REG - Rockfire Resources - 500% increase in Resource at Molaoi
04/09/2024 07:30
For best results when printing this announcement, please click on link below:
http://newsfile.refinitiv.com/getnewsfile/v1/story?guid=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20240904:nRSD8571Ca&default-theme=true
RNS Number : 8571C Rockfire Resources PLC 04 September 2024
The information contained within this announcement is deemed by the Company to
constitute inside information pursuant to Article 7 of EU Regulation 596/2014
as it forms part of UK domestic law by virtue of the European Union
(Withdrawal) Act 2018 as amended.
4 September 2024
Rockfire Resources plc
("Rockfire" or the "Company")
500% increase in Resource at Molaoi
Molaoi now in top 20 undeveloped global zinc deposits
Rockfire Resources plc (Rockfire, LON: ROCK), the base metal, precious metal
and critical mineral exploration company, is pleased to announce a JORC
Mineral Resource upgrade of 500% at the Molaoi zinc/silver/lead deposit in
Greece.
The updated JORC Resource is 500% larger than the Maiden Resource announced in
May 2022 (refer to Rockfire RNS 23 May 2022). This new Resource has surpassed
all expectations and places Molaoi within the top 20 undeveloped zinc
resources globally in terms of tonnage, grade and zinc equivalent metal
content.
Molaoi is in the Peloponnese Region of Greece and is held 100% by Hellenic
Minerals SA (Hellenic), which in turn is a 100% subsidiary of Rockfire. The
Resource is reported in accordance with the Joint Ore Reserve Committee
("JORC") Australasian Code (2012) for Reporting of Exploration Results,
Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves.
Highlights
· The Inferred JORC Resource estimation for Molaoi is:
15.0 million tonnes @ 7.26 % Zn, 1.75 % Pb and 39.5 g/t Ag
(9.96 % zinc equivalent)
· Molaoi contains 1,090,000 tonnes of zinc, 260,000 tonnes of lead, and
19.1 million ounces of silver.
· This Resource equates to 1,500,000 tonnes of zinc equivalent metal
content, with zinc currently trading at US$2,881 per tonne.
· Molaoi also contains one of the world's geologically rare critical
metals, germanium. A preliminary germanium quantity, which does not comply
with the requirements of the JORC Code has been calculated at:
4.8 million tonnes @ 21.9 g/t Ge (105,700 kilograms germanium)
· Germanium is currently selling for US$3,681 per kilogram and
represents a potentially valuable by-product of any future zinc production
from Molaoi.
· A low-grade cut-off of 4 % for Zn has been used in the Resource
estimate.
· The overall average width of all lodes throughout the resource is 4.1
m, with widths varying from 0.2 m to more than 20 m.
· Only 2.1 km of a potential strike extent of 7 km has been included in
the Resource and mineralisation remains open at depth and along strike to the
north and south.
· In the 2022 Maiden Resource estimate, 4 parallel mineralised lodes
had been identified. A revised geological and mineralisation model has now
identified 23 sub-parallel, north/south-striking, east-dipping lodes, with 18
of these lodes modelled. More lodes are yet to be tested both east and west.
· Owing to scheduling cut-offs, recent Rockfire drill holes HMO-005,
HMO-006 and HMO-007 are not included in this resource estimate and are
expected to increase the resource further.
o HMO-005 intersected 1.7 m @ 11.5% ZnEq.
o HMO-006 intersected 1.5 m @ 3.2 % ZnEq.
o HMO-007 intersected 2.0 m @ 14.3 % ZnEq.
· Metallurgical flotation test work completed in 1984 resulted in 96 %
zinc recovery, 92 % lead recovery and 91 % silver recovery into a bulk
concentrate. These recovery factors prove that the mineralisation at Molaoi is
highly recoverable.
· The following figures show a typical E/W cross-section and a typical
N/S long section. Individual zinc lodes are shaded different colours.
Molaoi Cross Section 4077500N (looking north)
(each colour represents an individual zinc lode, with 18 lodes modelled so
far)
Molaoi Long Section 665400E (looking west)
(each colour represents an individual zinc lode, with 18 lodes modelled so
far)
David Price, Chief Executive Officer of Rockfire, commented:
"Expanding the Molaoi resource to become such a globally significant deposit
with more than 1 million tonnes of zinc, is testimony to the tenacity, hard
work and sound geological understanding of, and application by our technical
team."
"Our maiden JORC resource in 2022 was established on a geological model of a
single main zinc lode. At that time, three other lodes were identified but not
included in the Maiden resource due to a lack of modern drilling evidence for
the verification of these additional lodes."
"Following the last three drilling phases completed by Rockfire, far more
geological, structural and geochemical information has become available and a
total of 23 lodes have so far been identified. This identification has been
aided significantly by the acquisition and deployment of our new portable
X-Ray Florescence ("pXRF") analyzer."
"Management has always considered Molaoi to be an outstanding base metal
project, however, this updated Resource has far exceeded our expectations.
There remains material upside potential for further expansion of the Resource
at Molaoi, with 5.5 km of known zinc occurrences outside the upgraded Resource
limits. Drilling results along this 5.5 km from drilling during the 1980's
include:
· 7.0 m @ 10.2 % Zn (Stavros Prospect)
· 3.0 m @ 6.7 % Zn (Gkagkania Prospect)
· 3.0 m @ 8.4 % Zn (Fournos Prospect)
· 0.5 m @ 27.3 % Zn (Agio Eustratios Prospect)
"In addition to extending the zinc north and south, significant upside also
exists at depth, and by drilling out the 23 identified lodes both east and
west to their full extent."
"Our goal now will be to move as many zinc tonnes into the "Indicated"
category of the JORC Code, for input to a Scoping Study of mining and
processing options. Several important drill holes will be required to close
drilling gaps on a number of drill lines."
"Molaoi is tracking well towards becoming a world-class zinc deposit. More
work is required to get the project to that status, however our team knows how
to deliver such results. We are looking forward to bringing regular updates to
the market on what is quickly becoming a significant deposit on a global
scale."
For further information on the Company, please
visit www.rockfireresources.com (http://www.rockfireresources.com) or
contact the following:
Rockfire Resources plc: info@rockfire.co.uk (mailto:info@rockfire.co.uk)
David Price, Chief Executive Officer
Allenby Capital Limited (Nominated Adviser & Broker): Tel: +44 (0) 20 3328 5656
John Depasquale / George Payne (Corporate Finance)
Guy McDougall / Matt Butlin (Sales and Corporate Broking)
Competent Person Statements:
Separate Competent Person (CP) Statements are given for the estimation and
reporting of Molaoi's 2024 Mineral Resources (by Consultant Mr Robin Rankin
for GeoRes) and for Molaoi's input exploration data (by Mr David Price for
Rockfire).
Robin Rankin visited the Molaoi Project site in early 2024 and comprehensively
acquainted himself with the area, its geology, and Hellenics's exploration.
David Price has extensive local knowledge gained through multiple visits and
Project management.
Statement: The information in this Report, that relates to Exploration
Targets, Exploration results and Mineral Resources at Molaoi in Greece (the
Project), was based on base metal exploration information and data that was
compiled and supplied by Rockfire Resources plc (Rockfire) (see Exploration
data Competent Person Statement below) which was reviewed and used for
Resource estimation and reporting by Mr Robin Rankin, a Competent Person who
is a Member (#110551) of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
(AusIMM) and accredited since 2000 as a Chartered Professional by the AusIMM
in the Geology discipline. Robin Rankin is the author of this Report.
Robin Rankin provided this information to his Client, Rockfire as paid
consulting work in his capacity as Principal Consulting Geologist and operator
of independent geological consultancy GeoRes. He and GeoRes are
professionally and financially independent in the general sense and
specifically of their Client and of the Client's Project. This consulting
was provided on a paid basis, governed by a scope of work and a fee and
expenses schedule, and the results and conclusions reported were not
contingent on payments (other than their validity being negated by
non-payment). Robin Rankin has sufficient experience that is relevant to the
style of mineralization 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' (the JORC Code). Robin Rankin consents
to the inclusion in his Client's report(s) of the matters based on this
information in the form and context in which it appears. Robin Rankin's
Competent Person Statement is given on the basis that his Client takes
responsibility to a Competent Persons level for the collection and integrity
of all source input data supplied by the Client. Mr Robin Rankin has
sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of
deposit under consideration and to the activity which has been undertaken to
qualify as a "Qualified Person" in accordance with the AIM Rules Guidance Note
for Mining and Oil & Gas Companies.
Statement: The input exploration information in this report that relates to
Exploration results, Exploration data, Sampling Techniques or Geochemical
Assay Methodology is based on information compiled by Mr David Price,
Competent Person, who is a Fellow of the AusIMM (#107108). Mr Price is Chief
Executive Officer (CEO), shareholder and full-time employee of Rockfire
Resources PLC (Rockfire). Mr Price has sufficient experience in mineral
exploration and in 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 Price
consents to the inclusion in this Report of the matters based on his
information in the form and context in which it appears.
