TIDMAMC
RNS Number : 8690T
Amur Minerals Corporation
18 October 2017
18 October 2017
AMUR MINERALS CORPORATION
(AIM: AMC)
Mining Update
Amur Minerals Corporation ("Amur" or the "Company"), a
nickel-copper sulphide mineral exploration and resource development
company focused on its Kun-Manie project in the Russian Far East
("Kun-Manie"), is pleased to provide an update of the open pit
mining potential from the four drill defined deposits. This first
set of results allows Amur to assess the project's economic
potential as an open pit only operation. Amur will carry out a
further evaluation of these results to determine the potential to
mine additional ores by underground production methods in areas
adjacent to and below the open pits. The primary area of interest
is the Maly Kurumkon / Flangovy ("MKF") deposit where previous
study work had identified the deposit was well suited for both open
pit and underground production.
Open Pit Mining Potential Highlights:
-- Approximately 76% of the 101.3 million tonne February 2017
MRE containing more than 1.0 million tonnes of nickel equivalent
can be mined by open pit from all four drill defined deposits at
Kun-Manie. This material is contained within ultimate pit mining
limits defined by nickel prices ranging from as low as USD 3.20 per
pound (USD 7,050 per tonne) to USD 3.60 per pound (USD 7,930 per
tonne).
-- Open pit production of 77 million tonnes of ore averaging
0.73% nickel (564,100 tonnes) and 0.20% copper (151,500 tonnes) is
contained with the four open pit designs. By-product cobalt
(0.02%), platinum (0.17 g/t) and palladium (0.15 g/t) will also be
recovered.
-- Nearly 93% of the global open pit contained ore
mineralisation is classified as Measured and Indicated (JORC,
December 2012) with the remaining 7% being Inferred. This indicates
limited infill drilling is needed within the immediate pit
areas.
-- Based on the exclusive open pit production scenario with toll
smelting of sulphide concentrates, the projected Earnings Before
Income Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation ("EBITDA") exceeds USD
1.6 billion, an increase of 36% from the March 2015 reported open
pit toll smelting EBITDA of USD 1.2 billion.
-- The open pit toll smelt EBITDA is based on a USD 7.27 per
pound nickel (USD 16,020 per tonne) and zero additional value from
the by-product metals of copper, cobalt, platinum and palladium.
This approach provides a more conservative calculation of the
EBITDA than previously reported which was based on a USD 7.50 per
pound nickel price (USD 16,530 per tonne) and 50% of the recovered
copper value.
-- Sequentially, RPM Global ("RPM") is now evaluating an
underground mine design of the MKF deposit using the Long Hole Open
Stoping ("LHOS") method. This work is designed to identify the
portion of the in-pit mineral resource that can be extracted at a
higher operating profit per ore tonne and to also define additional
mineable potential not contained within the ultimate pit limits
defined at MKF. It is anticipated that successful implementation of
a LHOS mining plan at MKF should substantially increase the
projected Kun-Manie EBITDA beyond the estimated USD 1.6 billion
exclusive open pit mining EBITDA operation with the concentrate
being sold to a toll smelter.
-- The expansion of the resources related to the 2017 drilling
at Kubuk ("KUB"), Ikenskoe / Sobolevsky ("IKEN") and the area
located between the two deposits (referred to as "ISK"), have not
been included in this assessment of the mining potential as final
analytical results from Alex Stewart Laboratories ("ASL") are not
yet available. It is anticipated the newly discovered
mineralisation will substantially increase the Mineral Resource
Estimate ("MRE") and future estimates of the Mining Ore Reserve
("MOR").
Robin Young, CEO of Amur Minerals, commented:
"We are pleased to provide the initial results of the mining
potential at Kun-Manie. Whilst Amur is looking at both open pit and
underground mining production, this evaluation of an exclusive open
pit mining assessment has included and consolidated an abundance of
newly acquired information since our last report on mining
potential in 2015. With new resource models from February 2017, a
Prefeasibility Study identifying a more definitive mining approach
for underground ore mining is being updated. This will include the
available independently reviewed operating costs, additional
metallurgical recovery information and a comprehensive review of
all preceding results.
