Xanadu Mines Ltd (
ASX: XAM, TSX: XAM)
(
Xanadu, XAM or the
Company) is
pleased to report an increase in the Mineral Resource Estimate
(
Resource, Mineral Resource Estimate or MRE) and a
Maiden Ore Reserve for its flagship copper-gold project at
Kharmagtai, in the South Gobi region of Mongolia (
Figure 1
and Table 1). The MRE update incorporates
a revised cut-off grade to align to the marginal cut-off grade in
the Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study (
PFS). The
updated Mineral Resource Estimate and Maiden Ore Reserve are
reported in concert with the PFS announced on 14 October 2024.
Highlights
-
Kharmagtai Maiden Ore Reserve reported with approximately 1.6Mt Cu
and 4.0Moz Au, comprised of Indicated material within the pit
shells in the Kharmagtai PFS, but excluding the final pit phase at
White Hill which is primarily driven by Inferred material.
-
Significant increase in Kharmagtai MRE as Kharmagtai adopts the
PFS1 marginal cut-off grade for economic extraction within the open
pit.
-
Open Pit Resource cut-off reduced from 0.20% CuEq to 0.13% CuEq to
match the PFS mine plan marginal cut-off grade.
-
Contained copper increase from 3.8Mt to
4.7Mt Cu, or an increase of 0.9Mt Cu.
-
Contained gold increase from 9.3Moz to 11Moz Au, or an increase of
1.7Moz Au.
-
No additional drilling has been completed since August 2024. The
MRE growth is exclusively due to change in cut-off grade aligned to
PFS1 calculations by Mining Plus.
Xanadu’s Executive Chairman and Managing
Director, Mr Colin Moorhead, said “We are pleased to
report Kharmagtai Maiden Ore Reserve in concert with the PFS
results announced today. We have also aligned the Mineral Resource
to the PFS marginal cut-off grades, which demonstrates the
sensitivity of this project to that cut-off grade and the
significant scale of Kharmagtai, which remains open along strike
and at depth with significant growth potential.”
Table 1: Comparison October 2024 vs
August 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate2
Resource |
Cutoff(% CuEq) |
Classification |
Tonnes (Mt) |
Grades |
Contained Metal |
CuEq (%) |
Cu (%) |
Au (g/t) |
CuEq (Mlbs) |
CuEq (kt) |
Cu (kt) |
Au (koz) |
October 2024 |
0.13 (OC)0.30 (UG) |
Indicated |
1,300 |
0.30 |
0.22 |
0.17 |
8,800 |
4,000 |
2,900 |
7,100 |
Inferred |
900 |
0.28 |
0.21 |
0.13 |
5,600 |
2,500 |
1,900 |
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 2024 |
0.20 (OC)0.30 (UG) |
Indicated |
890 |
0.37 |
0.26 |
0.21 |
7,300 |
3,300 |
2,300 |
6,000 |
Inferred |
590 |
0.34 |
0.25 |
0.17 |
4,500 |
2,000 |
1,500 |
3,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes:
- CuEq (lbs and t) accounts for Au (g/t) value and CuEq (t) must
not be totalled to Au ounces
- Figures may not sum due to rounding
- Significant figures do not imply an added level of
precision
- Resource constrained by 0.1%CuEq reporting solid in line with
geological analysis by XAM
- Resource constrained by RV1400fpit (coded field equal to
1)
- Cut-off for Open Cut uses 0.13% CuEq, the marginal mine cut-off
per the October 2024 PFS. Cut-off for Underground remains unchanged
at 0.30% CuEq.
- Resource CuEq equation (CuEq=Cu+Au*0.60049*0.86667) where Au at
USD$1400/oz and Cu at USD$3.4/lb was employed according to the
Clients' (XAM) direction.
- Au recovery is relative with Cu rec=90% and Au rec=78% (rel Au
rec=78/90=86.667% with number according to the Clients' (XAM)
direction
- Underground Resource "other 0p2 and 0p3" NOT inside RV1400fpit
above and below nominated mRL level by deposit as follows
SH>=720mRL, WH>=915mRL, CH>=1100mRL, ZA>=920mRL,
ZE>=945mRL, PE>=1100mRL and GE>=845mRL
- Model:
KH_ALL_GLOBAL_OKMOD_FINAL_V3_FORCLIENT_140624_inRV1400fpit
Table 2: Ore Reserve by Classification
(Open Cut)
Classification |
Tonnes (Mt) |
Grades |
Contained Metal |
Cu (%) |
Au (g/t) |
Cu (kt) |
Au (koz) |
Proved |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Probable |
730 |
0.21 |
0.17 |
1,600 |
4,000 |
Total |
730 |
0.21 |
0.17 |
1,600 |
4,000 |
Notes:
- Figures may not sum due to rounding
- Significant figures do not imply an added level of
precision
- Ore Reserve constrained by Kharmagtai PFS mine plan
inventory3
- Cut-off for Open Cut Ore Reserve uses 0.13% CuEq, the marginal
breakeven mine cut-off per the October 2024 PFS.
- Reserve CuEq equation (CuEq=Cu+Au*0.7039Au) where Au at
USD$1900/oz and Cu at USD$4.0/lb was employed according to the
Clients' (XAM) direction.
- Au recovery is relative with Cu rec=80% and Au rec=81%
according to the Clients' (XAM) direction
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE UPDATE
OVERVIEW
Xanadu engaged independent consultants, Spiers
Geological Consultants (SGC), to prepare an
updated Resource for Kharmagtai. The Resource has been reported in
accordance with the JORC Code 2012, is effective as of 31st July
2024, and is shown in full in Tables 3 to 5.
This Resource is an update to the August 2024
Mineral Resource Estimate, which reduces the open pit cut-off grade
from 0.20% CuEq to 0.13% CuEq in line with the PFS marginal
breakeven cut-off grade. Open cut resources are reported within the
same revenue factor 1.4 pit shell from the Kharmagtai PFS. The
revenue factor 1.4 pit shell is being used to define RPEEE for the
open pit-able MRE at Kharmagtai.
SGC considers that data collection techniques
are consistent with industry best practice and are suitable for use
in the preparation of a Resource to be reported in accordance with
JORC Code 2012. Available quality assurance and quality control
(QA/QC) data supports the use of the input data
provided by Xanadu.
The Resource is considered to have reasonable
prospects for eventual economic extraction (RPEEE)
on the following basis:
- the
deposit is located in a favourable mining jurisdiction, with no
known impediments to land access or tenure status;
- the
volume, orientation and grade of the Resource is amenable to mining
extraction via traditional open-pit and underground methods;
and
- a Scoping
Study4 and PFS5 have been reported to ASX that demonstrate
Kharmagtai economic viability as an open pit mine within the
revenue factor 1.4 shell that constrains the open cut Resource
using the selected marginal cut-off grade, at a range of metal
prices and assumptions.
- The PFS
has reported a maiden Ore Reserve based on Indicated Resource
within the Open Cut Mineral Resource Estimate.
The Resource models are well understood and
there is substantial upside potential to be realised by better
understanding the economics of the deposit. As demonstrated in the
images below, significant volumes of mineralisation have been
modelled that fall outside of the constraining pit wireframe. These
parts of the model will be targeted for further investigation
through economic studies to assess if more of this material can be
brought into the Mineral Resource.
The total Mineral Resource Estimate includes
material classified as oxide totalling 121Mt @ 0.31% CuEq which can
be found in Table 5.
Figure 1: Plan view of the
Kharmagtai district. Deposit outlines define the edges of the PFS
open pit designs. Confirmed porphyry centres define zones where
mineralised porphyry has been intersected in drilling. Geochemical
targets represent areas of anomalous copper and gold.
Figure 2: Cross section through
the White Hill Deposit showing open nature of the White Hill
deposit with grades generally increasing with depth.
Figure 3: Schematic Cross
Sections showing the cut-off grade reporting boundaries at White
Hill. Red zone represents MRE open pit potential with a cutoff of
0.13% CuEq, blue area “outside open pit” and green area represents
the area defined as underground potential with a 0.3% CuEq cutoff
applied. These are shown separately as previous MRE’s used this
915mRL level as the change from Open Pit and Underground.
Figure 4: Illustration of
resource classification within the 2024 PFS pit shells, plan
view.
Figure 5: Illustration of
resource classification within the 2024 PFS pit shells, long
section.
Table 3: Kharmagtai Project –
Potential Open Pit Mineral Resource Estimate October 2024 reported
at 0.13% CuEq cut-off grade, within the revenue factor 1.4 pit, by
resource classification.
Deposit |
Classification |
Tonnes (Mt) |
Grades |
Contained Metal |
CuEq (%) |
Cu (%) |
Au (g/t) |
CuEq (Mlbs) |
CuEq (kt) |
Cu (kt) |
Au (koz) |
Stockwork Hill |
Indicated |
314 |
0.35 |
0.23 |
0.23 |
2,445 |
1,110 |
730 |
2,310 |
White Hill |
704 |
0.30 |
0.23 |
0.13 |
4,578 |
2,080 |
1,590 |
2,980 |
Copper Hill |
65 |
0.29 |
0.21 |
0.15 |
420 |
190 |
140 |
310 |
Zaraa |
84 |
0.23 |
0.15 |
0.15 |
424 |
190 |
130 |
410 |
Golden Eagle |
62 |
0.24 |
0.11 |
0.25 |
334 |
150 |
70 |
500 |
Zephyr |
49 |
0.23 |
0.14 |
0.17 |
243 |
110 |
70 |
260 |
Exploration Potential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Indicated |
1,279 |
0.30 |
0.21 |
0.16 |
8,447 |
3,830 |
2,730 |
6,770 |
Stockwork Hill |
Inferred |
74 |
0.22 |
0.14 |
0.14 |
352 |
160 |
100 |
340 |
White Hill |
361 |
0.26 |
0.21 |
0.10 |
2,100 |
950 |
770 |
1,100 |
Copper Hill |
30 |
0.18 |
0.15 |
0.06 |
120 |
50 |
40 |
60 |
Zaraa |
195 |
0.26 |
0.18 |
0.15 |
1,123 |
510 |
350 |
970 |
Golden Eagle |
50 |
0.21 |
0.11 |
0.20 |
230 |
100 |
50 |
320 |
Zephyr |
39 |
0.19 |
0.12 |
0.14 |
165 |
70 |
50 |
180 |
Exploration Potential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Inferred |
751 |
0.25 |
0.18 |
0.12 |
4,097 |
1,860 |
1,380 |
2,970 |
Notes:
- CuEq (lbs and t) accounts for Au (g/t) value and CuEq (t) must
not be totalled to Au ounces
- Figures may not sum due to rounding
- Significant figures do not imply an added level of
precision
- Resource constrained by 0.1%CuEq reporting solid inline with
geological analysis by XAM
- Resource constrained by RV1400fpit (coded field equal to
1)
- CuEq equation (CuEq=Cu+Au*0.60049*0.86667) where Au at
USD$1400/oz and Cu at USD$3.4/lb was employed according to the
Clients' (XAM) direction.
- Au recovery is relative with Cu rec=90% and Au rec=78% (rel Au
rec=78/90=86.667% with number according to the Clients' (XAM)
direction
- Model:
KH_ALL_GLOBAL_OKMOD_FINAL_V3_FORCLIENT_140624_inRV1400fpit
Table 4: Kharmagtai Project –
Potential Underground Mineral Resource Estimate October 2024,
reported at 0.3%CuEq cut-off grade, outside the revenue factor 1.4
pit, by resource classification.
Deposit |
Classification |
Tonnes (Mt) |
Grades |
Contained Metal |
CuEq (%) |
Cu (%) |
Au (g/t) |
CuEq (Mlbs) |
CuEq (kt) |
Cu (kt) |
Au (koz) |
Stockwork Hill |
Indicated |
14 |
0.46 |
0.30 |
0.29 |
138 |
60 |
40 |
130 |
White Hill |
11 |
0.41 |
0.35 |
0.12 |
104 |
50 |
40 |
40 |
Copper Hill |
- |
0.33 |
0.23 |
0.19 |
2 |
- |
- |
- |
Zaraa |
13 |
0.47 |
0.33 |
0.28 |
132 |
60 |
40 |
110 |
Golden Eagle |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Zephyr |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Exploration Potential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Indicated |
38 |
0.45 |
0.32 |
0.24 |
376 |
170 |
120 |
290 |
Stockwork Hill |
Inferred |
26 |
0.42 |
0.32 |
0.19 |
238 |
110 |
80 |
160 |
White Hill |
57 |
0.38 |
0.32 |
0.12 |
478 |
220 |
180 |
210 |
Copper Hill |
- |
0.38 |
0.34 |
0.09 |
4 |
- |
- |
- |
Zaraa |
81 |
0.42 |
0.30 |
0.23 |
750 |
340 |
240 |
610 |
Golden Eagle |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Zephyr |
- |
0.40 |
0.06 |
0.67 |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
Exploration Potential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Inferred |
164 |
0.41 |
0.31 |
0.19 |
1,471 |
670 |
500 |
980 |
Notes:
- CuEq (lbs and t) accounts for Au (g/t) value and CuEq (t) must
not be totalled to Au ounces
- Figures may not sum due to rounding
- Significant figures do not imply an added level of
precision
- Resource constrained by 0.1%CuEq reporting solid in line with
geological analysis by XAM
- Resource NOT constrained by RV1400fpit (coded field equal to
1)
- CuEq equation (CuEq=Cu+Au*0.60049*0.86667) where Au at
USD$1400/oz and Cu at USD$3.4/lb was employed according to the
Clients' (XAM) direction.
- Au recovery is relative with Cu rec=90% and Au rec=78% (rel Au
rec=78/90=86.667% with number according to the Clients' (XAM)
direction
- Resource "other 0p2 and 0p3" NOT inside RV1400fpit above and
below nominated mRL level by deposit as follows SH>=720mRL,
WH>=915mRL, CH>=1100mRL, ZA>=920mRL, ZE>=945mRL,
PE>=1100mRL and GE>=845mRL
- Model:
KH_ALL_GLOBAL_OKMOD_FINAL_V3_FORCLIENT_140624_inRV1400fpit
Table 5: Kharmagtai Project –
Oxide Open Pit Mineral Resource Estimate October 2024, reported at
0.13% CuEq cut-off grade, inside the revenue factor 1.4 pit, by
resource classification.
