7 May 2024
Dog-Leg Delivers Further High-grade Intersections
Resource Extension Drilling Results
Ewoyaa Lithium Project,
27m at 1.85% Li2O from 126m returned at Dog-Leg target, outside of current MRE1
Atlantic Lithium Limited (AIM: ALL, ASX: A11, OTCQX: ALLIF, "Atlantic Lithium" or the "Company"), the African-focused lithium exploration and development company targeting to deliver
Highlights:
- Assay results received for 4,101m of extensional resource drilling at the Dog-Leg target and sterilisation reverse circulation ("RC") drilling at the proposed plant site, respectively, representing the first results from drilling completed in 2024.
- High-grade and broad extensional drill intersections reported at the new Dog-Leg target, outside of the current 35.3Mt @ 1.25% Li2O JORC (2012) compliant Ewoyaa Mineral Resource Estimate1 ("MRE" or the "Resource"), including highlights at a 0.4% Li2O cut-off and a maximum 4m of internal dilution of:
o GRC0177: 27m at 1.85% Li2O from 126m
o GRC1059: 15m at 1.08% Li2O from 126m
o GRC1058: 8m at 0.93% Li2O from 88m
- Results at Dog-Leg are significant; drilling has intersected shallow dipping, near surface mineralised pegmatite bodies with true thicknesses up to 35m outside of the MRE1, proving potential for significant resource growth.
- Assay results reported include a total of 3,177m of plant site sterilisation drilling completed, as part of the planned 2024 programme, with no mineralisation intersected, providing confidence in the proposed plant site location.
- MRE upgrade, for both lithium and feldspar, to incorporate all drilling completed in 2023 and so far in 2024, now targeted for mid-year.
Commenting on the Company's latest progress, Neil Herbert, Executive Chairman of Atlantic Lithium, said:
"Initial assay results from the drilling completed so far in 2024 have again delivered impressive intersections, providing confidence in the growth potential of the current 35.3Mt @ 1.25% Li2O Resource at the Ewoyaa Lithium Project.
"These results are from the new Dog-Leg target, located on the northern tip of the Ewoyaa Main deposit, outside of the current MRE, where drilling has returned multiple high-grade and broad near surface extensional intersections, including 27m at 1.85% Li2O from 126m in these most recent results.
"We look forward to receiving further drilling results from the diamond tail drilling completed at Dog-Leg and delivering a MRE upgrade for the Project, now targeted for mid-year. The MRE upgrade will include updates to both the lithium and feldspar and incorporate all results received from drilling completed in 2023 and results from drilling completed so far during 2024.
"Furthermore, assay results have confirmed no mineralisation has been intersected at the plant site sterilisation drilling programme, allowing us to continue with our mine site designs and permitting.
"We look forward to updating shareholders on our ongoing progress."
New Drilling Results
Assay results have been received for 4,101m of resource extension and sterilisation RC drilling completed so far in 2024 at the Ewoyaa Lithium Project. The results include 924m of resource extension drilling at the Dog-Leg target and 3,177m of sterilisation drilling at the proposed plant site. High-grade extensional drilling results have been reported at the new Dog-Leg target. The reported results sit outside of the current MRE1 (refer Table 1, Figure 1, Figure 2, Appendix 1 and Appendix 2).
Drilling is designed to intersect pegmatite bodies perpendicular to strike and dip to approximate true width as best possible. This is not always achieved due to the variable nature of pegmatites or challenging drill access, with some drill intersections drilled down-dip as apparent widths. Accordingly, estimated true widths are included in the intersections table in Appendix 1.
