IRW-News: Altona Mining Ltd.: Altona Mining: JORC 2012 Ressourcenschätzung für Little Eva Vorkommen

IRW-PRESS: Altona Mining Ltd.: Altona Mining: JORC 2012 Ressourcenschätzung für Little Eva Vorkommen

27. Mai 2014 ASX: AOH, FSE: A2O

JORC 2012 RESSOURCENSCHÄTZUNG FÜR LITTLE EVA VORKOMMEN

Altona Mining Limited (Altona oder das Unternehmen) gibt mit Freude eine JORC 2012 konforme Mineralische Ressourcenschätzung für ihr zu 100% im Eigentum befindlichen Little Eva Kupfer-Gold Vorkommen im nordwestlichen Queensland bekannt. Die Schätzung basiert auf neuen geologischen Modellen die sich aus einem sehr ausgedehnten Arbeitsprogramm ableiten das aus erneuten Bohrlochmessungen und Datenvalidierung bestand. Es wurden keine neuen Bohrungen durchgeführt und es gibt keine materiellen Änderungen zur früheren Schätzung vom 19. Dezember 2011.

Aktualisierte Little Eva Ressource bei 0,2% Kupfergrad als Betriebsschwellengrenze wie folgend:

Tonnen Kupfer Gold EnthaltenEnthalten

(Mio.) (%) (g/t) es es

Kupfer Gold

(Unzen)

(Tonnen)

Gemessene 37.1 0.60 0.09 222,000 112,000

Angezeigte45.0 0.46 0.08 205,000 108,000

Geschlussf23.9 0.50 0.10 119,000 75,000

olgert

Total 105.9 0.52 0.09 546,000 295,000

Eine ausführliche Tabelle mit verschiedenen Betriebsschwellengrenzen finden Sie im Appendix 1 und eine Beschreibung der Beurteilungskriterien und Berichtskriterien die in der Schätzung benutzt wurden und diese detailliert aus Tabelle 1 zeigen gemäß dem Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (The JORC Code, 2012) finden Sie in Appendix 2.

Das Little Eva Projekt in Deutscher Synchronisation: http://bit.ly/1mgw7cF

Die frühere Schätzung vom Dezember 2011 lag bei 100,3 Mio. Tonnen mit 0,53% Kupfer und 0,09g/t Gold was 534.000 Tonnen Kupfer und 284.000 Unzen Gold ergab.

Im Vergleich zur ersten Schätzung stieg die Tonnage um 6% an, das enthaltene Kupfermetall um 2% und das Goldmetall um 4%. Das Vertrauen in die Schätzung stieg nun auf 78% in die Gemessenen und Angezeigten Kategorien von zuvor 69% in der Schätzung von 2011. Beide Schätzungen berücksichtigen nicht die oxydische Mineralisierung.

Ein extensives Bohrlochbewertungsprogramm das 84% aller Ressourcenbohrungen abdeckte und ein Datenvalidierungsprogamm konzentrierten sich auf:

· Weitere Validierung und Korrekturen der Bohrkragenansätze, lochabwärts gerichtete Untersuchungen und Probendaten.

· Vereinheitlichung der Beschreibungen und Codierung der Lithologie, Verwitterung, Mineralisierung und Alterung.

· Bestimmen der Mineralisierungskontrollen.

· Aufbau eines 3D geologischen Modells aus den interpretierten Abschnitten.

· Aufbau eines Ressourcenmodells basierend auf den neuen geologischen Interpretationen unter Einsatz der gleichen Schätzmethode (MIK) wie bei der Schätzung 2011.

Das Little Eva vorkommen ist ein Proterozoische Eisen-Oxid-Kupfer-Gold Vorkommen das in der Region üblich ist. (z.B. Ernest Henry Mine). Beherbergt wird es in einem steil abfallenden linsenartigen metamorphosen vulkanischem Komplex (Little Eva Igneous Complex) der ca. 1,2 Km lang ist und bis zu 500 m breit. Der Komplex wird von variablen amygdaloidalen und flusspatig-phyrischen dazwischen liegenden vulkanischenm Felsen mit leichten felsichen Intrusiven beherbergt.

Hauptlithologien sind verschieden verwittert in Ansammlungen die aus Albit, Clacit, Quarz, Magnetit, Hämatit, Epidot, Chlorit, Cchalcopyrit, Pyrit und Chalcocit bestehen. Die häufigste intensive mineralisierung zeigt variable Venen und Breccias und intensiv verwitterte Zonen die mit Mächtigkeiten von 1-40 m variieren und steil nach Osten abfallen im Norden des Vorkommens und nach Nordwesten in den zentralen und südlichen Teilen des Vorkommens. Die Grade variieren auf bis zu 5% Kupfer und 1,6 g/t Gold in diesen Zonen was Durchschnitten von 0,84% und 0,13g/t jeweils entspricht. Die Mehrheit des vulkanischen Komplexes ist verwittert und mineralisiert mit tiefgradigem Kupfer welches weit verteilt ist.

Der vulkansiche Komplex ist in spätere Strukturen gebunden und wird von einer Reihe Unterstrukturen durchzogen.

Der vulkanische Komplex liegt innerhalb eines feinkörnigen und regelmäßigen kalkhltigen Metasediments. Metasedimente direkt neben dem vulknaischen Komplex können verwittert in gleichen Ansammlungen auftreten zum vulkanischen Komplex hin.

Die Hauptmineralisierung hat einen Deckel von ca. 15 bis 30 m Stärke der aus Kupferoxidmineraliserung besteht. (Goethit, Malachit).

Geologie und Mineralisierungen sehen Sie in den Abbildungen 1-5.

