Jervois drilling results from Idaho Cobalt Operations, United States

Coordinates

BHID

UTM_E_NAD83
Z11N

UTM_N_NAD83
Z11N

Elevation
(m)

Plan
Dip

Plan
Azi

Final Depth
(m)

R19-02

707546.8

5002220.8

2196.9

-75

245

431.2

R19-03

707547.1

5002223.1

2196.9

-67

220

164.0

R19-04

707579.2

5002233.8

2198.2

-70

245

186.8

R19-05

707579.8

5002234.2

2198.3

-75

245

196.0

R19-06

707580.5

5002234.5

2198.2

-80

245

232.3

R19-07

707579.4

5002236.2

2198.2

-65

225

220.4

R19-08

707569.3

5002273.8

2169.3

-64

252

165.2

R19-09

707570.6

5002273.9

2169.3

-70

248

177.4

R19-10

707571.7

5002274.1

2169.1

-76

242

184.1

R19-11

707540.7

5002261.1

2171.9

-60

250

118.6

R19-12

707540.7

5002261.1

2171.9

-70

250

127.7

R19-13

707542.3

5002262.0

2171.9

-62

228

122.8

R19-14

707514.8

5002291.6

2154.4

-75

227

116.7

R19-15

707514.4

5002291.9

2154.4

-65

238

116.7

R19-16

707514.0

5002293.2

2154.3

-68

270

124.4

R19-17

707417.4

5002240.3

2158.7

-90

0

20.7

R19-18

707417.4

5002240.3

2158.7

-75

245

16.5

R19-19

707416.5

5002241.9

2158.7

-55

205

15.0

BHID

Depth
From
(m)

Depth
To (m)

Intercept
(m)

Co %

Cu %

Au (g/t)

