NORTON GOLD MINE MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE · 2016-06-09 · Figure 1: Perspective view of...

www.mantlemining.com of 26

NORTON GOLD MINE MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 15 May 2015

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Mantle Mining Corporation Limited (ASX: MNM or the Company) is pleased to announce an independent JORC

(2012) Mineral Resource estimate for the Norton Gold Mine prospects within Mining Licence (ML) 80035.

The Mineral Resource estimate, at a 2 g/t Au cut-off, is:

Indicated 107 kt @ 6.2 g/t Au and 15 g/t Ag for 21 100 oz Au (in-situ)

Inferred 141 kt @ 3.9 g/t Au and 12 g/t Ag for 17 700 oz Au (in-situ)

Total 248 kt @ 4.9 g/t Au and 13 g/t Ag for 38 800 oz Au (in-situ)

A breakdown of the Mineral Resource by lode or area is provided in Table 1.

The Mineral Resources are defined to a maximum depth of 150 m below surface. To provide an indication of Mineral Resource

material with potential for open pit mining a Mineral Resource subset is reported above a reasonable depth assumption of

either:

40 m depth at Never Never, Chandler and Frampton areas where Indicated Mineral Resources demonstrate good

continuity and high grades, or

20 m depth in the central area, which is less well drilled and generally lower grade.

The resulting near surface Mineral Resource subset, at the 2 g/t Au cut-off and above a depth of either 20 or 40 m below original

surface (oxide and fresh material) is:

Indicated 70 kt @ 6.8 g/t Au and 16 g/t Ag for 15 200 oz Au (in-situ)

Inferred 58 kt @ 3.9 g/t Au and 10 g/t Ag for 7 400 oz Au (in-situ)

Total 128 kt @ 5.5 g/t Au and 13 g/t Ag for 22 600 oz Au (in-situ)

A breakdown of the Mineral Resource subset by lode or area is provided in Table 2. The relevant blocks for the subset are

displayed in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

Table 1: Total Mineral Resource by area and classification, above 2 g/t Au cut-off.

Domain/Lode Location Indicated Inferred Total

Kt Au g/t Ag g/t Kt Au g/t Ag g/t Kt Au g/t Ag g/t

Frampton South 61.4 4.97 11.6 6.2 5.29 12.7 67.6 5.00 11.7

Chandler South 18.6 10.60 17.1 7.2 5.63 8.4 25.7 9.21 14.7

Frampton Splays South

17.8 3.30 5.8 17.8 3.30 5.8

LW & NG & SW* Central

58.3 3.49 10.9 58.3 3.49 10.9

Never Never North 26.5 5.82 20.4 51.6 4.17 14.8 78.2 4.73 16.7

Total 106.5 6.16 14.7 141.1 3.90 11.6 247.6 4.88 13.0

* Little Wonder, Nine Grams and Stockwork lodes


Table 2: Near surface Mineral Resource subset by area and classification, above 2 g/t Au cut-off.

Domain/Lode Location Indicated Inferred Total

Kt Au g/t Ag g/t Kt Au g/t Ag g/t Kt Au g/t Ag g/t

Frampton South 29.9 5.00 11.0 0.4 2.85 4.6 30.2 4.97 10.9

Chandler South 13.5 12.54 19.1 3.3 6.70 8.9 16.8 11.40 17.1

Frampton Splays South

12.1 3.65 5.4 12.1 3.65 5.4

LW & NG & SW* Central

31.4 3.44 9.1 31.4 3.44 9.1

Never Never North 26.5 5.82 20.4 11.4 4.89 16.6 37.9 5.54 19.3

Total 69.9 6.77 16.1 58.5 3.94 9.8 128.4 5.48 13.2

* Little Wonder, Nine Grams and Stockwork lodes

Figure 1: Perspective view of topography (left) and near surface Resource blocks (right).

Figure 2: Cross section of resource model blocks above 2 g/t Au cut-off.

Ian Kraemer, Mantle’s Managing Director commented:

“We at Mantle are extremely pleased with the outcome of this Mineral Resource estimate.

Due to the good work achieved by the prior owners in producing gold from the Norton mine, Mantle’s staff and contractors

have been able to define a Mineral Resource of sufficient scale, quality and confidence to support a scoping study investigating

reopening the mine in the near future.

This Mineral Resource places Mantle in an excellent position to continue to deliver on its stated objective of acquiring and

moving gold projects into production for the benefit of all stakeholders.”


Location

The Norton Gold Mine is located within the historic Norton gold field and is less than 100 km south of the port city of Gladstone,

Queensland, Figure 3.

Figure 3: Norton Gold Mine project location.

Tenure

ML 80035 includes the majority of the historic gold lodes within the Norton gold field, Figure 4. ML 80035 is held 100% by

Mantle, pending transfer of a 10% equity position to Avanti Mining & Contracting Pty. Ltd. (Avanti). Avanti, pursuant to recent

Sale and Purchase and Joint Venture agreements, will provide project management services for the mine.

The property was previously mined in three phases:

Mining between 1878 to 1906 (and up to 1930) produced an estimated 9200 t @ 41 g/t Au.

