Wrap Text
Bengwenyama Mineral Resource Update:
Total (UG2 & MR) Mineral Resource now 40.25Moz
Merensky Reef Indicated Resource
Southern Palladium Limited
Incorporated in the Commonwealth of Australia
Australian Company Number 646 391 899
ASX share code: SPD
JSE share code: SDL
ISIN AU0000220808
("Southern Palladium" or "the Company")
Bengwenyama Mineral Resource Update:
Total (UG2 & MR) Mineral Resource now 40.25Moz
Merensky Reef Indicated Resource +17% to 2.23Moz (7E)
Highlights:
• The Merensky Reef Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) has now been completed. This has resulted in
a total combined UG2 and Merensky Reef Mineral Resource ounces (Measured, Indicated and
Inferred) for the Bengwenyama Project of 40.25 Moz.
• Merensky Reef Indicated Mineral Resource has increased by 17% to 2.23 Moz (7E).
• The combined Merensky Reef MRE (Measured, Indicated and Inferred) now totals 15.44 Moz
• 54% increase in Merensky Reef Inferred Mineral Resources since the last MRE.
• All MR exploration target estimates have now been converted to Inferred Mineral Resources.
• UG2 footwall mineralisation has now been quantified (~0.71 g/t (7E) over 40cm) and included in the
UG2 resource mining cut Mineral Resource for the PFS .
• The PFS is now being finalised for release by the end of October.
Southern Palladium (ASX:SPD and JSE:SDL), 'Southern Palladium' or 'the Company') is pleased to release
the latest update which highlights a combined Mineral Resource update for the 70%-owned
Bengwenyama Platinum-Group Metal (PGM) Project, including the Merensky Reef on the Eerstegeluk and
Nooitverwacht exploration areas. This follows the successful completion of a Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS)
drilling campaign and the earlier UG2 Resource upgrade.
Managing Director Johan Odendaal, said: "We are delighted to be able to report a total contained
resource of over 40 million ounces of PGE's in the latest resource upgrade, which incorporates additional
resource ounces for the Merensky Reef and follows on from the UG2 resource upgrade in August. The
combined Merensky Reef resource estimate now totals 15.44Moz, which resulted in a 14% increase in the
total PGE resource to 40.25Moz. These results further underline the status of SPD's 70%-owned
Bengwenyama project as a significant resource on the Eastern Limb of the Bushveld.
Drilling and geotechnical studies have confirmed a stable hanging wall for the UG2 Reef, while the
mineralised footwall will enable future mining operations to extract both the main chromitite seam and a
portion of the footwall, optimizing the PGE content in the ore. This is an additional 700 koz (7E) in the UG2
Reef's footwall not included in the resource estimation.
Directors are also pleased to announce that the Bengwenyama Pre-Feasibility Study is drawing to a close,
with a final report due out at the end of October."
Combined Mineral Resource Update
Figure 1: Strategic Positioning of the Bengwenyama Project Amidst Major Platinum Mining Operations
The Merensky Reef (MR) MRE has also been updated with the resource now totalling 15.44Moz. As a
number of historic holes did not assay for the minor PGE's a 7E resource can't yet be stated for a portion
of the Inferred Mineral Resource.
As shown in the table below, the total combined Mineral Resource (M&I and Inferred) is now 40.25Moz.
The Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource for the UG2 and MR on a 7E basis is now 10.39Moz ounces
with a combined (7E & 4E) Inferred Mineral Resource of 29.86 Moz. (17.43Moz (7E) for the UG2 and MR
+ 12.43Moz (4E) for the UG2 and MR). The total combined Mineral Resource for the UG2 and MR as at
23 October 2024 is summarised in Table 1.
Table 1: Combined UG2 and MR Mineral Resource as at 23 October 2024
Resource Tonnes Thickness Pt Pd Rh Au Ir Os Ru 4E 7E Cu Ni Moz Moz Total
Reef
Category (4E) (7E) Moz1
Mt (m) (g/t) (%)
Merensky Indicated 25.11 2.02 1.62 0.64 0.10 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.21 2.49 2.76 0.04 0.12 2.01 2.23 2.23
Merensky Inferred (7E) 62.54 1.81 2.09 0.86 0.14 0.18 0.04 0.04 0.26 3.22 3.55 0.05 0.14 6.47 7.13 7.13
Merensky Total (7E) 87.66 1.87 1.96 0.80 0.13 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.24 3.01 3.32 0.04 0.13 8.48 9.36 9.36
Merensky Inferred (4E) 59.44 1.96 2.01 0.93 0.10 0.17 3.18 6.08 6.08
Merensky Total (4E) 147.10 1.90 1.98 0.85 0.11 0.17 3.08 14.56 15.44
UG2 Measured 7.17 0.77 3.69 3.75 0.76 0.12 0.25 0.17 1.24 8.34 10.00 0.03 0.16 1.92 2.30 2.3
UG2 Indicated 18.52 0.72 3.68 3.63 0.76 0.11 0.26 0.17 1.23 8.19 9.85 0.04 0.16 4.88 5.86 5.86
UG2 Inferred (7E) 33.01 0.69 3.67 3.50 0.76 0.11 0.26 0.17 1.23 8.04 9.70 0.04 0.17 8.54 10.30 10.3
UG2 Total (7E) 58.70 0.71 3.67 3.57 0.76 0.11 0.26 0.17 1.23 8.12 9.78 0.04 0.17 15.33 18.46 18.46
UG2 Inferred (4E) 36.12 1.30 3.00 2.01 0.44 0.07 5.47 6.35 6.35
UG2 Total (4E) 94.82 0.93 3.42 2.98 0.64 0.10 7.11 21.68 24.81
Combined Total (7E) 146.35 1.40 2.64 1.91 0.38 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.64 5.06 5.91 0.04 0.14 23.81 27.82
Combined Total (4E) 241.92 1.52 2.54 1.68 0.32 0.14 4.66 36.24
Combined Total (7E&4E)1 40.25
Note:
1. Several historic drill holes in the Nooitverwacht Extension area did not assay for the minor PGEs, so a 7E resource cannot yet be stated
for part of the inferred Mineral Resource. However, it does contribute to the total resource ounces.
2. All elements have been estimated individually and their combined grade will vary slightly from the estimated composite 4E and 7E
modelled grades.
An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an Indicated Mineral
Resource and cannot be converted to an Ore Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of the
Inferred Mineral Resource could be upgraded to an Indicated Mineral Resource with continued exploration.
SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd in South Africa have also reviewed the Mineral Resource estimation and have not
found any fatal flaws.
Details of the MR Mineral Resource estimation can be found in Appendix 1.
No Measured Resource is declared for the MR at this stage, and additional drilling will be required for that
at a later stage. The latest MR upgrade has estimated an Indicated Mineral Resource of 2.23 Moz at a
6PGE + Au grade (7E) of 2.76 g/t respectively over 202 cm. This is a 17% increase in the M&I from the
previous MR release.
In addition to the increase in the Indicated Resource, there has been a 54% increase in the MR Inferred
Mineral Resource from 8.60 Moz to a combined inferred MR Mineral Resource of 13.21 Moz (7.13 Moz +
6.08 Moz). As per the UG2 Inferred Mineral Resource increase (refer ASX Announcement 27 August 2024),
this is also largely due to the conversion of the exploration target in the western area of the Project
(Nooitverwacht) to an Inferred Mineral Resource arising from the additional historical data sourced.
Table 2 below shows the consolidated MR Mineral Resource as at 23 October 2024. Geological losses have
been applied and the MR resource is declared at a pay limit of 1.6 g/t using a 4E basket price of
US$1,969/oz. Importantly, no Mineral Resource falls below the pay limit.
Table 2: Merensky Reef Mineral Resource as at 23 October 2024
Reef Pt Pd Rh Au Ir Os Ru 4E 7E Cu Ni (4E) (7E) Total1
Tonnes
Resource Classification width
(Mt) (g/t) (%) Moz
(cm)
Measured 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Indicated 25.11 2.02 1.62 0.64 0.10 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.21 2.49 2.76 0.04 0.12 2.01 2.23 2.23
Measured & Indicated 25.11 2.02 1.62 0.64 0.10 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.21 2.49 2.76 0.04 0.12 2.01 2.23 2.23
Inferred Eerste. & Nooit. Nth (7E) 62.54 1.81 2.09 0.86 0.14 0.18 0.04 0.04 0.26 3.22 3.55 0.05 0.14 6.47 7.13 7.13
Inferred Nooitverwacht Ext. (4E) 59.44 1.96 2.01 0.93 0.10 0.17 3.18 6.08 6.08
Inferred Combined (4E) 121.98 1.88 2.05 0.89 0.12 0.17 3.20 12.55
Combined Total (7E&4E)1 15.44
Note:
1. Several historic drill holes in the Nooitverwacht Extension area did not assay for the minor PGEs, so a 7E resource cannot yet be stated
for part of the inferred Mineral Resource. However, it does contribute to the total resource ounces.
2. All elements have been estimated individually and their combined grade will vary slightly from the estimated composite 4E and 7E
modelled grades.
Footwall Mineralisation
Geologists have noted the presence of MR footwall mineralisation which is not yet included as more
drilling is needed to confirm its distribution. In contrast, the UG2 Reef footwall mineralisation has been
confirmed as consistent and has now been estimated and included in a separate resource mining cut
estimate, which includes 40cm of mineralised UG2 footwall pyroxenite. This increases both the width of
mineralisation and the metal content of the MRE.
UG2 Resource Mining Cut Mineral Resource
The low grade UG2 footwall mineralisation has now been modelled and has been included with the UG2
Resource Mining Cut estimation. The optimal mining width is being determined as part of current PFS and
will incorporate dilution by low or nil grade hanging wall and footwall dilution, as is seen in most
operations within the Bushveld Complex. The footwall mineralisation has not been modelled for the
Nooitverwacht extension which has a higher reef width of ~1.48 m.
The UG2 footwall mineralisation model has been estimated over 40cm (Figure 2) as a separate model and
has been combined with the UG2 Reef MRE which has resulted in a Resource Mining Cut model (Figure 3
& Figure 4) to be used in the PFS. From Figure 4 it is evident that the resource UG2 mining cut width does
exceed 1m (the expected actual mining cut) so in these wider portions the footwall mineralisation will not
be included in the actual mining cut. The footwall model will allow for the low-grade footwall pyroxenite
PGE mineralisation to be included in the mining schedule and contribute to the financial model instead of
diluting the mining cut at zero grade.
Figure 2: UG2 Footwall 4E Mineralisation Model (g/t)
Figure 3: Resource Mining Cut Estimation Model (4E g/t)
Figure 4: Resource Mining Cut Reef Width Model
The footwall mineralisation, which increases to the west, adds approximately 700 Koz @ 0.71 g/t (7E) to
the UG2 reef content over the entire area except for the Nooitverwacht extension which is a wider reef
facies and the footwall mineralisation is not understood as yet. The diluted mining cut will be in the region
of 5.7 g/t (4E) and 6.9 g/t (7E).
