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.

GOLDEN CROSS RESOURCES LTD Capital/Financing Update 2014

Sep 30, 2014

64971_rns_2014-09-30_63162994-3a0d-41f4-b4e3-3e0ccaae21e7.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

==> picture [596 x 91] intentionally omitted <==

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT

Date: 1 October 2014 Number: 368/011014

IMPACT EARNS 51% INTEREST IN THE

BROKEN HILL Ni-Cu-PGE JOINT VENTURE PROJECT, NEW SOUTH WALES DRILL PROGRAMME TO COMMENCE THIS QUARTER

Impact Minerals Limited (ASX:IPT) is pleased to announce that it has earned a 51% interest in the rights to nickel-copper-PGE mineralisation from Golden Cross Resources Limited (GCR) at the Broken Hill Joint Venture Project in New South Wales.

Impact has also now elected to earn 80% of the metal rights by spending a further $200,000 which has to be completed by 2017. However this expenditure will be completed during the forthcoming drill programme at the Red Hill Prospect, for which Impact was recently awarded a grant of $125,000 under the N.S.W. State Government’s Co-operative Drilling Funding Programme.

The Red Hill Prospect

The host ultramafic intrusive unit at Red Hill, which outcrops over an area of about 500 sq metres, has a nickel-rich core and copper-precious metal-rich margins (Figure 1 and announcement dated 21 May 2014). This is a common feature in many major nickel-copperprecious metal sulphide deposits around the world.

The centre of the unit is marked by nickel-in-soil values greater than 10,000 ppb and up to 16,100 ppb nickel (MMI digest) that is 100 m wide and 300 m long. This is a priority area for drilling.

Both the western and, in particular, the eastern margins of the unit are marked by copperin-soil results greater than 2,500 ppb and up to 16,200 ppb copper (MMI digest) that are up to 200 m wide and 600 m long (Figure 1).

Within these margins there are a further three priority areas for follow up work that contain greater than 20 ppb platinum+palladium+gold-in-soil results (fire assay) covering several hundred square metres and which contain rock chip samples with high grade nickel, copper and precious metal assays (Figure1):

  1. At the Red Hill Shaft, mined to a depth of about 40 m in the early 1900’s, grab samples from outcrops around the shaft returned up to 16 g/t platinum, 12.1 g/t palladium, 4.2% nickel, 7.7% copper, 1.3 g/t gold and 221 g/t silver. Rock chip samples from a

26 Richardson Street West Perth Western Australia 6003 Tel +61 (8) 6454 6666 Facsimile +61 (8) 6454 6667 Email [email protected] www.impactminerals.com.au

==> picture [583 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

surface excavation about 50 m long located 100 m to the south of the shaft returned up to 1 g/t platinum, 2.6 g/t palladium, 0.9% nickel, 0.8% copper, 1.8 g/t gold and 3.3 g/t silver.

  1. At Simons Find, rock chip samples returned up to 0.7 g/t platinum, 1.7 g/t palladium, 0.4% nickel, 0.1% copper, 1.9 g/t gold and 6.6 g/t silver.

  2. In the south east corner of the intrusion, grab samples from weathered rocks associated with some surface diggings returned up to 22% copper, 0.2% nickel, 0.8 g/t gold and 91.1 g/t silver.

The soil geochemistry survey was completed by Impact at a spacing of 50 m by 50 m and submitted for analysis by the MMI partial digest (nickel and copper) and fire assay (platinum, palladium, gold and silver) (see Table 1).

==> picture [484 x 436] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1. Geology and Soil and Rock Chip Results from the Red Hill Prospect.

==> picture [583 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

Next Steps

Follow up detailed mapping at scales of 1:500 and 1:1000 as well as further rock chip sampling have recently been completed at Red Hill. An Induced Polarisation ground geophysical survey will commence by mid October and the results of all of this work will be integrated to define specific drill targets. The drilling is scheduled to commence in November 2014 subject to statutory approvals. The documentation for the approvals has been lodged with the relevant government department.

==> picture [104 x 43] intentionally omitted <==

Dr Michael G Jones Managing Director

The review of exploration activities and results contained in this report is based on information compiled by Dr Mike Jones, a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. He is a director of the company and works for Impact Minerals Limited. He has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposits under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking 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 (the JORC Code). Mike Jones has consented to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [596 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

Company Information

Impact Minerals Limited

ACN 119 062 261 ABN 51 119 062 261

Share Registry

Computershare Investor Services Pty Ltd GPO Box D182 Perth WA 6840 Australia

Directors

Peter Unsworth Non-Executive Chairman Michael Jones Managing Director Paul Ingram Non-Executive Director Markus Elsasser Non-Executive Director

Telephone: +61 (8) 9323 2000 Facsimile: +61 (8) 9323 2033

Email: [email protected]