Table 1: Drill intersection highlights at greater than 5 Li x m, reported at a 0.4% Li2O cut-off and maximum of 4m of internal dilution
|
Hole_ID |
From_m |
To_m |
Interval_m |
Hole depth_m |
Li2O% |
Intersection |
metal content Li x m |
Hole Purpose |
Deposit |
|
GRC0177 |
126 |
153 |
27 |
180 |
1.85 |
GRC0177: 27m at 1.85% Li2O from 126m |
49.85 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
126 |
141 |
15 |
180 |
1.07 |
GRC1059: 15m at 1.08% Li2O from 126m |
16.06 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1057 |
38 |
48 |
10 |
120 |
0.75 |
GRC1057: 10m at 0.76% Li2O from 38m |
7.51 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
88 |
96 |
8 |
107 |
0.93 |
GRC1058: 8m at 0.93% Li2O from 88m |
7.4 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
Note: Metal content is based on intercept rather than estimated true width
New drilling at the Dog-Leg target (refer announcement of 28 November 2023) has delivered further mineralised drill intersections, predominantly outside of the current MRE1. Highlights include hole GRC0177: 27m at 1.85% Li2O from 126m and hole GRC1059: 15m at 1.08% Li2O from 126m (refer Figure 1 and Figure 2).
The results are significant in that an apparent shallow dipping mineralised pegmatite body has been intersected in multiple drill holes with true widths of 20m to 35m which has the potential to add significant near surface resource tonnes.
Figure 1: Location of reported assay results with highlight drill intersections on greyscale topography background
Figure 2: Cross-section A-A' looking west showing assay results received for hole GRC0177 at the Dog-Leg target
Figure 3: Cross-section B-B' looking northwards showing assay results received for hole GRC1059 at the Dog-Leg target
The Company completed 3,177m of sterilisation drilling in 21 holes at the proposed plant site. No mineralisation was reported in drilling, providing confidence in the proposed plant site location. The drill rig has now been demobilised, with drilling planned to recommence in H2 2024.
Regional exploration programmes continuing concurrently in order to advance the Company's exploration project pipeline. The Company will incorporate the results of drilling completed in 2023 and drilling completed so far in 2024 into a MRE upgrade for the Project, targeted for mid-year.
Sample preparation was completed by Intertek Ghana and assay by Intertek Perth, with all reported results passing QA/QC protocols, providing confidence in reported results.
End note
1 Ore Reserves, Mineral Resources and Production Targets
The information in this announcement that relates to Ore Reserves, Mineral Resources and Production Targets complies with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code). The information in this announcement relating to the Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") of 35.3Mt @ 1.25% Li2O for Ewoyaa is extracted from the Company's announcement dated 1 February 2023, which is available at atlanticlithium.com.au. The MRE includes a total of 3.5Mt @ 1.37% Li2O in the Measured category, 24.5Mt @ 1.25% Li2O in the Indicated category and 7.4Mt @ 1.16% Li2O in the Inferred category. The Company confirms that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Mineral Resource Estimate continue to apply. Material assumptions for the Project have been revised on grant of the Mining Lease for the Project, announced by the Company on 20 October 2023. The Company it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in this announcement or the announcements dated 1 February 2023 and 20 October 2023.
Competent Persons
Information in this report relating to the exploration results is based on data reviewed by Mr Lennard Kolff (MEcon. Geol., BSc. Hons ARSM), Chief Geologist of the Company. Mr Kolff is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists who has in excess of 20 years' experience in mineral exploration and is a Qualified Person under the AIM Rules. Mr Kolff consents to the inclusion of the information in the form and context in which it appears.
Information in this report relating to Mineral Resources was compiled by Shaun Searle, a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Searle has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves' and is a Qualified Person under the AIM Rules. Mr Searle is a director of
This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of the Market Abuse Regulation (EU) 596/2014 as it forms part of
For any further information, please contact:
Atlantic Lithium Limited
Neil Herbert (Executive Chairman)
Amanda Harsas (Finance Director and Company Secretary)
|
|
www.atlanticlithium.com.au |
|||
|
|
IR@atlanticlithium.com.au |
|||
|
|
Tel: +61 2 8072 0640 |
|||
|
SP Angel Corporate Finance LLP Nominated Adviser Jeff Keating Charlie Bouverat Tel: +44 (0)20 3470 0470 |
Yellow Jersey PR Limited Charles Goodwin Bessie Elliot Tel: +44 (0)20 3004 9512
|
Canaccord Genuity Limited Financial Adviser: Raj Khatri ( Duncan
Corporate Broking: James Asensio Tel: +44 (0) 20 7523 4500 |
|
|
Notes to Editors:
About Atlantic Lithium
Atlantic Lithium is an AIM and ASX-listed lithium company advancing its flagship project, the Ewoyaa Lithium Project, a significant lithium spodumene pegmatite discovery in
The Definitive Feasibility Study for the Project indicates the production of 3.6Mt of spodumene concentrate over a 12-year mine life, making it one of the largest spodumene concentrate mines in the world.