The Mineral Resource diluted for a mining cut for the UG2, excluding the Nooitverwacht extension section,
is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: UG2 Resource Mining Cut Mineral Resource
Mining
Tonnes Pt Pd Rh Au Ir Os Ru 4E 7E Cu Ni Cr2O3 (4E) (7E)
Resource Classification Cut
(Mt) (m) (g/t) (%) Moz
Measured 10.24 1.16 2.64 2.73 0.55 0.09 0.18 0.12 0.89 6.01 7.20 0.03 0.14 21.52 1.98 2.37
Indicated 26.93 1.11 2.60 2.56 0.54 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.87 5.78 6.96 0.03 0.14 21.19 5.00 6.02
Measured & Indicated 37.17 1.12 2.61 2.60 0.55 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.88 5.84 7.03 0.03 0.14 21.28 6.98 8.40
Inferred Eerste. & Nooit, Nth (7E) 48.63 1.08 2.58 2.46 0.54 0.07 0.18 0.12 0.87 5.66 6.83 0.03 0.14 20.69 8.84 10.67
Inferred Nooitverwacht Ext. (4E) 39.97 1.36 2.74 1.84 0.40 0.07 5.01 6.43
Inferred Combined (4E) 88.60 1.21 2.65 2.18 0.48 0.07 5.36 15.28
Upcoming PFS
The PFS remains on track for completion and lodgement by the end of October.
This announcement has been approved for release by the Board of Southern Palladium Limited.
About Southern Palladium:
Southern Palladium Limited (ASX: SPD, JSE: SDL) is a dual-listed platinum group metals (PGM) company
focused on advancing the Bengwenyama PGM project, located in South Africa. This project, situated on
the Eastern Limb of the Bushveld Complex, boasts a rich abundance of platinum, palladium, rhodium and
other minor metals which are key components in the PGM market. The Bushveld Complex is renowned
for hosting over 70% of the world's known PGM resources, making Bengwenyama strategically positioned
for significant development.
With a 70% ownership stake in the project, the company's primary objective is to advance the Pre-
Feasibility Study. Additionally, key milestones include the completion of a geophysical survey, completed
in 2022; the submission of a Mining Right application in September 2023 and Environmental Impact
Assessment ("EIA") report submitted on July 10, 2024.
A diamond drilling program was initiated in August 2022, alongside various concurrent technical studies,
which are being incorporated into the PFS phase in 2024. Bengwenyama represents a compelling
opportunity in the global PGM market.
Guided by a seasoned management team with extensive on-ground experience, including notable figures
from South Africa's mining industry, Southern Palladium Limited is poised to unlock the full potential of
the Bengwenyama project and deliver substantial value to its stakeholders.
Competent Person Statement
The information in this report that relates to Exploration Targets, Exploration Results and Mineral
Resources is based on information compiled by Mr Uwe Engelmann (BSc (Zoo. & Bot.), BSc Hons (Geol.),
Pr.Sci.Nat. No. 400058/08, FGSSA). Mr Engelmann is a director of Minxcon (Pty) Ltd and a member of the
South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions. Minxcon provides geological consulting services
to Southern Palladium Limited. Mr. Engelmann has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as
a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration
Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr. Engelmann consents to the inclusion in the report of
the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Mr Engelmann has a
beneficial interest in Southern Palladium through a shareholding in Nicolas Daniel Resources Proprietary
Limited.
For further information, please contact:
Johan Odendaal
Managing Director
Southern Palladium
Phone: +27 82 557 6088
Email: johan.odendaal@southernpalladium.com
23 October 2024
JSE Sponsor
Merchantec Capital
Media & investor relations inquiries: Sam Jacobs, Six Degrees Investor Relations: +61 423 755 909
Follow @SouthernPalladium on Twitter
Follow Southern Palladium on LinkedIn
Appendix 1. Merensky Reef Estimation
Merensky Reef Estimation
An additional 10 drillholes from the recent SPD drilling campaign (which are in table 1) were used in the
MR modelling. In addition to this, the additional historical Anglovaal drillholes (refer ASX Announcement
27 August 2024) were used in the Nooitverwacht extension simple krige model for the Inferred Mineral
Resource over the Nooitverwacht extension. The Anglovaal MR drillhole data is detailed in Table 4.
Table 4: Historical Anglovaal (4E) Drillhole Data Details
Thickness Pt Pd Rh Au 4E
BHID X Y Z REEF_FROM REEF_TO
(m) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t)
BK1D0 -93871.00 -2746009.00 -481.07 1346.63 1349.50 2.87 1.59 0.79 0.10 0.06 2.54
BK1D2 -93871.00 -2746009.00 -481.18 1346.78 1349.58 2.80 1.83 0.82 0.11 0.13 4.77
BK1D3 -93871.00 -2746009.00 -481.13 1346.74 1349.52 2.78 1.56 0.79 0.09 0.14 2.57
BK1D4 -93871.00 -2746009.00 -481.13 1346.75 1349.51 2.76 1.29 0.66 0.06 0.18 2.20
BK2D0 -92838.00 -2744076.00 -414.56 1354.41 1356.71 2.30 0.88 0.29 0.04 0.06 1.28
BK3D0 -93008.00 -2742404.00 -274.05 1762.78 1763.31 0.53 1.97 1.02 0.03 0.29 3.32
BK3D2 -93008.00 -2742404.00 -273.72 1762.17 1763.26 1.09 2.25 1.47 0.00 0.08 3.80
BK3D3 -93008.00 -2742404.00 -274.05 1762.55 1763.54 0.99 4.30 1.29 0.03 0.34 5.96
BK4D0 -94248.00 -2744589.00 -426.20 1783.80 1786.60 2.80 2.14 1.48 0.20 0.16 3.98
BK4D2 -94248.00 -2744589.00 -426.15 1783.89 1786.40 2.51 1.99 0.86 0.03 0.19 3.07
BK4D3 -94248.00 -2744589.00 -426.40 1784.18 1786.62 2.44 2.64 1.79 0.01 0.36 4.80
BK4D4 -94248.00 -2744589.00 -425.34 1782.84 1785.84 3.00 3.57 1.86 0.17 0.31 5.91
BK5D2 -92713.00 -2743947.00 -401.97 1366.03 1367.91 1.88 2.22 1.06 0.00 0.21 3.49
BK6D10 -93537.00 -2742830.00 -283.10 1685.38 1686.82 1.44 0.79 0.39 0.00 0.04 1.22
BK6D7 -93537.00 -2742830.00 -283.09 1685.26 1686.91 1.65 0.95 0.35 0.00 0.04 1.34
BK6D8 -93537.00 -2742830.00 -283.25 1685.53 1686.96 1.43 1.24 0.60 0.04 0.07 1.95
MM1D0 -94698.00 -2748412.00 -874.02 1715.51 1718.53 3.02 1.76 1.01 0.03 0.18 2.98
MM1D1 -94698.00 -2748412.00 -873.78 1715.10 1718.45 3.35 2.55 2.37 0.13 0.10 5.15
MM1D2 -94698.00 -2748412.00 -873.95 1715.55 1718.35 2.80 2.16 1.10 0.06 0.19 3.51
MM1D3 -94698.00 -2748412.00 -873.74 1715.20 1718.28 3.08 1.25 1.01 0.06 0.19 2.51
MM1D4 -94698.00 -2748412.00 -873.87 1715.31 1718.42 3.11 2.04 0.91 0.12 0.26 3.33
SPA2D3 -95607.00 -2738195.00 -70.65 1742.61 1744.69 2.08 2.27 1.17 0.09 0.21 3.78
SPA2D4 -95607.00 -2738195.00 -70.59 1742.69 1744.48 1.79 0.74 0.24 0.00 0.02 1.02
SRD1D0 -97726.00 -2737258.00 -196.32 1581.39 1583.24 1.85 3.49 2.41 0.21 0.46 6.57
SRD1D11 -97726.00 -2737258.00 -196.62 1581.85 1583.39 1.54 1.68 0.73 0.07 0.06 2.67
SRD1D12 -97726.00 -2737258.00 -196.27 1581.55 1582.99 1.44 3.25 1.54 0.16 0.45 5.40
SRD1D9 -97726.00 -2737258.00 -196.49 1581.78 1583.19 1.41 2.70 1.15 0.12 0.09 4.06
The consolidated MR database comprises a total of 38 drillholes comprising 18 drillholes from the SPD
campaign, 11 drillholes from the Nkwe drilling database and 9 drillholes from the Anglovaal drilling
database. Only 21 drillholes from the SPD campaign present full representative Merensky Reef
intersections with the remaining 17 having been affected by faulting, potholing, dykes or weathering. In
field mapping and incorporation of additional datasets provided improvement in constraint of the MR
sub-crop position. Figure 5 shows the location of the drillholes that intersected the MR.
Figure 5: Spatial Distribution of drillholes with MR Intersections
Merensky Reef (MR) Mineral Resource Estimation
The MR geological and estimation models have been updated to include drilling and assaying data as at
end of April 2024. The estimation model utilised 11 historical Nkwe drillholes and 18 SPD drillholes. The
Nooitverwacht extension was estimated using simple kriging and used 9 drillholes.
Figure 6 shows the 3PGE+Au g/t resultant model with the drillhole positions used in the estimation. The
statistical analysis showed that capping of one anomalous drillhole (E121D1) was required for the
estimation. The kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA) recommended a block size of 350m with a minimum
and maximum number of samples of 5 and 15 respectively for the first search volume. Three search
volumes with decreasing samples were used for the estimation.
All elements (Pt, Pd, Rh, Au, Ir, Os, Ru, Cu, Ni, Cr and Fe) were estimated individually as well as a combined
4E (Pt, Pd, Rh & Au) and 7E (Pt, Pd, Rh, Ir, Os, Ru & Au). The average 4E prill splits for Pt:Pd:Rh:Au of 64.3%
: 26.2% : 4.2% : 5.3% were determined using these estimates.
The SPD campaign has provided 213 records, determined empirically from Merensky reef intersections
using the Archimedes methodology. As such, unlike in previous estimates where a single density of 3.28
t/m3 was used, this update utilises density modelled through Ordinary Kriging for all tonnage estimation.
Figure 6: Modelled 3PGE+Au g/t Plot of the MR Reef
Mineral Resource Categories
The Mineral Resource categories for the MR (Figure 7) were determined based on the data quality, QAQC,
geological confidence of the various fault blocks, drillhole spacing, slope of regression (SOR) and continuity
of the MR horizon. The extrapolated inferred portion of the Inferred Mineral Resource is 46% which makes
up a large portion of the inferred in the Nooitverwacht extension. Figure 7 also shows the weathered area
(oxide) down to 40m vertical depth, which has been excluded from the Mineral Resources.