Deposit |
Classification |
Tonnes (Mt) |
Grades |
Contained Metal |
CuEq (%) |
Cu (%) |
Au (g/t) |
CuEq (Mlbs) |
CuEq (kt) |
Cu (kt) |
Au (koz) |
Stockwork Hill |
Indicated |
14 |
0.46 |
0.30 |
0.29 |
138 |
60 |
40 |
130 |
White Hill |
44 |
0.26 |
0.19 |
0.12 |
249 |
110 |
90 |
170 |
Copper Hill |
10 |
0.32 |
0.24 |
0.15 |
70 |
30 |
20 |
50 |
Zaraa |
2 |
0.22 |
0.10 |
0.23 |
10 |
- |
- |
20 |
Golden Eagle |
6 |
0.27 |
0.10 |
0.33 |
34 |
20 |
10 |
60 |
Zephyr |
5 |
0.25 |
0.16 |
0.18 |
28 |
10 |
10 |
30 |
Exploration Potential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Indicated |
82 |
0.30 |
0.21 |
0.17 |
532 |
240 |
170 |
450 |
Stockwork Hill |
Inferred |
26 |
0.42 |
0.32 |
0.19 |
238 |
110 |
80 |
160 |
White Hill |
4 |
0.21 |
0.16 |
0.10 |
20 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
Copper Hill |
3 |
0.18 |
0.15 |
0.05 |
13 |
10 |
- |
10 |
Zaraa |
1 |
0.19 |
0.10 |
0.18 |
3 |
- |
- |
- |
Golden Eagle |
4 |
0.20 |
0.09 |
0.21 |
18 |
10 |
- |
30 |
Zephyr |
- |
0.15 |
0.10 |
0.11 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Exploration Potential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Inferred |
40 |
0.34 |
0.25 |
0.17 |
297 |
130 |
100 |
220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
- CuEq (lbs and t) accounts for Au (g/t) value and CuEq (t) must
not be totalled to Au ounces
- Figures may not sum due to rounding
- Significant figures do not imply an added level of
precision
- Resource constrained by 0.1%CuEq reporting solid in line with
geological analysis by XAM
- Resource constrained by RV1400fpit (coded field equal to
1)
- CuEq equation (CuEq=Cu+Au*0.60049*0.86667) where Au at
USD$1400/oz and Cu at USD$3.4/lb was employed according to the
Clients' (XAM) direction.
- Au recovery is relative with Cu rec=90% and Au rec=78% (rel Au
rec=78/90=86.667% with number according to the Clients' (XAM)
direction
- Model:
KH_ALL_GLOBAL_OKMOD_FINAL_V3_FORCLIENT_140624_inRV1400fpit
MRE Supporting Information
Geology and Geological Interpretation
Geological data has been collected in a
consistent manner that has allowed the development of geological
models to support the Mineral Resource estimate. Copper and gold
mineralisation is controlled by porphyry phases, oxidation zone,
the level of veining, breccia, country rocks and barren dykes.
- Solid geological
models were generated in Leapfrog for each of the deposits using
the following methodology
- Composite copper and
gold grades to 10m intervals
- Define cut-offs
using changes in slope of histograms and cumulative log plots
- Create raw grade
shells for these using implicit numeric modelling (e.g. 800, 1500
and 4000ppm Cu)
- Define the main
dividing features/structures between populations (clusters of
grade)
- Build these
structures in detail using grade, lithology, and structural
information
- For each
compartment/fault block
- Group the main
lithologies into “like units”
- Build geological
shapes from these units
- Re-build the grade
shells within each compartment using information from the
geological shapes to help constrain the grade shapes
- Once each
compartment was built, they were assessed in context with each
other and refined so that the models made geological sense.
- Geological
interpretation and wireframing were based on sampling results of
drill holes and trenches, which were logged at 2 m intervals
(average, tied to lithological boundaries during logging).
- SGC do not believe
that the effect of alternative interpretations will have a material
impact on the overall Mineral Resource Estimates.
- The geological
interpretation is considered robust & alternative
interpretations are not considered to have a material effect on the
Mineral Resource. No alternate interpretations are proposed as
geological confidence in the model is moderate to high. As
additional geological data is collected from additional drilling,
the geological interpretation will be continually updated.
- The factors
affecting continuity both of grade and geology are most likely to
be associated with structural controls and local complexity the
knowledge of which is considered at a moderate level with the
current spacing of information. The broad approach to the
mineralisation modelling is an attempt to model an unbiased
interpretation.
Sampling techniques
- Representative ½
core samples were split from PQ, HQ & NQ diameter diamond drill
core on site using rock saws, on a routine 2m sample interval that
also honours lithological/intrusive contacts.
- The orientation of
the cut line is controlled using the core orientation line ensuring
uniformity of core splitting wherever the core has been
successfully oriented.
- Sample intervals are
defined and subsequently checked by geologists, and sample tags are
attached (stapled) to the plastic core trays for every sample
interval.
- Reverse Circulation
(RC) chip samples are ¼ splits from one meter (1m) intervals using
a 75%:25% riffle splitter to obtain a 3kg sample
- RC samples are
uniform 2m samples formed from the combination of two ¼ split 1m
samples.
Sub-Sampling Techniques and Sample
Preparation
- All drill core
samples are ½ core splits from either PQ, HQ or NQ diameter cores.
A routine 2m sample interval is used, but this is varied locally to
honour lithological/intrusive contacts. The minimum allowed sample
length is 30cm.
- Core is
appropriately split (onsite) using diamond core saws with the cut
line routinely located relative to the core orientation line (where
present) to provide consistency of sample split selection.
- The diamond saws are
regularly flushed with water to minimize potential
contamination.
- A field duplicate ¼
core sample is collected every 30th sample to ensure the
“representivity of the in-situ material collected”. The performance
of these field duplicates is routinely analysed as part of Xanadu’s
sample QC process.
- Routine sample
preparation and analyses of DDH samples were carried out by ALS
Mongolia LLC (ALS Mongolia), who operates an independent sample
preparation and analytical laboratory in Ulaanbaatar.
- All samples were
prepared to meet standard quality control procedures as follows:
Crushed to 75% passing 2mm, split to 1kg, pulverised to 85% passing
200 mesh (75 microns) and split to 150g sample pulp.
- ALS Mongolia
Geochemistry labs quality management system is certified to ISO
9001:2008.
- The sample support
(sub-sample mass and comminution) is appropriate for the grainsize
and Cu-Au distribution of the porphyry Cu-Au mineralization and
associated host rocks.
Drilling techniques
- The Mineral Resource
Estimation has been based upon diamond drilling of PQ, HQ and NQ
diameters with both standard and triple tube core recovery
configurations, RC drilling and surface trenching with channel
sampling.
- All drill core
drilled by Xanadu has been oriented using the a Reflex orientation
tool.
Classification Criteria
- The resource
classification was based on drilling density in accordance with the
estimation passes (and the availability of data to present to the
search neighbourhood, including but not limited to, geological
modelling data, oxidation, density and recovery data as well as
data quality considerations).
- The classification
criteria is deemed appropriate by SGC.
Sample Analysis Methods
- All samples were
routinely assayed by ALS Mongolia for gold
- Au is determined
using a 25g fire assay fusion, cupelled to obtain a bead, and
digested with Aqua Regia, followed by an atomic absorption
spectroscopy (AAS) finish, with a lower detection (LDL) of 0.01
ppm.
- All samples were
also submitted to ALS Mongolia for the 48-element package ME-ICP61
using a four-acid digest (considered to be an effective total
digest for the elements relevant to the Mineral Resource Estimate
(MRE)). Where copper is over-range (>1% Cu), it is analysed by a
second analytical technique (Cu-OG62), which has a higher upper
detection limit (UDL) of 5% copper.
- Quality assurance
has been managed by insertion of appropriate Standards (1:30
samples – suitable Ore Research Pty Ltd certified standards),
Blanks (1:30 samples), Duplicates (1:30 samples – ¼ core duplicate)
by XAM.
- Assay results
outside the optimal range for methods were re-analysed by
appropriate methods.
- Ore Research Pty Ltd
certified copper and gold standards have been implemented as a part
of QC procedures, as well as coarse and pulp blanks, and certified
matrix matched copper-gold standards.
- QC monitoring is an
active and ongoing processes on batch-by-batch basis by which
unacceptable results are re-assayed as soon as practicable.
- Prior to 2014: Cu,
Ag, Pb, Zn, As and Mo were routinely determined using a
three-acid-digestion of a 0.3g sub-sample followed by an AAS finish
(AAS21R) at SGS Mongolia. Samples were digested with nitric,
hydrochloric and perchloric acids to dryness before leaching with
hydrochloric acid to dissolve soluble salts and made to 15ml volume
with distilled water. The LDL for copper using this technique was
2ppm. Where copper was over-range (>1% Cu), it was analysed by a
second analytical technique (AAS22S), which has a higher upper
detection limit (UDL) of 5% copper. Gold analysis method was
essentially unchanged.
Estimate Methodology
- Ordinary Kriging
technique was employed using third party software based on low
coefficient of variation between samples in the mineralised
domain.
- Grade interpolation
and search ellipses were based on variography and geometry
modelling outcomes.
- Modelling was
conducted in three passes with block sizes being 20.0 m E by 20.0 m
N by 10.0 m RL; discretisation was 5x5x2 for all project areas
- In the first pass
data and octant criteria used were, Minimum Data=12, maximum
Data=32, Minimum Octants=4. Search radii was 55 mE by 75 mN by 10
mRL.
- An expansion factor
of 1 was applied so in the second pass saw the same data and
octants criteria with an expanded search to 110mE by 150mN by
20mRL.
- The third pass saw
Minimum Data=6, maximum Data=32, Minimum Octants=2. Search radii
was 110mE by 150mN by 20mRL.
- Top cutting was
applied to domains and elements which displayed a very strongly
skewed nature as summarise in the report reference and in
accordance with the prevailing coefficients of variation.
- Secondary attributes
including the modelling of density which was also modelled on three
passes (as above) which included the same data and octant criteria
as above.
- No dilution was
expressly added to the SGC model however the domain strategy was
largely driven by geological and grade domains created by the
Client (XM) and provided to SGC which tends to incorporate the full
population range in the geological domains and a constrained
population range in the grade domains in-line with the grade domain
constraints.
- No assumptions were
made by SGC regarding the recovery of by-products
- Copper, gold,
molybdenum and sulphur were modelled as elements.
- Blocks in the model
were defined based on the likely mining bench heights and the
domaining took into account the SMU proposed at the outset of 4 m E
by 4 m N by 2 m RL.
- The interpretation
or domain model was largely driven by the lithology / geology,
oxidation state, and structural intervention and mineralised trends
observed over the various project areas. Grade was used as a
secondary domain driver for the definition of boundaries where
deemed appropriate by the XAM resource team.
- The model was
validated in a third-party software using section and plan
comparisons back to original informing data as well as with the use
of swath plots to assess local grade variability between the model
and informing data.
Cut-Off Grades & Basis for Selection
- Mineralised domain
interpreted on grade >= 0.1% CuEq inside the local
interpretation solids by area with reference to local variability
and geological consideration.
- Assumed to be
reasonable cut-off for open pit and underground propositions given
probability plot curve inflexions and grade population
distributions.
- Resources estimated
at a range of cut-offs and reported at a 0.13% CuEq cut-off grade
for open pit, consistent with PFS open pit marginal cut-off grade,
and 0.3% CuEq for underground public reporting.
Mining Factors or Assumptions
- This item is beyond
the scope of work for SGC as such this item details were not
addressed by SGC but will remain the responsibility of the Client
and Client’s representatives.
- Consideration was
given by SGC to SMU factors, blocks in the model were defined based
on the likely mining bench heights and the domaining took into
account the SMU proposed at the outset of 4 m E by 4 m N by 2 m
RL.
Metallurgical Factors or Assumptions
- No metallurgical
factors or assumptions used to restrict or modify the resource
estimation were employed by SGC proceeding or during the
construction of the model. Metallurgical recovery was not modelled
as an attribute of the model. To date metallurgical recovery
analysis has indicated recovery of Cu% to be 82% and Aug/t to be
81% overall.6
- The underlying
Mineral Resource Estimate is yet to be updated for final met
outcomes resulting from recent PFS work, however the cut-off grade
is now aligned to the PFS which is based on the most recent
metallurgical outcomes. This is issue is not considered material to
the estimate.
Other Material Assumptions and Additional
Information.
For other material assumptions and additional information,
please refer to Appendix 3, JORC Table 1 in this announcement and
the following press releases.
- ASX/TSX Announcement
28 August 2024 – Update Increase in Kharmagtai Resource
- ASX/TSX Announcement
14 October 2024 – Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study
- ASX/TSX Announcement
23 December 2023 – Kharmagtai Mineral Resource Grows
- ASX/TSX Announcement
08 December 2021 – Kharmagtai Resource Grows to 1.1 Billion
Tonnes
- ASX/TSX Announcement
31 October 2018 – Major Increase in Kharmagtai Open-Cut
Resource
- ASX/TSX
Announcements 19 March 2015 – Kharmagtai Maiden JORC Resource
For drilling results between 2014 and 2024, please refer to
company quarterly reports and press releases, available on the
Xanadu Mines website at www.xanadumines.com.
ORE RESERVE OVERVIEW
During the completion of the Kharmagtai PFS
(refer separate ASX release for the Kharmagtai PFS), evaluation of
an Ore Reserve Estimate was completed. This includes Probable
tonnes only. To support the Ore Reserve evaluation within the PFS a
separate Whittle 4X open pit optimization evaluation was completed
with no value given to the inferred classified material within the
mineral resource estimate for all deposits. Following this a PFS
level mine design, mine scheduling, mining costing and overall
project economic model evaluation was completed to confirm positive
economic outcomes for the Ore Reserve.
A summary of material assumptions is provided
below and included in JORC Table 1 within this report. There are no
material differences between the definitions of Probable Ore
Reserves under the 2014 CIM Definition Standards for Mineral
Resources and Mineral Reserves and the equivalent definitions in
the JORC Code.