Mining by Pacific Goldmines NL in 1997 at Never Never open pit produced 4713 t @ 9.5 g/t Au.

Mining by Norton Gold Fields in 2005 to 2006 at Never Never and Frampton produced 14 500 t @ 8.1 g/t Au, 600 t

of which remains onsite in high grade stockpiles.


Figure 4: Norton ML 80035 with geology, shears, drill holes and existing mine layout.


Geology

The project is located within an outcropping area central to a major Intrusion Related Gold System (IRGS) within the New

England Orogen of Eastern Australia. The region hosts several major gold mines and historic deposits including Cracow (3 Moz

gold), Mt Rawdon (2 Moz gold) and Mt Morgan (8 Moz gold). Regions prospective for these types of deposits occur worldwide

(Figure 5).

Figure 5: IRGS regions proliferate around the Pacific “Ring of Fire”, a tectonically active region 200 million years ago.

At Norton gold and silver is contained in high grade, sub-vertical shears, which outcrop at surface. The Mining Lease contains

eight significant shear systems, four of which have been previously mined and which are the focus of previous drilling, the

current resource estimate, and current redevelopment studies (Figure 4).

The lodes are generally single planar near vertical structures that exhibit local complexity where they intersect. The most

complicated section interpreted to date at Frampton is shown in Figure 6 and incorporates from left to right the Frampton lode,

some Frampton splay structures and the Chandler lode.

Example long sections in Figure 7 display the continuity of the mineralised intercepts on the Never Never and Frampton shears.

These illustrations have been compiled from historical and Norton Goldfields Limited data.


Figure 6: Frampton to Chandler cross-section.

Source: Norton Gold Fields Limited (2005), local grid coordinates.

There remains potential for the identification of additional mineral resources within ML 80035. These are areas of interest

where additional mineralisation and resources may or may not be identified by follow-up work that will include trenching and

sampling to expose and confirm prospectivity, and possible drill testing of the best confirmed targets.

Obvious immediate targets include:

Along as yet untested portions of shears along strike from and at depth below the current mined and resource areas

(Figure 2, Figure 7 and Figure 8), and

Within western areas of ML 80035 where probable extensions of the known mineralised structures, and others, have

been recognised during reconnaissance geological prospecting and mapping (Figure 8). Limited rock chip sampling has

demonstrated these shears to be mineralised. They also exhibit a similar structural pattern to that evident in the core

Never Never – Frampton – Little Wonder resource areas.


Figure 7: Never Never and Frampton long-sections.

Source: Mantle Mining Corporation Limited (2014)

Compiled from historical and Norton Goldfields data (coordinates and elevations are in local grid).


Figure 8: New mapping of interpreted prospective shear extensions with rock chip grades annotated.

Drilling

Drilling has been completed by several parties (Table 3 and Figure 4) with most resource definition drilling completed by Cyprus

in 1985 which was then infill drilled by Pacific Goldmines in 1986 and 1987 as they earned into a joint venture agreement.

Drilling by Norton Gold Fields in 2005 and 2006 was largely focused on the depth extension of Never Never and some smaller

vein systems.


Drilling methods were mixed but included both reverse circulation and diamond drilling. There is little available documentation

or quality control information on the drilling, sampling and assaying for the early work. Despite this, it is noted that drilling

subsequent to Cyprus has provided similar results.

Mining completed by Pacific Goldmines in 1998-9 and Norton Gold Fields in 2005-6 resulted in slightly lower than expected

tonnage but at higher grade due to good visual grade control and small selective mining equipment.

Although Mantle has not completed any corroboration drilling at this stage there is sufficient corroboration from drilling by

other companies and mine production results to consider the drilling suitable for resource estimation purposes.

Table 3: Summary of drilling.

Company Year Drill Method Holes Drilled (m) Assayed (m)

Noranda 1969 Percussion 2 230.1 89.9

Delhi 1970 Diamond 1 126.0 25.3

Cyprus 1985 RC & Diamond 46 2499.2 804.6

Pacific Goldmines NL 1986-7 RC & Diamond 50 1316.2 1068.0

Norton Gold Fields 2005-6 RC 12 1317.0 957.0

Total

111 5488.5 2944.8

Sampling

Approximately half the earlier 1980’s drilling is by diamond or diamond tail drilling methods where the target mineralisation is

cut diamond core. The remainder are short reverse circulation percussion only drill holes. The diamond drilling has included by

NQ and HQ diameter core that was halved for a sampling. Some diamond drilling is confirmed as triple tube.

Sampling of early RC drilling is not well documented but reports indicate both riffle splitting and some spear sampling. Sampling

was generally over 1 or 3 m intervals. Where mineralised, the samples are at 1 m intervals, with some subsampling in diamond

core evidently based on geological boundaries.

Selective sampling of the drill intervals has been undertaken, particularly for the earlier drilling programs as indicated in Table 3

from the difference between the drilled and assayed lengths. Core recovery logs are not available by interval so for the resource

estimation the missing assays are conservatively assumed to have 0 grade Au and Ag unless determined to be in one of the few

small historic stoped areas.