Figure 7: MR Mineral Resource Categories
Geological Losses
Geological losses have been applied to the resource to account for the effects of faults, IRUPs and potholes
on the MR Reef. The dykes have been mapped and removed from the model itself. These are geological
features common throughout the reefs of the Bushveld Intrusive Complex. The losses are estimated by
considering the successful drillhole intersections, major identified faults and dykes from the geophysics
and assumed additional minor fault losses. The project area was divided into larger blocks representing
various degrees of geological losses that range from 25% and 36% for the various fault blocks within the
indicated and inferred Mineral Resource and 50% for the extrapolated inferred resource portion and
dome structure area (Figure 8).
Figure 8: MR Reef Geological Losses (%)
Appendix 2. JORC Checklist – Table 1 Assessment and Reporting Criteria
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut 20 cm samples are taken within the reef horizon unless there is a lithological
channels, random chips, or specific reason to deviate from this. A single sample is also taken in the hanging
specialised industry standard wall and footwall to test for mineralisation in the direct waste rock. The
measurement tools appropriate to the samples are split with a core saw and one half is submitted to the laboratory
minerals under investigation, such as and the other half keep in the core tray.
down hole gamma sondes, or handheld
XRF instruments, etc.). These examples
should not be taken as limiting the broad
meaning of sampling.
Include reference to measures taken to The core is orientated in such a way that the two halves are equal.
ensure sample representivity and the
appropriate calibration of any
measurement tools or systems used.
Aspects of the determination of The sampling methodology is standard and as per industry practice in the
Sampling techniques mineralisation that are Material to the Bushveld Complex (BC). The samples are 20 cm in length and are split into
Public Report. In cases where 'industry two equal halves with one half being submitted for analysis. The core size
standard' work has been done this starts as HQ (10 m to 50 m) but is NQ by the time the reef is intersected.
would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse
circulation drilling was used to obtain 1
m samples from which 3 kg was
pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for
fire assay'). In other cases more
explanation may be required, such as
where there is coarse gold that has
inherent sampling problems. Unusual
commodities or mineralisation types
(e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant
disclosure of detailed information.
Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, The drillholes start with HQ (for approximately 10-50 m) in the weathered
open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, zone but are then drilled NQ once in the fresher material. The drill rigs that
auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details were utilised have been the CS 1500, Delta 520 and a smaller Longyear
Drilling techniques (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard 44.
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-
sampling bit or other type, whether core The drill contractor is Geomech Africa.
is oriented and if so, by what method,
etc.).
Initially the core was scanned in with the software ScanIT which scans the
Method of recording and assessing core core with high resolution photos and the geologists reconcile the depths
and chip sample recoveries and results and core losses per 3 m run. The Core recoveries and RQD are then
calculated for the drillhole. ScanIT has however been discontinued and the
assessed. core is now photographed and the core recovery and RQD is calculated
manually by the geological assistants.
The geologist informs the drilling supervisor at what depth the reef is
Measures taken to maximise sample expected so that they can take extra precautions around the anticipated
recovery and ensure representative reef depth.
nature of the samples.
Drill sample recovery The core recoveries are measured per 3 m run and if there is excessive
core loss in the reef horizon it is marked as a non-representative sample
and will not be used in the resource estimation process.
Whether a relationship exists between The core recoveries for the intersections submitted to the laboratory are all
sample recovery and grade and whether above 98%. If the core loss is excessive the sample is not submitted to the
sample bias may have occurred due to laboratory for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. Therefore, there will
preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse not be any sample bias due to poor recoveries.
material.
Whether core and chip samples have The core was initially scanned into ScanIT software which produced high
been geologically and geotechnically resolution images. This has however been discontinued. The logging is
logged to a level of detail to support conducted on paper log sheets or tablets at the core yard with dropdown
appropriate Minera Resource menus. Legends have been set up in excel that cover the necessary
estimation mining studies and detailed required for Mineral Resource estimation. Alpha angles and
metallurgical studies. structure detail is also observed and logged. The beta angle is not
measured as the core is not orientated but the downhole televiewer survey
Logging supplies structural orientation information which is incorporated into the
logs.
Whether logging is qualitative or
quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, Core logging is qualitative and utilises excel spreadsheets on tablets.
channel, etc.) photography.
The total length and percentage of the The total drillhole is geologically logged and photographed and the
relevant intersections logged. televiewer survey is conducted from 100 m above the reef horizon for
additional structural information.
If core, whether cut or sawn and The core is cut in two equal halves for sampling and storage purposes.
Sub-sampling whether quarter, half or all core taken.
techniques and
sample preparation If non-core, whether riffled, tube
sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether This project only makes use of core drilling.
sampled wet or dry.
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
The sample preparation code at ALS is PREP-31H which has the following
For all sample types, the nature, quality procedure: -
and appropriateness of the sample
preparation technique. Login of samples into the system, weighing, fine crushing of entire sample
to 70% - 2 mm, split off 500 g and pulverize split to better than 85% passing
75 microns.
The QAQC sequence is as follows: -
Quality control procedures adopted for
all sub-sampling stages to maximise If the batch is less than 20 samples the batch starts and ends with a blank
representivity of samples. and a CRM and duplicate are inserted into the sample stream. If the batch
is great than 20 samples then the batch starts and ends with a blank and
every tenth sample is either a CRM, duplicate or blank. This equates to
between 20% and 10% QAQC samples.
Measures taken to ensure that the The sampling of the reef is reef material only except for the first and last
sampling is representative of the in-situ sample of the reef as it will have 2 cm of hanging wall or footwall material
material collected, including for instance to ensure the entire mineralisation is captured. This 2 cm dilution will be
results for field duplicate/second-half calculated into the reef width. The hanging wall and footwall are sampled
sampling. separately to the reef. Hence the reef samples are representative of the in-
situ reef horizon. Requested duplicates are pulp duplicates and the CRMs
are material from the UG2 and MR from African Mineral Standards (AMIS).
The reef horizon is sampled in 20 cm increments so that the grade
Whether sample sizes are appropriate distribution can be observed if a mining cut is required. The UG2 reef is
to the grain size of the material being approximately 70 cm wide and will have three to four samples which will be
sampled. composited later. The MR is wider at around 200 cm and will have about
ten individual samples to determine the grade distribution. These will also
be composited later for Mineral Resource Estimation purposes. Hanging
wall and footwall samples are also taken to check if there is any
mineralisation in the direct surrounding waste rock.
This is industry best practice for the BC.
The nature, quality and appropriateness The UG2 reef will be assayed for 4E and 7E as well as for Cu, Ni, Co, Cr
of the assaying and laboratory and Fe. The MR will be assayed for the same except the Cr and Fe as it is
procedures used and whether the not a chromitite seam but a pyroxenite layer.
technique is considered partial or total.
The ALS methods are as follows: -
PGM-ICP23 - Pt, Pd, Au package using lead fire assay with ICP-AES finish.
30 g nominal sample weight.
Rh-ICP28 - Fire assay fusion using lead flux with Pd collector for Rh
determination by ICPAES. 10 g nominal sample weight.
PGM-MS25NS - The Platinum Group Metals are separated from the
gangue material using the Nickel Sulphide Fire Assay procedure. After
dissolution of the pulp with aqua regia, PGMs are determined by ICP-MS.
ME-XRF26s - Analysis of Chromite ore samples by fused disc / XRF. This
method is suitable for the determination of major and minor elements in ore
samples which require a high dilution digest such as Chromite ores.
Elements that will be analysed are Cr, Cu, Ni, Fe and Co.
Quality of assay data
and laboratory tests
The overall pass rate of the various QAQC samples is 90%.
All methodologies are total.
For geophysical tools, spectrometers, All analytical work is undertaken by ALS Chemex South Africa (Pty) Ltd,
handheld XRF instruments, etc., the located in Johannesburg, which is part of the ALS group. The South African
parameters used in determining the laboratory is ISO 17025 accredited by SANAS (South African National
analysis including instrument make and Accreditation System).
model, reading times, calibrations
factors applied and their derivation, etc.
The historical Anglovaal samples were sent to the Anglovaal Research
Laboratory (AVRL), which was located in Florida, South Africa when it
existed, for analysis.
Nature of quality control procedures
QAQC procedure has been described above. In addition to the QAQC
adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, samples the analytical methodologies are also correlated with each other
duplicates, external laboratory checks) i.e. PGM-ICP23 and RH-ICP28 is compared to PGM-MS25NS. There is a
and whether acceptable levels of good correlation and on average are within 1 - 2% of each other over the
accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision 4E grade.
have been established.
The verification of significant Two umpire laboratories were used, Suntech and Mintek. The umpire
intersections by either independent or samples showed good correlation for the overall 4E grades as well as the
alternative company personnel. individual elements for the prill splits.
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
No adjustments have been made to the assayed results.
Verification of Documentation of primary data, data The assay results are received from the laboratory in pdf format and excel
sampling and entry procedures, data verification, data format. The excel form is imported into the Minxcon excel database. These
assaying storage (physical and electronic) are checked by the senior geologist. The assay certificates are stored in the
protocols. project folder.
No twinning has been undertaken to date. However, statistics was utilised
The use of twinned holes. to confirm that the Nkwe dataset and new SPD dataset can be combined.
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to Drillhole collar positions are initially recorded by handheld Garmin GPS.
locate drillholes (collar and down-hole Drillhole collar survey was conducted by Aero Geomatics (Pty) Ltd. All
surveys), trenches, mine workings and completed drillholes were surveyed by post-processing Kinematic
other locations used in Mineral methodology. ("PPK"). The accuracy of PPK is 5 mm + 0.5 ppm horizontally
Resource estimation. and 10 mm + 1 ppm vertically. The survey was based on the World Geodetic
Location of data System 1984 ellipsoid, commonly known as WGS84.
points
Specification of the grid system used. The coordinate system used is LO31.
Regional three-dimensional (3D) topography was constructed from regional
Quality and adequacy of topographic surface contours and Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) data. The
control. surface was trimmed 300–500 m beyond the Project perimeter. A Lidar
DTM will however be flown for the mining studies.
The final drillhole spacing will be between 200 m and 350 m. There could
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration be gaps in this grid if there is sufficient confidence in the structure of the
Results. fault / structural block.
Whether the data spacing, and Geological continuity is based on the knowledge of the surrounding area
distribution is sufficient to establish the and 3D model constructed from historical data. 82 drillholes and 50
Data spacing and degree of geological and grade deflections have been completed confirming the position of the UG2 and
distribution continuity appropriate for the Mineral Merensky reefs. The total drilling meters is 30,746m.
