positive results from new round of testwork on los ... · gerdau group in brazil, owner of the...

08 May 2014

POSITIVE RESULTS FROM NEW ROUND OF TESTWORK ON LOS

CONCHALES COMPOSITE AT GUADALUPITO

1.8 TONNES OF MAGNETITE CONCENTRATE SENT TO STEEL

FOUNDRY OWNERS FOR TESTING

Highlights:

Magnetite and Andalusite successfully concentrated using gravity techniques indicative of industrial scale processes – Batch Reflux Classifier (BRC) significantly more efficient than wet table (comparative with spirals).

Heavy Mineral grade of 10.4% of Bulk Composite Sample sand fraction feed with the Heavy Mineral Assemblage containing 24% Magnetite1 and 23% Andalusite.

Magnetite successfully recovered from BRC concentrate using low intensity magnetic separation.

Andalusite was successfully recovered from BRC concentrate using high intensity magnetic separation (non-magnetic fraction).

80% of the Andalusite recovered was more than 80% liberated, grading 60% Al2O3 and 0.2% Fe2O3 which is the target specification for the final high purity Andalusite product in future bulk testing.

Focus of planned bulk testing will be recovery of high purity Andalusite product as prices and demand continue to increase.

Scope also exists for recovering other valuable heavy minerals such as Ilmenite, Rutile and Zircon.

Reflux Classifiers used as industrial scale gravity concentrators promise capital cost savings compared with more traditional spirals due to reduced footprint per feed unit mass and greater concentration efficiency.

1,880 kg of magnetite concentrate grading 61.4% Fe and 2.2% TiO2 has been dispatched to the Gerdau Group in Brazil, owner of the Steel Foundry located 25 km south of Los Conchales, for testing.

The magnetite concentrate was recovered from 27,200 kg of high grade sand (6.9% mass yield) from within the Los Conchales resource area.

1 For the purposes of Classification, Magnetite includes QEMSCAN determined Magnetite, Hematite and Intergrowth Fe

Ox/OH.

LATIN RESOURCES LIMITED ACN: 131 405 144 Suite 2, Level 1, 254 Rokeby Road Subiaco, Western Australia, 6008. P 08 9485 0601 F 08 9321 6666 E [email protected]

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

Latin Resources Limited (ASX:LRS) is pleased to announce the successful completion of the characterisation stage of a new phase of testing on a bulk composite sample representing approximately 20% of the Los Conchales JORC (2004) inferred resource estimate of 1.073Bt @ 6.1% HM. The 2000 kg bulk sample composite was prepared by combining weighted aliquots of 437 individual 1 m sonic drill samples from within the Los Conchales resource area, making up a higher grade portion of the resource from surface to around 17 m below groundwater level representing a theoretical dredge pond water level. The composite sample thus represents a portion of the Los Conchales resource that could be suitable for consideration within a future mine plan area (Appendix 1).

50 kg of the sand fraction of the composite sample was submitted to both Allied Mineral Laboratories Pty Ltd (“AML”) and to Valdrew Nominees Pty Ltd (“Nagrom”) in Perth, Western Australia.

Both laboratories undertook detailed characterisation of the samples using different, but equally thorough methodologies that utilised various combinations of Heavy Liquid Separations (HLS), size fraction analysis, magnetic fractionation and gravity concentration. Scalable methodologies of gravity concentration were trialled by both laboratories: AML used wet table methodology; and Nagrom used a Batch Reflux Classifier and also trialled wet tabling separately. XRF was used for chemical analysis and QEMSCAN for mineralogical analysis.

The testing has demonstrated the recovery of Magnetite and Andalusite by scalable gravity concentration equipment and also the separation and concentration of each mineral by magnetic fractionation. At the same time a wealth of technical information regarding mineral quality was generated.

Andalusite

The outcomes of the testing are an important step towards defining process for recovery of a high purity Andalusite concentrate from Los Conchales ore. A summary of the results of testing appear in Appendix 2. Processes are to be adapted from the results of this work in the design and execution of bulk testing on the remainder of the 2000 kg composite sample from Los Conchales with the aim of obtaining Andalusite product for marketing purposes.

The Company believes that the natural high purity characteristics of the Andalusite at Guadalupito, confirmed by the testing, will facilitate production of a premium Andalusite product. Some of the most price determinate characteristics of Andalusite are the Alumina (Al2O3) content which is sought to be as high as possible, commonly in the range of 55-59%, and also Iron (Fe2O3) content which is sought to be as low as possible, commonly in the range of 0.5-1%. At Los Conchales the potential exists for achieving an Andalusite product of 60% Al2O3 and 0.2% Fe2O3 and thus a premium product.

