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.

Sign up Log in

PEEL MINING LIMITED Interim / Quarterly Report 2017

Jul 30, 2017

65545_rns_2017-07-30_8a1286cc-b121-40f5-af50-5033d388d088.pdf

Interim / Quarterly Report

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

JUNE 2017 QUARTERLY REPORT 31 JULY 2017

Peel Mining Limited ASX Code: PEX ACN: 119 343 734

Unit 1, 34 Kings Park Rd West Perth, WA 6005

Ph: (08) 9382 3955 E: [email protected] Web: www.peelmining.com.au

Contact: Rob Tyson Managing Director [email protected]

Highlights for June Quarter 2017

The Mallee Bull Mineral Resource estimate is increased 65% to 6.76 Mt at 1.8% Cu, 31 g/t Ag, 0.4 g/t Au, 0.6% Pb, 0.6% Zn (2.6% CuEq), containing approximately 119,000t copper, 6.6 Moz silver, 83,000 oz gold, 38,000t lead and 38,000t zinc (175,000t CuEq) using a 1% CuEq cutoff.

  • Preliminary metallurgical testwork on T1 Zn-

  • Pb-Ag mineralisation yields overall recoveries of up to 90.3% Zn, 92.3% Pb, 82.3% Ag

  • Infill, metallurgical and geotechnical drilling

  • at T1 completed; better intercepts include:

  • 13.5m @ 21.1% Zn, 14.1% Pb, 268 g/t Ag from 82m in MBDD028

About Peel Mining Limited:

  • The Company’s projects cover more than 5,500 km[2] of highly prospective tenure in NSW and WA.

  • Mallee Bull is an advanced copperpolymetallic deposit that remains open in many directions. The T1 lens at Mallee Bull offers a potential staged, early development opportunity with a prefeasibility underway.

  • Cobar Superbasin Project Farm-in Agreement with JOGMEC offers funded, highly-prospective and strategic greenfields exploration potential along with the exciting new Wirlong copper discovery.

  • Wagga Tank represents a high-grade polymetallic deposit with many significant intercepts; no drilling since 1989.

  • Apollo Hill hosts a major, protruding, shear-hosted, gold mineralised system that remains open down dip and along strike.

  • 167 million shares on issue for $28m Market Capitalisation at 28 July 2017.

  • 16m @ 13.52% Zn, 7.61% Pb, 191 g/t Ag, 1.31 g/t Au from 74m in MBRCDD065

  • Drilling at Wirlong extends mineralisation to

  • nearly 1km below surface; further new significant intercepts returned including:

  • 17m @ 4.59% Cu, 8 g/t Ag from 738m in WLRCDD043 (previously reported)

  • 26m @ 2.89% Cu from 286m in WLRCDD026 (as indicated by portable XRF analysis)

  • 9m @ 8.59% Cu from 299m in WLRC052 (as indicated by portable XRF analysis)

  • Drilling at Wagga Tank recommences with

  • first drillhole returning significant mineralisation:

  • 6m @ 7.37% Zn, 1.81% Pb, 10 g/t Ag from 282m in WTRCDD020 (as indicated by portable XRF analysis).

  • Placement of $3.28m Peel shares to St

  • Barbara Mines Ltd (previously reported)

Plans for September quarter 2017

  • Assaying and metallurgical testwork for T1;

  • completion of prefeasibility study into “dig and truck” operation.

  • Drilling at Wagga Tank continuing, with

  • additional drillholes planned for Mt Allen, Dromedary and Double Peak.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

1

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Exploration

Mallee Bull Project: Copper, Silver, Gold, Lead, Zinc; Western NSW (PEX 50% and Manager, CBH 50%). Targets: Cobar-style polymetallic mineralisation; Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide mineralisation.

Mallee Bull Mineral Resource Update

The Mallee Bull project is a 50:50 Joint Venture with CBH Resources Limited (CBH). During the quarter an update to the May 2014 maiden JORC compliant Mineral Resource was completed; the new estimate represents a 65% increase in total contained copper equivalent tonnes and comprises 6.76 million tonnes at 1.8% copper, 31 g/t silver, 0.4 g/t gold, 0.6% lead and 0.6% zinc (2.6% copper equivalent) containing approximately 119,000 tonnes of copper, 6.6 million ounces silver, 83,000 ounces gold, 38,000t lead and 38,000t zinc (175,000t copper equivalent) (using a 1% copper equivalent cutoff). The updated estimate at Mallee Bull reflects the substantial exploration success that has occurred since the completion of Mallee Bull’s maiden mineral resource estimate in May 2014.

Cutoff
CuEq		 Domain Resource
Category		 Kt Grade Grade Contained Metal Contained Metal Contained Metal Contained Metal
CuEq
%
Cu
%		 Ag
**g/t **		 Au
**g/t **		 Pb
%		 Zn
%		 CuEq
kt		 Cu
kt		 Ag
Moz		 Au
koz		 Pb
kt		 Zn
kt
1.00 HW
Pb/Zn		 Indicated 270 3.08 0.10 51 0.22 2.30 4.00 8.3 0.3 0.44 1.9 6.2 11
Inferred 150 2.0 0.3 23 0.5 1.3 2.2 3.0 0.5 0.1 2.4 2.0 3.3
HW Cu Indicated 760 1.98 1.13 23 0.54 0.71 0.56 15 8.6 0.56 13 5.4 4.3
Inferred 1,300 2.1 0.8 30 0.9 1.1 1.0 28 10 1.3 38 14 13
FW Cu Indicated 310 1.75 1.09 28 0.20 0.42 0.48 5.4 3.4 0.28 2.0 1.3 1.5
Inferred 3,400 3.1 2.6 32 0.2 0.2 0.1 104 88 3.5 22 6.8 3.4
Central Inferred 180 2.2 1.6 36 0.2 0.3 0.3 4.0 2.9 0.21 1.2 0.5 0.5
North Inferred 390 1.8 1.3 23 0.2 0.3 0.4 7.2 5.1 0.3 2.5 1.2 1.6
Total Indicated 1,340 2.15 0.91 30 0.40 0.96 1.23 29 12 1.3 17 13 17
Inferred 5,420 2.7 2.0 31 0.4 0.5 0.4 146 107 5.4 66 25 22
Total 6,760 2.6 1.8 31 0.4 0.6 0.6 175 119 6.6 83 38 38

Table 1: Mallee Bull Mineral Resource estimate based on 1% copper equivalent (CuEq) cutoff grade. The figures in this table are rounded to reflect the precision of the estimates and include rounding errors.

Mineral Resource estimates include copper equivalent grades incorporating copper, silver, gold, lead and zinc values. The copper equivalent grades are based on copper, silver, gold, lead and zinc prices of US$5,500/t, US$17.00/oz, $1,200/oz, US$2,100/t and US$2,500/t with overall recoveries of 95%, 85%, 40%, 90% and 85% respectively. These estimates are based on Peel’s interpretation of potential commodity prices and the Company’s interpretation of early stage metallurgical test work performed on Mallee Bull diamond core using the following formula: Cu equivalent (%) = Cu (%) + 0.009 x Ag (g/t) + 0.295 x Au (g/t) + 0.362 x Pb (%) + 0.407 x Zn (%). It is the company’s opinion that all elements included in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold.

The Mineral Resource update was prepared by MPR Geological Consultants Pty Ltd. The Mineral Resource estimate is reported in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2012 edition) and includes the addition of more than 17,200m of drilling conducted since mid-2014. Approximately 20% of the Mallee Bull resource is in the Indicated Mineral Resource category.

The Mallee Bull Mineral Resource comprises five mineralised domains. The domains were generated by wire-framing of geological data and the use of a 0.8% copper equivalent lower cutoff. Resources were

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

2

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

estimated by Ordinairy Kriging of one metre down-hole composited assay grades from RC and diamond drilling within these domains. A breakdown of the Mineral Resources at various copper equivalent cutoffs is shown in Table 2. The figures in Tables 1 & 2 are rounded to reflect the precision of the estimates and include rounding errors. A detailed summary of the information used in the resource estimation is found in the appended Table 1 - Mallee Bull (JORC Code, 2012 Edition).

A range of lower cutoffs was used to report grades and tonnages, as shown in Table 2. The estimates at zero cutoff grade represent the entire mineralised domain volumes. Mineralisation appears robust and this is demonstrated by the fact that elevated cutoff grades have relatively minor effect on the contained metal – i.e., at a 1.8% copper equivalent cutoff, the resource still contains approximately 103,000 tonnes of copper, 5.3 Moz of silver and 55 koz of gold ( see Table 2).

Cut Grade Contained Metal Contained Metal Contained Metal Contained Metal
off
CuEq		 Category Kt CuEq
%		 CuEq
Kt		 Cu% Pb% Zn% Au
**g/t **		 Ag
**g/t **		 CuEq
kt		 Cu
kt		 Pb
kt		 Zn
kt		 Au
koz		 Ag
Moz
0.00 Indicated 1,630 1.90 31.0 0.80 0.86 1.11 0.36 27 31 13 14 18 19 1.4
Inferred 5,850 2.6 153 1.9 0.5 0.4 0.4 30 153 112 27 22 69 5.6
Total 7,480 2.5 184 1.7 0.5 0.5 0.4 29 184 125 41 40 88 6.9
1.00 Indicated 1,340 2.15 28.8 0.91 0.96 1.23 0.40 30 29 12 13 17 17 1.3
Inferred 5,420 2.7 146 2.0 0.5 0.4 0.4 31 146 107 25 22 66 5.4
Total 6,760 2.6 175 1.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 31 175 119 38 38 83 6.6
1.40 Indicated 1,020 2.45 25.0 1.02 1.12 1.43 0.45 34 25 10 11 15 15 1.1
Inferred 4,760 2.9 138 2.2 0.5 0.4 0.4 33 138 103 22 18 60 5.0
Total 5,780 2.8 163 2.0 0.6 0.6 0.4 33 163 113 34 33 75 6.2
1.80 Indicated 710 2.84 20.1 1.08 1.40 1.85 0.49 39 20 8 10 13 11 0.9
Inferred 3,760 3.3 124 2.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 36 124 95 18 14 44 4.4
Total 4,470 3.2 144 2.3 0.6 0.6 0.4 37 144 103 28 27 55 5.3

Table 2: Mallee Bull Mineral Resource estimate based on a range of copper equivalent (CuEq) cutoff grades. The figures in this table are rounded to reflect the precision of the estimates and include rounding errors.