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation
procedure(s) and classifications
applied.
Whether sample compositing has been The 20cm (or larger) samples are composited to obtain the weighted
applied. average of the entire intersection.
Whether the orientation of sampling The drillholes are vertical drillholes and intersect the reef close to right
achieves unbiased sampling of possible angles. The sample is therefore unbiased. If the reef is faulted it will be
structures and the extent to which this is noted and if the reef intersection is not representative, it will not be used in
known, considering the deposit type. Mineral Resource estimations.
Orientation of data in If the relationship between the drilling No sampling bias will be introduced based on the drilling orientation as they
relation to geological orientation and the orientation of key are close to perpendicular.
structure
mineralised structures is considered to
have introduced a sampling bias, this
should be assessed and reported if
material.
Samples are only handled by the drilling contractor and the Minxcon
geological staff. There is a strict chain of custody that is followed from the
Sample security The measures taken to ensure sample time the core leaves the drill site to the time the sample is received by the
security. laboratory.
An audit on the exploration processes and geological interpretations was
undertaken by Dr. Richard Hornsey from Richard Hornsey Consulting (Pty)
Ltd from 17 to 19 January 2024. No issues were identified in terms of the
The results of any audits or reviews of procedures and data but valuable geological input around the geology of
Audits or reviews sampling techniques and data. the dome structure was supplied.
Additional historical Anglovaal drilling data was shared by Dr. Richard
Hornsey with SPD for the utilisation in the geological interpretation, 3D
modelling and estimation of the Nooitverwacht area.
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Type, reference name/number, location A Preferent Prospecting Right LP002PPR was granted to the
and ownership including agreements or Bengwenyama Tribe's investment vehicle, Miracle Upon Miracle
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
material issues with third parties such Investments (Pty) Ltd in 2015 over the farms Eerstegeluk 327 KT and
as joint ventures, partnerships, Nooitverwacht 324 KT. This was renewed in early 2021 and is valid until
overriding royalties, native title February 2024. The Right covers all elements of potential economic
interests, historical sites, wilderness or interest. The Prospecting Right has expired but an application for a
Mineral tenement national park and environmental Mining Right has been submitted to the DMRE for the two properties
and land tenure settings. and an acceptance letter has been received.
status
The security of the tenure held at the
time of reporting along with any known The right was valid until February 2024. However, the application for the
impediments to obtaining a licence to Mining Right has begun and is in progress.
operate in the area.
Exploration done by Drilling was undertaken by Rustenburg Platinum Mines from 1966 to
other parties 1985. Trojan exploration completed drilling on Eerstegeluk between
1990 and 1993. Drilling prior to 1994 was not used as part of this
Mineral Resource estimate (MRE) due to the incomplete nature or
availability of the drillhole data. Nkwe completed drillholes in 2007–
2008. This drilling supports the MRE. Reconnaissance mapping has
Acknowledgment and appraisal of been completed by previous operators.
exploration by other parties.
However, new historical drilling data from 1988 to 1991 from Anglovaal
has been discovered through Dr. Richard Hornsey and has been utilised
in the estimation of the Nooitverwacht extension inferred Mineral
Resource. The drilling that was completed was a joint venture between
Anglovaal through Midvaal Mining Company and Severin Mining and
Development Company (Pty) Ltd.
The target UG2 and Merensky reefs occur within the Upper Critical
Zone of the Rustenburg Layered Suite of the BC. These reefs are
laterally continuous for tens to hundreds of kilometres. The UG2
comprises mineralised chromitite, whereas the Merensky Reef is
Deposit type, geological setting and defined as the mineralised pyroxenitic zone between upper and lower
Geology style of mineralisation. chromitite stringers. The BC is the world's largest igneous intrusion and
also the largest global repository of PGEs and chromitite. Both reefs are
stratiform with relatively minor disruptive structural features and
replacement deposits.
Drilling
A summary of all information Northing Easting Elevation Dip Azimuth From To Drilled Metres Comment
material to the understanding of the BHID WG31 m º º m m m
exploration results including a
tabulation of the following E001 -87997 -2734366 856 -90 0 0.00 554.75 554.75 EOH, completed
information for all Material drillholes: E001D1 -87997 -2734366 856 -90 0 508.00 552.02 44.02 EOH, Completed
* easting and northing of the drillhole E003 -87886 -2735050 841 -90 0 0.00 563.75 563.75 EOH, Completed
collar E004 -87545 -2734954 836 -90 0 0.00 524.50 524.50 EOH, completed
* elevation or RL (Reduced Level – E004D1 -87545 -2734954 836 -90 0 457.00 518.75 61.75 Deflection completed
elevation above sea level in metres) E007 -87016 -2735561 823 -90 0 0.00 422.80 422.80 EOH, completed
of the drillhole collar
* dip and azimuth of the hole E010 -86653 -2735835 815 -90 0 0.00 365.90 365.90 EOH, Completed
* down hole length and interception E010D1 -86653 -2735835 815 -90 0 301.00 363.96 62.96 EOH, Completed
depth E010D2 -86653 -2735835 815 -90 0 295.00 365.90 70.90 EOH, Completed
* hole length.
E011 -86918 -2736242 815 -90 0 0.00 407.75 407.75 EOH, Completed
E011D1 -86918 -2736242 15 -90 0 74.00 100.00 26.00 EOH, Completed
E011D2 -86918 -2736242 815 -90 0 68.00 98.75 30.75 EOH, Completed
E013 -86433 -2736520 805 -90 0 0.00 327.22 327.22 EOH, completed
E014 -86585 -2736211 811 -90 0 0.00 354.10 354.10 EOH, completed
E014D1 -86585 -2736211 811 -90 0 302.00 344.04 42.04 EOH, Completed
E014D2 -86585 -2736211 811 -90 0 292.00 346.55 54.55 EOH, Completed
E015 -86175 -2736459 801 -90 0 0.00 298.72 298.72 EOH, completed
E016 -87176 -2736677 812 -90 0 0.00 454.68 454.68 EOH, completed
E017 -87228 -2736278 820 -90 0 0.00 461.65 461.65 EOH, Completed
E019 -86451 -2736870 802 -90 0 0.00 32.42 32.42 Abandoned
E019a -86446 -2736871 802 -90 0 0.00 323.77 323.77 EOH, completed
E020 -86719 -2737286 796 -90 0 0.00 350.75 350.75 EOH, completed
E021 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 0.00 249.05 249.05 EOH, Completed
E021D1 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 203.00 247.00 44.00 EOH, Completed
E021D2 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 197.00 247.00 50.00 EOH, Completed
E021D3 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 187.00 247.55 60.55 EOH, Completed
E024 -86103 -2737214 799 -90 0 0.00 284.75 284.75 EOH, completed
E025 -85961 -2737488 793 -90 0 0.00 267.58 267.58 EOH, completed
E027 -86336 -2737554 789 -90 0 0.00 290.75 290.75 EOH, completed
E028 -86763 -2736874 804 -90 0 0.00 383.75 383.75 EOH, completed
E029 -86619 -2737663 789 -90 0 0.00 320.78 320.78 EOH, Completed
E029D1 -86619 -2737663 789 -90 0 248.00 320.78 72.78 EOH, Completed
E030 -87118 -2737703 798 -90 0 0.00 413.75 413.75 EOH, completed
E031 -87055 -2737304 800 -90 0 0.00 423.22 423.22 EOH, completed
E032 -87186 -2737011 807 -90 0 0.00 467.75 467.75 EOH, Completed
E033 -85929 -2737822 784 -90 0 0.00 261.58 261.58 EOH, completed
E034 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 0.00 298.38 298.38 EOH, Completed
E034D1 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 232.00 296.88 64.88 EOH, Completed
E034D2 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 227.00 296.51 69.51 EOH, Completed
E035 -85755 -2738095 773 -90 0 0.00 260.62 260.62 EOH, Completed
E035D1 -85755 -2738095 773 -90 0 213.00 257.62 44.62 EOH, Completed
E036 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 0.00 276.47 276.47 EOH, Completed
E036D1 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 231.00 273.47 42.47 EOH, Completed
E036D2 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 225.00 277.97 52.97 EOH, Completed
E036D3 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 219.00 276.99 57.99 EOH, Completed
E037 -86265 -2738275 774 -90 0 0.00 282.45 282.45 EOH, completed
E039 -87036 -2738502 781 -90 0 0.00 249.30 249.30 EOH, Completed
E039D1 -87036 -2738502 781 -90 0 166.00 229.23 63.23 EOH, Completed
E041 -86452 -2738759 768 -90 0 0.00 258.77 258.77 EOH, completed
E043 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 0.00 266.14 266.14 EOH, Completed
E043D1 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 193.00 263.00 70.00 EOH, Completed
E043D2 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 182.00 263.89 81.89 EOH, Completed
E044 -86399 -2739001 774 -90 0 0.00 263.73 263.73 EOH, completed
E045 -86703 -2738971 779 -90 0 0.00 206.55 206.55 EOH, Completed
E046 -86818 -2738720 781 -90 0 0.00 245.68 245.68 EOH, Completed