Andalusite is one of the few mineral commodities that has experienced a sustained rise in price and demand over the past decade (Figure 1).

Approximately 90% of the consumption of the Al2SiO5 (Andalusite, Kyanite and Sillimanite) minerals are for refractory use in the following areas:

The steel industry (e.g. lining of smelting furnaces in the form of bricks, which depending on the raw material are called Andalusite bricks, Kyanite bricks or Sillimanite bricks, moulds, plastic compounds, refractory concrete, ramming mix, refractory mortar, etc.);

The non-ferrous industry (e.g. lining of electric smelting furnaces for the smelting of aluminium, copper-rich bronze, brass and Cu-Ni alloys, in zinc smelting and gold refining);

The glass industry (e.g. framework of glass mix tanks), and;

Figure 1 – Development of Andalusite prices since 2000,

high range pricing for higher Al2O3 content.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

The cement industry (e.g. lining of cement furnaces), for incineration plants and other industries.

The Al2SiO5 minerals are also used outside of the refractory industry. Of this material, ground Andalusite (together with Kyanite) is most commonly used as a mass additive (source for Al and Si) in the manufacture of sanitary and kitchen ceramics, tiles and electro-porcelain (high voltage insulators etc.) and brake shoes.

The major producer of Andalusite products are the French company, Imery’s, which supplies a significant proportion of the world’s market demand.

Magnetite

While the test results performed in Australia have confirmed gravity and magnetic process to concentrate Magnetite, this has been previously demonstrated at Guadalupito, (announcements 16 August 2012 and 28 February 2013) and other work has been ongoing in parallel to provide the larger quantities of concentrate required for marketing purposes.

While the testing in Australia was on-going, the Company has used available third party pilot plant equipment in Peru to recover a 1,880 kg magnetite concentrate grading 61.4% Fe and 2.2% TiO2 from 27,200 kg of high grade ore from Guadalupito representing a 6.9% mass yield from the -2 mm sand feed collected manually from within the Los Conchales resource area (see map in Appendix 1 for location of the ore).

The pilot plant used a multi stage magnetic separation process on feed material and does not include a gravity concentration process (Figure 2 and Figure 3). The ore was taken from within the Los Conchales resource area where 1 m pit sampling undertaken in 2012 revealed Heavy Mineral contents of more than 20%, sampling that led the Company to drill the area, ultimately leading to the estimation of the 1,073Mt @ 6.1% Inferred Resource (announced 07 February 2013).

The concentrate has been sent to the Minas Gerais (Brazil) laboratories of the Gerdau Group, owners of the SiderPeru steel foundry located in Chimbote, 25km by sealed highway from the Los Conchales resource area. Gerdau will evaluate the magnetite concentrate as feedstock for their SiderPeru operation.

Latin managing director Chris Gale said: “We are very encouraged with these advances in testing of samples representing our billion tonne Los Conchales Resource.”

“Clearly we have overcome a major hurdle in being able to successfully recover and concentrate Andalusite by scalable cost-effective gravity methods, and at the same time we are very pleased to be able to provide a quality magnetite concentrate for evaluation by our natural market located only 25 km from the project.”

He then went on to say: “In the next phase of bulk testing we aim to recover Andalusite product samples for marketing purposes, made more likely now the bulk testing can be guided by the extremely comprehensive characterisation undertaken in Perth.”

Figure 2 – Magnetite concentrate being bagged

from the pilot plant equipment in Peru.

Figure 3 – Pilot plant

installed in third party

premises, designed and

previously owned by

Cardero Resources’

Pampa El Toro project,

used to recover Los

Conchales magnetite

concentrate.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

For further information please contact:

Chris Gale Managing Director Latin Resources Limited +61 8 9485 0601

David Tasker Professional public relations Perth +61 8 9388 0944

About Latin Resources Latin Resources Limited is a mineral exploration company focused on creating shareholder wealth through the identification and definition of mineral resources in Latin America, with a specific focus on Peru. The company has a portfolio of projects in Peru and is actively progressing its two main project areas: Guadalupito (Iron and Heavy Mineral Sands) and Ilo (Iron Oxide-Copper-Gold/Copper Porphyry). Latin has also recently acquired the mineral rights covering a total of 40,483 hectares in the new Iron Ore district of Rio Grande do Norte State, Brazil.