"Having determined that nearly 77% of our resource falls within
four open pits, we can assess the economic potential of the
exclusive open pit option and can now move forward to establish the
underground mining potential. A key consideration in this
assessment is to maximize the operating profit per ore tonne. It is
likely that portions of the open pit ores may be more profitably
mined by underground methods and we may also be able to recover
ores that do not fall within the currently defined pit limits.
"The current results are encouraging and we note that the
outcome of these results exclude all of the newly discovered ore
from this year's drill programme where we may have doubled the
resource at both Ikenskoe / Sobolevsky and Kubuk and identified a
near continuous zone of mineralisation along the three kilometre
long zone linking the two deposits together."
Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) Disclosure
Certain information contained in this announcement would have
been deemed inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of
Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 until the release of this
announcement.
Enquiries:
Company Nomad and Broker Public Relations
Amur Minerals S.P. Angel Corporate Yellow Jersey
Corp. Finance LLP PR
Robin Young Ewan Leggat Charles Goodwin
CEO Soltan Tagiev Harriet Jackson
Dominic Barretto
+44(0)7544
+7(4212)755615 +44(0)2034 700 470 275 882
For additional information, visit the Company's website,
www.amurminerals.com.
Click on, or paste the following link into your web browser, to
view the associated PDF document and audio file.
http://amurminerals.com/content/wp-content/uploads/Open-Pit-Assessment-2017-Oct-17.pdf
http://amurminerals.com/content/wp-content/uploads/Audio-18-Oct-2017.mp3
Notes to Editors
The information contained in this announcement has been reviewed
and approved by the CEO of Amur, Mr. Robin Young. Mr. Young is a
Geological Engineer (cum laude), a Professional Geologist licensed
by the Utah Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing,
and is a Qualified Professional Geologist, as defined by the
Toronto and Vancouver Stock Exchanges. An employee of Amur for 13
years, previously Mr. Young was employed as an exploration and mine
geologist, mining engineer, construction manager of a mine startup
as well as independent consultant with Fluor Engineers, Fluor
Australia and Western Services Engineering, Inc. during which time
his responsibilities included the independent compilation of
resources and reserves in accordance with JORC standards. In
addition, he has been the lead engineer and project manager in the
compilation of numerous studies and projects requiring the
compilation of independent Bankable Studies utilised to finance
small to large scale projects located worldwide. Mr. Young is
responsible for the content of this announcement which includes
results reported by RPM Global ("RPM"), Gipronickel Institute and
Alex Stewart Laboratories ("ASL").
For further information, see the Company website at
www.amurminerals.com.
Introduction
RPM Global ("RPM") is in the process of defining the mining
potential at the Company's Kun-Manie nickel copper sulphide project
located in the Russian Far East. A phased approach is being
implemented to define the project wide mining potential based on
the February 2017 Mineral Resource Estimates ("MRE"). The results
allow the Company to:
-- Establish the global open pit mining potential for the four
drill defined deposits of Maly Kurumkon / Flangovy ("MKF"),
Vodorazdelny ("VOD"), Ikenskoe / Sobolevsky ("IKEN") and Kubuk
("KUB"). This scenario allows the Company to determine the economic
potential of Kun-Manie based exclusively on open pit mining. This
evaluation is complete and is reported herein.
-- The second mining alternative available to the Company is
based on a combination of open pit and underground production from
within the MKF deposit. This scenario is based on open pit mining
of the near surface ores with the open pit operation transitioning
to a Long Hole Open Stoping ("LHOS") underground mining approach
recovering the deeper ores of MKF. This alternative is based on a
previous study (December 2016) which indicated the combined ore
extraction approach at MKF would likely provide superior Earnings
Before Income Taxes, Depreciation and Amoritisation ("EBITDA") than
an open pit only production scenario for the deposit. This
assessment is nearing completion.
