Skip to main content

AI assistant

Sign in to chat with this filing

The assistant answers questions, extracts KPIs, and summarises risk factors directly from the filing text.

Celsius Resources Limited Capital/Financing Update 2017

Sep 3, 2017

10450_rns_2017-09-03_52185d14-8c23-49f1-a4e1-0b502107b9f4.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

ASX RELEASEASX RELEASE | 4 September 2017 | 16 February 2017

CELSIUS MOVES TO 95% INTEREST AT EXPANDED OPUWO COBALT PROJECT

HIGHLIGHTS

  • Celsius moves to immediate 95% interest in Opuwo Cobalt Project.

  • Gecko Namibia to become the largest shareholder of Celsius as a result of the transaction.

  • New licences surrounding Opuwo totaling approximately 782 km[2] acquired (95% interest) from Gecko Namibia.

  • Over 100 km of cobalt-copper prospective horizon now under control of Celsius.

  • Pine van Wyk (Gecko Namibia Managing Director) appointed to Celsius Board.

Celsius Resources Limited (“Celsius” or “the Company”) is pleased to announce significant positive developments regarding the ownership structure and expansion of the scope of the Opuwo Cobalt Project (“Project”) in Namibia.

Celsius Managing Director, Brendan Borg commented:

“The desire of the Company’s Joint Venture Partner, Gecko Namibia, to ensure they maintain their interest in the Opuwo Project, through taking a direct shareholding in Celsius, is in our view a striking endorsement for the Project. We look forward to working with Gecko’s board nominee, Pine van Wyk, whose demonstrated experience in developing and operating mines in Namibia will be of significant benefit to the Company. The expanded landholding announced today places Celsius in a dominant position in a region that has the potential to be a significant cobalt and copper district.”

Background

Prior to today’s announcement, Celsius held a 30% interest in the Project (EPL 4346), earning up to 76% via staged expenditure of AUD 2.5 million. A call option provided the ability for Celsius to acquire an additional 20% from Gecko Namibia (Pty) Ltd (“Gecko”) for AUD 1.25 million, prior to the completion of a Bankable Feasibility Study.

==> picture [568 x 63] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Immediate 95% interest in Opuwo and acquisition of surrounding licences

Gecko and Celsius have entered into an acquisition agreement (“Acquisition Agreement”) pursuant to which Celsius will move to a 95% interest in EPL 4346 (through its shareholding in Gecko Cobalt Holdings (Pty) Ltd) in consideration for issuing Gecko with 31,250,000 shares in Celsius. Additionally, Gecko has agreed to sell to Celsius a 95% interest in three surrounding licences in the Opuwo region (the “Additional EPLs”), covering approximately 782 km[2] , taking the contiguous landholding of the expanded Celsius owned Opuwo Project to approximately 1,470 km[2] , for consideration of 12,500,000 shares in Celsius. The remaining 5% in all project licences will be retained by Amor Investments (Amor), a local Namibian Company owned by historically disadvantaged Namibians.

Gecko has agreed to a voluntary escrow lock on the Celsius shares it receives as 50% for 6 months from completion and 50% for 12 months from completion. The Company does not require Shareholder Approval for this issue of shares as they fall within the capacity available under Listing Rule 7.1. Completion under the Acquisition Agreement remains subject to Gecko making an application in terms of Section 39(1) of the Minerals Act for the approval by the Minister of the transfer of the Additional EPLs to Gecko Cobalt Mining (Pty) Ltd). The ownership structure of the entities following completion under the Acquisition Agreement is set out in Figure 2 in the “About Gecko” section below.

Highly Prospective New Licences

Celsius has so far defined mineralisation over approximately 15 km of strike, of a potential total of 30 km at the existing Opuwo licence, EPL 4346. The new licences acquired by Celsius extend the prospective cobalt and copper stratigraphic horizon to over 100 km. Historical sampling and laboratory assays over this additional strike zone, consisting of just 16 samples, yielded results of up to 8.3% copper and 0.32% cobalt , illustrating the high potential to identify further cobalt and copper mineralisation on the new licences. Details of the available historical sampling are provided in Appendix 1.