Competent person statement

The information in this report that relates to composite sample preparation and testing results undertaken in 2014 is based on information compiled by Mr Andrew Bristow, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientist and a full time employee of Latin Resources Limited’s Peruvian subsidiary. Mr Bristow has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Bristow consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Some of the information in this report relates to previously released exploration results, geological data and mineral resources that were prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. This has not been updated since to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported, and was based on information compiled by Mr Andrew Bristow, a full time employee of Latin Resources Limited’s Peruvian subsidiary. Mr Bristow is a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralization and the type of deposit under consideration to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the December 2004 edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code). Mr Bristow consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which they appear.

[email protected]

www.latinresources.com.au

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.latinresources.com.au/

Hole_ID Interval Included

BL-045 0 to 17 TOTAL SAMPLES 437

BL-181 0 to 19 TOTAL WEIGHT Kg 2260.183

BL-182 0 to 18 TOTAL WEIGHT SAND (-1mm to +52um) Kg 2056.04

BL-183 0 to 17 TOTAL WEIGHT UNDERSIZE (-52um) Kg 204.15

BL-184 0 to 17 Avg. HM in Situ

BL-186 0 to 18 Avg. %HM in Sand 9.82

BL-195 0 to 17 %HM in sand&undersize 8.94

BL-202 0 to 17

BL-204 0 to 27

BL-206 0 to 17

BL-214A 0 to 38

BL-215 0 to 17

BL-216 0 to 20

BL-221 0 to 17

BL-223 0 to 20

BL-224 0 to 27

BL-225 0 to 31

BL-226 0 to 34

BL-227 0 to 28

BL-228 0 to 21Hole_ID Interval Included

BL-045 0 to 17 TOTAL SAMPLES 437

BL-181 0 to 19 TOTAL WEIGHT Kg 2260.183

BL-182 0 to 18 TOTAL WEIGHT SAND (-1mm to +52um) Kg 2056.04

BL-183 0 to 17 TOTAL WEIGHT UNDERSIZE (-52um) Kg 204.15

BL-184 0 to 17 Avg. HM in Situ

BL-186 0 to 18 Avg. %HM in Sand 9.82

BL-195 0 to 17 %HM in sand&undersize 8.94

BL-202 0 to 17

BL-204 0 to 27

BL-206 0 to 17

BL-214A 0 to 38

BL-215 0 to 17

BL-216 0 to 20

BL-221 0 to 17

BL-223 0 to 20

BL-224 0 to 27

BL-225 0 to 31

BL-226 0 to 34

BL-227 0 to 28

BL-228 0 to 21

APPENDIX 1

Preparation of the “Los Conchales” Bulk Composite Sample A bulk sample was prepared that represents approximately 20% of the Los Conchales JORC (2004) inferred resource estimate of 1.073Bt @ 6.1% HM. The 2000 kg bulk sample composite was prepared by combining weighted aliquots of 437 individual 1 m sonic drill samples from within the Los Conchales resource area, making up a higher grade portion of the resource from surface to around 17 m below groundwater level representing a theoretical dredge pond water level. The composite sample thus represents a portion of the Los Conchales resource that could be suitable for consideration within a future mine plan area (Figure 4).

The composite was prepared from drill samples already subjected to wet sieving at 1mm and 52µm as part of routine sample testing. As such separate weighted composites were prepared from the 437 1 m drill samples -1mm +52µm fractions and also from the -52µm fractions.

The composite preparation and homogenisation was undertaken by professional metallurgists at CERTIMIN laboratories in Lima, Peru.

50 kg of the sand fraction of the composite sample was submitted to both Allied Mineral Laboratories Pty Ltd (“AML”) and to Valdrew Nominees Pty Ltd (“Nagrom”) in Perth, Western Australia.

Table 1 - Drill hole numbers, collar information and sample intervals from each hole included in the composite sample.

Bulk Sample (27,200 kg) of high grade ore for pilot plant processing in Peru, taken from approximately 756,100mE 9,022,400mN, UTM WGS84.