T1 Prefeasibility Study

Peel is currently undertaking a pre-feasibility study on the high-grade, near-surface zinc-lead-silver-gold T1 lens at the Mallee Bull Project. The aim of the study is to investigate the conceptual development of T1 as a “dig and truck” operation, under which ore would be milled at joint venture partner CBH’s Endeavor mine approximately 150km away, where surplus milling capacity exists. Prefeasibility concepts will consider open pit and underground mining scenarios, followed by the development of an exploration decline to ~300m below surface to enable the underground drilling of the primary Mallee Bull copper mineralisation. Peel and CBH believe this scenario could allow for a reduction in total capital expenditure and the staged mining development of the Mallee Bull deposit.

As part of the prefeasibility study, 39 RC/diamond drillholes were recently completed for 5,732.4m (4,927.6m RC and 803.8m diamond). The primary aim of this drilling was to infill to a maximum 20m by 20m drill spacing, and to define the limits of T1 mineralisation. The results will be included in an update to the geological and resource model for T1, which will form the basis for prefeasibility economic modelling. The drilling has also provided material for ongoing metallurgical testwork, and for geotechnical review. Other recent activities at Mallee Bull/T1 include the completion of an initial environmental baseline study, and the establishment of environmental and groundwater monitoring systems.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

3

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Recent assay results follow-on from metallurgical drillhole MBDD028 which returned T1’s best result to date, comprising 13.5m @ 21.1% Zn, 14.1% Pb, 268 g/t Ag from 82m ; and continue to provide encouragement for the establishment of a high-grade mining reserve at T1. Highlights from recent assays include:

  • 16m @ 13.52% Zn, 7.61% Pb, 191 g/t Ag and 1.31 g/t Au from 74m in MBRCDD065

  • 5m @ 5.47% Zn, 7.63% Pb, 102 g/t Ag and 0.14 g/t Au from 76m in MBRC066

  • 3m @ 19.79% Pb, 53 g/t Ag and 0.36 g/t Au from 62m in MBRC067

  • 4m @ 5.64% Zn, 3.29% Pb, 52 g/t Ag and 0.20 g/t Au from 64m in MBRC068

  • 4m @ 6.76% Pb, 46 g/t Ag and 0.53 g/t Au from 62m in MBRC069

Metallurgical testwork on drill core from T1 is ongoing at CBH Resources' Endeavour Mine laboratory facilities and ALS Burnie with highly encouraging preliminary results. Excellent overall metal recoveries were returned of up to 90.3% Zn, 92.3% Pb, and 82.3% Ag, producing separate Pb and Zn concentrates with grades of 55.6% Pb, 13.1% Zn, 780 g/t Ag and 49.6% Zn, 2.4% Pb, 75 g/t Ag respectively. Details of the preliminary metallurgical testwork are outlined in the announcement released 9 May 2017, "New Mallee Bull Met-Testing Yields Excellent Results".

The second metallurgical drillhole MBDD029 was drilled from the east down the plunge of the T1 and intersected multiple zones of shear hosted and massive sulphide (sphalerite, galena, pyrite) mineralisation from ~60m onwards. Assays returned this quarter defined the most significant intervals as follows, however it should be noted that given the down-dip nature of drilling no true width estimates are possible:

  • 45m @ 3.00% Zn, 2.51% Pb, 29.3 g/t Ag, 0.15% Au from 57m ; and

  • 14m @ 5.16% Zn, 2.70% Pb, 84.9 g/t Ag, 0.67 g/t Au from 104m (incl. 3m @ 20.3% Zn, 10.6% Pb, 319 g/t Ag, 2.81 g/t Au from 114m) ; and

  • 15m @ 2.16% Zn, 1.13% Pb, 16.6 g/t Ag, 0.21 g/t Au from 145m

Results from two other metallurgical drillholes at Mallee Bull have similarly been positive. To the west and down-dip of the T1 mineralisation, hole MBRCDD064 was drilled to target a gap between Zn-Pb intercepts within the main Mallee Bull resource domain and returned 3m @ 6.81% Zn, 7.64% Pb, 0.35% Cu, 29.4 g/t Ag, 0.55 g/t Au from 227m was returned at the target zone, along with strong copper mineralisation further downhole including 9m @ 3.69% Cu, 0.61% Pb, 0.48% Zn, 42 g/t Ag, 0.64 g/t Au from 233m and 7m @ 1.45% Cu, 0.44% Pb, 0.52% Zn, 35.8 g/t Ag, 0.23 g/t Au from 265m . In MBRCDD065, drilled up-dip of MBDD028, a broad interval of 16m @ 13.52% Zn, 7.61% Pb, 191 g/t Ag, and 1.31 g/t Au from 74m was returned.

Complete assays for remaining drillholes remain pending, and once obtained will be included in an update to the T1 geological and resource model for use in a prefeasibility study. Three diamond holes (MBDD030 to MBDD032) for geotechnical purposes have also been completed since the end of June. The prefeasibility study is expected to be completed in the September quarter.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

4

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [467 x 684] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Mallee Bull June Quarter Drilling, Plan View

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

5

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [469 x 691] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Mallee Bull Section 6413376N, looking North

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Cobar Superbasin Project: Copper, Silver, Gold, Lead, Zinc; Western NSW (PEX 100%).

Targets: Cobar-style polymetallic mineralisation; Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide mineralisation.

The Cobar Superbasin Project is subject to a Memorandum of Agreement with Japan Oil, Gas, and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC). Details of the JOGMEC MoA can be found in Peel's ASX Announcement released on 30 September 2014. In the June quarter, drilling and geophysical surveying continued at the Wirlong prospect under Stage 2 of the farm-in agreement.

The Wirlong prospect represents a very large hydrothermal system hosting significant copper mineralisation along its greater than 2.5km strike length and to depths of up to 950m. Over 2,900m of RC and diamond drilling was completed between April and June under Phases 4 and 4a of the JOGMEC JV, to further define this system, with the assistance of down hole EM surveying and detailed on-ground gravity surveying.

Wirlong Phase 4 Drilling

In April, Peel reported the best copper intercept returned to date at Wirlong with drillhole WLRRCDD043 returning 17m @ 4.59% Cu and 8g/t Ag from 738m , extending the down-dip continuity of strong copper mineralisation at Wirlong to ~600m below surface. At the end of May 2017, RC/diamond drill hole WLRCDD044 was drilled down-dip of WLRCDD043 targeting ~800m below surface. Difficult ground conditions caused a deviation from the planned drill trace, with WLRCDD044 intercepting the target horizon at nearly 1km below surface. Importantly WLRCDD044 returned 14m @ 0.51% Cu, 5 g/t Ag from 1004m (incl. 2m @ 1.49% Cu, 0.44% Zn, 11 g/t Ag from 1004m and 1m @ 1.28% Cu, 0.54% Zn, 19 g/t Ag from 1017m).

Nearer to surface, extensions were made to several RC holes drilled in the December quarter that were designed to test for oxide copper mineralisation up-dip of significant intercepts. A review of a number of these drillholes, indicated potential for further mineralisation past the previous end-of-hole depths, and this was verified by the latest intercepts which include:

  • 1m @ 0.59% Cu, 4 g/t Ag from 163m, 2m @ 0.69% Cu, 6 g/t Ag from 170m and 1m @ 0.74% Cu, 6 g/t Ag from 173m in WLRC031

  • 7m @ 0.86% Zn, 0.19% Pb from 137m (incl. the 1m @ 0.52% Zn from 137m returned at EOH in the December quarter), 4m @ 0.65% Zn, 0.29% Pb from 145m, and 3m @ 1.00% Zn from 153m in WLRC033

  • 6m @ 0.43% Cu from 138m, 1m @ 0.88% Zn, 0.33% Pb, 0.29% Cu, 6 g/t Ag from 147m, 4m @ 0.56% Zn from 152m, 1m @ 0.93% Cu, 0.39% Zn, 5 g/t Ag from 158m, 1m @ 0.91% Zn from 164m and 5m @ 0.50% Zn from 181m in WLRCDD032

Phase 4 drilling concluded in mid-April with three RC holes WLRC045 to WLRC047 which targeted along strike and up-dip of the significant intercept in hole WLRC035 (drilled in November 2016, returned 9m @ 3.29% Cu, 0.60% Zn, 18 g/t Ag from 70m). The northern hole WLRC045 encountered 3m @ 0.92% Cu, 6 g/t Ag from 54m and 7m @ 0.53% Cu from 81m (incl. 2m @ 0.95% Cu, 5 g/t Ag from 83m). Corresponding intercepts of 1m @ 1.57% Cu, 5 g/t Ag from 68m and 2m @ 2.06% Cu, 5 g/t Ag from 91m were encountered 40m along strike to the south in WLRC046. Up dip of WLRC035, hole WLRC047 also intercepted 1m @ 1.11% Cu, 0.51% Pb, 0.58% Zn, 22 g/t Ag from 60m, 1m @ 0.86% Cu, 6 g/t Ag from 63m, 5m @ 0.53% Zn, 0.35% Pb from 66m.

Wirlong Phase 4a Drilling

Prior to the commencement of Phase 4a drilling, a ground-based gravity survey was completed over Wirlong for a total 1,328 stations at 100m spacings. Three high priority targets were identified, named

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

7

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

'The Jack', 'TNT' and 'High Voltage' (with a coincident EM anomaly previously identified from 2014 HeliTEM data. A single RC drillhole was completed on each of the latter two targets; however, results were disappointing with no explanation for the source of the observed gravity anomalies. Drillholes WLRC048 and WLRC049 are located approximately 1.2km and 2km respectively to the south along strike from the southern-most RC drillhole from Phase 4.

Also in the last quarter, DHEM surveying of WLRCDD043 identified an off-hole anomaly centred between WLRCDD043 and WLDD001 (9m @ 8.0% Cu, 17 g/t Ag, 0.21 g/t Au from 616m and 4m @ 1.14% Cu, 3 g/t Ag from 643m) and a diamond wedge drillhole was designed to target its centre. Whilst only minor copper mineralisation was observed at the expected depth, it has been construed that the drillhole WLRCDD043W1 intersected a structural “pinch” in the Wirlong copper system; not uncommon in Cobarstyle deposits.