The Project, which was awarded a Mining Lease in October 2023, is being developed under an earn-in agreement with Piedmont Lithium Inc.
Atlantic Lithium holds a portfolio of lithium projects within 509km2 and 774km2 of granted and under-application tenure across
Appendix 1 New drill intersections reported in hole ID order, reported at a 0.4% Li2O cut-off and maximum 4m of internal dilution
|
Hole_ID |
From_m |
To_m |
Interval_m |
Est. true thick_m |
Hole depth_m |
Li2O% |
Intersection |
Comment |
metal content Li x m |
Hole Purpose |
Deposit |
|
GRC0177 |
126 |
153 |
27 |
26 |
180 |
1.85 |
GRC0177: 27m at 1.85% Li2O from 126m |
|
49.85 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC0177 |
153 |
155 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1036 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1037 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1038 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1038 |
11 |
12 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1038 |
134 |
137 |
3 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1039 |
138 |
144 |
6 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1040 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1041 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1042 |
119 |
120 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1042 |
123 |
125 |
2 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1042 |
134 |
136 |
2 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1042 |
137 |
140 |
3 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1043 |
133 |
142 |
9 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1044 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1045 |
142 |
143 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1046 |
76 |
77 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1046 |
92 |
100 |
8 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1047 |
108 |
109 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1047 |
119 |
121 |
2 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1047 |
123 |
124 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1048 |
91 |
92 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1048 |
131 |
132 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1049 |
131 |
136 |
5 |
n/a |
160 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1049 |
137 |
140 |
3 |
n/a |
160 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1049 |
146 |
151 |
5 |
n/a |
160 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1049 |
152 |
156 |
4 |
n/a |
160 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1050 |
116 |
123 |
7 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1050 |
124 |
126 |
2 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1051 |
148 |
150 |
2 |
n/a |
167 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1051 |
153 |
155 |
2 |
n/a |
167 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1051 |
157 |
159 |
2 |
n/a |
167 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1051 |
162 |
163 |
1 |
n/a |
167 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1052 |
61 |
62 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1053 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1054 |
139 |
140 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1055 |
|
|
150 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
No pegmatite intersected |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1056 |
21 |
22 |
1 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1056 |
24 |
28 |
4 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1056 |
51 |
53 |
2 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1056 |
66 |
70 |
4 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1056 |
71 |
75 |
4 |
n/a |
150 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Sterilisation Drilling |
plant site |
|
GRC1057 |
3 |
38 |
35 |
n/a |
120 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1057 |
38 |
48 |
10 |
8 |
120 |
0.75 |
GRC1057: 10m at 0.76% Li2O from 38m |
|
7.51 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1057 |
48 |
49 |
1 |
n/a |
120 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
49 |
50 |
1 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
53 |
56 |
3 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
59 |
62 |
3 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
62 |
67 |
5 |
4 |
107 |
0.30 |
GRC1058: 5m at 0.31% Li2O from 62m |
|
1.51 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
68 |
69 |
1 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
73 |
77 |
4 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
80 |
81 |
1 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
81 |
83 |
2 |
n/a |
107 |
1.43 |
GRC1058: 2m at 1.43% Li2O from 81m |
|
2.85 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
83 |
84 |
1 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