E048 -85474 -2737965 769 -90 0 0.00 236.70 236.70 EOH, Completed
E049 -85950 -2739599 769 -90 0 0.00 322.75 322.75 EOH, completed, extended to UG1 for
E050 -85990 -2739275 768 -90 0 0.00 193.31 193.31 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E050D1 -85990 -2739275 768 -90 0 185.00 279.98 94.98 EOH, Completed
E051 -86256 -2739690 774 -90 0 0.00 105.56 105.56 EOH, Completed
E051D1 -86256 -2739690 774 -90 0 50.00 99.36 49.36 EOH, Completed
E052 -86338 -2739349 774 -90 0 0.00 252.55 255.55 EOH, Completed
E054 -85732 -2739268 762 -90 0 0.00 287.57 287.57 EOH, Completed
E056** -87026 -2739473 784 -90 0 0.00 335.70 335.70 EOH, Completed
E057** -87351 -2739458 789 -90 0 0.00 299.68 299.68 EOH, Completed
Drillhole E058 -86128 -2740387 776 -90 0 0.00 158.25 158.25 EOH, completed
E059 -85913 -2739975 770 -90 0 0.00 99.55 99.55 EOH, Completed
Information E060 -85837 -2740293 773 -90 0 0.00 206.72 206.72 EOH, completed
E060D1 -85837 -2740293 773 -90 0 139.00 185.53 46.53 EOH, completed
E062 -86184 -2740003 775 -90 0 0.00 120.34 120.34 EOH, completed, extended to UG1 for
E062D1 -86184 -2740003 775 -90 0 18.30 34.92 16.62 Deflection completed, faulted UG2
E062D2 -86184 -2740003 775 -90 0 13.30 33.00 19.70 Deflection completed, faulted UG2
E064 -84844 -2738000 749 -90 0 0.00 166.40 166.40 EOH, completed
E065 -85573 -2738426 762 -90 0 0.00 239.75 239.75 EOH, completed
E066 -85299 -2738831 753 -90 0 0.00 225.32 225.32 EOH, Completed
E066D1 -85299 -2738831 753 -90 0 161.00 225.62 64.62 EOH, Completed
E067 -85466 -2739534 760 -90 0 0.00 306.45 306.45 EOH, completed
E069 -85315 -2740512 761 -90 0 0.00 305.45 305.45 EOH, Completed
E069D1 -85315 -2740512 761 -90 0 180.00 251.65 71.65 EOH, Completed
E070 -85144 -2737715 763 -90 0 0.00 191.90 191.90 EOH, Completed
E070D1 -85144 -2737715 763 -90 0 125.00 191.90 66.90 EOH, Completed
E071 -85049 -2738331 749 -90 0 0.00 188.80 188.80 EOH, completed
E072 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 0.00 254.75 254.75 EOH, Completed
E072D1 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 208.00 251.75 43.75 EOH, Completed
E072D2 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 203.00 251.75 48.75 EOH, Completed
E076 -85482 -2738844 755 -90 0 0.00 239.75 239.75 EOH, Completed
E077 -85821 -2738313 769 -90 0 0.00 264.22 264.22 EOH, Completed
E077D1 -85821 -2738313 769 -90 0 191.00 263.68 72.68 EOH, Completed
E079 -85446 -2739178 756 -90 0 0.00 270.13 270.13 EOH, Completed
E080 -85065 -2738654 746 -90 0 0.00 195.17 195.17 EOH, Completed
E082 -85905 -2738776 760 -90 0 0.00 248.90 248.90 EOH, Completed
E082D1 -85905 -2738776 760 -90 0 177.00 245.90 68.90 EOH, Completed
E085 -86750 -2738523 776 -90 0 0.00 251.90 251.90 EOH, Completed
E086 -86127 -2739438 770 -90 0 0.00 68.75 68.75 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E086A -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 0.00 260.75 260.75 EOH, Completed
E086AD1 -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 195.00 259.75 64.75 EOH, Completed
E086AD2 -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 190.00 257.75 67.75 EOH, Completed
E087 -86730 -2738203 782 -90 0 0.00 294.37 294.37 EOH, Completed
E091 -85179 -2740650 752 -90 0 0.00 350.75 350.75 EOH, Completed
E091D1 -85179 -2740650 752 -90 0 190.00 275.00 85.00 EOH, Completed
E092 -85027 -2740115 750 -90 0 0.00 360.05 360.05 EOH, Completed
E100 -88989 -2734027 895 -90 0 0.00 503.35 503.35 EOH, Completed
E101 -88735 -2735092 860 -90 0 0.00 507.40 507.40 EOH, Completed
E101D1 -88735 -2735092 860 -90 0 460.00 510.40 50.40 EOH, Completed
E105 -89028 -2736913 832 -90 0 0.00 744.08 744.08 EOH, Completed
E113 -87934 -2738339 793 -90 0 0.00 497.60 497.60 EOH, Completed
E114 -87909 -2738842 796 -90 0 0.00 101.68 101.68 EOH, Completed
E115 -87331 -2738719 788 -90 0 0.00 93.30 93.30 EOH, Completed
E117 -85092 -2738849 746 -90 0 0.00 225.00 225.00 EOH, Completed
E118 -85830 -2739673 768 -90 0 0.00 294.18 294.18 EOH, Completed
E119 -89586 -2737994 850 -90 0 0.00 809.85 809.85 EOH, Completed
E120 -86593 -2739333 777 -90 0 0.00 218.68 218.68 EOH, Completed
E120D1 -86593 -2739333 777 -90 0 95.00 182.68 87.68 EOH, Completed
E121 -89429 -2735773 871 -90 0 0.00 515.79 515.79 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E121D1 -89429 -2735773 871 -90 0 426.00 628.56 202.56 EOH, Completed
E122 -86925 -2738886 782 -90 0 0.00 185.70 185.70 EOH, Completed
E124 -86874 -2737771 793 -90 0 0.00 356.65 356.65 EOH, Completed
E124D1 -86874 -2737771 793 -90 0 290.00 356.65 66.65 EOH, Completed
E125 -86540 -2739132 776 -90 0 0.00 233.75 233.75 EOH, Completed
E125D1 -86540 -2739132 776 -90 0 168.00 233.75 65.75 EOH, Completed
E126 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 0.00 268.42 268.42 EOH, Completed
E126D1 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 203.00 268.25 65.25 EOH, Completed
E126D2 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 195.45 268.00 72.55 EOH, Completed
E126D3 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 189.00 268.00 79.00 EOH, Completed
E128 -88317 -2734759 858 -90 0 0.00 536.75 536.75 EOH, Completed
E128D1 -88317 -2734759 858 -90 0 490.00 536.00 46.00 EOH, Completed
E128D2 -88317 -2734759 858 -90 0 484.00 533.75 49.75 EOH, Completed
E130 -88491 -2734387 869 -90 0 0.00 506.65 506.65 EOH, Completed
E130D1 -88491 -2734387 869 -90 0 441.00 505.00 64.00 EOH, Completed
E130D2 -88491 -2734387 869 -90 0 435.00 505.00 70.00 EOH, Completed
E131 -89026 -2734386 885 -90 0 0.00 497.75 497.75 EOH, Completed
E131D1 -89026 -2734386 885 -90 0 429.00 494.75 65.75 EOH, Completed
E132 -89652 -2734972 877 -90 0 0.00 749.55 749.55 EOH, Completed
E134 -89369 -2734315 894 -90 0 0.00 557.75 557.75 EOH, Completed
E134D1 -89369 -2734315 894 -90 0 512.00 556.00 44.00 EOH, Completed
E144 -88380 -2738325 800 -90 0 0.00 543.80 543.80 EOH, Completed
17
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
All drillholes were drilled -90 degrees.
The UG2 and MR geological and estimation models have been
updated to include drilling and assaying data as at end of May 2024.
The structural / geological model utilised 20 historical Nkwe drillholes
and 82 SPD drillholes while the estimation model utilised 10 historical
Nkwe drillholes and 73 SPD drillholes for the UG2 and 10 historical
Nkwe drillholes and 18 SPD drillholes for the MR. 9 historical
Anglovaal drillholes were used in the estimation of the Nooitverwacht
extension.
Anglovaal Data - UG2 Reef composites
Anglovaal Data - Merensky Reef Composites
If the exclusion of this information is
justified on the basis that the
information is not Material and this
exclusion does not detract from the N/A
understanding of the report, the
Competent Person should clearly
explain why this is the case.
In reporting Exploration Results, With the Mineral Resource update the statistical analysis recommended
weighting averaging techniques, no top cutting of the grade for the UG2 reef. However, there is an
maximum and/or minimum grade instance (E121D1) within the MR where one sample had to be capped.
truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) The Mineral Resource has been declared at a paylimit of 2.2 g/t for the
and cut-off grades are usually Material UG2 and 1.6 g/t for the MR.
and should be stated.
Where aggregate intercepts
Data aggregation incorporate short lengths of high-grade
methods results and longer lengths of low-grade The individual 20cm samples are combined per drillhole per reef
results, the procedure used for such intersection for the composite grades used in the estimation process.
aggregation should be stated and some
typical examples of such aggregations
should be shown in detail.
The assumptions used for any No metal equivalent has been reported but the various elements have
reporting of metal equivalent values been combined for 3PGE+Au grades (4E) and 6PGE+Au grades (7E).
should be clearly stated.
Relationship If the geometry of the mineralisation
between with respect to the drillhole angle is The intersection lengths stated are the downhole lengths. The drillholes
mineralisation known, its nature should be reported. are drilled at -90 degrees and the reef dip is expected to be
widths and intercept If it is not known and only the down approximately 6 degrees. Therefore, the difference will be minimal.
lengths hole lengths are reported, there should
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
be a clear statement to this effect (e.g.
'down hole length, true width not
known').
Appropriate maps and sections (with
scales) and tabulations of intercepts
should be included for any significant A map of the drillhole positions and the stratigraphic column was
Diagrams discovery being reported These should included in the previous press releases. A section has also been
include, but not be limited to a plan included in previous press releases.
view of drillhole collar locations and
appropriate sectional views.
Where comprehensive reporting of
all Exploration Results is not
Balanced practicable, representative reporting Reef intersection depths for all the drillholes have been reported in
reporting of both low and high grades and/or the table below.