At the Wirlong oxide zone, additional extensions to prior drillholes was undertaken again under Phase 4a; drillhole WLRC026 was initially drilled in May 2016 to test up-dip of hole WLRCDD015 (4.9m @ 4.3% Cu, 13 g/t Ag from 402.1m and 22m @ 1.0% Cu, 4 g/t Ag from 332m) and terminated early at 277m due to insufficient lift. WLRC026 previously returned significant copper mineralised zones averaging 2m @ 3.80% Cu, 10.5 g/t Ag from 36m, 1m @ 1.31% Cu from 71m, 2m @ 0.80% Cu from 74m, 2m @ 0.96% Cu from 243m, 1m @ 1.46% Cu from 249m and 9m @ 1.27% Cu from 255m. A further 73m of RC drilling this quarter saw the intersection of further significant mineralisation (pXRF) with 26m @ 2.89% Cu, 0.45% Zn, 0.12% Pb, 15 g/t Ag from 286m and 3m @ 0.75% Cu, 0.56% Zn from 334m returned; assays remain pending. Subsequent to the end of the quarter, RC drillholes WLRC052 and WLRC053 have also been completed to follow-up the new intercept in WLRCD026, returning highly mineralised zones with pXRF intervals of 9m @ 8.59% Cu from 299m in WLRC052 , and 23m @ 0.82% Cu from 179m in WLRC053 . Given these recent results a further 300m RC/diamond extension has been added to drillhole WLRCDD032, with assay results pending.

Approximately 80m north along strike from the above intercepts, modelling of down hole EM data had defined a conductor off-hole from WLRCDD024. WLCRDD024 intercepted 121m @ 0.73% Cu, 3 g/t Ag from 207m. RC hole WLRC050 was drilled in response from the west and down-dip of the mineralised zone, however, the hole steepened excessively and was abandoned at 150m. Hole WLRC051 was drilled as a replacement to 480m and initial surveys show the hole intersected the bottom edge of the modelled conductor plate near ~419m down hole where preliminary pXRF assays have returned 1m @ 0.50% Cu from 419m as well as 0.58% Cu and 0.62% Cu from 414m and 416m respectively. Additional significant intercepts at shallower depths include 3m @ 0.30% Pb, 0.75% Zn from 182m, 1m @ 1.10% Cu, 0.21% Pb, 0.19% Zn from 186m and 1m @ 1.03% Cu, 3.12% Pb, 0.44% Zn, 38 g/t Ag from 332m.

Drilling at Wirlong was ongoing at the time of reporting, with extensions of previous oxide drillholes WLRC029 and WLRC030 planned.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

8

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [479 x 677] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Wirlong June Quarter Drilling, Plan View

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

9

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [467 x 689] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Wirlong June Quarter Drilling, Main Zone Plan View

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

10

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [463 x 683] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Wirlong Section 6446915N

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

11

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [488 x 689] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Cobar Superbasin Tenure

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

12

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Wagga Tank/Mount View Projects: Copper, Silver, Gold, Lead, Zinc; Western NSW (PEX 100%).

Targets : Cobar-style polymetallic mineralisation; Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide mineralisation.

Wagga Tank Drilling and Geophysics

Wagga Tank is a high-grade polymetallic deposit located on the western edge of the Cobar Superbasin, ~130m south of Cobar and ~45km south-west of Mallee Bull. Historic drilling intersected significant base and precious metals mineralisation interpreted to occur as sub-vertical elongate shoots/lenses within zones of brecciation and hydrothermal alteration. This was substantiated by an 18-drillhole maiden drilling program completed by Peel last year which returned intercepts such as 27m @ 10.00% Zn, 6.41% Pb, 89 g/t Ag, 0.42 g/t Au, 0.21% Cu from 240m, 16m @ 3.27 g/t Au, 0.35% Cu, 1.1% Zn, 0.57% Pb, 12 g/t Ag from 226m, and 15m @ 8.5% Zn, 4.11% Pb, 114 g/t Ag, 1.57 g/t Au, 0.3% Cu from 280m.

The second drilling program at Wagga Tank commenced during the quarter and was ongoing at the time of reporting. Drilling so far has returned significant new massive sulphide (sphalerite-galena) mineralisation in WTRCDD020, collared ~40m further north-east of drillhole WTRC017 (completed by Peel); best intercepts from WTRCDD020 (indicated by portable XRF analysis) include include 3m @ 1.11% Zn, 0.45% Pb, 3 g/t Ag from 201m, 1m @ 61 g/t Ag, 1.54% Cu, 0.51% Pb, 0.38% Zn from 250m, 6m @ 7.37% Zn, 1.81% Pb, 7 g/t Ag from 282m and 9m @ 1.01% Zn, 0.30% Pb from 291m.

Almost 1km south of the main Wagga Tank deposit, drillhole WTRC021 was drilled to target a significant chargeability anomaly generalted from a recent IP survey. The drillhole was terminated early due to high water inflow however the IP anomaly remains untested and extensional drilling was underway at the time of reporting. Drillholes WTRCDD022 and WTRCDD023 were completed subsequent to the quarter’s end with logging, sampling and assaying ongoing at the time of reporting.

Additional geophysical surveys completed during the quarter comprised gravity surveying and an airborne magnetic survey; a preliminary review has defined a number of targets for further investigation.

Mt Allen, Double Peak & Mt Dromedary Geophysics and Prospecting

Approximately 16km to the east-southeast of Wagga Tank lies the Mt Allen, Double Peak and Mt Dromedary prospect areas which are host to historic mines and workings. As at Wagga Tank, during the quarter the area was covered with gravity and airborne magnetic surveys as well as several IP surveys over the Mt Allen prospect area. Several significant coincident chargeable IP and gravity anomalies near historic workings at Mt Allen were noted.

At the Double Peak and Mt Dromedary prospects, 258 portable XRF soil samples and 9 grab and rock chip samples were collected. Field reconnaissance and geological mapping show the areas to be strongly altered at surface with abundant gossanous material. Rock chip samples returned highly anomalous values: at Double Peak, one grab sample of galena+malachite rich, magnetite-altered, gossanous/scorodite sediment returned 678 g/t Ag, 2.31 g/t Au, 9.72% Cu, 21.8% Pb, 4.43% Zn and another of malachite veined, chlorite-altered, fine-grained sediment returned 139 g/t Ag, 0.47 g/t Au, 4.00% Cu, 18.2% Pb, 1.27% Zn. Encouragingly, these results are from an area with a coincident magnetic/gravity anomaly.

A significant RC and diamond drilling program has been planned for the next quarter at all three prospect areas, commencing at Mt Allen to target identified IP and gravity anomalies as well as to follow-up historic gold intercepts.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

13

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [471 x 695] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Wagga Tank Drill Plan with RTP Magnetics Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017 14

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [490 x 692] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Mt Allen, Double Peak & Mt Dromedary Prospects with RTP Magnetics Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017 15

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [486 x 687] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8: Wagga Tank Project Prospect Locations

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

16

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Apollo Hill Project: Gold; Northeastern Goldfields WA (PEX 100%).

Targets: Archean gold deposits.

No field work was undertaken at the Apollo Hill Project during the quarter.

Other Projects

No fieldwork was undertaken on any other project during the quarter.

Corporate

As previously reported, during the quarter, ASX-listed gold producer, St Barbara Limited subscribed for $3.28 million of Peel shares. The placement, at a subscription price of 20.5 cents per share, represented a premium to Peel’s then share price and volume-weighted average share price, and gives St Barbara an approximate 9.5% stake in the Company. The funds raised will allow for the acceleration of work programs including further drilling at Peel’s 100%-owned Wagga Tank prospect (now underway).

Also during the quarter, Peel Mining Limited received a tax refund of approximately $1.14m (before costs) for the 2015/16 year in relation to Research & Development activities undertaken by the Company.

For further information, please contact Managing Director Rob Tyson on (08) 9382 3955.

Competent Persons Statements

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Rob Tyson who is a fulltime employee of the company. Mr Tyson is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Tyson has sufficient experience of relevance to the styles of mineralisation and the types of deposits under consideration, and to the activities undertaken, to qualify as Competent Persons as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Tyson consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on information in the form and context in which it appears. Exploration results are based on standard industry practices, including sampling, assay methods, and appropriate quality assurance quality control (QAQC) measures.

The information in this report that relates to the Mallee Bull Mineral Resource estimates, and reported by the Company in compliance with JORC 2012 is based on information compiled by Jonathon Abbott, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Jonathon Abbott is a full-time employee of MPR Geological Consultants Pty Ltd and is an independent consultant to Peel Mining Ltd. Mr Abbott has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Mr Abbott consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. As at the date of this report, there has been no material changes to the Mallee Bull Resource estimates.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

17

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drill Collars

Hole ID Northing Easting Azi Dip Final Depth(m)
MBDD029 6413440 415503 268.51 -53.79 201.7
MBRCDD065 6413413 415406 94.36 -61.15 99.7
MBRC066 6413400 415411 90.01 -60.92 157
MBRC067 6413400 415431 94.07 -61.09 140
MBRC068 6413440 415431 90.72 -60.25 140
MBRC069 6413430 415461 92.24 -59.16 120
MBRC070 6413450 415461 92.81 -59.2 120
MBRC071 6413470 415451 96.93 -60.34 157
MBRC072 6413470 415432 95.74 -61.34 157
MBRC073 6413410 415463 94.94 -60.82 120
MBRC074 6413390 415463 90.37 -64.81 120
MBRC075 6413370 415464 90.43 -60.28 110
MBRC076 6413370 415445 90.28 -59.95 120
MBRC077 6413370 415427 95.68 -60.35 130
MBRC078 6413370 415405 98.52 -60.1 140
MBRC079 6413370 415384 98.94 -59.85 150
MBRC080 6413370 415364 99.38 -59.68 160
MBRC081 6413390 415363 90.22 -59.88 180
MBRC082 6413410 415362 91.74 -59.83 180
MBRC083 6413400 415383 95.1 -58.89 180
MBRC084 6413420 415411 94.69 -60 160
MBRC085 6413420 415394 93.37 -60.57 180
MBRC086 6413440 415412 93.01 -60.46 160
MBRC087 6413440 415392 93.91 -59.96 180
MBRC088 6413440 415373 93.88 -59.5 150
MBRC089 6413470 415339 91.66 -59.3 152
MBRC090 6413470 415360 90.73 -59.85 140
MBRC091 6413382 415422 89.5 -59.81 100
MBRC092 6413380 415383 92.89 -59.34 120
MBRC093 6413470 415320 94.23 -60.27 162
MBRC094 6413470 415401 96.19 -60.43 120
MBRC095 6413445 415355 96.27 -59.82 162
MBRC096 6413490 415488 98.64 -59.2 150
MBRC097 6413550 415482 92.95 -60.06 150