Hole_Id Easting (m) WGS 84

Northing (m) WGS 84 RL (m)

GUA-BL-045 755023 9023630 -0.5

GUA-BL-181 756572 9022817 1.6

GUA-BL-182 755631 9024132 0.1

GUA-BL-183 755380 9023900 -0.7

GUA-BL-184 755178 9023750 -0.9

GUA-BL-186 754724 9025407 0.9

GUA-BL-195 754644 9024350 -0.6

GUA-BL-202 756308 9022762 -0.2

GUA-BL-204 756367 9023439 9.3

GUA-BL-206 756012 9023167 -0.1

GUA-BL-214A 756449 9024723 20.8

GUA-BL-215 755070 9024323 -0.7

GUA-BL-216 755386 9024554 2.0

GUA-BL-221 757020 9022647 -0.2

GUA-BL-223 757315 9022891 2.5

GUA-BL-224 757009 9023326 9.5

GUA-BL-225 756708 9023702 13.6

GUA-BL-226 756139 9024478 16.0

GUA-BL-227 755805 9024902 10.3

GUA-BL-228 755133 9025727 3.8

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

Conceptual Blocks

Figure 4 – Location of Drill Holes with Sample Intervals used to prepare Los Conchales Composite for testing and the location from where 27,200 kg of high grade material was collected for

pilot plant processing.

X

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

Figure 5 – Particle Size Distribution determined by

QEMSCAN for each HLS Density Fraction.

APPENDIX 2

Summary of results of test work on Los Conchales composite sample

50 kg of the sand fraction of the composite sample was submitted to both Allied Mineral Laboratories Pty Ltd (“AML”) and to Valdrew Nominees Pty Ltd (“Nagrom”) in Perth, Western Australia. Details of preparation of the composite sample are reported in Appendix 1.

AML undertook Heavy Liquid Separation (“HLS”) on the sample using dense liquids of 2.96 SG, 3.3 SG and 3.7 SG. Magnetic fractionation was undertaken on the 2.96-3.3 SG HLS fraction, and the non-magnetic fraction screened at 180µm to provide two separate size fractions for analysis. AML also undertook wet table separation on the sample collecting 4 cuts for analysis.

Nagrom undertook detailed size fraction analysis and HLS on the sample using dense liquid of 2.96 SG. The >2.96 SG fraction was subject to detailed size fraction analysis, and a selection of size fractions were recombined into three size fractions each subsequently subject to magnetic characterisation. Based on these results, another aliquot of the feed sample was screened at 425um with the -425um fraction (representing 97% of the feed weight) then subjected to gravimetric concentration using a Batch Reflux Classifier to recover 6 overflow products at different flow rates, and a concentrate that “remains” in the classifier at the highest flow rate, representing the underflow in a larger continuous feed unit. All overflow products and the “remains” concentrate were subject to HLS (2.96 SG) and size fraction analysis. The “remains” concentrate was also subject to magnetic fractionation at four different intensities.

A variety of key products from both laboratories were analysed by XRF and QEMSCAN to provide chemical and mineralogical data to aid classification and an evaluation of the different separation techniques.

Sample Characterisation

The calculated weighted average heavy mineral content of the composite sample was 9.8% Heavy Mineral (>2.96 SG) in the sand fraction (-1mm+52µm), almost 20% higher in grade than the equivalent measure of the overall Los Conchales resource.

Heavy Liquid Separation (HLS) of the sand fraction (-1mm+52µm) of the composite sample at Nagrom returned a grade of 10.32% Heavy Mineral (>2.96 SG).

A split of the same sample at AML, reported a HM grade of 10.44% >2.96 SG, of which 62% was between 2.96-3.3 SG, 19% between 3.3-3.7 SG and 19% >3.7 SG.

The particle size distributions of each SG fraction were estimated by QEMSCAN (Figure 1). There is a clear trend between SG and particle size range with the denser particles being generally smaller, as expected: Estimated P80’s were 140µm, 188µm and 381µm for the >3.7 SG HM, 3.3-3.7 SG HM and 2.96-3.3 SG HM fractions respectively.

QEMSCAN determined mineralogy of the >2.96 SG HM Fraction is summarised in Table 1 and is very similar to previously reported mineralogy determined by QEMSCAN on composites prepared from >2.96 HM separated from individual drill samples from Los Conchales (see press release dated 7 February 2013).

The relative distributions of the HM in three density ranges determined by variable density HLS and respective QEMSCANs are also presented in Table 2.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

Table 2 – Heavy Mineral Assemblage (>2.96 SG) in Bulk Composite from Los Conchales determined by QEMSCAN and relative distribution of each mineral between 2.96-3.3 SG, 3.3-3.7 SG and >3.7 SG fractions.