Table 6 - Ore Reserve by Classification
Classification |
Dry Tonnes (Mt) |
Copper Grade (%) |
Gold Grade (g/t) |
Insitu Copper (‘000 t) |
Insitu Gold (‘000 oz) |
Proved |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Probable |
730 |
0.21 |
0.17 |
1,570 |
4,000 |
Table 7: Ore Reserve by Deposit (all
Probable)
Classification |
Tonnes (Mt) |
Grades |
Contained Metal |
Cu (%) |
Au (g/t) |
Cu (kt) |
Au (koz) |
Stockwork Hill |
233 |
0.22 |
0.21 |
520 |
1,600 |
White Hill |
437 |
0.21 |
0.14 |
930 |
2,000 |
Copper Hill |
22 |
0.26 |
0.17 |
60 |
200 |
Golden Eagle |
13 |
0.12 |
0.31 |
20 |
100 |
Zephyr |
16 |
0.15 |
0.19 |
20 |
100 |
White Hill West |
11 |
0.16 |
0.11 |
20 |
40 |
Probable |
730 |
0.21 |
0.17 |
1,570 |
4,000 |
Notes:
- Figures may not sum due to rounding
- Significant figures do not imply an added level of
precision
- Ore Reserve constrained by Kharmagtai PFS mine plan
inventory7
- Reserve CuEq equation (CuEq=Cu+Au*0.7039Au) where Au at
USD$1900/oz and Cu at USD$4.0/lb was employed according to the
Clients' (XAM) direction.
- Au recovery is relative with Cu rec=80% and Au rec=81%
according to the Clients' (XAM) direction
Material Assumptions for the Ore
Reserve
Kharmagtai is a project at PFS stage based on a
conventional open pit, truck and shovel operation feeding a copper
concentrator. The Ore Reserve is supported by the PFS Study, and
the Project is progressing to the Feasibility Stage. To support the
Ore Reserve evaluation within the PFS a separate Whittle 4X open
pit optimization evaluation was completed with no value given to
the inferred classified material within the mineral resource
estimate for all deposits. Following this a PFS level mine design,
mine scheduling, mining costing and overall project economic model
evaluation was completed to confirm positive economic outcomes for
the Ore Reserve. A marginal breakeven cut-off grade of 0.13% CuEq
was adopted based on economic parameters and recoveries determined
as part of the PFS study. The Ore Reserve statement will be further
updated at the completion of the Bankable Feasibility Study.
Ore Reserve Classification
The Probable Ore Reserve is based on Indicated
Mineral Resources and diluting material within a regularized
resource block model. Diluting material is either low grade
Indicated Mineral Resource or material carrying no grade. No
Measured Mineral Resource is stated for this deposit. Resource
classifications are based on an assessment of geological confidence
as a function of geological and mineralisation continuity as
outlined in the provided mineral resource estimate.
Risk and Mitigating Actions
Within the Kharmagtai PFS ASX announcement there
is detail provided regarding risk and mitigating actions across the
following areas:
- Infrastructure and water
- Regulation, permitting and ESG
- Funding
Water
The Project has identified a material risk to
the project water supply. The PFS has partially mitigated the risk
through exploration and pump testing in a nearby water basin. Water
supply will continue to be a core focus of the BFS and will be
actioned through a forward work plan in development and prospective
areas delineated by the Kharmagtai study team, with important
contributions from SRK, senior Mongolian hydrogeologists from Litho
Exploration, the Oyut Ulaan government & community relations
team, and O2 Mining. The Project has a substantial water resource
established nearby which can supply in the range of 50 to 100 l/s
of water, but additional make-up water will be required to meet the
full Stage 1 demand of 350 l/s. The work during BFS will include a
combination of additional exploration in nearby basins and
commercial discussions with holders of regional water resources
which are not fully utilised. The Stage 2 demand is anticipated to
be met through additional borefield exploration, with a strong risk
mitigation through the government’s Kherlen Toono project, a major
north-south water pipeline. Kherlen Toono is a national industry
building program designed to support the mining industry in the
Gobi and is currently in Feasibility Study stage. The pipeline will
also serve as further risk mitigation for Stage 1.
Mining Operations Summary
The operation is configured as an open pit mine
to achieve the highest value, lowest cost, lowest complexity, and
most rapid development option. The PFS assumes a contract mining
model for mining operations.
Mine Design
The PFS assumes mining will be a conventional
drill, blast, load and haul operation. The mine plan is based on 10
metre benches consistent with the current Resource model, and
results of an initial Standard Mining Unit assessment. Furthermore,
equipment selected is appropriate for the planned selectivity and
mining production rates for 10 metre benches. Further optimisation
of the Selective Mining Unit (SMU), including bench height will be
addressed in the BFS. Grade control will be undertaken from
sampling of blasthole cuttings assayed in the on-site laboratory
and also planned targeted grade control drilling during
operation.
Mine Equipment
The primary mining fleet comprises nominal
600-700t hydraulic excavator (backhoe configuration for mine
selectivity and wall control) and 195t large electric rope shovels
loading ultra class (nominal 290t capacity) electric drive diesel
haul trucks as a well-proven, flexible and efficient match suited
to the planned scale of operations. Supplemental primary loading
capacity and stockpile reclaim will be provided by 32m3 capacity
wheel loaders.
For this PFS and the reserves mine planning, no
additional estimate was made for mining dilution and loss due to
the gradational nature of the deposit, other than the inherent
dilution within the regularized resource model (20m x 20m x10m)
used for mining planning. It was also assumed that with this style
of mineralisation the geological model incorporates some level of
dilution.
Geotechnical Investigation
MineGeoTech was engaged to undertake
geotechnical analysis for the project, which included evaluation of
geological, structural and alteration environments, material
strength, in-situ stress and rock mass quality. The data was used
to undertake bench configuration design and overall slope stability
analysis using 3D modelling. Slope recommendations were provided to
guide pit optimisation by Whittle Consulting Pty Ltd (Whittle) and
mine design by the Mining Plus team.
The PFS and reserve mine designs used a
conservative bench configuration for the pit slopes and has
developed a plan for additional geotechnical study during the BFS.
This has potential upside to support steeper interim and final pit
slopes.
Pit Optimisation and Operations
Configuration
Xanadu engaged Whittle Consulting Pty Ltd
(Whittle) to perform the pit optimization study. Whittle used
Dassault Systèmes Geovia WhittleTM software to determine the
estimated inventories to be mined, and to develop pit phasing
strategies. They also used their Prober software to provide
strategic guidance to the study configuration. The Resource in each
phase was then scheduled on an annualised basis over the LOM using
Whittle Consulting’s proprietary Prober-ETM software for a variety
of scenarios. The parameters are based on deposits and operations
of similar properties providing confidence in the
applicability.
Phase selection and analysis of the highest
value mining sequence was performed on the deposits both
individually and in combination.
The Stockwork Hill and White Hill phases
overlapped considerably. The common areas were treated as a set of
wedges to be mined as the deposits’ phases required, depending in
which phase was scheduled first.
The result was a total of 23 phases
incorporating a number of wedges across the 5 deposits. An economic
pit could not be defined for the Zaraa deposit based on the assumed
costs and metal prices.
Mine Design, Scheduling, Cut-off and
Stockpiling
Mining Plus prepared PFS8 level pit designs
based on the selected shells (or cutbacks) and used Deswik software
to schedule the material in each cutback. The Deswik software was
used to focus on material blending and stockpile utilizing the
Deswik “Blender” module, with a detailed assessment of primary
loading and haulage equipment requirements by year completed using
Deswik LHS module to determine annual truck requirements
considering detailed haul routes to all destination also including
waste rock to be delivered to the two proposed TSF locations.
Deswik determined the multi-mine mining sequence
and rate, elevated cutoff to the plant by “bin” varying over time,
and stockpiling of lower grade material for processing later, to
maximise NPV using the Study assumptions and constraints, and for
only indicated resource material for the reserve mine design and
schedule.
The mine cut-off grade analysis was calculated
based on net sales less smelting, refining deductions, concentrate
transport and royalties on a per tonne of ore feed basis regressed
against CuEq % over the life of mine to work out a revenue per %Cu
per tonne of feed. Unit costs and recovery assumptions were aligned
to the PFS. Prices assumed US$4.0/lb Cu and US$1,900/oz Au. The
marginal and breakeven costs are then calculated using costs per
tonne ore in the financial model against this revenue factor.
Marginal breakeven cut-off was determined to be 0.13% CuEq and was
utilised for this update to the Open Cut Mineral Resource to align
with the PFS, which provided a RPEEE.
The final mining capacity is staged from 100Mtpa
to 140Mtpa with a vertical rate of advance limited to 10 benches
per year (this constraint was not hit), and a processing capacity
staged from 26Mtpa to 52Mtpa.
Sulphide ore is processed through the
concentrator, while oxide mineralisation is moved to a designated
stockpile for potential future leach processing. A limited amount
of gold rich oxide is processed in a CIL circuit.
The first eight years of production (Stage 1)
uses predominantly material classified as Indicated (88% of the
mine schedule), with other Inferred material stockpiled for
processing over the remaining 21-year mine life (Stage 2).
Approximately 73% of the 29-year Life of Mine Production Target is
in the Indicated Mineral Resource category, and 27% is in the
Inferred Mineral Resource category.
The outcome for the selected case is a multi-pit
mine schedule mining 1,780M tonnes of waste, processing 1,270M
tonnes of ore over 29 years of production to produce 2.1Mt of
copper in concentrate and 4.9Moz oz of gold in concentrate and
bullion.
Higher-grade ore is prioritised by using a
varying elevated cut-off grade to the plant, with by year 9 of
production up to approximately 270M tonnes are stockpiled for
processing in later years. There is sufficient capacity within the
footprints of the ore stockpiles and future waste dumps for this
capacity of ore in year 9. The stockpile is depleted from this year
until the end of the operations.
WASTE ROCK MANAGEMENT
The Kharmagtai Project comprises extensive
systems of open pits, waste rock dumps, LG ore and oxide storage
areas, tailings storage facilities, ROM pad, crushing and
processing area, and associated roads and infrastructure, as shown
in the Kharmagtai PFS Site General Arrangement Figure in this
document.
The waste dumps will be constructed such that
PAF materials will be encapsulated by NAF material. The as-built
waste dumps are designed with a slope of 37 degrees and the final
landforms with a shallower slope of 22 degrees to allow for mine
closure. Further analysis of the final slope angle is planned as
part of further work in the BFS.
An environmental geochemical assessment to
support the PFS was conducted based on the available environmental
geochemistry data to allow for an initial Acid Rock Drainage (ARD)
classification of the waste rock material which was used to inform
the design of waste management facilities, waste handling and
management.
The PFS mine schedule indicated that
approximately 63% of the waste rock material is classified as high
sulphur waste rock or PAF-MS. Material earmarked for encapsulation
(low sulphur, NAF-MS, pNAF_MS) comprises approximately 37% of waste
rock as shown in the Figure below. During the PFS checks completed
have confirmed, there is overall adequate material to achieve
required encapsulation with recommendations for further detailed
scheduling of waste rock, and dump design recommended in further
studies.
Figure 6 - Classification of Waste Rock
Material for Disposal over LOM
Based on the evaluation of the available
geochemical data, only a conceptual waste rock management approach
can be provided at this stage of the project. A more detailed Mine
Waste Management Plan (MWMP) should be developed for the
Feasibility Stage (FS), including laboratory testwork to validate
and revise material classification.
A conceptual-level closure cost estimate of
earthworks associated with the closure and rehabilitation of
planned waste rock dumps, stockpiles and infrastructure, was
completed as part of the PFS. The estimate is developed as part of
an estimate of potential financial obligations following the
immediate cessation of mining activities should this occur during
planned mining activities.
The high-level analysis encompasses major cost
components associated with bulk earth movements for dozing waste
dump batters, ripping, developing access roads, capping the
tailings facilities, spreading topsoil, and seeding. Mineralised
stockpiles including the ROM pad, are assumed to have been
processed. The Oxide dump is assumed not to have been processed and
will require rehabilitation. The processing plant and all buildings
are assumed to have been removed.
At the time of this estimate the future land
use, rehabilitation objectives and permitting guidance has not been
defined, accordingly the estimate is based on generally practised
(Globally) industry standards, to return the mine site to a use
similar to its current use prior to mining.
The waste dumps will be profiled to be similar
to regional topography based on topographical data, and other
information shared by the Xanadu project stakeholders, and also
considering observations from the completed site visit by the
mining competent person on 15-16 April 2024.
The topsoil and NAF mine waste balance will need
to be monitored during operations such that sufficient sources are
readily available to implement the coverages in this estimate.
Further studies such as a feasibility study should also include
more detailed scheduling of both of topsoil and NAF mine waste
rock, to ensure movements are adequate and if stockpiling of
material may be required.
Mineral Processing
DRA Global completed the PFS process engineering
study that demonstrates that a conventional, low risk copper
concentrator producing a copper-gold concentrate and gold dore is
appropriate for the Project.
A range of options were assessed in concert with
the metallurgical test program, based on the option study outcomes,
the PFS design for the concentrator was based on two stages, with a
Stage 1 throughput rate of 26 Mtpa, fully duplicated in Stage 2 to
52 Mtpa. Modifying factors such as metallurgical overall recoveries
for copper of 82% and gold of 81%, and processing costs, etc have
been considered and used to support the ore reserve estimate.
Infrastructure, Logistics and
Services
Kharmagtai PFS study infrastructure, logistics
and services as outlined in the ASX PFS announcement also support
the Ore Estimate reserve.
An important consideration is water. The South
Gobi region has significant potential water resources which could
meet all known demand including Kharmagtai projections. These lie
in deep, non-potable industrial aquifers. While a large portion of
these resources are not yet claimed, there are also third parties
who hold resources but are not utilizing them. The Kharmagtai
project has focused on both new and third-party sources.
The PFS project has identified a material risk
to the project water supply. The PFS has partially mitigated this
risk to its water supply and this will continue to be a core focus
of the Bankable Feasibility Study (BFS) with a
forward work plan developed. The project has a substantial water
resource established nearby, but significant amounts of additional
make-up water will be required to be identified to meet the full
Stage 1 demand. Kharmagtai requires approximately 350Ml/s make-up
water supply for Stage 1, which is roughly doubled for Stage 2.
Make-up water supply costing has been included
in the PFS. The make-up water supply risk will de-risked for the
operation, and requirements are expected to be met via a detailed
technical and commercial work plan during 2025. The commercial plan
will engage with other water rights holders who have underutilized
resources and will prioritise based on environmental, social,
sustainability, technical and financial outcomes. The exploration
plan will progress based on a regional survey which has identified
high priority targets near the operation. This plan was developed
with contributions from SRK, a qualified Mongolian hydrogeologists
from Litho exploration, the Kharmagtai government & community
relations team, and O2 Mining. The PFS has conservatively costed a
commercial supply to provide the additional Stage 1 water.