Composite

Zone

R19-02

122.8

123.6

0.8

0.34

0.05

0.54

Ram

R19-03

119.8

120.5

0.8

1.00

1.47

0.64

2.4m @ 0.45% Co,

Ram

120.5

121.3

0.8

0.21

2.52

0.19

1.43% Cu, 1.1g/t Au

Ram

121.3

122.2

0.9

0.20

0.48

2.23

Ram

123.1

123.9

0.8

0.49

0.10

0.63

Ram

128.0

128.9

0.9

1.17

0.11

0.52

Ram

R19-04

73.1

73.8

0.7

0.19

0.03

0.10

HW

150.3

154.4

4.1

Whole core Met

Ram

154.4

155.4

1.1

0.18

0.35

0.21

1.7m @ 0.22% Co,

Ram

155.4

156.1

0.6

0.27

0.08

0.14

0.25% Cu, 0.18g/t Au

Ram

R19-05

117.3

118.0

0.6

0.28

1.15

0.12

HW

156.5

157.2

0.7

1.03

2.48

0.7

4.6m @ 1.14% Co,

Ram

157.2

157.9

0.7

0.75

2.92

0.55

2.75% Cu, 1.01g/t Au

Ram

157.9

158.5

0.6

0.47

1.99

0.33

Ram

158.5

159.1

0.6

0.99

2.85

1.6

Ram

159.1

159.8

0.7

2.18

4.55

1.96

Ram

159.8

160.3

0.5

1.49

2.66

1.11

Ram

160.3

161.1

0.8

1.09

1.86

0.91

Ram

R19-06

167.3

171.3

4.0

Whole core Met

Ram

171.3

171.9

0.6

0.81

6.06

4.47

3.5m @ 1.46% Co, Au

Ram

171.9

172.5

0.6

1.1

3.93

1.73

2.75% Cu, 1.83g/t

Ram

172.5

173.1

0.6

1.23

1.63

0.77

Ram

173.1

174.0

0.9

1.18

2.58

0.73

Ram

174.0

174.8

0.8

2.76

0.20

1.93

Ram

R19-07

69.4

70.0

0.6

0.28

0.03

0.05

HW

75.0

75.6

0.6

2.24

0.01

0.63

1.2m @ 1.32% Co,

HW

75.6

76.2

0.6

0.41

0.02

0.24

0.02% Cu, 0.44g/t Au

HW

154.0

154.8

0.9

1.35

3.17

2.8

5.4m @ 0.6% Co,

Ram

154.8

155.5

0.6

0.35

0.91

0.29

1.36% Cu, 0.74g/t Au

Ram

155.5

156.1

0.6

0.97

2.88

0.56

Ram

156.1

157.1

0.9

0.29

1.26

0.38

Ram

157.1

157.9

0.8

0.51

0.83

0.32

Ram

157.9

158.8

0.9

0.42

0.38

0.23

Ram

158.8

159.4

0.6

0.28

0.07

0.36

Ram

165.0

165.6

0.6

0.74

0.03

0.28

FW

R19-08

126.6

127.4

0.9

0.49

0.59

0.23

2.4m @ 0.64% Co,

Ram

127.4

128.1

0.7

0.37

0.59

0.21

0.62% Cu, 0.37g/t Au

Ram

128.1

128.9

0.8

1.06

0.70

0.68

Ram

R19-09

51.5

52.0

0.5

0.51

0.02

0.21

HW

135.7

136.4

0.7

1.91

0.95

1.36

1.3m @ 1.33% Co,

Ram

136.4

137.0

0.6

0.67

0.20

0.34

0.6% Cu, 0.89g/t Au

Ram

137.3

138.1

0.7

0.90

0.36

0.42

Ram

R19-10

55.1

55.7

0.6

0.77

0.00

0.38

HW

99.1

99.7

0.6

0.15

0.12

0.07

HW

131.4

132.4

1.1

0.18

0.13

0.03

HW

144.8

145.4

0.6

0.22

0.27

0.20

Ram

146.0

146.5

0.5

0.49

0.64

0.28

2.3m @ 0.51% Co,

Ram

146.5

147.0

0.6

0.79

1.40

0.50

0.64% Cu,0.30g/t Au

Ram

147.0

147.5

0.5

0.50

0.14

0.41

Ram

147.5

148.3

0.8

0.31

0.40

0.08

Ram

R19-11

32.1

32.6

0.5

0.21

0.15

0.54

HW

99.0

99.7

0.7

0.27

0.08

0.42

3.7m @ 1.07% Co,

Ram

99.7

100.6

0.9

0.27

0.05

0.22

0.13% Cu, 0.69g/t Au

Ram

100.6

101.5

0.9

0.42

0.25

0.52

Ram

101.5

102.1

0.6

2.83

0.21

1.47

Ram

102.1

102.7

0.6

2.35

0.05

1.15

Ram

R19-12

105.2

105.8

0.6

0.31

0.43

0.26

2.4m @ 0.57%Co,

Ram

105.8

106.4

0.6

1.13

0.14

1.05

0.26%Cu, 0.47g/tAu

Ram

106.4

107.0

0.6

0.67

0.35

0.39

Ram

107.0

107.6

0.6

0.16

0.15

0.18

Ram

R19-13

64.0

64.9

0.9

0.20

0.02

0.10

HW

103.9

104.5

0.6

0.48

0.09

0.37

Ram

104.5

105.2

0.6

2.41

0.15

1.46

1.8m @ 1.06% Co,

Ram

105.2

105.8

0.6

0.28

0.08

0.23

0.1% Cu, 0.69g/t Au

Ram

106.4

107.0

0.6

0.15

0.23

0.48

Ram

R19-14

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0

0.00

No Significant Assays

R19-15

64.6

65.2

0.6

0.45

0.04

0.47

Ram

R19-16

23.5

24.4

0.9

0.56

0.02

0.21

HW

81.7

82.4

0.7

0.23

0.10

0.35

Ram

R19-17

8.8

9.4

0.6

0.21

0.04

2.18

Ram

R19-18

No Significant Assays

R19-19

No Significant Assays

Notes:

1. Core holes selectively sampled.

2. Whole core Met – Whole core ore composites consumed by metallurgical testwork, no assays.

3. Ram = Main Ram Zone, HW = Hanging wall Zone, FW = Footwall Zone.

4. Previous results for holes R19-01 and R19-02 reported 15 October 2019.

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.

Sampling is by diamond drill coring.

All drill core was sampled contingent on geology and core recovery:

Core was collected directly from the core barrel into core boxes, and Core samples were split in half, with the top half of the core analysed and other half retained as reference core in the tray. Core trays were clearly labelled with the hole number, tray number and metre intervals marked.

Samples were cut along the orientation line before being correctly placed back into the tray. The half-core was sampled, ensuring that the same side is consistently sampled, and placed into sample bags labelled with the assigned sample number.  Downhole measurements are recorded using a Reflex EZ-Trac at 50 foot intervals down each hole and at the end of every hole. 

Field sampling followed Jervois protocols including industry standard quality control procedures. 