Los Conchales Bulk Composite

HM1 in situ (%) 8.2 HLS Fractionation Distribution (%)

Undersize, -52um (%) Oversize, +1mm (%)

7.9 12.9

2.96-3.3 SG 3.3-3.7 SG >3.7 SG

HM2 in sand (-1mm+52um) fraction (%) 10.4 62 19 19

Typical SG Heavy Mineral % of HM

(>2.96 SG)

HLS Fractionation Distribution (%)

2.96-3.3 SG 3.3-3.7 SG >3.7 SG

5.1-5.2 Magnetite (%)3 24 16.9 19.3 63.8 3.13-3.17 Andalusite (%) 23 98.5 1.5 0.0

Sum of Titanium minerals (%)4 5.7 25.7 35.6 38.7

4.25 Rutile (%) 0.2 54 18 28 3.5 Leucoxene (%) 0.1 31 23 46 4.7 Ilmenite (%) 2.2 12 9 79

3.4-3.56 Titanite (%) 3.1 34 60 7 Silica Bearing Titanium Oxides (%) 0.1 62 19 19 Garnet Group minerals (%)5 1.6 16 53 31

4.1-4.3 Almandine (%) 0.6 18 7 75 3.4-3.7 Grossular (%) 0.1 44 53 3 3.7-4.1 Andradite (%) 0.9 13 75 11

3.16-3.22 Apatite (%) 1.2 75 20 5 4.8-5.5 Monazite (%) 0.4 16 27 57 4.6-4.7 Zircon (%) 0.3 7 5 88

98.5% of all Andalusite reports to the 2.96-3.3 SG HM, while the majority of Magnetite (combined Magnetite, Hematite and Intergrowth FeOx/OH) reports to the >3.7 SG HM together with the majority of Ilmenite, Zircon, Monazite, and one of the Garnet species. The extent to which each mineral reports to the corresponding SG fraction is an indication of the degree of liberation of the mineral.

The 2.96-3.3 SG HM was subject to magnetic fractionation and the 17500G non-magnetic component retained 96.5% of the contained Andalusite (95% of all Andalusite in the sand fraction feed). The 17500G non-magnetic component was wet sieved at 180µm with grades of 70% and 79% Andalusite in the >180 µm and <180 µm fractions respectively. Of the Andalusite in these fractions, 81% and 85% respectively was greater than 80% liberated, each with greater than 60% Al2O3 and less than 0.2% Fe2O3.

These results clearly demonstrate the potential for producing an Andalusite pre-concentrate using simple gravity concentration and high intensity magnetic separation.

1 Back calculated from HM content in Sand (-1mm+52um) fraction taking into account the Undersize content, assuming no

HM in Undersize (-52µm) and 12.9% oversize (+1mm). 2 As measured by AML by Heavy Liquid Separation (TBE, S.G. 2.96).

3. “Magnetite” is the sum of all Iron Oxides differentiated by QEMSCAN: Magnetite, Hematite and Intergrowth Fe Ox/OH.

4 “Titanium Minerals” include Ilmenite, Rutile, Leucoxene, Titanite and Silica Bearing Titanium Oxides.

5 “Garnets” include Almandine, Grossular and Andradite.

6. Gangue Minerals form the balance of Heavy Minerals and include Pumpellyite-Prehnite, Amphibole, Quartz, Feldspar,

Chlorite, Micas, and other Silicates (those that are not strictly HM may be present in composite grains with other HM).

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

Figure 6 – Example of mineral mapping by QEMSCAN showing some of the >95% liberated Andalusite from the >180µm

size fraction of the 17500G non-magnetic fraction of the 2.96-3.3 SG HM. Calculated chemistry of this product is a high

purity 62% Al2O3 and <0.1% Fe2O3.

The proportion of Magnetite (combined Magnetite, Hematite and Intergrowth FeOx/OH) reporting to the >3.7 SG fraction is equivalent to 15.3% of the total >2.96 SG HM which is in turn approximately equivalent to Davis Tube Recoveries (DTR) from the >2.96 HM fraction, at between 1500G and 2500G (15.09%, Table 3), suggesting that the “Magnetite” (combined Magnetite, Hematite and Intergrowth FeOx/OH) in the lower density HM fractions is present as minor inclusions of magnetic Iron Oxides in lighter minerals or as non-magnetic Iron Oxides.

Chemistry of the different DTR magnetic fractions is relatively constant with respect to Fe content, averaging 59.2% Fe (84.6% Fe2O3), and TiO2 content which varies only at the lowest and highest magnetic intensity, and averages 3.3%. Higher Fe contents were observed in previously reported low magnetic intensity DTR fractions, and in this case the constant Fe content together with lower than previously observed yields suggests finer (purer) magnetite may have been lost due to the higher feed flow rate used in this case.