Furthermore, this plan addresses Stage 2
requirements are anticipated to be met through additional water
exploration. Risk mitigation for both Stage 1 and Stage 2
requirements will come from the Mongolian Government’s Kerlen-Toono
project (Blue Horse Water Infrastructure Program), which aims to
bring a high-capacity water pipeline from the Kherlen River in
northern Mongolia to the Gobi within 6-8 years. Kherlen-Toono
project is already in Feasibility Study stage, partly funded by Oyu
Tolgoi and Tavan Togloi operating mines, and is designed to support
the mining industry in the Gobi region. The Kherlen-Toono project
was identified within a resolution of the Mongolian Parliament to
approve the Cabinet’s 2024-2028 Action Program, which defines 15
specific nation building mega-projects.
Operations Strategy
The operating model selected for the PFS
envisages Kharmagtai operating as a long-distance commute site
supported by an office in Ulaanbaatar. The project targets
Mongolian management with any expatriate roles aimed at training
and developing Mongolians into management positions. Details are
provided in the Kharmagtai PFS ASX release and supporting
study.
Mining operations are structured as a 3rd party
contract miner model. Mineral processing, tailings, on-site
infrastructure, general and administrative tasks will be owner
operated.
Regulatory, Social and
Environmental
The work outlined in the Kharmagtai PFS ASX
release and supporting study in these areas also support the Ore
Reserve Estimate.
About Xanadu Mines Ltd
Xanadu is an ASX and TSX listed Exploration
company operating in Mongolia. We give investors exposure to
globally significant, large-scale copper-gold discoveries and
low-cost inventory growth. Xanadu maintains a portfolio of
exploration projects and remains one of the few junior explorers on
the ASX or TSX who jointly control a globally significant
copper-gold deposit in our flagship Kharmagtai project. Xanadu
holds a 50-50 JV share with Zijin Mining Group in Khuiten Metals
Pte Ltd, which controls 76.5% of the Kharmagtai project.
For further information, please visit
www.xanadumines.com or contact:
Colin
Moorhead |
Spencer
Cole |
Executive Chairman & Managing
Director |
Chief Financial & Development Officer |
P: +61 2 8280 7497 |
P: +61 2 8280 7497 |
E: colin.moorhead@xanadumines.com
|
E: spencer.cole@xanadumines.com |
W: www.xanadumines.com |
|
|
|
This Announcement was authorised for release by
Xanadu’s Board of Directors.
APPENDIX 1: COMPETENT PERSON’S
STATEMENT
Mineral Resource Estimate
Mr Robert Spiers is a full time Principle
Geologist employed by Spiers Geological Consultants (SGC), 4 Martin
Street, Mount Martha, Victoria, Australia. Mr Spiers is contracted
on a consulting basis by Xanadu Mines.
Mr Spiers graduated with a Bachelor of Science
(BSc) Honours and a double Major of Geology and Geophysics from
Latrobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia and has been a
member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists for 26 years;
working as a Geologist for in-excess of 30 years since
graduating.
Mr Spiers 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 Exploration Results, Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Spiers consents to the inclusion in
the report to which this statement is to be attached of the matters
based on his information in the form and context in which it
appears.
The information in the report to which this
statement is to be attached that relates to Mineral Resources is
based on information compiled by Mr Robert Spiers, a Competent
Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists
or a ‘Recognised Professional Organisation’ (RPO) included in a
list posted on the ASX website from time to time.
Mr Spiers consents to the disclosure of this
information on the page/s in the form and context in which it
appears.
To the best Mr Spiers knowledge, neither SGC,
himself and / or other related parties have any conflict of
interest with by XAM in accordance with the transparency principle
set out by the JORC code and supported by ASX rulings.
In relation to the above statement, Mr Spiers
holds 750,000 ordinary shares in the ASX listed XAM entity
purchased on market in accordance with the XAM trading policy
(guidance notes 27). The aforementioned shareholding does not
constitute a material holding in the company in question.
Mr Spiers has read the definition of “competent
person” set out in the JORC code and guidelines for the reporting
of Mineral Resource Estimates and certify that by reason of his
education, affiliation with a professional association (MAIG) and
past relevant professional work experience, that he fulfils the
requirements of a “Competent Person” for the purposes of JORC
2012.
As of the date of this document, to the best of
Mr Spiers knowledge, information and belief, the Public Release /
Technical Report to which this statement is to be attached (in
relation to the Reporting of the Kharmagtai Mineral Resource
Estimation October 2024) contains all the scientific and technical
information that is required to be disclosed in relation to the
Mineral Resources to make the Public Release / Technical Report not
misleading with respect to the sections for which Mr Spiers is
responsible.
Dated the 14th day of October
2024.
__________________________
Robert Spiers, BSc Hons, MAIG
Our Customer
This report has been produced by or on behalf of Spiers
Geological Consultants (SGC) for the sole use by Xanadu Mines
(XAM - the Customer). The Customer’s use and
disclosure of this report is subject to the terms and conditions
under which SGC prepared the report. All items in the report must
if used in a third party report be taken in context and consent
from SGC must be sought on each occasion.
Notice to Third Parties
SGC prepared this report for the Customer only. If you are not
the Customer:
-
SGC have prepared this report having regard to the particular needs
and interests of the Customer, and in accordance with the
Customer’s instructions. It did not draft this report having regard
to any other person’s particular needs or interests. Your needs and
interests may be distinctly different to the Customer’s needs and
interests, and the report may not be sufficient, fit or appropriate
for your purposes.
-
SGC does not make and expressly disclaims from making any
representation or warranty to you – express or implied regarding
this report or the conclusions or opinions set out in this report
(including without limitation any representation or warranty
regarding the standard of care used in preparing this report, or
that any forward-looking statements, forecasts, opinions or
projections contained in the report will be achieved, will prove to
be correct or are based on reasonable assumptions).
-
SGC expressly disclaim any liability to you and any duty of care to
you.
-
SGC does not authorise you to rely on this report. If you choose to
use or rely on all or part of this report, then any loss or damage
you may suffer in so doing is at your sole and exclusive risk.
Inputs, Subsequent Changes and No Duty to
Update
SGC have created this report using data and information provided
by or on behalf of the Customer [and Customer’s agents and
contractors]. Unless specifically stated otherwise, SGC has not
independently verified that data and information unless expressly
noted. SGC accepts no liability for the accuracy or completeness of
that data and information, even if that data and information has
been incorporated into or relied upon in creating this report (or
parts of it).
The conclusions and opinions contained in this report apply as
at the date of the report. Events (including changes to any of the
data and information that SGC used in preparing the report) may
have occurred since that date which may impact on those conclusions
and opinions and make them unreliable. SGC is under no duty to
update the report upon the occurrence of any such event, though it
reserves the right to do so.
Mining Unknown Factors
The ability of any person to achieve forward-looking production
and economic targets is dependent on numerous factors that are
beyond SGC’s control and that SGC cannot anticipate. These factors
include, but are not limited to, site-specific mining and
geological conditions, management and personnel capabilities,
availability of funding to properly operate and capitalize the
operation, variations in cost elements and market conditions,
developing and operating the mine in an efficient manner,
unforeseen changes in legislation and new industry developments.
Any of these factors may substantially alter the performance of any
mining operation.
Ore Reserve
The information in this Study that relates to Ore Reserves is
based on information compiled by Mr Colin McVie and Mr Simon
Grimbeek, who are responsible for the Ore Reserve. Both Mr McVie
and Mr Grimbeek are full time Managers and Mining Engineers
employed by Mining Plus and are both Fellows of the Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. They both have sufficient
experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of
deposit under consideration and to the activity he is undertaking
to qualify as the Qualified Person as defined in the CIM Guidelines
and National Instrument 43-101 and as a Competent Person under JORC
Code 2012. Mr McVie and Mr Grimbeek consent to the inclusion in the
report of the matters based on this information in the form and
context in which it appears.
The information in this Study that relates to open pit
geotechnical analysis for the project has been reviewed by Dr John
Player, BEng (Mining) (Hons) MEngSc (Mining Geomechanics) PhD
MAusIMM(CP) RPEQ (Geotech). Dr Player is not an employee of the
Company but is Director and Principal Engineer with MineGeoTech. Dr
Player is a Member and Chartered Professional of the Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy; has sufficient experience
relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under
consideration and to the activity undertaken to qualify as the
Qualified Person as defined in the CIM Guidelines and National
Instrument 43-101 and as a Competent Person under JORC Code 2012.
Dr Player consents to the inclusion in this report of the contained
technical information in the form and context as it appears.
The information in this Study that relates to processing,
metallurgy and metallurgical testwork has been reviewed by Graham
Brock, BSc (Eng), ARSM. Mr Brock is not an employee of the Company
but is employed as a contract consultant. Mr Brock is a Fellow of
the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy; he has
sufficient experience with the style of processing response and
type of deposit under consideration, and to the activities
undertaken, to qualify as the Qualified Person as defined in the
CIM Guidelines and National Instrument 43-101 and as a Competent
Person under JORC Code 2012. Mr Brock consents to the inclusion in
this report of the contained technical information in the form and
context as it appears.
The information in this Study that relates to marketing and
concentrate logistics was reviewed by Albert de Sousa, MAusIMM, BA,
Graduate Diploma International Business. Mr de Sousa is not an
employee of the Company but is employed as a contract consultant.
Mr de Sousa is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy. He has sufficient experience the style of
mineralisation, type of deposit, and concentrate production and
logistics, and to related activities undertaken, to qualify as the
Qualified Person as defined in the CIM Guidelines and National
Instrument 43-101 and as a Competent Person under JORC Code 2012.
Mr de Sousa consents to the inclusion in this report of the
contained technical and commercial information in the form and
context as it appears.
The technical and scientific information contained in this
document related to Kharmagtai PFS was reviewed by Julien Lawrence,
MEngSc (PM), FAusIMM, B Eng Mining (Hons). Mr Lawrence is not an
employee of the Company but is employed as a contract consultant.
Mr Lawrence is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy. He has sufficient experience the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit, and to the activities
undertaken, to qualify as the Qualified Person as defined in the
CIM Guidelines and National Instrument 43-101 and as a Competent
Person under JORC Code 2012. Mr Lawrence consents to the inclusion
in this report of the contained technical information in the form
and context as it appears.
Exploration
The information in this announcement that
relates to exploration results is based on information compiled by
Dr Andrew Stewart, who is responsible for the exploration data,
comments on exploration target sizes, QA/QC and geological
interpretation and information. Dr Stewart, who is an employee of
Xanadu and is a Member of the Australasian Institute of
Geoscientists, has sufficient experience relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the
activity he is undertaking to qualify as the Competent Person as
defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting
Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves and the
National Instrument 43-101. Dr Stewart consents to the inclusion in
the report of the matters based on this information in the form and
context in which it appears.
APPENDIX 2: ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS AND
DISCLAIMERS
Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves
Reporting Requirements
The 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves (the JORC Code 2012) sets out minimum
standards, recommendations and guidelines for Public Reporting in
Australasia of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves. The Information contained in this Announcement has been
presented in accordance with the JORC Code 2012.
The information in this Announcement relates to
the exploration results previously reported in ASX Announcements
which are available on the Xanadu website at:
https://www.xanadumines.com/site/investor-centre/asx-announcements
The Company is not aware of any new, material
information or data that is not included in those market
announcements.
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this
Announcement, including information as to the future financial or
operating performance of Xanadu and its projects may also include
statements which are ‘forward‐looking statements’ that may include,
amongst other things, statements regarding targets, estimates and
assumptions in respect of mineral reserves and mineral resources
and anticipated grades and recovery rates, production and prices,
recovery costs and results, capital expenditures and are or may be
based on assumptions and estimates related to future technical,
economic, market, political, social and other conditions. These
‘forward-looking statements’ are necessarily based upon a number of
estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by
Xanadu, are inherently subject to significant technical, business,
economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties and
contingencies and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties
that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from
estimated or anticipated events or results reflected in such
forward‐looking statements.
Xanadu disclaims any intent or obligation to
update publicly or release any revisions to any forward‐looking
statements, whether as a result of new information, future events,
circumstances or results or otherwise after the date of this
Announcement or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events,
other than required by the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the
Listing Rules of the Australian Securities Exchange
(ASX) and Toronto Stock Exchange
(TSX). The words ‘believe’, ‘expect’,
‘anticipate’, ‘indicate’, ‘contemplate’, ‘target’, ‘plan’,
‘intends’, ‘continue’, ‘budget’, ‘estimate’, ‘may’, ‘will’,
‘schedule’ and similar expressions identify forward‐looking
statements.
All ‘forward‐looking statements’ made in this
Announcement are qualified by the foregoing cautionary statements.
Investors are cautioned that ‘forward‐looking statements’ are not
guarantee of future performance and accordingly investors are
cautioned not to put undue reliance on ‘forward‐looking statements’
due to the inherent uncertainty therein.
For further information please visit the Xanadu
Mines’ Website at www.xanadumines.com.
APPENDIX 3: KHARMAGTAI TABLE 1 (JORC
2012)
Set out below is Section 1 and Section 2 of
Table 1 under the JORC Code, 2012 Edition for the Kharmagtai
project. Data provided by Xanadu. This Table 1 updates the JORC
Table 1 disclosure dated 8 December 2023.
JORC TABLE 1 - SECTION 1 - SAMPLING
TECHNIQUES AND DATA
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections).
Criteria |
Commentary |
Sampling techniques |
- Representative ½
core samples were split from PQ, HQ & NQ diameter diamond drill
core on site using rock saws, on a routine 2m sample interval that
also honours lithological/intrusive contacts.
- The orientation
of the cut line is controlled using the core orientation line
ensuring uniformity of core splitting wherever the core has been
successfully oriented.
- Sample intervals
are defined and subsequently checked by geologists, and sample tags
are attached (stapled) to the plastic core trays for every sample
interval.
- Reverse
Circulation (RC) chip samples are ¼ splits from
one meter (1m) intervals using a 75%:25% riffle
splitter to obtain a 3kg sample
- RC samples are
uniform 2m samples formed from the combination of two ¼ split 1m
samples.
|
Drilling techniques |
- The Mineral
Resource Estimation has been based upon diamond drilling of PQ, HQ
and NQ diameters with both standard and triple tube core recovery
configurations, RC drilling and surface trenching with channel
sampling.
- All drill core
drilled by Xanadu has been oriented using the “Reflex Ace”
tool.
|
Drill sample recovery |
- Diamond drill
core recoveries were assessed using the standard industry (best)
practice which involves removing the core from core trays;
reassembling multiple core runs in a v-rail; measuring core lengths
with a tape measure, assessing recovery against core block depth
measurements and recording any measured core loss for each core
run.
