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.

GRANGE RESOURCES LIMITED. Capital/Financing Update 2013

Dec 18, 2013

65014_rns_2013-12-18_90a15453-d09e-48da-9f0e-dc17e152a6cd.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

19 December 2013 ASX: GRR

GRANGE RESOURCES LIMITED Australia’s most experienced magnetite producer

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS

HIGHLIGHTS

==> picture [12 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [12 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [12 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [12 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [12 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [12 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [12 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

  • Updated JORC 2012 Mineral Resource includes 107 million tonnes of magnetite iron ore at Long Plains (up from 49 million tonnes)

  • The deposit is located 6km from the Savage River magnetite mine

  • 25% of tonnage is in the Indicated Resource category, all in North Zone

  • Mineralisation is very robust and continuous at various cut-off grades

  • Estimated depth of mineralisation is variable and generally greater than 300 metres

  • Ore outcrops on a prominent ridge, with very low planned strip ratios

  • Deposit contains abundant alkaline waste rocks and low amounts of sulphide waste rock

Commenting on the announcement Grange Resources Managing Director, Wayne Bould said:

“This significant resource upgrade at Long Plains caps the next phase of a successful drilling program at an exploration target in close proximity to the Savage River magnetite mine”.

“These results provide Grange with the confidence to continue its exploration and prefeasibility studies at Long Plains to determine if there is an opportunity for this magnetite resource to be integrated into the life of mine plans for the Savage River magnetite mine”.

==> picture [557 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Grange Resources Pty Ltd ( ASX: GRR ) ( “Grange” or the “Company”) is pleased to advise that the revised Mineral Resource Estimate for the Long Plains Magnetite Iron Ore Deposit has significantly increased since the previous estimate dated August 2012. This has been the result of a continued drilling and estimation program.

The resource consists of 107 million tonnes at 35% DTR (above a cut-off of 15% DTR) as detailed in the following table:

Table 1 - Long Plains Mineral Resource Estimate (above a cut-off of 15% DTR)

Measured
Resources
Indicated
Resources
Inferred
Resources
TOTAL
Resources
Tonnes(Mt) 0.0 25.4 82.1 107.5
DTR(%) 0.0 33.9 35.6 35.2
Fe(%) 0.0 68.9 69.4 69.2
Ni(%) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.03
TiO2 (%) 0.00 0.63 0.55 0.57
MgO (%) 0.00 0.91 0.93 0.92
P(%) 0.000 0.004 0.007 0.006
V(%) 0.00 0.33 0.36 0.35
S(%) 0.00 0.05 0.07 0.07

The Mineral Resource has been estimated by Optiro in conjunction with the Company’s geology staff, and reported in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2012 edition). 24% of the Long Plains resource, all located in North Zone, has been classified as an Indicated Resource – this category is able to be used as a basis for undertaking a prefeasibility study and calculating a Probable Ore Reserve.

This resource estimate includes the entire three kilometre strike length of the Long Plains deposit (Figure 2), comprised of the North Zone, Central Zone and South Zone.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 2 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

GEOLOGY & TENURE

The overall geological setting is a series of elongate, discontinuous magnetite lenses that extend over a three kilometre strike length (Figure 2). The deposit has been separated into three distinct zones termed the Northern, Central and Southern Zones, on the basis of total magnetic intensity ground geophysical surveys. The deposit outcrops as a haematite cap at surface and occupies a prominent ridge, with steep slopes and weathered host rocks flanking the outcropping ore.

The magnetite lenses are oriented sub-vertical to strongly east dipping and are hosted in ultramafic and mafic schists that have formed within and near the eastern margin of the Proterozoic Arthur Metamorphic Complex in north-western Tasmania. The entire package has been metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies.

Detailed geological studies, surface geological mapping and surface geophysics have enabled the development of a robust geological model that supports the construction of detailed 3D geological domains used to constrain the resource estimate.

==> picture [223 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

Long Plains is believed to be an immature analogue Figure 1 - Long Plains Location of the Savage River ore bodies that Grange and its predecessors have been mining for over 40 years. Long Plains is situated approximately 6 km south of Savage River on Exploration Lease EL30/2003.

==> picture [471 x 192] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

South Zone Central Zone North Zone
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 2 - Long Plains long section, looking west (GDA94 coordinate system)

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 3 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

EXPLORATION, DRILLING, SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS

The Mineral Resource area has dimensions of 3,000m (north) by 100m (east) and 400m (elevation). Drilling of the deposit was predominantly by diamond drill holes (67%), mostly HQ3 diameter core (41 holes for 8,874 metres). The remainder were reverse circulation (RC) holes (25 holes for 4,463 metres) employing a 140mm face sampling hammer (Table 2).

Table 2 - Long Plains Drilling History

Type Up to 2010 2011-12 2012-13 TOTAL
Diamond* 2,972 2,976 2,926 8,874
Reverse Circulation 918 2,053 1,492 4,463
Costeans 1,640 - - 1,640
Number of Holes 21 24 17 62
  • Includes diamond tails on Reverse Circulation holes

The nominal drill hole spacing for:

North zone (NZ) is 100m between sections and 50-75m on section.

Central zone (CZ) is 100m between sections with a single hole per section. South zone (SZ) is 300m between sections with a single hole per section.

Core recoveries were generally high in the ore zones at Savage River (>90%) and there were no significant core recovery issues. Drill collars were surveyed using a combination of conventional surveying (total station) and/or high resolution real time kinematic GPS. Older drilling used a single-shot Eastman at 50m spacing downhole (accurate to 0.5°). Hole azimuths were assumed to be straight (compass data is not useable due to the magnetic nature of the mineralisation). For modern drilling, holes were surveyed using the Devi Flex downhole survey tool, with stations every 3m downhole. A few of the earliest holes have collars that are now destroyed or are under roads, so these cannot be re-surveyed. The original survey data in the database is deemed valid. These holes have been excluded from the resource (assay database), but where intercepts were aligned with adjacent drilling, they were used to inform the geology domain wireframes.

All samples used in the resource estimation were taken from diamond drill core of either HQ or NQ size. RC pre-collars were used for a limited selection of recent drill holes but this precollaring did not usually extend into the ore zones.