Mineral Resource summary details and parameters
The results of the 2024 updated Molaoi Mineral Resource estimate are detailed
in the Statement of Mineral Resources in Table 1. The Statement of Mineral
Resources is reported in accordance with the requirements of the 2012 JORC
code and is therefore suitable for public reporting.
The Mineral Resource is reported above a cut-off grade of 4 % Zn.
ZnEq(1) Zinc equivalent based on commodity prices
(averaged for 3 months to 25th July 2024) and metallurgical recoveries
determined for Molaoi mineralisation by IGME in the 1980s. Commodity
prices: Zinc 1.34 US$/lb (2,954 US$/t), Lead 1.01 US$/lb (2,227 US$/t),
Silver 30 US$/oz. Commodity price source: Daily Metal Prices
(www.dailymetalprice.com (http://www.dailymetalprice.com) ). Recoveries:
Based on historical Molaoi metallurgical test-work in 1984. Zinc 95.8%, Lead
91.8%, Silver 91.0%.
Summary details of the Resource estimation follow:
· The Molaoi deposit is interpreted as VMS style containing zinc
mineralisation in distinct layers. Those layers are within and sub-parallel
to a pile of layered volcanic rocks.
· Rockfire operates the Molaoi Project within "Exploration and Mining
Lease L1" in the Laconia Municipality, Greece. The Lease is ~7.0 km long and
~1.5 km wide and has an area of 9.4 km(2). The Lease was granted in 2022
for 30 years. Data uses the UTM WGS84 coordinate system for the northern
hemisphere.
· This 2024 Resource was calculated from both historical and recent
drill core data. The previous 2022 Resource used data from 175 core holes
(for ~29,800 m) drilled by the Greek Government from 1979 to 1988. To that
was added 19 core holes (for ~4,015 m) drilled by Hellenic in 2023 and 2024.
· The historical drill hole assays were validated by Rockfire through
the re-analysis of precise sampling intervals of the original drill core and
through a campaign of 5 twin holes drilled in 2023.
· A high-resolution LIDAR topography survery was undertaken in
mid-2024. This provides clear topographic control data and helped verify
drill hole collars.
· Drill holes exist on E/W cross-sections spaced ~100 m apart N/S,
their spacing on-section being ~50-100 m E/W. Most holes were drilled
dipping steeply westwards to intersect mineralisation as close as possible to
normal.
· Samples for assay are collected continuously over mineralised zones
based on close geological logging (now augmented by pXRF analysis). Sample
lengths are short (in the range 0.1m - 1.5 m) reflecting narrow layer
widths. Historical samples were analysed by ITMI in Italy. Recent samples
were analysed by ALS in Ireland.
· Mineralised intercepts were interpreted (using a rough lower zinc
grade cut-off of 0.2%) into a system of 23 sub-parallel, N/S striking,
~50°E-dipping layers which pinch and swell along strike and down dip.
Individual layer thicknesses vary between 0.2 and ~6.2 m, with sporadic local
maximums to >20 m.
· The layer system covers ~2.2 km N/S (northings 4,076,350 to 4,078,550
m), ~0.9 km E/W (eastings 664,950 to 665,800 m) and ~500 m vertically (-300 to
200 m RL).
· Individual layer structure floors were modelled with interpolated
bounding gridded DTM surfaces using a growth algorithm. DTM mesh size was 10
m * 10 m. Surfaces were truncated conservatively 80 m outside peripheral
drill holes. Layer thicknesses were conservatively modelled with
interpolated DTM surfaces using an ID(2) algorithm to preclude extrapolation
of thickness outside data values.
· An un-folding block model was built within the layers to trend grade
estimation in the plane of the layers and along the undulations. Block sizes
were fixed at 10 m * 40 m in X and Y and variable at ~0.5 m in Z.
· Individual metal grade block models were estimated, domained
individually by layer, using an ID(2) algorith. Sample lengths were
composited to 0.5 m. Data maximum scan distance was 250 m. A vertical
distance weighting of 1.5 was used in Z (across layers) to emphasise
continuity along the layers. No data limits were applied and low grades had
been effectively precluded through the intercept interpretation process.
· For Resource reporting the grade models were loaded into and
orthogonal-shaped block model with primary block sizes of 10 m * 40 m * 10
m. Blocks were sub-blocked along layer surfaces by factors of 5 * 2 * 5 to
potentially give minimum block sizes of 2 m * 20 m * 2 m.
· A zinc equivalent grade was computed by block from the individual
zinc, lead and silver block values using metal price factors (derived from
3-month averages to late July 2024) and the historical metallurgical
recoveries (details given below the Table above).
· Base metal Resources were estimated using a default density of 2.7
t/m(3) and for material above a 4% zinc cut-off.
· The quantity of germanium (associated with zinc mineral sphalerite,
and assumed to be a by-product) was estimated from material above the 4% zinc
cut-off and additionally were above a 10 g/t germanium cut-off
Glossary
Item Definition
''Ag'' silver
''Ge'' germanium
''g/t'' grams per tonne
''JORC'' Joint Ore Resource Committee
''Pb'' lead
"Ppm" parts per million
''Zn'' zinc
"ZnEq'' zinc equivalent
Notes to Editors
Rockfire Resources plc (LON: ROCK) is a mineral exploration and development
company with a portfolio of 100%-owned mineral projects including a high-grade
zinc deposit in Greece and gold and copper projects in Queensland Australia.
§ The Molaoi deposit in Greece has a JORC resource of 1,090,000 tonnes of
zinc, 260,000 tonnes of lead and 19.1 million ounces of silver.
§ The Plateau deposit in Queensland has a JORC resource of 130,000 ounces of
gold and 800,000 ounces of silver.
§ The Copperhead deposit in Queensland has a JORC resource of 80,000 tonnes
of copper, 9,400 tonnes of molybdenum and 1.1 million ounces of silver.
Appendix 1 - JORC Code (2012 Edition) - Table 1
Sources of information in Table Sections:
JORC Table 1 Sections 1 (sampling techniques and data) and 2 (exploration
results):
· Sections 1 and 2 given here apply to the input data behind this
Resource estimation (described in this Report).
· Hellenic Minerals SA (Hellenic) is a 100% subsidiary of Rockfire
Resources plc (Rockfire) and the names are inter-changeable throughout this
Table 1.
· Historic data was largely sourced from the Greek government's
Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration (IGME). Since 2019 that state
office has been known as the Hellenic Survey of Geology and Mineral
Exploration (HSGME) and the terms IGME and HSGME are inter-changeable
throughout this Table 1.
· Original information was contained in Rockfire's 2022 MRE
compiled by Rockfire's Resource geologist Mr Edward Fry.
· That 2022 information is reproduced here and augmented with
details of Hellenic's 2023 and 2024 drilling.
· New augmented details were supplied by the Exploration CP Mr
David Price (for Rockfire); Hellenic's Exploration Geologist Mr Konstantinos
Christodoulou; exploration drilling specialist Mr Mick Oates (consultant to
Rockfire); and by CP for this Report, Mr Robin Rankin (Resource Consultant to
Rockfire).
· The Consultant is unaware of any other exploration, pertinent to
this Resource estimate, which may have been done subsequent to the
commencement of the Resource estimation work.
· The latter statement is made in the knowledge that Hellenic's
three newest drill holes (#5, #6 and #7) were completed after the Consultant's
site visit, the last being finished during this estimation work. Geological
information from those holes was incorporated in the estimate. However
assays from those holes were not available for the estimate and would not have
varied the estimate to any significant degree.
JORC Table 1Section 3 (estimation and reporting of Mineral Resources):
· Section 3 given here applies specifically to this Resource
estimation (described in this Report).
· The information was compiled by the CP for this Report, Mr Robin
Rankin (Resource Consultant to Rockfire).
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
Sampling techniques · Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or · HISTORICAL:
specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF o The historical sampling was exclusively sourced from diamond drilled
instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad holes. The drill core sampling is assumed to be of an adequate quality.
meaning of sampling.
o The historical drill core was half-core sampled. The historical diamond
· Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity drill core was cut in half, with half core sent off to analysis and the
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. remaining half stored in appropriately marked core trays at a secure Greek
government facility.
· Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to
the Public Report. o The mineralized zone is characterized by massive to semi-massive sulphides
(sphalerite, galena, pyrite). This zone is surrounded by a disseminated
· In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be sulphide zone. Both of these zones are easily visible and discernible from
relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m unmineralized host rock within the historical drill core, making the
samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire determination of mineralized material fairly straight forward.
assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there
is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or o The historical diamond drill core sampling was based on geological
mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed intervals, with a minimum sample length of 0.1 m and a max of 2.0 m.
information.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
o All recent data was sourced from diamond core holes.
o All sampling was conducted by qualified and experienced, full-time
employees of Hellenic Minerals SA
o All other details are the same as for the historical drill holes.
Drilling techniques · Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary · The historical drilling was composed entirely of unoriented diamond
air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or drilled core of PQ NQ and BQ size.
standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type,
whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). · Recent drilling for Hellenic comprised orientated drill core. Poor
ground conditions mean that many orientations were not possible.
· Recent drilling for Hellenic has all been by commercial drillers.
