TIDMTYM
RNS Number : 3268Q
Tertiary Minerals PLC
17 June 2015
("Tertiary" or "Company")
17 June 2015
JORC Compliant Mineral Resource Estimate Increase at MB
Project
67% Increase in the Company's Total Fluorspar Mineral
Resource
Tertiary Minerals plc, the AIM traded company building a
strategic position in the fluorspar sector, is delighted to
announce a substantial increase in the JORC(2) (2012) compliant
Mineral Resource Estimate for its MB Fluorspar Project in Nevada,
USA.
Highlights:
Applying a 9% fluorspar (CaF(2) ) Cut-Off Grade:
-- JORC compliant Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource
Estimate - 86.4 million tonnes grading 10.7% CaF(2)
-- JORC compliant Indicated Mineral Resource Estimate - 6.1
million tonnes grading 10.8% CaF(2)
-- JORC compliant Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate - 80.3
million tonnes grading 10.7% CaF(2)
-- Contained fluorspar more than doubled for the MB Project and
a 67% increase in the Company's total fluorspar Mineral Resource
asset base - JORC(2) compliant
-- The MB Fluorspar Deposit remains open at depth and in all lateral directions
Commenting on today's announcement Managing Director, Richard
Clemmey said: "We are delighted the detailed planning that has gone
into the Phase 3 drilling programme has resulted in a significant
increase in the Mineral Resource Estimate, thereby achieving the
overall objective of the programme. Within a relatively short time
frame the Company has transformed the original Tonnage-Grade
Estimate into JORC(2) compliant Mineral Resources."
"The MB Deposit remains open at depth and laterally in all
directions and therefore we are very excited about the sheer size
potential of the MB Deposit and believe that, eventually, the
deposit size will far exceed the current estimates."
"The higher fluorspar grades and thick intersections which have
been encountered in the newly defined Western Area during Phase 3
leads the Directors to believe that this area is closer to the core
of the mineralised system where higher grade fluorspar
mineralisation might be expected. We believe that a programme of
geophysical work on the deposit will improve the Company's
understanding of the geology and structural controls and therefore
lead to improved planning for the next phase of drilling with the
aim of targeting higher grades of fluorspar and increasing the
already large Mineral Resource Estimate. Details of the geophysical
programme and future drilling will be announced in due course."
Enquiries
Tertiary Minerals plc
Patrick Cheetham, Executive
Chairman
Richard Clemmey, Managing
Director +44 (0)845 868 4580
SP Angel Corporate Finance
LLP
Nominated Adviser & Joint
Broker
Ewan Leggat
Katy Birkin +44 (0) 20 3470 0470
Beaufort Securities Ltd
Joint Broker
Elliot Hance +44 (0)20 7382 8300
Yellow Jersey PR Limited
Dominic Barretto
Kelsey Traynor +44 (0)7768 537 739
Detailed Information
The MB Fluorspar Deposit is located 19km south-west of the town
of Eureka in central Nevada, USA. Eureka is located on US Highway
50 and the main railroad is located 165 km to the north of the
deposit providing bulk freight distribution to the east and west of
the USA.
The Mineral Resource being reported today for the MB fluorspar
Project has been prepared by Wardell Armstrong(1) International
Limited (WAI) following the guidelines of the JORC(2) Code
(2012).
The MB Deposit is a large fluorine rich skarn hosted by
Ordovician age carbonate sedimentary rocks. The mineralised zone
extends for more than a kilometre from the postulated position of
an unexposed granite.
A series of drilling campaigns between the 1960s and the 1980s
were completed by various owners, and outlined the potential of the
deposit. Assays and geological information from this historical
drilling is available but there is limited information on assay
procedure and the core has not been located. In 2013 the Company
completed a two phase drilling programme comprising of 26 holes and
totalling 3,223m across three areas of the deposit and in 2014
completed a third phase of drilling of 9 holes totalling 2,516m.