Australian Stock Exchange Listing

Shares IPT

Company Secretary

James Cooper-Jones

Registered & Administrative Office

309 Newcastle Street Northbridge Western Australia 6003 Telephone: +61 (8) 6454 6666 Facsimile: +61 (8) 6454 6667

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.impactminerals.com.au

Major shareholders as at 1.8.14

Bunnenberg Family 29%
Directors 7%
Top 20 58%
Top 50 69%

Capital Structure as at 1.8.14

Ordinary Shares on Issue 565,486.800 Total Listed Options 8,000,000 Total Unlisted Options 34,300,000

An ASX listed Australian company focused on gold-copper and nickel-copper-PGE exploration

==> picture [835 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 1 - SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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.
Random rock samples were taken at surface which represented favourable geology and alteration to known
mineralisation in the region. Samples are variably weathered.
Soil samples were taken at 50 m intervals from a hole 15-20 deep and sieved to -2mm to collect about 250 g of
material.
Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the
appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used
Representative rock chip samples at each sample site weigh between 0.8 and 1.2 kg. Soil samples are taken at a
consistent depth below surface and sieved.
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 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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of
detailed information
Rock samples were sent to Intertek Adelaide where they were crushed, dried and pulverised (total prep) to
produce a 25-30 g sub-sample for analysis by four acid digest with an ICP/AES finish for ore grade base metal
samples and lead collection fire assay with AAS finish for gold and precious metals. Weathered samples
contained gossanous sulphide material. Soil samples were sent to SGS Perth for analysis by the MMI digest.
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).
No drilling results are reported.
Drill sample recovery Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results
assessed
No drilling results are reported.
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature
of the samples
No drilling results are reported.
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 results are reported.
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.
No drilling results are reported.
Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,
channel, etc) photography.
No drilling results are reported.
The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged
No drilling results are reported.

==> picture [835 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

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.
No drilling results are reported.
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled
wet or dry.
No drilling results are reported.
For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample
preparation technique.
The sample preparation techniques follow industry best practice.
Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise
representivity of samples.
Laboratory QC procedures for rock sample assays involve the use of internal certified reference material as
assay standards, along with blanks, duplicates and replicates.
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.
Field duplicates were taken at selected sample sites.
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being
sampled.
This is not relevant to soil and rock chip 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.
Industry standard assay techniques were used.
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.
No geophysical tools were used to determine material element concentrations.
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.
For the rock chips, quality control procedures for assays were followed via internal laboratory protocols.
Accuracy and precision are within acceptable limits.
Verification of sampling and
assaying
The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative
company personnel.
The results have not been verified by independent or alternative companies. This is not required at this stage of
exploration.
The use of twinned holes.
No drilling results are reported.
Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data
storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
Primary assay data for rock chips has been entered into standard Excel templates for plotting in Mapinfo.
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
There are no adjustments to the assay data.
Location of data points Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drillholes (collar and down-hole
surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource
estimation.
Sample locations were located by hand held GPS.
Specification of the grid system used.
The grid system for Broken Hill is MGA_GDA94, Zone 54.

==> picture [835 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation
Commentary
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Standard government topographic maps have been used for topographic validation. The DGPS is considered
sufficiently accurate for elevation data.
Data spacing and distribution Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.
Sample spacing for the soil survey was on a 50 m by 50 m grid.
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.
Estimations of grade and tonnes have not yet been made.
Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Sample compositing has not been applied.
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.
Not relevant to soil and rock chip results.
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 relevant to soil and rock chip results.
Sample security The measures taken to ensure sample security.
Chain of custody is managed by Impact Minerals Ltd. Samples for Broken Hill are delivered by Impact Minerals
Ltd by courier who transports them to the laboratory for prep and assay. Whilst in storage, they are kept in a
locked yard. Tracking sheets have been set up to track the progress of batches of samples.
Audits or reviews The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.
At this stage of exploration a review of the sampling techniques and data by an external party is not warranted.

==> picture [835 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

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 Broken Hill Project currently comprises 1 exploration licences covering 100 km2. The tenement is held 100%
by Golden Cross Resources Ltd. Impact Minerals Limited is earning 80% of the nickel-copper-PGE rights in the
licence from Golden Cross. No aboriginal sites or places have been declared or recorded over the licence area.
There are no national parks over the license area.
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 tenement is in good standing with no known impediments.
Exploration done by other parties Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.
There has been no significant previous work at this prospect.
Geology Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.
Nickel-copper-PGE sulphide mineralisation associated with an ultramafic intrusion.
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:

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

down hole length and interception depth

hole length.
No drilling results are reported.
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.
This is not relevant.
The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be
clearly stated.
No metal equivalents have been 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 down hole lengths are reported, there should be
a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).
Historical drill holes to date have been sub-perpendicular to the mineralised trend and stratigraphy so intervals
are close to true width or otherwise stated.

==> picture [835 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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
Refer to Figures in body of text.
appropriate sectional views.
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 All results reported are representative
practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.
Other substantive exploration Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported
data including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey Assessment of other substantive exploration data is not yet complete however considered immaterial at this
results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of stage.
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical
and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
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
Follow up work programmes will be subject to interpretation of recent and historic results which is ongoing.
main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this
information is not commercially sensitive