Für Fragen wenden Sie sich bitte an:

Alistair Cowden

Managing Director

Altona Mining Limited

Tel: +61 8 9485 2929

altona@altonamining.com

James Harris

Professional Public Relations

Perth

Tel: +61 8 9388 0944

james.harris@ppr.com.au

Jochen Staiger

Swiss Resource Capital AG

Tel: +41 71 354 8501

info@resource-capital.ch

Es gilt ausschließlich das Englische Original dieser Pressemitteilung

Über Altona Mining Ltd.

Altona Mining Limited ist ein Kupferproduzent in Finnland und besitzt ein großes Kupferentwicklungsprojekt in Australien.

Das Outokumpu Projekt des Unternehmens im Südosten Finnlands nahm die Produktion Anfang 2012 auf. Das Projekt schließt die Kylylahti-Untertagemine mit einer Jahreskapazität von 600.000 t und die Luikonlahti-Mühle ein. Die durchschnittliche Jahresproduktion liegt bei 9.000t Kupfer, 9.000 Unzen Gold und 1.600t Zink mit der Möglichkeit einer Produktionserweiterung. Die regionalen Ressourcen sind in zwei stillgelegten Minen und 4 noch nicht abgebauten Ressourcen innerhalb von 30km der Luikonlahti-Mühle beherbergt. Finnland ist Mitglied der Eurozone und hat eine lange Bergbauhistorie, eine stabile Steuergesetzgebung (20%) und keine weiteren Abgaben.

Altonas weiteres Herzstück ist das Roseby-Kupferprojekt nahe Mt. Isa in Queensland und eines der größten noch nicht entwickelten Kupferprojekte Australiens. Das erste angestrebte Entwicklungsziel mit 7 Mio. t pro Jahr ist die Kupfer-Gold-Tagebaumine und Aufbereitungsanlage Little Eva. Little Evas angestrebte Jahresproduktion1 soll bei 38.800 t Kupfer und 17.000 Unzen Gold für mindestens 11 Jahre Produktionsdauer liegen. Es konnte eine endgültige Machbarkeitsstudie abgeschlossen werden und das Projekt ist voll genehmigt. Altona ist derzeit in Verhandlungen mit potenziellen Partnern, um die Finanzierung dieses Großprojektes ermöglichen zu können.

Altona Mining ist an der Australian Securities Exchange und der Börse Frankfurt notiert.

1Siehe ASX-Pressemitteilung Cost review Delivers Major Upgrade to Little Eva vom 13. März 2014, die die Informationen hinsichtlich dieses Produktionsziels und die auf diesem Produktionsziel basierenden Finanzprognosen skizziert. Diese Pressemitteilung ist bei www.altonamining.com oder www.asx.com.au zu finden. Das Unternehmen bestätigt, dass alle wesentlichen Annahmen, die das Produktionsziel unterstützen und die auf diesem Produktionsziel basierenden Finanzprognosen, die in der oben genannten Pressemitteilung erwähnt werden, weiterhin gültig sind und sich nicht wesentlich geändert haben. Es gilt ausschließlich das Englische Original dieser Pressemitteilung.

Aussage der kompetenten Person

Die Informationen in dieser ASX-Pressemitteilung, die sich auf Explorationsergebnisse, Mineralressourcen oder Erzvorräte beziehen, basieren auf Informationen, die von Dr. Alistair Cowden BSc (Hons), PhD, MAusIMM, MAIG, Managing Director von Altona zusammengestellt wurden. Er ist Mitarbeiter des Unternehmens und verfügt über ausreichendes Wissen und Erfahrung über diesen hier vorliegenden Vererzungs- und Lagerstättentyp. Seine Tätigkeiten qualifizieren ihn als kompetente Person gemäß den Regeln des 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Dr. Alister Cowden stimmt den hier eingefügten Informationen, die auf seinen Informationen basieren, in Form und Kontext je nach Auftreten zu.

Weiter geht es im Englischen Original:

JORC 2012 and Competent Persons Statement

The Company has reported Resources and Reserves according to the 2012 edition of the JORC Code and a full Table 1 is appended.

1. Mineral Resources estimation: The Little Eva Mineral Resource Estimate that is reported in this ASX Release is based on information compiled by Mr Jani Impola, MSc, MAusIMM who is a full time employee of Altona Mining Limited and Mr Ian Glacken, MSc, FAusIMM(CP), CEng, who is a full time employee of Mineral Resource advisory firm Optiro, and who both have sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (The JORC Code). Mr Impola and Mr Glacken consent to the inclusion in the release of the statement of their undertaking the resource estimation process in the form and context in which it appears.

2. Responsibility for entire release: Information in this ASX Release that relates to Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves and commentary in Table 1 on mining, metallurgy and environment is based on information compiled by Dr Alistair Cowden BSc (Hons), PhD, MAusIMM, MAIG and Dr Iain Scott PhD Min. Processing, BSc Met. (Hons), MAusIMM who are both a full time employee of the Company and who have sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Dr Alistair Cowden and Dr Iain Scott consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears.

http://www.irw-press.at/prcom/images/messages/2014/6283/AOH_JORC2012_PRcom.001.png

Figure 1: Plan of interpreted Geology and block model of copper grade distribution for the Little Eva deposit

http://www.irw-press.at/prcom/images/messages/2014/6283/AOH_JORC2012_PRcom.002.png

Figure 2: Cross Section A showing geology, drilling and block model of copper distribution (refer Figure 1)

http://www.irw-press.at/prcom/images/messages/2014/6283/AOH_JORC2012_PRcom.003.png

Figure 3: Cross Section B showing geology, drilling and block model of copper distribution (refer Figure 1)

http://www.irw-press.at/prcom/images/messages/2014/6283/AOH_JORC2012_PRcom.004.png

Figure 4: Cross Section B showing geology and drilling (refer Figures 1 and 3)

http://www.irw-press.at/prcom/images/messages/2014/6283/AOH_JORC2012_PRcom.005.png

Figure 5: Cross Section C showing geology, drilling and block model of copper distribution (refer Figure 1)

http://www.irw-press.at/prcom/images/messages/2014/6283/AOH_JORC2012_PRcom.006.jpeg