With regard to the mining potential reported herein, it is based
on the February 2017 Mineral Resource MRE. It is these results that
are being used in the current update to the Prefeasibility Study
("PFS"). The PFS is a key document for the Company in evaluating
the full potential of Kun-Manie and is a living document that is
and will be updated as additional information comes available.
It is noted that the highly successful resource expansion drill
results of this summer's field programme (2017) are not included as
the required final independent analytical results by Alex Stewart
Laboratories ("ASL") are not fully available. Once these analytical
results are available, resource updates for IKEN, KUB and the
drilled area between the two deposits (referred to as "ISK") will
be compiled. The Company plans to complete the PFS prior to the
compilation of the resource update based on this year's drilling.
The Company believes the results presented within this RNS as
conservative based on the exclusion of the increase in the MRE
derived from the 2017 drilling.
Mining Evaluation Strategy
The Company is evaluating two potential mining scenarios. The
first being an open pit only operation with the second being a
combined open pit underground production alternative.
Previous trade off studies have indicated a second alternative
consisting of open pit and underground mining provides better
financial results with regard to Net Present Value ("NPV") and
Earnings Before Income Taxes, Depreciation and Amortisation
("EBITDA"). These study results were based on resource models
predating the most recent MRE's issued by RPM in February 2017.
With the February 2017 changes to the MRE inventory (substantially
higher grades of ore) and as a part of the PFS update, the Company
specifically has revisited the all open pit option to ensure that
an appropriate and full comparison of the mining alternatives is
being implemented.
Resource Base for the Determination of Mining Potential
The Kun-Manie nickel copper sulphide project has four drill
defined nickel copper sulphide deposits containing a total of 101.3
million ore tonnes (> 0.4% nickel cutoff grade) and more than
one million nickel equivalent tonnes. The February 2017 Mineral
Resource Estimates ("MRE") for the four deposits have been
independently compiled by RPM Global ("RPM") in accordance with
JORC (Dec. 2012) standards estimated by RPM Global ("RPM"). It is
from these MRE's that the mining potential has and is being
determined.
Open Pit Mining Criteria at Kun-Manie
The mineralisation at all four Kun-Manie deposits consists of
ore thicknesses and grades suitable for open pit mining. The first
step in determination of the open pit potential has been
implemented using a "Pit Limit Optimisation" software system. The
open pit potential of the four deposits was evaluated by defining a
series of open pits for each deposit based on 17 July 2017 audited
operating costs, metallurgical grade recovery curves specific to
each deposit and a series of nickel prices ranging from USD 1.00 a
pound (USD 2,204 per tonne) to USD 7.50 a pound (USD 16,530 per
tonne) in USD 0.10 increments. For conservative purposes, the pit
limits were based on nickel only revenue generation. A summary of
the operating costs used to define the incremental pit designs
follows:
Pit Design Parametres
Cost Centre Units Unit Cost
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
Open Pit Mining $/t ore 1.67
$/t waste 1.29
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
Ore Transport to
Process Plant $/t ore 1.58
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
Processing Cost $/t ore 11.50
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
Tailings $/t ore 0.16
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
Concentrate Transport
to Ulak $/t ore 1.50
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
General and Administrative $/t ore 1.98
---------------------------- ------------ ----------
Selection of the optimal open pit limit for each deposit was
based on the projected Net Present Value ("NPV") for the planned
6.0 million ore tonne per year operational plan. A discount rate of
10% was utilised to calculate the NPV.
Open Pit Mining Potential
Assuming the Company undertakes an exclusive open pit mining
operation at Kun-Manie, nearly 76% of the February 2017 MRE is
contained within open pit mining limits. The four open pits (one at
each deposit) are projected to contain a total of 77 million tonnes
of ore with accumulative stripping ratio of 9.8 tonnes of waste per
tonne of ore. The open pit ore tonnage indicates a total nickel
content of 564,100 tonnes and 151,500 tonnes of copper. By-product
cobalt (13,900 tonnes), platinum (12.9 tonnes) and palladium (11.9
tonnes) will also be recovered from within the four open pits.