Wirlong RC/Diamond Drill Collars

Hole ID Northing Easting Azi Dip Final Depth(m)
WLRC029* 6446864 418458 265 -55 204
WLRC030* 6446898 418455 265 -55 210
WLRC031* 6446941 418457 265 -55 210
WLRCDD032* 6446978 418458 268.65 -55.23 510.3
WLRC033* 6447019 418465 265 -55 210
WLRC045 6447083 418416 85 -50 96
WLRC046 6447045 418409 85 -50 102
WLRC047 6447057 418446 255 -50 96
WLRCDD043W1
6446800		 417837 62.64 -60.93 869.8
WLRC048 6443821 418550 270 -57 348
WLRC049 6443033 418854 234.65 -55.96 299

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

18

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Hole ID Northing Easting Azi Dip Final Depth(m)
WLRC026* 6446927 418465 258.52 -55.82 350
WLRC050 6447077 418142 85 -60 150
WLRC051 6447077 418144 85 -55 480
Wagga Tank RC/Diamond Drill Collars Wagga Tank RC/Diamond Drill Collars Wagga Tank RC/Diamond Drill Collars
Hole ID Northing Easting Azi Dip Final Depth(m)
WTRC019 6387319 378875 0 -90 132
WTRCDD020 6387390 378983 312 -50 399.5
WTRC021 6386354 378698 270 -60 204
Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results(1m intervals) Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results(1m intervals) Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results(1m intervals) Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results(1m intervals) Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results(1m intervals) Mallee Bull RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results(1m intervals)
Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029		 21
22
33
36
37
38
41
42
43
46
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84		 22
23
34
37
38
39
42
43
44
47
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85		 0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.11
0.16
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.04
0.06
0.16
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.05
0.08
0.04
0.05
0.16
0.06
0.06		 1.14
0.95
0.51
0.93
0.18
0.29
0.23
0.8
0.36
0.66
0.89
2.33
8.73
2.93
1.5
1.42
0.83
2.01
2.45
2.68
1.68
2.69
2.66
2.82
3
7.07
2.61
3.56
2.77
3.63
3.41
2.46
3.43
1.82
1.98
3.94
2.63
4.76		 0.03
0.03
0.01
0.05
0.02
0.02
0
0.25
0.02
0.03
0.17
0.73
2.43
1.61
3.34
2.99
1.58
2.81
4.66
4.25
0.89
3.9
3.26
4.77
4.68
12.65
3.8
0.16
0.14
0.35
0.33
1.17
0.77
2.64
4.04
8.74
5.18
8.48		 76.4
28.7
0.3
48.7
106
113
58
99.2
1.2
93.1
24
87.5
235
26.7
27.9
15.8
9
11.8
12.5
13.9
11.5
19.3
16.2
14
15.2
47.5
14.9
17.9
14.1
20.3
19.9
16.6
34.1
27.3
17.4
28.4
17.3
32.4		 0.04
0.02
0.05
0.12
0.15
0.14
0.11
1.37
1.05
0.38
0.05
0.19
0.91
0.38
0.21
0.21
0.11
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.05
0.11
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.15
0.37
0.13
0.18

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

19

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029		 85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
104
105
107
109
110
111
113
114
115
116
117
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
145
146
147
148
149		 86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
105
106
108
110
111
112
114
115
116
117
118
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
146
147
148
149
150		 0.08
0.07
0.07
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.07
0.17
0.21
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.03		 2.12
2.07
2.4
5.46
0.89
1.1
0.68
1.89
2.06
0.82
0.99
1.72
6.64
0.5
0.52
0.27
0.17
0.12
1.01
0.12
0.1
0.91
1.44
1.06
14.85
7.06
9.9
0.79
0.49
0.45
0.43
0.34
0.56
0.78
0.46
0.43
0.35
0.69
0.99
0.94
0.89
0.49
0.38
0.69
0.64
0.37
0.44
0.62
0.93
0.8
0.65		 4.54
3.77
0.84
7.72
1.6
2.29
0.16
0.08
0.13
3.48
1.3
0.74
13.95
0.51
0.72
0.9
1.6
0.53
1.31
0.54
0.82
2.29
1.29
1.62
29
15.6
16.35
1.67
0.9
1
0.87
0.85
0.98
1.33
0.57
0.96
0.89
0.97
1.45
1.23
1.78
0.66
0.8
1.45
0.94
0.73
0.79
0.98
1.28
1.31
0.71		 13
10.4
13.5
111
17.9
20
10.3
25
25.1
8.5
15
30.9
135
10.1
13
5.5
6
4.8
40.9
5.9
5
52.3
53.6
29.1
370
280
307
22.9
19.9
18.8
16
10.8
14.6
18.9
10.3
8.8
6.7
12.5
16.3
16
13.2
7.4
7.4
12.5
10.3
5.9
6.2
8.8
13.7
11.7
9.4		 0.17
0.12
0.07
0.75
0.16
0.11
0.05
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.05
0.62
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.19
0.04
0.01
0.18
0.03
0.05
2.8
2.58
3.04
0.18
0.08
0.12
0.11
0.1
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.12
0.09
0.06
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.04
0.15
0.09
0.15
0.04

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

20

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029
MBDD029		 150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
167
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
178
179
183
185
186
187
188
191
196
199		 151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
168
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
179
180
184
186
187
188
189
192
197
200		 0.02
0.03
0.05
0.06
0.04
0.09
0.13
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0
0
0.01
0
0.01
0.04
0.03		 0.89
1.09
1.83
1.45
1.23
1.97
2.41
1.02
0.7
1.01
0.56
0.29
0.71
0.3
0.75
1.17
0.85
0.72
0.93
1.31
0.72
0.79
0.55
0.59
0.74
0.52
0.59
0.34
0.32		 1.15
2.73
3.64
3.36
2.71
3.85
5.12
2.09
1.51
1.19
0.95
0.54
1.24
0.54
1.16
2.22
0.66
0.31
0.19
0.57
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.11
0.14
0.17
0.18
0.52
1.04		 12.2
17.2
28.5
23.7
19.2
29
34.1
13.7
8.9
12.5
7.4
3.2
7
2.7
6
8.1
5.8
4.8
6.3
7.6
4.2
4.8
3.5
3.5
4.5
3.2
3.8
2.6
2.6		 0.09
0.17
0.39
0.66
0.21
0.44
0.28
0.07
0.12
0.28
0.03
0.06
0.06
0.02
0.01
0.04
0.07
0.06
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.01
-0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065
MBRCDD065		 73
74
74.4
75
76
77
78
79
79.6
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
88
88.4
89
90
94
95		 74
74.4
75
76
77
78
79
79.6
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88.4
89
90
91
95
96		 0.01
0.04
0.09
0.05
0.09
0.3
0.55
0.43
0.03
0.1
0.09
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.28
0.46
0.31
0.02
0.01
0.01		 0.08
0.73
22.6
10.1
15.35
18.95
17.85
20.1
1.79
3.57
2.37
0.88
1.04
0.78
1.05
0.53
4.22
24.1
6.34
0.76
0.59
0.64		 0.74
1.7
22.7
21.6
28.8
32.4
32.3
33.4
3.95
7.99
5.06
2.07
2.44
2.02
2.48
1.31
7.65
40.9
13.9
0.42
0.2
0.19		 2.7
23.7
622
275
468
530
479
520
27.1
40.8
33.4
14.6
17.8
12.9
14
7.7
81.6
506
120
12.1
4.7
4.3		 0.02
0.17
3.35
4.86
3.79
2.78
4.04
2.78
0.07
0.07
0.12
0.21
0.32
0.06
0.07
0.03
0.17
0.92
0.15
0.23
0.01
0.01

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

21

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
MBRCDD065 96 97 0.02 0.61 0.47 3.7 0.11
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066
MBRC066		 69
70
71
72
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
84
85
86
88
89
91
118
119
121
136		 70
71
72
73
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
85
86
87
89
90
92
119
120
122
137		 0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.05
0.15
0.84
0.78
0.34
0.07
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.04
0.08
0.21
0.12
0.42		 0.01
0.28
0.4
0.2
2.35
6.17
23.1
3
3.53
0.79
0.74
0.92
0.83
0.83
0.51
0.67
0.65
0.29
2.85
1.55
2		 1.45
1
1.01
0.82
3.99
12.75
8.9
1.07
0.65
0.61
0.43
0.42
0.21
0.86
0.27
0.2
0.36
0.64
1.49
0.43
1.28		 1
15.5
25.1
15.4
54.9
78.3
288
42.4
46.5
10
9.1
9
8.5
9.3
4
5
7.8
12.4
64.8
20.3
36		 -0.01
0.04
0.06
0.05
0.07
0.19
0.26
0.12
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.28
0.14
0.05
0.06
0.05
1.09
0.07
0.26
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067
MBRC067		 60
61
62
63
64
65
66
69
71
73
97
100
106
107
109
110
111
113		 61
62
63
64
65
66
67
70
72
74
98
101
107
108
110
111
112
114		 0.12
0.05
0.15
0.16
0.08
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.14
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.32
0.16
0.06
0.04		 0.88
0.97
34.2
15.8
9.36
0.54
1.04
0.82
0.57
0.47
0.29
0.16
0.25
0.72
2.07
0.43
0.55
0.35		 0.16
0.18
0.83
0.33
0.71
0.73
0.37
0.24
0.26
0.56
0.79
0.57
0.51
0.93
2.48
0.5
0.48
0.54		 27.1
5.9
71.4
57
30.7
2.4
3.2
2.2
1.8
6
7.1
2.9
6.1
16.5
46
13
10.1
6.2		 0.15
0.08
0.61
0.29
0.19
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.07
0.02
0.43
0.6
0.55
0.48
0.28
0.79
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068		 59
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
72		 60
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
73		 0.05
0.07
0.01
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.1
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.02		 1.29
0.82
2.65
2.4
2.77
4.39
3.31
2.69
0.86
0.23
0.26		 0.15
0.8
0.18
1.88
4.86
8.02
5.03
4.63
1.43
0.56
0.69		 43
38.5
9.1
12.5
32.3
73.2
57
45.5
15.1
4
3.9		 0.08
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.12
0.28
0.21
0.2
0.23
0.04
0.07