Appendix 1

Table 1: May 2014 Little Eva Mineral Resource Estimate at 0.20% copper cut-off grade

Tonnes Copper Gold ContainedContained

(million)(%) (g/t) Copper Gold

(tonnes) (ounces)

Measured 37.1 0.60 0.09 222,000 112,000

Indicated 45.0 0.46 0.08 205,000 108,000

Inferred 23.9 0.50 0.10 119,000 75,000

Total 105.9 0.52 0.09 546,000 295,000

Table 2: May 2014 Little Eva Mineral Resource Estimate at 0.30% copper cut-off grade

Tonnes Copper Gold ContainedContained

(million)(%) (g/t) Copper Gold

(tonnes) (ounces)

Measured 24.6 0.78 0.12 192,000 94,000

Indicated 26.8 0.60 0.10 160,000 84,000

Inferred 14.6 0.66 0.13 96,000 60,000

Total 66.1 0.68 0.11 448,000 238,000

Table 3: December 2011 Little Eva Mineral Resource Estimate at 0.20% copper cut-off grade (provided for comparative purposes only)

Tonnes Copper Gold ContainedContained

(million)(%) (g/t) Copper Gold

(tonnes) (ounces)

Measured 36.3 0.63 0.08 227,000 99,000

Indicated 32.7 0.48 0.08 156,000 81,000

Inferred 31.5 0.48 0.10 150,000 104,000

Total 100.3 0.53 0.09 534,000 284,000

Table 4: December 2011 Little Eva Mineral Resource Estimate at 0.30% copper cut-off grade (provided for comparative purposes only)

Tonnes Copper Gold ContainedContained

(million)(%) (g/t) Copper Gold

(tonnes)(ounces)

Measured 24.6 0.81 0.10 198,000 76,000

Indicated 20.5 0.62 0.09 127,000 62,000

Inferred 18.5 0.64 0.13 119,000 79,000

Total 63.6 0.70 0.11 444,000 217,000

Note: Totals may not match sub-totals due to rounding.

Table 5: Summary of Mineral Resource Estimates for the Cloncurry Copper Project

DEPOSIT TOTAL CONTAINED MEASURED INDICATED INFERRED

METAL

TonnesGrade CopperGold TonnesGrade TonneGrade TonnesGrade

millioCu Au tonnesouncesmillioCu Au milliCu Au millioCu Au

n % g/t n % g/t on % g/t n % g/t

COPPER GOLD DEPOSITS

Little 105.9 0.52 0.09 546,00295,0037.1 0.60 0.09 45.0 0.46 0.08 23.9 0.50.1

Eva 0 0 0 0

Ivy Ann 7.5 0.57 0.07 43,00017,000- - - 5.4 0.60 0.08 2.1 0.40.0

9 6

Lady Clay14.0 0.56 0.20 78,00085,000- - - 3.6 0.60 0.24 10.4 0.50.1

re 4 8

Bedford 1.7 0.99 0.20 17,00011,000- - - 1.3 1.04 0.21 0.4 0.80.1

3 6

Sub-t129.1 0.53 0.10 684,00409,0037.1 0.60 0.09 55.3 0.49 0.09 36.7 0.50.1

otal 0 0 1 2

COPPER ONLY DEPOSITS

Blackard 76.4 0.62 - 475,00- 27.0 0.68 - 6.6 0.60 - 42.7 0.5-

0 9

Scanlan 22.2 0.65 - 143,00- - - - 18.4 0.65 - 3.8 0.6-

0 0

Longamund10.4 0.66 - 69,000- - - - - - - 10.4 0.6-

i 6

Legend 17.4 0.54 - 94,000- - - - - - - 17.4 0.5-

4

Great 6.0 0.61 - 37,000- - - - - - - 6.0 0.6-

Southern 1

Caroline 3.6 0.53 - 19,000- - - - - - - 3.6 0.5-

3

Charlie 0.7 0.40 - 3,000 - - - - - - - 0.7 0.4-

Brown 0

Sub-t136.7 0.61 - 840,00- 27.0 0.68 - 25.0 0.64 - 84.7 0.5-

otal 0 9

TOTAL 265.8 0.57 0.05 1,524,409,0064.1 0.63 0.05 80.3 0.54 0.06 121.4 0.50.0

000 0 6 4

See ASX release of 23 October 2007 and 26 July 2011 (Longamundi, Great Southern, Caroline and Charlie Brown), 23 April 2012 (Bedford, Ivy Ann and Lady Clayre), 03 July 2012 (Blackard and Scanlan) and 22 August 2012 (Legend) for full details of resource estimation methodology and attributions.

Note: All figures may not sum exactly due to rounding.

Little Eva is reported above a 0.2% copper lower cut-off grade, all other deposits are above 0.3% lower copper cut-off grade.

JORC Table 1

The table below is a description of the assessment and reporting criteria used in the Little Eva Resource and Reserve Estimation that reflects those presented in Table 1 of The Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (The JORC Code, 2012).

Criteria Commentary

Sampling Techniques and Data

Sampling · The dataset incorporates 316 Reverse

techniques Circulation (RC) and 34 RC holes with

diamond tails holes for a total of 57,559

metres of

drilling.

· 3,845 of a total 53,911 (7.1%) samples

were drill core and 50,066 (92.9%)

samples were RC chips.

· No other sample types were used in the

resource

estimate.

· Holes were nominaly drilled at dip angles

of either

60

o or 90o. Wherever possible, holes were

planned to intersect mineralisation at

optimal true width

angles.

· 94% of RC drilling was sampled at one

metre intervals with the remainder sampled

at either 2, 3, 4 or partial metre

lengths. Approximately 2kg of each

interval was submitted for geochemical

analysis.

· Each sample was crushed and pulverised to

produce a representative charge for assay.