Samples were sent to one of two laboratories: ALS Elko Geochemistry, an independent and fully accredited laboratory in Nevada, USA ("ALS") for analysis for gold and multi-element Induction Coupled Plasma Spectroscopy ("ICP") or to SGS Lakefield, an independent and fully accredited laboratory in Ontario, Canada ("SGS") for analysis for gold and multi-element Induction Coupled Plasma Spectroscopy ("ICP").  Jervois also has a regimented Quality Assurance, Quality Control ("QA/QC") program where at least 10% standards and blanks are inserted into each sample shipment.

Sample representivity is ensured by:

Diamond Core: For all drilling core was halved for sub?sampling with a diamond saw. For PQ, core was then quartered for sampling. Sample intervals range from 2 feet to 5 feet in length, with majority of samples assayed over 3 feet intervals.

Handheld XRF instruments were used to spot check drill core for mineralization, however those results were not relied on.  All sample results reported on are from ALS or SGS.

All of the drilling was diamond drill core (PQ/HQ).  Typically, drill core was sampled on nominal 3 foot half core samples for HQ and quarter core for PQ.

All sample analyses were completed at ALS or SGS.  ALS and SGS are global independent laboratories which are ISO accredited.

Samples are received at the laboratory:  Bar codes are scanned and logged; samples are weighed and dried; samples are crushed to 70% less than 2mm, riffle split off 250g, pulverize split to better than 85% passing 75 microns; all samples are analyzed for 35 elements using ICP-AES and gold using 30 gram Fire assay for core, both with an AA finish.  Any samples with over-limits specific to base metals or gold are re-analyzed.    

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).

PQ coring was completed up to the limit of PQ penetration and then reduced to HQ to the end of hole where appropriate.

Holes were generally angled from -55 to -90 degrees at varying azimuths.

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.

All holes are teched and all intervals are measured for recovery and RQD's are calculated.  Recovery % recorded in the geotechnical records as equivalent to the length of core recovered, as a percentage of the drill run.

Excellent recoveries were obtained from Diamond drilling.

There is no bias noted between sample recovery and grade. Excellent recoveries were obtained from Diamond drilling other than in faulted zones which were not sampled.

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.

Diamond drilling:

Drill core is photographed and logged prior to sampling;

Core has been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail appropriate to support mineral resource estimation and mining studies.

Logging has been conducted both qualitatively and quantitatively; full description of lithologies, alteration and comments are noted, as well as percentage estimates on veining and sulphides.

The total length of all holes drilled in 2019 was 3126m. All depths are listed in the table in the body of the text. All drill holes are logged in their entirety. 

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 was half-cut lengthwise using a diamond saw.  The HQ core half-core was sampled. For PQ core half was cut again and quarter core was sampled. For holes R19-04 and R19-06, whole core for select intervals was crushed and used for Metallurgical testwork. These intervals are not reported as the method requires Head grade calculation.

Samples are received at the laboratory:  Bar codes are scanned and logged; samples are weighed and dried; samples are crushed to 70% less than 2mm, riffle split off 250g, pulverize split to better than 85% passing 75 microns; all samples are analyzed for 35 elements using ICP-AES and gold using 30 gram Fire assay for core, both with an AA finish.  Any samples with over-limits specific to base metals or gold are re-analyzed.

For core sampling the same side is consistently sampled, half-core is retained in the tray for HQ for PQ quarter core is retained and half core is reserved for metallurgical test sample. The assay sub- sample is placed into sample bags labelled with the assigned sample number.

One in 20 samples is duplicated where the core is quartered and a quarter cut sample is analysed as a duplicate.  The remaining quarter samples is retained in the tray.

Sample sizes of 2-3 kg are appropriate for the grain size of material. The sample preparation technique and sample sizes are considered appropriate to the material being sampled.

Quality of assay data and laboratory tests

• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.
• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.

The ICP-AES and Fire Assay (30 gram) are considered total and are high quality.

Jervois has a regimented Quality Control protocol which has consisted of systematic submission of blanks, standards and duplicates in addition to those conducted at the laboratory. 

Precision levels for all blanks, standards and duplicate samples fell within acceptable ranges. 

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.

Significant intersections are alternatively verified by the CP and QP of the company.

No holes have been twinned in this drill programme.

Data is collected using a customized template on MS Excel.  The data is backed up systematically on and off site as well as on the cloud. As well, data is recorded using a master Microsoft Office Excel spreadsheet.