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

22

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068
MBRC068		 73
74
81
85
87
88
89
93
100
101
102
103
104
105
129
135		 74
75
82
86
88
89
90
94
101
102
103
104
105
106
130
136		 0.09
0.02
0.01
0
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.28
0.13		 2.01
0.38
0.11
0.13
0.12
0.14
0.14
0.19
1.08
1.2
1.25
1.38
1.02
0.56
0.2
0.72		 3.92
0.98
0.5
0.61
0.59
0.55
0.7
0.54
0.06
0.04
0.07
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.25
0.92		 32.7
6.5
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
9.2
10
10.7
11.7
9.2
5.4
8.4
19.2		 0.4
0.06
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.74
0.21
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069
MBRC069		 38
39
42
45
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
88
89
90
91
92
93		 39
40
43
46
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
89
90
91
92
93
94		 0.1
0.03
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01		 2.26
0.71
0.61
0.95
0.09
0.32
0.24
1.14
16.55
4.62
1.94
3.94
1.24
0.2
0.19
0.16
0.19
0.14
0.23
0.24
0.18
0.18
0.33
0.41
2.04
0.63
1.46
0.84
0.71
0.62
0.82
0.91
0.53		 0.26
0.06
0.13
0.14
0.68
2.18
1.8
0.07
0.18
0.09
0.39
0.54
0.54
0.69
0.53
0.79
0.72
0.65
0.73
0.86
0.59
0.56
0.93
0.85
1.3
0.64
0.29
0.15
0.08
0.07
0.05
0.01
0.01		 30.4
4.8
8.5
0.9
11.9
31.3
22.7
13.3
105
39.6
15.3
25.2
9.5
3.5
3.5
2.4
3.4
2
3.3
3.5
2.9
2.7
4.5
5.2
23.3
7.9
18.1
15
12.7
6.8
7.9
9.3
6.3		 0.29
0.05
0.06
0.03
0.08
0.23
0.22
0.32
1.22
0.37
0.16
0.38
0.12
0.02
0.05
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.06
0.35
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
MBRC070
MBRC070		 39
40		 40
41		 0.06
0.04		 0.23
0.12		 0.03
0.02		 134
228		 0.29
0.17

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

23

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
MBRC070
MBRC070
MBRC070
MBRC070
MBRC070
MBRC070
MBRC070		 42
56
61
88
89
90
106		 43
57
62
89
90
91
107		 0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.04		 0.18
0.51
0.61
0.98
1.02
1.18
0.53		 0.06
0.14
0.17
0.74
0.31
0.15
0.13		 49.1
1
1.6
17.7
16.8
14
7.7		 0.06
0.01
0.35
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.13
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071
MBRC071		 83
84
85
86
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
102
103
104
113
114
119
120
141
145
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156		 84
85
86
87
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
103
104
105
114
115
120
121
142
146
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157		 0.03
0.01
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0
0.01
0.01
0
0.01
0.38
0.03
0.3
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01		 1.1
0.32
0.97
0.56
0.4
0.34
0.38
0.73
0.61
0.62
0.35
0.36
0.28
0.32
0.19
0.17
0.23
0.43
0.4
0.65
0.02
4.95
0.66
0.44
0.5
0.3
0.39
0.27
0.32
0.37
0.47
0.33
0.36		 2.25
0.63
0.52
0.4
0.57
0.7
0.6
0.84
0.89
1.05
0.88
0.79
0.55
0.72
0.66
0.5
0.55
1.17
0.56
1.17
0.06
0.12
0.45
0.82
0.63
0.81
0.61
0.51
0.63
0.9
0.91
0.57
0.59		 10.8
3.3
10.4
6
3.8
3
3.2
6.4
5.5
5.5
3.2
3.1
2.5
2.9
2.1
2.1
2.8
3.7
4.1
18.8
0.9
96.2
5.9
4.1
4.4
2.9
3.3
2
2.7
2.8
3.3
2.4
2.6		 0.01
-0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.04
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.61
0.61
0.44
0.05
0.06
0.15
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.06
0.04
MBRC072
MBRC072
MBRC072
MBRC072
MBRC072		 87
88
133
134
143		 88
89
134
135
144		 0.11
0.26
0.01
0.01
0.31		 0.07
0.2
0.69
0.75
2.09		 0.91
0.84
0.27
0.08
2.5		 2.3
5.3
4.6
5.8
43.6		 0.02
0.08
0.03
0.11
0.26

Wirlong RC/Diamond Drilling Significant Assay Results (1m intervals)

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t) Au(g/t)
WLRC045
WLRC045
WLRC045		 21
54
56		 22
55
57		 0.08
0.88
1.55		 0.01
0
0.01		 0.64
0.1
0.09		 1
2.8
12.7		 0.01
-0.01
0.02

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

24

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

WLRC045
WLRC045		 83
84		 84
85		 0.79
1.11		 0.01
0.03		 0.01
0.04		 3.9
5.3		 0.01
-0.01
WLRC046
WLRC046
WLRC046		 68
91
92		 69
92
93		 1.57
3.31
0.81		 0
0
0		 0.02
0.02
0.01		 5
8
1.9		 -0.01
0.02
0.01
WLRC047
WLRC047
WLRC047
WLRC047
WLRC047
WLRC047		 60
63
66
67
68
70		 61
64
67
68
69
71		 1.11
0.86
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.01		 0.51
0.08
0.24
0.33
0.53
0.37		 0.58
0.07
0.61
0.59
0.51
0.52		 22
6.2
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.4		 0.04
0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.01
-0.01

Wagga Tank RC/Diamond Significant pXRF Assay Results (1m intervals)

Hole ID From(m) To(m) Cu(%) Pb(%) Zn(%) Ag (g/t)
WTRC019
WTRC019
WTRC019
WTRC019
WTRC019		 98
101
114
115
121		 99
102
115
116
122		 0.53
0.59
1.73
0.89
1.04		 0.01
0.01
0.01
0
0.01		 0
0
0
0
0.01		 -1
-1
-1
-1
-1
WTRC021 197 198 0 0.15 0.67 -1
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020
WTRCDD020		 188
201
202
203
224
225
244
245
248
250
252
254
256
257
261
276
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
291
292
293
295
296
297
298
299		 189
202
203
204
225
226
245
246
249
251
253
255
257
258
262
277
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
292
293
294
296
297
298
299
300		 0
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.06
0.06
0.51
0.85
0.72
1.54
0.11
1.4
0.53
0.14
0.18
0.52
0.5
0.7
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0
0
0
0.04		 0.66
0.66
0.38
0.32
0.41
0.25
0.06
0.2
0.03
0.51
0.53
0.34
0.21
0.73
0.49
0.06
0.06
0.08
2.27
2.21
1.76
2.07
1.56
1
0.48
0.24
0.29
0.18
0.38
0.13
0.19
0.81		 0.01
1.8
1.01
0.53
1.21
0.53
0.11
0.2
0.12
0.38
0.74
0.57
0.09
0.47
0.57
0.14
0.49
0.49
9.53
10.76
6.47
8.49
4.99
3.96
1.53
0.64
0.73
0.65
1.16
0.56
0.69
2.98		 -1
-1
-1
9
-1
13
-1
30
13
61
-1
20
10
-1
-1
-1
-1
16
-1
-1
14
13
15
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

25

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1 - Mallee Bull (JORC Code, 2012 Edition)

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. _		  Within the resource area the Mallee Bull drill hole
database comprises 80 RAB holes, 58 RC holes and 70
pre-collared diamond holes drilled by Peel since 2011
for 49,892 m of drilling.
 Wedges were drilled from 7 of the diamond holes
with between 1 and 4 wedges drilled from each
parent hole.
Include reference to measures taken to ensure
sample representivity and the appropriate
calibration of any measurement tools or
systems used.		  Measures taken to ensure the representivity of RC
and diamond sampling include close supervision by
field geologists, use of appropriate sub-sampling
methods, routine cleaning of splitters and cyclones,
and RC rigs with sufficient capacity to provide
generally dry, high recovery samples.
 Information available to demonstrate
sample
representivity includes recovered RC sample weights,
diamond core recoveries and RC field duplicates.
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		  Potentially mineralised RC and diamond samples
were selected for assaying on the basis of geological
logging and nearby drilling results.
 Down-hole sample lengths of assays within the
mineralised domains used for resource estimation
range from 0.4 to 4.0 m and average 1.0 m with 1.0 m
samples representing 98% of the resource dataset.
 RC samples were generally sub-sampled with either a
three-tier riffle splitter or cone splitter. A small
number of intervals were sub-sampled by scoop.
 Diamond core was generally halved for assaying with
a diamond saw.
 Samples were submitted to ALS in Orange NSW for
analysis, with check assaying by SGS in Townsville.
 Samples submitted to ALS were oven dried and jaw
crushed (for diamond core), then riffle split if
required to produce a maximum 3 Kg sample which
was pulverised to nominally 85% passing 75 microns.
 All gold assaying was by 30 gram fire assay
 For assaying to mid-2012 copper, silver, cobalt, lead,
zinc and sulphur assaying was by four acid digest with
determination by ICP-AES.
 From mid-2012 copper, silver, cobalt, lead, zinc and
sulphur assaying was by aqua regia digest with
determination by ICP-AES. These samples represent
around 67% of the resource dataset.
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).		  Resources were estimated from 1m down-hole
composited assay grades from RC and diamond
drilling with diamond drilling providing 73% of
resource composites.
 All RC drilling used face-sampling bits of generally 5 ½
inch diameter.
 Diamond drilling included NQ, HQ and PQ sized core,
which contribute 40.5%, 59.1% and 0.4% of the
diamond resource dataset respectively.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

26

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
 Approximately 66% of the diamond core was oriented
byconventional spear or electronic methods.
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.		  Measures taken to maximise recovery for RC drilling
included use of face sampling bits and drilling rigs of
sufficient capacity to provide generally dry, high
recovery samples.
 Recovered sample weights show an average recovery
of around 77% for mineralised domain RC samples.
 Recovered core lengths were recorded for virtually all
core runs. These data show an average recovery of
100% for mineralised domain drilling.
 The available information is indicative of generally
good sample recoveries with no notable relationship
between sample recovery and grade and no
indication that preferential sample loss may have
generated biased samples.
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.		  Mallee Bull drill holes were routinely geologically
logged by industry standard methods with core
samples routinely photographed. Diamond core was
generally geotechnically logged, including RQD.
 Geological logs are available for all resource area RC
and diamond holes.
 The logging is qualitative in nature and of sufficient
detail to support the current resource estimates.
Sub-sampling
techniques
and sample
preparation		 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether
quarter, half or all core taken.
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled,
rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or
dry.
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation
technique.
Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-
sampling stages to maximise representivity of
samples.
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in situ material collected,
including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the
grain size of the material being sampled.		  RC samples were collected over generally 1m down-
hole intervals and sub-sampled with a cone or three
tier riffle splitter.
 Diamond core was generally halved for assaying with
a diamond saw.
 Measures taken to ensure the representivity of RC
and diamond sub-sampling include close supervision
by field geologists, use of appropriate sub-sampling
methods, routine cleaning of splitters and cyclones,
and rigs with sufficient capacity to provide generally
dry, high recovery RC samples.
 Information
available
to
demonstrate
the
representivity of sub-sampling includes RC field
duplicates.
 The available information demonstrates that the sub-
sampling methods and sub-sample sizes are
appropriate for the grain size of the material being
sampled, and provide sufficiently representative sub-
samples for resource estimation.
Quality of
assay data
and
laboratory
tests		 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.		  No geophysical measurements including hand-held
XRF measurements were used in the resource
estimates.
 Assay quality control procedures adopted by Peel
include reference standards, blanks and inter-
laboratory check assays. These results have
established acceptable levels of precision and
accuracy for the assaying of the metals included in the
Mineral Resource estimates.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

