Oriental Peninsula Resources Group Inc

1,686 views
1,597 views

Published on

Oriental Peninsula Resources Group Inc

REPORT ON THE MINERAL RESOURCE VALIDATION OF
CITINICKEL MINES AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
NARRA AND ESPAÑOLA, PALAWAN

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
2 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • YES TO LIFE
    AGRICULTURE & ECO TOURISM
    No to mining in Palawan AND other
    Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs)
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Ang yaman ng Palawan ay yaman ng Pilipinas It is known as the Philippines’ Last Ecological Frontier. It has 40% of our country’s remaining mangrove areas, 30% of our coral reefs, at least 17 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), 2 UNESCO World Heritage Sites, and 8 declared Protected Areas (PAs). It is unmatched anywhere in the country
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,686
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
38
Comments
2
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Oriental Peninsula Resources Group Inc

  1. 1. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources REPORT ON THE MINERAL RESOURCE VALIDATION OF CITINICKEL MINES AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION NARRA AND ESPAÑOLA, PALAWAN1. INTRODUCTION On a letter dated September 11, 2007, the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) was requested by Citinickel Mining Corporation to undertake a validation of the mineral resource for the Toronto and Pulot Nickel Mining Projects located in Narra and Española, Palawan. In response to the said request, the undersigned technical personnel conducted the fieldwork in the subject property from October 5- 8, 2007. The objective of the fieldwork was to validate the declared mineral resource identified and delineated by previous exploration programs in the Citinickel Project under Mineral Production Sharing Agreement No. 229-2007-IVB There were three (3) general areas of concerns verified during the field validation to assess the acceptability of the declared mineral resources, namely: a) basic exploration data and integrity of database; b) parameters used in the resource estimation; and c) procedures of sampling, assaying, handling of assay results and resource models. 2. PROJECT BACKGROUND 2.1 Property Legal Rights The two (2) claim blocks in the Toronto Nickel Project were applied by Toronto Exploration in June 1970 and were registered in the Office of the Mining Recorder in Puerto Princesa on July 30, 1970. Thru an Operating Agreement with subsequent amendments, the Olympic Mines and Development Corporation (OMDC) acquired the rights to explore, develop and exploit these claim blocks which are both covered by Mineral Lease Contacts Nos. V-549 and V-550. The technical description of which were as follows: Block Latitude Longitude Area Lease Contracts North Block 9°14’30” to 9°15’00” 118°14’30” to 118°14’30” 192 PLC-V-550 South Block 9°12’30” to 9°14’00” 118°15’00” to 118°17’00” 576 PLC-V-550 The Pulot claims were applied for by two mining companies namely, Mondo Exploration Corporation covering the southern area and Atlantic City Exploration Corporation for the northern portion on June 2-13, 1970 and were registered on June 22, 1970. 1
  2. 2. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesOMDC acquired the rights over the area through an Operating Agreement withsubsequent amendments, to explore, develop, and exploit the mineral propertiesbounded by the following geographical coordinates: Block Latitude Longitude Area Lease ContractsArea* 9°03’00” to 9°06’30” 117°56’30” to 117°58’30” 1,408 PLC-V-554, MLC MRD 127-130 Prior to the exploration of the Mining Lease Contracts (MLCs), the Torontoand Pulot Nickel Projects, OMDC applied for a Mineral Production sharingAgreement (MPSA) with this Office on August 21, 1996 denominated