Information from these programmes forms the basis for the current
Mineral Resource Estimate. Significant drilling results from the
2013 and 2014 campaign have been included in previous announcements
made by the Company and a map showing the location of the 2013 and
2014 drill programmes and the Mineral Resource outline is available
on the Company's website at:
http://www.tertiaryminerals.com/projects/fluorspar-projects/mb-fluorspar-nevada-usa
The Company adopted rigorous QAQC procedures for its sample
analysis including field, preparation, internal and external pulp
duplicates, blank samples and series of standard samples in line
with best international practice. Results were generally
satisfactory.
The Mineral Resource Estimate and classification has been
prepared in accordance with the Australasian Code for Reporting of
Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves JORC Code
(2012). Sample data was imported and verified before mineralised
zones were defined to a cut-off grade of 2.0% CaF(2) . Samples were
composited and subsequently used to produce a Mineral Resource
Estimate of the CaF(2) mineralisation at the MB Project using
ordinary kriging as the principal estimation method.
The fundamental consideration to classify a Mineral Resource in
accordance with guidelines of the JORC Code (2012) is that it has a
"reasonable prospect for eventual economic extraction". Mineral
Resources are classified, in order of increasing geological
confidence, into Inferred, Indicated and Measured categories.
An 'Indicated Mineral Resource' is that part of a Mineral
Resource for which continuity, grade (or quality), densities, shape
and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient
confidence to allow the application of Modifying Factors in
sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the
economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived
from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and
testing gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such
as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes and is
sufficient to assume geological and grade (or quality) continuity
between points of observation where data and samples are
gathered.
An 'Inferred Mineral Resource' is the part of a Mineral Resource
for which quantity and grade (or quality) are estimated on the
basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological
evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade
(or quality) continuity. It is based on the exploration, sampling
and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques
from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill
holes.
WAI considers that the MB Project has been sufficiently explored
to estimate Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources as defined by
JORC Code (2012).
WAI has classified the area of the southern part of the MB
Project where the 2013 drilling has been completed roughly on an
80m x 80m grid and at least three north-south profile lines have
been completed as Indicated Resources. WAI has classified the
remainder of the deposit as Inferred Resources generally where
estimated blocks are within 120m of a 2013 or 2014 drill hole.
The Mineral Resource is restricted to all material falling
within an optimised pit shell created in NPV Scheduler and above a
cut-off grade of 9% CaF(2) . The base of the pit has a maximum
depth of approximately 300m from current surface. The Mineral
Resource Estimate for the MB Project is shown below.
MB Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate,
16(th) June 2015
Cut Off Grade 9% CaF(2)
(in accordance with the guidelines
of the JORC Code (2012)
=============================================
Density Tonnes CaF(2)
(t/m(3) (Mt) (%)
)
------------- ---------- -------- --------
Measured - - -
------------- ---------- -------- --------
Indicated 2.6 6.1 10.8
------------- ---------- -------- --------
Inferred 2.6 80.3 10.7
============= ========== ======== ========
The overall grade of the Mineral Resource can be increased by
applying a different cut-off grade, for example changing the
applied cut-off grade to 10% increases the total Mineral Resource
grade to 11.5% CaF(2) .
MB Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate,
16(th) June 2015
Cut Off Grade 10% CaF(2)
(in accordance with the guidelines
of the JORC Code (2012)
=============================================
Density Tonnes CaF(2)
(t/m(3) (Mt) (%)
)
------------- ---------- -------- --------
Measured - - -
------------- ---------- -------- --------
Indicated 2.6 4.2 11.4
------------- ---------- -------- --------
Inferred 2.6 46.2 11.5
============= ========== ======== ========
Further Work
The higher fluorspar grades and thick intersections which have
been encountered in the Western Area during Phase 3 leads the
Company to believe that this area is closer to the core of the
mineralising system where the Directors believe that higher grade
fluorspar mineralisation may be found. A programme of geophysical
work on the deposit is planned to improve the Company's
understanding of the geology and structural controls and therefore
lead to improved planning for the next phase of drilling with the
dual aims of targeting higher grades of fluorspar and increasing
the already large Mineral Resource. Details of the geophysical
programme and future drilling will be announced in due course.