- Diamond core
recoveries average 97% through mineralisation.
- Overall, core
quality is good, with minimal core loss. Where there is localised
faulting and or fracturing core recoveries decrease, however, this
is a very small percentage of the mineralised intersections.
- RC recoveries
are measured using whole weight of each 1m intercept measured
before splitting
- Analysis of
recovery results vs grade shows no significant trends that might
indicate sampling bias introduced by variable recovery in
fault/fracture zones.
|
Logging |
- All drill core
is geologically logged by well-trained geologists using a modified
“Anaconda-style” logging system methodology. The Anaconda method of
logging and mapping is specifically designed for porphyry Cu-Au
mineral systems and is entirely appropriate to support Mineral
Resource Estimation, mining and metallurgical studies.
- Logging of
lithology, alteration and mineralogy is intrinsically qualitative
in nature. However, the logging is subsequently supported by 4 Acid
ICP-MS (48 element) geochemistry and SWIR spectral mineralogy
(facilitating semi-quantitative/calculated mineralogical,
lithological and alteration classification) which is integrated
with the logging to improve cross section interpretation and 3D
geological model development.
- Drill core is
also systematically logged for both geotechnical features and
geological structures. Where drill core has been successfully
oriented, the orientation of structures and geotechnical features
are also routinely measured.
- Both wet and dry
core photos are taken after core has been logged and marked-up but
before drill core has been cut.
|
Sub-sampling techniques and sample
preparation |
- All drill core
samples are ½ core splits from either PQ, HQ or NQ diameter cores.
A routine 2m sample interval is used, but this is varied locally to
honour lithological/intrusive contacts. The minimum allowed sample
length is 30cm.
- Core is
appropriately split (onsite) using diamond core saws with the cut
line routinely located relative to the core orientation line (where
present) to provide consistency of sample split selection.
- The diamond saws
are regularly flushed with water to minimize potential
contamination.
- A field
duplicate ¼ core sample is collected every 30th sample to ensure
the “representivity of the in-situ material collected”. The
performance of these field duplicates is routinely analysed as part
of Xanadu’s sample QC process.
- Routine sample
preparation and analyses of DDH samples were carried out by ALS
Mongolia LLC (ALS Mongolia), who operates an
independent sample preparation and analytical laboratory in
Ulaanbaatar.
- All samples were
prepared to meet standard quality control procedures as follows:
Crushed to 75% passing 2mm, split to 1kg, pulverised to 85% passing
200 mesh (75 microns) and split to 150g sample pulp.
- ALS Mongolia
Geochemistry labs quality management system is certified to ISO
9001:2008.
- The sample
support (sub-sample mass and comminution) is appropriate for the
grainsize and Cu-Au distribution of the porphyry Cu-Au
mineralization and associated host rocks.
|
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests |
- All samples were
routinely assayed by ALS Mongolia for gold
- Au is determined
using a 25g fire assay fusion, cupelled to obtain a bead, and
digested with Aqua Regia, followed by an atomic absorption
spectroscopy (AAS) finish, with a lower detection
(LDL) of 0.01 ppm.
- All samples were
also submitted to ALS Mongolia for the 48-element package ME-ICP61
using a four-acid digest (considered to be an effective total
digest for the elements relevant to the Mineral Resource Estimate
(MRE)). Where copper is over-range (>1% Cu), it
is analysed by a second analytical technique (Cu-OG62), which has a
higher upper detection limit (UDL) of 5%
copper.
- Quality
assurance has been managed by insertion of appropriate Standards
(1:30 samples – suitable Ore Research Pty Ltd certified standards),
Blanks (1:30 samples), and Duplicates (1:30 samples – ¼ core
duplicate) by XAM.
- Assay results
outside the optimal range for methods were re-analysed by
appropriate methods.
- Ore Research Pty
Ltd certified copper and gold standards have been implemented as a
part of QC procedures, as well as coarse and pulp blanks, and
certified matrix matched copper-gold standards.
- QC monitoring is
an active and ongoing processes on batch-by-batch basis by which
unacceptable results are re-assayed as soon as practicable.
- Prior to 2014:
Cu, Ag, Pb, Zn, As and Mo were routinely determined using a
three-acid-digestion of a 0.3g sub-sample followed by an AAS finish
(AAS21R) at SGS Mongolia. Samples were digested with nitric,
hydrochloric and perchloric acids to dryness before leaching with
hydrochloric acid to dissolve soluble salts and made to 15ml volume
with distilled water. The LDL for copper using this technique was
2ppm. Where copper was over-range (>1% Cu), it was analysed by a
second analytical technique (AAS22S), which has a higher upper
detection limit (UDL) of 5% copper. Gold analysis method was
essentially unchanged.
|
Verification of sampling and assaying |
- All assay data
QA/QC is checked prior to loading into XAM’s Geobank data
base.
- The data is
managed by XAM geologists.
- The data base
and geological interpretation is managed by XAM.
- Check assays are
submitted to an umpire lab (SGS Mongolia) for duplicate
analysis.
- No twinned drill
holes exist.
- There have been
no adjustments to any of the assay data.
|
Location of data points |
- Diamond drill
holes have been surveyed with a differential global positioning
system (DGPS) to within 10cm accuracy.
- The grid system
used for the project is UTM WGS-84 Zone 48N
- Historically,
Eastman Kodak and Flexit electronic multi-shot downhole survey
tools have been used at Kharmagtai to collect down-hole azimuth and
inclination information for the majority of the diamond drill
holes. Single shots were typically taken every 30m to 50m during
the drilling process, and a multi-shot survey with readings every
3-5m are conducted at the completion of the drill hole. As these
tools rely on the earth’s magnetic field to measure azimuth, there
is some localised interference/inaccuracy introduced by the
presence of magnetite in some parts of the Kharmagtai mineral
system. The extent of this interference cannot be quantified on a
reading-by-reading basis.
- More recently
(since September 2017), a north-seeking gyro has been employed by
the drilling crews on site (rented and operated by the drilling
contractor), providing accurate downhole orientation measurements
unaffected by magnetic effects. Xanadu have a permanent calibration
station setup for the gyro tool, which is routinely calibrated
every 2 weeks (calibration records are maintained and were
sighted)
- The project
Digital Terrain Model (DTM) is based on 1m
contours from satellite imagery with an accuracy of ±0.1 m.
|
Data spacing and distribution |
- The drill-holes
spacing ranges from <50m spacing within the core of
mineralization to +500m spacing for exploration drilling. The
drill-hole spacing can be determined using the sections and drill
plans provided.
- Holes range from
vertical to an inclination of -60 degrees depending on the attitude
of the target and the drilling method.
- The data spacing
and distribution is sufficient to establish anomalism and targeting
for porphyry Cu-Au, tourmaline breccia and epithermal target
types.
- Holes have been
drilled to a maximum of 1,400m vertical depth.
- The data spacing
and distribution is sufficient to establish geological and grade
continuity, and to support the Mineral Resource
classification.
|
Orientation of data in relation to geological
structure |
- Drilling is
conducted in a predominantly regular grid to allow unbiased
interpretation and targeting.
- Scissor
drilling, as well as some vertical and oblique drilling, has been
used in key mineralised zones to achieve unbiased sampling of
interpreted structures and mineralised zones, and in particular to
assist in constraining the geometry of the mineralised hydrothermal
tourmaline-sulphide breccia domains.
|
Sample security |
- Samples are
delivered from the drill rig to the core shed twice daily and are
never left unattended at the rig.
- Samples are
dispatched from site in locked boxes transported on XAM company
vehicles to ALS lab in Ulaanbaatar.
- Sample shipment
receipt is signed off at the Laboratory with additional email
confirmation of receipt.
- Samples are then
stored at the lab and returned to a locked storage site.
|
Audits or reviews |
- Internal audits
of sampling techniques and data management are undertaken on a
regular basis, to ensure industry best practice is employed at all
times.
- External reviews
and audits have been conducted by the following groups:
- 2012: AMC
Consultants Pty Ltd. was engaged to conduct an Independent
Technical Report which reviewed drilling and sampling procedures.
It was concluded that sampling and data record was to an
appropriate standard.
- 2013: Mining
Associates Ltd. was engaged to conduct an Independent Technical
Report to review drilling, sampling techniques and QAQC. Methods
were found to conform to international best practice.
- 2018: CSA Global
reviewed the entire drilling, logging, sampling, sample shipping
and laboratory processes during the competent persons site visit
for the 2018 MRE and found the systems and adherence to protocols
to be to an appropriate standard.
- 2024: Ted
Coupland reviewed the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimation (MRE) and
during this review covered drilling, QAQC, data and documentation.
Ted found no issues with the work conducted.
|
JORC TABLE 1 - SECTION 2 - REPORTING OF
EXPLORATION RESULTS
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections).
Criteria |
Commentary |
Mineraltenementand
landtenurestatus |
- The Project comprises Mining
Licence MV-17387A Kharmagtai, originally granted in September
2013.
- Mining licences are granted for a
period of 30 years, extendable twice, for 20 years each time. A
mining license holder has the right to conduct mining activities
throughout the licence area and to construct structures within the
licence area that are related to its mining activities.
- The Mining License is held by Oyut
Ulaan LLC, a Mongolian registered company that is 90% owned by
Mongolian joint venture (JV) company, Mongol Metals LLC. The
remaining 10% of Oyut Ulaan LLC is owned by QGX Ltd a private
company registered in Canada. Mongol Metals is in turn 85% owned by
the Singapore JV company, Khuiten Metals Pte Ltd. The remaining 15%
of Mongol Metals is the personal holding of Ganbayar Lkhagvasuren,
a Mongolian citizen. Khuiten Metals is a 50-50 JV between Xanadu
Mines Ltd and Jinping Singapore Mining, a subsidiary of Zijin
Mining Group. Khuiten Metals effectively holds 76.5% of the
Kharmagtai project.
- The Mongolian Minerals Law (2006)
and Mongolian Land Law (2002) govern exploration, mining and land
use rights for the project.
|
Explorationdone
byotherparties |
- Previous exploration at Kharmagtai
was conducted by Quincunx Ltd, Ivanhoe Mines Ltd and Turquoise Hill
Resources Ltd including extensive drilling, surface geochemistry,
geophysics and mapping.
- Previous exploration at Red
Mountain (Oyut Ulaan) was conducted by Ivanhoe Mines.
|
Geology |
- The mineralisation is characterised
as porphyry copper-gold type.
- Porphyry copper-gold deposits are
formed from magmatic hydrothermal fluids typically associated with
felsic intrusive stocks that have deposited metals as sulphides
both within the intrusive and the intruded host rocks. Quartz
stockwork veining is typically associated with sulphides occurring
both within the quartz veinlets and disseminated thought out the
wall rock. Porphyry deposits are typically large tonnage deposits
ranging from low to high grade and are generally mined by large
scale open pit or underground bulk mining methods. The deposits at
Kharmagtai are atypical in that they are associated with
intermediate intrusions of diorite to quartz diorite composition;
however, the deposits are in terms of contained gold significant,
and similar gold-rich porphyry deposits.
|
Drill holeInformation |
- Diamond drill holes are the
principal source of geological and grade data for the Project.
- See figures in this ASX/TSX
Announcement.
|
DataAggregation methods |
- A nominal cut-off of 0.1% eCu is
used in copper dominant systems for identification of potentially
significant intercepts for reporting purposes. Higher grade
cut-offs are 0.3%, 0.6% and 1% eCu.
- A nominal cut-off of 0.1g/t eAu is
used in gold dominant systems like Golden Eagle for identification
of potentially significant intercepts for reporting purposes.
Higher grade cut-offs are 0.3g/t, 0.6g/t and 1g/t eAu.
- Maximum contiguous dilution within
each intercept is 9m for 0.1%, 0.3%, 0.6% and 1% eCu.
- Most of the reported intercepts are
shown in sufficient detail, including maxima and subintervals, to
allow the reader to make an assessment of the balance of high and
low grades in the intercept.
- Informing samples have been
composited to two metre lengths honouring the geological domains
and adjusted where necessary to ensure that no residual sample
lengths have been excluded (best fit).
The copper equivalent (CuEq or
eCu) calculation represents the total metal value
for each metal, multiplied by the conversion factor, summed and
expressed in equivalent copper percentage with a metallurgical
recovery factor applied. Copper equivalent (CuEq
or eCu) grade values were calculated using the
following formula:eCu or CuEq = Cu + Au * 0.60049 * 0.86667,Gold
Equivalent (eAu) grade values were calculated
using the following formula:eAu = Au + Cu / 0.60049 *
0.86667.Where:Cu - copper grade (%)Au - gold grade (g/t)0.60049 -
conversion factor (gold to copper)0.86667 - relative recovery of
gold to copper (86.67%)The copper equivalent formula was based on
the following parameters (prices are in USD):
- Copper price - 3.4 $/lb
- Gold
price - 1400
$/oz
- Copper recovery - 90%
- Gold recovery - 78%
- Relative recovery of gold to copper
= 78% / 90% = 86.67%.
|
Relationship between mineralisationon
widthsand
interceptlengths |
- Mineralised structures are variable
in orientation, and therefore drill orientations have been adjusted
from place to place in order to allow intersection angles as close
as possible to true widths.
- Exploration results have been
reported as an interval with 'from' and 'to' stated in tables of
significant economic intercepts. Tables clearly indicate that true
widths will generally be narrower than those reported.
|
Diagrams |
- See figures in the body of this
ASX/TSX Announcement.
|
Balancedreporting |
- Resources have been reported at a
range of cut-off grades, above a minimum suitable for open pit
mining, and above a minimum suitable for underground mining.
|
Othersubstantiveexplorationdata |
- Extensive work in this area has been done and is reported
separately.
- This MRE and prior MRE announcements incorporate drilling
results that have been previously reported to ASX by Xanadu since
2014 and are available on the Xanadu Mines website:
https://www.xanadumines.com/site/investor-centre/asx-announcements
- Please also refer to previous Mineral Resource announcements:
- ASX/TSX Announcement 28 August 2024 – Update Increase in
Kharmagtai Resource
- ASX/TSX Announcement 14 October 2024 – Kharmagtai
Pre-Feasibility Study
- ASX/TSX Announcement 23 December 2023 – Kharmagtai Mineral
Resource Grows
- ASX/TSX Announcement 08 December 2021 – Kharmagtai Resource
Grows to 1.1 Billion Tonnes
- ASX/TSX Announcement 31 October 2018 – Major Increase in
Kharmagtai Open-Cut Resource
- ASX/TSX Announcements 19 March 2015 – Kharmagtai Maiden JORC
Resource
|
FurtherWork |
- The mineralisation is open at depth
and along strike.