In the exclusive open pit mining scenario where 6.0 million ore
tonnes per annum are mined, there is approximately 13 years of
production available for extraction in the exclusive pit production
scenario. Available potential production by deposit is presented in
the following table.
Exclusive Open Pit Mining Production Scenario
Deposit Ore Waste Total Stripping Ni Cu Co Pt Pd
Mt Mt Tonnes Ratio (%) (%) (%) (g/t) (g/t)
Mt t:t
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
MKF
$3.50 50 639 689 12.8 0.76 0.21 0.02 0.15 0.14
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
VOD
$3.30 5 4 9 0.8 0.79 0.20 0.02 0.17 0.17
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
IKEN
$3.60 15 77 93 5.1 0.60 0.15 0.01 0.23 .019
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
KUB
$3.20 7 38 46 5.2 0.78 0.20 0.02 0.16 0.17
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
Total 77 758 837 9.8 0.73 0.20 0.02 0.17 0.15
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
The distribution of open pit tonnages by resource category
indicates the majority of the ore (93%) is comprised of resources
within the Measured and Indicated resource category confirming that
a minimum of infill drilling is required within the identified four
open pit areas.
The KUB deposit contains the largest portion of the Inferred
material which has been successfully infill drilled during the 2017
summer drill programme. This portion of the KUB resource is now
drilled to the spacing previously used to identify Indicated
resources.
Distribution of Ores in Open Pit Only Production Scenario
Deposit Ore Open Pit Composition Percent of
Mt by Resource Category Resource
Tonnage Mined
--------- ---- -------------------------------- ---------------
Measured Indicated Inferred
--------- ---- --------- ---------- --------- ---------------
MKF 50 0% 97% 3% 82%
--------- ---- --------- ---------- --------- ---------------
VOD 5 12% 67% 21% 100%
--------- ---- --------- ---------- --------- ---------------
IKEN 15 31% 69% 0% 71%
--------- ---- --------- ---------- --------- ---------------
KUB 7 0% 57% 43% 48%
--------- ---- --------- ---------- --------- ---------------
Total 77 7% 86% 7% 77%
--------- ---- --------- ---------- --------- ---------------
It is also noted that the four selected ultimate pit limit
designs were based on nickel commodity prices ranging from a low of
USD 3.20 per pound (USD 7,050 per tonne) to USD 3.60 per pound
(7,930 per tonne). The current nickel price is approximately USD
5.00 (USD 11,020 per tonne). For conservative purposes, all
potential revenues from the by-products of copper, cobalt, platinum
and palladium have been excluded. This provides for a more robust
evaluation of the mining potential and reduces project exposure to
reduced nickel prices.
Open Pit EBITDA Projections
On 30 March 2015, the Company reported EBITDA projections for a
toll smelting production scenario based on an exclusive open pit
production alternative. The total projected EBITDA was estimated to
be USD 1.18 billion. Currently, the Company now projects the EBITDA
to be USD 1.60 billion (an increase of approximately 36%). A
comparison of the toll smelting March 2015 and current EBITDA
values by deposit is presented below.
EBITDA Comparison
March 2015 vs October 2017
Deposit EBITDA - Open Pit Increase
Operation (Decrease)
In EBITDA
--------- -------------------------------- ------------
March 2015 October
2017
(USD Million) (USD Million)
--------- --------------- --------------- ------------
IKEN $356 $232* ($124)
--------- --------------- --------------- ------------
MKF $552 $1,030* $478
--------- --------------- --------------- ------------
VOD $135 $188* $53
--------- --------------- --------------- ------------
KUB $139 $157* $18
--------- --------------- --------------- ------------
Total $1,183 $1,606* $425
--------- --------------- --------------- ------------
*Excludes all revenues related to copper, cobalt, palladium and
platinum.
The March 2015 EBITDA includes 50% of the recovered copper
value.