86 |
88 |
2 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
88 |
96 |
8 |
5 |
107 |
0.93 |
GRC1058: 8m at 0.93% Li2O from 88m |
|
7.4 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
96 |
97 |
1 |
n/a |
107 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
5 |
12 |
7 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
14 |
17 |
3 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
20 |
22 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
78 |
82 |
4 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
121 |
126 |
5 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
126 |
141 |
15 |
14 |
180 |
1.07 |
GRC1059: 15m at 1.08% Li2O from 126m |
|
16.06 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
141 |
142 |
1 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
144 |
146 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1060 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1060 |
9 |
11 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1060 |
65 |
72 |
7 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1060 |
119 |
121 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1060 |
144 |
146 |
2 |
n/a |
180 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1061 |
34 |
36 |
2 |
n/a |
157 |
|
no significant intersections |
weathered pegmatite |
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1061 |
80 |
82 |
2 |
n/a |
157 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1061 |
86 |
87 |
1 |
n/a |
157 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1061 |
142 |
147 |
5 |
n/a |
157 |
|
no significant intersections |
|
|
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
Note 1: Metal content is based on intercept rather than estimated true width
Note 2: Estimated true width only included for mineralised intersections greater than 4m
Appendix 2 Newly reported drill hole collar locations
|
Hole_ID |
Hole depth_m |
Easting |
Northing |
Elevation |
Dip |
Hole Azimuth |
Hole Purpose |
Deposit |
|
GRC0177 |
180 |
715783 |
579892 |
68.74 |
-50 |
210 |
Resource Drilling; hole re-entry |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1036 |
150 |
713938 |
577796 |
20.52 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1037 |
150 |
714035 |
577810 |
24.05 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1038 |
150 |
714135 |
577836 |
23.69 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1039 |
150 |
713848 |
577878 |
22.36 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1040 |
150 |
713950 |
577898 |
24.67 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1041 |
150 |
714045 |
577913 |
30.41 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1042 |
150 |
713816 |
577973 |
23.40 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1043 |
150 |
713919 |
577993 |
23.27 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1044 |
150 |
714015 |
578011 |
26.90 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1045 |
150 |
714150 |
578034 |
48.34 |
-50 |
80 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1046 |
150 |
713709 |
578057 |
26.62 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1047 |
150 |
713807 |
578076 |
24.09 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1048 |
150 |
713903 |
578088 |
25.70 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1049 |
160 |
714006 |
578107 |
25.23 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1050 |
150 |
713831 |
578180 |
25.89 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1051 |
167 |
714012 |
578211 |
27.25 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1052 |
150 |
714105 |
578231 |
27.68 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1053 |
150 |
714200 |
578139 |
54.19 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1054 |
150 |
714210 |
578145 |
55.21 |
-50 |
80 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1055 |
150 |
714104 |
578128 |
34.33 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1056 |
150 |
714240 |
577741 |
31.69 |
-50 |
260 |
Sterilisation Drilling |
Plant site |
|
GRC1057 |
120 |
715826 |
579744 |
38.07 |
-90 |
0 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1058 |
107 |
715905 |
579787 |
26.25 |
-60 |
305 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1059 |
180 |
715641 |
579868 |
32.92 |
-50 |
125 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1060 |
180 |
715624 |
579942 |
38.93 |
-50 |
125 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
|
GRC1061 |
157 |
715681 |
579889 |
35.27 |
-70 |
125 |
Resource Drilling |
Dog-Leg |
Note: Grid references reported in projection UTM, WGS84, Zone 30N
The following extract from the JORC Code 2012 Table 1 is provided for compliance with the Code requirements for the reporting of Exploration Results.
JORC Code Table 1: Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections).