The diamond drill holes were half core sampled as standard practice and rarely full core sampled in the very few older holes. The sampled length was generally between 0.75m to 1.25m within lithological units to preserve volume variance and to provide sample weights of 3kg. Reverse circulation drilling was used to give uniform 1 m samples by cone or riffle splitter, resulting in a 3kg sample. Field quality control procedures included insertion of prepared sample standards at a rate of 1:25 and limited field duplicate samples on the RC holes.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 4 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Sample preparation techniques were industry standard for magnetite ores and used the subsampling protocol as recommended by the Savage River Laboratory. Sample preparation was conducted at an external NATA-accredited laboratory for both core and RC chips. The subsampling process for RC was identical to that of the core except for the coarse crush stage. For drill core, the core was first analysed for bulk density by immersion in water. All mineralised core samples have had a density determination completed. The half core samples were oven dried at 110 degrees for 12 hours, then coarse crushed to minus 2mm in a Boyd crusher then split to ~3kg, crushed again to 90% passing 1.7mm and split again with a 150g sub-sample taken for pulverising to 98% passing 75 microns.

A pulp sub-sample was collected and shipped for analysis at Savage River’s mine laboratory by Davis Tube Recovery (DTR).

The primary assay technique is DTR on a 10 g sample, followed by Ferrous Iron (Fe2+) via Satmagan and S, total Fe, TiO2, MgO, V, P, S and Ni via XRF on the Davis Tube Concentrate (DTC). All techniques are considered total. DTR is the most appropriate assay technique for the determination of magnetite recovery. All DTR assays were completed on the mine site using the Savage River DTR technique. This technique has been used for over 40 years and is supported by pit reconciliations.

GEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION AND RESOURCE ESTIMATION

Geological controls and relationships were used to define estimation domains with mostly hard boundaries, based on sharp mineralisation contacts and sulphide content. A nominal grade cut-off of 15% DTR is a natural grade boundary between magnetite lenses and disseminated wallrocks. This cut-off was used to help define the mineralised envelope within which the higher grade sub domains were interpreted. 3D wireframes were used to code the drilling intersects and select samples within each domain.

Samples were composited on one metre lengths within the resource wireframes and adjusted where necessary to ensure that no residual sample lengths were excluded (best fit). Statistical analysis showed that populations in each domain had low coefficients of variation (CV) for all elements except sulphur and phosphorus. Only these two required top-cutting in order to achieve a reasonably low CV. Directional variograms were developed for each element, and subsequently used with ordinary kriging to estimate the DTR and grades in all domains. Due to the strong correlation of the DTR x density attribute with other elements, the search ellipse per domain was based on the variography ranges of DTR x density.

The block model was constructed using a 25 mY x 10 mX x 10 mZ parent block cell with subcelling to 6.25 mY by 1.25 mX by 2.5 mZ for domain volume resolution. Ordinary Kriging was completed at the parent cell scale, using 45 discretisation points (5Y by 3X by 3Z) per parent block to determine the block grade. Kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA) was carried out in order to optimise the block size, search distances and sample numbers used. It was also a factor guiding the resource classification decisions, resulting in some of the North Zone being classified as an Indicated resource.

The mineralised domains have demonstrated sufficient geological and grade continuity to support the definition of a Mineral Resource, and classifications were applied under the guidelines of the JORC Code (2012 Edition).

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 5 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

In North Zone, the nominal drill hole spacing of 100 m between sections and 50-7 5m on section, as well as the continuity defined by the ranges of variograms and the strong geological continuity, was considered to provide adequate geological and grade continuity definition to classify it as an Indicated Resource.

For the remainder of North Zone, all of Central Zone and South Zone, geological evidence was sufficient to imply but not verify both geological and grade continuity, and these zones were classified as an Inferred Resource. The geological and grade continuity can reasonably be inferred and are limited to widths and depths that have reasonable prospects of economic extraction (ie: they are more likely than not to prove up to indicated or measured resource with more drilling).

The validation of the block model shows good correlation of the input data to the estimated grades.

A range of lower cut-offs was used to report grades and tonnages, as shown in Figure 3.

==> picture [252 x 232] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 - Grade Tonnage Curve, Long Plains

75% of the resource has been classified as Inferred (Figure 4). Within the Inferred Resource wireframe models have been extrapolated by up to 150 metres beyond the last drill hole section to the south, which is slightly less than the maximum variogram range of 165 metres for the estimated element Density*DTR. Wireframes have been extended up to 200m downdip in order to fill the model to a constant base elevation of -100mRL. 30% of the Inferred Resource volume has been extrapolated beyond drill holes (Figure 4).

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 6 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [455 x 145] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 – Extrapolated and Interpolated Inferred Resource, Long Plains

The maximum distance that the Inferred Resource has been extrapolated beyond the sample points is 387m, in order to fill the wireframes completely.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 7 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

JORC TABLE 1 LONG PLAINS

SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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.
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.
The deposit was sampled using diamond drilling
(DD) and Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling. Drilling
was conducted on approximately 100m spaced
sections orientated perpendicular to the overall
orebody strike. [See data spacing p.4] On section
spacing (down-dip) varies but is commonly 50-
70m. The mineralisation is sub-vertical and the
holes are typically inclined at -60°. All samples
are assayed for DTR, Fe2+, Total Fe, Ni, TiO2,
MgO, P, V, S, CaO, SiO2 and Al2O3. CaO, SiO2
and Al2O3 are not presently estimated.
The drill hole locations were picked up and
down-hole surveys completed. Diamond core
was used to obtain the best possible sample
quality for lithology, structural, grade and density
information.
Drilling of Diamond core was a combination of
HQ and NQ sizes, some triple tube. Samples were
controlled based on geological contacts and
generally no more than 2m in length. Sample
selection was nominally >=0.75m and <=1.25m.
All core samples were half cored. Core was split
by diamond sawing. Samples were dried,
crushed, split and pulverised to nominally 98%
passing 75µm for Davis Tube Recovery (DTR)
determination.
Drilling
techniques
Drill type (eg core, reverse
circulation, open-hole
hammer, rotary air blast,
Samples used in the resource estimation were
taken from diamond drill core of either HQ or NQ
size or RC samples.(recentprograms)