as AMA-IVB-40 pursuant to the provisions of the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 (R.A. No. 7942). On July 18, 2003, OMDC entered into an operating agreement with PlatinumGroup Metals Corporation (PGMC) for the Toronto and Pulot claims. Subsequentlyon November 4, 2004, OMDC/PGMC applied for four (4) Small Scale MiningPermits (SSMPs) denominated as follows SSMP for Toronto : Nos. 37 and 39 SSMP for Pulot : Nos. 38 and 40 PGMC, as the Mine Operator, started development and extraction of nickelore from SSMP Nos. 37 and 39 in 2005 while the SSMP Nos. 38 and 40 wereunder development. However, PGMC was able to extract and ship more that300,000 DMT of nickel ore to Japan and Australia. Over extraction and violation ofthe Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) prompted OMDC to apply for therevocation of the Operating Agreement with PGMC. OMDC then signed anOperating Agreement with Rockworks Resources Corporation on April 18, 2006. On June 9 2006, a Deed of Assignment of the areas covered by AA-IVB-040was executed in favor of Citinickel. MPSA No. 229-2007-IVB was granted toCitinickel by the DENR Secretary on January 3, 2007.2.2 Exploration History In 1970, OMDC entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with MarubeniCorporation and Pacific Metals Co. of Japan for the direct shipping of nickel silicateore for Japanese smelter plants. A feasibility study was likewise completed whichinclude the establishment of nickel reserves, the design of mine and shippingfacilities and exploration works by geochemical soil sampling using manual augerdrills, test pitting and core drilling by vibro drilling machines. 2
  3. 3. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources3. LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY 3.1 Location and Accessibility 3.1.1 Pulot Nickel Project The Pulot Nickel Project is located in the municipality of Sofronio, Espanola with an aggregate area of approximately 1,408 hectares. It is specifically situated in Barangay Pulot with some portions lying within barangays Labog and Punang. It is bounded by the following geographical coordinates: Parcel 3: Espanola Area 1,408 hectares Corner Latitude Longitude 1 9º06’30.05” 117º58’18.21” 2 9º06’30.05” 117º56’59.62” 3 9º04’19.85” 117º56’59.62” 4 9º04’19.85” 117º56’33.42” 5 9º03’27.27” 117º56’33.42” 6 9º03’27.27” 117º57’52.01” 7 9º03’53.81” 117º57’52.01” 8 9º03’53.81” 117º58’18.21” Sitio Olympic in Espanola which is 148 km from Puerto Princesa can be reached through the national Highway via Narra Town. Pulot Nickel Project is about 12 km north of Sitio Olympic (Highway, km 148). 3.1.2 Toronto Nickel Project The Toronto Nickel Project is situated in Barangay San Isidro, Narra consisting of 2 parcels with a combined area of 768 hectares more or less, which are bounded by the following geographical coordinates: Parcel 1 : Narra Area = 192 hectares Corner Latitude Longitude 1 9º14’50.09” 118º15’44.01” 2 9º14’50.09” 118º14’51.59” 3 9º13’58.01” 118º14’51.59” 4 9º13’58.01” 118º15’17.80” 5 9º14’24.05” 118º15’17.80” 6 9º14’24.05” 118º15’44.01” Parcel 2 : Narra Area = 576 hectares Corner Latitude Longitude 1 9º13’40.97” 118º16’36.43” 2 9º13’40.97” 118º14’51.59” 3 9º12’48.89” 118º14’51.59” 4 9º12’48.89” 118º15’44.01” 5 9º12’22.85” 118º15’44.01” 6 9º12’22.85” 118º16’10.22” 7 9º12’48.89” 118º16’10.22” 8 9º12’48.89” 118º16’36.43” 3
  4. 4. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources Puerto Princesa City is a 55-minute flight distance from Manila bycommercial flights. From Puerto Princesa, the Toronto Nickel project is 110 km.south along the National Highway. The project is reached from the nationalHighway, km-110 through an old access road and alter improved by previousoperation.Figure 1. Map of the Province of Palawan showing Española and Narra and the Citinickel Project area 4