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Sampling techniques |
· Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. · Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. · Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. · In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1m samples from which 3kg was pulverised to produce a 30g charge for fire assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. |
· RC drill holes were routinely sampled at 1m intervals with a nominal 3-6kg sub-sample split off for assay using a rig-mounted cone splitter at 1m intervals. · DD holes were quarter core sampled at 1m intervals or to geological contacts for geochemical analysis. · For assaying, splits from all prospective ore zones (i.e. logged pegmatites +/- interburden) were sent for assay. Outside of these zones, the splits were composited to 4m using a portable riffle splitter. · Holes without pegmatite were not assayed. · Approximately 5% of all samples submitted were standards and coarse blanks. Blanks were typically inserted with the interpreted ore zones after the drilling was completed. · Approximately 2.5% of samples submitted were duplicate samples collected after logging using a riffle splitter and sent to an umpire laboratory. This ensured zones of interest were duplicated and not missed during alternative routine splitting of the primary sample. · Prior to the December 2018 - SGS Tarkwa was used for sample preparation (PRP100) and subsequently forwarded to SGS Johannesburg for analysis; and later SGS Vancouver for analysis (ICP90A). · Post December 2018 to present - Intertek Tarkwa was used for sample preparation (SP02/SP12) and subsequently forwarded to Intertek Perth for analysis (FP6/MS/OES - 21 element combination Na2O2 fusion with combination OES/MS). · ALS Laboratory in |
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Drilling techniques |
· Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.). |
· Six phases of drilling were undertaken at the Project using RC and DD techniques. All the RC drilling used face sampling hammers. · Phase 1 and 2 programmes used a 5.25 inch hammers while Phase 3 used a 5.75-inch hammer. · All DD holes were completed using PQ and HQ core from surface (85mm and 63.5mm). · All DD holes were drilled in conjunction with a Reflex ACT II tool; to provide an accurate determination of the bottom-of-hole orientation. · All fresh core was orientated to allow for geological, structural and geotechnical logging by a Company geologist. |
|
Drill sample recovery |
· Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. · Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. · Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. |
· A semi-quantitative estimate of sample recovery was completed for the vast majority of drilling. This involved weighing both the bulk samples and splits and calculating theoretical recoveries using assumed densities. Where samples were not weighed, qualitative descriptions of the sample size were recorded. Some sample loss was recorded in the collaring of the RC drill holes. · DD recoveries were measured and recorded. Recoveries in excess of 95.8% have been achieved for the DD drilling programme. Drill sample recovery and quality is adequate for the drilling technique employed. · The DD twin programme has identified a positive grade bias for iron in the RC compared to the DD results. |
|
Logging |
· Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. · Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography. · The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. |
· All drill sample intervals were geologically logged by Company geologists. · Where appropriate, geological logging recorded the abundance of specific minerals, rock types and weathering using a standardised logging system that captured preliminary metallurgical domains. · All logging is qualitative, except for the systematic collection of magnetic susceptibility data which could be considered semi quantitative. · Strip logs have been generated for each drill hole to cross-check geochemical data with geological logging. · A small sample of washed RC drill material was retained in chip trays for future reference and validation of geological logging, and sample reject materials from the laboratory are stored at the Company's field office. · All drill holes have been logged and reviewed by Company technical staff. · The logging is of sufficient detail to support the current reporting of a Mineral Resource. |
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation |
· If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. · If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether sampled wet or dry. · For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. · Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. · Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. · Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. |
· RC samples were cone split at the drill rig. For interpreted waste zones the 1 or 2m rig splits were later composited using a riffle splitter into 4m composite samples. · DD core was cut with a core saw and selected half core samples dispatched to Nagrom Laboratory in · The other half of the core, including the bottom-of-hole orientation line, was retained for geological reference. · The remaining DD core was quarter cored for geochemical analysis. · Since December 2018, samples were submitted to Intertek Tarkwa (SP02/SP12) for sample preparation. Samples were weighed, dried and crushed to -2mm in a Boyd crusher with an 800-1,200g rotary split, producing a nominal 1,500g split crushed sample; which was subsequently pulverised in a LM2 ring mill. Samples were pulverised to a nominal 85% passing 75µm. All the preparation equipment was flushed with barren material prior to the commencement of the job. Coarse reject material was kept in the original bag. Lab sizing analysis was undertaken on a nominal 1:25 basis. Final pulverised samples (20g) were airfreighted to Intertek in · The vast majority of samples were drilled dry. Moisture content was logged qualitatively. All intersections of the water table were recorded in the database. · Field sample duplicates were taken to evaluate whether samples were representative and understand repeatability, with good repeatability. · Sample sizes and laboratory preparation techniques were appropriate and industry standard. |