widths should be practiced to avoid
misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
Drilling Merensky Reef UG2 Reef
From To Width From To Width
BHID Comment Comment
m m m m m m
E001 259.82 261.64 1.82 Complete intersection 548.07 549.21 1.14 Complete intersection
E001D1 - - - Deflection below MR 547.78 548.26 0.48 Complete Intersection
E003 272.02 274.20 2.18 Complete intersection 558.16 559.16 1.00 Complete intersection
E004 210.77 212.90 2.13 Complete intersection 517.33 517.57 0.24 Pothole
E004D1 - - - Deflection below MR 515.83 516.52 0.69 Pothole
E007 100.38 102.54 2.16 Complete intersection 417.42 418.14 0.72 Complete intersection
E010 48.24 50.42 2.18 Complete intersection 361.67 362.20 0.52 Complete intersection
E010D1 - - - Deflection below MR 361.89 362.49 0.60 Complete intersection
E010D2 - - - Deflection below MR 361.25 361.90 0.64 Complete intersection
E011 94.89 96.88 1.99 Incomplete intersection, Grinding 399.23 400.43 1.20 Complete intersection
E011D1 94.89 96.91 2.02 Incomplete intersection, Grinding - - - Deflection drilled for MR
E011D2 94.99 97.20 2.22 Complete intersection - - - Deflection drilled for MR
E013 12.43 14.53 2.10 Highly weathered & friable, 321.26 321.76 0.50 Complete intersection
E014 37.28 39.68 2.40 Complete intersection 342.62 343.68 1.06 Complete Intersection
E014D1 - - - Deflection below MR 343.29 343.74 0.45 Incomplete intersection,
E014D2 - - - Deflection below MR 342.19 343.06 0.87 Complete Intersection
E015 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 291.89 292.63 0.74 Complete intersection
E016 159.68 160.59 0.91 Pothole 449.24 450.01 0.77 Complete intersection
E017 154.50 156.55 2.05 Complete intersection 452.63 453.35 0.73 Complete intersection
E019 20.25 22.45 2.20 Highly weathered & friable, - - - Hole stopped short
E019a 19.55 22.35 2.80 Highly weathered & friable, 315.85 316.61 0.76 Complete intersection
E020 54.20 55.39 1.19 Faulted 342.90 343.56 0.66 Complete intersection
E021 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.25 243.94 0.69 Complete intersection
E021D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.27 243.92 0.64 Incomplete Intersection
E021D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.19 243.65 0.46 Complete intersection
E021D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.32 243.98 0.66 Complete intersection
E024 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 278.77 279.26 0.49 Complete intersection
E025 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 260.42 261.32 0.90 Complete intersection
E027 9.58 12.04 2.46 Highly weathered, friable, core loss & 284.47 285.04 0.57 Complete intersection
E028 66.70 68.66 1.96 Complete intersection 373.26 373.79 0.53 Complete intersection
E029 40.03 42.00 1.97 Highly weathered, friable, core loss & 314.68 314.88 0.20 Pothole
E029D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 315.08 315.10 0.02 Pothole
E030 143.00 144.68 1.68 Complete intersection 409.55 410.07 0.52 Complete intersection
E031 122.40 124.29 1.89 Complete intersection 416.57 417.19 0.62 Complete intersection
E032 171.69 173.78 2.09 Complete intersection 462.66 463.98 1.32 Complete Intersection
E033 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.62 254.25 0.63 Complete intersection
E034 25.67 28.00 2.33 Highly weathered & friable, 292.00 292.94 0.94 complete intersection
E034D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 292.38 292.97 0.59 Incomplete intersection,
E034D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 292.74 293.27 0.53 Incomplete intersection,
E035 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.92 254.43 0.51 Incomplete intersection,
E035D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.94 254.44 0.50 Incomplete intersection,
E036 0.00 1.98 1.98 Highly weathered & friable, 271.34 271.65 0.31 Complete intersection
E036D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.26 271.80 0.55 Complete intersection
E036D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.30 271.90 0.60 Complete intersection
E036D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.21 271.64 0.43 Complete intersection
E037 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E039 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 226.54 226.89 0.34 Incomplete intersection,
E039D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 226.85 227.56 0.71 Complete intersection
E041 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 250.95 251.60 0.65 Complete intersection
E043 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.25 258.41 0.15 Pothole
E043D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 257.55 258.36 0.81 Pothole
E043D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.00 258.32 0.32 Pothole
E044 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.75 259.42 0.67 Complete intersection
E045 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 202.21 202.82 0.61 Complete Intersection
E046 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 238.66 239.22 0.56 Complete Intersection
E048 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 229.77 230.36 0.59 Complete Intersection
E049 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E050 - - - Abandoned in the hanging wall - - - Hole stopped short
E050D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 276.37 276.90 0.53 Complete Intersection
E051 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 95.09 95.60 0.51 Incomplete intersection,
E051D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 95.22 95.97 0.75 Complete intersection
E052 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 246.01 246.65 0.64 Complete Intersection
E054 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 280.52 280.94 0.42 Complete Intersection
324.59 325.02 0.43 LG6A reef
E056** - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 325.29 325.56 0.27 LG6 reef
325.82 326.54 0.72 LG6 reef
29.96 30.76 0.80 Highly weathered & friable,
237.73 238.06 0.33 LG6A reef
E057** - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop
238.30 238.63 0.33 LG6 reef
238.66 239.85 1.19 LG6 reef
E058 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 140.88 141.29 0.41 Complete intersection
E059 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 95.17 95.70 0.53 Complete Intersection
E060 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Reef Missing
E060D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 178.78 179.29 0.51 Complete intersection
E062 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 31.27 32.30 1.03 Complete intersection,
E062D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 31.45 32.27 0.82 Moderately weathered &
E062D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 31.16 31.56 0.40 Moderately weathered &
E064 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 156.19 157.05 0.86 Complete intersection
E065 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 231.81 232.50 0.69 Complete intersection
E066 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 221.30 221.64 0.34 Incomplete Intersection
E066D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 221.19 221.63 0.44 Complete Intersection
E067 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 299.70 300.20 0.50 Complete intersection
E069 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 240.98 241.39 0.41 Complete intersection
E069D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 241.33 241.63 0.30 Complete Intersection
E070 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 185.15 185.72 0.57 Incomplete intersection,
E070D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 185.29 186.08 0.79 Complete intersection
E071 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 180.04 180.73 0.69 Complete intersection
E072 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 248.48 249.01 0.53 Incomplete intersection,
E072D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 248.71 249.44 0.73 Complete Intersection
E072D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 248.64 249.22 0.58 Complete Intersection
E076 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 233.22 233.68 0.46 Complete Intersection
E077 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 259.56 259.93 0.37 Incomplete intersection,
E077D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 259.82 261.07 1.25 Complete intersection
E079 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.00 263.39 0.39 Complete intersection
E080 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 188.64 189.12 0.49 Complete intersection
E082 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.15 243.47 0.32 Incomplete intersection,
E082D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.25 243.67 0.42 Complete intersection
E085 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 247.34 247.91 0.57 Complete intersection
E086 - - - Abandoned in the hanging wall - - - Abandoned in the hanging
E086A - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 255.62 255.78 0.16 Complete intersection
E086AD1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 256.01 256.34 0.33 Complete intersection
E086AD2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 255.46 255.71 0.25 Complete intersection
E087 24.05 27.90 3.85 Highly weathered & friable, 287.97 288.43 0.46 Complete intersection
E091 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 270.10 270.29 0.19 Pothole
E091D1 - - - Deflection below MR 268.29 268.68 0.39 Pothole
E092 69.88 71.70 1.82 NS (Incomplete intersection, faulted 352.81 352.85 0.04 Pothole
E100 283.31 284.66 1.34 Complete intersection 498.58 499.04 0.46 Complete intersection
E101 242.73 244.48 1.75 Incomplete intersection (IRUP) 505.06 505.64 0.58 Complete intersection
E101D1 - - - Deflection below MR 506.06 506.57 0.51 Pothole
E105 - - - Not developed - - - Not developed
E113 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 289.62 289.69 0.07 Pothole
E114 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E115 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 87.75 88.52 0.77 Complete intersection
E117 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 215.44 216.05 0.62 Complete intersection
E118 27.64 29.65 2.01 Incomplete intersection, core loss 288.56 289.34 0.78 Complete intersection
E119 - - - Not developed - - - Not developed
E120 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 155.65 155.74 0.09 Pothole
E120D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 156.10 156.69 0.59 Pothole
E121 - - - Abandoned in the hanging wall - - - Hole stopped short
E121D1 548.12 548.92 0.80 Narrow Facies (faulted) - - - Not developed
E122 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 179.19 179.75 0.56 Complete intersection
E124 - - - Faulted 350.06 350.65 0.59 Incomplete intersection
E124D1 - - - Deflection below MR 349.67 350.28 0.61 Incomplete intersection
E125 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 228.25 228.50 0.25 Incomplete intersection,
E125D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 228.44 229.03 0.59 Complete intersection
E126 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.43 264.07 0.63 Complete intersection
E126D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.49 264.03 0.54 Incomplete intersection
E126D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.10 263.59 0.48 Incomplete intersection
E126D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.27 263.68 0.41 Incomplete intersection
E128 309.53 311.69 2.16 Complete intersection 530.05 530.64 0.59 Complete intersection
E128D1 - - - Deflection below MR 530.09 530.68 0.59 Complete intersection
E128D2 - - - Deflection below MR 529.19 529.75 0.57 Complete intersection
E130 287.11 287.60 0.49 Pothole 501.09 501.47 0.38 Complete intersection
E130D1 - - - Deflection below MR 499.63 500.04 0.41 Complete intersection
E130D2 - - - Deflection below MR 500.96 501.25 0.29 Complete intersection
E131 235.82 236.83 1.01 Narrow facies (faulted) 489.86 489.92 0.06 Pothole
E131D1 - - - Deflection below MR 489.97 490.24 0.27 Pothole
E132 - - - Faulted out - - - Not developed
E134 - - - Pothole 552.08 552.61 0.52 Complete intersection
E134D1 - - - Deflection below MR 551.86 552.15 0.28 Complete intersection
E144 370.16 371.55 1.39 Narrow facies (faulted) - - - Pothole
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Other exploration data, if meaningful A high-definition helicopter borne Total Magnetic Field (TMF) gradient
and material, should be reported and gamma-ray spectrometry survey was completed by New Resolution
including (but not limited to): geological Geophysics (Pty) Ltd (NRG) in January of 2022 which highlighted the
observations; geophysical survey major structural features that could be expected.
results; geochemical survey results;
bulk samples – size and method of The total line kilometres flown was 1,425 lkm over the farms
treatment; metallurgical test results; Eerstegeluk 327 KT and Nooitverwacht 324 KT with the survey being
bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical flown at a height between 25 m and 80 m due to the topography and
and rock characteristics; potential residential areas with an average height of approximately 35 m to 40 m
deleterious or contaminating and a line spacing of 50 m.
substances.
Other substantive
exploration data
The nature and scale of planned further The PFS drilling campaign has been completed with 30,746m of drilling
work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or consisting of 82 drillholes and 50 deflections. Deflections will now be
depth extensions or large-scale step- drilled for short range variability work.
out drilling).
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas
of possible extensions, including the
main geological interpretations and
future drilling areas, provided this
information is not commercially
sensitive.
Further work
Above are the structural blocks modelled from the drillhole database
(UG2 on top and MR the second). The entire UG2 and MR area is now
a Mineral Resource so there is limited upside potential within the project
boundaries.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Measures taken to ensure Geological data in the form of drillhole collar surveys, downhole surveys and
that data has not been geological logs captured on paper records was compared to data captured and
corrupted by, for example, saved in soft copy Excel spreadsheets that form the geological repository which
transcription or keying informs the modelling database. Any errors, omissions, and invalid
errors, between its initial transcriptions identified were returned to the exploration team for rectification
collection and its use for before the data was processed any further for use in 3D-structural modelling
Mineral Resource estimation and grade estimation processes.
purposes.
Base geological data informing the estimate was validated using in-built
functionality in Datamine StudioRM software. Validation routine involved
Database checking spatial location of drillholes collars and intersections, validity of
integrity stratigraphic logging, checking for repetition of logged intersections, reasons for
the absence of analytical data, negative thicknesses and an assessment of the
correlation of all aspects of the new drilling data to the historic drilling data from
Data validation procedures the Nkwe drillhole database. The Nkwe database was inspected for erroneous /
used. non representative datapoints and removed based on the knowledge gained
from the recent SPD drilling.
The historical Anglovaal drilling database was captured from scanned copies
into an excel spreadsheet and verified as much as possible with the surrounding
reef intersection depths. The database reviewed to check for representative
intersections that could be used in the resource estimation.
Comment on any site visits
undertaken by the The Competent Person regularly visits the project site with the latest visit having
Competent Person and the been carried out on 20 May 2024.