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 8 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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). _
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.
Core recoveries were recorded in the
geotechnical logs. Core recoveries are generally
high in the ore zones at Savage River (>90%) and
there were no significant core recovery issues.
Drilling penetration rates were controlled in
order to maximise recovery in ore zones.
No relationship between sample recovery and
grade is known at Savage River.
Logging Whether core and chip
samples have been
geologically and geo-
technically 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.
Core samples have been logged for lithology,
mineralogy, alteration and mineralisation.
Geotechnical logging including domain and
structural defects logging including orientations
were undertaken. Older core 2007 and earlier
was not geo-technically logged and the oldest
core was drilled EX size (25mm diameter).
Logging was a combination of qualitative and
quantitative. Core was photographed wet and
dry. No photos available for the oldest core (five
holes in total).
All core and RC chips were fully logged.
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
Core was half core sampled as standard practice
and rarely full core sampled in the very few older
holes. Core was cut using a diamond
impregnated saw blade on site at the Savage
River core farm. The ore is relatively massive and
the preferred orientation for core sawing is just
left of the orientation line.
RC chips were riffle split when dry and a 3kg
sample was taken for each single metre drilled.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 9 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.
When RC sample was damp, samples were
speared uniformly.
When RC sample in ore was wet, RC holes were
stopped and completed later with diamond tails.
Sample preparation techniques were industry
standard for magnetite ores and used the sub-
sampling protocol as recommended by the
Savage river laboratory. Sample prep on recent
drill core was completed at a commercial lab
[NATA accredited]. The half core samples were
oven dried at 110 degrees for 12 hours, then
coarse crushed to minus 2mm on a Boyds
crusher then split to ~3kg, crushed again to 90%
passing 1.7mm and split again with a 150g sub-
sample taken for pulverising to 98% passing 75
microns.
Limited numbers of duplicate samples were
taken for intervals of HG, MG and LG within the
RC drilling suite.
Field QC procedures for RC and diamond samples
involve the insertion of assay standards at a rate
of 1 in 25.
Standards were derived from 2005 MLEP drilling
campaign in North Pit Savage River and umpire
assayed by Ammtec labs.
No field duplicates or second-half sampling has
been undertaken on sampled core.
Duplicates in RC as described above.
The sample sizes are considered to be
appropriate based on the style of mineralisation,
the thickness and consistency of the
intersections and assay range for the primary
analysis (% recoverable magnetite concentrate).
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,
calibrationsfactors applied
The primary assay technique is Davis Tube
Recovery (DTR) on a 10g sample, followed by
Ferrous Iron (Fe2+) via Satmagan and S, total Fe,
TiO2, MgO, V, P, S and Ni via XRF on the Davis
Tube Concentrate (DTC). All techniques are
considered total. DTR is the most appropriate
assay technique for determination of magnetite
recovery. All DTR samples completed on site
using Savage River technique. This technique has
been use for 40 years at SR and our pit
reconciliations are consistent.
For Long Plains, five of the oldest drill holes were
assayed with an acid digestion-total iron [Total
%Fe(HCL)]technique when drilled in 1959.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 10 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.
These Total % Fe values were converted to an
equivalent/theoretical DTR value in the database
that supports the current resource estimate. In
2013 these holes were re-logged and re-sampled
and new DTR analyses have been run for these
older samples. We have removed these holes
from the assay database so as to exclude them
from the 2013 resource estimate. These intervals
are denoted as 2 in the lp_resource2013 field in
Table 3 attached.
Magnetic susceptibility instruments were used
for initial geological logging to help the geologist
classify the logged interval as ore grade or waste.
Ore samples had sample prep, DTR and XRF
determinations done and these were used to
estimate the resource. No mag sus values were
used in the resource estimate.
Field assay standards were inserted at a rate of 1
in 25 in drilled core and RC through ore zones.
DTR determinations were performed in
duplicate. No external laboratory checks have
been performed and no check assaying has been
undertaken. Data analysis has been performed
and the data demonstrates sufficient accuracy
and precision for use in Mineral Resource
estimation.
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 verified by
alternative company personnel.
No twinned holes have been drilled at Long
Plains.
Primary data was captured directly to standard
template Microsoft Excel log sheets using tough
book laptops with standard logging codes and
data entry control. The data was verified by the
geologist and then loaded into the central
(project-wide) database.
No adjustments were made 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
All significant surface features including drill
collars were surveyed by Grange staff surveyors
using a combination of conventional surveying
(total station) and/or high resolution RTK GPS. In
each case, the features were located to within
100mm in X, Y and Z. For downhole surveys,
older drilling used single-shot Eastman dips at
50m spacing downhole (accurate to 0.5°). Hole
azimuths were assumed to be straight (compass
data is not useable due to the magnetic nature of

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
topographic control. the mineralisation). For modern drilling, holes
were surveyed using the DeviFlex downhole
survey tool. This has a stated accuracy of +/-
0.01° per station in azimuth and +/- 0.1° in dip,
with stations every 3m downhole.
A few of the earliest holes have collars that are
now destroyed or are under roads, so these
collars cannot be re-surveyed. The original
survey data in the database was deemed valid.
These holes have been excluded from the
resource (assay database), but where intercepts
were aligned with adjacent drilling, these
intercepts were used to inform the wireframe.
The GDA94 grid system was used.
The topographic surface in the vicinity of the
deposit has been surveyed by Grange staff
surveyors using a combination of conventional
surveying (total station) and/or high resolution
RTK GPS. In each case, the data points were
located to within 100mm in X, Y and Z and the
point spacing was approximately 5m in X and Y.
For areas further away from the deposit, LIDAR
data was used (some variation in Z coordinate
values were resolved by editing the surface to
match the collar Z coordinate value).
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 nominal drill hole spacing for NZ is 100m
between sections and 50-75m on section.
The nominal drill hole spacing for CZ is 100m
between sections (single hole per section).
The nominal drill hole spacing for SZ is 300m
between sections (single hole per section).
Most of the LP deposit has been classified as an
Inferred Resource. Most of the NZ has been
classified as an Indicated Resource.
Data spacing and distribution were analysed
using semi-variograms. The general quality of
the experimental variograms was good. The
ranges of the variograms were used to provide
guidance for resource classification.
Samples were composited to 1m lengths prior to
geostatistical analysis and Mineral Resource
estimation.
The majority of drill holes were oriented to
achieve intersection angles as close to
perpendicular to the mineralisation as is
practicable.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 12 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

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.
No significant sampling bias occurs in the data
due to the orientation of drilling with regards to
mineralised structures/bodies.
Sample
security
The measures taken to
ensure sample security.
All samples were logged and bagged on site by
Grange staff. Assay determinations were
performed by Grange staff. Core is palletised
and stored onsite.
Audits or
reviews
The results of any audits or
reviews of sampling
techniques and data.
A sample preparation audit was conducted for
the external provider. No audits or reviews have
been undertaken on SR lab recently.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 13 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