|
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests |
· The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. · For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. · Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. |
· Analysis for lithium and a suite of other elements for Phase 1 drilling was undertaken at SGS Johannesburg / · Review of standards and blanks from the initial submission to · Results of analyses for field sample duplicates are consistent with the style of mineralisation and considered to be representative. Internal laboratory QAQC checks are reported by the laboratory, including sizing analysis to monitor preparation and internal laboratory QA/QC. These were reviewed and retained in the company drill hole database. · 155 samples were sent to an umpire laboratory (ALS) and/assayed using equivalent techniques, with results demonstrating good repeatability. · Atlantic Lithium's review of QAQC suggests the SGS Vancouver and Intertek Perth laboratories performed within acceptable limits. · No geophysical methods or hand-held XRF units have been used for determination of grades in the Mineral Resource. |
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Verification of sampling and assaying |
· The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. · The use of twinned holes. · Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. · Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
|
· Significant intersections were visually field verified by company geologists and Shaun Searle of · Drill hole data was compiled and digitally captured by Company geologists in the field. Where hand-written information was recorded, all hardcopy records were kept and archived after digitising. · Phase 1 and 2 drilling programmes were captured on paper or locked excel templates and migrated to an MS Access database and then into Datashed (industry standard drill hole database management software). The Phase 3 to 6 programmes were captured using LogChief which has inbuilt data validation protocols. All analytical results were transferred digitally and loaded into the database by a Datashed consultant. · The data was audited, and any discrepancies checked by the Company personnel before being updated in the database. · Twin DD holes were drilled to verify results of the RC drilling programmes. Results indicate that there is iron contamination in the RC drilling process. · Reported drill hole intercepts were compiled by the Chief Geologist. · Adjustments to the original assay data included converting Li ppm to Li2O%. |
|
Location of data points |
· Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. · Specification of the grid system used. · Quality and adequacy of topographic control. |
· The collar locations were surveyed in WGS84 Zone 30 North using DGPS survey equipment, which is accurate to 0.11mm in both horizontal and vertical directions. All holes were surveyed by qualified surveyors. Once validated, the survey data was uploaded into Datashed. · RC drill holes were routinely down hole surveyed every 6m using a combination of EZ TRAC 1.5 (single shot) and Reflex Gyroscopic tools. · After the tenth drill hole, the survey method was changed to Reflex Gyro survey with 6m down hole data points measured during an end-of-hole survey. · All Phase 2 and 3 drill holes were surveyed initially using the Reflex Gyro tool, but later using the more efficient Reflex SPRINT tool. Phase 4 and 5 drill holes were surveyed using a Reflex SPRINT tool. · LiDAR survey Southern Mapping to produce rectified colour images and a digital terrain model (DTM) 32km2, Aircraft C206 aircraft-mounted LiDAR Riegl Q780 Camera Hasselblad H5Dc with 50mm Fixfocus lens. · Coordinate system: WGS84 UTM30N with accuracy to ±0.04. · The topographic survey and photo mosaic output from the survey is accurate to 20mm. · Locational accuracy at collar and down the drill hole is considered appropriate for resource estimation purposes. |
|
Data spacing and distribution |
· Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. · Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. · Whether sample compositing has been applied. |
· The RC holes were initially drilled on 100m spaced sections and 50m hole spacings orientated at 300° or 330° with dips ranging from -50° to -60°. Planned hole orientations/dips were occasionally adjusted due to pad and/or access constraints. · Hole spacing was reduced to predominantly 40m spaced sections and 40m hole spacings, with infill to 20m by 15m in the upper portions of the Ewoyaa Main deposit. Holes are generally angled perpendicular to interpreted mineralisation orientations at the Project. · Samples were composited to 1m intervals prior to estimation. |
|
|
|
|
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure |
· Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. · If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. |
· The drill line and drill hole orientation are oriented as close as practicable to perpendicular to the orientation of the general mineralised orientation. · Most of the drilling intersects the mineralisation at close to 90 degrees ensuring intersections are representative of true widths. It is possible that new geological interpretations and/or infill drilling requirements may result in changes to drill orientations on future programmes. · No orientation based sampling bias has been identified in the data. |
|
Sample security |
· The measures taken to ensure sample security. |
· Samples were stored on site prior to road transportation by Company personnel to the SGS preparation laboratory. · With the change of laboratory to Intertek, samples were picked up by the contractor and transported to the sample preparation facility in Tarkwa. |
|
Audits or reviews |
· The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. |
· Prior to the drilling programme, a third-party Project review was completed by an independent consultant experienced with the style of mineralisation. · In addition, Shaun Searle of |
'JORC Code 2012 Table 1' Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section).