Foot Notes
(1) The information in this document that relates to the MB
Project Mineral Resource is based on information compiled by Mr
Alan Clarke, a Competent Person who is a Fellow and Chartered
Geologist of the Geological Society of London. Alan Clarke is
employed by Wardell Armstrong International and has no interest in,
and is entirely independent of Tertiary Minerals. Alan Clarke has
sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the
activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person
as defined in JORC 2012. Alan Clarke consents to the inclusion in
the report of the matters based on his information in the form and
context in which it appears.
(2) JORC is the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration
Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves prepared by the Joint
Ores Reserves Committee (JORC) of the Australasian Institute of
Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists and
the Minerals Council of Australia.
JORC Mineral Resource Accompanying Statements:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have
demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or
pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The effective date of the Mineral Resource is 16(th) June
2015.
4. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of
the estimate.
5. Mineral resources are limited to an optimised open pit shell
based on appropriate economic and mining parameters.
6. Mineral Resources for the MB Project have been classified
following the guidelines of the JORC Code (2012) by Alan Clarke, an
independent Competent Person as defined by JORC.
7. The Mineral Resource estimate has not been affected by any
known environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation,
socio-political, marketing or any other relevant issues.
The information in this release has been compiled and reviewed
by Mr. Richard Clemmey (BSc, CEng, MIQ, MIMMM, ARSM) who is a
qualified person for the purposes of the AIM Note for Mining and
Oil & Gas Companies dated June 2009. Mr Clemmey is a Chartered
Engineer and a Member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals &
Mining.
Cautionary Note: Traditional analytical methods measure fluorine
content and fluorite (CaF(2 -) fluorspar) contents are calculated
on the assumption that all fluorine is present as fluorite.
Metallurgical testwork reviewed by the Company suggests this is
likely although small amounts of fluorine can occur in mica and
other minerals commonly present in skarn mineralised systems.
Notes to Editors
Tertiary Minerals plc (ticker symbol 'TYM') is an AIM-traded
mineral exploration and development company building a significant
strategic position in the fluorspar sector. Fluorspar is an
essential raw material in the chemical, steel and aluminium
industries. Tertiary controls two significant Scandinavian projects
(Storuman in Sweden and Lassedalen in Norway) and a large deposit
of strategic significance in Nevada USA (MB Project).
JORC Code, 2012 Table 1 - Technical Summary
Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data
Criteria Commentary
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Sampling techniques
* Sampling was carried out using a mix of diamond and
RC drill holes drilled under contract by Boart
Longyear. In total 2 x diamond and 33 x RC holes were
drilled.
* Holes were sampled and assayed at 5 foot intervals.
* Sample preparation was carried out at American Assay
Labs, Reno, USA with the phase 2 sample analysis
being carried out at PANalytical, UK and the phase 3
sample analysis being carried out at Bureau Veritas,
Perth, Australia. All laboratories hold ISO/IEC 17025
accreditation.
* Phase 2 samples were analysed using Pressed Pellet
X-Ray Fluorescence (PPXRF) spectrometry with a subset
being subject to check analysis using Fused Bead
X-Ray Fluorescence (FBXRF). Phase 3 samples were
analysed by FBXRF by Bureau Veritas, Perth and
external check analysis by FBXRF at PANalytical, UK
with a sub-set being subject to check analysis with
Fluorine Ion Specific Electrode.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Drilling techniques
* The 2 x diamond drill holes were drilled using a
Boart Longyear LF70 track mounted rig, drilling at HQ
diameter.
* The first two RC holes were drilled using a Foremost
Explorer 1500 rig with a
5 3/4 " hammer bit (146mm).