27

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
 Four acid digest check assaying by ALS and SGS
indicates that ALS aqua regia assaying undervalues
iron grades. Although not included in Mineral
Resource estimates, the block model constructed for
the current estimates includes iron grades to
facilitate
density
assignment.
Investigations,
including comparative modeling with alternative
density estimation methods indicate that the
apparent bias in iron assays does not significantly
affect the assigned densities or the current resource
estimates.
Verification
of sampling
and assaying		 The verification of significant intersections by
either independent or alternative company
personnel.		  No
drill hole
results
are
reported
in
this
announcement.
The use of twinned holes.  No twinned holes have been drilled at Mallee Bull
Documentation of primary data, data entry
procedures, data verification, data storage
(physical and electronic) protocols.		  Sample intervals and geological logs were recorded
by field geologists on hard copy sampling sheets
which were then entered into spreadsheets for
merging into the central database. Laboratory assay
files were merged directly into a central sql database.
 Peel geologists routinely validate data when loading
into the database.
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.  Assay values were not adjusted for resource
estimation.
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.
  All RC and diamond holes included in the current
estimates have accurate differential GPS collar
surveys. All resource holes were down hole surveyed
by gyro tools at an average of 13 m intervals
 The locations of drill hole traces have been defined
with sufficient accuracyfor the current estimates.
Specification of the grid system used.  All surveying was undertaken in Map Grid of Australia
1994(MGA94)Zone 55 coordinates.
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.  A topographic triangulation was generated from drill
hole collar surveys. The mineralisation does not
outcrop
and
accuracy
of
the
topographic
triangulation does not influence resource estimates.
 Topographic control is adequate for the current
estimates.
Data spacing
and
distribution		 Data spacing for reporting of Exploration
Results.		  No drill results are included in this announcement.
 Drill hole spacing varies from around locally 20 by 20
m in central portions to 80 by 80 m and locally
broader inperipheral areas and at depth.
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.		  The data spacing has established geological and grade
continuity sufficiently for the current Mineral
Resource Estimates.
Whether sample compositing has been applied  Drill hole samples were composited to 1 m down-hole
intervals for resource modeling.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

28

==> picture [156 x 69] 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.		  Most Mallee Bull mineralisation generally dips at an
average of around 70oto the west, with shallow
portions averaging around 40o. Most resource RC and
diamond holes are inclined moderately to steeply to
the east.
 One diamond hole with two wedges (MBDD017,
MBDD017W1, MBDD017W2) drilled primarily for
metallurgical sampling is inclined steeply west, sub-
parallel to the mineralisation. These data were
excluded from the hangingwall and footwall domain
estimation datasets, and used only for estimation of
the small central zone.
 For the combined resource dataset true thicknesses
of mineralised intersections approximate 60% of
down-hole intersection lengths.
 For the resource dataset the drilling orientations
achieve un-biased samplingof the mineralisation.
Sample
security		 The measures taken to ensure sample security.  Field sampling was undertaken by field staff
supervised by Peel geologists. Subsequent sample
preparation and analyses were undertaken by
commercial assay laboratories.
 Sub-samples selected for assaying were collected in
heavy-duty polywoven plastic bags which were
immediately sealed. These bags were delivered to the
assay laboratory by independent couriers, Peel
employees or contractors.
 Results of field duplicates, and the general
consistency of results between sampling phases
provide confidence in the general reliability of the
resource data.
Audits or
reviews		 The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data.		  MPR Geological Consultants independently reviewed
sample quality information, and database validity for
the Mallee Bull resource drilling. These reviews
included comparison of assay, collar survey and
down-hole survey entries in the database with
original records and checking for consistency within
and between database tables. These reviews showed
no significant discrepancies.
 MPR consider that the sample preparation, security
and analytical procedures adopted for the Mallee Bull
resource drilling provide an adequate basis for the
current Mineral Resource estimates.

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
nationalpark and environmental settings.		  The Mallee Bull prospect is wholly located within
Exploration
Licence
EL7461
“Gilgunnia”.
The
tenement is subject to a 50:50 Joint Venture with CBH
Resources Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Toho Zinc
Co Ltd. Peel Mining Limited has a 50% interest in the
tenement.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

29

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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 and no known
impediments exist.
Exploration
done by
other parties		 Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration
by other parties.		  Drilling by previous project explorers did not intersect
Mallee Bull mineralisation and resource estimates
include only Peel RC and diamond drilling.
 Exploratory work completed in the area by former
tenement holders Triako Resources between 2003
and 2009 included diamond drilling, IP surveys,
geological mapping and reconnaissance geochemical
sampling around the historic Four Mile Goldfield area.
Prior to Triako Resources, Pasminco Exploration
explored the Cobar Basin area for Cobar or Elura type
deposits.
Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of
mineralisation.		  The project area lies within the Cobar-Mt Hope Siluro-
Devonian sedimentary and volcanic units. The
northern Cobar region consists of predominantly
sedimentary units with tuffaceous member, whilst the
southern Mt Hope region consists of predominantly
felsic volcanic rocks; the Mallee Bull prospect seems
to be located in an area of overlap between these two
regions. Mineralisation at Mallee Bull features the
Cobar-style attributes of short strike lengths, narrow
widths and vertical continuity, and occurs as shoot-
like structures dippingsteeplyto the west.
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.		  No
drill
hole
results
are
reported
in
this
announcement.
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.		  No
drill
hole
results
are
reported
in
this
announcement.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

30

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
The assumptions used for any reporting of
metal equivalent values should be clearly
stated.		  Mineral
Resource
estimates
include
copper
equivalent grades incorporating on copper, lead, zinc,
gold and silver grades and the following price and
recovery assumptions: Copper, $5,500/t and 95%,
lead $2,100 and 90%, zinc $2,500/t and 85%, gold
$1,200/oz and 40%, and silver $17/oz and 85%.
 These estimates are based on Peel’s interpretation of
potential commodity prices and interpretation of
early stage metallurgical test work performed on
Mallee Bull diamond core and give the following
formula: Cu equivalent (%) = Cu (%) + 0.362 x Pb(%) +
0.407 x Zn (%) + 0.295 x Au (g/t)+ 0.009 x Ag (g/t).
 It is the company’s opinion that all elements included
in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable
potential to be recovered and sold.
Relationship
between
mineralisatio
n 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’).		  Most Mallee Bull mineralisation generally dips at an
average of around 70oto the west, with shallow
portions averaging around 40o.Most resource holes
are inclined moderately to steeply to the east.
 Data from one diamond hole, with two wedges drilled
with a steep westerly inclination were excluded from
the hangingwall and footwall domain estimation
datasets, and were used only for estimation of the
small central zone.
 For the combined resource dataset true thicknesses of
mineralisation intersections approximate 60% of
down-hole intersection lengths.
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.		  See diagrams included in this announcement.
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.		  No
drill
hole
results
are
reported
in
this
announcement.
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.		  Metallurgical testwork has yielded recoveries of
copper, silver, gold, lead and zinc of 95%, 85% and
40%, 90% and 85% respectively. Testwork is ongoing.
 A variety of geophysical surveys have been completed
at Mallee Bull with results reported previously.
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 andfuture drilling		  Additional work will include economic studies
including
geotechnical
and
metallurgical
investigation. Further drilling is anticipated in due
course.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

31

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
areas, provided this information is not
commercially sensitive.

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.		  Sample intervals and geological logs were recorded by
field geologists on hard copy sampling sheets which
were then entered into spreadsheets for merging into
the central database. Laboratory assay files were
merged directly into a central database.
 Peel geologists routinely validate data when loading
into the database.
 MPR Geological Consultants independently reviewed
sample quality information, and database validity for
the Mallee Bull resource drilling. These reviews
included comparison of assay, collar survey and down-
hole survey entries in the database with original
sampling records and checking for consistency within
and between database tables. These reviews showed
no significantly discrepancies.
 MPR consider that the sample preparation, security
and analytical procedures adopted for the Mallee Bull
resource drilling provide an adequate basis for the
current Mineral Resource estimates.
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.		  Jonathon Abbott visited Mallee Bull from the 3rdto the
6thof February 2014. Mr Abbott inspected drill core,
and drilling and sampling activities and had detailed
discussions with Peel field geologists gaining an
improved understanding of the geological setting and
mineralisation controls, and the resource sampling
activities.
Geological
interpretatio
n		 Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty
of) the geological interpretation of the mineral
deposit.
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.		  The geological setting of the Mallee Bull deposit
mineralisation has been confidently established from
drill hole logging, including development of a three
dimensional model of the major rock units.
 Mineralised domains used for resource estimation
capture zones of continuous mineralisation with drill
sample copper equivalent grades of greater than
0.8%, with some lower grade intercepts included for
continuity.
 The resource domains comprise two main zones
designated as the hangingwall and footwall domain
respectively, and smaller subsidiary zones designated
as the central zone and northern zones which
represent around 3% and 6% of estimated resources
respectively.
 The hangingwall and footwall domains are divided
into zones of generally shallower comparatively high
lead-zinc grades, and deeper copper dominant
mineralisation. For the Footwall domain the lead-zinc
dominant mineralisation is generally too low grade
and too poorly defined for inclusion in Mineral
Resources,and the current estimates include onlythe