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Mineral tenement and land tenure status |
· Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. · The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. |
· The Project covers two contiguous licences the Mankessim (RL 3/55) and Mankessim South (PL3/109) licence. · The Mankessim is a joint-venture, with the licence in the name of the joint-venture party (Barari DV Ghana Limited). Document number: 0853652-18. · The Project occurs within a Mineral Prospecting licence and was renewed on the 27 July 2021 for a further three-year period, valid until 27 July 2024. · The Mankessim South licence is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Green Metals Resources. The Mineral Prospecting licence renewal was submitted in Nov 2022 for a further three-year period. · The tenement is in good standing with no known impediments. · Mining Lease granted in respect of the Project for a period of 15 years, effective 20 October 2023 until 19 October 2038, file number APL-M-93. |
|
Exploration done by other parties |
· Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. |
· Historical trenching and mapping were completed by the Ghana Geological survey during the 1960s. But for some poorly referenced historical maps, none of the technical data from this work was located. Many of the historical trenches were located, cleaned and re-logged. No historical drilling was completed. |
|
Geology |
· Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. |
· Pegmatite-hosted lithium deposits are the target for exploration. This style of mineralisation typically forms as dykes and sills intruding or in proximity to granite source rocks. · Surface geology within the Project area typically consists of sequences of staurolite and garnet-bearing pelitic schist and granite with lesser pegmatite and mafic intrusives. Outcrops are typically sparse and confined to ridge tops with colluvium and mottled laterite blanketing much of the undulating terrain making geological mapping challenging. The hills are often separated by broad, sandy drainages. |
|
Drillhole Information |
· A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: · easting and northing of the drill hole collar · elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar · dip and azimuth of the hole · downhole length and interception depth · hole length · If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case. |
· No exploration results are being reported. · All information was included in the appendices (of the Mineral Resource report). No drill hole information were excluded (from the Mineral Resource report). |
|
Criteria |
JORC Code Explanation |
Commentary |
|
Data aggregation methods |
· In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. · Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. · The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. |
· Exploration results are not being reported. · Not applicable as a Mineral Resource is being reported. · No metal equivalent values are being reported. |
|
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths |
· These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. · If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. · If it is not known and only the downhole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'downhole length, true width not known'). |
· The drill line and drill hole orientation are oriented as close to 90° degrees to the orientation of the anticipated mineralised orientation as practicable. · The majority of the drilling intersects the mineralisation between 60° and 80° degrees. |
|
Diagrams |
· Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported. These should include, but not be limited to, a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. |
· Relevant diagrams have been included within the Mineral Resource report 'Ewoyaa Lithium Project Mineral Resource Estimate' dated 25 March 2023. |
|
Balanced reporting |
· Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results. |
· All hole collars were surveyed WGS84 Zone 30 North grid using a differential GPS. All RC and DD holes were down-hole surveyed with a north-seeking gyroscopic tool. · Exploration results are not being reported. |
|
Other substantive exploration data |
· Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. |
· Results were estimated from drill hole assay data, with geological logging used to aid interpretation of mineralised contact positions. · Geological observations are included in the report. |
|
Further work |
· The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). · Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. |
· Follow up RC and DD drilling may be undertaken. · Further metallurgical test work may be required as the Project progresses through the study stages. · Drill spacing is currently considered adequate for the current level of interrogation of the Project. |
~end~
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.