The expansion of the land position at Opuwo allows Celsius to explore for possible source zones and additional cobalt-copper mineralisation in the vicinity of the known DOF mineralisation. To this end, an airborne electromagnetic survey is planned for Q4 2017 to identify possible accumulations of massive sulphides and potential extensions to the known Dolomite Ore Formation (DOF) cobalt-copper mineralisation. This survey will include the new licences.

In addition to the cobalt-copper mineralisation investigated by Celsius to date, and other similar targets, the new licences are considered to have significant potential for other commodities including zinc-lead-vanadium (Otuziru Prospect), copper-gold (Chirumbu Prospect), chromium-vanadium (Jimi Prospect) and lead-zinc-silver (NOTZ Prospect) (Figure 1).

Pine van Wyk to join Celsius Board

As a result of this transaction, Gecko Namibia will become the largest shareholder of Celsius with a shareholding of approximately 8.68%. The Managing Director of the Gecko Namibia, Mr. Pine van Wyk, will join the board of Celsius with immediate effect, as a non-executive director.

Pine van Wyk (NHD Met. Eng., B.Com, MBA) is a Metallurgical Engineer by profession, with extensive experience in the mining industry, particularly in developing and operating mines in Namibia. He holds commercial qualifications (B.Com and MBA), with a focus on project management. He spent eight years at

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 2

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Rössing Uranium, where his roles included Superintendent Acid Plant and Metallurgical Services, Superintendent Strategic Projects and Engineering Manager. In 2005, he joined Paladin Energy Ltd at their Langer Heinrich Uranium project as Operations Manager, taking the project from feasibility to full production. In 2008, he joined Gecko Namibia as Director Projects and in 2014 became Managing Director of the Gecko Namibia group of companies.

New Celsius Director, Pine van Wyk commented:

“Gecko Namibia is excited about the strategic joint venture with Celsius. The experience and capacity of Gecko in the Namibian mining industry will add significant value to the Opuwo Project. The Gecko in-country support base enables Celsius to effectively accelerate the development of this Project. I further believe that the additional licences, now under the control of Celsius, bring the potential to develop a world class project. I am looking forward to working with the Board of Celsius to develop another significant project in Namibia.”

==> picture [483 x 331] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Expanded Licence Position

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 3

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

About Gecko Namibia

Gecko Namibia (Pty) Ltd is a wholly Namibian owned company. In addition to developing its own projects in the mineral and chemical industry, Gecko focusses on providing services to the mining industry of Namibia by providing exploration and blasthole drilling, contract mining, chemical analyses, R&D metallurgical test work, civil engineering and construction, process design and plant construction.

Gecko currently operates the Okanjande Graphite Mine in partnership with major global graphite producer, Imerys, and the Cape Cross Salt operations. It is also the owner of the Okorusu Fluorspar Mine in northern Namibia. Additionally, the Gecko Group is one of the largest holders of Exclusive Prospecting Licences in Namibia, covering a large variety of commodities.

==> picture [483 x 329] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Ownership Structure of the Opuwo Cobalt Project (Post transaction completion)

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 4

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Background on the Opuwo Cobalt Project

The Opuwo Cobalt Project is located in northwestern Namibia, approximately 800 km by road from the capital, Windhoek, and approximately 750 km from the port at Walvis Bay (Figure 3). The Project has excellent infrastructure, with the regional capital of Opuwo approximately 30 km to the south, where services such as accommodation, fuel, supplies, and an airport and hospital are available. Good quality bitumen roads connect Opuwo to Windhoek and Walvis Bay. The Ruacana hydro power station (320 MW), which supplies the majority of Namibia’s power, is located nearby, and a 66 kV transmission line passes through the eastern boundary of the Project.

On completion of the Acquisition Agreement, Celsius will own 95% of the 4 Exclusive Prospecting Licences comprising the Project, covering approximately 1,470 km[2] .

==> picture [225 x 305] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Location of the Opuwo Cobalt Project, Namibia

Background on Cobalt

Cobalt has a diverse range of metallurgical and chemical uses ranging from aircraft engines to rechargeable batteries. Strong demand for rechargeable batteries has been the biggest growth driver for cobalt consumption and demand is forecast to continue to increase as batteries are increasingly adopted in households and vehicles. Cobalt cathode chemistry continues to be the product of choice for applications requiring thin, flexible and high energy density batteries with the best possible cycle life. Furthermore, automotive related demand for cobalt

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 5

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

containing battery materials is expected to rapidly increase in coming years with increasing sales of plug in hybrid and fully electric vehicles.