Analysis

Throughout the various drilling programs all analyses are by fire assay for gold.

Previous drilling and sampling has negligible QAQC data available and there is little remaining core available in a state suitable

for verification sampling. However, drilling by a range of companies in three separate phases and modern mining in two phases

has helped to establish the mineralised structures, their continuity and verified the integrity of drilling data used for the

resource estimate.

Estimation

The narrow, near vertical, lode structures were interpreted and wireframed to a minimum true width of 1.2 m and strike of 098º

to 135º true azimuth. Eight separate lode structures were modelled as wireframed structures with continuity, Figure 9. Other

mineralised intercepts were estimated within the four dashed regions on Figure 9. The influence of these estimates is restricted

by assuming zero grade for any unsampled material and limiting the distance of the estimates.

A block model was constructed with 5 m by 2 m by 2 m blocks sub-blocked down to 1.25 m by 0.5 m by 1 m. Blocks and sub-

blocks were estimated using 1 m composites using length weighted inverse distance squared estimation method with a 5 to 1

flattening anisotropy for elements Au, Ag and where available Cu, Pb, Zn, As and S.


High grade cuts of 50 g/t Au and 60 g/t Ag are for grade estimation. These take into consideration that previous modern mining

at Norton resulted in ore grades well above those predicted.

In-situ dry bulk density of 2.5 t/m3 for oxide and 3.0 t/m

3 is used for mineralised zones and is supported by previous mining and

124 recent specimen measurements by Mantle.

Figure 9: Plan view of lode wireframe models.

Classification

Previous drilling has been concentrated on three principal lode structures at Frampton Chandler and Never Never. Where drilled

to a 25 m spacing for these three lodes, Indicated Mineral Resource is considered suitable and is supported by previous mining

operations. Indicated Mineral Resource includes a 12.5 m extrapolation.

The Inferred Mineral Resources include:

Up to 50 m drill spacing and 25 m extrapolation along modelled lodes,

15 m extrapolation or interpolation along strike around unconstrained intercepts.


The maximum depth of the current estimates is between 25 m and 150 m for the available lodes and is restricted by the

maximum extrapolation beyond the drilling applied for the Mineral Resource classification. Significant exploration targets exist

both as extensions to the existing lodes estimated and in areas not yet estimated or drilled (and which have surface expression

or historic mining). At this stage the exploration targets have not been assessed but previous estimates used in the 2005 Norton

Gold Fields prospectus includes calculations that would now be classified as Exploration Targets under JORC (2012).

Previous resource estimates have been by polygonal methods with little documentation of the process or final data used.

Though used to help validate the current resource estimate they are not reproduced here as they would not be considered JORC

(2012).

Mining

Recent mining at Never Never in 1997 and Frampton and Never Never in 2005-6 resulted in a combined ore processing of 14.5 kt

@ 8.1 g/t Au. This used small mining equipment to provide sufficient selectivity to maintain a high production grade required for

transport of ore to another distant processing facility. The process included blasting on 6 m benches, mining on 1 m lifts with an

excavator with a 0.6 m wide bucket and an effective minimum mining width of about 1 m to 1.2 m. Current scoping studies are

investigating a similar mining scenario but with an on-site concentrator to allow a lower cut-off grade to be implemented and

more mining flexibility.

The mineralised veins can be visually grade controlled and so the previous mining resulted in lower production tonnage and

higher grade than modelled in the previous polygonal estimates. Reconciliation of the current resource estimate for the areas

mined since 1997 indicate grade control resulted in -20% of the tonnage and +20% of the predicted gold grade at a 4 g/t Au cut-

off. Although the previous mining achieved a more selective mining outcome, the current model used in this resource estimate

reconciles well on total metal content and is considered suitable for the planned mining scenario.

Small areas of the Chandler and Frampton shears were mined in the late 1800’s by underground stoping. Historic mining was

very selective with production grades reported at around 41 g/t Au. These areas represent some risk of additional depletion but

also offer potential upside since the drilling in these areas is incomplete due to broken ground conditions and where the

remnant material is likely to be high grade.

Cut-off grade

Previous mining in 1997 and 2004-5 at Norton used a high cut-off grade of 4 to 5 g/t Au as mined run-of-mine ore had to be

trucked over long distances to be processed at other operations.

Mantle is studying the option of producing a high grade concentrate on-site for transport to another processing facility. This will

allow a lower cut-off grade to be viable. At this stage a 2 g/t Au cut-off is used for reporting resources as a likely economic cut-

off. Mantle will be reassessing the available mining and processing options to confirm the assumed cut-off grade.

Metallurgy

Gold mining from 1878 to the 1903’s concentrated the gold and sulphides using stampers. Onsite processing included

reverberatory furnaces to roast the ore followed by chlorination.

Subsequent mining has demonstrated that Norton ore is amenable to either direct cyanide leaching through a conventional

carbon-in-pulp circuit, or by flotation concentration into a bulk sulphide concentrate for off-site gold recovery.

Early test work was performed by independent consultants Warman International in 1986, on two samples grading 3.8 g/t and

31.2 g/t and achieved gold recoveries between 88% and 94%.