Site visits outcome of those visits.
If no site visits have been
undertaken indicate why this Refer to above.
is the case.
The Bengwenyama project is bounded to the northern extremity by a mine that
Confidence in (or is in current operation and economically exploiting the same UG2 reef. Several
conversely, the uncertainty SPD drillholes are sited in areas in which similar drilling was completed by Nkwe
of) the geological Platinum during the early 2000s. Geological interpretation as informed from the
interpretation of the mineral current SPD holes, correlates well with interpretation from the historic Nkwe drill
deposit. data. The historical Anglovaal data also confirms the 3D geological model of the
reefs.
The consolidated SPD database informing this estimate incorporates data from
historic Nkwe drilling. This data was compiled by transcribing information from
documents available in the public domain. Analytical data in the Nkwe drillholes
is presented as 4E only. Individual PGEs were not reported. Results from QQ
plots (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest that SPD data is
highly comparable to the Nkwe data. Accordingly, the data has been
consolidated into a single geological database.
Additional historic exploration drilling data from Anglovaal, although spatially
located outside the licence footprint, has been incorporated into the database
informing the estimate. Analysis of this data suggests, a change of the UG2
morphology into a main chromitite seam and multiple stringers in the hanging
wall of the UG2 bearing a materially different PGE mineralisation 4E prill split
Nature of the data used and over the south-west section of farm Nooitverwacht compared to PGE
of any assumptions made. mineralisation over farm Eestergeluk. This suggests different facies warranting
modelling of the section as a separate domain. Consequent of low data density,
Geological grade interpolation for this section was achieved through Simple Kriging (SK)
interpretation techniques with the resultant block model then appended to the rest of the block
model completed via Ordinary Kriging techniques.
The Anglovaal data provides support of insights into geological and grade
continuity over undrilled west sections over farm Nooitverwacht with the quality
of the data enabling declaration of Mineral Resources over farm Nooitverwacht.
The MR data from the Anglovaal database was treated in the same manner as
the UG2 data. The MR did however seem to be more similar to the SPD MR
intersections but the area was still modelled separately as per the UG2
methodology.
The recently completed drilling campaign by SPD has confirmed that the dome
The effect, if any, of structure on Eerstegeluk is larger than initially expect and this area has been
alternative interpretations on excluded from the Mineral Resource. In the case of the MR there is a portion of
Mineral Resource the dome structure that does still have MR present.
estimation. The additional Anglovaal drillhole data has however confirmed that the UG2 and
MR continue to the southern boundary of Nooitverwacht.
Contouring of the elevation of the UG2 reef and MR top contact as interpreted
from geological logging, knowledge of the regional structural geology,
The use of geology in incorporation of mapped faults, dykes, sills, and the use of data from the TMF
guiding and controlling gradient and gamma-ray spectrometry survey completed by New Resolution
Mineral Resource Geophysics (Pty) Ltd (NRG) in January of 2022, highlighting the major structural
estimation. features, guided delineation of fault blocks and culminated in the generation of
the associated UG2 and MR 3D wireframe model.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The project area is bisected by faults and several dyke swarms with throws in
excess of 200m. Current structural interpretation postulates the Eerstegeluk
The factors affecting Dome area comprises a stack of several upthrow faults culminating in an overall
continuity both of grade and upthrow of the UG2 reef to a location as shallow as 30m below surface. Other
geology. than potholing observed in the areas limited to the northern periphery, the PGE
grades appear unaffected. The dome structure does however disrupt the reefs
and has been excluded from the resource in these areas.
The extent and variability of The Bengwenyama project covers an area of approximately 52.9km2. with a
the Mineral Resource strike of approximately 4km. Data from the drillholes suggests a down-dip
expressed as length (along continuity of UG2 and MR reef over approximately 11km at an average true dip
strike or otherwise), plan of approximately 6-7?, north-west. A typical West-East cross section through the
width, and depth below deposit showing separation of the UG2 and Merensky reefs is provided below.
surface to the upper and This section does not show the dome structure to the south of Eerstegeluk.
lower limits of the Mineral
Resource.
Dimensions
Location of the UG2 reef is shallowest in the south-east corner of the project
area at approximately 30m below surface and deepest in the north-west corner
where it is in excess of 1,000m below surface. The MR is approximately 260m
above the UG2 reef and subcrops in the central portion of the farm Eerstegeluk.
The nature and The 3D wireframe modelling process was completed in Seequent's LeapFrog
appropriateness of the Geo® Version 2023.2.3 geological modelling software.
estimation technique(s)
applied and key Statistical analysis (CoV<1) on the base geological data informing UG2 grade
assumptions, including estimates suggests no capping or treatment of extreme values is necessary.
treatment of extreme grade However, for the MR one sample needed capping to values as provided below.
values, domaining,
interpolation parameters and
maximum distance of
extrapolation from data
points. If a computer
assisted estimation method
was chosen include a
description of computer
software and parameters
used. Ordinary Kriging, an industry best choice for evaluation of PGEs, has been
applied for all grade interpolation with all grade estimation processes completed
in Datamine StudioRMTM Version 2.1.125.0 geological modelling software. No
geological domains, except for the Nooitverwacht split reef domain (simple
kriging domain) have been defined and anisotropy has not been identified. A
Estimation facies plan has been developed with the majority (77%) of the UG2 reef falling
and modelling into the massive UG2 facies. The Merensky reef also has defined facies but not
techniques separate geological domains, except for the Nooitverwacht extension for the
simple kriging.
Kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA) recommended a parent block size of
350m (in X and Y directions) with a minimum and maximum number of samples
of 5 and 15 respectively for the first search volume which is matched to the
range of the 4E modelled variogram (approximately 2,000m). Three search
volumes with decreasing samples were used for the estimation.
All PGE elements, Pt, Pd, Rh, Au, Ir, Os and Ru as well as base metals Cu, Ni,
Cr and Fe were individually estimated in addition to estimation of combined 4E
(Pt, Pd, Rh & Au) and 7E (Pt, Pd, Rh, Ir, Os, Ru & Au) grades, density and reef
thickness. Extrapolation has been carried out to half the average drillhole
spacing and where applicable terminated on the major geological structures.
The availability of check The Bengwenyama Project is a green field project with no mining activity ever
estimates, previous recorded. As such no depletion of Mineral Resources is applicable.
estimates and/or mine
production records and The previous estimate for the Bengwenyama Project declared as at 01
whether the Mineral December 2023 presented 20.8Mt at 8.08g/t 4E (5.4 Moz) Indicated Resources
Resource estimate takes and 29.99Mt at 7.87g/t 4E (7.58 Moz) Inferred Resources.
appropriate account of such
data.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Concerted effort with the additional SPD drilling completed to date resulted in
filling of gaps within the previous wide spaced grid (approximately 500 m x 500
m) reducing it to approximately 350 m x 350 m on farm Eestergeluk. This has
resulted in significant elevation of confidence in structural interpretation enabling
upgrading of various sections of the Minerals Resources to higher categories.
Although the direct reconciliation of the current estimate to previous estimates is
now convoluted, consistency in 4E and 7E grade between the current and all
previous estimate remains notable.
Metallurgical testwork is currently underway to establish the viability of recovery
The assumptions made of any by-products, in particular chromite. There is no record of previous similar
regarding recovery of by- testwork completed in the Bengwenyama project area. However, the UG2 on
products. the eastern limb of the BC is well known and understood and the average
recoveries have been assumed for now.
Estimation of deleterious
elements or other non-grade Other than the base metals Cu, Ni and Fe, no deleterious elements have been
variables of economic identified. The base metals have all been estimated on elemental basis with the
significance (e.g. sulphur for Cr:Fe ratio of the UG2 chromitite horizon, from modelled Cr and Fe analysis,
acid mine drainage observed to be around 1.21.
characterisation).
In the case of block model Drillhole spacing is not on a defined grid owing to challenges drilling in a
interpolation, the block size populated space. The well drilled areas are typically informed by an average
in relation to the average drillhole spacing of approximately 350m with areas even closer at approximately
sample spacing and the 200m spacing with poorly informed areas informed by drilling spacing in excess
search employed. of 750m to 1,000m.
Kriging neighbourhood analysis (QKNA) recommended a parent block size of
350m (in X and Y directions) with a minimum and maximum number of samples
of 5 and 15 respectively for the first search volume which is matched to the
range of the 4E modelled variogram (approximately 1,000m). Three search
volumes with decreasing samples were used for grade estimation.
A study to test the viability of several possible options and in some cases
Any assumptions behind combinations of mining methods is currently underway. The current modelling
modelling of selective mining does not incorporate guidance from knowledge of any possible proposed mining
units. method or selective mining approach.
The QQ plot results (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest SPD
data is highly comparable to the Nkwe historic drill data.
Any assumptions about
correlation between
variables.
Accordingly, the data was consolidated into a single database. The
consolidation enabled expansion of the database to incorporate back-calculated
individual Pt, Pd, Rh and Au grades from the single analytical 4E grade in the
Nkwe drillholes basing on prill splits as established from the complete empirical
SPD analytical dataset. The grades for Os, Ir and Ru were then determined from
Estimation regression relationships enabling the estimation and eventual reporting to 7E
and modelling grade and including base metals.
techniques
(continued) Major structural discontinuities were identified from interpretation of the TMF
gradient and gamma-ray spectrometry survey, field mapping and contouring of
elevation of the UG2 reef top contact. Knowledge of regional structural geology
and regional geological losses guided delineation of fault blocks and the
generation of the resultant UG2 and MR 3D wireframe model.
The additional historic Anglovaal drilling data informed UG2 and MR wireframe
models generated for areas located spatially outside the licence footprint. The
Description of how the models provide support of geological and grade continuity over undrilled west
geological interpretation was sections over farm Nooitverwacht with the quality of the Anglovaal data enabling
used to control the resource declaration of Mineral Resources over Nooitverwacht. Further analysis of the
estimates. Anglovaal data suggests a different UG2 facies towards the west warranting
modelling of the section as a separate domain. Due to low data density, grade
interpolation for this section has been completed through Simple Kriging (SK)
techniques with the resultant block model appended to the rest of the block
model which was completed via Ordinary Kriging techniques. The MR was
treated in a similar fashion even though the MR facies seem to be more similar.
Guidance from kriging quality parameters such as spatial continuity of kriging
efficiencies, assessment of bias through analysis of the slope of regression
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
results, sample search volume used and number of samples informing a grade
estimate underpin constraint of grade extrapolations beyond known drilling.
Other than one MR sample, statistical analysis (CoV<1) on raw data informing
Discussion of basis for using the estimate suggests that no capping or treatment of extreme values is
or not using grade cutting or necessary.
capping.