· 67% of diamond core was sampled at 1

metre intervals with a further 22% sample

at 2 metre intervals and the remainder

sampled at variable lengths according to

geology.

· Drill core sampling was guided by

geology. Either half or quarter core was

submitted for analysis to the

laboratory.

Drilling · RC drilling included 5.25, 5.375, 5.5

techniques and 6 size face-sampling hammers.

· HQ, HQ3, NQ, NQ2, NQ3 and BQ core sizes

were used in diamond

drillholes.

· Most recent diamond drill core has been

marked using inner tube inlaid systems

such as Ezy-Mark while the method for

orientation of core sourced from older

generation holes is

uncertain.

Drill sample · Diamond Core recovery is good, averaging

recovery 94%.

· RC samples were visually checked for

moisture and contamination and recoveries

estimated from the sample

volume.

· Best practice methods were used for

diamond coring to ensure the return of

high quality core

samples.

· During RC drilling, the cyclone and

splitter were routinely cleaned, ensuring

no material build

up.

· Due to the subjective nature of RC sample

recovery estimation, no reliable

relationship with grade variation has been

established. No relationship between

drill core recovery and grade has been

established.

Logging · A re-logging campaign was completed

during 2013. A total of 48,725 metres (64%

of drilling were re-logged for lithology,

alteration, mineralisation

characteristics, weathering/oxidation and

structure. Logging information was

recorded on paper and was later

transferred into the database.

· Diamond core was geologically logged

using predefined logging codes for

lithological, mineralogical and physical

characteristics (such as colour,

weathering and lithology). In addition,

structural measurements of major features

were

collected.

· RC logging was completed in single or

multi-metre intervals.

· Earlier drilling was logged onto paper

and transferred to a digital form for

loading into the drill

hole database. More recently logging was

completed directly onto a laptop in the

field using a proprietary geological

logging package with in-built validation.

Logging information was reviewed by the

responsible geologist prior to the final

database

upload.

· Chip trays were collected for each of the

RC intervals and core trays were

photographed.

· Geotechnical logging of diamond core

consisted of recording core

recovery, RQD, fracture frequency and

nature, core state (i.e. whole, broken)

and

hardness.

· Logging was generally qualitative in

nature with the exception of structural

and geotechnical measurements and the

estimation of sulphide

percentages.

· Drill core was photographed and digitally

stored for visual

reference.

· Lithological logs exist for 100% of the

Little Eva database. Approximately 64% of

all metres were

relogged during 2013; this equates to

approximately 84% of holes used in the

resource

estimation.

Sub-sampling · CRA Exploration (CRAE) diamond drill core

techniques collected during the period 1963-1996 was

and sample sampled as sawn half core on approximately

preparation 2 metre

intervals.

· Sampling of diamond core generated by

later exploration companies was guided by

logged visual mineralisation. Samples were

mostly 1 metre intervals, except where

sampling was more selective to preserve

geological boundaries. Core was generally

halved for initial assay sampling. If

later umpire or additional metallurgical

sampling was required, the remaining half

core was split to yield quarter core

samples.

· For Altona RC drilling, a trailer mounted

cyclone and triple deck splitter were used

to collect representative chip samples

from the drill rig in 1 or 2 metre

intervals. Wet intervals were sub-sampled

with a scoop or

spear.

· There is little information available on

the RC sampling procedures used by CRAE in

the period 1963-1996. 11% of the RC

drillholes used in the estimate are CRAE

RC holes from the period 1988-1996.

· Drillholes with identified quality issues

have been excluded from the estimation

data

set.

· The preparation techniques employed for

the diamond and RC samples followed

industry best practice and were completed

by the relevant

laboratory.

· While peparation techniques vary they

usually comprise oven drying, crushing

and pulverising samples to established

paramet

ers.

· There is little information available on

the RC Quality Assurance and Quality

Control (QAQC) sampling procedures

employed by CRAE in the period 1963-1996.

· From 2002 to 2006 the following QAQC

practices

applied:

- Regular field duplicate sampling of RC

samples at a ratio of 1:37; in 2004

duplicates were sent to both the primary

and secondary

laboratory.

- Post campaign duplicate re-sampling of 5%

to 10% of bulk rejects (2004

only).

- Insertion of standard samples at a 1:40

ratio (2004

only).

- Insertion of blank samples at a 1:40

ratio

(2004).

- Screen fire assay checks against fire

assay for gold on a campaign

basis.

· From 2006 more rigorous QAQC practices

applied:

- RC field duplicates were collected either

directly from the cyclone or as a second

sample from the riffle splitter. Drill

core duplicates were either collected by

halving the sampled half core or were

split from

pulped half core.

- Primary field duplicates were collected

at a 1:20 ratio, with a second duplicate

collected at a 1:40 ratio. These second

duplicates were then submitted to a check

laboratory for umpire

testing.

- Universal field QAQC procedures included

the insertion of certified reference

standards at a 1:20 ratio to samples.

Standards included multiple elemental

abundances reflecting the variations of

those elements in the Little Eva

mineralisation.

- Certified or in-house quartz sand blanks

were inserted at regular intervals of 1:40

samples.

· Duplicate scatter plots for data

generated later than 2003 indicate fair to

excellent precision for copper and gold

results.

· Control plots for Standards submitted

after 2003 show few outliers, indicating

good to excellent

accuarcy.

· The mass of RC chip samples received by

laboratories averaged 2.136 kg. This is an

appropriate sample size for this style of

mineralisation and elemental

abundance.