All data below detection limit have been entered as zero.

Samples received damaged at the laboratory, or with insufficient sample weight for analysis had the interval or location left blank. 

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.

All collars were surveyed by licensed surveyors. Down-hole surveys were routinely carried out on all holes using a Reflex EZ-Trac at 50 foot intervals downhole. Holes were setup on collar using a Reflex TN14 Gyro.

All datum is collected and recorded in UTM_NAD83 Z11N

The 3D location of the individual samples is considered to be adequately established, consistent with accepted industry standards.

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.

To date, due to the exploratory nature of the footwall drilling, the spacing is wide. Assay results for only one hole and for only the footwall intercept have been received. Further intervals have been sampled but the assays are not yet available.

The intervals reported for these 2 holes is exploratory and data spacing would not be considered sufficient to establish a Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve Estimation for this particular mineralisation intercept.

Data is reported both composited and uncomposited.

Orientation of data in relation to geological structure

• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.
• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

Drilling sections are orientated perpendicular to the strike of the host rocks.  Drill holes were inclined between 55° and 90° to optimize intercepts of mineralisation with respect to thickness and distribution. 

Drilling with angled holes in most instances provides a representative sample across the stratigraphy.

Sample security

• The measures taken to ensure sample security.

All individual samples are bagged and sealed with a zip tie.  Then individual samples are bagged in poly woven sacks and sealed with a zip tie. The samples are sent by courier to the lab and tracked. To date, no sample shipments have had reported problems and/or a breach in security. 

Audits or reviews

• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.

Jervois protocols consist of a regimented internal QA/QC which match or exceed global industry standards.  This drilling program has not been subjected to audits or reviews so far, however this will be completed as part of the current feasibility study of which this drilling is a part.

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

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.

Idaho Cobalt Operations consists of 243 unpatented mineral claims totalling 5990 acres.  The claims are 100% owned by Jervois subsidiary Formation Capital LLC and are in good standing.

Unpatented Mineral Claims:

Ownership of unpatented mining claims in the U.S. is in the name of the holder, with ownership of the minerals belonging to the United States of America, under the administration of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Under the Mining Law of 1872, which governs the location of unpatented mining claims on federal lands, the locator has the right to explore, develop and mine minerals on unpatented mining claims without payments of production royalties to the federal government.  Annual claim maintenance and filing fees paid before September 1^st each year are the only federal encumbrances to unpatented mining claims. Exploration plans are permitted and administered by the Unites States Forestry Service.

The United States Department of Agriculture Salmon Challis National Forest (the Forest Service) issued a revised Record of Decision (the ROD) for the ICO in January 2009. The ROD described the decision to approve a Mine Plan of Operations (MPO) for mining, milling and concentrating mineralized material from the ICO. The ROD was subsequently affirmed by the Forest Service in April 2009. The Plan of Operations at the ICO mine and mill remained unchanged and the ROD remains in place. In December 2009, the Forest Service approved the MPO allowing for the commencement of ICO construction.

There are no known encumbrances. 

Exploration done by other parties

• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.

The ICO came under Jervois management following the merger with eCobalt in 2019. Prior to this merger, the area has a long history of copper and cobalt exploration and mining. Copper mineralization in the Blackbird Creek area was discovered in 1892, and the area was soon explored as both a copper and gold prospect. The area was first mined by Union Carbide at the Haynes-Stellite Mine located south of the present ICO claim block, during World War I. Union Carbide mined approximately 4,000 tons of cobalt-bearing ore before ceasing operations. From 1938 to 1941, the Uncle Sam Mining and Milling Company operated a mine at the south end of the present Blackbird mine and reportedly mined about 3,600 tons of ore.

Calera Mining Company, a division of Howe Sound Company, developed and mined the Blackbird deposit between 1943 and 1959 under a contract to supply cobalt to the U.S. government. Calera stopped mining when the government contract was terminated in 1960.

Machinery Center Inc. mined from the district between 1963 and 1966, when Idaho Mining Company (owned by Hanna Mining Company) purchased the property. Noranda optioned the property from Hanna in 1977 and carried out extensive exploration, mine rehabilitation and metallurgical testing. In 1979 Noranda and Hanna formed the Blackbird Mining Company (BMC) to develop the property. BMC completed an internal feasibility study of their property at the time, including material from the Sunshine deposit in 1982. BMC allowed perimeter claims to lapse in 1994, and eCobalt restaked much of that ground. From 1995 to the present, eCobalt completed surface geochemical sampling and drilled 158 diamond drill holes on the ICO ground.