In 1997, 4700 tonnes @ 9.5 g/t Au of predominantly oxidised ore mined from the Never Never open cut was processed through

the Shamrock CIP plant near Kilkivan. Ore was ground to a nominal 75% passing 80 micron size and leached through a CIP circuit

with a resident time of 24 hours with an overall gold recovery of 93%.


In 2005-6, 9200 tonnes @ 7.4 g/t Au of ore mined from the Never Never and Frampton open cuts was toll treated through the

Gympie Eldorado CIP plant with the gold recovery rising to 93%. Mining was curtailed due to permitting issues at Gympie with

the elevated arsenic content present in the Norton concentrate.

Mantle test work has concentrated on the mechanical separation of the gold into a concentrate suitable for off-site processing

by CIP. This work is ongoing but indicates 90% recovery of the gold into a concentrate.

Competent Person statements

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Stuart Moore who is a full-

time employee of Mantle Mining Corporation Ltd. Mr Moore is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy

and 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 Moore consents to the inclusion in the report of the

matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by John Horton, Principal

Geologist of ResEval Pty Ltd, who is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, a Member of the Australian

Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Horton 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 the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Horton consents to the

inclusion in the report of matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

13

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 report template

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Sampling techniques

Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.

Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.

Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.

In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

The public report provides information based upon historical, pre-Mantle Mining Corporation Limited (Mantle) drilling completed at the Norton Gold Mine. Mantle personnel are currently reviewing and compiling historical exploration information into a form suitable for exploration, mining, and resource estimation and planning. Information provided in this Table reflects an understanding of the historical data at the time of compilation.

Reported drilling results are from programs undertaken in: o 1969 by Noranda in Joint Venture with Delhi Petroleum Australia

Limited completed 2 open hole rotary percussion drill holes. Samples were initially assayed for Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, Zn by AAS at Geomin, Sydney) and elevated assays were rechecked by Fire Assay for Au and Ag.

o 1985-1986 by an AMOCO/Cyprus Minerals – Climax Mining joint venture, 26 reverse circulation and 23 diamond drill core holes were completed. Sampling of diamond drill holes completed was by ½ cut drill core of mineralized intervals and of reverse circulation drill holes by collecting drill chip samples at 1 m intervals. Additional details of sampling procedures are presently unclear. Samples were analysed at AMDEL, Townsville for Au by method A7/1 (50 g fire assay) and for Cu, Pb, Zn, and Ag by method A1/1 (AAS). Standard laboratory check sample duplicate assays were completed and laboratory reports show that all values of 1 g/t Au or greater were replicated up to 3 times and checked up to 2 times to confirm repeatability.

o 1987 by a joint venture between Pacific Goldmines Limited and Cyprus Mining, 47 reverse circulation and 14 diamond core holes were completed. ½ drill core samples were collected from selected mineralized intervals; it has been assumed that these were industry standard ½ cut core but a definitive record has yet to be located. Reverse circulation samples were collected at 1 m intervals and bagged from the cyclone. A sub-split from the cyclone enabled the collection of nominally 3 kg composite samples for 3 m intervals downhole. Selected 1 m samples were collected from mineralized zones by riffle splitting (or in some

14


cases spearing to obtain nominal 3 kg samples from the 1 m bulk samples, these are not clearly identified). Samples were assayed by ALS, Brisbane for Au by method PM209 (30 g fire assay) and Ag by method G001 (AAS).

o 2005-2006, by AT Prowse (Norton Gold Mine Limited).12 reverse circulation drill holes were completed. 1 m samples were collected from the interval bulk samples and combined to make 3 m composite samples for multi-element analysis. Then selected geochemically anomalous zones of strong alteration and quartz-sulphide veining were re-sampled (by splitting 3 times in a riffle splitter give a 3-4 kg sample) to obtain 1 m representative samples for Au analysis by fire assy. Samples were analysed by ALS-Chemex, Brisbane; selected base metals were analysed by method MR_ICP43, and Au was analysed by Au-AA25 (30 g fire assay).

There are no records of sample standards been submitted with the drill samples. It is noted that for greenfield exploration drilling in the 1980’s this may be considered generally to have been standard practice, in contrast to more recent exploration and resource drilling QAQC protocols.

Rock chip samples were collected in October-November 2014 during field reconnaissance and geological and structural mapping. Samples were collected by hand using a hand-held geology hammer. Samples were collected only from locations were competent bedrock was observed through soil and colluvial/alluvial cover. Samples were collected in calico sample bags. These were labelled and taken by the project geologist to Australian Laboratory Service in Townsville.

Drilling techniques

Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).

The 1969 Noranda percussion holes are considered to be standard open hole percussion in the absence of definitive records.

1985 drill holes: diamond drilling using HQ3 core and reverse circulation using a 4 ½ inch (nom. 114.3 mm) hammer

1986 drill holes: diamond drilling using NQ core and reverse circulation using a nom. 100 mm hammer.

2005 drill holes: reverse circulation using a 5 ½ inch (nom. 139.7 mm) hammer.

In the absence of records otherwise, it is assumed that the diamond drilling was completed using industry standard tubes and wireline.