Drill sample recovery · Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and · HISTORICAL:
results assessed.
o The historical diamond drill core recovery was recorded in a digital
· Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative database.
nature of the samples.
o The method of core preparation, core measurement, or sample maximization
· Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and techniques do not appear to have been recorded in the records supplied to
whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of Rockfire.
fine/coarse material.
o Correlation between sample recovery and sample grade was not included in
the records provided to Rockfire.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
· Core recovery assessment:
o All new drilling has been fully geologically logged and the drilling
process and drill core handling monitored and recorded by Rockfire personnel
on site.
o Assessment of core recovery was by correlation of driller's notes and
driller's depth markings on the core with core measurements by Hellenic's
geologist.
· Maximisation of core recovery:
o Maximisation of core recovery was by near constant monitoring of drilling
and core delivery by the geologist and on-going discussions of drilling
conditions between drillers and geologist.
o In 2024 drilling specialist Mr Mick Oates spent time on-site observing the
drilling and suggesting measures to further improve core recovery and drilling
processes in general.
o Measures introduced by Mr Oates include; improved casing at the collar,
the use of drilling muds and foams and faster drilling to minimise time spent
in broken ground.
· Sample recovery / grade relationship:
o In competent rock, recovery was often close to 100%. In mineralised
zones, recovery drops off. Measurements of recovery have been recorded by
Hellenic for each drill run. Generally, recovery was deemed to be
acceptable, with loss often less than 20% in the ore zones
Logging · Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and · HISTORICAL:
geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral
Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. o Historical geological logs for a portion of the drill holes have been
found and translated from Greek. They are of sufficient detail to support a
· Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or mineral resource estimation.
costean, channel, etc) photography.
o The core logging is considered qualitative in nature.
· The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
o Only a portion of the logs have been provided to Rockfire from the Greek
Government. These logs represent ~30 % of the relevant drill holes, being
2,760.9 m of the 9,447.2 m drill meters. The geological logs demonstrate good
relationship between the sulphide rich zones and the historical drill assays.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
· Logging:
o All core was moved from the drill site to the Project field office for
logging and processing (a distance of approximately 1.5km).
o Core was logged geologically and geotechnically.
o Logging was in sufficient detail to support Resource estimation.
· Qualitative/quantitative: Qualitative.
· Length: 100% of core was geologically logged.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation · If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core · HISTORICAL:
taken.
o The core was cut and ½ core was sent for analysis. The core in places has
· If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and been further sampled with the remaining material stored in well-labelled
whether sampled wet or dry. plastic bags within the core trays.
· For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the o Little information exists regarding the methodology of the historical
sample preparation technique. sampling beyond what can be inferred from the remaining core which has been
located by Hellenic.
· Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
maximise representivity of samples. o It appears that no information has been recorded regarding the quality
control procedures.
· Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the
in situ material collected, including for instance results for field o It appears that no information has been recorded regarding the quality
duplicate/second-half sampling. assurance procedures
· Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the o The sample sizes are appropriate given the
material being sampled. massive/semi-massive/disseminated sulphide nature of the mineralization.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
· Sample method:
o The core was cut in ½ core and ½ core was sent for analysis.
o Sample lengths were short and variable (<1 m, in the range 0.1-1.5 m)
and broken on geological breaks.
o Sampling for lab analysis was continuous over mineralised zones, chosen
visually. Waste zones were not sampled for assaying.
o In mid-2024 a hand-held pXRF analyser was introduced and used to scan the
entirety of holes. This introduced further accuracy to selecting mineralised
sections for lab assay. Previously sampled holes were scanned to find
mineralisation that had been missed visually and those sections were then send
for lab assay.
· Appropriateness of sampling:
o Sampling short lengths continuously over sections representing mineralised
layers was considered highly appropriate to the fineness required to sample a
thin layer VMS.
o Introduction of scanning by pXRF added further accuracy to sampling based
on geological logging by detecting all possibly mineralised material.
· Quality control measures:
o Duplicates were inserted every 10 samples with standards and blanks
inserted every 20 samples (SRK notes).
· Representivity of sampling, including duplicates, standards and
blanks:
o Sampling was continuous over full mineralised sections and immediately
adjacent waste.
· Sample size /grain size relationship:
o With sulphide mineralisation grain size being small (at ~2 mm) the
relatively much larger sample sizes (~0.2-1.0 m long, 0.5-3.0 kg in weight)
were appropriate.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests · The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and · HISTORICAL:
laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or
total. o Unknown procedures.
· For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, o The historical assaying was completed by an Italian government laboratory
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and (ITMI) based in Rome.
model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
o No comment can be made regarding the appropriateness of the assaying
· Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, method beyond what can be inferred from the resampling of 50 sections of core,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of which found a good correlation between the historical and re-sampled zinc
accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. assays. The re-sampling demonstrated a variance of ~10%. As such the
historical data is considered as being appropriate for use in this Mineral
Resource Estimate.
o No records exist regarding the assay method used or the quality
assurance/quality control procedures enacted.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
· Assay details:
o Sample preparation and precious mineral analysis was conducted by ALS
Laboratories in Gura Rosiei Romania.
o Analysis for base metals and a suite of 48 elements was conducted by ALS
Laboratories in Galway, Ireland.
o Analytical techniques included ME-MS61 (48 elements), ME-OG62h (lead and
zinc) and ME_MS85 (germanium)
· pXRF details:
o Olympus Vanta M-Series. Cal check, blank (clear quartz?), standard
(OREAS620) before every use.
· QA/QC procedures and results:
o AMISO304, CDN-W-4, CPB-2, EMOG17, MRGeo08, OREAS317, OREAS101b,
OREAS45fand REE-1 for all Standards, Blanks and Duplicates
o Results of original and duplicate sample correlation are deemed to be
within acceptable error limits.
o Results of submitted Standards and Blanks are deemed to be within
acceptable error limits.
Verification of sampling and assaying · The verification of significant intersections by either independent · HISTORICAL:
or alternative company personnel.
o The historic drill results have been verified by Rockfire personnel. The
· The use of twinned holes. historical drill core was located at a government facility in Athens and
select intervals were resampled and sent to ALS for verification analysis.
· Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data
verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. o The original hard copy databases were scanned and presented to Rockfire
resources. These databases were then digitized and validated by Rockfire
· Discuss any adjustment to assay data. personnel and SRK Consulting. All drill data is stored in a Micromine based
system. Manual backups are completed to both separate hard-drive and
cloud-based services.
o No adjustment to assay data has been undertaken.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
· Verification of significant intervals:
o 50 samples were collected from historical core and reanalysed. The hole ID
and sample interval were clearly marked on the original plastic bags in which
the sample is stored. Analytical reproduction was deemed very good, with an
error <10% in all samples.
· Twinned holes:
o Four twin holes were drilled by Hellenic (MO-GTK008 - MO-GTK-011). Results
for holes MO-GTK008, 009 and 010 indicate very good correlation in elevation,
grade and width between the original and twin holes. MO-GTK011 showed similar
width, slightly lower grade, but a variation in downhole position of the
mineralisation of approximately 25 m. This may be as a result of an error in
the elevation recorded for the original drill hole.
· Documentation procedures:
o All drill data is stored electronically in a Micromine based system.
Backups are completed to cloud-based storage and individual computers on a
daily basis. A separate hard-drive back-up is completed each month.
· Adjustments to assays:
o No adjustment to assay data has been undertaken.
Location of data points · Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar · HISTORICAL:
and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in
Mineral Resource estimation. o The original data supplied to Hellenic has been translated from local
Greek grid system into UTM WGS84. The drill data has been matched with
· Specification of the grid system used. different sources of data from various historical records and reports to
provide the best average location fit. This fit corresponds well with the
· Quality and adequacy of topographic control. surveyed underground development completed by the Greek Government and was
further verified by Hellenic drilling 4 twinned holes.
o Topographic control appeared to have been based on government survey data.
This was considered highly adequate for MRE purposes.
· HELLENIC 2023/4:
· Survey accuracy:
o Historic drill hole collar locations which could be found (~20%) were
checked by Hellenic by hand-held GPS and found to match the historic mapping
closely (±10 m). The Consultant confirmed ~20 hole collars during his due
diligence on site.
o New drill hole collars locations determined by hand-held GPS - accurate to
±5 m and considered adequate.
o In July 2024 Rockfire commissioned a high-resolution aerial LIDAR
topography survey. The survey was flown by drone with data provided over the
southern half of the Lease area (the area of current exploration).
o All drill hole collar GPS elevations checked against the new LIDAR
topography survey and found to be ±2 m and considered adequate.
· Coordinate system:
o Project uses a universal coordinate system rather than the Greek system.
o Project mapping all based on projection UTM Zone 34N with WGS84 datum.
· Topography:
o New LIDAR topography survey considered highly accurate (to <1 m in XY).
o This survey provided a DTM surface and an orthophoto - both very adequate
for exploration.
Data spacing and distribution · Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. · Data spacing:
· Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish o Drill hole orientation either vertical or steeply W-dipping (across strike
the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral of E-dipping mineralisation) is considered appropriate.
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.
o Drill hole XY spacing:
· Whether sample compositing has been applied.
§ Holes spaced ~50-100 m E/W across strike.