* The remaining RC drilling (31 holes), across phase 2
and phase 3 drilling, was carried out by Boart
Longyear using a Foremost MPD 1500 tracked rig with a
* 5 1/2 " centre return hammer apart from one hole,
14TMBRC027, where a conventional RC hammer was used
for the majority of the hole.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Drill sample
recovery * Drill core sample recovery was logged and recorded by
field technicians and subsequently entered into the
drill hole database.
* Core recovery was generally good and improved with
depth.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Logging
* Core and RC chips were logged into an Excel
spreadsheet logging system recording lithology,
structure and alteration.
* Every metre of drilling at the MB Project has been
logged to the same criteria.
* Core and RC chips were photographed as standard
during the logging procedure.
* Core is stored at American Assay Labs in Reno.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub-sampling
techniques * Core samples were sawn using a diamond core saw or
and sample split using a v-splitter with half core being sent
preparation for sample preparation.
* RC samples were drilled wet and collected from a rig
mounted rotary splitter.
* Core and RC samples were crushed to 90% passing 10
mesh (2mm) before being passed through a Jones riffle
splitter to provide a 250g sub-sample pulverized to
95% passing 150 mesh (105 micron) from which 20g was
selected for assay for phase 1 and phase 2 and 50g
for phase 3.
* 183 field duplicate samples were taken at a rate of
1:20 from a random point within a set of 20 during
the standard field sampling procedure. Broad
agreement was seen in the analysis of the field
duplicate analysis results.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Quality of
assay data * Samples were crushed and pulverized to produce a 250g
and laboratory sub-sample passing 105um from which 20g (phase 1 and
tests 2) or 50g (phase 3) was selected for assay.
* For the majority of samples for phase 1 and 2 CaF(2)
grade was determined using Pressed Pellet X-Ray
Fluorescence (PPXRF). For phase 3 primary analysis
was by Fused Bead X-Ray fluorescence (FBXRF).
* Assay data quality was determined through submission
of standards, blanks and duplicates.
* For the first phase of drilling (2 x diamond and 2 x
RC holes) QAQC protocol consisted of 3 blanks, 13
laboratory duplicates and 16 standards per 100
samples.
* For the second and third phase of drilling (31 RC
holes) QAQC protocol consisted of 2 x pulp duplicates,
2 x blanks, 6 x standards with 2 each of F=8.99%
(AMIS250), F=3.00% (diluted AMIS250) and F=15.80%
(diluted SARM15).
* In addition field duplicates and preparation
duplicates were also analysed as part of the QAQC
procedures.
* In addition 5% of samples were also analysed using
Fused Bead XRF for phase 2 drilling and for phase 3
drilling 5% of samples were also analysed by Fluorine
Ion Specific Electrode. These same check samples
across all phases of drilling were also analysed at
an external laboratory.
* Field duplicates performed well demonstrating
consistent distribution of mineralisation across
samples.
* Preparation duplicates performed well demonstrating
appropriateness of preparation procedure.
* Pulp duplicates performed well demonstrating
precision of the assaying method.
* Analysis between method duplicates indicated a bias
towards PPXRF analysis returning higher grades when
compared to FBXRF pointing to a potential inaccuracy
in the assaying method.
* Blank samples performed well indicating little
contamination.
* The between laboratory duplicates performed
satisfactorily demonstrating no bias between
laboratories.
* The AMIS 250 standard performed well using PPXRF and
FBXRF.
* Diluted standards performed well using FBXRF but over
reported using PPXRF. This is likely due to particle
size effects or mineralogical effects as a result of
the dilution using silica flour.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Verification
of sampling * WAI inspected two diamond core drill holes in their
and assaying entirety to compare logged lithology with drill core.
WAI also inspected RC samples for comparison against
logging. No issues were found.
* Twin holes were drilled to compare results of RC and
diamond core holes.
* No twin holes were drilled for verification purposes
against historical data but this historical data has
not been used in the Mineral Resource Estimate.
* No adjustments to assay data have been made.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Location of
data points * 32 of 35 holes were surveyed downhole using a
multi-shot Reflex MEMS Gyro tool at intervals of 50
feet.