Table 3 – David Tube Recovery Yields from the >2.96 SG HM Fraction, separated by HLS.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

Gravity Concentration Trials

Gravity concentration of splits of the same composite sample (sand fraction) was undertaken at both AML (using a Wet Table) and Nagrom (using a Batch Reflux Classifier) with distinctly different results (Figure 8).

At AML, a Wet Table (WT) was used as a gravity concentrator, commonly considered by industry to produce the best possible lab results that could be expected from spiral concentrators. Four cuts were taken at visually selected breakpoints in the flow off the table. “Cut 1” had a high concentration of HM (74%), but relatively low HM yield with only 37% of the contained HM recovered into 5.3% of the feed mass. “Cut 2” graded 18% HM representing 43% of the contained HM in 26.2% of the feed mass. Combined, these cuts recovered 80% of the HM to 32% of the Mass.

At Nagrom, a Batch Reflux Classifier (BRC) was used. This lab scale instrument provides results that are indicative of industrial continuous feed Reflux Classifiers, although the continuous feed machines should be more efficient than the batch units as a stable fluidised bed is able to form. Six products were collected, representing overflow from the BRC at continuously increasing flow rates (“Flow 1”-“Flow 6”), and a “Remains” product that is not ejected from the classifier at the highest flow rate. The “Remains” product had 88% HM content, with 64% of the contained HM recovered in only 7.8% of the feed mass. “Flow 6” graded 19% HM representing 19% of the contained HM in 18.5% of the mass. Combined, these two products recovered 83% of the contained HM to 26% of the Mass. The Reflux Classifier provides superior gravity separation efficiency compared with the Wet Table, with the added scope for improvements in efficiency from a continuous feed unit.

The Reflux Classifier “Remains” product recovered 42% of all Andalusite contained in the feed concentrated into 7.6% of the feed mass compared with the Wet Table “Cut 1” product recovering only 24% of all Andalusite contained in the feed concentrated into 5.3% of the feed mass.

Magnetic fractionation of the BRC “Remains” product produced a Non-Magnetic fraction (at 14840 Gauss) grading 57.9% Andalusite recovering 39% of all Andalusite contained in the feed concentrated into 1.9% of the feed mass (i.e. 93% of Andalusite in the BRC “Remains” gravity concentrate). Improved HM and Andalusite recovery expected from the Continuous Feed Reflux Classifier combined with higher intensity magnetic separation should improve both overall Andalusite recovery and grade in the pre-concentrate which can then be evaluated for final cleaning stages based on retained contaminant mineralogy.

QEMSCAN data shows that >80% liberated Andalusite represents 50% of the BRC “Remains” Non-mag product, and has a combined chemistry of >60% Al2O3 <0.2% Fe2O3.

These results are a significant advance towards a high purity Andalusite concentrate compared with all previous work, aided by the use of alternative technology and facilitated by the large proportion of highly liberated Andalusite in the Los Conchales deposit.

The “Remains” BRC product also produced a magnetic fraction (at 578 Gauss) grading 57.0% Fe and 3.4% TiO2

Figure 7 – Davis Tube Recovery Curve from

>2.96 SG HM separated by HLS. Erratic DTR

yields below 1500G have been reported

previously and from Guadalupito magnetite.

In this case low intensity yields were lower

than previous DTR’s most likely because of

higher feed flow rates through the tube.

Yields above 1000G are very similar to other

>2.96 SG Heavy Mineral samples from Los

Conchales published previously (see press

release 07 February 2013).

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

representing 1% of the feed mass. QEMSCAN mineralogy suggests this only represents 35% of the total Magnetite (combined Magnetite, Hematite and Intergrowth FeOx/OH) contained in the feed and more attention to magnetite recovery will be made in the bulk testing phase.

Bulk testing is being planned to capitalise on the advances of this characterisation stage of testing, and will utilise a pilot size Continuous Feed Reflux Classifier to process the remainder of the 2000 kg composite with the underflow concentrate to be processed through WLIMS, WMIMS and WHIMS magnetic separation before alternatives are tested to produce a high purity Andalusite concentrate and a magnetite product suitable for pig iron production.