§ Holes on E/W cross-sections spaced ~100 m apart N/S.
· Data spacing wrt geology:
o Drill hole spacing was sufficiently close to interpret geological and
grade continuity of the interpreted mineralised layer system and for the MRE
procedures used.
o The Inferred JORC classification reflects that adequate drill hole spacing
in that closer spacing would generally be expected to raise the
classification.
· Sample compositing:
o Drill hole samples were composited to exactly 0.5 m (plus >50%
residuals) for block grade estimation.
o Drill hole samples were composited across the full width of interpreted
layer intersections for the estimation of composite layer grade surfaces used
to illustrate layer grade trends.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure · Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of · Data orientation wrt geological structure:
possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the
deposit type. o All mineralisation was interpreted in sub-parallel steeply E-dipping
layers.
· If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the
orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a o Drill orientations were designed to minimise sampling bias by, as far as
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. possible, intersecting layers at a high angle normal to strike.
o Therefore most drill holes were oriented steeply W-dipping.
o Drilling was also spaced reasonably evenly along-strike, thus minimising
drilling only around high-grade areas.
o Sampling in all drill holes was concentrated on or biased towards visibly
mineralised zones. This sampling therefore introduced a bias against waste
zones.
o Down-hole sampling of mineralised zones aimed to be representative by
being continuous over their full width and composed of multiple short samples
(<1 m).
· Orientation introducing bias:
o Drilling orientation and sampling was considered as being unbiased.
Sample security · The measures taken to ensure sample security. · Sample security:
o No information exists regarding the how historical samples were secured.
o Hellenic personnel log and process drill core at a secure field
camp/office set up at a local farmhouse within the Lease area.
o Core trays are subsequently moved to a more permanent secure storage pad
(fenced and locked) at the portal of the old underground mine within the Lease
area.
Audits or reviews · The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. · No information exists as to whether the historical data was ever
reviewed or audited.
· Audits/reviews:
· In 2023 SRK Consulting (UK) performed a review (effectively an audit)
of Rockfire's Molaoi Project. That comprised:
o A visit to the Project site and other data sources (HSGME's offices in
Athens) and undertake inspections and verifications of exploration and all
data to a level that SRK could act as a CP (as defined by JORC) for
preparation of an MRE.
o Performed a high level review of Rockfire's 2022 MRE, including reviewing
the geological setting, reviewing Rockfire's data and completed work and
making recommendations for necessary work, and reviewing Rockfire's Resource
models and estimation procedures.
· SRK's review results were:
o Site visit in early-January 2023: SRK walked over the Molaoi site; took
various GPS readings to confirm a small selection of drill hole collars;
viewed local geology and several mineralised gossan outcrops and confirmed
their E-dipping structure; observed active drilling pads; and observed
Rockfire's core treatment procedures. SRK's overall impression was positive
and their observations confirmed geology, deposit type (VMS), exploration
methods and exploration data.
o HSGME visit in late-January 2023: SRK visited the office of HSGME in
Athens and observed stored drill core and familiarised themselves with
Rockfire's re-sampling program which had confirmed historical assays. SRK's
opinion was that Rockfire's re-sampling verification program was reasonable.
SRK completed an independent comparison of Rockfire's results which confirmed
them.
o MRE review: SRK found that:
§ Rockfire's overall MRE procedures were appropriate.
§ That modelling and estimation issues or details which they would have done
slightly differently would not have made material differences to the quantum
of the Resources.
§ SRK agreed with Rockfire's 4% zinc cut-off although they suggested using
NSR.
§ SRK agreed with Rockfire's classification as Inferred.
§ SRK found that there were opportunities to model more mineralisation from
existing data (significant un-modelled intersections existed) and that
additional mineralised zones would be found with additional exploration.
o Check Resource estimate:
§ In order to check Rockfire's actual Resource figures SRK independently
modelled the mineralisation and estimated comparison Resources.
§ SRK's results were close to Rockfire's and confirmed them.
o Recommendations: SRK made a number of recommendations:
§ Drilling and sampling accuracy: That could be improved though better
surface and down-hole surveying; through tighter core measurement practices;
through tighter QA/QC monitoring of batch assay results; and through an
alternative density method (down-hole geophysics) to overcome difficulties
posed by broken core.
§ Data verification: Confirm more historic drill hole collar locations;
perform a drill hole twinning program (successfully undertaken by Rockfire in
2023); and locate more geological logs of historical data.
§ Surveying: Acquire a high-resolution DTM of the area (successfully
implemented by the LIDAR survey in mid-2024).
§ Geological modelling & estimation: Try to improve confidence in
mineralisation continuity (by finding more historical data); develop a
stratigraphic model of the deposit; model the base of oxidation; further
investigate faulting impact on mineralisation; and undertake an optimisation
study to identify minimum RPEEE criteria.
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
(Criteria listed in the preceding Section 1 also apply to this Section.)
Mineral tenement and land tenure status · Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including · Tenement:
agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, o The Molaoi Project is covered by a single tenement "Exploration and Mining
wilderness or national park and environmental settings. lease M1 (Molaoi Apidia)" in the Laconia Municipality in Greece.
· The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with o Lease M1 is owned by Hellenic Minerals S.A, a 100% subsidiary of Rockfire
any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. Resources PLC.
o Hellenic does not own any freehold land within the Lease area.
o Hellenic has a lease with the Greek Government over the "METVA" area,
which is used for core storage. METVA is also the location of the portal to
the old decline and the crushing facility (since removed) used during trial
mining.
o The Consultant is unaware of any other commercial interests in the Lease.
o The Consultant is aware that hills to the west of the mining lease and
wholly outside the lease boundaries are designated wilderness areas controlled
by the central Greek government. This area is designated Natura 2000 (ORI
ANATOLIKIS LAKONIAS - GR2540007) protected under the Birds Directive.
o The Environmental Permit submitted by Hellenic has an exclusion zone
around the limits of the Natura reserve. This impacts ground-disturbing
exploration in the northern part of the tenement. Hellenic intends to apply
to reduce the exclusion zone to match the legal minimum measurements for such
exclusion zones. Once this application is made, and if successful, the
exclusion zone will not have any encroachment on the mining lease.
· Security of mineral and land tenure:
o Lease M1 was granted for 30 years from March 2022.
o The Lease permits Hellenic to explore for and exploit minerals.
o Hellenic is required to negotiate access and operational rights with
freehold landowners, and to compensate them for disturbance.
o There are no known other impediments to operating in the area or within
the Lease.
Exploration done by other parties · Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. · Historical exploration by other parties:
· The Molaoi Project was discovered and initially explored by the Greek
government geological department (IGME) in the 1980s, and subsequently
continued with IGME in joint venture with a local company METVA.
· IGME completed the generative exploration work:
o Stream sediment sampling
o Geological mapping
o Soil sampling
o Core drilling of ~175 drill holes for 29,800 m.
o Resource estimations (not compliant with any modern reporting codes).
o Trial underground mining (decline and 700m drive development on 2 levels).
o Underground channel sampling
o Underground bulk sampling.
o Metallurgical test-work.
· METVA completed high-level technical studies and feasibility studies.
· Appraisal of past exploration:
o IGME's exploration very effectively identified the presence of a layered
VMS base metal deposit at Molaoi.
o Their drilling exploration (particularly) clearly defined a mineralised
zone ~1.4 km long N/S containing several layers.
o IGME estimated ~2 Mt @ 11% zinc in their principal layer (WB) - not very
different from modern estimations of a layer presumed to be the same.
Geology · Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. · Deposit type:
o The Molaoi deposit was initially considered as being a zinc dominant
'Kuroko style" Volcanogenic Massive sulphide (VMS) system.
o Debate as to the validity of the VMS model is ongoing.
o There is a significant body of evidence which suggests that these zinc VMS
deposits are actually structurally controlled hydrothermal (epigenetic)
systems (possibly intrusion related).
· Geological setting:
o The geological and structural studies indicate a complex setting of
east-dipping andesite lavas and tuffs along with clay-carbonate sediments and
numerous fault breccias.
o The package may have undergone at least three folding events
(contentious). At least one folding event is noted as being isoclinal.
o Given the structural complexity and the relatively good level of
continuation (+1,400 m long) of the zinc mineralized zones it could be
unlikely that the mineralization is primary in nature, as suggested by the VMS
model. As such, the hydrothermally derived model (possibly intrusion
related) could be adopted. In any event the mineralisation is clearly
generally thinly layered regionally but locally may reach 15-20 m thick.
· Mineralisation style:
o Base metal mineralisation is contained within thin (typically <6 m)
sub-parallel east-dipping layers.
o The thin mineralized zone layers are typically hosted in fault breccias
and are represented by massive/semi-massive sulphides surrounded by zones of
disseminated sulphides.
o The sulphides consist of sphalerite, galena, and pyrite. The primary
elements of interest are Zn, Pb, Ag, +/-Ge. Low levels of cadmium have been
recorded within the deposit, it is unclear as to whether or not Cd is a credit
or a detriment to the mineralization at this stage.