- Current estimates are restricted to
those expected to be reasonable for open pit mining. Limited
drilling below this depth (-300m RL) shows widths and grades
potentially suitable for underground extraction.
- Exploration on going.
|
JORC TABLE 1 - SECTION 3 - ESTIMATION
AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria |
Commentary |
Database integrity |
The database is managed using Micromine Geobank software. Data is
logged directly into an Excel spread sheet logging system with drop
down field lists. Validation checks are written into the importing
program ensures all data is of high quality. Digital assay data is
obtained from the Laboratory, QA/QC checked and imported. Geobank
exported to CSV TEXT and imported directly to the Micromine
software used for the MRE.
- The combined database was provided
for the MRE.
- Validation of the data import
include checks for the following: o Duplicate drill hole or trench
names,
- One or more drill hole collar or
trench coordinates missing in the collar file,
- FROM or TO missing or absent in the
assay file,
- FROM > TO in the assay
file,
- Sample intervals overlap in the
assay file,
- First sample is not equal to 0 m in
the assay file,
- First depth is not equal to 0 m in
the survey file,
- Several downhole survey records
exist for the same depth,
- Azimuth is not between 0 and 360°
in the survey file,
- Dip is not between 0 and 90° in the
survey file,
- Azimuth or dip is missing in survey
file,
- Total depth of the holes is less
than the depth of the last sample,
- Total length of trenches is less
than the total length of all samples.
- Negative sample grades.
- No logical errors were identified
in the analytical data.
|
Site visits |
- Site visits was
conducted by SGC during the period 5th of September 2022 through to
the 16th of September 2022.
|
Geological interpretation |
Geological data has been collected in a consistent manner that has
allowed the development of geological models to support the Mineral
Resource estimate. Copper and gold mineralisation is controlled by
porphyry phases, oxidation zone, and the level of veining, breccia,
country rocks and barren dykes.
- Solid geological
models were generated in Leapfrog for each of the deposits using
the following methodology
- Composite copper and gold grades to
10m intervals
- Define cut-offs using changes in
slope of histograms and cumulative log plots
- Create raw grade shells for these
using implicit numeric modelling (e.g. 800, 1500 and 4000ppm
Cu)
- Define the main dividing
features/structures between populations (clusters of grade)
- Build these structures in detail
using grade, lithology, and structural information
- For each compartment/fault
block
- Group the main lithologies into
“like units”
- Build geological shapes from these
units
- Re-build the grade shells within
each compartment using information from the geological shapes to
help constrain the grade shapes
- Once each compartment was built,
they were assessed in context with each other and refined so that
the models made geological sense.
- Geological
interpretation and wire-framing were based on sampling results of
drill holes and trenches, which were logged at 2 m intervals
(average, tied to lithological boundaries during logging).
- SGC do not
believe that the effect of alternative interpretations will have a
material impact on the overall Mineral Resource Estimates.
- The geological
interpretation is considered robust & alternative
interpretations are not considered to have a material effect on the
Mineral Resource. No alternate interpretations are proposed as
geological confidence in the model is moderate to high. As
additional geological data is collected from additional drilling,
the geological interpretation will be continually updated.
- The factors
affecting continuity both of grade and geology are most likely to
be associated with structural controls and local complexity the
knowledge of which is considered at a moderate level with the
current spacing of information. The broad approach to the
mineralisation modelling is an attempt to model an unbiased
interpretation.
|
Dimensions |
- Stockwork Hill:
The strike length of the mineralised zone is about 1,350 m. Width
is up to 800 m, traced down dip to 1,250 m. Mineralisation outcrops
at the surface.
- White Hill: The
strike length of the mineralised zone is about 1,800 m. Width is up
to 830 m, traced down dip to 1,210 m. Mineralisation outcrops at
the surface.
- Copper Hill: The strike length of
the mineralised zone is about 630 m. Width is up to 150 m with
apparent plunging to SW at about 40 degrees traced down dip to 420
m dipping 70 degrees to SE. Mineralisation is outcropped at the
surface.
- Zaraa: The strike length of the
mineralised zone is about 1,300m. Width is up to 600m with apparent
plunging to SW at about 60 degrees and traced down dip to 1,280m
dipping. Mineralisation outcrops at the basement surface, beneath
35m of Palaeozoic cover.
- Golden Eagle: The strike length of
the mineralised zone is about 400m. Width is up to 400m and traced
down dip to 450 m. Mineralisation outcrops at the basement surface,
beneath 35m of Palaeozoic cover.
- Zephyr: The strike length of the
mineralised zone is about 1,030 m. Width is up to 310 m. Traced
down dip to 350m. SE. Mineralisation outcrops at the basement
surface, beneath 30m of Palaeozoic cover.
|
Estimation and modelling techniques |
- Ordinary Kriging
technique was employed using third party software based on low
coefficient of variation between samples in the mineralised
domain.
- Grade
interpolation and search ellipses were based on variography and
geometry modelling outcomes.
- Modelling was
conducted in three passes with block sizes being 20.0 m E by 20.0 m
N by 10.0 m RL; discretisation was 5x5x2 for all project areas
- In the first
pass data and octant criteria used were, Minimum Data=12, maximum
Data=32, Minimum Octants=4. Search radii was 55 mE by 75 mN by 10
mRL.
- An expansion
factor of 1 was applied so in the second pass saw the same data and
octants criteria with an expanded search to 110mE by 150mN by
20mRL.
- The third pass
saw Minimum Data=6, maximum Data=32, Minimum Octants=2. Search
radii was 110mE by 150mN by 20mRL.
- Top cutting was
applied to domains and elements which displayed a very strongly
skewed nature as summarise in the report reference and in
accordance with the prevailing coefficients of variation.
- Secondary
attributes including the modelling of density which was also
modelled on three passes (as above) which included the same data
and octant criteria as above.
- No dilution was
expressly added to the SGC model however domain was largely driven
by geological and grade domains created by the Client (XM) and
provided to SGC which tends to incorporated the full population
range in the geological domains and a constrained population range
in the grade domains in=line with the grade domain
constraints.
- No assumptions
were made by SGC regarding the recovery of by-products
- Copper, gold,
molybdenum and sulphur were modelled as elements.
- Blocks in the
model were defined based on the likely mining bench heights and the
domaining took into account the SMU proposed at the outset of 4 m E
by 4 m N by 2 m RL.
- The
interpretation or domain model was largely driven by the lithology
/ geology, oxidation state, and structural intervention and
mineralised trends observed over the various project areas. Grade
was used as a secondary domain driver for the definition of
boundarieswhere deemed appropriate by the XAM resource team.
- The model was
validated in a third party software using section and plan
comparisons back to original informing data as well as with the use
of swath plots to assess local grade variability between the model
and informing data.
|
Moisture |
- Tonnages are
estimated on a dry basis.
|
Cut-off parameters |
- Mineralised
domain interpreted on grade ≥ 0.1% CuEq inside the local
interpretation solids by area with reference to local
variability.
- Assumed to be
reasonable cut-off for open pit and underground propositions given
probability plot curve inflexions and grade population
distributions.
- Resources
estimated at a range of cut-offs and reported at a 0.13% CuEq
cut-off grade for open pit and 0.3% CuEq for underground public
reporting.
|
Mining factors or assumptions |
- This item is
beyond the scope of work for SGC as such this item details were not
addressed by SGC but will remain the responsibility of the Client
and Client’s representatives.
- Consideration
was given by SGC to SMU factors, blocks in the model were defined
based on the likely mining bench heights and the domaining took
into account the SMU proposed at the outset of 4 m E by 4 m N by 2
m RL.
|
Metallurgical factors or assumptions |
- No metallurgical
factors or assumptions used to restrict or modify the resource
estimation were employed by SGC proceeding or during the
construction of the model. Metallurgical recovery was not modelled
as an attribute of the model.
- Recent PFS level
Metallurgical test-work conducted during 2023 to 2024 (post Mineral
Resource Estimation) has indicated recovery of Cu% to be 81% and Au
g/t to be 80% overall. see ASX/TSX Announcement 18 September 2024 –
Kharmagtai PFS Metallurgy Results
- To the best of
SGC’s knowledge no further work has been conducted in regard to
metallurgical recovery which would indicated anything to the
contrary of the recovery numbers put forth by the Client.
|
Environmental factors or assumptions |
- No environmental
factors or assumptions were used to restrict or modify the resource
estimation.
|
Bulk density |
- Bulk density was
estimated into block models and post processed on the basis of data
analysis by primary domain and oxidation to assign missing values
with average density values.
- In all 61,295
bulk density measurements were taken from non-specified drilling
samples by XAM site representatives during the period 2014 through
to 2023 drilling program. The remainder of the SG database is
historical in nature.
|
Classification |
- The resource
classification was based on drilling density (and the availability
of data to present to the search neighbourhood, geological
modelling, oxidation and, density and recovery data as well as data
quality considerations
- The
classification criteria is deemed appropriate by SGC.
|
Audits or reviews |
- An internal
independent review was conducted by Ted Coupland, of Coupland
Consulting Services Pty Ltd in May, 2024 and spent three days on
site at Kharmagtai.
- Below are his
main conclusions
- The Author has
concluded that there are no fatal flaws or areas of significant
concern with the XAM December 2023 MRE.
- The Author can
replicate the publicly stated MRE numbers from the data provided in
the data room.
- Check estimates
undertaken by the Author confirm the robustness of the XAM December
2023 MRE.
- All data
management procedures and protocols, including QAQC, are
comprehensively documented and are line with industry best
practices.
- QC performance
over time indicates a high degree of assay data integrity.
- The approach to
domaining is comprehensive and well considered.
- There may be
some opportunity to further simply the estimation domain framework
where there is strong evidence of diffusive grade behaviour across
lithological and structural boundaries.
- The approach to
grade estimation is well considered and robust.
- The approach to
resource classification is reasonable, however, a more holistic and
broader approach taking into consideration the scale of production
timeframes should be considered.
|
Discussion of relative accuracy/confidence |
- Outlines of
resource classifications were reviewed against drill-hole data
density and assays results and each block in the model has a
resource classification which indicates the relative (block to
block) confidence level.
- Mineral resource
estimate technique was deemed appropriate by an internal peer
review by SGC as were the estimates themselves.
- Total mineral
resource estimate based on global estimate.
- No production
data was available at the time the estimates were undertaken.
- The block model
was produced to represent global estimates, however the model
honours the local grade distributions appropriately given the
drilling data provided and the domaining strategy employed.
- The relative
accuracy of the Mineral Resource estimate is reflected in the
reporting of the Mineral Resource as per the guidelines of the 2012
JORC Code.
|
JORC TABLE 1 - SECTION 4 - ESTIMATION
AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria |
Commentary |
Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore
Reserves |
• The JORC Code (2012) Ore Reserve Estimate has been
classified and reported as a conventional bulk open cut mine
feeding a copper concentrator. |
• The MRE Update used as a basis for the conversion to an Ore
Reserve is detailed in this announcement. |
• The Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of the Ore
Reserves. |
Site visits |
• Julien Lawrence, overall study Competent Person, visited
site and labs in 2023 and 2024 |
• Colin McVie, one of the Competent Persons for Mining and
estimated Ore Reserve visited site on 15-16 April 2024 to ensure
the data used for the study matches the field observations. |
• Numerous other members of the study team including Xanadu
employees and technical consultants have visited site during the
completion of the PFS study used as the basis of the support for
the estimated Ore Reserve. |
Study status |
• The study presented is developed to a Pre-Feasibility Study
level. |
• This includes a mine plan that is technically achievable and
economically viable. |
• Mine optimisation and strategic guidance for project
configuration was undertaken by Whittle Consulting. |
• Mine design and mine engineering were undertaken by Mining
Plus. |
• The PFS was undertaken by a team of industry professionals
focused on technical areas including infrastructure, approvals,
environmental, governance, community, local considerations,
operations readiness, geochemistry, hydrogeology, geotechnical
engineering, metallurgical, and PFS discounted cashflow model. |
• The Pre-Feasibility Study shows that the mine plan is technically
achievable and economically viable taking into consideration all
material Modifying Factors |
• To support the Ore Reserve evaluation within the PFS a separate
Whittle 4X open pit optimization evaluation was completed with no
value given to the Inferred Resource within the Mineral Resource
Estimate and mine plan for all deposits. Following this a PFS level
mine design, mine scheduling, mining costing and overall project
economic model evaluation was completed to confirm positive
economic outcomes for the Ore Reserve. |
Cut-off parameters |
• A breakeven cutoff of 0.22% CuEq was adopted based on economic
parameters and recoveries determined as part of the PFS study. The
marginal cut-off was 0.13% CuEq. |
• Breakeven and marginal cut-off grades for the Ore Reserve were
calculated based on copper equivalent grades that account for the
relative value of the recovered copper and gold. This calculation
used a copper price of $4.0/lb and gold price of $1,900/oz.