Quality of Copper assaying was completed at a variety

assay data of different laboratories utilising

and various preparation and direct analytical

laboratory methodologies.

tests

· Laboratories

- Australian Laboratory Services (ALS)

- Australian Mineral Development

Laboratories

(AMDEL)

- AMMTEC Laboratory

- Classic Laboratory Services

- SGS / Analytical Laboratories (ANALAB)

- Ultra Trace Pty Ltd

· Preparation Methods

- Aqua Regia (~36% of total)

- Perchloric Acid

- Mixed Acid (Hydrochloric, Perchloric,

Hydrofluoric) (~57% of

total)

- 4 Acid (Near Total) (~4% of total)

- Total Digest

· Analytical Methods

- Atomic Adsorption Spectroscopy (AAS)

(~57% of

total)

- Inductively coupled plasma mass

spectroscopy (ICPMS)

- Inductively coupled plasma optical

emission spectrometry (ICPOES) (~4% of

total)

- Inductively coupled plasma atomic

emission

spectros

copy (ICPAES) (~33.7% of total).

Gold assaying was completed at two

laboratories with the following

preparation and analytical

methods.

· Laboratories

- Australian Laboratory Services (ALS)

- SGS / Analytical Laboratories (ANALAB)

· Preparation Method

- 3 Acid

- Fire Assay

· Analytical Method

- Atomic Adsorption Spectroscopy (AAS)

· No geophysical tools were used for

collection of elemental assay data

relevant to the Little Eva 2014

resource.

· Laboratory QAQC involves the use of

external company and internal lab

standards using certified reference

material, blanks, splits and replicates as

part of the in-house procedures. Specific

QAQC protocols vary across

organisations.

· Umpire laboratory check samples were

submitted from 2004 to indepentently

verify reported results.

· The umpire sample checks indicate a high

degree of precision for primary copper

assay results generated after 2004, with

little evidence for bias.

· Umpire checks upon gold assays indicate

some discordance in 2004 drilling

r

esults (a minor proportion of the database)

and good reliability since that

year.

Verification · Several assay validation checks have been

of sampling completed at different stages of the

and exploration process. Numerous external

assaying parties have reviewed significant

intersections during the life of the

project.

· There are 10 sets of twinned drillholes at

Little Eva dataset. Overall mineralisation

trends are replicated in twin holes,

though variation exists in tenor and

location of mineralisation. This may

sometimes be attributed to

downhole survey issues or in other

instances drill directions relative to

mineralisation dip or discontinuity in

small scale mineralisation pods. In

isolated cases diamond drilling suggests

thin, high grade material may be reflected

as broader, moderate zones of

mineralisation. The discontinuity is

largely reflected in the nugget effect

highlighted by

variography.

· Historic paper delivered assay results

have been retained in hard copy format

and/or converted to scanned digital

versions. More recent assay results were

delivered in electronic

format.

· Data is entered into the database using

standardised protocols which preserve the

upload user ID and time/date

stamping.

· Subpopulations of historic database

records have been verified against

original paper

records

· Delivered digital results and the entire

database are stored upon company servers

which are protected by multiple tiers of

backup protocols. Additional data storage

and protection is provided by the current

laboratory provider ALS - which retains a

digital copy of data

generated.

· No assay results have been adjusted prior

to upload to the

database.

Location of · Three dimensional spatial locations were

data calculated using collar locations and

points downhole survey measurements with curved

path geometries.

· In 2002, all historic drill collars

except four were surveyed by contractor

Hugh Patterson with a Differential Global

Positioning System (DGPS). During the

period 2003-2011, licensed surveyors M H

Lodewyk carried out DGPS collar surveys at

the conclusion of annual programs. Altona

purchased a DPGS unit in 2011 and has

surveyed all holes since this

time.

· All drillhole collar spatial locations

are recorded within the resource database

using the Map Grid of Australia (MGA) Zone

54

datum.

· A summary of downhole survey methods at

Little Eva is given below.

- Most collars have been surveyed by both

magnetic and gyroscopic

means.

- 12% of holes have a compass survey at the

drillhole collar only. This was common

practice for historic holes, drilled prior

to the year 2000.

- 11% of holes have a gyro survey at the

drillhole collar

only;

- 56% of holes have magnetic downhole

camera surveys, usually at 50 metre

intervals.

- 3% of holes have magnetic downhole

multi-shot surveys, usually at 10 metre

intervals.

- 18% of holes have downhole gyroscopic

surveys,

usua

lly at 3 or 5 metre intervals.

· Variable quantities of magnetite present

in the rocks at Little Eva affects

magnetic survey and compass readings,

particularly within the intermediate host

rock.

· The resource estimate was completed using

the MGA54 Zone 54 national grid as

datum.

· The majority of drilling was completed

within the Local Eva New local grid

which has its northing axis oriented

parallel to the strike of the ore body.

Drillhole collar locations were

transformed from the local grid to the

MGA54 Zone 54 national grid within the

database using the two common point

method.

· The surface topography was constructed

from survey data in the form of 0.5 metre

contours, collected by licensed surveyors

Bennett & Bennett Surveyors and Planners.

The DGPS collar survey location for Little

Eva

drillholes was compared to this topographic

surface, and the average variation was

16cm. This confirms that the topographic

surface is high

quality.

Data spacing · Drilling has dominantly been completed on

and 50 metre spaced lines oriented east-west

distribution in local grid orientation.

· 50% of the drilling is aligned at 55-60

degrees to

east.

· 33% of the drilling is subvertical or

vertical.

· 13% of the drilling is aligned at 55-60

degrees to

west.

· 4% of the drilling is aligned in other

directions.

· 27 sections between local grid

coordinates 25400mN-26450mN have been

drilled to a 50m x 40m drilling density.

This represents 1,300 metres of strike

length across 95% of the resource, which

is deemed appropriate for establishing

geological continuity and to understand

grade continuity. Local scale variability

has been addressed by selecting a suitable

estimation method - Multiple Indicator

Kriging.

· CRAE composited 5,586 single metre RC

chip samples into two metre intervals for

holes LE034-LE076, representing 9.6% of

all sampling

metres.

· Universal Resources composited all

samples in its 2002 RC programme as two

metre intervals. Specific intervals of

interest were then resplit as 1 metre

samples following the result of intial

assays.