Drill hole Information · A summary of all information material to the understanding of the · Drill hole information:
exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for
all Material drill holes: o All known historical and recent drill hole information (collar survey,
hole orientation and length, and down-hole mineralised intercept depths and
o easting and northing of the drill hole collar composite assays) are given in Appendices to the Report.
o elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the o IGME's historical drilling from the 1980s comprised ~175 core drill holes
drill hole collar for 29,800 m.
o dip and azimuth of the hole o Missing IGME data: There was a limited number of historical IGME/METVA
drill holes (from late in their exploration) for which only collar positions
o down hole length and interception depth are known (effectively from mapped locations). No drill hole logs or assays
for these particular holes were made available by IGME, and the IGME database
o hole length. did not contain details on these holes, other than collar positions. The
Consultant presumes these holes were drilled by METVA and the data was lost
· If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that when METVA ceased to operate in the 1990s.
the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why o Hellenic's recent drilling from 2023 comprises 12 core drill holes for
this is the case. 1,866 m.
o Hellenic's recent drilling from 2024 comprises 7 core drill holes for
2,149 m.
o The adjacent plan diagram illustrates the great majority of historical
IGME hole collar locations (blue crosses) in the southern part of the Lease
area (the remaining few are to the NW out of the diagram).
o The diagram also illustrates all recent Hellenic hole collar locations
(red dots).
o Most collars line up on E/W cross-sections (blue lines) spaced 100 m
apart.
Data aggregation methods · In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, · Reporting of data weighting, averaging and cutting:
maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and
cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. o NA - exploration intercept results are not being reported independently.
· Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade o However, as part of the MRE interpreted layers, mineralisation is fully
results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such tabulated in Appendices to the Report.
aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations
should be shown in detail. · Aggregation of intercepts:
· The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values o NA - exploration intercept results are not being reported in this MRE
should be clearly stated. Report.
o However, as part of the MRE interpreted layer mineralisation, grades are
tabulated as length-weighted composites across layer intercepts in Appendices
to the Report.
· Metal equivalent assumptions:
o NA here. Full details of zinc equivalent assumptions and calculation are
given in Table 1, Section 3 below (estimation and reporting of Resources).
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths · These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of · Mineralisation width / intercept width relationship:
Exploration Results.
o All reported interpreted layer intercepts comprised down-hole from and to
· If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole depths fully encompassing the mineralisation.
angle is known, its nature should be reported.
o Thus, the mineralisation width equalled the intercept width at whatever
· If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there angle the hole was to the mineralisation.
should be a clear statement to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width
not known'). · Hole geometry wrt mineralisation geometry:
o Mineralisation geometry was universally interpreted as being in thin,
roughly sub-parallel, steeply E-dipping (50° ±10°) N/S-striking layers
separated by thicker waste (barren) layers.
o Mineralised layers in the zone close to a drill hole were assumed to have
their bounding surfaces roughly parallel (i.e. not folded).
o Since the N/S strike was appreciated, the vast majority of drill hole plan
(XY) orientations were ~E/W (±30°), normal to the strike of the mineralised
layers.
o Apart from various (mostly old) vertical drill holes, the vast majority of
holes were drilled to cross mineralisation layers as close to normal to their
E dip as practicable and so were angled steeply west (down 60-70° to west).
o Thus, drilling aimed to have down-hole intercept widths close to
mineralised layer true widths.
Diagrams · Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of · Relevant diagrams have been included within the main body of the
intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported Report or in Appendices to the Report.
These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar
locations and appropriate sectional views.
Balanced reporting · Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not · N/A - exploration results are not being reported in this MRE Report.
practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or
widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
Other substantive exploration data · Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be · Other data:
reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of o Other exploration data collected from the Project, and used to guide the
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical interpretation and inform this MRE generally, included:
and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
§ Density determinations by Rockfire - reported elsewhere (see below).
§ Bulk sample - from IGME's trial underground mining.
§ Metallurgical test-work by IGME on the bulk sampling.
§ Metallurgical test-work by Hellenic on original core drilled by IGME.
o NA here. Relevant details are given in Table 1, Section 3 below
(estimation and reporting of Resources) and in the body of the Report.
Further work · The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral · Further work:
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).
o The Consultant understands that Rockfire's prime exploration intention
· Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, will be to follow up drilling to extend and in-fill the Resource area in
including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, general.
provided this information is not commercially sensitive.
o SRK's 2023 Project review made recommendations on further work (detailed
under Audits in Section 1 above). Rockfire has implemented many of those
already and are in the process of implementing the remainder.
Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
(Criteria listed in Section 1, and where relevant in Section 2, also apply to
this Section.)
Database integrity · Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for · Data integrity:
example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and
its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. o No information exists regarding the nature, quality, or appropriateness of
the historical data validation by IGME (Rockfire 2022).
· Data validation procedures used.
o Rockfire checked historical raw drill hole collar and sample assay data in
2022. Where possible they checked and made minor corrections to collar
coordinates, hole depths, hole orientation, assay data overlaps and assay
duplicates.
o The use of an Italian government laboratory (ITMI) based in Rome for the
historical results was validated by the Rockfire's re-sampling program which
utilized Australian Laboratory Services (ALS).
o New topography data was cross-checked against historical geological and
topography mapping and found to match closely.
o Drill hole data was supplied in computerised MS Excel spreadsheet form.
§ Historical collar location data was spot-checked against plotted plans
matched closely.
§ Hole collars (where visible) were checked against new aerial photography
matched closely.
§ A good number of historical and all new hole collar locations were
confirmed during the site visit.
§ No reporting of historical assays was available to allow checking.
However Rockfire's re-sampling of core retained at HSGME correlated well and
provided confidence about the accuracy of past assaying.
· Data validation:
o The Consultant databased all data into Minex geological software.
o Topography data: New topography data was contoured and compared again
historical topography contours and found to match closely.
o Drill hole data: Gross software error data checking occurred with all
drill holes during its databasing. This caught a very minor number of
collar, survey, sample depth and assay value inconsistencies. All data
issues were satisfactorily resolved and corrected by reference to logs and
through common sense. Drill holes were plotted in plan and cross-section and
compared with plots in old reports.
Site visits · Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the · Site visits:
outcome of those visits.
o The Consultant (CP for the Resource estimation and this Report) visited
· If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. the site in late April 2024 in the company of Rockfire's CEO and various
Hellenic (Rockfire's Greek subsidiary) personnel.
o The visit formed a specific and comprehensive due diligence on the Project
- all of which confirmed the Project's setting, geology, mineralisation and
exploration.
o The visit confirmed all geographical and (limited) geological features and
presumptions of the Project area necessary for the Resource estimation.
o Geographically the Consultant gained impressions of the Project general
location, its access from the sealed road running the length of the Project
area and mineral lease and the valley topography bounded by hills. The
Consultant traversed much of the southern part of the tenement on foot.
o An impression was gained of the steeply east-dipping basement volcanics
and overlying limestones.
o A number of gossanous mineralisation outcrops were visited.
o The Consultant confirmed the precise location of a broad selection of
historical drill hole collar locations and almost all recent drill hole collar
locations.
Geological interpretation · Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological · Geology and mineralisation 'style' interpretation:
interpretation of the mineral deposit.
o The historical geological interpretation was that of a VMS type base metal
· Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. deposit.
· The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral o Zinc mineralisation occurs in a sequence of thin sub-parallel layers
Resource estimation. dipping steeply eastward and hosted within volcanic rocks.
· The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource · Confidence in the geological interpretation:
estimation.
o The Consultant became highly confident in the VMS mineralised layer
· The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology. interpretation after the site inspection and data familiarization
· Data nature, assumptions & geological controls:
o Interpretation was based on historical descriptions and interpretations;
field outcrop inspections; and interpretation of assay data.
o The basic assumptions and geological controls were:
§ High grade primary base metal mineralisation on flat sea floors typical of
other VMS deposits - interspersed by barren sediments in the geological
column.
§ Occurrence of narrow sharp (distinct contacts) high-grade drill hole
intercepts correlated between holes into layers.
· Alternative interpretations:
o The data overwhelmingly supports the current layered geology and
mineralisation style interpretation and the Consultant cannot envisage an
alternative one.
o If the current interpretation was not implemented a simple semi-layered 3D
grade modelling method would produce a similar Resource but much less sharp
grade boundary focused.
· Use of geology and grade continuity:
o The geological layered VMS model appreciated early in the Project history
directed most drill hole orientation to be steeply west across strike and
across dip of the perceived attitude of east-dipping layers.
o Geological grade continuity was tightly controlled by obvious correlation
of mineralised intercepts in the drill holes.
o Grade estimation was controlled within the plane of the mineralisation
layering by the use of an un-folding block model - which forced continuity in
the plane of the layers.
o Grades in each layer were segregated with a unique data population domain
number.
o Block grade estimation also employed a strong vertical direction distance
weighting factor (2) to minimise vertical continuity and emphasise continuity
within the layer.
Dimensions · The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as · Deposit dimensions:
length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the
upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. o Coordinates of the area encompassing the Lease:
§ Long polygon oriented NW/SE.