It is uncertain if the reverse circulation drilling was completed using a cross-over sub or face sampling hammer. In the absence of specific

15


records this is unclear, although history would suggest that the earlier programs would have used a cross-over sub and the 2005 program a face sampling hammer for sample return because face-sampling hammers came into use during the early-mid 1990’s and became industry standard due to improved and cleaner sample recoveries.

Diamond drill holes have been surveyed downhole but not orientated.

Drill sample recovery

Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.

Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.

Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.

RQD and recovery data are recorded in the geology logs for the 1986 series diamond drill holes.

There is no RQD or recovery data for the 1985 diamond drill holes.

There are no record of percussion drill hole recoveries, such as recovered sample weights, observed for any of the programs. Not all laboratory reports include received sample weights.

Any relationship that may or may not exist between the documented 1986 drill core recoveries and grade does not appear to have been tested. This would not be possible for the 1985 and 2005 core drilling programs and the 1986 reverse circulation drill holes.

Logging Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.

Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.

The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.

All recovered diamond drill core and reverse circulation samples have been geologically logged. Geological logs appear satisfactory, however detailed geotechnical logging has not been completed on all drill core.

Only the 1986 diamond drill holes have RQD and recovery information provided as part of the logs.

The logging, both core and R/C chips, is generally qualitative in nature. The 1969 Noranda logs include detailed qualitative estimates of sulphides but less detailed on the host granites and alteration.

There are no photographs of core or reverse circulation drill chips.

Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation

If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.

If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.

For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.

Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.

Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.

Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.

Drill core where sampled has been half-cut.

Reverse circulation (RC) samples have been collected as bulk samples from the cyclone and typically will have been riffle split by either an attachment to the cyclone or a stand-alone splitter to obtain a 3-4 kg assay sample split.

Reports indicate that some sub-samples may have been sampled from the retained bulk sample using a spear, however these samples are not clearly identified.

Detailed formal documented sample procedures have not been provided, however brief notes assist determining the basic sampling methodologies for the RC drilling.

There does not appear to be a documented process of field duplicate/second-half sampling, or use of standards samples.

16


Sample sizes and volumes would be equivalent to industry standard practices. However there are no records of detailed sampling analysis along the lines of that proposed by Gy, and others, and how the samples collected relate to the theoretical values.

Quality of assay data and laboratory tests

The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.

For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.

Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.

The analytical work was completed by AMDEL and ALS, both NATA accredited laboratories, using standard minerals industry sample preparation and analytical methods. Samples would have been crushed and then pulverized to -75 micron prior to weighing out an assay split. Assay methods were 30 g and 50 g Fire Assay for gold and 25 g ICP-MS and AAS methods for silver, arsenic, base metals, and trace elements. There is variability in the specific methods used according to the company, date, and laboratory used, however all methods are appropriate for the elements sought.

No information is available for GEOMIN (Geochemical and Mineralogical Laboratories), Sydney, in the available reports.

All methods used are total digest techniques.

No geophysical or hand-held analytical tools have been used.

Different labs have been used for each of the drill programs referred to. The elements and analytical methods requested are generally equivalent between the laboratories used

The laboratories have used standard calibrations and included their own internal reference standards throughout the analytical processes, and these data, as laboratory reports, are available to Mantle.

No major inconsistencies have been observed in the data. Certainly some variability in the gold values is recognized and has been in part reflected by laboratory replicate and check analyses from the 1985 drilling program. The presence of nuggety gold is acknowledged.

Some of the drilling information on the Never Never and Frampton structures has been validated by subsequent mining.

Verification of sampling and assaying

The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.

The use of twinned holes.

Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.

Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

Multiple phases of drilling by different companies have resulted in similar results. This does not include twin drilling but does include regular infill or extension drilling of the principal structures.

Previous mining at Never Never and Frampton by Pacific Goldmines in 1989 and Norton Gold Mine Limited in 2006-2008 demonstrated the structural continuity and produced higher grade ore than predicted.

Multiple holes on adjacent sections help confirm continuity. On some sections, diamond core holes have been drilled below shallow RC

17


percussion holes

Project data now held by Mantle is held in both digital and hard copy formats.

There have been no adjustments to the assay data as received from the laboratories other than grade cutting and assigning zero value to unsampled core.

Location of data points

Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.

Specification of the grid system used.

Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

Drill hole collars have been located by licensed surveyor in two phases; by Pacific Goldmines in 1987 and Mantle in 2015.

Eastman downhole survey information are available for some drill holes. However this is primarily end-of-hole data with some readings near drill hole midpoints. There are no instances of in-hole surveys at or close to the drill hole collars to validate the drill-rig set-up of azimuth and dip.

Early drilling information has been recorded on a local project grid and the AGD66 projection. All drill hole collar information has now been either resurveyed or locally transformed to the current MGA94 Zone 56 projection.

Topographic information is principally derived from a recent ground survey in 2015 that included all available collars, spot heights and break-lines. This is supplemented with Queensland State Government 5 m contour data for peripheral areas where no ground survey data is available. The base of the Never Never pit was informed from 21 depth sounds since the pit is now flooded.