In its 2016 market outlook respected industry group CRU stated: “The refined cobalt market will fall into a 3,000 tonne deficit this year following seven years of overcapacity and oversupply. CRU anticipates prices to increase onward into 2017 as global demand for refined cobalt exceeds the 100,000 tonne mark and mine and refined supply tightens.”

Cobalt resources and production are concentrated in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has close to half of the world’s cobalt reserves and accounts for more than half of the world’s production. The balance of the world’s cobalt is concentrated in Australia, Cuba, Zambia, New Caledonia, Canada, Russia and Brazil. Notably, the United States has no domestic resources of cobalt ore. As a result of the industrial importance of cobalt and the concentration of supply, cobalt is classed as a strategic mineral by the USGS and as a critical raw material by the EU.

  • ENDS -

Celsius Resources Contact Information

Level 3, 216 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000 PO Box 7775 Cloisters Square Perth WA 6850 P: +61 8 9226 4500 F: +61 8 9226 4300 E: [email protected] www.celsiusresources.com.au

Competent Persons Statement

The information in this report that relates to historical Exploration Results and other technical information for the Opuwo Cobalt Project complies with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves ( JORC Code ) and has been compiled by Dr. Rainer Ellmies, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Dr. Ellmies is the General Manager of Gecko Exploration (Pty) Ltd which owns an interest in the Opuwo Cobalt Project, and post transaction completion, shares in Celsius. He 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 JORC Code. Dr. Ellmies consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. The Exploration Results are based on standard industry practices for drilling, logging, sampling, assay methods including quality assurance and quality control measures as detailed in Appendix 2.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 6

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1. Results from historical DOF sampling on new licences

Sample
Name
UTM Zone 33S
Easting (m)
UTM Zone 33S
Northing (m)
Co(ppm) Cu(%) Comment
KK1644
KK1645
K046
KK1614
KK1631
V02
V03
V05
OVWR1
OVWR2
RCC1-1
RCC1-2
RCC1-3
EWIS
HZWIS
BZIS
350374.0
351265.6
351276.3
353584.3
352897.9
389326.0
388996.0
388974.8
388622.3
388643.5
404503.0
404311.0
404321.6
398120.0
378417.7
365926.5
8027128.2
8026957.9
8026946.9
8027296.1
8026959.0
8037940.3
8038181.9
8038170.7
8038633.5
8038633.6
8034887.5
8035130.0
8035119.0
8049638.4
8037500.5
8037520.0
241
1773
4.9
54.8
3200
180
12
14
1.4
1.6
10
4
12
0.7
86.7
2.4
0.84
0.01
0.00
0.07
0.36
0.00
0.25
8.30
1.57
2.54
0.02
0.94
0.10
6.23
4.06
1.64
Pb - 1.67%
Au - 1.09g/t

Note:

  1. It is recommended that the supporting information contained in Appendix 2 is read in conjunction with these results.

Appendix 2. The following tables are provided to ensure compliance with the JORC Code (2012) requirements for the reporting of Exploration Results for the Opuwo Cobalt Project

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling
techniques

Nature and quality of sampling (eg
cut channels, random chips, or
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. _

Historical rock chip / grab sampling carried out by various geologists.

Samples chosen for collection and assay at the geologist’s discretion.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 7

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Aspects of the determination of
mineralisation that are Material to the
Public Report. In cases where
‘industry standard’ work has been
done this would be relatively simple
(eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was
used to obtain 1 m samples from
which 3 kg was pulverised to produce
a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other
cases more explanation may be
required, such as where there is
coarse gold that has inherent
sampling problems. Unusual
commodities or mineralisation types
(eg submarine nodules) may warrant
disclosure of detailed information.
Drilling
techniques

Drill type (eg core, reverse
circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary
air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)
and details (eg core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond
tails, face-sampling bit or other type,
whether core is oriented and if so, by
_what method, etc). _

No drilling reported so not applicable.
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.

No drilling reported so not applicable.

Grab samples not representative, used only to verify presence of
mineralisation for due diligence and guide future work programmes.
Logging
Whether core and chip samples have
been geologically and geotechnically
logged to a level of detail to support
appropriate Mineral Resource
estimation, mining studies and
metallurgical studies.