Geology

• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.

Deposit Types:

Whilst the deposits in the Idaho Cobalt Belt have been studied over many years the deposit types are still a subject of debate. Prior to 2005 the overriding opinion was that the deposits are sedimentary exhalative and are referred to as the Blackbird Sediment Hosted Cu-Co. And have been described as stratabound iron-, cobalt-, copper-, and arsenic-rich sulphide mineral accumulations in nearly carbonate-free argillite/siltite couplets and quartzites

Post 2005 the discovery of high concentrations of rare earth elements (REE) lead to the postulation that the deposits are not volcanogenic massive sulphide or sedimentary exhalative deposits but instead are iron oxide-copper-gold (IOCG) deposits

Geological Setting:

The ICO is situated in the Idaho Cobalt Belt, a 30- to 35-mile long metallogenic district characterized by stratiform/tabular copper-cobalt deposits. The deposits are hosted by a thick, dominantly clastic sequence of Middle Proterozoic age sandwiched between late Proterozoic quartz monzonitic intrusions. The clastic sediments were deposited in a large fault-bounded basin, probably as large submarine fan complexes and/or deltaic aprons that were frequently "drowned" by continuing subsidence within the basin. All significant copper-cobalt deposits and occurrences are found in the Proterozoic Apple Creek Formation, which constitutes the base of this sequence. This formation was originally correlated with Pritchard Formation metasediments of the Belt supergroup to the north, its age being constrained by dates of 1.37 Ga for adamellites intruding the sequence and 1.7 Ga from mafic dykes and sills emplaced along the basin margin faults.

The structure of the Apple Creek Formation is dominated by the regional rift structure. Cobalt-copper-gold mineralization occurs along a northwest-southeast trending structure parallel to and west of the central axis of the rift.

There is a series of northerly trending faults that are considered to represent initial growth faults, reactivated by Laramide and younger events. The district has also been affected by north-easterly structures of the Trans-Challis Fault Zone.

The ICO is hosted in Proterozoic age meta-sediments found on the east side of the central Idaho Batholith comprising granitic-to-granodioritic rocks. The Idaho Cobalt Belt represents a distinct district dominated by stratabound cobalt + copper ± gold mineralization, with a remobilized constituent. The district is underlain by strata of the middle Proterozoic-age Apple Creek Formation, which is an upward-thickening, upward-coarsening clastic sequence at least 49,000 feet thick that represents a major basin-filling episode and was formerly considered part of the Yellow Jacket Formation.

The Apple Creek can be divided into three units. The lower unit of the Apple Creek Formation is over 15,000 feet thick and consists mainly of argillite and siltite, with lesser occurrences of fine-grained quartzite and carbonates. Graded bedding and planar to wavy laminae are common in the lower unit, which is locally metamorphosed to phyllite. The middle unit of the Apple Creek Formation is up to 3,600 feet thick and comprises several upward-coarsening sequences of argillite, siltite, and quartzite, with distinctive biotite-rich interbeds that generally have a direct correlation to mineralization. The middle unit hosts the majority of the known cobalt, copper and gold occurrences in the Idaho Cobalt Belt. The upper unit exceeds 9,800 feet in thickness and is predominantly composed of thin- to thick bedded, very fine- to fine-grained quartzite.

Mafic tuffs within the Apple Creek Formation are the oldest igneous rocks exposed in the Sunshine-Blackpine district. They are accompanied by felsic tuffs and carbonatitic tuffs. Some mafic dikes and sills intrude the Apple Creek Formation and may be comagmatic with the mafic tuff beds. Several small lamproitic diatremes may also be coeval with mafic volcanism.

The Apple Creek Formation has undergone varying degrees of regional metamorphism, ranging from greenschist facies in the southern part of the district to amphibolite grade facies in the northern part of the district. Several types of mafic dikes and sills, ranging from 3 ft. to 100 ft. thick, intrude the Apple Creek Formation and are interpreted as feeders to the exhalative mafic tuffs, which are most abundant in areas of intrusive actvity

Style of Mineralization: 

Mineralization at the ICO is characterized as syngenetic, stratiform/tabular exhalative deposits within, or closely associated with, the mafic sequences of the Apple Creek Formation. This mineralization is dominantly bedding concordant and the deposits range from nearly massive to disseminated. Some crosscutting mineralization is present that may be in feeder zones to the stratiform mineralization or may be due to remobilization locally into fracture quartz veins and/or crosscutting structures.