The accuracy of the surveyed holes is less than 1 m. The transform of the previous local grid survey data was found to vary locally. The accuracy of the older drill collar surveys cannot be defined but comparison of the current locations to previous survey plans would suggest most collars are within 2 m. Previous mining demonstrated visual ore control across the tight structures, consequently the current collar accuracy is considered suitable for resource estimation since it will not be required for mine grade control.

Data spacing and distribution

Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.

Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.

Whether sample compositing has been applied.

The spacing of drill hole collars and sample intervals down hole are appropriate for the nature of the mineralisation by indicating both geological continuity and grades. The spacing has been appropriate for the limited mining undertaken to date.

Data compilation and review is presently in progress by Mantle personnel to determine what other information, including drilling, may be necessary to enable application to Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation purposes.

18


Sample compositing to 1 m down hole lengths has been used for estimation during and is consistent with the previous sampling in minerlaised areas.

Orientation of data in relation to geological structure

Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.

If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

Diamond drill holes have not been orientated. Core axis angles have been noted in some logs, but in the absence of orientated core, do not enable determinations of the actual dip and strike, or dip direction, of identified structures.

Drill hole collar orientations have generally been set up perpendicular to the target structures. It is recognized that the intersections between what are steep structures (80ºto vertical) and drill holes at flatter angles (60º ) result in apparent down hole intersections that are longer than they actually are.

The three dimensional block model honours the true width of the resource.

Sample security

The measures taken to ensure sample security. Drilling samples were dispatched to AMDEL, Townsville, and ALS, Brisbane, both NATA accredited laboratories by a preferred freight contractor.

Once at the laboratories, the samples were subject to NATA accredited laboratory sample security requirements and procedures.

Audits or reviews

The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. Work by Pacific Goldmines in 1986 and Norton Gold Fields in 2004 involved reviews of the data as new joint venture partners or owners took on the project and completed their own drilling. There are no records of any significant issues being raised with the quality of the previous work and similar results were achieved with additional infill drilling.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results


Mineral tenement and land tenure status

Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.

The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.

The Mining Lease ML 80035 was purchased by Mantle from Norton Gold Mines Limited in early 2014.

Mantle commenced the sale of 10% of ML 80035 to Avanti Mining and Contracting Pty Ltd in early 2015.

ML 80035 was granted on 4 April 1996 for 21 years to 30 April 2017 and consists of 22.23 Ha, Figure 2. The property is 100% owned by Mantle, pending transfer of a 10% equity position to Avanti Mining & Contracting Pty. Ltd. (Avanti), with no contractual liabilities or royalties applicable other than those due to the State Government.

19


Mining has occurred on the property in three stages, with the latest by Norton Gold Fields in 2005 to 2006 and has an existing Plan of Operations (POO).

Exploration done by other parties

Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. Reported drilling results are from programs undertaken in 1969 by a Noranda – Delhi Petroleum Australia joint venture, 1985-1986 by an AMOCO/Cyprus Minerals – Climax Mining joint venture, in 1987 by a joint venture between Pacific Goldmines Limited and Cyprus Mining, and in 2005-2006 by AT Prowse (Norton Gold Mine Limited).

In 1969, two percussion drill holes were completed in the Norton Mine area. These followed up earlier programs of rock chip sampling, costeaning, and IP Geophysics.

In 1985, 26 reverse circulation and 23 diamond drill core holes were completed. In 1986, 47 reverse circulation and 14 diamond core holes were completed.

In 2005, 12 reverse circulation drill holes were completed.

Programs of costeaning, soil sampling and IP geophysical survey have also been undertaken by these parties and have contributed to the delineation of the surface expression of the mineralized structures and assisted drill hole locations.

Cumulatively, this work led to the identification of economic gold resources on the Never Never and Frampton structures and the determination of a resource calculation in 2004 by AT Prowse (Norton Gold Mine Limited)

Norton Gold Mine Limited undertook mining operations on the Never Never and Frampton structures during the period 2005 to 2007, after which no mining or exploration activity has been done.

Geology Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. Gold and silver mineralisation occurs with pyrite and arsenopyrite and minor sphalerite, galena, and chalcopyrite, within a series of linear structures in the Norton Tonalite.

The mineralized structures localize quartz-sericite-sulphide mineralisation and appear to roughly be aligned parallel to and inside the contact of the Norton Tonalite with adjacent lithologies.

The host Norton Tonalite is recessive in outcrop and is extensively sheared, jointed, and faulted.

Drill hole Information

A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in

Drilling results were previously summarized in an ASX announcement dated 16 May 2014.

No drilling or assay data is excluded from the estimate

20


metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length.

If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

Data aggregation methods

In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.

Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.

The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

Density work completed by Mantle to date suggests a relationship for high grade sulphide material to have a higher density. There is insufficient data available to allow this to be modelled.

Composting and estimation is on a length weighted basis

No metal equivalents are used or presented. Silver has lesser value and is simply reported at the gold cut-off applied.

Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths

These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.

If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.

If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).

Drilling is perpendicular to the structure but angled at 60º to 70º into essential vertical structured systems. The apparent width is accounted for the three dimensional wireframe models of the structures.