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.
Exploration Lease # EL30/2003 of 38 sq km.
Holder is Grange Resources (Tasmania) Pty Ltd.
Held for:
Category 1 - Metallic Minerals, Atomic
Substances
Category 5 - Industrial Minerals,
Semi/Precious and Stone
Exploration lease is renewable annually on
anniversary date of 18 June. Current
environmental bond held is $50,000. There are
no impediments to renewing the lease.
Exploration
done by other
parties
Acknowledgment and
appraisal of exploration by
other parties.
Some earlier exploration on the lease area
including regional and lease scale mapping and
geophysical surveys on adjacent leases have
been compiled into a surface geological
compilation. This was used to create the
geological model that was used to constrain the
resource estimate.
Rio Tinto Australia Exploration drilled hole rtae1
in 1959 and IMI drilled 5 holes between 1964-
1966. These were AX or BQ sized holes, whole
core assayed and were located by manually
scaling from old paper plans in 2000 by
Australian Bulk Minerals staff.
Some of these older hole collars have been
surveyed, while 4 others have been destroyed or
cannot be found (see comments in “Location of
data points”).
Geology Deposit type, geological
setting and style of
mineralisation.
The Long Plains Magnetite deposit is a
metamorphosed magnetite deposit of
sedimentary origin. It is described as an
immature analogue of the much larger Savage
River Magnetite deposit that lies 10km to the
north [along strike] within and near the eastern
margin of the Proterozoic Arthur metamorphic
Complex in north-western Tasmania. This
complex is exposed alonga northeast–southwest

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 14 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
trending structural corridor, the Arthur
Lineament, which separates Proterozoic
sedimentary rocks to the northwest from a
variety of Palaeozoic rocks to the southeast
(Turner 1990). These Palaeozoic rocks include
some major mafic and ultramafic intrusive
complexes which lie just to the east of Savage
River. The magnetite orebodies are enclosed
within a highly sheared and strike faulted belt of
mafic and ultramafic schists and mylonite. This
belt is 0.5km wide, strikes North-north-east to
south-south-west, and is enclosed in a thick
sequence of quartz-white mica schist (Whyte
schist). Magnetite ore at Long Plains is almost
entirely confined within ultramafic rocks,
specifically serpentinite and chlorite-carbonate
schist.
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
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.
See : Table 3 Drill hole Data table

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 15 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.
Davis Tube Recovery (“DTR”) analyses were
conducted on core and RC chips that had first
had an estimated grade determined by magnetic
susceptibility (mag-sus). If the mag-sus indicated
an estimated grade greater than 15% DTR, the
analytical DTR technique was used for assay.
Sampling protocol insists on samples between
0.75 and 1.25m in length within unique
lithologies.
Shorter intervals were sampled, where discreet
lithologies exist.
All samples within wireframes were composited
to a nominal 1m length, with an allowance of
25% (0.75m to 1.25m) in order to minimise the
amount of residual samples. The compositing
routine aggregates samples less than the
composite length to the nominal 1m composite
length.
No metal equivalence values were used.
Most drilling was oriented normal to strike and
was drilled from the hanging-wall to maximise
the intersection angle of the core to the
orebody.
Mineralisation contacts are very clear and the
orientation of the orebody relative to the drill
intersects was considered during wire-framing.
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’). _
The geometry of the mineralisation with respect
to the drill hole angle was measured on oriented
core with the alpha angle ( dip) and the beta
angle (dip direction) when available core
orientations were available.
True widths were calculated from wireframes
Diagrams Appropriate maps and
sections (with scales) and
tabulations of intercepts
should be included for any
significant discovery being
Plans and sections are included. These include a
plan view of drill hole collar locations (Figure 4)
and appropriate sectional views (Figures 5, 6,
and 7).

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 16 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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
practicable, representative
reporting of both low and
high grades and/or widths
should be practiced to
avoid misleading reporting
of Exploration Results.
All exploration results within the mineralised
wireframes are presented in Table 3.
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.
Drill targeting known magnetic anomalies has
identified the maximum probable extent of
economic mineralisation. Future drilling will
focus on proving up the higher grade portions of
the inferred resource in central and south zones
and defining measured resources within North
zone.
Preliminary Waste rock classification has been
completed on 159 acid based accounting
samples taken from drilled core and
demonstrates that the waste rocks are alkaline
and that there is little waste that is potentially
acid forming outside the mineralisation.
Hydro-Geology studies have been completed to
provide baseline data for hydro-geological
modelling.
Environmental baseline data has been collected
on flora, fauna including EPBC listed values.
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.
Additional drilling is required to support a
prefeasibility study.
A five year program of environmental and mine
permitting activities is underway aiming at
completing a successful Long Plains
Development Proposal and Environmental
Management Plan (LP-DPEMP).

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 17 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

SECTION 3 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Database
integrity
Measures taken to ensure
that data has not been
corrupted by, for example,
transcription or keying
errors, between its initial
collection and its use for
Mineral Resource
estimation purposes.
Data validation
procedures used.
The Long Plains resource data is stored in an MS
Access database and is managed using MS Access
and Excel software.
Data was logged onto field sheets which were
then entered into the data system by geology
staff.
Data was validated on entry into the
spreadsheets, and on upload to the MS Access
databases, by a variety of means including the
enforcement of coding standards, constraints
and triggers. These are features built into the
data model that ensure data meets essential
standards of validity and consistency.
Laboratory data has been received in digital
format and uploaded directly to the database.
Original data sheets and files have been retained
and are used to validate the contents of the
database against the original logging.
Optiro performed a visual validation by reviewing
drill holes on section and by subjecting drill hole
data to data auditing processes in Surpac (e.g.
checks for sample overlaps etc.).
A data audit was undertaken by Optiro which
identified an issue relating to some standards.
This was identified as a procedural error and the
raw analytical data was verified as accurate.
Site visits Comment on any site
visits undertaken by the
Competent Person and
the outcome of those
visits.
If no site visits have been
undertaken indicate why
this is the case.
The CP is a member of Grange and has visited
the site on numerous occasions, to review data
collection, sampling and geology.
Grange staff whom are major contributors to this
report have been on site throughout the
exploration work and have either done much of
the work themselves or have directly supervised
the work.
Optiro staff have visited the site for the
development of the maiden resource model for
Long Plains.
Geological
interpretation
Confidence in (or
conversely, the
uncertainty of ) the
geological interpretation
of the mineral deposit.
The Long Plains Magnetite deposit is a
metamorphosed magnetite deposit of
sedimentary origin. It is described as an
immature analogue of the much larger Savage
River Magnetite deposit that lies 10km to the