Dominant minerals include cobaltite (CoAsS) and chalcopyrite (CuFeS2), with lesser, variable occurrences of gold. Other minerals present in small quantities are pyrite (FeS2), pyrrhotite (FeS), arsenopyrite (FeAsS), linnaeite ((Co Ni)3S4), loellingite (FeAs2), safflorite (CoFeAs2), enargite (Cu3AsS4) and marcasite (FeS2).

Recently, rare-earth minerals have been identified in samples from the deposit as monazite, xenotime and allanite. At this time, these minerals have not been considered for potential recovery as by-products of the Co-(Cu-Au).

The Ram is the largest and best-known deposit in the ICO area. It consists of a Hanging-wall Zone with 3 primary and 4 minor horizons, a Main Zone comprising 3 horizons, and a Footwall Zone with 3 horizons. These sub-parallel horizons generally strike N15oW and dip 50o – 60o to the northeast. Most of the significant Co mineralization is associated with exhalative lithologies i.e. biotitic tuffaceous exhalate (BTE), siliceous tuffaceous exhalate (STE), and quartzite with impregnations of biotitic tuffaceous exhalate (QTZ/BTE) or siliceous tuffaceous exhalate (QTZ/STE).

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:
• • easting and northing of the drill hole collar
  • elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar
  • dip and azimuth of the hole
  • down hole length and interception depth
  • 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.

All Material drill holes relating to this report are detailed in the tables included in the body text of the report.

Data aggregation methods

• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.
• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail
• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

For this report weighted averaging has been used in reported composite intervals and individual results are also listed, no grade truncations etc. has been used.

Aggregate intercepts are reported using a grade metre calculation.  For example: ((assay x meter interval sampled) + (assay x meter interval sampled) + (assay x meter interval sampled) / divided by total number of meters in the interval). Individual sample intercepts are also shown.

No metal equivalent values have been reported.

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').

As the exact orientation of the Blacktail North mineralisation is not known, the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is not precisely known but is assumed to be similar to, if not parallel to that of the known Ram deposit. Ram deposit and Hanging-wall zones have a well-defined geometry from past drilling. Drilling orientation is targeted to intercept perpendicular to the mineralized zones and is therefore approximates true width.

Notwithstanding that, true width is not reported and only down hole length is reported.

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.

Plan and cross sections included in the body of the report.

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.

Assay returns are complete. The assay summary table lists all significant assays above 0.2% Co which is at the bottom end of low grade material as defined by previous economic studies. Where returned grades for an entire hole were below 0.2% Co, "No Significant Assays" is stated.

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.

Table 1a summarizes other exploration data.  It includes: ground geophysics (magnetics, VLF TEM); geochemical surveys (soil sampling); rock grab sampling; and trenching.

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.

Planning for further surface exploration drilling will commence in early 2020. A digital geological and structural model is under construction incorporating the 2019 drilling data. An update to the Resource model will be completed incorporating the 2019 drilling data and geological-structural model to support an ongoing feasibility study.

Data Type

Summary of Results

Airborne Geophysics

Not Applicable

Ground Geophysics

A VLF-EM and Ground Magnetics survey was completed in 1996 over the ICO claims. The results were weak and inconclusive. No follow-up work was recommended.

Geochemical Surveys

In 1995, soil sampling of selected areas was conducted on lines spaced 200 ft. and 400 ft. apart, with samples collected at intervals of 100 ft. along the lines.

In 1996, the soil grid was extended north and soil samples were collected on lines spaced 200 ft. apart with samples collected at 25 ft. intervals along the lines.

Some infill samples were collected from the 1995 soil grid. Other parts of the grid were also extended and sampled on 25 ft. intervals where it was deemed warranted.

A total of 8,427 soil samples were collected during the 1995/1996 campaign. A further 95 soil samples were taken in 1997.

Other exploration activities conducted during 1995/1996 include surface geological mapping at a scale of 1 in. to 100 ft.

Trenching

In 1995/1996 mapping of old trenches and prospect pits, and collection of 979 surface rock samples including those from trenches. In 1997 three trenches, 623 ft. long in aggregate, were excavated within the "prism" of the road; the trenches were mapped and 83 rock samples were collected.

Geochemical Survey Results

The 1995 soil sampling program lead to the discovery of the southern end of the Ram target.