The process of validation, Integrity of grade estimation was validated through swath plots in the X and Y
the checking process used, directions, sample-to-model box-whisker plots on global means for all estimated
the comparison of model grades and the visual analysis of grade plans for the 4E and 7E grades as well
data to drillhole data, and as plans showing the spatial distribution of the UG2 reef thickness, Slope of
use of reconciliation data if Regression, Kriging Efficiencies, Search Volume and the number of samples
available. used to inform grades estimates.
Whether the tonnages are
estimated on a dry basis or
Moisture with natural moisture, and All tonnages are reported on a dry basis.
the method of determination
of the moisture content.
Zone specific geological losses have been applied and the Mineral Resources
are declared at a paylimit of 2.2 g/t and 1.6 g/t 4E using a basket price of USD
2,691/oz and USD 1,969/oz for the UG2 Reef and MR respectively. The Mineral
Resource has been stated as in-situ or over reef widths. However, a mining cut
has been estimated for the UG2 which includes the low-grade PGE
mineralisation in the footwall as part of the mining dilution. The mining is being
planned at a stope width of 1m.
The basis of the adopted Below are the parameters used for the basket price and pay limit calculation.
Cut-off cut-off grade(s) or quality
parameters parameters applied.
Element Resource price (USD/oz) 4E prill split_UG2 7E prill split_UG2 Recovery Payability
Platinum 1,074 45.0% 37.0% 85% 86%
Palladium 2,309 45.0% 37.0% 85% 86%
Rhodium 12,751 9.0% 8.0% 85% 86%
Gold 2,116 1.0% 1.0% 85% 86%
Ruthenium 400 0.0% 12.5% 71% 55%
Iridium 4,700 0.0% 2.5% 75% 45%
Osmium 400 0.0% 2.0% 75% 45%
Assumptions made
regarding possible mining
methods, minimum mining
dimensions and internal (or,
if applicable, external) It is envisaged that the Mineral Resource mining cut will be approximately 1m for
mining dilution. It is always the UG2 due to the absence of stringers in the footprint of the currently drilled
necessary as part of the area. The hanging wall contact is a distinct Leuconorite plane referred to as the
process of determining Leuconorite Parting Plane (LPP) and forms a distinct sharp hanging wall contact
reasonable prospects for with no chromitite stringers above it. For the MR the mining cut will probably be
eventual economic the reef width, which is approximately 2,00m plus 10cm hanging wall and 10cm
Mining factors extraction to consider footwall dilution.
or potential mining methods,
assumptions but the assumptions made Mining studies on the possible practical mining methods or a combination
regarding mining methods thereof are currently being concluded.
and parameters when
estimating Mineral The current geological modelling does not incorporate any assumptions or
Resources may not always provide any form of guidance for a chosen specific mining method.
be rigorous. Where this is
the case, this should be
reported with an explanation
of the basis of the mining
assumptions made.
The basis for assumptions or
predictions regarding
metallurgical amenability. It
is always necessary as part
of the process of
determining reasonable
prospects for eventual
Samples for metallurgical testwork for the UG2 have been submitted to the SGS
economic extraction to and Suntech Geomet laboratories to establish the most optimal recovery method
Metallurgical consider potential or a combination thereof.
factors or metallurgical methods, but
assumptions the assumptions regarding The current geological modelling supporting this estimate does not incorporate
metallurgical treatment any assumptions or provide guidance for a specific recovery method.
processes and parameters
made when reporting
Mineral Resources may not
always be rigorous. Where
this is the case, this should
be reported with an
explanation of the basis of
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
the metallurgical
assumptions made.
Assumptions made
regarding possible waste
and process residue
disposal options. It is always
necessary as part of the
process of determining
reasonable prospects for
eventual economic
extraction to consider the
potential environmental
A series of specialised environmental studies are in the process of being
impacts of the mining and commissioned to establish a balance between compliance of the eventual
processing operation. While chosen mining method to environmental regulations against optimal and
Environmental at this stage the practical extraction that will achieve the least environmental impact.
factors or determination of potential
assumptions environmental impacts, The current geological modelling supporting this estimate does not incorporate
particularly for a greenfields any assumptions or provide guidance to achieve the least environmental impact.
project, may not always be
well advanced, the status of
early consideration of these
potential environmental
impacts should be reported.
Where these aspects have
not been considered this
should be reported with an
explanation of the
environmental assumptions
made.
Whether assumed or The density for the UG2 was modelled and the average density is 3.92 t/m3 for
determined. If assumed, the the UG2 and an average density of 3.28 t/m3 was used for the MR in the
basis for the assumptions. If tonnage estimation. The density was determined empirically using the
determined, the method Archimedes method on UG2 reef and MR intersection samples from the SPD
used, whether wet or dry, drillholes. The determination of density is an ongoing exercise conducted by the
the frequency of the field exploration team to expand the database for use to support tonnage
measurements, the nature, estimates.
size and representativeness Limited bulk density information was available for the Anglovaal drillholes. An
of the samples. average density of 3.77 t/m3 and 3.18 t/m3 for the UG2 and MR respectively,
was used for the simple krige portion of the estimation.
The bulk density for bulk
Bulk density material must have been
measured by methods that
adequately account for void The density was determined empirically using the Archimedes method on UG2
spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), reef and MR intersection samples.
moisture and differences
between rock and alteration
zones within the deposit.
Discuss assumptions for
bulk density estimates used Not applicable
in the evaluation process of
the different materials.
The Mineral Resource categories were determined based on drillhole density,
data quality, QAQC, slope of regression (SOR), kriging efficiency (KE), sample
search volumes and knowledge of the continuity of the UG2 reef horizon.
Mineral Resource Classification – UG2 Reef
The basis for the
classification of the Mineral
Classification Resources into varying
confidence categories.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Mineral Resource Classification – UG2 Reef
The Measured Mineral Resources are based on a drill spacing of 200m x 200m
(in structurally complex areas) and 350m x 350m (in less structural complex
areas), SOR greater than 0.75, sample search within first volume (4E variogram
range), a minimum of 5 drillholes and high confidence in UG2 structural
interpretation.
The Indicated Mineral Resources are based on a general drill spacing of 350m x
350m, a SOR between 0.6 and 0.75, a KE greater than 0.25, sample search
within second volume, high confidence in UG2 structural interpretation and
application of local knowledge of areas with high confidence in UG2 reef
continuity.
The Inferred Mineral Resources are based on drill spacing greater than 500m x
500m, a SOR of less than 0.6, extrapolation based on one and a half the
distance of the range of the 4E grade variogram with termination on major
structural discontinuities such as interpreted or mapped major faults and dykes.
The extrapolated inferred is beyond the inferred criteria, up to project boundary.
Whether appropriate Geological losses have been applied to the resource to account for the effects of
account has been taken of faults, dykes, and potholes. This was estimated by considering the successful
all relevant factors (i.e. drillhole intersections, identified major faults and dykes from the TMF
relative confidence in geophysics and additional minor losses. The project area was divided into larger
tonnage/grade estimations, blocks representing various degrees of geological losses. The geological losses
reliability of input data, for the UG2 range from 15% to 50% with the Eerstegeluk Dome area completely
confidence in continuity of excluded at this stage of reporting.
geology and metal values, For the MR the geological losses range from 25% to 50% for the extrapolated
quality, quantity and inferred portion and the top 40m (vertically) at the subcrop for the MR is also
distribution of the data). excluded due to weathering and oxidation.
Geological Losses – UG2 Reef
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Geological Losses – Merensky Reef
Whether the result The CP is of the opinion that the Mineral Resource classification criteria and
appropriately reflects the associated results are a true reflection of the Bengwenyama orebody and
Competent Person's view of demonstrate the current levels of confidence as informed by drill data.
the deposit.
The Mineral Resources estimate, as well as processes associated with
estimation work as contained in this press release has been reviewed by an
The results of any audits or independent third party, Mr. Garth Mitchell, of ExplorMine Consultants (Pty) Ltd.
Audits or reviews of Mineral Resource Mr. Mitchell confirms validity and reasonableness of estimate and confirms that
reviews estimates. due care and diligence was applied in the compilation.
SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd in South Africa have also reviewed the Mineral
Resource estimation and have not found any fatal flaws.
Where appropriate a The QQ plot results (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest the
statement of the relative SPD data is highly comparable to the Nkwe historic drill data and that the two
accuracy and confidence datasets can be consolidated into a single database without any issues.
level in the Mineral
Resource estimate using an The consolidation enabled back-calculation of individual Pt, Pd, Rh and Au
approach or procedure grades from the single analytical 4E grade in the Nkwe drillholes basing on prill
deemed appropriate by the splits established from the complete empirical SPD analytical dataset as well at
Competent Person. For determining individual grades for Os, Ir and Ru from regression relationships.
example, the application of This has enabled reporting to 7E grade.
statistical or geostatistical
procedures to quantify the In contrast to the Nkwe data, analysis of the Anglovaal data suggests a change
relative accuracy of the in the PGE mineralisation 4E prill split and UG2 reef morphology into a split reef
resource within stated comprising a main chromitite seam and multiple stringers in the hanging wall
confidence limits, or, if such over the south-west section of farm Nooitverwacht. As this suggests different
an approach is not deemed facies, modelling of the section as a separate domain was warranted. In
appropriate, a qualitative addition, due to low data density, grade interpolation for this section has been
discussion of the factors that completed through the Simple Kriging (SK) technique with the resultant block
could affect the relative model appended to the rest of the block model which was completed via the
Discussion of accuracy and confidence of Ordinary Kriging technique. Accordingly, 4E grade and UG2 reef thickness
relative the estimate. estimates within this west section approach global means of the Anglovaal
accuracy/ dataset. However, the quality of the supporting data is of such high standard it
confidence provided insights into geological and grade continuity to enable successful
declaration of Mineral Resources over undrilled sections of Nooitverwacht.
The statement should
specify whether it relates to
global or local estimates,
and, if local, state the
relevant tonnages, which The CP is of the opinion that geological modelling underlying the estimate
should be relevant to contained in this press release is a true reflection of the Bengwenyama orebody
technical and economic and considers the grade and tonnage estimates robust.
evaluation. Documentation
should include assumptions
made and the procedures
used.
These statements of relative
accuracy and confidence of
the estimate should be Not applicable
compared with production
data, where available.
Date: 23-10-2024 11:05:00
Produced by the JSE SENS Department. The SENS service is an information dissemination service administered by the JSE Limited ('JSE').
The JSE does not, whether expressly, tacitly or implicitly, represent, warrant or in any way guarantee the truth, accuracy or completeness of
the information published on SENS. The JSE, their officers, employees and agents accept no liability for (or in respect of) any direct,
indirect, incidental or consequential loss or damage of any kind or nature, howsoever arising, from the use of SENS or the use of, or reliance on,
information disseminated through SENS.
Sharenet Sites 
