Itafos increases mineral resources at Itafos Conda ITAFOS ANNOUNCES RESULTS OF ITAFOS CONDA TECHNICAL REPORT, INCREASED MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES AND PATH FORWARD FOR MINE LIFE EXTENSION
Itafos has released the results of an independent technical report encompassing the Itafos Conda and Itafos Paris Hills deposits, concluding increased existing mineral resource estimates and defining the Husky-1/North Dry Ridge (H1/NDR) deposits as the company's path forward for mine development. The technical report, compiled by Golder Associates Ltd. and entitled "NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Itafos Conda and Itafos Paris Hills Mineral Projects, Idaho, USA," will be filed on SEDAR within the next 45 days.
"This is a significant step towards executing on our key objective at Itafos Conda of extending phosphate ore supply from a combination of additional resources in existing mines and defining the path forward for long-term ore continuity by focusing efforts and resources on H1/NDR. In addition, these results provide further flexibility in terms of timing of required growth capex," said Tim Vedder, general manager of Itafos Conda.
The Itafos Conda technical report concluded that, with respect to Itafos Conda's existing mines, the Rasmussen Valley mine (RVM) deposit contains mineral resource estimates of 15.2 million short tons. This mineral resource estimate for RVM is a 37-per-cent increase over Itafos Conda's historical internal estimates. Further, the Itafos Conda technical report concluded that, with respect to Itafos Conda's mine development options, the H1/NDR deposits contain mineral resource estimates of 38.1 million short tons at approximately 24.3 per cent P2O5 (diphosphorus pentoxide). This mineral resource estimate for H1/NDR is a 60-per-cent increase over Itafos Conda's historical internal estimates.
The Itafos Conda technical report includes mineral resource estimates for the RVM, Lanes Creek mine (LCM) and H1/NDR deposits, all of which are wholly owned by Itafos Conda. The mineral resource estimates for these deposits were prepared by Golder and this news release is the initial public disclosure of such mineral resource estimates. The Itafos Conda technical report also includes an update of the previous mineral resource estimate for the Paris Hills (PH) deposit, which is wholly owned by Stonegate Agricom Ltd. (STG), the owner of Itafos Paris Hills. The previous mineral resource estimate for PH was prepared by Agapito Associates Ltd. on behalf of STG within the technical report entitled "NI 43-101 Technical Report Paris Hills Phosphate Project Bloomington, Idaho, USA," dated as of Jan. 18, 2013, and restated as of July 8, 2013, and filed under STG's profile on SEDAR.
The effective date for the mineral resource estimates is July 1, 2019. There have been no material changes in the available information for the deposits between the effective date of the mineral resource estimates and the date of this news release. Only mineral resource estimates are being reported at this time. The company intends to report mineral reserve estimates for RVM and LCM once current mine planning and other modifying factors studies have been completed to a minimum of a prefeasibility level of study.
About the deposits
The phosphate mineralization encountered at the deposits considered in the Itafos Conda technical report occurs as stratigraphically controlled sedimentary phosphate mineralization within the Meade Peak member of the early Permian Phosphoria formation. The Meade Peak member is further subdivided into an upper phosphate zone and a lower phosphate zone, separated by an unmineralized centre waste zone. The mineral resource estimates include mineralization from both the upper phosphate zone and lower phosphate zone.
The mineral resource estimates were prepared by Golder under the supervision of an independent qualified person in accordance with the definitions presented in National Instrument 43-101 and the CIM (Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum) definition standards, 2014. The mineral resource estimates were based on all verified exploration and preproduction drill holes and analytical samples drilled to date for the deposits considered in the Itafos Conda technical report. Data verification was performed under the supervision of an independent qualified person, while exploration data collection was performed under the supervision of Itafos Conda geologists and engineers who also meet the standard for qualified persons under the applicable definitions.
Reverse circulation (RC) drilling was the predominant drilling method for the RVM, LCM, NDR and H1 deposits, while all PH deposit drill holes were cored. Wireline gamma logs were performed on most of the drill holes across the deposits considered in the Itafos Conda technical report and were used to perform bed picks for lithological domain correlation and analytical sampling purposes.
Summaries of the drill hole and sample data used in the geological models and mineral resource estimates are presented for each of the deposits considered in the Itafos Conda technical report as shown in the accompanying table.