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

32

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
deeper copper dominant mineralisation for this
domain.
 Domain
interpretation
included
reference
to
lithological domain wire-frames and the domains are
consistent with geological understanding.
 Peel interpreted a surface representing the base of
weathering from drill hole logging. Interpreted depth
to fresh rock ranges from around 50 to 110 m and
averages around 75 m.
 The interpreted mineralised domains extend above
the interpreted base of weathering. Reported
resources include only fresh mineralisation.
 Due
to
the
confidence
in
understanding
mineralisation controls and the robustness of the
geological
model
investigation
of
alternative
interpretations are considered unnecessary.
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.		  The combined hangingwall domain strikes north-
south over approximately 280 m and extends over a
vertical distance of approximately 510 m, from 15 to
525 m below surface. True widths range from around
1 to rarely 23 m and average 6.6 m.
 The copper dominant portion of the footwall domain
strikes north-north east (020) over approximately 290
m with a vertical extent of approximately 685 m from
around 140 m to 825 m depth. The domain ranges
from around 1 to rarely 23 m thick and averages
around 7.6 m thick. For data analysis and assignment
of upper cut it was subdivided into an upper, lower
copper grade zone, and a deeper zone of higher
average copper grades below 390 m depth.
 The central mineralised domain strikes north-south
over approximately 175 m with a vertical extent of
approximately 165 m between approximately 280 and
445 m depth. True widths range from around 1 to 8 m
and average approximately2.9 m.
Estimation
and
modelling
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 block model includes copper, lead, zinc, gold,
silver cobalt, sulphur and iron grades. Iron and sulphur
are not included in Mineral Resource estimates.
 Grades were estimated by Ordinary Kriging of 1 m
down-hole composited assay grades within the
mineralised domains.
 Upper cuts applied to the fresh hangingwall Pb-Zn,
hangingwall Cu, footwall upper, footwall lower and
central domain respectively, were as follows:

Cu (%): 0.50, 4.5, 5.0, 12, 5.0

Pb (%): 15, 8.5, 2.0, 2.0, 1.3

Zn (%): 28, 6.0, 1.8, 0.8, 2.0

Au (g/t): 1.8, 2.5, 1.0, 1.5, 1.0

Ag (g/t): 350, 75, 100, 200, 85

Co (g/t): 60, 900, 250, 190, 70

S (%): 15, 45, 25, 10, Uncut
 The selected upper cuts generally approximate the
96thpercentile of each dataset. Estimation of the
sparselydrilled north domain included upper cuts

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

33

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
from the hangingwall Cu domain, which is interpreted
as comparable mineralisation style.
 Iron grades were estimated without upper cuts
reflecting the lower variability of these grades.
 Resource estimates are generally extrapolated to a
maximum of around 40 m from drill intercepts.
 Micromine software was used for data compilation,
domain wire-framing, and coding of composite values,
and GS3M was used for resource estimation.
 The estimation technique is appropriate for the
mineralisation style.
The availability of check estimates, previous
estimates and/or mine production records and
whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes
appropriate account of such data.		  There has been no production to date at Mallee Bull.
 Comparative check modeling included construction of
un-cut estimates and comparative modeling with
alternative density estimation methods which
indicate that the apparent bias in iron assays does not
significantly affect the assigned densities or the
current resource estimates.
 The current estimates are not directly compatible with
previous Mallee Bull resource estimates which
included mineralised domains based only on copper
grades. However, where the two models overlap, they
are broadly consistent, with differences reflecting the
revised domains and additional drilling.
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). _		  Estimated resources make no assumptions about
recovery of by-products.
 The block model includes iron grades for assignment
of density, and sulphur grades for potential use in
evaluations and comparative density modeling.
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		  Grades were Kriged into 2 m by 10 m by 10 m (east,
north, vertical) blocks with sub-blocking to minimum
dimensions of 0.4 m by 2.0 m by 2.0 m at domain
boundaries.
 Drill hole intercept spacing varies from around 20 by
20 m and locally tighter in central areas of the
mineralisation to greater than 80 by 80 m in
peripheral areas and at depth.
 Estimation included a four pass octant based search
strategy, with ellipsoids aligned with mineralised
domain orientations.
 Search ellipsoid radii (across strike, along strike, down
dip) and minimum data requirements for these
searches range from 10 by 50 by 50m (8 data) for
search 1 to 20 by 200 by 200 m (4 data) for search 4.
 Estimates from search pass 4 contribute around 2% of
estimated resources.
Any assumptions about correlation between
variables.		  Grade modeling did not include any specific
assumptions about correlation between variables.
 Densities were assigned to the resource model from
Kriged iron values using a density-iron formula derived
from densitymeasurements of diamond core.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

34

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Description
of
how
the
geological
interpretation was used to control the
resource estimates.		  The mineralised domains used for the current
estimates capture zones of continuous mineralisation
with drill sample copper equivalent grades of greater
than 0.8%. Domain interpretation included reference
to lithological domain wire-frames, and the domains
are consistent with geological understanding.
 Although the interpreted mineralised domains extend
above the interpreted base of weathering, reported
resources include onlyfresh mineralisation.
Discussion of basis for using or not using grade
cutting or capping.		  Estimation of each attribute included upper cuts
selected on a domain by domain basis which generally
approximate the 96thpercentile of each dataset.
These upper cuts reduce the impact of a small number
of outlier compositegrades.
The process of validation, the checking process
used, the comparison of model data to drill
hole data, and use of reconciliation data if
available.		  Model validation included visual comparison of model
estimates and composite grades, and trend (swath)
plots, along with comparison with results from
comparative models.
Moisture Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry
basis or with natural moisture, and the
method of determination of the moisture
content.		  Tonnages are estimated on a dry tonnage basis
Cut-off
parameters		 The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or
quality parameters applied.		  Economic evaluation of the Mallee Bull deposit is at an
early stage, and metallurgical and mining parameters
have not yet been confidently established. The cut-off
grades applied to the estimates reflect Peel’s
interpretation of potential commodity prices, costs
and recoveries.
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.		  Economic evaluation of the Mallee Bull deposit is at an
early stage, and mining parameters have not yet been
confidently established. The estimates assume
underground mining of the comparatively narrow
mineralisation.
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 assumptions made.		  Metallurgical test work undertaken by Peel during
2013, 2014 and 2017 suggests that the mineralisation
is amenable to recovery by floatation with copper,
silver, gold, lead and zinc recoveries of around 95%,
85%, 40%, 90% and 85% respectively. Testwork is
continuing.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

35

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Environment
al 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 greenfields 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.		  Economic evaluation of the Mallee Bull deposit is at an
early stage, and environmental considerations for
potential mining have not yet been evaluated in
detail. Information available to Peel indicates that
there are unlikely to be any specific environmental
issues that would preclude potential eventual
economic extraction.
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 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.		  Peel
routinely
performed
immersion
density
measurements on air dried samples of drill core with
results available for 2,781 samples.
 The reliability of Peels density measurements was
confirmed by 97 repeat measurements performed by
ALS on oven dried samples.
 Density measurements are positively correlated with
iron grade reflecting increasing concentration of iron
bearing sulphide minerals.
 Densities were assigned to the current block model
from Kriged iron values using the following formula
derived from the density measurements:
 Fe < 10%: Density (t/m3) = 2.80
 Fe >10%: Density (t/m3) = 2.80 + 0.06 x (Fe%-10)
 Densities of the hangingwall lead-zinc domain are less
well defined than for other resource domains.
Available information suggests the formula used for
the current estimates may understate average
densities for this domain by in the order of 10%. This
difference is not material at the current stage of
project evaluation.
 Average densities for the resource estimates average
3.1 t/m3and range from around 2.9 t/m3for the
footwall and central domains to approximately 3.4
t/m3for the more sulphide rich hangingwall domain.
 The available information suggests that the density
measurements
are
generally
sufficiently
representative of the mineralisation for the current
estimates.
Classification The basis for the classification of the Mineral
Resources into varying confidence categories.		  Estimated resources are extrapolated to generally
around 40 m from drill intercepts and classified as
Indicated and Inferred on the basis of estimation
search pass and polygons defining areas of relatively
consistent drill hole spacing.
 For the hangingwall and footwall domains, estimates
for mineralisation with consistently 40 by 40 m or
closer spaced sampling are classified as Indicated and
estimates for more broadly sampled mineralisation
are classified as Inferred.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

36

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
 The central and northern domains are comparatively
broadly drilled and all estimates for these domains are
classified as Inferred.
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). _		  The resource classification accounts for all relevant
factors.
Whether the result appropriately reflects the
Competent Person’s view of the deposit.		  The resource classifications reflect the Competent
Person’s views of the deposit.
Audits or
reviews		 The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral
Resource estimates.		  The resource estimates have been reviewed by Peel
geologists, and are considered to appropriately reflect
the mineralisation and drillingdata.
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 to quantify the 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.		  Confidence in the relative accuracy of the estimates is
reflected by the classification of estimates as
Indicated and Inferred.

Table 1 - Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data for Cobar Superbasin/Wagga Tank Projects

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. _		  Diamond and reverse circulation (RC)
drilling were used to obtain samples for
geological logging and assaying.
 Diamond core was cut and sampled at 1m
intervals. RC drill holes were sampled at
1m intervals and split using a cone splitter

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

37

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.		 attached to the cyclone to generate a split
of 2-4kg to ensure sample representivity.
 Multi-element readings were taken of the
diamond core and RC drill chips using an
Olympus Delta Innov-X portable XRF tool.
The portable XRF was calibrated against
standards after every 30 readings.
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).		  Drilling to date has been a combination of
diamond, reverse circulation and rotary air
blast. Reverse circulation drilling utilised a
5 1/2 inch diameter hammer. A blade bit
was predominantly used for RAB drilling.
NQ and HQ coring was used for diamond
drilling.
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 are recorded by the drillers
in the field at the time of drilling and
checked by a geologist or technician
 RC and RAB samples are not weighed on a
regular basis due to the exploration nature
of drilling but no significant sample
recovery issues have been encountered in
a drilling program to date.
 Diamond core is reconstructed into
continuous runs on an angle iron cradle for
orientation marking and depths are
checked against the depths recorded on
core blocks. Rod counts are routinely
undertaken by drillers.
 When
poor
sample
recovery
is
encountered during drilling, the geologist
and driller have endeavoured to rectify the
problem to ensure maximum sample
recovery.
 Sample recoveries at Wirlong and Mallee
Bull to date have generally been high.
 Sample recoveries at Wagga Tank have
been
variable
with
broken
ground
occurring in places and poorer sample
recoveries encountered. Insufficient data
is available at present to determine if a
relationship exists between recovery and
grade. This will be assessed once a
statistically valid amount of data is
available to make a determination.
Logging Whether core and chip samples have been
geologically andgeotechnically logged to a level of		  All core and drill chip samples are
geologicallylogged. Core samples are