Recovery and unit cost assumptions matched PFS stage 1 and stage 2
outcomes. |
• The copper equivalent cut off grades vary over time with
stockpiling of lower grade material for processing later to
maximise net present value (NPV). |
Mining factors or assumptions |
• Kharmagtai is a project at PFS stage based on a conventional open
pit, truck and shovel operation feeding a copper concentrator. The
Ore Reserve is supported by this PFS Study, and the Project is
progressing to the Feasibility Stage. To support the Ore Reserve
evaluation within the PFS a separate Whittle 4X open pit
optimisation evaluation was completed with no value given to the
inferred classified material within the Mineral Resource Estimate
for all deposits. Following this a PFS level mine design, mine
scheduling, mining costing and overall project economic model
evaluation was completed to confirm positive economic outcomes for
the Ore Reserve. |
• There are no inferred Resources reported in the Ore Reserves
estimation or valued in the mine schedule and financial evaluation
to support the Ore Reserve Estimation. |
• The copper-gold mineralisation at Kharmagtai Project is
relatively shallow therefore open pit mining is considered
appropriate. Oxide mineralisation at Stockwork Hill, White Hill and
Copper Hill is exposed at surface and sulphide mineralisation
commences 25m to 45m below surface. At Golden Eagle, Zephyr and
Zaraa oxide mineralisation is under 20m to 35m of cover and
sulphide mineralisation commences 40m to 60m below surface. |
• The mining method was based on conventional drill, blast, load
and haul open pit operation, utilising large electric rope shovels
and hydraulic excavators loading electric drive diesel ultra class
haul trucks as a well-proven, flexible and efficient match suited
to the planned scale of operations. The PFS assumes a contract
miner model for mining operations. |
• Geovia Whittle pit optimisation software was used to generate a
series of potentially viable pit shells for the deposits, based on
the 2023 Mineral Resource. A validation check optimization run was
also performed in 2024 with the updated resource model as part of
final project checks and completion which confirmed location of
final pits and staging. |
• The Ore Reserves estimate was created from a detailed
mine-design. Pit optimisations were performed to determine the
inventories to be mined, and to develop pit phasing strategies. The
process generates a set of nested pit shells by varying the
“Revenue Factor” (i.e. metal price assumption). Selected shells are
used for the intermediate phases and ultimate pits. The resulting
phases (or cutbacks) were designed and scheduled using Deswik
software, aiming to closely approximate the optimised shells with a
mine design and PFS level engineering. Deswik determined the
multi-mine mining sequence and rate, elevated cutoff to the plant
varying over time, and stockpiling of lower grade material for
processing later, to maximise NPV using Study assumptions and
constraints. |
• A 10-metre bench height was used consistent with the resource
estimate block height and based on the required production rate and
appropriately sized equipment. |
• No additional estimate has been made for mining dilution and loss
for the PFS assessment due to the gradational nature of the
deposit, other than the inherent dilution within the regularised
resource model (20m x 20m x10m) used for mining planning. Diluting
material is either low grade Indicated Mineral Resource or material
carrying no grade. It was also assumed that due to the style of
mineralisation the geological model and mine schedule incorporates
some level of dilution |
• A minimum mining width appropriate for the proposed equipment and
consideration of the geometry of mining areas was considered (of
nominal 80m), and the intermediate pit shells adjusted as
required. |
• Grade control will be undertaken from sampling of blasthole
cuttings assayed in the on-site laboratory and also planned
targeted grade control drilling during operation. Grade control
plan will consider both ore definition and waste rock
characterization definition. |
• The geotechnical analysis was completed by external consultants
(MineGeoTech), which included evaluation of geological, structural
and alteration environments, material strength, in-situ stress
estimate and rock mass classification from 48 drill holes. The
geotechnical data was analysed for the geological and weathering
wireframes to undertake bench configuration. The resultant design
was tested for overall slope stability analysis using 3D finite
element modelling. Slopes recommended were typically 39 degrees in
transition zones. By deposit in fresh material the slope ranges
were from 36 to 48 degrees in Stockwork Hill, 39 to 48 degrees at
White Hill, 39 to 52 degrees at Copper Hill, and 39 to 59 degrees
at both Golden Eagle and Zephyr. |
• The PFS design (also used for the reserve mine schedule) for the
concentrator was based on a Stage 1 throughput rate of 26mtpa,
which would be increased to 52mtpa in Stage 2, both utilising
conventional comminution and flotation technologies, with Stage 2
based on a full duplication of Stage 1 flowsheet. |
The following preliminary inputs were used to select pit shells and
prepare preliminary production schedules for the six deposits.
Final project operating parameters and economic assessments will
vary from pit selection parameters below: |
• Metal prices Copper price $4.00/lb; Gold price $1900/oz. |
• Mining operating costs were based on the costs built up from
first principles in the 2024 PFS: $1.70-2.00/t mined. (Variation
dependent on material source pit and destination (Plant, Stockpile
or Waste Dump)). |
• Processing cost $6.17/t milled for 26Mtpa operation and $6.04/t
milled for 52Mtpa. |
• General and administration cost $1.2/t milled for 26Mtpa
operation and $0.72/t milled for 52Mtpa operation. |
• Corporate overheads $1.42/t milled for 26Mtpa operation and
$0.81/t milled for 52Mtpa operation. |
• All costs are in USD. |
• 25% Cu concentrate grade in Stage 1 and 22% Cu concentrate grade
in Stage 2 with 8% moisture. |
• Concentrate transport costs of $44.8/wmt. |
• Concentrate treatment of $75/dry tonne. |
• Concentrate refining charge of $0.075/lb Cu and $4.50/ oz
Au. |
• Concentrate payment terms: 96.5% Cu payable, 1% Cu deduction,
97.5% Au payable. |
• A progressive royalty averaging 8.2% is assumed. |
• Cu recovery 81%. |
• Au recovery 80%. |
Additional Information is below: |
• The infrastructure requirements for open pit mining includes
maintenance workshop for mobile equipment, offices, crib rooms and
amenities, explosive storage and explosive contractor
infrastructure, fuel farm, geotechnical monitoring, electrical
infrastructure for electric rope shovels, drills and de-watering
systems. |
• The PFS project has identified a material risk to the project
water supply. The PFS has partially mitigated this risk to its
water supply and this will continue to be a core focus of the BFS
with a forward work plan developed. This plan was developed by a
team of competent persons & experts with contributions from
SRK, a qualified Mongolian hydrogeologists from Litho exploration,
the Kharmagtai government & community relations team, and O2
Mining. The project has a substantial water resource established
nearby, but significant amounts of additional make-up water will be
required to be identified to meet the full Stage 1 demand. Current
predictions Kharmagtai requires approximately 350Ml/s make-up water
supply for Stage 1, which is roughly doubled for Stage 2. |
• Mining Factors and assumptions have been signed off by CPs Colin
McVie and Simon Grimbeek. See Competent Persons Statements in this
announcement. |
Metallurgical factors or assumptions |
• The proposed metallurgical process is a simple comminution
circuit comprising a primary crusher, semi-autogenous mill and
recycle crusher, ball mill, a gravity circuit to recover coarse
free gold and a flotation circuit to produce a copper-gold
concentrate. The gravity gold will be tabled and smelted to produce
bullion. |
• These processing techniques are all well tested and techniques
currently in use in similar operations globally. |
• Pre-Feasibility confidence level variability testwork has been
completed on samples representing the major mineralisation styles
using techniques commonly applied to similar copper/gold porphyry
deposits. |
• Based on the testwork results and experience with similar
mineralisation the copper recovery has been estimated at 81% and
the gold recovery at 80%. Copper concentrate grades assumed 23%
copper for S:Cu ratio below 7.5 and 22% copper for ratios above
7.5. |
• Further PFS sampling and test work to date have not shown any
deleterious element that would have a material detrimental effect
on the selling price or project viability. |
• A market assessment on concentrate assays from the PFS
metallurgical assessment of metallurgical composites in 2024
indicated that any potential penalties will be limited and will not
have a material impact on the marketability of the
concentrate. |
• No bulk or pilot scale testwork has been carried out to
date. |
• Please refer to ASX/TSX Announcement 18 September 2024 –
Kharmagtai PFS Metallurgy Results |
Environmental |
• Mongolian certified EIA consultant Eco Trade LLC undertook a
preliminary baseline environmental survey in 2003 and prepared the
Mongolian Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIA) in 2011
as part of the Mining Licence application. The Mining Licence was
granted in 2013. Xanadu initiated a review of the approved DEIA in
2019 that identified supplementary studies to be undertaken in the
PFS. The approval for this initial DEIA has since lapsed and is no
longer valid |
• Mongolian Certified EIA consultant Sublime LLC undertook
subsequent baseline environmental surveys in 2024 and are preparing
a new DEIA as part of permitting requirements, as a prerequisite
for Mongolian Investment Agreement discussions in 2025. |
• Waste rock characterisation was undertaken by SoilTrade LLC in
2024 as part of the PFS. |
• The PFS identified a site in the northeast corner of the Mining
License for a tailings storage facility (TSF) in a shallow
depression ~6km to the east of the proposed plant site. Design
capacity is 350Mt over 12 years on lease and 760Mt off lease over
the remaining LOM, sufficient for the proposed operation. Testwork
indicated limited acid formation such that dam liner is not
required. |
• For the waste rock from the mining operation, a waste rock
characterisation study was completed as part of the PFS. An
environmental geochemical assessment was conducted based on the
available environmental geochemistry data to allow for an initial
Acid Rock Drainage (ARD) classification of the waste rock material
which was used to inform the design of waste management facilities,
waste handling and management. |
• The exploration assay data set was used for the preliminary
classification of the Kharmagtai waste rock material. This is a
large data set and was deemed to be of a very good quality for this
stage of study. The acid-base properties of the rock samples were
calculated from the sulphur and calcium assays. This dataset
consists of assay data for about ~133,000 samples taken at 2 m
intervals from exploration boreholes. The sulphur content and the
Neutralisation Potential Ratio (NPR) were used for the waste
classification within the mine scheduling model. |
• The PFS mine schedule indicated that approximately 63% of the
waste rock material is classified as high sulfur waste rock or
PAF-MS. Material earmarked for encapsulation (low sulfur, NAF-MS,
pNAF_MS) comprises approximately 37% of waste rock. During the PFS,
checks completed have confirmed, there is overall adequate material
to achieve required encapsulation with recommendations for further
detailed scheduling of waste rock, and dump design recommended in
further studies in the BFS. |
• The waste dumps will be constructed such that Potentially Acid
Forming (PAF) materials will be encapsulated by Non-Acid Forming
(NAF) material. The as-built waste dumps are designed with a slope
of 37 degrees and the final landforms with a shallower slope of 22
degrees. Further analysis of the final slope angle is planned as
part of further work in the BFS. |
• A conceptual-level cost estimate of earthworks associated with
the closure and rehabilitation of planned waste rock dumps,
stockpiles and infrastructure, was completed as part of the PFS.
The estimate is developed as part of an estimate of potential
financial obligations following the immediate cessation of mining
activities should this occur during planned mining activities. This
estimate has been included within the PFS evaluation. |
Infrastructure |
• The mine site is currently connected to a 32kV power line. In the
future the Kharmagtai project will build a new 220kV substation,
powered by 2 lines from the SS switch station. |
• The new line will extend approximately 140×2 km, with two
additional 220kV lines connecting the Inner Mongolia 500kV Bazhong
substation to the SS switch station, each about 175×2 km in length.
This phase includes two main transformers, with plans for a future
expansion to add one more. |
• The project focuses primarily on renewable energy, emphasising
wind and solar power. Wind power will have an installed capacity of
169 MW, providing an annual equivalent full-load hour of 3180
hours. Solar power will have a DC installed capacity of 102 MWp and
an AC capacity of 83 MW, with an average utilization of 1760 hours
over 25 years. |
• The site is located within 15km of the new railway line
connecting Tavan Tolgoi to Sainshand on the Trans-Siberian railway.
The site access road is planned to connect to this road and the
railway. The Trans-Mongolian railway crosses the Mongolia-China
border approximately 420 km east of Kharmagtai, traversing the
country from southeast to northwest through Ulaanbaatar, to the
border with Russia. |
• Road access to site from Ulaanbaatar is via the
Ulaanbaatar-Delgertsogt-Mandalgobi-Tsogt-Ovoo route, a 461 km
asphalt-paved road. From Tsogt-Ovoo to the Tsogttsetsii-Kharmagtai
site, the road is 145 km long and unpaved. The 71 km dirt road from
Tsogttsetsii to Kharmagtai needs upgrading to accommodate increased
project traffic volumes, loads, and road standards. |
• A permanent mining camp, heavy and light vehicle (HV/LV)
workshop, and warehouse will be constructed in two phases. This
phased approach minimises start-up capital expenditure, with
initial construction supporting early operations, followed by
expansion as operations ramp up and the process plant is
expanded. |
• The camp will be located northeast of the existing exploration
camp, adjacent to the main access road. Other key facilities will
include the main office, mine dry change facility, and security
guard houses. Workshops and warehouses will consist of a general
warehouse, chemical warehouse, and processing workshop, positioned
near the processing plant and ore stockpiles to optimise
efficiency. |
• The Study assumes workforce from both Ulaanbaatar and nearby
regional centres. Commuting to site from regional centres will be
via bus. Commutes to regional centres from Ulaanbaatar will be via
plane. |
• Water supply for the project will primarily come from the Zagiin
Usnii Khudag (ZUK) groundwater basin, approximately 20 km northeast
of the site. A 20 km pipeline with a capacity of up to 150 l/s will
be installed. Additionally, a 50 km double pipeline, designed to
transmit up to 700 l/s, will be used for a more distant groundwater
basin and has been costed into the project. The project will
require approximately 350 l/s during the first nine years,
increasing to approximately 700 l/s following expansion. Stage 2
water supply will come from groundwater exploration in reginal
basins and will be augmented and derisked by the option to use the
Mongolian Government Kherlen Toono water pipeline currently in
Feasibility Study stage. This alternative water supply is to
address the water supply risk and identify the make-up water
requirements, with costs considered in the PFS, with further
technical definition planned in the BFS. |
• The TSF strategy includes two phases: an on-lease two-cell
paddock facility with a capacity of 350Mt for the first 12 years of
operation, followed by an off-lease two-cell paddock facility with
a capacity of 760 Mt for the remaining 17 years. |
Costs |
• The capital cost estimates were based on a mixture of quotations
and factoring, PFS stage engineering, as well as benchmarking with
similar operations, targeting accuracy of +/- 25%. |
• DRA prepared the capital cost of the ore processing facility
based on a first principles mechanical equipment list, supported by
quotations for major equipment and factoring balance of plant. |
• Xanadu estimated the EPCM rate of 10% for the ore processing
plant using its JV partner Zijin Engineering as the EPCM
provider. |
• The capital cost of the majority of the non-processing
infrastructure was estimated by Mongolian based O2 Mining. The
methodology involves using detailed parametric costing and first
principles costing. This estimate is based on analysing relevant
costs from previous projects in Mongolia and current market rates
to accurately assess costs for facilities and project components.
It includes all direct and indirect costs, with 30% owner costs
considered under the 3rd party Build, Own, Operate, Transfer
(BOOT) arrangement. In this study, the direct
costs include temporary facilities to support construction as these
will be utilised for shutdown maintenance and other activities
early in the project life. |
• Process operating costs were built up by DRA from first
principles. |
• Mining operating costs were built up by Mining Plus from first
principles based on pricing from Mongolian based equipment &
consumable suppliers and input from established in-country mining
contractors and also cross-checked against a database of comparable
bulk copper mines. |
• No contingency was applied to operating costs. |
• No allowances were made for deleterious elements as they are not
considered material. |
• Realisation charges were based on market analysis undertaken by
Zijin Trading Company and Albert de Sousa independent Competent
Person. |
• The PFS assumes Mongolian royalties will be set as part of the
Investment Stability Agreement. Copper royalties are assumed to
match draft legislation for copper royalties published by the
Government of Mongolia. Sensitivities are run in this study at
higher and lower benchmarks (high = government owned Erdenet Copper
Mine; low = Rio Tinto and government owned Oyu Tolgoi Copper Mine.