There is an EBITDA increase of nearly USD 425 million with the
majority of the increase being attributable to the substantial
resource increase at the MKF deposit as a result of drilling during
the summer field seasons of 2015 and 2016. These results are
included in the February 2017 MRE. The similar EBITDA projections
for the remaining three deposits are attributable to changes in the
EBITDA calculation procedure undertaken by the Company:
-- The long term base case price for nickel was reduced from USD
7.50 per pound (USD 16,530 per tonne) to USD 7.27 per pound (USD
16,020 per tonne) for nickel. This change was implemented based on
a current long term nickel price projection survey by CIBC.
-- All revenues derived from copper, cobalt, platinum and
palladium have been excluded in the 2017 EBITDA calculation. This
exclusion provides a conservative basis for pit design selection
reducing the need to having to "adjust" designs should nickel metal
pricing decline to less than USD 3.20 per pound (USD 7,050 per
tonne).
Status of MKF Combined Open Pit Underground Mining
Assessment
Work by the Company and its consultants has indicated that
profitability of mining the MKF deposit will likely be
significantly increased by mining the MKF ores using open pit
extraction of the near surface ores then transitioning to mining of
the deeper ores by underground methods. The most recent work was
completed by RPM in December 2016. Substantial technical
assessments and work completed post the December 2016 report also
necessitates a review and update of the December 2016 work with the
inclusion of recently acquired and critical information. This
includes the following:
-- In December 2016, RPM completed a mining trade-off study on
the MKF deposit confirming the combined production scenario
required further investigation subsequent to the MRE update that
was underway and completed subsequent to the December 2016
analysis. The December 2016 reported study indicated that
approximately 13 million ore tonnes would be mined from open pit
operations with an additional 32 million ore tonnes derived by
underground production.
-- The update of the February 2017 MRE at MKF was focused on
newly modeled high grade structures more suited for evaluating
underground mining potential which had not previously been included
in the MRE estimation process.
-- The Gipronickel Institute completion of metallurgical
flotation test work on a representative MKF bulk sample to
determine the metallurgical recoveries of nickel, copper, cobalt,
platinum and palladium. The indicated nickel recovery was 80% with
copper being 83%.
-- In July 2017, RPM reviewed the Company projected operating
costs and calculated the all in MKF underground operating costs to
be in the order of $24.16 per ore tonne. The LHOS mining cost
component is projected to be USD 7.44 per ore tonne.
With completion of the generation of the MKF series of open pit
mining designs for the MKF deposit, RPM has initiated the
evaluation of mining MKF by both open pit and underground methods.
The first step has been completed with the selection of the optimal
ultimate pit based on the incremental strip ratio. The incremental
strip ratio used to identify the ultimate pit limit for the
combined production scenario was 4.5 tonnes of waste per mined
tonne of ore. This incremental stripping ratio identifies the
location where the total cost of mining open pit ore (ore mining
cost plus waste mining cost to mine the ore tonne) exceeds that of
the LHOS underground mining cost per ore tonne.
The selected ultimate open pit is substantially reduced in size
when underground production is considered. The table below presents
a comparison of the open pit MKF production scenario versus that of
the selected open pit limit identified for transition from open pit
to an underground mining.
Open Pit Transition to LHOS Mining
MKF Comparison
Mining Scenario Ore Waste Total Stripping Ni Cu Co Pt Pd
Mt Mt Tonnes Ratio (%) (%) (%) (g/t) (g/t)
Mt t:t
------------------ ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
Open Pit Only
- Maximum 50 639 689 12.8 0.76 0.21 0.02 0.15 0.14
------------------ ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
Open Pit at
LHOS Interface 14 47 61 3.4 0.72 0.20 0.01 0.14 0.13
------------------ ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
Delta -36 -592 628
------------------ ---- ------ --------
The selected MKF open pit located above the deeper ores of the
deposit contains 14 million ore tonnes and is defined by a the pit
limit having a nickel price of USD 2.10 per pound (USD 4,630 per
tonne). This open pit "mines" 628 million fewer tonnes (including
36 million fewer ore tonnes) having a cumulative direct open pit
mining cost in the order of USD 823 million.