Whether logging is qualitative or
quantitative in nature. Core (or
costean, channel, etc) photography.

The total length and percentage of
the relevant intersections logged.

Geological notes taken for each sample, used to guide future work
programmes.
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
samplepreparation technique.

Grab samples not representative, to verify presence of mineralisation for
due diligence and guide future work programmes.

Best endeavours made when collecting grab samples to take largest
possible sample of item of interest.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 8

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

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. _
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. _

Historical samples submitted to ACME, Actlabs, ALS, Bureau Veritas and
SGS for analysis by ICP-OES or ICP-MS.

No geophysical tools quoted in this report.

Standard lab QA/QC only.

Absence of QA/QC sampling from grab samples not believed to be
significant due to the first pass nature of this sampling.
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..

Not completed.

No twin holes

No adjustment to assay data.
Location of
data points

Accuracy and quality of surveys used
to locate drill holes (collar and down-
hole surveys), trenches, mine
workings and other locations used in
Mineral Resource estimation.

Specification of the grid system used.

Quality and adequacy of topographic
control.

All sampling located by GPS

UTM grid WGS84 Zone 33 (South).
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.

Samples taken in ad hoc nature, not on consistent spacing.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 9

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

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.

Not applicable / possible in grab sampling.

Further sampling (and drilling) will better determine the orientation of the
geological features and mineralisation and enable any biases to be
determined.
Sample
security

The measures taken to ensure
sample security.

Samples delivered to laboratory by Kunene Resources Namibia.
Audits or
reviews

The results of any audits or reviews
of sampling techniques and data.

No review has been carried out.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral
tenement and
land tenure
status

Type, reference name/number,
location and ownership including
agreements or material issues with
third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties,
native title interests, historical sites,
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 Opuwo Cobalt Project comprises four Exclusive Prospecting Licences
(EPL4346, EPL 4350, EPL 4351 and EPL 4540) owned by Kunene
Resources (Pty) Ltd, a subsidiary of Gecko Namibia.

Three licences are active and one is currently in the renewal process.
Exploration
done by other
parties

Acknowledgment and appraisal of
exploration by other parties.

Previous work carried out by Kunene Resources includes geological
mapping, outcrop sampling, soil sampling, high resolution magnetic and
radiometric data and hyperspectral data.
Geology
Deposit type, geological setting and
style of mineralisation.

Copper-cobalt mineralisation is developed in a sedimentary package of
likely Nosib succession. Arkose quartzitic sandstones and conglomerates of
the footwall Nosib Formation are exposed to the west and southwest

The upper Nosib or Ombombo Formation consists of a sequence of finely
intercalated siltstones and shales with minor sandstone, marlstone,
limestone and dolostone layers.
Drill hole
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:
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

No drilling reported.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 10

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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,
maximum and/or minimum grade
truncations (eg cutting of high
grades) and cut-off grades are
usually Material and should be
stated.

Where aggregate intercepts
incorporate short lengths of high
grade results and longer lengths of
low grade results, the procedure used
for such aggregation should be stated
and some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in
detail.

The assumptions used for any
reporting of metal equivalent values
_should be clearly stated. _

Not applicable.
Relationship
between
mineralisation
widths and
intercept
lengths

These relationships are particularly
important in the reporting of
Exploration Results.

If the geometry of the mineralisation
with respect to the drill hole angle is
known, its nature should be reported.

If it is not known and only the down
hole lengths are reported, there
should be a clear statement to this
effect (eg ‘down hole length, true
_width not known’). _

Determination of the orientations and thickness of mineralisation will be
possible with future drilling.
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. _

Refer Figure 1.
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. _

Reporting is representative, all samples are shown on Figures 1 and 2.
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 _

Geophysical and geological datasets detailed in report.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 11

==> picture [576 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
test results; bulk density,
groundwater, geotechnical and rock
characteristics; potential deleterious
_or contaminating substances. _
Further work
The nature and scale of planned
further work (eg tests for lateral
extensions or depth extensions or
large-scale step-out drilling).

Diagrams clearly highlighting the
areas of possible extensions,
including the main geological
interpretations and future drilling
areas, provided this information is not
_commercially sensitive. _

Planned further work detailed in report.

ASX RELEASE | PAGE 12