§ Lease ~7 km long NW/SE
§ Lease ~1.5 km wide SW/NE
§ Lease area ~9.4 km(2).
o Resource model area:
§ Area in the SE of the tenement formed the area of all recent exploration:
o Layer model area (of all combined layers):
§ N/S strike ~2.2 km
§ E/W width ~900 m
§ Depth ~500 m
Estimation and modelling techniques · The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied · ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES
and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining,
interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data · Estimation combined several techniques:
points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a
description of computer software and parameters used. o Mineralised layer structures - gridded DTM surfaces.
· The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine o Grades - "un-folding" block modelling for grade interpolation and regular
production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate block modelling for reporting.
account of such data.
· Mineralised layer structure surface modelling:
· The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.
o Software: Modelling and estimation was done in Minex Genesis software.
· Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of
economic significance (eg sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). o Deposit type: Interpreted as a strongly "layered" VMS deposit.
· In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation o Estimation methods:
to the average sample spacing and the search employed.
§ Geological structural layer modelling employed computerised gridded DTM
· Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. surface interpolation.
· Any assumptions about correlation between variables. § Interpolated layers were built into an "un-folding" block model to guide
block grade interpolation.
· Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control
the resource estimates. o Appropriateness of estimation methods:
· Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. § Combination of surface interpolation followed by "un-folding" grade
estimation along the layers considered best suited to deposit type.
· 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 surface DTM method's appropriateness stems from its 3D computational
capability and rigor when applied to thin "layer" deposits where manual
interpretation between relatively widely spaced drill hole data points cannot
match interpolation in 3D.
§ Gridded surfaces allow simple mathematical operations within and between
surfaces, including preventing over-laps.
§ Bounding layer surfaces were interpolated from down-hole drill hole layer
intercepts for each layer to give hanging wall (structure roof, SR) and foot
wall (structure floor, SF) boundary surfaces.
§ "Un-folding" block model trending grade estimation as continuity in the
plane of the layers considered to most closely achieve the strong observed
grade trends within and along the layers.
o Roof/floor/thickness: Here the layer surfaces computation order was:
§ Overall 23 individual layers were interpreted in drill holes, of which 18
had enough data to model. Layer list adjacent:
§ Floor surfaces were interpolated from the layer lower intercept depths.
§ Thicknesses were interpolated from the down-hole lengths of the layer
intercepts.
§ Roof surfaces were computed by addition of the thickness surfaces to the
floor surfaces.
o Algorithm:
§ Floor surface modelling used a trending growth algorithm to interpolate
smooth natural surfaces (as opposed to straight line methods) as a regular
fine mesh. Through extrapolation this method honours local inflections away
from the reference plane mean orientation. Mesh point interpolations grow
out from data points until all mesh points are estimated.
§ A long default scan distance of 1,000 m was used to produce a smooth
regional surface for the method.
o Algorithm:
§ Thickness surface modelling used an inverse distance squared algorithm to
keep interpolated values within data limits (preventing extrapolation).
§ A long scan distance of 500 m was used to avoid holes in surfaces caused
where distances were great between drill holes.
§ At the edges surfaces were only expanded 80 m beyond peripheral drill
holes.
o Coordinates and grid mesh size:
§ Surfaces were interpolated within a coordinate area encompassing all drill
holes with interpreted layer intercepts.
§ The adjacent figure shows a number of layers in plan view, illustrating
their slightly differing locations.
§ The DTM mesh point dimensions of all surface gridded DTMs were 10*10 m.
This was considered fine enough to produce smooth surfaces honouring layer
intercepts well but not be greatly finer than the ~50*100-200 m drill hole
spacing.
o Orientation:
§ All layer surfaces were effectively sub-parallel and dipping ~45-50° to
the east.
§ The adjacent figure looks horizontally northwards at a selection of layer
floors.
§ Modelling could have used an inclined reference plane dipping parallel to
the layers.
§ However to avoid rotational complications all layers were modelled with
respect to an (assumed) horizontal reference plane at 0 RL.
o Boundary:
§ No limiting boundary polygons were used.
§ Surfaces were interpolated to 80 m outside peripheral drill hole intercepts
by layer.
§ This distance was less than the typical drill hole spacing (~50-100*100-200
m)
o Stratigraphic model build: After independent interpolation of each
layer's roof and floor the suite of surfaces was 'built' into a valid model
using processes to correct potential cross-overs between and within lodes.
This process resulted in near zero loss.
o Surface naming:
§ File: Molaoi_20240508.GRD
§ Bounding surfaces: Layer name + suffix SR and SF.
§ Thickness surfaces: Layer name + suffix ST.
· Data population domains:
o Samples and blocks (see below) in layers were uniquely identified and
segregated by domain number for assay analysis and block grade estimation.
o Domains were set in the drill hole database and in the block models.
o Domain numbers given above with the layer names (see layer Table above).
· Drill hole sample analysis:
o Base metals (zinc, lead and silver) were the focus of the Project - and
mineralised drill hole intercepts were interpreted as layers based on grade.
o Brief analysis was performed for the principal base metal zinc in the
layers with most intercepts.
o Brief interpretations showed the mineralised intercepts to be sharply
anomalous against waste between layers.
· Grade continuity control 'un-folding' block model:
o An 'un-folding' 3D block model (MOL1_D/Z.GR3) was built within the
geological layer surface models to provide domain control within layers and to
control grade trending continuity within and along the layers (the 'Z'
direction in a Minex 'Z-grid' block model). Dimensions tabulated adjacent:
o Rotation: As the layers were essentially in an ~45°E dipping plane the
Z-grid required no rotating to have its Z axis normal to that plane (see
below).
o Extent: The un-folding block model was given a smaller and tighter plan
extent than the default used for interpolating the layers. The extent
covered all 18 layers being modelled.
o Block size: XY block size set at 10 * 40 m to be roughly 25% of the
minimum drill hole spacing of ~50 * 1-200 m (some holes 100 * 200 m).
o Block Z size and number:
§ Block numbers set according to layer average vertical thicknesses.
§ Aim to approximate Z block size 0.5 m.
§ Each mineralised layer given unique domain number.
§ Parameters tabulated adjacent:
· Grade block estimation:
o 3D block grades were estimated into individual grade block models for each
element. The block grade models had the same coordinate parameters as the
un-folding model (see above).
o Estimation parameters tabulated:
o Continuity: Data search directions within the layers were controlled by
the un-folding block model, and layer data was segregated by domain number.
A vertical (Z) distance weighting of 1.5 was used to enhance continuity in the
plane (XY) of the layering.
o Compositing: Down-hole drill hole sample compositing done to 0.5 m +
residuals +50%.
o Algorithm: Inverse distance squared (ID2) done in a single pass.
Interpolation of grades in two passes (to overcome issues of very localised
highly anomalous grades) was considered but not undertaken because of the
limited numbers of high grade samples in particular. In a 2 pass estimation
an initial 1st pass uses all samples whilst a 2nd pass uses only high grade
samples with severely restricted scan distances to over-write blocks close to
the high grades.
o Scan distance:
§ A scan of 250 m was used to ensure grades were estimated in all blocks.
§ Distance was ~25% longer than generally longest N/S distances between drill
holes.
§ In practice the boundary limit around the layer surfaces (and hence block
model) limited actual scans to <80 m.
o Data limits:
§ No lower cut or clip limits were applied or required as the layer intercept
interpretation process had effectively applied a lower 0.2 % zinc cut-off
already.
§ No upper cut of clip was applied because of 1) the limited number of
anomalous high grades, 2) their short intervals, and 3) the positive desire to
allow the few high grades to register higher grades in some blocks.
o Estimation stats tabulated:
· Grade reporting block model:
o A normal "orthogonal-shaped" block model (MOL1.G3*, simply called a block
model or a block database) was built from the un-folding block model.
Parameters tabulated adjacent:
o Block sizes/numbers to cover the same coordinates as the un-folding block
model.
o Primary block sizes were based on the un-folding block model for X and
Y. Z assigned a fixed 10 m vertically to be the same as X for the ~45° east
dipping layers. So primary blocks 10 * 40 * 10 m.
o Primary blocks sub-blocked 5 * 2 * 5 to increase resolution across strike
along layer surfaces. So minimum sub-block potentially 2 * 20 * 2 m.
o Block grades were loaded from the individual grade block models (see
above).
o Other variables, such as grade totals and JORC classification variables,
were computed using SQL macros.
· Grade block manipulation:
o Zinc equivalent (ZnEq) calculated with an SQL from zinc, lead and silver
o Elements factorised on 3 month average metals prices to 25(th) July 2024
and historical Molaoi metallurgical recoveries. Computations tabulated:
· Check estimates:
o Resource estimate could be partially checked (for 1 layer and minor parts
of 3 others) against historic estimates (non-JORC) made by IGME in the 1980s
during the original exploration; and against Rockfire's 2022 (JORC estimate);
and against SRK's 2023 (non-JORC) reconciliation of Rockfire's estimate.
o Those estimates of historic layer West Zone B could approximately be
checked against this layer L3 as they covered similar areas and the new recent
drilling by Hellenic did not increase the area but represented internal
in-fill drilling simply supplying more grades. The comparison also appears
valid as densities were similar and Rockfire's ZnEq calculation was similar to
here as parameters had not changed dramatically. Comparisons are tabulated
adjacent:
o Rockfire's comparison to IGME's estimate had 15% more tonnes at 15% less
zinc grade, resulting in virtually the same contained zinc - a close
comparison.
o Similary SRK's comparison to Rockfire had 14% more tonnes at a similarly
lower zinc grade, resulting in contained zinc being 6% less - also a close
comparison.
o GeoRes's comparison to Rockfire and SRK had 13% more tonnes then Rockfire
(and the same as SRK) at slightly lower zinc grades than both, resulting in
14% less contained zinc then Rockfire and 9% less than SRK.
o GeoRes considers that its L3 estimate reconciles well with Rockfire's and
very well with SRK's.
o All other 17 layers interpreted here were not estimated in the pas and
cannot be checked.