  5. 5. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources4 GEOLOGY AND MINERALIZATION 4.1 Palawan – Geologic Setting Palawan is an island province of the Philippines located west of the VisayasRegion consisting of three island groups namely, the Calamian, Palawan mainlandand the Balabac groups. These islands generally trend along the southwest axis.The island of Palawan measures roughly 430 km long with varying widths along itslength. The maximum width of 50 kilometers can be found in the municipality ofBrooke’s Point. Four geological regions can be distinguished on Palawanmainland, namely north of St. Paul’s, between St Paul’s and the Quezon-Aboabogap, south of the Quezon Aboabo gap, and the lowland fringe within the first threeregions. The region north of Mount St Paul is dominated by metamorphic rocks ofthe basement complex, with volcanics around Cleopatra’s Needle and thesedimentary Bangley Formation in the west. Slightly metamorphosed limestoneforms the impressive karst landscape around Mount St.Paul and El Nido Cliffs.Central Palawan is mainly underlain by ultramafic rocks giving rise to poor soils andvegetation cover. South of the Quezon-Aboabo gap, the ultrmafic outcrops aremixed with undifferentiated volcanic and tertiary limestone. Tertiary sandstonesand shales occur along the south-west coast. The lowland fringe of alluvial plainsand terraces are extensive along the south-eastern half of the mainland such as theplains of Narra, Aborlan and Brookes Pont. These are virtually absent in the northexcept around Abongan (HTS, 1983) The Sabang thrust or Ulugan Bay Fault divides structurally the province intoNorthern and Southern Palawan. Northern Palawan is composed of pre-cretaceous sedimentary andmetasedimentary rock formations. Exposed in the north-central portion of thisstructural unit is the basement which is made up of phyllitic rocks and mica schist,overlain by Tertiary sedimentary formation. These rock units exhibit widespreaddeformation which is believed to have resulted from the collision of the westernPalawan terrain/structural unit with the proto-Philippine are during the Mioceneperiod. The Southern Palawan structural unit consists of basal formations foundsouthwest of the Ulugan bay Fault and is composed of Cretaceous to Oligocenesediments and ultramafics. An ophiolite suite believed to be eocence overlies thebasal formations. Basalt and ultramafics abundantly occur in the central apart ofthe terrain and form the Victoria Mountain. The proposed nickel mining project issituated in this structural group. 5
  6. 6. Mines and Geosciences BureauDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources Figure 2. Geology of Palawan 6
  7. 7. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources Table 1. Brief Geology of Palawan Island Age Rock Type Geological Descriptions SymbolPaleogene- Basalt/Green Schist Kpgb Show increasing metamorphism to greenschistCretaceous facies towards the contact with the ultramafics. - do - Sandstone & Kpgs Show increased metamorphism to quartz- Shale/Quartz Sericite sericite schist towards the ultramatic contact. Schist - do - Harzburgite Khz Dark green color resulting from pervasive serpentization. This rock unit occupies the lower apart of the ophiolite. Parent rock of nickel mineralization through tropical weathering process. - do - Dunite Kdu Occurs as distinct differentiate bodies in the harzburgite. The rock unit is strongly serpentized and is primary host to massive or disseminated chromite deposits. Parent rock of good nickel mineralization through weathering process. - do - Gabbro Dyke Kgbd Fine to medium grained and equi-granular. To duke margins are chilled to a diabasic texture. - do - Gabbro Kgb Medium to coarse grained, massive. - do - Diabase Kdb Dark green to dark gray occurring as dykes between basalts and gabbros. - do - Basalt Kba Dark gray and massive, in places exhibiting pillow structure. Miocene Limestone N1 Massive and calcareous siltstone interbeds, fossiliferous and karsted. - do - Sandstone & N2 Calcareous matrix with intra-formational Mudstone conglomerate with clasts of sandstone, mudstone and basalt.Quaternary Alluvial Qal Unconsolidated deposits including organic debris along major and coastal area. 4.2 Brief Profile of Palawan Nickel Resources Ore Deposits: Nickel mineralization consists of (1) nickel laterite and (2) nickel silicate or garnierite/saprolite ores, both of which were formed through tropical chemical weathering of ultramafic rocks. Comparative chemical analysis of these type types of nickel ores are presented below: Table 2. Comparative chemical analysis for nickel ores Element Nickel Silicate (%) Nickel Laterite (%) Ni 2.39 1.36 Co 0.04 0.14 Fe 17.00 46.00 SiO2 35.80 7.70 Mg0 20.90 2.40 Al003 1.98 5.43 Cr 0.75 2.81 Mn 0.31 0.81 7
  8. 8. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources5. EXPLORATION WORKS AND DATA SUBMITTED BY CITINICKEL 5.1 Mineral Exploration Data Main Data Source : Test pits Total Number of Test Pits : 1,762 Total Aggregate Depth : 16,609 meters Average Depth Per Test Pit: 9.23 meters Sampling Intervals : 1 meter Average Specific Gravity : 1.175 5.2 Topographic Map The topographic map submitted by Citinickel based on its survey data tied to local and national grids was used in the estimation of the mineral resource. The survey points are in Philippine Trans Mercator system units. 5.3 Test Pit Location Test pits were surveyed for their location and elevation based on local grid coordinates tied to local and national grid. Test pits were marked with wooden stacks placed over the test pit collar. Spot checking and verification of locations and positions of randomly selected test pits was conducted by the validating team using Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver. Test pit surveys have been provided to the undersigned inclusive of test pits database. 5.4 Sample Preparation Procedures and Methodology Test pit samples are placed in sample bags, marked and logged in a sample book as to their location and description. The marked and logged samples are transported to a storage area for inventory and logging. The samples are dried prior to manual crushing. The crushed samples are then mixed and quartered and sent to an assay laboratory. 5.5 Methodology Used In Mineral Resources Estimation Citinickel generated three dimensional block models. Exploration, geologic and assay data of each sample were recorded in a conventional spreadsheet and used as input in the generation of the block model. The test pits were analyzed in both horizontal and vertical sections to determine the geometry of the mineralization using geological analysis. Statistical and variogram analysis were also conducted to determine the numerical character and average range of influence of the sample grades. The appropriate resource classification based on the amount of geological knowledge was applied in the overall analysis to 8
  9. 9. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources delineate the various types of resources within the identified mineralization envelope. Selective mining units (SMU) of 25 meters x 25 meters horizontal dimensions and 3 meters high were fitted into the mineralization geometry. The average nickel and iron grade in each block or SMU were interpolated using Inverse Distance Squared. The volume of mineralization was then estimated using the volumes of blocks whose average grade are within the selected cutoff grade. 