Diagrams Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.

Maps and sections are presented in the announcement.

Balanced reporting

Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.

No new drilling has been completed by Mantle.

The existing drilling targets the definition of three mineralised structures at an approximately 25 m drill spacing. Many of the structures are open at depth but the estimated areas are evenly drilled.

Other structures are less well defined but provide indication of similar narrow high grade mineralised veins.

Other substantive exploration

Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,

During April, 2014, Mantle undertook systematic sampling of 39 stockpiles comprising approximately 900 tonnes of mined ore from the Frampton shear. This was to obtain an approximate grade for each stockpile and therefore a general average grade of the entire

21


data groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.

volume. This activity was reported to the ASX on 28 April, 2014.

Six samples were collected during the sampling program for petrologic analysis. These confirmed the presence of very fine (down to 2 micron) gold in late fractures that is likely to be free milling.

Rock chip samples were collected in October-November 2014 during field reconnaissance and geological and structural mapping. Samples were collected by hand using a hand-held geology hammer. Samples were collected only from locations were competent bedrock was observed through soil and colluvial/alluvial cover. Samples were collected in calico sample bags. These were labelled and taken by the project geologist to Australian Laboratory Service in Townsville.

All samples were assayed for gold by method Au-AA26 (50g Fire Assay) and for 33 elements (including Ag) by method ME-ICP61 (4-acid digest and ICP emission spectrometer assay). Tabulated complete Au and Ag results are presented at the end of this table.

Further work The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).

Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

Further work is likely to include

Scoping study

Progression of works towards restarting the mining operation

Surface exploration for extension of existing known targets

Mapping and exploration for additional mineralised structures

Additional metallurgical test work.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources


Database integrity

Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.

Data validation procedures used.

Geology and assay database was built from the available Excel files. Basic cross validation checks were undertaken to find and correct any errors.

Drill hole locations and significant intercepts in the current database were overlain on located historic plans to verify both the relative location and the most significant intercepts reflect the results of the previous workers.

A small number of randomly selected original assays sheet were compared to the database for verification of the assays.

Site visits Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.

If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.

Stuart Moore has visited site on several occasions in 2014 and 2015 with the last visit being the 25 March 2015.

John Horton of ResEval visited site with the Mantle exploration and development team on the 25 March 2015.

22


The site layout and condition conformed with expectations from preliminary analysis completed prior to the visit.

Geological interpretation

Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.

Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.

The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.

The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.

The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.

Where continuity was considered sufficient the lode structures were wireframed from sections perpendicular to the lodes. A minimum true width of about 1.2 m was used to bulk out very narrow intercepts to a width suitable for block modelling.

All structures display a narrow continuous vein style structure that has discrete sharp boundaries, except at Frampton which displays a lower grade halo or a corridor with one or more veins which can be parallel or begin to splay out of the main orientation. Hence Frampton was modelled as a single main high grade lode within a lower grade broader zone.

Lodes were interpreted on geology and then reviewed on grade to enforce the minimum width and eliminate subgrade zones.

The interpretations are continuous and include subgrade drill intercepts where necessary to maintain a continuous structure.

The continuity of the lode structures modelled are demonstrated by drill and surface mapping trenching and old workings.

Dimensions The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.

The area of known veins and previous mining within the existing ML covers an area of 300 by 400 m. The veins are narrow and modelled to a minimum width of 1.2 m and rarely more than 5 m wide. In long section the overall dimensions for the principal veins are:

o Frampton 220 m long by up to 160 m depth o Chandler 200 m long by up to 90 m depth o Never Never 280 m long by up to 100 m depth o Nine Grams 240 m long by up to 35 m depth

Estimation and modelling techniques

The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used.

The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data.

The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.

Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation).

A block model was constructed with 5 m by 2 m by 2 m blocks sub-blocked down to 1.25 m by 0.5 m by 1 m.

Blocks and sub-blocks were estimated using 1 m composites using length weighted inverse distance squared estimation method with a 5 to 1 flattening anisotropy for elements Au, Ag and where available Cu, Pb, Zn, As and S.

High grade cuts of 50 g/t Au and 60 g/t Ag are possibly higher than normal practice but take into consideration that previous modern mining at Norton has resulted in ore grades well above those predicted.

The blocks sizes were selected to allowing effective representation of a minimum 1.2 m true width used for modelling. Previous mining has indicated that good visual grade control of the structure can achieve

23


In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed.

Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.

Any assumptions about correlation between variables.

Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates.

Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.

The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.

the 1.2 m mining width and potentially be even more selective.

Validation was by visual assessment, review of the estimation quality parameters and comparison of the estimate to previous polygonal estimates and drill hole grade averages.

Moisture Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.

All tonnages are summed on a dry basis and moisture content is not considered in the resource estimate.

The material types are granitic and will drain freely during mining and retained moisture is not considered an issue.

Cut-off parameters

The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.

Previously, in 1989 and 2004-5 mining at Norton used a high cut-off grade of 4 to 5 g/t Au as mined ore was trucked ore long distances to be processed at other operations.