· By-product recovery:
o Elements other than base metals and germanium were effectively not
considered in this Resource estimate, hence most potential by-products were
not considered.
o However germanium has recently been assayed for and is a common by-product
of some zinc deposits.
o GeoRes provides a quantity estimate for germanium, and considers that the
significant tonnage and reasonable grade would position germanium as
by-product if it proves amenable to extraction from residues of zinc
beneficiation.
· Deleterious elements:
o No deleterious elements have been considered or are known of
· Block size - sample size relationship:
o Situation:
o Block sizes: Major block sizes were moderate at 10 * 40 * 10 m - and not
considered too small for the typical data spacing. Sub-blocking (5*2*5)
reduces those sizes along the edges of layers in a proportionate way.
o Sample spacing:
o Down-hole sampling was typically of the order of 1 m.
o Drill N/S section spacing was typically 100 m, sporadically 200 m.
o Hole E/W spacing on section was ~50 to 100 m.
o Data search distances: Maximum ~250 m.
o Distance relationships:
o Plan block sizes were considered well-proportioned to drill hole spacing
(20-25% in X and Y).
o Vertical block sizes were considered very well-proportioned to down-hole
sampling intervals (100% bigger in Z).
· Model - SMU relationship:
o No specific focus on selective mining units (SMU) occurred.
o However The primary 10*40*10 m block size, with potential sub-blocking to
2*20*2 m, would be similar in size to an underground mining SMU - given that
the Consultant considers that mining by underground would be probable.
o IGME's underground mining was done in drives of those dimensions.
· Correlation between variables:
o No work on variable correlation was done.
o However it was clear that the base metals were typically closely
corelated, a feature used extensively through the mineralised layer intercept
interpretation.
· Geological interpretation control of estimate:
o Previously described in detail - mineralised intercept interpretation
layer by layer in each drill hole sub-parallel to volcanic layering.
o In summary - the block grade estimates were fundamentally controlled by
the geological interpretation of strong layered sub-parallel mineralization.
Mineralised layers were specifically modelled to match layer shapes and grades
estimated in them were confined by domain control and by the use of
'un-folding' modelling to emphasise layer continuity along them.
· Grade cutting/capping use:
o No grade cutting of clipping was used.
o Justification for this was
o Layer interpretations had effectively already clipped out low grades
(below 300 ppm TREO).
o Highly anomalous grades were relatively uncommon and where they existed
the Consultant considered that they should be incorporated to realistically
allow the known high grade shutes to be represented. The fact that REEs
consist of 15 individual elements, each individually estimated here before
being combined into totals meant that high values in any one of the elements
had limited impact overall.
o The Consultant considers that individual anomalously high grades could
potentially be clipped in future estimation, after consideration hole-by-hole,
if they were found to be completely isolated.
· Estimate validation:
o Block geology validation:
§ Volume report: Initial check to compare volumes reported within
geological layer model surfaces with volumes reported from the blocks built
from them. Expect almost exact match. Checks all considered acceptable.
§ Plots: Visual cross-sectional plot comparison of block boundaries with
geological model surface intersections. Particular focus on validity of the
blocks in each layer (possibly corrupt if the raw surfaces overlapped). Also
check of block domain assignments. Comparisons considered good.
o Block grade estimate validation:
§ Estimate stats: Initial basic check to compare overall (not on a
lode/domain basis) stats given during the block estimation - input drill
sample stats with output estimated grade stats. Expect reasonable but not
exact match. Particular focus on closeness of the maximums and the raw
averages. Results considered acceptable.
§ Plots: Methodical visual cross-sectional plot comparison of colour-coded
block grades with annotated drill hole samples. Comparisons considered
acceptable.
· Estimate reconciliation:
o Estimate reconciliation: Described above under "Check estimates" for the
L3 layer. Not possible for other layers as they were not previously
interpreted.
o The Consultant's overall view here was that the past 2022 Resource
estimate by Rockfire was completely valid in itself (and as confirmed by SRK's
2023 review) but only represented a very small proportion of this Resource.
Moisture · Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural · Moisture:
moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.
o Tonnage was calculated using dry density.
Cut-off parameters · The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters · Resource grade cut-off:
applied.
· A lower cut-off of 4% zinc was used in reporting Resources.
· Basis:
o Zinc was the predominant base metal in the deposit.
o A 4% zinc cut-off was seen as reasonable and conservative when compared to
a wide range of similar VMS deposits.
o The value was also seen to be appropriate to envisaged underground mining.
o The 400 ppm cut-off also corresponded to the bottom end of direct tonnage
correlation in the grade/tonnage curve.
o A 4% cut-off lies approximately mid-way down the left-hand linear portion
of the grade/tonnage curve and well away from smaller tonnages associated with
the high grade tail produced by higher cut-offs.
o The Consultant agrees with SRK's 2023 comment that an alternative cut-off
method could be based on a Net Smelter Return (NSR) value where each metal's
value contributes. However the Consultant did not go into that deeper level
of refinement considering that the deposit is open in all directions and that
further exploration could be expected to alter parameters to the good.
Mining factors or assumptions · Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining · Mining factors & assumptions:
dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is
always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects o The Consultant assumed future extraction by underground "narrow vein" type
for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the mining.
assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating
Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this o Underground mining was undertaken successfully at Molaoi (within the
should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions current Lease) by IGME in the 1980s. That mining involved a 700 m decline
made. and then drives on two levels.
o Narrow vein type mining would be highly applicable to the deposit's
layers, in scale and geological form. It would also minimize dilution by
being highly selective.
o Envisaged mineral processing would be concentration by flotation on site.
Underground bulk sampling and metallurgical test-work in the 1980s produced
high recoveries >90%.
o Exports of concentrates would presumably be highly feasible through
trucking on local sealed roads to local ports.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions · The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical · Metallurgical assumptions:
amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential o Past metallurgical test work on bulk samples from IGME's 1980's
metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment underground mining showed Molaoi's (fresh) sulphide ore to be amenable to
processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always simple flotation separation, with high recoveries reported (95.8 % for Zn,
be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an 91.8 % for Pb, and 91 % for Ag).
explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.
o Test-work on oxidized material proved inconclusive.
o Results of that test work was used in various historical process flow
studies.
o The possibility of germanium extraction as a by-product was apparently not
studied in the past - but would be suggested by the good quantities indicated
in this estimate.
Environmen-tal factors or assumptions · Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue · Environmental factors/assumptions:
disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the o The Consultant is generally unaware of any potentially negative impacts of
potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While the Project environmentally.
at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts,
particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the o Envisaged underground mining would minimize environmental impacts in
status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should comparison the opencut mining.
be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be
reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made. o Underground mining could potentially reduce waste by back-filling stopes.
o Flotation concentration on site would pose minimal environmental risk.
o Further concentration and smelting is not envisaged on-site and would
occur where the flotation concentrated would be shipped to (potentially
Northern Greece).
Bulk density · Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the · Bulk density:
assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency
of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. o A considerable number of density measurements were undertaken by Rockfire.
· The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods o Measurements were used to produce a regression formula (SG = [2.5481 +
that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and (0.0284 * Zn%)]) for density based on zinc content.
differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit.
o Density determination using water displacement method: Density was
· Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation determined from the weight and volume of samples of 10-15 cm long pieces of
process of the different materials. core. Volume was determined by wrapping the core in plastic and measuring
its displacement of water. Rockfire found this to be reliable with sample
weights >700 g.
o The Consultant used a default density of 2.7 t/m(3) for the Resource
estimate. This value was seen to be very close (within 2%) when applied to
the average zinc grades in the Resource.
· Density accounting for rock variability:
o Rockfire's dry density determinations were consistently made but could not
fully account for rock variability due to the varied nature of mineralised
intervals, and particularly by the broken and poor quality of parts of the
mineralisation.
· Assumptions behind density estimates:
o Density determination relied heavily on sample recovery being 100%.
JORC Classification · The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into · JORC classification: See Section 20.2 in the Report.
varying confidence categories.
o Previous classification: 2022 Resources were classified as Inferred
· Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (according to JORC (2012 Edition) by the CP Mr Ed Fry for Rockfire.
(ie relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input
data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity o Current classification: The Consultant considered here that 100% of
and distribution of the data). these base metal Resources should all be classified as Inferred, according to
JORC (2012 Edition).
· Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person's view
of the deposit. o The "quantities" of germanium estimated alongside the base metals are not
reported according to JORC and are un-classified.
o Basis for Inferred classification:
§ The Consultant's opinion was that all data and its modelling strongly
implies geological and grade continuity along thinnish layers at Molaoi.
§ However the lack of assaying and geological logging for many parts of
historical drill holes resulted in layers too frequently being implied from
holes either side (over long distances (>200 m) in places) rather than
being firmly interpreted. Incomplete assaying and logging of historical
drill holes meant that many layers geologically interpreted for this Resource
could not be reliably interpreted in historical holes, requiring interpolation
of their positions and assignment of zero thickness.
§ GeoRes accepts that "comprehensive" verification should not imply
"complete" verification - but rather mean in a generalised sense that all
combined old and new data meets a certain threshold of overall data
compatibility. The Consultant does not believe that threshold has been met.
§ The extent to which layer positions required interpolation would not "allow
the application of Modifying Factors in sufficient detail to support mine
planning".
§ Notwithstanding that this 2024 Resource includes data from new Hellenic
drilling to add to the historical IGME drilling, GeoRes's classification
position generally mirrors previous positions (particularly as detailed by
SRK). That is to say that the lack of "comprehensive" verification of
historical data coupled with the inability to fully correlate it with new data
prevents a higher classification.
· Accounting for relevant factors:
o The CP considers that appropriate account has been taken of all relevant
factors.
o The most relevant factor influencing the Inferred decision was the
incomplete knowledge of historical drill hole logging.
· CP's view of classification:
o The CP has a very positive opinion of the deposit in scale and grade, and
that it remains open in all directions.
o The CP considers data analysis results, drill hole spacing, and Resource
estimation methods used fully support the classification given.
o The Consultant believes that a reasonable proportion of the current
Inferred Resources would be very readily be upgraded to at least the Indicated
class most cost-effectively by relatively minimal continued exploration
drilling amongst the recent Hellenic 2023 and 2024 drill holes where they were
closest and most evenly spaced to achieve an even spacing envisaged as <75
m.
o Furthermore a more considerable portion of the current Resource could be
upgraded by a larger program in-fill drilling between existed drill holes to
halve the current along-strike 100 m E/W cross-section spacing to 50 m.
Audits or reviews · The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. · Audits:
o The Project and the previous Rockfire 2022 Resource estimate was reviewed
by SRK in 2023.
o That "high level" review looked at Project data, exploration techniques
and previous Resource estimates. It included a site visit and computation of
a check estimate.
o On Rockfire's MRE SRK comments were positive and noted that:
§ The approach to modelling was the best possible considering the data
available.
§ Rockfire's 2% zinc cut-off for interpreting layer intercepts could have
been lower so as to include more lower grade intervals.
§ Block size used was too small relative to data spacing, but considering the
Inferred status this was not material.
§ The Inferred classification was appropriate.
§ The reporting 4% zinc cut-off should be replaced by an NSR value.
§ Metal price assumptions should be long-term forecasts rather than spot
prices.
§ SRK's check estimate returned figure very close to Rockfire's, thus
validating it and proving Rockfire's estimation approach to be reasonable.
§ SRK noted the potential for additional Resources in the model area as
additional lenses in both the hanging wall and the footwall and along
strike. They noted "The mineralisation drilled and modelled to date is quite
continuous and suggests that it is likely that extensions to existing modelled
zones, as well as additional zones of mineralisation, will be located with
additional exploration". They added that "There are additional significant
intersections on the project that have not been modelled to date and suggest
even further potential".
§ The Consultant strongly agrees with comments in the last paragraph, and
included those additional intersections and more in this 2024 Resource.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence · Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence · Accuracy & confidence in the estimate:
level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed
appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of o Statement: The Consultant is confident in the accuracy of the
statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of estimate.
the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not
deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect o Reasons include:
the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.
§ The careful geological mineralised intercept interpretation and layer
· The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local surface modelling are considered the most appropriate to the style of
estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be mineralisation.
relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include
assumptions made and the procedures used. § The clear continuity of grades between virtually all of the drill holes
gives the CP confidence in the interpretation.
· These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate
should be compared with production data, where available. § The historical underground mine proved the dipping layer mineralisation
style and the practicality of extraction.
§ Historical metallurgical test-work proved good extractability of metal.
§ Parts of these interpretations and estimates may be considered as at least
second generation studies.
§ Resource estimation for layer L3 closely reconciles with previous
estimates.
· Risks to the Resources:
o The Consultant considers potential risks to the estimation to be minimal.
o Potential risks identified, all considered moderate to very low, were:
§ Miss-interpretation of layers was possible due to some wide hole spacings
and due to missing data from historical drill holes.
§ Down-hole survey data - missing for historical holes and apparently all
straight for recent holes.
§ Sample accuracy - due to low quality/recovery of some sampling of broken
mineralisation. Risk of under-estimating grade.
§ Base of limestone has not yet been modelled. Impact unknown.
§ Density used was default. Very sligh possibility of under-estimating
tonnage.
§ Lack of assay cutting. Anomalously high grades were very few in number,
were generally from very short sample intervals, were probably under-called
anyway, and down-hole compositing almost completely removed their effect.
· Global or local estimate: This is a global estimate.
· Comparisons with production data: No production data yet exists
for the Project.
CP Statements
Separate Competent Person (CP) Statements are given for the estimation of
Molaoi's 2024 Mineral Resources and the reporting of them here (by Consultant
Mr Robin Rankin for GeoRes) and for Molaoi's input exploration data (by Mr
David Price for Rockfire).
Resource estimation & Mineral Resources:
Statement: The information in this Report, that relates to Exploration
Targets, Exploration results and Mineral Resources at Molaoi in Greece (the
Project), was based on base metal exploration information and data that was
compiled and supplied by Rockfire Resources plc (Rockfire) (see Exploration
data Competent Person Statement below) which was reviewed and used for
Resource estimation and reporting by Robin Rankin, a Competent Person who is a
Member (#110551) of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
(AusIMM) and accredited since 2000 as a Chartered Professional by the AusIMM
in the Geology discipline. Robin Rankin is the author of this Report.
Robin Rankin provided this information to his Client Rockfire as paid
consulting work in his capacity as Principal Consulting Geologist and operator
of independent geological consultancy GeoRes. He and GeoRes are
professionally and financially independent in the general sense and
specifically of their Client and of the Client's Project. This consulting
was provided on a paid basis, governed by a scope of work and a fee and
expenses schedule, and the results and conclusions reported were not
contingent on payments (other than their validity being negated by
non-payment). Robin Rankin has sufficient experience that is relevant to the
style of mineralization 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' (the JORC Code). Robin Rankin consents
to the inclusion in his Client's report(s) of the matters based on this
information in the form and context in which it appears. Robin Rankin's
Competent Person Statement is given on the basis that his Client takes
responsibility to a Competent Persons level for the collection and integrity
of all source input data supplied by the Client.
Source data: All source data (whether supplied by his Client or derived
elsewhere) was originally taken at face value by the Consultant. The
Consultant performed validation of the data to the extent considered possible
and to his satisfaction. He believes that validation to at least be to the
level required for JORC Resource estimation and reporting. The Consultant
could not validate 'historical data' to the same degree as recent data.
Validity: This Statement will be become invalid, and all consents withdrawn,
if consulting fees are outstanding for an unreasonable period (taken here to
be more than a month after the date on the introductory letter). This general
consent may be subordinated by specific consent details agreed with the
Client.
Input exploration data:
Statement: The input exploration information in this report that relates to
Exploration results, Exploration data, Sampling Techniques or Geochemical
Assay Methodology is based on information compiled by Mr David Price,
Competent Person, who is a Fellow of the AusIMM (#107108). Mr Price is Chief
Executive Officer (CEO), shareholder and full-time employee of Rockfire
Resources PLC (Rockfire). Mr Price has sufficient experience in mineral
exploration and in 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 Price
consents to the inclusion in this Report of the matters based on his
information in the form and context in which it appears.
Company information: Some information in this report was extracted from
reports lodged as ASX announcements and is available on Rockfire's website
(www.rockfireresources.com (http://www.rockfireresources.com) ) . Rockfire
confirms that it is not aware of any new information that materially affects
the information included in original market announcements and that all
material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in
the relevant market announcements continue to apply and have not materially
changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent
Persons' findings are presented have not been materially modified from the
original market announcements.
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact
rns@lseg.com (mailto:rns@lseg.com)
or visit
www.rns.com (http://www.rns.com/)
.
RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services. For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange use the personal data you provide us, please see our
Privacy Policy (https://www.lseg.com/privacy-and-cookie-policy)
. END DRLSSMSMLELSESURecent news on Rockfire Resources
See all newsREG - AIM - AIM Notice - 24/09/2024
AnnouncementREG - Rockfire Resources - Result of Retail Offer & Result of Fundraise
AnnouncementREG - Rockfire Resources - Placing and Subscription to raise £0.45 million
AnnouncementREG - Rockfire Resources - Retail Offer
AnnouncementREG - Rockfire Resources - Interim Results
Announcement