5.6 Results Of Mineral Resource Estimation by Citinickel Citinickel submitted a mineral resource estimation report together with all available exploration database including a total of 1,762 test pits with an aggregate depth of 16, 609 meters and an average depth of 9.23 meters test pit. Citinickel estimated a resource for the Pulot, Española and Toronto, Narra area using a resource classification of measured, indicated and inferred resources. The total resource estimate for the Pulot, Española area is 10.3 million metric tons @ 1.51% Ni and 27.72% Fe. The total resource estimate for the Toronto, Narra area is 50.2 million metric tons @ 1.55% Ni and 15.28% Fe. The average specific gravity used for both areas ranges from 1.22 to 1.32.6. MGB VALIDATION OF THE SUBMITTED RESOURCE ESTIMATEThe undersigned validated Citinickel declared mineral resources through fieldverification of test pits, storage inspection, check sampling, laboratory analysis ofcheck samples, review of geological interpretation and re-estimation of the volumeand average grade of the delineated mineralization. 6.1 Confirmation of Test Pit Locations Using the digitized map submitted by Citinickel, sixteen (16) test pits were randomly selected and verified during the fieldwork (Appendix 2). Their collar positions were checked using a Geographic Positioning System (GPS) receiver. While differences were noted in some GPS readings, the overall location of the sixteen test pits were generally accurate as reported. 6.2 Inspection of Test Pit Samples Sample of randomly selected test pits in the storage warehouse were inspected and compared with the descriptions in the submitted data. The written descriptions generally agree with the physical characteristics observed in the split cores and surface samples. 6.3 Collection And Laboratory Analysis Of Check Samples Gathering of check samples from randomly selected test pits was conducted during the course of the fieldwork. These samples are intended for 9
  10. 10. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources laboratory analysis by the MGB to confirm the veracity of the submitted assay report as well as the declared grade of the deposit. A total of fifteen (15) check samples were collected from randomly selected test pits by channel and grab sampling using sample pick. The samples collected were placed in a sample bag, properly tagged and sent to the MGB assay laboratory for nickel, iron, and cobalt content analysis.6.4 Review of Geological Interpretation The mineralization outline delineated by Citinickel was reviewed and compared with available geological report and assay information. The MGB interpretation which consist of four geological mineralization zones, namely: overburden, limonite, saprolite and bedrock, relatively agrees with the mineralization outline generated by Citinickel in both horizontal and vertical sections.6.5 Estimation Parameters: Where deemed appropriate by standard practice and as used in similar deposits elsewhere in the Philippines, most of the parameters used by Citinickel were adopted and employed in the estimation of tonnage and grade of the nickel deposit. These parameters are as follows:6.6 Cut-Off Grade Citinickel’s estimate shows the grade tonnage using different grade ranges to show the maximum potential resource of the project area. Grade range for resource classification is 1.51% to 1.55% Nickel.6.7 Specific Gravity The specific gravity used in the resource estimation for limonite and saprolite are S.G. 1.1 and 1.35 respectively.6.8 Block Model Dimension In modeling the blocks, the dimensions of the selective mining unit (SMU) used to estimate the tonnage and grade of the Citinickel deposit was 25 meters x 25 meters in the horizontal plane and 3 meters in the vertical plane.6.9 Resource Estimation Methodology The following procedure was generally employed in the estimation of the deposit: a. Construction and validation of the integrity of the exploration database b. Construction and validation of the topographic map c. Statistical and geostatistical analysis of the sample assays 10