· RC holes drilled after 2002 were sampled

as single metre intervals and no

compositing

applied.

Orientation · Nominal east-west drill sections are

of data in normal to the strike of the

relation to mineralisation.

geological · The dip of the mineralisation varies from

structure 50 degrees to the east to subvertical.

Local grade continuity follows the dip of

the mineralisation in the north; flatter

local grade continuity is noted in the

central and southern domains. The bulk of

the drilling intersects local grade

continuity at between 60 and 90 degree

angles.

· A small number of drillholes were drilled

parallel to mineralisation trends, mostly

in the strongly mineralised northern

portions of Little Eva. These drillholes

were excluded from the estimation process.

As such, no biases are expected from the

drilling

direction.

Sample · Industry standard sample security

security measures were employed. Samples were

transported to the Company depot at the

end of each working day and secured.

Sample dispatch through reputable

commercial freight companies was completed

as soon as was practically

possible.

Audit or · A comprehensive audit of the sampling and

reviews assaying procedures used by the company

and of the results of the quality control

sampling programme was carried out by

independent consultants McDonald Speijers

in 2006, with no significant adverse

findings.

· Sampling and QC procedures employed by

CRAE prior to 1996 have been poorly

documented. Reports state that procedures

conformed to the CRAE standards of the

time.

Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Database · Data used for estimation is stored within

integrity a SQL Server database and is managed using

DataShed software. The structure of the

drilling and sampling data is based on the

Maxwell Data

Model.

· Prior to 2006 data was logged onto field

sheets which were then entered into the

data system by data capture technicians.

· Since 2006 data has been logged directly

into digital logging systems and uploaded

to the database by the database

administrator.

· Laboratory data has been received in

digital format and uploaded directly to

the database since

2002.

· In both cases the data was validated on

entry to the database, or on upload from

the earlier MS Access databases, by a

variety of means, including the

enforcement of coding standards,

constraints and triggers. These are

features built into the data model that

ensure that the data meets essential

standards of validity and

consistency.

· Original data sheets and files have been

retained and are used to validate the

contents of the database against the

original

logging.

· Certain drillholes, such as those

associated with unreliable or

non-representative data including auger

holes, open percussion holes, trenches or

poorly located holes, were excluded for

resource calculation

purposes.

· Extensive validation of existing collar, d

ownhole

survey and assay data was completed in

2013/2014. Validation steps

included:

- All collar surveys were compared against

original records.

- Downhole surveys were compared against

original records.

- A representative population (11.5%) of

copper and gold assays in the database

were validated against original records.

Selected assays

represent all main drilling programmes by

different owners between 1978 and 2011.

Errors were identified in less than 0.001%

of the database, confirming that the

copper and gold assays in the database are

of high

quality.

- Drillhole collar locations were compared

to the topographic surface.

- Downhole deviations of all drillhole

traces were examined and problematic

surveys were excluded.

- The downhole survey datum was checked to

ensure grid transformations were correctly

applied.

- All data (e.g. assay, bulk density, RQDs,

core recovery) was checked for incorrect

values by deriving minimum and maximum

values.

- Lithology data was checked to ensure

standard rock type codes were used.

- Meta-data fields were checked to ensure

they were populated and that the data

recorded was

consistent.

Site visits · Multiple site visit have been completed

by the Competent Persons other than Mr Ian

Glacken.

Geological · Confidence in the geological

interpretati interpretation of the deposit is moderate

on to high. The spatial extent and geometry

of separate lithological components is

well constrained by geological knowledge

acquired through the

relogging of historic drill core and chips

completed in

2013.

· The deposit is characterised by an

Iron-Oxide-Copper-Gold style of

mineralisation common in the local region

and is hosted within a metamorphosed

igneous complex dominated by variably

amygdaloidal and feldspar-porphyritic

intermediate igneous rock crosscut by

later felsic

intrusives. The igneous complex is situated

within Proterozoic age fine grained,

frequently calcareous

metasediments.

· Primary lithologies have been altered to

varying degrees of intensity to assemblage

comprising of haematite,

albite, carbonate, silica, magnetite, epidot

e

, chlorite, chalcopyrite, pyrite and

chalcocite

..

· The lithologies are inferred to have

been cross cut by several generations of

faults.

· The geological context has been defined

by diamond and RC drilling. This

information is supported by surface

mapping and geophysical

in

terpretation, including magnetics and

gravity.

· A new geological interpretation was

completed for 13 detailed 100 metre spaced

sections. Prior interpretations were used

for other

sections.

· Geological surfaces were interpolated to

creation of three dimensional solids for

mineralisation and

lithology.

· All holes, including those between

detailed sections, were then used to snap

lithological and mineralisation contacts

in three dimensional

space

· There are no alternative detailed

interpretations of geology. The geology

interpretation has been

refin

ed and is believed to be highly robust.

· The current geology model was updated in

2013 after an extensive re-logging

campaign.

· Economic mineralisation is mostly hosted

within a fault-bounded package of

dominantly intermediate igneous rocks.

This package is mostly well-mineralised;

however, a weakly mineralised to barren

halo exists at its

eastern and southern margin with

metasediments. The western mineralisation

boundary is generally parallel to the

contact between the igneous package with

metasediments. Thus in less densely

drilled areas (mostly at depth), the

wireframe of the igneous package was used

to constrain

mineralisation.

· A felsic intrusive body is present along

the faulted western contact between the

igneous package and meta-sediments.

Mineralisation within this felsic

intrusive varies to that in the nearby

intermediate igneous rock. Strongly

mineralised zones recognised in adjacent

intermediate rocks can be traced into the

felsic intrusive. The mineralisation that

surrounds these strongly mineralised zones

is not as well developed within the felsic

intrusive; thus this was separated into a

unique weakly mineralised domain for grade

estimation.

· The main mineralisation domains, North,

Central, South and Southeastern were

defined using grade constraints in

conjunction with lithological contacts

between the igneous complex and

metasedimentary

rocks.