On an EBITDA basis, the 36 million ore tonnes have an estimated
in pit value of USD 608 million. Hence, the MKF underground mine
design EBITDA needs to exceed USD 608 million to confirm
implementation of the combined open pit underground mining
configuration at MKF. The Company anticipates the LHOS mining
configuration will result in an EBITDA exceeding this hurdle rate
and results will be reported when finalised.
The table below presents the adjusted Open Pit production
component assuming MKF is mined using both open pit and the LHOS
method.
.
Open Pit Production Potential
February 2017 Resource Models
(MKF Underground Results Pending)
Deposit Ore Waste Total Stripping Ni Cu Co Pt Pd
Mt Mt Tonnes Ratio (%) (%) (%) (g/t) (g/t)
Mt t:t
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
MKF
$2.10 14 47 61 3.4 0.72 0.20 0.01 0.14 0.13
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
VOD
$3.30 5 4 9 0.8 0.79 0.20 0.02 0.17 0.17
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
IKEN
$3.60 15 77 93 5.1 0.60 0.15 0.01 0.23 .019
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
KUB
$3.20 7 38 46 5.2 0.78 0.20 0.02 0.16 0.17
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
Total 41 166 209 4.0 0.69 0.18 0.01 0.18 0.16
--------- ---- ------ -------- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ------- -------
Additional Mining Potential
The 2017 drill programme has doubled the size of the IKEN and
KUB deposit. Mineralisation has also been identified to be present
on a near continuous basis over a three kilometre long length
between the deposits of between IKEN and KUB. These newly
discovered resources could add substantially to the MRE and
ultimately to the mining potential of Kun-Manie. Both open pit and
underground mining opportunities need to be assessed within the
newly discovered mineralisation.
RPM Ordinary Kriging Mineral Resource Estimates
February 2017
0.4% Nickel Cutoff Grade
Resource Ore Ni Cu Co Pt Pd Eq Contained Metal (t)
Classification Mt % % % g/t g/t Ni
(%)
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- ---------------------------------------------------------
Ni Cu Co Pt Pd Eq
(1000's) (1000's) (1000's) (t) (t) Ni
(1000's)
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
MKF
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Indicated 57.5 0.77 0.22 0.015 0.15 0.16 1.05 445 124 8.9 8.8 9.3 602.5
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
M+I 57.5 0.77 0.22 0.015 0.15 0.16 1.05 445 124 8.9 8.8 9.3 602.5
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Inferred 3.4 0.80 0.22 0.017 0.16 0.15 1.06 27 7 0.6 0.5 0.5 36.2
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
MKF TOTAL 60.9 0.78 0.22 0.015 0.15 0.16 1.05 472 131 9.5 9.3 9.8 639.3
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
IKEN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured 10.1 0.66 0.18 0.011 0.21 0.25 0.94 67 18 1.1 2.1 2.5 94.6
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Indicated 6.3 0.61 0.14 0.011 0.20 0.25 0.87 39 9 0.7 1.2 1.6 54.7
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
M+I 16.4 0.65 0.17 0.011 0.20 0.25 0.91 106 27 1.8 3.3 4.1 149.3
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Inferred 4.7 0.84 0.20 0.016 0.19 0.23 1.14 40 9 0.8 0.9 1.1 53.9
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
IKEN TOTAL 21.1 0.69 0.17 0.012 0.20 0.25 0.96 146 36 2.6 4.2 5.2 201.8
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
KUB
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured -
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Indicated 3.6 0.87 0.21 0.016 0.18 0.19 1.17 31 8 0.6 0.6 0.7 41.6
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
M+I 3.6 0.87 0.21 0.16 0.18 0.20 1.17 31 8 0.6 0.6 0.7 41.6
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Inferred 10.9 0.74 0.20 0.015 0.16 0.14 1.00 81 22 1.7 1.7 1.5 109.5
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
KUB TOTAL 14.5 0.77 0.20 0.016 0.16 0.15 1.04 112 30 2.3 2.3 2.2 149.5
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
VOD
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured 0.6 0.74 0.22 0.012 0.29 0.32 1.16 5 1 0.1 0.2 0.2 7.1
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Indicated 3.2 0.85 0.21 0.017 0.16 0.16 1.13 27 7 0.5 0.5 0.5 35.8
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