  11. 11. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources d. Generation of vertical and horizontal sections using geological and assay data and a cut-off grade. e. Generation of 3-D blocks and estimation of block volumes. f. Interpolation of block grades6.10 Construction And Validation of Exploration Database The drill and assay database which were submitted by the company in MS Excel format were compiled and converted into CSV format. Internal consistency and possible errors were checked against the entries in the spreadsheet. There were a total of 16,995 assays values recorded in the spreadsheet. Nickel assays were composited in three (3) meter fixed length interval to harmonize with the vertical thickness of the blocks. The database used the following table formats for the drillhole information (Tables 3, 4 and 5). Table 3. Drillhole Information - Header Hole ID North East Level Depth 195A-05 1003900 385660.9 274 9.0 195A10 1003900 385810.9 300 7.0 Table 4. Drillhole Information - Survey Hole ID From To Depth Azimuth Dip 195A-05 0 9.0 9.0 0 -90 195A10 0 7.0 7.0 0 -90 Table 5. Drillhole Information - Assay Hole ID From To % Ni % Fe % Co 195A-05 0 4 1.28 43.04 0.11 5 7 1.93 14.4 0.03 195A10 0 5 1.64 33.24 0.09 6 9 1.40 12.60 0.066.11 Construction And Validation Of Topographic Map The topographic map used in the estimation was based on a topographic map submitted by Citinickel in Autocad (DWG) format digitized at 20.0 meter contour interval and converted to DXF format to create topography triangulations of the project area. The topographic map of the project area showing test pit locations is shown in Appendix 2 and 3. 11
  12. 12. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources6.12 Generation of Vertical And Horizontal Sections Using a Cut-off Grade A total of four (4) geologic zones based entirely on the grade ranges of nickel and iron was used in the resource model. Boundaries were delineated based on the interpretation of mineralization envelope per section with the following specifications: Table 6. Geologic Zones Geologic Zones Ni Fe Overburden < 0.8 > = 20% Limonite > 0.8 > = 20% Saprolite > 0.8 < 20% Bedrock < 0.8 < 20%6.13 Creating A Solid Representation of Interpreted Mineralization The outline of the mineralization envelope for each section was generated by connecting (or wiring) the mineralization intercepts in each test pit to provide a comprehensive and interactive 3D view-profile of the deposit. By wire framing a solid wire model is formed representing the lateral and vertical extent of the deposit. The non-intersecting surfaces were stitched together to create a solid representing the Citinickel deposit. The solid mass generated was validated to make sure no solid problems are encountered later in the block modeling.6.14 Block Model Generation And Estimation Of Volume Employing a 25 meter x 25 meter x 3 meter selective mining unit, three- dimensional block models within the mineralization envelope were generated. Each whole block corresponds to a volume of 1,875.00 cubic meters. Once the block model is populated with rock type, density, percentage and grade data, tonnages were reported through volumetric procedure.6.15 Interpolation Of Block Grades Using the results of the variogram analysis on the assay database, interpolation of the nickel grades in each of the blocks was made using Inverse Distance Squared (IDS) Method employing an appropriate search radius.6.17 Results of Mineral Resources Estimate by MGB The parameters used for resource classification for the measured, indicated and inferred resources utilized an area of influence for both the limonite and saprolite zones as shown in tables 7 and 8. The summations for both zones 12