Mantle is studying the option of producing a high grade concentrate on-site prior to shipping to another processing facility. This will allow a lower cut-off grade to be viable. At this stage a 2 g/t Au cut-off is used for reporting resources as a likely economic cut-off.

Mantle will be reassessing the mining and processing options to confirm the assumed cut-off grade.

Silver content is low and is not considered in the cut-off grade.

Mining factors or assumptions

Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.

A minimum horizontal width of 1.2 m has been applied for intercept selection and block modelling. This can easily be achieved with the proposed mining scenario that includes small production rate, small mining equipment on 1 m bench lifts and blasting on 6 m lifts but which is constrained to a narrow pit that will limit material movement.

Previous grade control has achieved highly selective mining and as a result the mine has historically produced higher grades at lower tonnage than predicted.

Metallurgical factors or assumptions

The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made

Gold mining from 1878 to the 1930’s concentrated the gold and sulphides using stampers. Onsite processing included reverberatory furnaces to roast the ore followed by chlorination.

Subsequent mining has demonstrated that Norton ore is amenable to both direct cyanide leaching through a conventional carbon-in-pulp

24


when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.

circuit or by flotation concentration into a bulk sulphide concentrate for off-site gold recovery.

Early test work was performed by independent consultants Warman International in 1986, on two samples grading 3.8 g/t and 31.2 g/t and achieved gold recoveries of 88% to 94%.

In 1997-8, 4700 tonnes @ 9.5 g/t Au of predominantly oxidised ore mined from the Never Never open cut was processed through the Shamrock CIP plant near Kilkivan. Ore was ground to a nominal 75% passing 80 micron size and leached through a CIP circuit with a resident time of 24 hours with an overall gold recovery of 93%.

In 2005-6, 9200 tonnes @ 7.4 g/t Au of ore mined from the Never Never and Frampton open cuts was toll treated through the Gympie Eldorado CIP plant with the gold recovery rising to 93%. Mining was curtailed due to permitting issues at Gympie with the elevated arsenic content present in the Norton concentrate.

Mantle test work has concentrated on the mechanical separation of the gold into a concentrate suitable for off site processing by CIP. This work is ongoing but indicates 90% recovery of the gold into a concentrate.

Environmen-tal factors or assumptions

Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.

The proposed onsite processing is to create a gold bearing sulphide rich gravity concentrate by mechanical sorting. High levels of arsenic occur at Norton but it is expected to mostly report with the sulphides in the concentrate. The disposal of onsite tailings is not expected to contain significant arsenic or sulphides, as was the case during previous operations at Norton in 1989 and 2004-5.

The occurrence of high arsenic will be an issue for the sale of the concentrate to a processing facility that will need to manage the arsenic disposal.

Bulk density Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples.

The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit.

Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.

Previous estimates relied on a standard density of 3.0 t/m3 for all

material. Reasonable reconciliation after two separate phases of mining support this assumption.

Mantle has completed 124 hand specimens from the existing pits and surface stockpiles. They confirm high density for sulphide rich mineralisation and slightly lower density for oxide material in the shallow weathering profile. These have been used to refine the global density assumptions to

3.0 t/m3 for all fresh mineralisation

2.6 t/m3 for all fresh waste

25


2.5 t/m3 for all oxide material

The density of the sulphide samples can range up to 4.7 t/m3. There

is potentially a grade relationship between Au grade and density where higher grades are associated with higher sulphide occurrence. Such a relationship can result in an underestimation of Au grade if an average or standard density for mineralisation is assumed. This could explain why the mine previously outperformed resource grade estimates in the past.

Classification The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories.

Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (ie relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data).

Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.

Three principal veins at Chandler, Frampton and Never Never were the focus of the current study. These all display sufficient continuity at a drill spacing of 25 m to warrant Indicated Mineral Resource classification.

Two of these zones at Frampton and Never Never have been previously mined and demonstrated reasonable reconciliation. Though Mantle has not verified these deposits with additional drilling, and neither is there adequate QAQC for the historic drilling, there is sufficient verification of the drilling to warrant Indicated Mineral Resource by:

Drilling by different companies

Previous mining and reconciliation in 1989 and 2004-5

Some other veins are modelled and estimated that have limited drilling support or restricted continuity. These are currently classified as Inferred. They include:

Mineralisation in side splays at Frampton that are demonstrated in the existing pit and previous mining

Depth extensions of lodes at Nine Grams and Little Wonder which were mined historically over 100 years ago.

Audits or reviews

The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. Neither the current nor the previous estimates were audited.

A comparison of the previous polygonal and current block model estimates indicates similar results after considering the difference in approach.

Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence

Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.

The resource model has been compared to

The previous polygonal estimate with similar result though the block model has some additional smoothing with greater tonnage at lower grade.

The previous mined production for the mined out areas estimate which indicted the model was +20% in tonnage and -20% in Au grade. Note that this was using a 4 g/t Au cut-off which will differ to the current mining scenario and cut-off grade.

26


The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used.

These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.

NORTON GOLD MINE MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE · 2016-06-09 · Figure 1: Perspective view of...

Documents

Transcript of NORTON GOLD MINE MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE · 2016-06-09 · Figure 1: Perspective view of...