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 18 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Nature of the data used
and of any assumptions
made.
The effect, if any, of
alternative interpretations
on Mineral Resource
estimation.
The use of geology in
guiding and controlling
Mineral Resource
estimation.
The factors affecting
continuity both of grade
and geology.
north [along strike].
Similar to the Savage River geology, the
magnetite orebodies are enclosed within a highly
sheared and strike faulted belt of mafic and
ultramafic schists with significant magnesite on
the western side of the ore.
Interpretations were given as triangulated 3D
solids, which were extrapolated by no more than
half the section spacing at the edge of drilling.
Geological interpretations were undertaken by
Grange staff.
The main factor relating to the continuity of both
grade and geology is drillhole spacing. The
Inferred Resource Classification has been applied
where drilling is >50m along section and there
are fewer than three drillholes.
Dimensions The extent and variability
of the Mineral Resource
expressed as length
(along strike or
otherwise), plan width,
and depth below surface
to the upper and lower
limits of the Mineral
Resource.
In plan orientation, the deposit is approximately
3,400 metres long and 25 to 150 metres wide.
Mineralisation has vertical extents ranging
between -100 and 290 mRL.
Estimation
and modeling
techniques
The nature and
appropriateness of the
estimation technique(s)
applied and key
assumptions, including
treatment of extreme
grade values, domaining,
interpolation parameters
and maximum distance of
extrapolation from data
points. If a computer
assisted estimation
method was chosen
include a description of
computer software and
parameters used.
The availability of check
estimates, previous
estimates and/or mine
production records and
Drillhole compositing and resource estimation
was undertaken by Optiro.
Drill hole sample data was flagged as ore within
the wireframes.
Sample data was composited to a 1.0 metre
downhole length using a best fit-compositing
method. Residual samples (those composite
intervals for which there was less than 75% of
the composite length) were considered biased
and hence were not included in the estimate
An
Analysis
of
the
grade
distribution
characteristics of the domain composites for all
elements was undertaken. Only the sulphur and
phosphorus
had
unacceptably
high
CVs,
noticeable high grade inflection points on log-
probability graphs and/or significant gaps on
disintegration plots. The following top cuts were
used:

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 19 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Commentary
whether the Mineral
Resource estimate takes
appropriate account of
such data.
The assumptions made
regarding recovery of by-
products.
Estimation of deleterious
elements or other non-
grade variables of
economic significance (eg
sulphur for acid mine
drainage
characterisation).
In the case of block model
interpolation, the block
size in relation to the
average sample spacing
and the search employed.
Any assumptions behind
modelling of selective
mining units.
Any assumptions about
correlation between
variables.
Description of how the
geological interpretation
was used to control the
resource estimates.
Discussion of basis for
using or not using grade
cutting or capping.
The process of validation,
the checking process used,
the comparison of model
data to drill hole data,
and use of reconciliation
data if available.


Element Topcut Number of
Samples Affected
Sulphur 0.3 24
Phosphorus 0.05 12

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 20 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Commentary Commentary Commentary Commentary Commentary Commentary
The following parameters were used:
Domains Element Search Distance
Pass
1
Pass
2
Pass
3
21 to 31
and
33
density 75 75 500
DTR*density 165 165 500
Fe2 150 150 500
iron 300 300 500
MgO 183 183 500
Ni 225 225 500
P 157.5 157.5 500
S 180 180 500
TiO2 255 255 500
V 157.5 157.5 500
32 density 45 45 500
DTR*density 240 240 500
Fe2 225 225 500
iron 112.5 112.5 500
MgO 150 150 500
Ni 352.5 352.5 500
P 90 90 500
S 225 225 500
TiO2 210 210 500
V 187.5 187.5 500
Allelements /Alldomains:
Pass Number of Samples
Min Max
1 10 32
2 2 32
3 2 32
Moisture Whether the tonnages are
estimated on a dry basis
or with natural moisture,
and the method of
determination of the
moisture content.
Tonnes have been estimated on a dry basis.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 21 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Cut-off
parameters
The basis of the adopted
cut-off grade(s) or quality
parameters applied.
Indicated and Inferred Resources have been
reported above a 15% DTR cut-off grade.
Mining factors
or
assumptions
Assumptions made
regarding possible mining
methods, minimum
mining dimensions and
internal (or, if applicable,
external) mining dilution.
It is always necessary as
part of the process of
determining reasonable
prospects for eventual
economic extraction to
consider potential mining
methods, but the
assumptions made
regarding mining methods
and parameters when
estimating Mineral
Resources may not always
be rigorous. Where this is
the case, this should be
reported with an
explanation of the basis of
the mining assumptions
made.
No mining factors (i.e. dilution, ore loss,
recoverable resources at selective mining block
size) have been applied.
Metallurgical
factors or
assumptions
The basis for assumptions
or predictions regarding
metallurgical amenability.
It is always necessary as
part of the process of
determining reasonable