  13. 13. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resourcesrepresent the total of the resource inventory by classification shown intables 9 and 10. Table 7. Parameters used in resource classification for limonite LIMONITE PARAMETERS USED IN AREA OF INFLUENCE RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION NORTH SOUTH LEVEL MEASURED 50.00 50.00 3.00 INDICATED 100.00 100.00 3.00 INFERRED 200.00 200.00 3.00 Table 8. Parameters used in resource classification for saprolite SAPROLITE PARAMETERS USED IN AREA OF INFLUENCE RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION NORTH SOUTH LEVEL MEASURED 25.00 25.00 3.00 INDICATED 50.00 50.00 3.00 INFERRED 100.00 100.00 3.00The volumetric run conducted by the MGB using the above parametersgave an estimate of 9.65 million metric tons @ 1.51% Ni and and 44.8million metric tons @ 1.55% Ni for the Pulot and Toronto depositrespectively. The specific gravity used was adapted from the one used byCitinickel in their estimation. Tables 9 and 10 below shows the details of theestimate.Table 9. MGB Resource Inventory by Classification of Pulot, Española RESOURCE INVENTORY BY CLASSIFICATION RESOURCE DMT %Ni %Fe %Co SG CLASSIFICATION MEASURED 4,642,286 1.43 34.30 0.08 1.16 INDICATED 3,123,499 1.58 21.86 0.06 1.27 INFERRED 1,894,040 1.59 19.75 0.06 1.28 TOTAL 9,659,826 1.51 27.34 0.08 1.22 13
  14. 14. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources Table 10. MGB Resource Inventory by Classification of Toronto, Narra RESOURCE INVENTORY BY CLASSIFICATION RESOURCE DMT %Ni %Fe %Co SG CLASSIFICATION MEASURED 11,217,919 1.60 21.26 0.06 1.26 INDICATED 14,439,300 1.57 13.62 0.04 1.34 INFERRED 19,232,123 1.51 13.11 0.03 1.34 TOTAL 44,889,341 1.55 15.31 0.04 1.327. RESULT OF CHECK SAMPLES ANALYSISCheck samples taken during the fieldwork were sent to the MGB laboratory foranalysis of nickel, iron and cobalt contents. The results of the analysis gave anaverage variance of 0.095 for Ni in the Pulot, Española area and 0.327 for Nibetween the assay results of MGB and that of Citinickel (Appendix 4 and 5).A statistical t-Test, was performed to evaluate the significance between thevariance of the nickel assays of MGB and that of Citinickel. Computation of thestatistical t-Test on the nickel assays showed that they do not differ significantly(Appendix 4 and 5).8. CONCLUSIONSThe general methodology applied by Citinickel in the estimation of its mineralresources in Narra and Española appear to follow the general standards asobserved in similar mining projects in the country. The integrity of the explorationdatabase was duly validated by checking for possible errors using software tools.Test pit samples taken during the course of the fieldwork were sent to the MGBLaboratory for testing. A Report on Analysis of the said samples was completedand provided to the undersigned.From the foregoing discussions, it may be concluded that the declaration of themineral resources of Citinickel in the Narra and Española Project is deemedacceptable.MARCELO M. ALILIO ALLAN E. TALAG Engineer IV Engineer II 14
  15. 15. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources REFERENCESQuestionnaires and Checklist on Mineral Resource and Ore ReserveValidation, MGB, October 2007.Resource Study, Palawan Properties-Resource Estimation, Appendix A,September 1996.Independent Consulting Geologist’s Report, Citinickel Mines andDevelopment Corporation, July 2007Waldpole, R.E., Introduction to Statistics, 3rd Edition, 15
  16. 16. Mines and Geosciences BureauDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources APPENDIX 1 LIST OF TEST PITS VERIFIED BY THE MGB Pulot, S. Española Samples Easting Northing P001 605249 1002128 P002 605303 1002135 P003 605353 1002143 P004 605398 1002153 P005 605448 1002132 P006 605413 1002231 P007 605458 1002274 P008 605560 1002782 P009 605607 1002797 P010 605655 1002811 Toronto, Narra Samples Latitude Longitude TP-1 9.222388889 118.27425 TP-2 9.222166667 118.2735 TP-3 9.222027778 118.2726667 TP-4 9.221416667 118.2716389 TP-5 9.221333333 118.2698889 TP-6 9.22125 118.2709444 16
  17. 17. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources APPENDIX 2TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF THE PULOT PROJECT SHOWING TEST PITS LOCATIONS 17
  18. 18. Mines and Geosciences BureauDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources APPENDIX 3 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF TORONTO PROJECT SHOWING TEST PITS LOCATIONS 18