SUMMARY OF DRILL HOLE AND SAMPLE DATA Property Drill hole count Total drilling (ft.) Sample count Nominal drill section line spacing (ft.) RVM 210 59,787 11,788 200 LCM 142 21,957 3,057 300 (locally irregular spacing) NDR 293 48,130 3,896 200 H-1 305 109,094 17,005 400 (locally 200) PH 65 73,042 1,865 700 (south half) and 1,600 (north half) Notes: 1. RVM stands for Rasmussen Valley mine; LCM stands for Lanes Creek mine; NDR stands for North Dry Ridge deposit; H1 stands for Husky-1 deposit; PH stands for Itafos Paris Hills deposit. 2. Sample counts are based on samples containing P2O5 values of greater than 0 per cent. SUMMARY OF MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES Property Zone Resource Volume Short tons P2O5 MgO Fe2O3 Al2O3 classification (millions; bcf) (millions, dry) (wt. %) (wt. %) (wt. %) (wt. %) RVM UPZ and LPZ Measured 197.5 13.0 26.6 0.90 0.86 2.33 combined Indicated 27.0 2.0 26.2 0.63 0.90 2.46 Inferred 2.5 0.2 25.7 0.59 0.92 2.48 LCM UPZ and LPZ Measured 14.0 1.0 27.5 0.90 0.80 1.34 combined Indicated 6.5 0.5 28.2 0.98 0.76 1.62 Inferred 0.5 0.0 27.5 1.15 0.66 1.56 NDR UPZ and LPZ Measured 95.0 6.5 26.9 0.82 - 2.38 combined Indicated 19.0 1.5 27.0 0.91 - 2.32 Inferred 2.0 0.1 26.8 0.94 - 2.39 H1 UPZ and LPZ Measured 314.5 21.0 24.3 0.98 0.82 2.09 combined Indicated 128.0 8.5 24.7 0.98 0.84 2.13 Inferred 10.5 0.5 24.3 0.89 0.82 2.04 PH UPZ Measured 320.5 26.0 22.9 0.89 0.80 1.15 Indicated 492.0 40.0 22.3 0.86 0.81 1.06 Inferred 93.0 7.5 22.0 0.89 0.75 0.99 LPZ Measured 157.5 13.0 30.9 0.26 0.51 1.02 Indicated 223.5 18.0 29.5 0.59 0.49 0.81 Inferred 49.0 4.0 30.1 0.63 0.46 0.77 Totals UPZ and LPZ Measured 1,099.0 80.5 25.5 0.81 0.70 1.67 combined Indicated 896.0 70.5 24.6 0.80 0.72 1.19 Inferred 157.5 12.3 24.8 0.80 0.65 1.00 Notes: 1. RVM stands for Rasmussen Valley mine; LCM stands for Lanes Creek mine; NDR stands for North Dry Ridge deposit; H1 stands for Husky-1 deposit; PH stands for Paris Hills deposit; UPZ stands for upper phosphate zone; LPZ stands for lower phosphate zone; bcf means bank cubic feet; wt. % means weight percentage. 2. The effective date of the mineral resource estimates is July 1, 2019. 3. The categorization of measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources is presented in accordance with the CIM definition standards, 2014. 4. The mineral resource estimates are reported on a dry in situ basis. Masses have been converted from wet to dry basis using a 10-per-cent moisture factor. 5. No recovery, dilution or other similar mining parameters have been applied. 6. The mineral resource estimates for RVM and LCM reflect remaining in situ resources using end of June, 2019, mining surfaces; material mined from the deposits prior to this date has been depleted from the mineral resource estimates. 7. The mineral resource estimates presented are not mineral reserve estimates and do not reflect demonstrated economic viability. The reported inferred mineral resource estimates are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserve estimates. There is no certainty that all or any part of mineral resource estimates will be converted into mineral reserve estimates. 8. Mineral resource estimates are not precise calculations, being dependent on the interpretation of limited information on the location, shape and continuity of the occurrence and on the available sampling results. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimates, and totals may not add correctly. 9. The mineral resource estimates for the potentially surface minable resources (RVM, LCM, NDR and H1) were constrained by conceptual pit shells for the purpose of establishing reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction based on potential mining, metallurgical and processing grade parameters identified by mining, metallurgical and processing studies performed to date on the resources. 10. The mineral resource estimates for the potentially underground minable resources at PH were constrained by property boundaries on the north, south and east sides. A vertical limb on the west side of the property would require an alternative mining method and to date has not been drilled to the extent to support an estimate of geologic resources. 11. Key constraint inputs included reasonable assumptions for operating costs, CRU fertilizer product forecast prices and a 20-per-cent minimum P2O5 grade, based on current Itafos Conda plant specifications, for all estimated resources except for the LPZ mineralization at PH. The LPZ at PH was defined using a 24-per-cent minimum P2O5 grade to allow for a head grade of 30 per cent P2O5, which is amenable to direct shipping without the need for beneficiation.