Gold bullion is assumed to attract a 5% royalty. |
Revenue factors |
• The Company has not established any contracts or committed any of
its production pursuant to offtake agreements at this time. |
• The copper market outlook is based on research reports by S&P
Global Research (15 May 2024) and IEA Global Critical Minerals
Outlook 2024 (17 May 2024). |
• The sale price is derived from estimated commodity prices based
on the market outlook and from benchmarking comparable copper
project study prices. |
• This study assumes sale in China. Freight, handling and insurance
are included in the cost of shipping. |
• A breakeven cutoff of 0.22% CuEq was adopted based on economic
parameters and recoveries determined as part of the PFS study and
Ore Reserve mine schedule. A marginal cutoff of 0.13% CuEq was
adopted. |
Market assessment |
Market and Pricing Assumptions |
• This market assessment was completed by Xanadu using publicly
available price information and long term forecasts from S&P
Market Intelligence and others. |
• The 12-month price range for copper reached a low of $3.57/lb and
a high of $5.19/lb. A price assumption of $4.10 has been applied to
the calculations for the 2024 PFS, in the lower half of this
12-month price range. |
• The $4.10/lb price assumption is conservative when balanced
against higher forecasts based on exceptionally strong pricing
conditions year to date (YTD), low inventories, momentum shifts in
economic recovery, stimulus packages and expectations of increased
medium-term demand due to carbon reduction energy policies. |
• The 12-month price range for gold reached a low of $1,820/oz and
a high of $2,673/oz. A price assumption of $2,100/oz has been
applied to the calculations for the 2024 PFS, near the low point
for the period. * |
Price Fundamentals |
• Demand for copper is increasing with growing electrification,
smart buildings, electric vehicle (EV) demand. |
• Copper prices are near 10-year highs, currently $4.60/lb |
• Forecast to remain well above $4.50/lb |
• S&P Global Market Intelligence, as of 30 April 2024, compiles
consensus price forecasts which remain above $4.44/lb Cu beyond
2028 |
Supply Factors |
• The copper industry is experiencing declining grade, depleting
resources in ageing major projects, and increasing production costs
as mines go deeper. |
• There is an emerging shortage of high-quality copper concentrate
producers |
• There have been major disruptions including the closure of Cobre
Panama. |
• RFC Ambrian (and others) highlights 75 new mines must come online
in the next 8 years to balance the market, with supply deficit
valued at 10 times the total forecast value of the global lithium
market in 2028 |
• New projects can take 15 years from discovery to production in
many jurisdictions. |
• Jurisdictions previously seen as historically reliable (Chile)
are now experiencing a trend towards resource nationalism |
• Lack of major new, long-life discoveries |
• Lack of exploration success resulting in shortage of quality
assets |
Demand Factors |
• Copper metal demand is in response to rising living standards
globally |
• Environmental policies (carbon reduction) drive electrification
and displace fossil fuel use |
• Urbanisation of developing nations populations including China
and India |
• Electrification of transport including electric vehicles |
• Growth in renewable energy technology |
Economic |
• The inputs to the NPV analysis are tabulated in this Study. |
• The NPV was determined using the Discounted Cash Flow method of
valuation using a discount rate of 8%, noting that one of the JV
partners Zijin Mining Group will most likely have access to much
lower cost capital through its scale and the Chinese banking system
than the other partner Xanadu Mines. |
• The financial model is in real terms based on yearly
increments. |
• No escalation was applied. |
• Mongolian Corporate tax rate of 25% taxable income has been
applied. |
• Mongolian Customs Duty of 5% has been applied to all imported
materials and equipment. |
• Mongolian VAT of 10% has been applied to both capital and
operating costs. |
• Inflation was not included |
• PFS outcomes using full mine inventory (including Inferred
Resource) include a NPV range is between approximately $450M and
$1,220M with base case NPV of $930M. |
• The PFS ranges include a low case based on a 10% reduction in
copper price, a 5% increase in capex and a 5% increase in gold
prices as a natural by-product hedge. The high case is the inverse
scenario. The project is most sensitive to copper price, followed
by gold price and capital expenditure. Further detail on
sensitivity is presented in the Study. |
• The PFS Ore Reserve Schedule (including only Indicated Resource)
was determined through the project financial model to have NPV of
$650M with a range between approximately $350M and US$950M). All
model assumptions were per the PFS discounted cash flow model other
than the mining schedule which was changed to the Ore Reserve
Schedule. Ore Reserve Schedule economic results are below. |
• The PFS Ore Reserve Schedule (including only Indicated Resource)
was determined through the project financial model to have NPV of
$670M with a range between approximately $240M and US$900M). All
model assumptions were per the PFS discounted cash flow model other
than the mining schedule which was changed to the Ore Reserve
Schedule. The Ore Reserve Schedule economic results are below. |
RESERVE Key Findings |
RESERVE |
PFS |
|
|
Project Financial Summary |
Low Scenario |
Base Case |
High Scenario |
Spot Prices |
Base Case |
|
|
|
|
Net Revenue ($M) |
16,555 |
|
17,305 |
|
18,055 |
|
20,145 |
|
27,925 |
|
|
|
EBITDA ($M) |
4,683 |
|
5,298 |
|
5,902 |
|
7,886 |
|
8,455 |
|
|
|
Net Cash Flow ($M) After CITax |
1,340 |
|
2,333 |
|
2,870 |
|
4,275 |
|
4,631 |
|
|
|
NPV (8% discount) After CITax |
236 |
|
666 |
|
901 |
|
1,465 |
|
931 |
|
|
|
IRR after CITax |
12% |
|
20% |
|
24% |
|
31% |
|
21% |
|
|
|
Capital Payback Period (years) After CITax |
6 |
|
4 |
|
4 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
|
|
Net Cash Flow ($M) Before CITax |
2,505 |
|
3,224 |
|
3,931 |
|
5,811 |
|
6,280 |
|
|
|
NPV (8% discount) Before CITax |
739 |
|
1,047 |
|
1,351 |
|
2,114 |
|
1,405 |
|
|
|
IRR Before CITax |
21% |
|
26% |
|
31% |
|
39% |
|
27% |
|
|
|
Capital Payback Period (years) Before CITax |
4 |
|
3 |
|
3 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
RESERVE High-Low-Base Sensitivity Scenarios |
RESERVE |
PFS |
|
|
Project Financial Summary |
Low Scenario |
Base Case |
High Scenario |
Spot Prices |
Base Case |
|
|
|
|
Cu price ($/lb) +/-10% |
3.69 |
|
4.1 |
|
4.51 |
|
4.52 |
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
Au price ($/oz) +/-5% |
2,205 |
|
2,100 |
|
1,995 |
|
2,658 |
|
2,100 |
|
|
|
Ag price ($/oz) +/-10% |
26 |
|
25 |
|
24 |
|
32 |
|
25 |
|
|
|
Establishment Capex ($M) +/-5% |
929 |
|
885 |
|
840 |
|
885 |
|
885 |
|
|
|
LOM Capex ($M) +/-5% |
1,973 |
|
1,879 |
|
1,785 |
|
1,879 |
|
1,970 |
|
|
|
|
Social |
• The South Gobi Desert is the least populated region in Mongolia,
the least populated country in the world. |
• Xanadu has strong relationships with remote communities closest
to Kharmagtai, providing support to education, health and economic
development. This will continue into future stages of project
development. |
• The potential social impacts of the Project, both positive and
negative, have been subject to an initial assessment to assist in
scoping of social baseline studies and identifying affected
communities for stakeholder engagement. These studies were
commenced in 2024 to support both national environmental and land
use approvals and the ESIA requirements for project financing. |
• Xanadu’s Annual Sustainability Report is available on its
website |
• An initial Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) was
completed for the grant of mining license in 2012. The 2012 DEIA
approval has expired and is no longer valid. The new DEIA is being
prepared for submission to the Mongolian authorities in 2024. |
• Baseline environmental studies will be completed in 2025 to
support a Mongolian Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIA)
which is required for the Mongolian permitting process. |
• Additional baseline environmental studies are underway to support
an international standard ESIA, with requirements as defined by
Ramboll to meet project lender requirements. The baseline ESIA
social studies will be completed in 2025. |
Other |
• No natural occurring risks have been identified. Mongolia has
harsh winters with temperatures down to -40C, as well as dust
storms in the spring. The mine, facilities and business processes
have been designed with personnel and operational safety and
resilience in mind. |
• Xanadu has a marketing agency agreement with Tailai, a subsidiary
of Noble Resource International Pte Ltd, for 30% of production for
20 years. For clarity this is not offtake, and to secure their
marketing rights further discussions will be needed against
competitive offers. No other marketing agreements are currently in
place. |
• Xanadu holds a Mining License at Kharmagtai, granted in 2012 for
30 years, and extendable twice for an additional 20 years each |
• As part of this Mining License, a registered Water Resource was
established within 15km of the project |
• Applications for land access and water usage are not expected to
affect the timelines outlined in this Study. The critical path for
project timeline will be success of water exploration and timing of
commercial negotiations. |
• The next stage of approvals is to submit Mongolian DEIA and
Feasibility Study (which will be based off this PFS). Once those
are approved, discussions will commence for investment stability
agreement. Following that, a well structured and understood
permitting process will be followed. |
Classification |
• Kharmagtai has no Measured Mineral Resources, only Indicated and
Inferred. |
• As a result, all Ore Reserves have all been classified as
Probable Ore Reserves, with no Proven Ore Reserves. |
• Probable Ore Reserve was declared based on the Indicated Mineral
Resources contained within the optimised pit design and the latest
financial metrics from the PFS work and the reserve schedule
economic model evaluation. |
• To support the Ore Reserve evaluation within the PFS a separate
Whittle 4X open pit optimization evaluation was completed with no
value given to the Inferred Resource within the Mineral Resource
Estimate and mine plan for all deposits. Following this a PFS level
mine design, mine scheduling, mining costing and overall project
economic model evaluation was completed to confirm positive
economic outcomes for the Ore Reserve. |
• The estimated Ore Reserve provided appropriately reflects the
Competent Person’s view of the deposit based on the modifying
factors derived from the PFS and the updated Mineral Resource
received and referred to in this announcement. |
Audits or reviews |
• The Ore Reserve was developed by Mining Plus and subject to its
internal review and audit process. |
• Enthalpy conducted an Independent Review of all sections of this
PFS other than Mineral Resource and Geotechnical. |
• Mineral Resources Estimate was further reviewed by Ted Coupland
consulting. |
• Geotechnical assumptions were reviewed by PSM during development
of mine parameters. |
• O2 Mining, a Mongolia based consultancy, provided review of all
study work packages. |
• Graham Brock undertook review of the DRA process engineering and
design work. |
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence |
• The Ore Reserve applied procedures include numerous levels of
review, benchmarking comparison and risk assessment, to determine
accuracy within the stated confidence limits. |
• The level of accuracy of the PFS is +/- 25%. |
|
Considerations in favour of a high confidence in the Ore Reserves
include: |
• Detailed analysis and consideration of local Mongolian costs at a
PFS level to best reflect the costs during the operations |
• The process flowsheet is relatively simple producing a
saleable concentrate and gold doré. |
• The study team comprises an experienced team of experts with
various background and expertise, with a mix of Mongolian and
international experience in similar projects, to ensure
identification of the most appropriate approach for project
development as determined in the PFS. |
|
Considerations in favour of a lower confidence in the Ore Reserves
include: |
• Commodity prices and exchange rate assumptions are subject
to market forces and present an area of uncertainty. |
• There is a degree of uncertainty associated with geological
estimates. The Reserve classifications reflect the levels of
geological confidence in the estimates. |
• There are risks associated with impacts of natural phenomena
including geotechnical assumptions, hydrological assumptions, and
the modifying factors, commensurate of the PFS level detail of the
study. |
• The Ore Reserve is based on a global estimate. Modifying
factors have been applied on a local scale. |
• The PFS project has identified a material risk to the
project water supply. The PFS has partially mitigated this risk to
its water supply, and this will continue to be a core focus of the
BFS with a forward work plan developed. This plan was developed by
a team of competent persons & experts with contributions from
SRK, a qualified Mongolian hydrogeologists from Litho exploration,
the Kharmagtai government & community relations team, and O2
Mining. The project has a substantial water resource established
nearby, but significant amounts of additional make-up water will be
required to be identified to meet the full Stage 1 demand. Current
predictions Kharmagtai requires approximately 350Ml/s make-up water
supply for Stage 1, which is roughly doubled for Stage 2.
Additional pumps and water pipelines are included in the PFS
costing assuming water will be required to be pumped from other
sources to site for the make-up water. |
|
• A BFS is planned to commence in Q1 2025. |
____________________________1 ASX/TSX Announcement 14 October
2024 – Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study2 ASX/TSX Announcement 28
August 2024 – Update Increase in Kharmagtai Resource3 ASX/TSX
Announcement 14 October 2024 – Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study4
ASX/TSX Announcement 6 April 2022 – Kharmagtai Copper-Gold Project
Scoping Study5 ASX/TSX Announcement 14 October 2024 – Kharmagtai
Pre-Feasibility Study6 ASX/TSX Announcement 14 October 2024 –
Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study7 ASX/TSX Announcement 14 October
2024 – Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study8 ASX/TSX Announcement 14
October 2024 – Kharmagtai Pre-Feasibility Study
Photos accompanying this announcement are available at
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/4b23a3a1-94bc-4339-863d-b6c187775073https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/30f54f0e-40b4-4302-816b-f9e2db1eb1f4https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/e4329406-6664-4ea0-9cc8-20e2d71ad215https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/38e87af1-aa95-4e74-9b06-741c06e8df7dhttps://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/f793aee6-790e-4de9-a0ae-1306919e60cahttps://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/1470c9bb-1fd2-4a44-a987-89689bf40be1https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/dad2a622-a708-4545-ae18-472f3267062b
Xanadu Mines (TSX:XAM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Nov 2024 to Dec 2024
Xanadu Mines (TSX:XAM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Dec 2023 to Dec 2024