  19. 19. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources APPENDIX 4 COMPARISON OF THE NICKEL ANALYSIS REPORT BETWEEN CITINICKEL AND MGB PULOT AREA MGB SAMPLES CITINICKLE SAMPLES VARIANCE (d) MGB-CITINICKLE DIFFERENCE SQUAREDSAMPLES %Fe %Ni %Co HoleID %Fe %Ni %Co Fe Ni Co Fe Ni CoP002 41.64 1.28 0.089 TP6A-4.5 50.50 1.14 0.08 8.86 -0.14 -0.01 78.4996 0.0196 8.1E-05P003 49.77 1.13 0.069 TP6A-3.5 49.40 1.04 0.11 -0.37 -0.09 0.04 0.1369 0.0081 0.001681P004 48.24 1.11 0.1 TP6A-3 51.30 0.97 0.10 3.06 -0.14 0.00 9.3636 0.0196 0P005 49.77 1.12 0.032 TP6A-2.5 50.10 0.73 0.07 0.33 -0.39 0.04 0.1089 0.1521 0.001444P006 46.21 1.14 0.056 TP7A-3 50.60 1.04 0.09 4.39 -0.10 0.03 19.2721 0.01 0.001156P007 44.18 1.08 0.069 TP7.5A-2.5 48.70 1.01 0.12 4.52 -0.07 0.05 20.4304 0.0049 0.002601P009 33.01 1.51 0.067 TP13A-1.5 27.50 2.18 0.06 -5.51 0.67 -0.01 30.3601 0.4489 4.9E-05P010 37.07 1.7 0.071 TP13A-0.5 10.40 1.20 0.02 -26.67 -0.50 -0.05 711.2889 0.25 0.002601 Count 8 8 8 SUM -11.39 -0.76 0.10 869.46 0.91 0.01 MEAN -1.42 -0.10 0.01 SD 11.04047 0.346616 0.034717 t- Test 0.726071 0.463594 0.35614 t -Test Analysis for Nickel * Using the Formula of t-Test involving Paired Observation: d__ t (calculated) = Sd ; Sd = ∑d2 — [ (∑d )2 / n ] ; d = ∑d √n n-1 n Where : d is the mean difference between paired observations Sd is the standard deviation of the difference between paired observations n is the number of paired observation Solution: d = -0.70 Sd = 0.346616 t(calculated) = 0.463594 at 95% Level of Confidence: t(tabular) = 1.721 Conclusion: since t (calculated) < t(tabular) , the difference between the analysis of Nickel for CNMDC and MGB is not significant 19
  20. 20. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources APPENDIX 5 COMPARISON OF THE NICKLE ANALYSIS REPORT BETWEEN CITINICKEL AND MGB TORONTO AREA MGB SAMPLES CITINICKLE SAMPLES VARIANCE (d) MGB-CITINICKLE DIFFERENCE SQUARED DepthSAMPLES (m) %Fe %Ni %Co HOLE ID %Fe %Ni %Co Fe Ni Co Fe Ni CoTP-1 1 27.93 1.14 0.049 19-R-4 50.1 0.75 0.1 22.17 -0.39 0.051 491.5089 0.1521 0.002601TP-3 3 20.56 1.5 0.052 18.5R-6.0 17.2 1.32 0.04 -3.36 -0.18 -0.012 11.2896 0.0324 0.000144TP-4 3 14.9 1.11 0.025 17.75R-7.25 25.2 1.67 0.11 10.3 0.56 0.085 106.09 0.3136 0.007225TP-4 4 11.17 1.42 0.024 17.75R-7.25 10.5 2.21 0.03 -0.67 0.79 0.006 0.4489 0.6241 0.000036TP-5 3 49.26 1.01 0.12 17.75R-9.25 17.2 2.69 0.04 -32.06 1.68 -0.08 1027.844 2.8224 0.0064TP-5 4 39.15 1.48 0.17 17.75R-9.25 10.2 2.23 0.02 -28.95 0.75 -0.15 838.1025 0.5625 0.0225TP-5 5 10.83 2.68 0.1 17.75R-9.25 10.5 1.76 0.02 -0.33 -0.92 -0.08 0.1089 0.8464 0.0064 SUM -32.9 2.29 -0.18 2475.392 5.3535 0.045306 MEAN -4.7 0.327143 -0.02571 SD 19.66707 0.876008 0.082338 t- Test 0.550524 0.361283 0.440263 t -Test Analysis for Nickel * Using the Formula of t-Test involving Paired Observation: d__ t (calculated) = Sd ; Sd = ∑d2 — [ (∑d )2 / n ] ; d = ∑d √n n-1 n Where : d is the mean difference between paired observations Sd is the standard deviation of the difference between paired observations n is the number of paired observation Solution: d = 0.327143 Sd = 0.876008 t(calculated) = 0.361283 at 95% Level of Confidence: t(tabular) = 1.721 Conclusion: since t (calculated) < t(tabular) , the difference between the analysis of Nickel for CNMDC and MGB is not significant rd * Critical Values of the t Distribution, R.E. Waldpole, Introduction to Statistics, 3 Edition 20
  21. 21. Mines and Geosciences Bureau Department of Environment and Natural Resources APPENDIX 6MGB Report of Analysis for Samples taken during the fieldwork at the Project Area (See attachment) APPENDIX 7 PICTURES FROM FIELDWORK Engr. Vicente Pulvenar and M. Alilio supervising the retrieval of test pit sample M. Alilio instructing laborer how to retrieve samples. 21
  22. 22. Mines and Geosciences BureauDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources Garnierite / Saprolite outcrop Test Pit sampling 22

×