M+I 3.8 0.85 0.21 0.016 0.20 0.19 1.13 32 8 0.6 0.7 0.7 42.9
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Inferred 1.0 0.81 0.22 0.016 0.17 0.16 1.07 8 2 0.2 0.2 0.2 11.1
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
VOD TOTAL 4.8 0.83 0.21 0.016 0.18 0.18 1.12 40 10 0.8 0.9 0.9 54.0
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
TOTAL
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured 10.7 0.67 0.18 0.011 0.21 0.25 0.95 72 19 1.2 2.3 2.7 101.7
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Indicated 70.5 0.77 0.21 0.015 0.16 0.17 1.04 542 148 10.7 11.1 12.1 734.6
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
M+I 81.2 0.76 0.21 0.015 0.17 0.18 1.03 614 167 11.9 13.4 14.8 836.3
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Inferred 20.1 0.77 0.20 0.016 0.17 0.16 1.05 156 40 3.3 3.3 3.3 210.6
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
TOTAL 101.3 0.76 0.20 0.015 0.17 0.18 1.03 770 207 15.2 16.7 18.1 1,044.5
---------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- ----- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ----------
Numbers may not be concise due to rounding.
Glossary
DEFINITIONS OF EXPLORATION RESULTS, RESOURCES & RESERVES
EXTRACTED FROM THE JORC CODE: (December 2012) (www.jorc.org)
A 'Mineral Resource' is a concentration or occurrence of
material of intrinsic economic interest in or on the Earth's crust
in such form, quality and quantity that there are reasonable
prospects for eventual economic extraction. The location, quantity,
grade, geological characteristics and continuity of a Mineral
Resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific
geological evidence and knowledge. Mineral Resources are
sub-divided, in order of increasing geological confidence, into
Inferred, Indicated and Measured categories.
An 'Inferred Mineral Resource' is that part of a Mineral
Resource for which tonnage, grade and mineral content can be
estimated with a low level of confidence. It is inferred from
geological evidence and assumed but not verified geological and/or
grade continuity. It is based on information gathered through
appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches,
pits, workings and drill holes which may be limited or of uncertain
quality and reliability.
An 'Indicated Mineral Resource' is that part of a Mineral
Resource for which tonnage, densities, shape, physical
characteristics, grade and mineral content can be estimated with a
reasonable level of confidence. It is based on exploration,
sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate
techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits,
workings and drill holes. The locations are too widely or
inappropriately spaced to confirm geological and/or grade
continuity but are spaced closely enough for continuity to be
assumed.
A 'Measured Mineral Resource' is that part of a Mineral Resource
for which tonnage, densities, shape, physical characteristics,
grade and mineral content can be estimated with a high level of
confidence. It is based on detailed and reliable exploration,
sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate
techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits,
workings and drill holes. The locations are spaced closely enough
to confirm geological and/or grade continuity.
An 'Ore Reserve' is the economically mineable part of a Measured
and/or Indicated Mineral Resource. It includes diluting materials
and allowances for losses, which may occur when the material is
mined. Appropriate assessments and studies have been carried out,
and include consideration of and modification by realistically
assumed mining, metallurgical, economic, marketing, legal,
environmental, social and governmental factors. These assessments
demonstrate at the time of reporting that extraction could
reasonably be justified. Ore Reserves are sub-divided in order of
increasing confidence into Probable Ore Reserves and Proved Ore
Reserves.
This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange
END
DRLUBRNRBNARAAA
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
October 18, 2017 02:00 ET (06:00 GMT)
Amur Minerals (LSE:AMC)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2024 to Apr 2024
Amur Minerals (LSE:AMC)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2023 to Apr 2024