- A general grade cut-off of 0.15% copper

was used to define the boundaries between

mineralised and weakly-mineralised or

unmineralised

domains.

- The North domain is defined by generally

higher copper grade averaging

approximately 1% and hosted by steaply

east dipping sheet of intensly altered

igneous complex. Southern and western

contacts are interpreted to be fault

structures.

- The Central domain is defined by moderate

(0.3% to 0.5% copper) grade mineralisation

hosted by the altered igneous complex and

bounded by fault structures to the north,

south, and west. Subdomains of breccia

hosted high grade mineralisation (modelled

using 0.5% copper cut off) strike

northeast and dip steeply to the

northwest.

- The South domain is generally low (<0.3%

copper) to moderate (0.3% to 0.5% copper)

grade mineralisation hosted by the

altered igneous complex and bounded by

fault contacts. Dip of mineralisation is

shallower than the in the central

domain.

- The Southeastern domain forms a block of

igneous complex seperated from the main

mineralisation by fault structures.

Internaly this block is structurally

divided into several low, moderate or high

grade sheets of mineralisation with

varying strikes and dips, though generally

to the southwest.

All domains were subdivided using a base of

oxidation surface to separate oxide

mineralisation and primary sulphide

mineralisation.

Dimensions · The main zone of mineralisation inclusive

of the North, Central and South domains,

strikes north-south to NNW-SSE and the dip

varies between 60 degrees to East in the

north to subvertical in the central and

south

domains.

· Mineralisation has a strike length of

1300 metres and the width varies from 20

metres (north) to over 300 metres

(central). Mineralisation has been

intersected between the elevations of

165mRL and

-200mRL.

· The deposit remains open to the south and

at

depth.

Estimation · Multiple Indicator Kriging (MIK) was used

and to estimate copper grades into parent

modelling blocks (25m x 25m x 10m) using up to

techniques eleven indicator cut-offs with associated

indicator variograms per domain for

primary mineralisation. Ordinary block

kriging was used to interpoloate

indicators. Indicators were

post-processed to calculate e-type mean

grades (for validation) and the grades and

fractions above cut-offs for a selective

mining method. An Indirect lognormal

support correction was applied for the

change of support from points to Selective

Mining Unit (SMU) support (6.25m x 6.25m x

5m). The distribution above the topmost

threshold was modelled using a hyberbolic

extrapolation which was fitted to the

actual composite data from the bin

threshold up to a top cut value. The MIK

copper grades at the panel support were

post-processed to yield SMU-support grades

using a local MIK (LMIK) algorithm based

upon the local Uniform Conditioning (LUC)

algorithm. Gold grades were estimated at

SMU support using the copper and gold

grades and a collocated cokriging method,

which preserves the generally-high

copper-gold correlation. Both copper and

gold were reported above a 0.2% copper

cut-off at the SMU

support.

· Ordinary Kriging (OK) estimates for

copper were also made at the SMU scale to

provide a ranking model for the LMIK

post-processing

· 14 unique domains have been estimated.

Two estimation passes were used for all

the domains. The first pass has search

radii of 150m x 150m x 30m with a minimum

of 12 and a maximum of 24 samples in

search. The second pass searched 250m x

250m x 50m with a minimum of 6 and maximum

of 24 samples. Search ellipse

orientations were the same as variography

orientations. No octant restrictions were

used, and as such the maximum distance of

extrapolation from data points is equal to

the search radii specified above. Most of

the blocks were informed in the 1st pass

and commonly the 24 sample restriction was

met before reaching maximum search

distances.

· Sample data was composited to a one metre

length. A minor quantity of small

composite lengths remained and these were

excluded from grade

estimation.

· Composites were declustered using a 50 x

50 x 40 cell declustering

method.

· Extreme outliers of the gold sample

population were top cut. No top cut was

applied to copper.

· Directional variograms were modelled for

whole domains and indicator variograms for

selected indicator percentiles (up to 11).

Modelled indicator variograms showed 50-70

metre variogram ranges with 20-45% nuggets

variances.

· Geovariances Isatis and Snowdens

Supervisor software was used for

variography.

· The public domain Stanford University

GSLIB software was used for resource

estimation. Dassault Systemes Surpac

software provides a front-end interface

for GSLIB, and this was used to run

GSLIBs DOS

executables.

· Isatis was used for the LMIK copper

post-processing and the collocated

kriging for gold estimation.

· An OK estimation was compiled and

comparison with the E-type (panel average)

estimate was within acceptable limits.

· Comparison with the previous May 2011

Little Eva MIK model showed no material

change.

· No by-product metallurgical assumptions

have been built into the estimate. These

are not relevant to the extraction of

copper and gold by conventional

means.

· No internal, external dilution or ore

loss due to deleterious elements or other

non-grade variables of economic

significance were

modelled.

· The block model was constructed using 25m

x 25m x 10m parent block size with

standard subcelling to 6.25m x 6.25m x 5m

, which represents the mining SMU.

Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis was

performed to optimise the block size,

search distances and sample

numbers.

· The selective mining unit (SMU) size was

defined at 6.25m x 6.25m x 5m. This is in

line with assumptions made regarding

current mine plans, production rates and

equipment

sizes.

· Only copper and gold were integrated in

the resource calculation. Correlation

between these two variables is moderate to

good, with domain

sample correlation coefficients varying

between 0.6 and 0.7. The collocated

cokriging of gold makes use of the

copper-gold correlation to pair high

copper and gold

grades.

· Top cut analysis was carried out for all

the domains for copper and gold.

The top cut was decided using the following

criteria:

- Continuity of the high grade tail in the

grade

histogram

- Log probability plots

- Change in the coefficient of variation

(CV)

- Spatial location and clustering of high

grade

samples

- Mean and variance plot analysis for

sensitiv

ity of mean grade to top cutting

· Top cuts were applied to gold as top cut

analysis indicated that extreme outliers

had some influence on the sample

population.