prospects for eventual
economic extraction to
consider potential
metallurgical methods,
but the assumptions
regarding metallurgical
treatment processes and
parameters made when
reporting Mineral
Resources may not always
be rigorous. Where this is
the case, this should be
reported with an
explanation of the basis of
the metallurgical
DTR has been incorporated into the model as a
measure of metallurgical recovery in the
magnetic separation process. This is based on
the performance of DTR at the Savage River
mine, where it has been employed as a good
measure of delineating ore and waste and in
modelling the anticipated recoveries through the
magnetic separation process.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 22 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
assumptions made.
Environmental
factors or
assumptions
Assumptions made
regarding possible waste
and process residue
disposal options. It is
always necessary as part
of the process of
determining reasonable
prospects for eventual
economic extraction to
consider the potential
environmental impacts of
the mining and processing
operation. While at this
stage the determination
of potential
environmental impacts,
particularly for a green
fields project, may not
always be well advanced,
the status of early
consideration of these
potential environmental
impacts should be
reported. Where these
aspects have not been
considered this should be
reported with an
explanation of the
environmental
assumptions made.
Modelling of Sulphur grades will allow material
to be flagged as potentially acid generating and
be incorporated into the waste rock
management plan when the mineral resource
estimate is being considered for economic
extraction.
The waste model uses acid base accounting
(ABA) data on selected samples to effectively
domain the various waste types. 159 ABA
samples have been collected thus far for Long
Plains.
Bulk density Whether assumed or
determined. If assumed,
the basis for the
assumptions. If
determined, the method
used, whether wet or dry,
the frequency of the
measurements, the
nature, size and
representativeness of the
samples.
The bulk density for bulk
material must have been
measured by methods
that adequately account
for void spaces (vugs,
porosity, etc), moisture
Prior to drill core sample crushing, the core was
first analysed for bulk density by immersion in
water. The procedure used by SGS Australia
includes spraying the sample with hairspray prior
to immersion to seal small voids. All mineralised
samples had a density determination completed.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 23 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
and differences between
rock and alteration zones
within the deposit.
Discuss assumptions for
bulk density estimates
used in the evaluation
process of the different
materials.
Classification The basis for the
classification of the
Mineral Resources into
varying confidence
categories.
Whether appropriate
account has been taken of
all relevant factors (ie
relative confidence in
tonnage/grade
estimations, reliability of
input data, confidence in
continuity of geology and
metal values, quality,
quantity and distribution
of the data).
Whether the result
appropriately reflects the
Competent Person’s view
of the deposit.
Mineral Resources have been classified on the
basis of confidence in geological and grade
continuity using the drilling density, geological
model, modelled grade continuity and
conditional bias measures (kriging efficiency).
Indicated Mineral Resources have been defined
generally in areas of 50 by 50 m drill spacing.
Inferred Mineral Resources have been defined in
areas of 100x100 metre up to 600x100 metre
drill spacing.
Audits or
reviews
The results of any audits
or reviews of Mineral
Resource estimates.
The resource estimate was visually reviewed on
section by Optiro and Grange staff.
The estimated grades were validated against
declustered average grades for each element. In
addition, profile plots of estimated grade for
northing, easting, and elevation were validated
against composite grades for domains 31 and 32,
as well as for the entire deposit.
Discussion of
relative
accuracy/
confidence
Where appropriate a
statement of the relative
accuracy and confidence
level in the Mineral
Resource estimate using
an approach or procedure
deemed appropriate by
the Competent Person.
For example, the
application of statistical
or geostatistical
procedures toquantify the
Optiro place a relative accuracy of +/- 20% (and
90% confidence level) in the Mineral Resource
estimate at the global level for the Indicated
Resources based on the estimation technique
and data quality and distribution. Inferred
Resources would have a lower level of
confidence outside of this range.
No production has taken place at Long Plains to
allow for reconciliation against the mineral
resource estimate and comparison against the
anticipated relative accuracy at the global scale.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 24 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
relative accuracy of the
resource within stated
confidence limits, or, if
such an approach is not
deemed appropriate, a
qualitative discussion of
the factors that could
affect the relative
accuracy and confidence
of the estimate.
The statement should
specify whether it relates
to global or local
estimates, and, if local,
state the relevant
tonnages, which should be
relevant to technical and
economic evaluation.
Documentation should
include assumptions made
and the procedures used.
These statements of
relative accuracy and
confidence of the estimate
should be compared with
production data, where
available.