Figure 8 – Comparison of Heavy Mineral and Andalusite recovery efficiency between Wet Table concentration and the

superior Batch Reflux Classifier concentration.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

APPENDIX 3 The following information is provided to comply with the JORC Code (2012) requirements for the reporting of the above testing results on samples from the Guadalupito Project, comprising over 22,000 hectares of Peruvian Mining concessions.

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Sampling techniques

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

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

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

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

Samples used in the preparation of the composite were recovered by Sonic Drilling performed by Boart Lonyear in 2012, results of which have been published previously. Sonic core was recovered in 3 metre lifts with a 6 inch sample barrel inside 7 inch casing. Samples recovered (generally 100%) are not affected by percussion with the minimum of disturbance making the samples highly representative of the saturated and unconsolidated sediments from which they were recovered.

The Sonic Drill core was photographed and logged according to sedimentary characteristics every 1 meter interval and also average magnetic susceptibility measurements were recorded over each 1m interval.

The core was sampled by Latin Geologists every 1m interval, and if course sediment was present the entire 1m interval was bagged and sent for laboratory analysis. If the sediment was all fine, the core was cut in half longitudinally with a knife (unconsolidated sands), and one half was sent for analysis, and one half stored.

Laboratory analysis on every 1m drill sample was undertaken by CERTIMIN laboratories in Lima, Peru and included wet sieving at 1mm and 52µm apertures with the three resulting fractions dried and weighed. The -1mm+52µm fraction was subject to Heavy Liquid Separation using TBE (SG 2.96) to determine Heavy Mineral Content by industry standard techniques.

The drill hole locations were determined by hand held GPS.

Drilling techniques

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

The drilling that provided the samples subject of this announcement was Sonic Drilling performed by Boart Longyear in 2012. The sample barrel was 6 inches external diameter, and 5.5 inches internal diameter. The casing was 7 inches external diameter. The sample barrel is advanced ahead of

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y


the casing. Holes were vertical to a maximum depth of 62 metres and core is not oriented (irrelevant to mineralisation style).

Drill sample recovery

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

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

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

Core barrel length and core length measurements were made. No significant core loss was experienced.

No significant core loss was experienced.

In the Sonic Drilling performed in the Los Conchales resource area, results of which have been published previously, no significant core loss was experienced, and thus not relationships with Heavy Mineral content and recovery are able to be established.

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

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

The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.

All drill core was logged in detail by professional geologists for sedimentary characteristics and heavy mineral content. Measurements of average magnetic susceptibility were taken with an industry standard hand held susceptibility meter. Each sample interval was weighed to estimate bulk density. All core was photographed in 1m intervals.

Logging was qualitative and quantitative, logging and photographs were taken of all core.

100% of the core from all drill holes referred to in this announcement was photographed and logged as above.

Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation

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

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

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

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

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

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

All core recovered was of unconsolidated sediments of a generally sandy nature and were able to be manipulated manually without the need for machine cutting.

The core was sampled by Latin Geologists every 1m interval: if course sediment was present the entire 1m interval was bagged and sent for laboratory analysis following logging and photographing. If the sediment was all fine, the core was cut in half longitudinally with a knife (unconsolidated sands), and one half was sent for analysis, and one half stored.

Duplicate samples were collected primarily from core with no coarse sediment, allowing the core to be cut longitudinally and each half submitted separately to the laboratory for analysis.

Quality of assay data

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

For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the

Laboratory analysis on every 1m drill sample was undertaken by CERTIMIN laboratories in Lima, Peru and included wet sieving at 1mm and 52µm apertures with the three resulting fractions dried and weighed. The -

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y


and laboratory tests

parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.

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

1mm+52µm fraction was subject to Heavy Liquid Separation using TBE (SG 2.96) to determine Heavy Mineral (HM) Content by industry standard techniques.

Latin prepared its own homogenized standards (low, medium and high grade) that were analysed repeatedly to generate average HM content.

Statistical analysis of standards and duplicates included in all batches of samples was performed, with results passing standard QA/QC checks.

Verification of sampling and assaying

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

The use of twinned holes.

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

Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

Independent validation of data was undertaken by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants as part of their resource estimations prepared under the JORC 2004 code.

Additional verifications have been undertaken during the course of the project work, but are not relevant to the information being reported in this announcement.

Location of data points

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

Specification of the grid system used.

Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

Drill hole collars were located using hand held GPS.

Coordinates reported in this announcement are in UTM WGS84

Altitude of drill collars was extrapolated from their GPS location against 1:2500 Scale Digital Terrain Model generated from an aerial LIDAR survey. Topographic control is highly accurate.