* Two holes were not surveyed downhole as they were
plugged before the arrival of the survey technician.
One hole was not surveyed downhole after rods had to
be blasted free after sticking during drilling.
* Downhole surveys were checked mathematically and
visually for excessive deviation. No problems were
identified.
* Drill hole collars were surveyed in co-ordinate
system NAD83 Zone 11 using a Differential Global
Positioning System DGPS. One hole was not surveyed
with DGPS due to heavy snow cover. This hole was one
of the twinned pairs and the collar co-ordinates for
the twinned DC hole were used for its location during
Mineral Resource Estimation.
* Topographic data was downloaded from the USGS
National Map Website and forms part of the NED
dataset (National Elevation Database). Data was
provided in raster format and converted to XYZ ASCII
by taking the midpoint of the cells. Accuracy of data
is stated at 1/3 arc second.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Data spacing
and distribution * Drilling of 16 holes in the south area of the MB
Project has been completed on a grid at 80-120m
spacing with 3 roughly N-S profiles with 4-6 holes on
each with one set of twin holes.
* Across the rest of the deposit drilling has generally
been completed on a spacing of 200-250m with one set
of twin holes.
* Drilling was roughly vertical with little downhole
variation in inclination and samples were taken at
5ft intervals.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Orientation
of data in * The majority of the drilling (that covering the
relation to southern part of the project) has been completed on a
geological grid at approximately 80m centres.
structure
* Drilling was carried out roughly vertically from
surface.
* There is no expected bias due to the orientation of
the drilling with respect to the orientation of the
mineralisation.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample security
* Samples were transported directly from site to the
preparation laboratory by the supervising geologist
during Phase 1 and Phase 2 drilling. For Phase 3
drilling samples were collected from the field by AAL,
the laboratory conducting sample preparation.
* Samples are logged into a laboratory information
management system.
* Whilst in storage samples were kept in a secure area.
* Chain of custody between laboratories is managed by
Tertiary.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Audits or
reviews * Internal audits are conducted by all of the
analytical laboratories used.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3: Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
Criteria Commentary
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Database integrity
* The project database is held in Excel spreadsheets.
* Data held includes; collar location, downhole surveys,
assay information, duplicate sample, standards and
blank sample results and geological logging.
* Geological logging was initially completed on paper
but a standard logging template was subsequently set
up and used in excel format.
* Validation of the database was carried out during
import of the data in to CAE Mining Studio 3 for
production of the Mineral Resource Estimate, no major
issues were found.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Site visits
* The Competent Person visited site between 11(th) and
12(th) March 2014. The site visit included a general
walkover of the project area, a field inspection of
regional geology, inspecting drill hole markers and a
visit to the sample preparation laboratory to view
drill core and RC samples. No site visit was carried
out subsequent to the 2014 drilling as no material
changes were deemed to have occurred.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Geological
interpretation * The confidence in the geological formation is
considered reasonable.
* The geological setting is thought to be a skarn type
deposit with fluorine mineralisation developed in a
series of Ordovician marine sediments, primarily
limestone of the Pogonip Group with some developed in
the Copenhagen formation in the overlying Eureka
Quartzite, a calcareous unit possibly formed as the
result of the formation of dissolution cavities.
* Garnet alteration has been logged in holes in the
west of the central zone of drilling usually
associated with higher temperature alteration and
possibly indicating proximity to the source of the
fluorspar mineralisation assumed to be a Cretaceous
age granite.
* Geological logging has been carried out from drill
core and RC samples.
* Geological logging was used to define sub-domains
within the overall model.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimensions
* The Mineral Resource defined by the Tertiary drilling
modelled as a single continuous area. The dimensions
of the modelled mineralisation are from 500m to
1,400m east-west and 1,600m maximum north-south.
* Mineralisation is currently defined to approximately
550-580m below current surface levels.