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

38

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.		 orientated and logged for geotechnical
information. Drill chip samples are logged
at 1m intervals from surface to the bottom
of each individual hole to a level that will
support
appropriate
future
Mineral
Resource studies.
 Logging of diamond core, RC and RAB
samples records lithology, mineralogy,
mineralisation, structure (DDH
only),
weathering, colour and other features of
the samples. Core is photographed as both
wet and dry.
Sub-sampling
techniques
and
sample
preparation		 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter,
half or all core taken.
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary
split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness
of
the
sample
preparation
technique.
Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-
sampling stages to maximise representivity of
samples.
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in situ material collected,
including
for
instance
results
for
field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain
size of the material being sampled.		  Drill core was cut with a core saw and half
core taken.
 The RC drilling rigs were equipped with an
in-built cyclone and splitting system, which
provided
one
bulk
sample
of
approximately 20kg and a sub-sample of 2-
4kg per metre drilled.
 All samples were split using the system
described above to maximise and maintain
consistent representivity. The majority of
samples were dry.
 Bulk samples were placed in green plastic
bags, with the sub-samples collected
placed in calico sample bags
 Field duplicates were collected by re-
splitting the bulk samples from large
plastic bags. These duplicates were
designed for lab checks.
 A sample size of 2-4kg was collected and
considered
appropriate
and
representative for the grain size and style
of mineralisation.
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.		  ALS Laboratory Services were used for Au
and multi-element analysis work carried
on out on 3m to 6m composite samples
and 1m split samples.
The laboratory techniques below are for all
samples submitted to ALS and are
considered appropriate for the style of
mineralisation defined at Wirlong and
Wagga Tank:
o
PUL-23 (Sample preparation
code)
o
Au-AA26 Ore Grade Au 50g
FA AA Finish
o
ME-ICP41 35 element aqua
regia
ICP-AES,
or
an
appropriate Ore Grade base
metal AA finish
o
ME-ICP61 33 element 4 acid
digest ICP-AES, with an
appropriate Ore Grade base
metal AA finish

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

39

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
 Assaying of samples in the field was by
portable XRF instrument Olympus Delta
Innov-X Analyser. Reading time was 20
seconds per reading with a total 3 readings
per sample.
 The QA/QC data includes standards,
duplicates
and
laboratory
checks.
Duplicates for drill core are collected by
the lab every 30 samples after the core
sample is pulverised. Duplicates for
percussion drilling are collected directly
from the drill rig or the metre sample bag
using a half round section of pipe. In-house
QA/QC tests are conducted by the lab on
each batch of samples with standards
supplied by the same companies that
supplyour own.
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.		  All geological logging and sampling
information is completed in spreadsheets,
which are then transferred to a database
for validation and compilation at the Peel
head office. Electronic copies of all
information are backed up periodically.
 No adjustments of assay data are
considered necessary.
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.		  A Garmin hand-held GPS is used to define
the location of the samples. Standard
practice is for the GPS to be left at the site
of the collar for a period of 5 minutes to
obtain a steady reading. Collars are picked
up after by DGPS. Down-hole surveys are
conducted by the drill contractors using
either a Reflex gyroscopic tool with
readings every 10m after drill hole
completion or a Reflex electronic multi-
shot camera will be used with readings for
dip and magnetic azimuth taken every 30m
down-hole. QA/QC in the field involves
calibration using a test stand. The
instrument is positioned with a stainless
steel drill rod so as not to affect the
magnetic azimuth.
 Grid system used is MGA 94 (Zone 55). All
down-hole
magnetic
surveys
were
converted to MGA94grid.
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.		  Data/drill hole spacing is variable and
appropriate to the geology and historical
drilling.
 3m to 6m sample compositing has been
applied to RC drilling at Mallee Bull,
Wirlong and Wagga Tank for gold and/or
multi-element assay.
Orientation of
data
in
relation
to		 Whether the orientation of sampling achieves
unbiased sampling of possible structures and the		  Most drillholes are planned to intersect the
interpreted mineralised structures/lodes
as near to aperpendicular angle as

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

40

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
geological
structure		 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.		 possible (subject to access to the preferred
collar position).
Sample
security		 The measures taken to ensure sample security.  The chain of custody is managed by the
project geologist who places calico sample
bags in polyweave sacks. Up to 5 calico
sample bags are placed in each sack. Each
sack is clearly labelled with:
o
Peel Mining Ltd
o
Address of Laboratory
o
Sample range
 Detailed records are kept of all samples
that are dispatched, including details of
chain of custody.
Audits
or
reviews		 The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data.		  Data is validated when loading into the
database. No formal external audit has
been conducted.

Table 1 - Section 2 - Reporting of Exploration Results for Cobar Superbasin/Wagga Tank Projects

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 Cobar Superbasin Project comprises of
multiple exploration licences that are
subject to a farm-in agreement with
JOGMEC whereby JOGMEC can earn up to
50%.
 The Wagga Tank Project comprises of
EL6695, EL7226, EL7484 and EL7581 and is
100%-owned by Peel Mining Ltd, subject to
a 2% NSR royalty agreement with MMG
Ltd.
 The tenements are in good standing and no
known impediments exist.
Exploration
done by other
parties		 Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by
other parties.		  Work at Wagga Tank was completed by
multiple previous explorers including
Newmont, Homestake, Amoco, Cyprus,
Arimco, Golden Cross, Pasminco and
MMG.
Geology Deposit type, geological setting and style of
mineralisation.		  Wagga Tank, a volcanic-hosted massive
sulphide (VHMS) deposit, is located
~130km south of Cobar on the western
edge of the Cobar Superbasin. The deposit
is
positioned
at
the
western-most
exposure of the Mt. Keenan Volcanics (Mt.
Hope Group) where it is conformably
overlain by poorly-outcropping, distal
turbidite sequence of carbonaceous slate
and siltstone. Mineralisation is hosted in a
sequence of rhyodacitic volcanic and
associated volcaniclastic rocks comprising
polymictic conglomerate, sandstone, slate,
crystal-lithic tuff and crystal tuff. This
sequence
faces
northwest,
strikes

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

41

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
northeast-southwest and dips range from
moderate westerly, to vertical, and locally
overturned to the east. Mineralisation
straddles
the
contact
between
the
volcaniclastic facies and the siltstone-slate
facies where there is a broad zone of
intense
tectonic
brecciation
and
hydrothermal alteration (sericite-chlorite
with local silicification).
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.		  All relevant information material to the
understanding of exploration results has
been included within the body of the
announcement or as appendices.
 No information has been excluded.
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.		  No length weighting or top-cuts have been
applied.
 No metal equivalent values are used for
reporting exploration results.
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’). _
True widths are generally estimated to be
about 60-70% of the downhole width
unless otherwise indicated.
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 to Figures in the body of text.
Balanced
reporting		 Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration
Results is not practicable, representative reporting
of both low and high grades and/or widths should		  All results are reported.

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

42

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
Exploration Results.
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.
 No other substantive exploration data are
available.
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.
 Future work at the Cobar Superbasin and
Wagga
Tank
Projects
will
include
geophysical surveying and RC/diamond
drilling to further define the extent of
mineralisation at the prospects. Down hole
electromagnetic (DHEM) surveys will be
used to identify potential conductive
sources
that
may
be
related
to
mineralisation.

TENEMENT INFORMATION AS REQUIRED BY LISTING RULE 5.3.3 Granted tenements

TENEMENT PROJECT LOCATION OWNERSHIP CHANGE IN
QUARTER
E39/1198 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4588 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4589 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4590 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4591 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4592 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4677 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4678 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
P39/4679 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
E39/1887 Apollo Hill Leonora, WA 100%
M39/0296 Isis Leonora,WA 100%
E40/0337 The Gap Leonora,WA 100%
E31/1063 Apollo Hill South Leonora,WA 100%
E31/1075 Yerilla Leonora,WA 100%
E31/1076 Mt Remarkable Leonora,WA 100%
M31/486 Apollo Hill ML Leonora, WA 100%
E31/1087 Rise Again Leonora, WA 100%
P31/2071 Rise Again Leonora, WA 100%
P31/2069 Rise Again Leonora, WA 100%
P31/2072 Rise Again Leonora, WA 100%
P31/2073 Rise Again Leonora, WA 100%
P31/2068 Rise Again Leonora, WA 100%
P31/2070 Rise Again Leonora,WA 100%
E31/1116 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
E31/1132 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
E39/1984 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA 100%
EL8326 Attunga Attunga,NSW 100%

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

43

==> picture [156 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

ML1361 Mayday Cobar,NSW 50% Renewal sought
EL7461 Gilgunnia Cobar,NSW 50%
EL7711 RubySilver Armidale,NSW 100%
EL7519 Gilgunnia South Cobar,NSW 100% Renewal sought
EL7976 Mundoe Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8070 Tara Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8071 Manuka Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8105 Mirrabooka Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8112 Yackerboon Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8113 Iris Vale Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8125 Hillview Nth Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8126 Norma Vale Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8201 Mundoe North Cobar,NSW 100% Renewal sought
EL8114 Yara Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8117 Illewong Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8307 SandyCreek Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8314 Glenwood Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8336 Brambah Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8345 Pine Ridge Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8391 Gilgunnia North Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8414 Mt Walton Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8426 Marygold Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8447 Linera Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8450 Beanbah Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8451 Michelago Cooma,NSW 100%
EL6695 Wagga Tank Cobar,NSW 100%
EL7581 Lowan Cobar,NSW 100%
EL7484 Mount View Cobar,NSW 100%
EL7226 Wongawood Cobar,NSW 100% Renewal sought
EL8534 Burthong Cobar,NSW 100%
EL8562 Nombinnie Cobar,NSW 100% Granted

Tenements under application

TENEMENT PROJECT LOCATION STATUS
ELA5431 Four Corners Cobar,NSW Under application
ELA5472 Woorara Cobar,NSW Under application
ELA5498 Glenwood Cobar,NSW Under application
ELA5497 Brambah Cobar,NSW Under application
E40/365 27 Well Leonora,WA Under application
E31/1149 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA Under application
E39/2021 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA Under application
E37/1317 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA Under application
E31/1155 Apollo Hill Leonora,WA Under application

Peel Mining Limited – Quarterly Report June 2017

44

More from PEEL MINING LIMITED

Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 28
Proxy Solicitation & Information Statement 2026
May 11
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 23
Regulatory Filings 2026
Apr 20
Interim / Quarterly Report 2026
Apr 19
Regulatory Filings 2026
Apr 16
Regulatory Filings 2026
Apr 15
M&A Activity 2026
Mar 23
Regulatory Filings 2026
Feb 26
Regulatory Filings 2026
Feb 9
View all filings →