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 25 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

TABLE 3

DRILL HOLE DATA TABLE

lp2013_resource hole_id x y z dip azimuth depth_from depth_to hole_depth
2 IMI28 348036 5396583 280 -47 259 24.37 83.33 166.72
1 IMI29 348011 5396883 263 -50 258 111.86 115.21 182.88
1 IMI29 348011 5396883 263 -50 258 141.57 151.24 182.88
1 IMI29 348011 5396883 263 -50 258 79.44 90.3 182.88
1 IMI29 348011 5396883 263 -50 258 16.45 36.32 182.88
2 IMI30 348311 5395383 230 -45 255 128.52 157.01 192.02
2 IMI30 348311 5395383 230 -45 255 98.38 110.76 192.02
2 IMI30 348311 5395383 230 -45 255 58.16 83.09 192.02
2 IMI35 347976 5397188 253 -85 257 65.2 79.8 137.76
2 IMI46 347976 5397188 253 -44 257 98.5 116.5 233.5
2 IMI46 347976 5397188 253 -44 257 30.92 46.44 233.5
1 LPC06001 347832.334 5396884.196 274.325 9.975 97.4236 52 52.07 136
1 LPC06001 347832.334 5396884.196 274.325 9.975 97.4236 85.71 97.25 136
1 LPC06001 347832.334 5396884.196 274.325 9.975 97.4236 115.44 122.03 136
1 LPC06002 347824.675 5396929.225 275.468 7.633 73.084 72 72.14 182.5
1 LPC06002 347824.675 5396929.225 275.468 7.633 73.084 140 142.34 182.5
1 LPC06002 347824.675 5396929.225 275.468 7.633 73.084 151 156 182.5
1 LPC06003 347878.762 5396988.981 278.285 5.374 99.484 18.14 30.97 115.5
1 LPC06003 347878.762 5396988.981 278.285 5.374 99.484 86 90 115.5
1 LPC06004 347789.948 5396998.136 274.601 -22.742 74.0721 184 185.35 222
1 LPC06005 347839.92 5397087.878 262.647 6.756 102.2647 28.99 29 157
1 LPC06005 347839.92 5397087.878 262.647 6.756 102.2647 70.46 71.21 157
1 LPC06006 347800.287 5397139.931 251.357 1.5 96.39 66.16 98.85 232
1 LPC06006 347800.287 5397139.931 251.357 1.5 96.39 121.23 141.85 232
1 LPC06006 347800.287 5397139.931 251.357 1.5 96.39 166.9 169.18 232
1 LPC06007 347794.805 5397184.637 238.578 10.962 94.769 85 103.99 226
1 LPC06007 347794.805 5397184.637 238.578 10.962 94.769 117.81 125.3 226
1 LPC06007 347794.805 5397184.637 238.578 10.962 94.769 130.62 146.2 226
1 LPC06008 347937.035 5396682.272 282.404 2.312 90.2152 4.1 27.98 56.5
1 LPC06008 347937.035 5396682.272 282.404 2.312 90.2152 43.27 56.5 56.5
1 LPC06009 347994.785 5396703.768 287.834 -2.586 71.4756 35.08 39.02 75.5
1 LPC06010 347968.41 5396582.489 277.129 6.828 86.3733 8 48.91 111
1 LPC06010 347968.41 5396582.489 277.129 6.828 86.3733 72 79 111
1 LPC06011 347955.274 5396486.27 269.432 7.154 93.0714 12.02 22.41 90.5
1 LPC06011 347955.274 5396486.27 269.432 7.154 93.0714 69.08 73.12 90.5
1 LPC06012 347996.683 5396384.121 264.179 11.897 91.1609 32 33 35
1 LPC06012 347996.683 5396384.121 264.179 11.897 91.1609 9.02 15.12 35
1 LPDD1103 348437.026 5394659.961 259.328 -54.29 89.64 71.04 76 293.2
1 LPDD1103 348437.026 5394659.961 259.328 -54.29 89.64 123.5 137.47 293.2
1 LPDD1103 348437.026 5394659.961 259.328 -54.29 89.64 184.3 186 293.2
1 LPDD1103 348437.026 5394659.961 259.328 -54.29 89.64 232 245.53 293.2
1 LPDD1204 348295.353 5394950.179 259.373 -59.57 94.09 97.21 143.61 488.34
1 LPDD1204 348295.353 5394950.179 259.373 -59.57 94.09 175.08 215 488.34
1 LPDD1204 348295.353 5394950.179 259.373 -59.57 94.09 220.18 297.31 488.34
1 LPDD1204 348295.353 5394950.179 259.373 -59.57 94.09 297.32 351.95 488.34
1 LPDD1205 348194.817 5395259.99 240.681 -57.36 84.36 24.04 31.2 278.5
1 LPDD1205 348194.817 5395259.99 240.681 -57.36 84.36 66.55 120.66 278.5
1 LPDD1205 348194.817 5395259.99 240.681 -57.36 84.36 120.66 145 278.5
1 LPDD1205 348194.817 5395259.99 240.681 -57.36 84.36 166.9 179.58 278.5
1 LPDD1212 348080.499 5396392.012 267.101 -59.82 268 219.87 235.2 301.3
1 LPDD1212 348080.499 5396392.012 267.101 -59.82 268 123.98 132.1 301.3
1 LPDD1212 348080.499 5396392.012 267.101 -59.82 268 145.44 159.06 301.3
1 LPDD1212 348080.499 5396392.012 267.101 -59.82 268 265.33 268.97 301.3
1 LPDD1212 348080.499 5396392.012 267.101 -59.82 268 55.1 61.25 301.3
1 LPDD1215 348123.424 5396480.009 271.778 -56.96 273.29 204.6 252.2 301.4
1 LPDD1215 348123.424 5396480.009 271.778 -56.96 273.29 178.1 189.9 301.4
1 LPDD1218 348088.841 5396580.143 282.278 -60 270 101.5 232.12 288.1
1 LPDD1218 348088.841 5396580.143 282.278 -60 270 73.95 81.2 288.1
1 LPDD1220 348083.671 5396676.398 275.584 -52.29 259.25 178.8 207.53 236.6
1 LPDD1220 348083.671 5396676.398 275.584 -52.29 259.25 61 165.85 236.6
1 LPDD1223 347995.504 5396772.048 290.53 -73.49 280.98 142.3 201.2 300
1 LPDD1223 347995.504 5396772.048 290.53 -73.49 280.98 33.1 103.3 300
1 LPDD1228 347988.855 5397078.404 263.659 -60.76 274.49 111.9 156.51 270.2
1 LPDD1228 347988.855 5397078.404 263.659 -60.76 274.49 79.72 107 270.2
1 LPDD1228 347988.855 5397078.404 263.659 -60.76 274.49 24.48 52.38 270.2
1 LPDD1229 348007.081 5397181.123 254.693 -60 270 175.1 183.75 261.8
1 LPDD1229 348007.081 5397181.123 254.693 -60 270 74.42 83.87 261.8
1 LPDD1301 347991.708 5397130.271 262.24 -61 270 131 167 201.8
1 LPDD1301 347991.708 5397130.271 262.24 -61 270 37.02 48.89 201.8
1 LPDD1302 347992.196 5397130.286 262.136 -71 270 192.5 203.7 228.7
1 LPDD1302 347992.196 5397130.286 262.136 -71 270 72 78 228.7
1 LPDD1306 347795.267 5396931.67 276.328 -46.99 88.6 173.5 243 488.2
1 LPDD1306 347795.267 5396931.67 276.328 -46.99 88.6 278.2 300 488.2
1 LPDD1307 347845.553 5396939.252 283.403 -49.53 94.3 93 145 260.5

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 26 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

