
within the current pit outlines.
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 (new intercepts shown with white background)
Table 1: Drilling Summary - Holes Completed to 15/09/2025 (note results in
blue previously reported)
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 revolution.
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.)
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 drilling was
relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m used to obtain 1m samples. (a JACRO percussion rig was used to sample shallow
samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire 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 to
results assessed. 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 intersections
· The use of twinned holes. 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 by
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. 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 -25°
· If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the and -60° to be as close as possible to cutting across the veins at 90°. Due
orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a to difficulties drilling at very shallow angles, especially with RC, a default
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. 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.)
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 parties. · Detailed exploration and feasibility studies were undertaken by 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 of
exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for 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.
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.
Data aggregation methods · In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, · Intercepts are reported based on a 0.05% Sn lower cut-off using simple
maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and weighted averaging. Sub-intercepts are based on a 0.10% Sn lower cut-off.
cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. 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 -25°
Exploration Results. 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 have
reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical been collected for metallurgical testwork and the testwork has shown that a
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of 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 is
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). 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.
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 DRLLTMJTMTBTTTARecent news on First Tin
See all newsREG - First Tin PLC - SAXORE XTRACT
AnnouncementREG - First Tin PLC - Taronga Tin Project – Drilling Update
AnnouncementREG - 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
Announcement