Data spacing and distribution

Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.

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

Whether sample compositing has been applied.

Samples used to prepare the composite sample subject of this announcement were selected from available drill samples to provide a single composite representing a potential conceptual mine plan area.

While variations in mineralogy may occur at closer spacing, the composite is considered appropriate for the nature of the testwork undertaken and reported here.

The drill holes used for the composite are part of a larger set of holes that together were used to estimate inferred resources under the JORC 2004 code. It is not the intention of this announcement to qualify the previously estimated and reported resource estimate under the JORC 2012 code.

The composite sample which was subject to the testing reported in this announcement was prepared according to the detail in Appendix 2 from individual samples collected in the manner described herein.

Orientation of data in

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

Orientation of drill pattern is considered appropriate given the context of the composite sample used for testing and subject of this announcement.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y


relation to geological structure

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

Geological information to date suggests that there is no sampling bias in relation to mineralisation.

Sample security

The measures taken to ensure sample security. Sample security was managed by Latin personnel. Samples were collected daily from the drill sites, and stored in secure storage facilities before being transported to the Laboratory on a weekly basis, following industry standard chain of custody procedure. Subsequent to analysis, sample products are stored by Latin in secure storage facilities in Lima with appropriate inventory control.

Audits or reviews

The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. A review of all field sampling procedures was completed by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants as part of their resource estimation under the JORC 2004 code.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)


Mineral tenement and land tenure status

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

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

The Guadalupito Project comprises over 22,000 hectares of Peruvian Mining Concessions. Those concessions that include the Los Conchales inferred resource estimate area, samples from which are subject of this announcement are: Santa XIX, Santa XX, Auxiliadora II, Mathew 2 and Los Conchales totalling 2,686 hectares. The locations of these concessions and the others related to the Guadalupito Project have been reported in the recently released 2013 Annual Report and addendum.

The Company’s 100% owned subsidiary, Peruvian Latin Resources S.A.C. (PLR) holds title inscribed in the Peruvian public mining registry. Santa XIX, Santa XX and Auxiliadora II are subject to an agreement with a local owner detailed in an announcement published 28 March 2014.

The mining concessions are current and in good standing.

Surface rights over the Los Conchales resource area and additional areas were provisionally granted to the Company, subject of an announcement made 20 December 2013.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y


Exploration done by other parties

Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. Prior exploration on the project was minimal and largely irrelevant beside the quantity of published exploration results by the Company since 2010.

Geology Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. Guadalupito is a beach placer containing heavy minerals including

Magnetite, Andalusite, Ilmenite, Rutile, Zircon, Monazite, Garnets and

Apatite.

The sedimentary process that has formed the Guadalupito deposits

involves the Santa River to the south of the project having delivered

heavy mineral bearing sediment derived from the Andes Mountains at

over 5,000 m elevation down to the ocean.

Subsequently the sediment was deposited along a prograding shoreline through tides and wave action across the tenement package with resource accumulation of heavy minerals owing to their higher specific gravities. This combined with the embayment of the substantial coastal foothills and changing sea levels have given rise to the Guadalupito deposit.

Drill hole Information

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

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

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

Detail of the information relating to the drill holes, samples from which are subject of this announcement are given in Appendix 1. Locations of the drill holes are also marked on a map which places them in context with previously released exploration results according to the JORC code (2004 edition).

Not applicable, the information has been provided above.

Data aggregation methods

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

Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results

Not applicable – no assay results from drill holes are subject of this announcement.

Not applicable – no assay results from drill holes are subject of this

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y


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

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

announcement.

Not applicable – no metal equivalents were mentioned in this announcement.

Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths

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

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

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

No intercept lengths or mineralisation widths were reported in this announcement. Results of test work must be considered in context with the samples that were used to make the composite sample tested, and the make-up of the composite has been described in detail.

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

Appropriate maps are included in the body of the announcement to show the location of the drill holes and samples used to prepare the composite sample subject of the announcement.

Balanced reporting

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

The reporting of geological information, and results from testing is considered balanced.

Other substantive exploration data

Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.

This announcement includes sufficient reference to other relevant data, namely the JORC 2004 inferred resource estimate from within which the sample materials subject of this announcement were taken.

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

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

Further work is planned, and is specifically mentioned in the body of the announcement and appendices. This is related to further bulk scale testing to derive high purity Andalusite product suitable for marketing purposes.

For

per

sona

l use

onl

y

positive results from new round of testwork on los ... · gerdau group in brazil, owner of the...

Documents