* Mineralisation is open in all directions from the
limit of the Mineral Resource model.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimation
and modelling * Ordinary kriging was used for estimation of CaF(2) %
techniques using CAE Mining Studio 3 software.
* Domains: A single domain was created as a result of
infill drilling defining mineralisation between the
previously modelled southern and central areas.
* Grade capping: No grade capping was applied as no
outlier values were found after assessment of the
assay database.
* Composites: 5 foot composites were created using
lithological wireframes as a control.
* Variography: A variographic study resulted in
reasonably robustly structured directional variograms
but these are likely influenced by the relatively
wide drill hole spacing and drill grid orientation.
* Estimation: Estimation was carried out using Ordinary
kriging as the primary method. Inverse distance
(squared) and Nearest Neighbour estimates were
carried out for validation purposes.
* Maximum extrapolation distance: Up to 120m from
nearest 2013 or 2014 drill hole based on knowledge of
geological continuity from historical drilling.
* A block size of 40m (X) x 40m (Y) x 10m (Z) was used
in this model. This compares to an average drill hole
spacing of 80m x 80m in the southern part of the
deposit and an assumed bench height of 10m.
Estimation was carried out in to parent cells only.
* No previous mining has taken place at site and so no
reconciliation study was possible.
* No assumptions were made regarding the recovery of
by-products.
* The block model was verified by comparing drill hole
assays with modelled values visually and
statistically by zone. Grade profile plots were also
constructed to compare modelled grades and input
composite grades.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Moisture
* Tonnage is estimated on a dry basis using a bulk
in-situ density. No moisture content has been
measured.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Cut-off parameters
* The Mineral Resource is restricted to all material
falling within an NPV Scheduler pit shell, as
described below, and above 9% CaF(2) .
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining factors
or assumptions * The project is deemed to be appropriate to being
mined by standard open pit operations.
* Reported Mineral Resources were limited by an
optimised open pit shell created using appropriate
technical and economic parameters. These economic
parameters are not reported here due to their
sensitive commercial nature.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Metallurgical
factors or * No metallurgical test work is available from the
assumptions recent drilling by Tertiary. Samples have been
selected for this analysis but results are not yet
available. During the creation of an optimized open
pit shell for limiting the reporting of Mineral
Resources a processing recovery figure of 80% was
used based on publicly available reports from
Fluorspar operations worldwide.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental
factors or * No environmental studies have been conducted to
assumptions determine impact of mining operations.
* It is assumed that the area of the MB Project will
provide sufficient space for waste and process
residue.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Bulk density
* Tertiary submitted 27 samples from the 2 core drill
holes for density measurement based on the standard
Archimedes Principle.
* Samples were a mixture of Eureka Quartzite and
Pogonip Formation.
* Density was assigned to the block model using average
values for each major lithology. Density for
overburden was assumed.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification
* Classification was based on sample density and
confidence in the geological and grade continuity.
* A portion of the southern area was classified as
indicated. The deposit was classified as indicated
where the sample spacing was approximately 80m x 80m
and at least 3 complete north-south exploration
profiles had been completed.
* The remainder of the deposit was classified as
inferred generally up to 120m from the nearest recent
drilling.
* The Mineral Resource estimate reflects the Competent
Person's views of the MB Deposit.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Audits or
reviews * WAI is not aware of any audits or reviews of this or
any previous Mineral Resource Estimates.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion
of relative * The relative accuracy and confidence in the Mineral
accuracy/ Resource estimate is reflected in the reporting of
confidence the Mineral Resource as set out in the JORC Code
(2012).
* It is not deemed appropriate at this stage to conduct
a geostatistical study to quantify the relative
accuracy of the resource.
* The statement relates to global estimates of tonnes
and grade.
* No production data is available for the MB Project as
it has not previously been mined and hence no
comparison of production data is possible.
------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange
END
DRLKMGMVFVNGKZM
Tertiary Minerals (LSE:TYM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Feb 2024 to Mar 2024
Tertiary Minerals (LSE:TYM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2023 to Mar 2024