· No top cut was applied to the copper as

top cut analysis indicated minimal

influence from extreme outliers on the

sample population.

Howeve

r, copper top cuts were selected and used

for the maximum data value allowed for

upper tail extrapolation, a parameter used

during MIK post-processing to calculate

the recoverable

resource.

· An external and independent review of

this Mineral Resource

estimate was undertaken by Optiro Consultant

s. Internal validation was carried out by

Altona, comparing the MIK E-type and the

OK panel estimates and this was reviewed

by

Optiro and found to be satisfactory.

SMU-level gold estimates were validated

against gold composites and the

copper-gold correlation at the SMU scale

was compared to the composite correlation.

Visual validation of all models was

carried out in plan and

section.

Moisture · Tonnes have been estimaed on a dry basis.

Cut-off · Resources are reported above 0.20% and

parameters 0.30% copper cut-offs using a recoverable

resource technique with the change of

support to the SMU scale. By definition

this reflects the planned scale of mining

and

production.

· These cut-off grades have been adopted as

they permit a bulk tonnage

operation.

Mining · The resources are estimated and reported

factors or using a recoverable resource technique

assumptions (LMIK) which assumes selective mining at

the scale of the SMU.

· The SMU selected was 6.25m x 6.25m x 5m.

· The selected SMU is compatible with a

large scale bulk tonnage mining

operation.

Metallurgical· Extensive mineralogical and metallurgical

factors or testwork has been completed on the Little

assumtpions Eva

resource.

· Testwork indicates that a 96% copper

recovery will be achieved at a concentrate

grade of 25% copper. Gold recovery is 85%

at a concentrate grade of 4

g/t.

· No metallurgical assumptions have been

built into the resource estimate and none

are

necessary.

Environmental· The Little Eva resource is a component of

factors or the Little Eva Development Project and

assumptions accordingly is encapsulated within the

granted Environmental Management Plan

(EMP).

· The EMP considers a broad range of

environmental considerations

including:

- Flora and Fauna

- Soils

- Radiation

- Atmospheric Emissions

- Hydrogeology

· Baseline and ongoing studies form part of

EMP

requirements.

· Analysis of simulated tailings fluids and

solids prepared through laboratory scale

test work indicates favourable

environmental results. Simulated sulphide

and oxide tailings were found to be benign

in terms of potential for formation of

acidic, saline or

metalliferous drainage.

· Consequently, no adverse environmental

considerations have been built into the

resource

model.

Bulk density · In total 1,862 bulk density measurements

have been taken from Little Eva core.

· Samples were sourced from multiple holes

across the extent of the

deposit in both the oxide and sulphide

mineralisation zones. Spatially, samples

cover 1,000m of strike length and 200m of

depth

extent.

· Measurements were completed using the

industry standard weight in air / weight

in water

method.

· The mean bulk density value for each

modelled lithology was used for tonnage

calculations.

- The lithology wireframes and oxidation

surfaces were used to flag the block model

and the bulk density samples.

- For each lithology within fresh rock, the

mean bulk density value was calculated

from sample data and assigned to the block

model. A value of 2.8 t/m3 was assigned to

intermediate rock; 2.63 t/m3 for felsic

intrusive; and 2.7 t/m3 for

meta-sediments.

- Insufficient bulk density measurements

existed within the oxide zone, and a

nominal value of 2.5 t/m3 was assigned to

the block model. The oxide zone is not

included

in the Mineral Resource.

· Bulk density has no correlation with

copper or gold

grades.

· Bulk density has a broad correlation with

lithology and alteration.

· Bulk density averages for fresh rock were

calculated from statistically signficant

volumes of samples. A total of 1386

samples were used for intermediate rock;

371 for meta-sediments; and 70 for

f

elsic intrusive. The felsic intrusive

comprises a relatively small volume of the

Mineral

Resource.

Classificatio· Classification for Little Eva is based

n upon the continuity of geology,

mineralisation and grade, using

drillhole and density data spacing and quali

ty

, variography and estimation statistics

(number of samples used, estimation pass,

and slope of

regression).

· Mineral resources have been classified on

the basis of confidence in

geological and grade continuity using the

drilling density, geological model,

modelled grade continuity and conditional

bias measures (slope of the regression and

Kriging efficiency) as criteria.

- Measured Mineral Resources have been

defined in areas of 50m x 40m drill

spacing with low variance in grade and

good grade and geological continuity.

- Indicated Mineral Resources have been

defined in areas of 50m x 40m drill

spacing where grade variance is moderate.

- Inferred Mineral Resources have defined

generally in areas of 100m x 100m drill

spacing. Inferred Mineral Resources have

b

een modelled down to 100m RL (250 metres

below

surface).

· The classification appropriately reflects

the quality of and confidence in the

grade estimates expressed by the Competent

Persons.

Audits or · An external and independent review of the

reviews resource estimate was undertaken by

Optiro consultants.

Discussion · No formal confidence intervals have been

or relative derived by

accuracy/con

fidence geostatistical or other means; however, the

use of quantitative measures of estimation

quality such as the

Kriging efficiency and the slope of

regression allow the Competent Person to

be assured that appropriate levels of

precision have been attained within the

relevant resource confidence categories.

· These levels of confidence and accuracy

relate to the quarterly estimates of grade

and tonnes for the deposit, which have

been

used in the Definitive Feasibility Study

updated and released on 13 March

2014.

NEWSLETTER REGISTRIERUNG:

Aktuelle Pressemeldungen dieses Unternehmens direkt in Ihr Postfach:

http://www.irw-press.com/alert_subscription.php?lang=de&isin=AU000000AOH9

Mitteilung übermittelt durch IRW-Press.com. Für den Inhalt ist der Aussender verantwortlich.

Kostenloser Abdruck mit Quellenangabe erlaubt.