lp2013_resource hole_id x y z dip azimuth depth_from depth_to hole_depth
1 LPDD1307 347845.553 5396939.252 283.403 -49.53 94.3 158.7 174 260.5
1 LPDD1307 347845.553 5396939.252 283.403 -49.53 94.3 203.9 209.3 260.5
1 LPDD1309 347948.173 5396780.587 290.548 -69.53 92.66916667 46.3 172.9 284.7
1 LPDD1309 347948.173 5396780.587 290.548 -69.53 92.66916667 242.9 257.1 284.7
1 LPDD1310 348081.84 5396676.7 270 -74.1 270 153.96 309.8 309.8
1 LPDD1311 348070.753 5396534.388 281.853 -70.91 261.1580556 162.6 241 271.6
1 LPDD1311 348070.753 5396534.388 281.853 -70.91 261.1580556 120 129 271.6
1 LPDD1312 348090 5396160 262.527 -65 270 101 153.6 222.2
1 LPDD1313 348133.62 5396058.823 258.612 -72 279.31 172 206.4 298.8
1 LPDD1313 348133.62 5396058.823 258.612 -72 279.31 170.2 172 298.8
1 LPDD1313 348133.62 5396058.823 258.612 -72 279.31 128.3 166.5 298.8
1 LPDD1314 348159.542 5395961.302 251.144 -69.86 259 190 228.4 283.8
1 LPDD1314 348159.542 5395961.302 251.144 -69.86 259 150.8 183.1 283.8
1 LPDD1314 348159.542 5395961.302 251.144 -69.86 259 78 119.05 283.8
1 LPDD1315 348155.99 5395864.405 246.255 -76 270 175.3 204.7 312.7
1 LPDD1315 348155.99 5395864.405 246.255 -76 270 83 137.2 312.7
1 LPDD1315 348155.99 5395864.405 246.255 -76 270 5 43 312.7
1 LPDD1316 348158.501 5395867.783 246.338 -50 209 197.6 216.55 303.6
1 LPDD1316 348158.501 5395867.783 246.338 -50 209 140.8 171.3 303.6
1 LPDD1316 348158.501 5395867.783 246.338 -50 209 8.36 39.12 303.6
1 LPDD1318 347988.855 5397078.404 263.659 -75.84 274.5 143.7 220 245.9
1 LPDD1318 347988.855 5397078.404 263.659 -75.84 274.5 112.55 121 245.9
1 LPDD1318 347988.855 5397078.404 263.659 -75.84 274.5 34.16 69.07 245.9
1 LPDDH0707 347942.14 5397183.33 262 -55.32 268.42 52.3 89.6 156.2
1 LPDDH0707 347942.14 5397183.33 262 -55.32 268.42 37 46.72 156.2
1 LPDDH0707 347942.14 5397183.33 262 -55.32 268.42 5 23.9 156.2
1 LPDDH100 347993 5397029 260 -50 255 111.04 154.2 181
1 LPDDH100 347993 5397029 260 -50 255 78 105 181
1 LPDDH100 347993 5397029 260 -50 255 32.8 46.7 181
1 LPDDH101 347945.548 5397030.359 274.873 -50 255 34.88 80 95
1 LPDDH101 347945.548 5397030.359 274.873 -50 255 26.1 28 95
1 LPDDH102 347896.183 5397018.656 275.786 -50 255 0 10 49
1 LPDDH103 348038 5397041 249 -50 255 180.6 199 199
1 LPDDH103 348038 5397041 249 -50 255 144.2 175.6 199
1 LPDDH103 348038 5397041 249 -50 255 81.7 96.5 199
1 LPRC07001 347942.22 5397124.86 267.41 -60.38 270.14 52 125 160
1 LPRC07001 347942.22 5397124.86 267.41 -60.38 270.14 7 36 160
1 LPRC07002 347936.054 5397079.973 266.893 -70.82 270.21 54 119 154
1 LPRC07002 347936.054 5397079.973 266.893 -70.82 270.21 34 45.64 154
1 LPRC07003 347891 5396985.04 280.04 -68.83 94.92 21 120 184
1 LPRC07003 347891 5396985.04 280.04 -68.83 94.92 123 163 184
1 LPRC07003 347891 5396985.04 280.04 -68.83 94.92 179.52 184 184
1 LPRC07004 347895.79 5396985.02 282.11 -56.02 92.25 2.05 41 160
1 LPRC07004 347895.79 5396985.02 282.11 -56.02 92.25 54 92 160
1 LPRC07004 347895.79 5396985.02 282.11 -56.02 92.25 102 121 160
1 LPRC07005 347908.03 5397133.71 263.89 -60.49 270.03 6 70 167
1 LPRC07006 347896.8 5397082.05 265.92 -70.38 270.36 23 66 93
1 LPRC1113 348042.602 5396380.131 271.166 -60.1 269.16 144 155 220
1 LPRC1113 348042.602 5396380.131 271.166 -60.1 269.16 29.27 33.3 220
1 LPRC1113 348042.602 5396380.131 271.166 -60.1 269.16 79.12 88.36 220
1 LPRC1113 348042.602 5396380.131 271.166 -60.1 269.16 200 203 220
1 LPRC1114 347973.878 5396383.201 266.921 -58.1 273.78 6 17 103
1 LPRC1114 347973.878 5396383.201 266.921 -58.1 273.78 45 58 103
1 LPRC1116 348044.813 5396479.946 281.345 -57.1 269.44 47 114 200
1 LPRC1116 348044.813 5396479.946 281.345 -57.1 269.44 29 42 200
1 LPRC1117 347972.774 5396480.018 274.563 -58.71 272.96 3.51 15 100
1 LPRC1121 348007.536 5396674.801 290.545 -55.7 266.77 74 111 196
1 LPRC1121 348007.536 5396674.801 290.545 -55.7 266.77 1.54 49 196
1 LPRC1122 347949.997 5396679.889 287.229 -60.26 269.48 0 16 106
1 LPRC1127 347929.009 5396879.567 292.593 -59.74 276.21 0 21 100
1 LPRC1127 347929.009 5396879.567 292.593 -59.74 276.21 65 73 100
1 LPRC1209 348156.736 5396270.128 258.904 -57.34 262.93 127.03 131 131
1 LPRC1210 348075.085 5396280.1 262.102 -59.31 271.34 135 170 200
1 LPRC1210 348075.085 5396280.1 262.102 -59.31 271.34 7 22 200
1 LPRC1210 348075.085 5396280.1 262.102 -59.31 271.34 42.31 57.48 200
1 LPRC1211 348013.93 5396278.708 258.77 -59.5 277.09 37 61 88
1 LPRC1224 347996.064 5396774.079 290.517 -58.22 272.08 95.55 141 200
1 LPRC1224 347996.064 5396774.079 290.517 -58.22 272.08 24.8 76 200
1 LPRC1225 347943.252 5396780.434 290.429 -61.25 276.21 25.44 66 100
1 LPRC1308 347949.088 5396780.572 290.574 -48 92 39.33 61 166
1 LPRC1308 347949.088 5396780.572 290.574 -48 92 127 136 166
1 LPRC1310 348085.212 5396674.553 275.746 -74 270 150.77 153 153
1 LPRC1317 348091.727 5396161.494 262.527 -65 90 17 28 149
1 LPRC1317 348091.727 5396161.494 262.527 -65 90 51 62 149
1 MC29 347888.057 5397120.877 263.792 -49.26 258.83 7.99 30.83 348
2 rtae1 347991 5397143 257 -45 255 90 145 195
2 rtae1 347991 5397143 257 -45 255 72.11 72.99 195
2 rtae1 347991 5397143 257 -45 255 26 35 195

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 27 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [436 x 649] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 - Regional Geology Compilation

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 28 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [422 x 622] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6 - Typical Cross Section for North Zone

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 29 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [420 x 626] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7 - Typical Cross Section for Central Zone

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 30 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [425 x 624] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8 - Typical Cross Section for South Zone

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 31 of 32

==> picture [557 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN MAGNETITE
RESOURCE AT LONG PLAINS
----- End of picture text -----

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results or Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr Ben Maynard, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and is a full time employee of Grange Resources, and who holds shares in Grange Resources as part of the company incentive scheme.

Mr Maynard has sufficient experience which 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’.

Mr Maynard consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

-ENDS-

For further information, please contact:

Investors: Wayne Bould Managing Director & CEO Grange Resources Limited + 61 3 6430 0222 Or visit www.grangeresources.com.au

34a Alexander St, Burnie Tasmania 7320

Page 32 of 32