TIDMBZT

RNS Number : 4334R

Bezant Resources PLC

27 October 2023

27 October 2023

Bezant Resources PLC

("Bezant Resources", "BZT" or "the Company")

Updated Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate

for the Hope and Gorob Copper Project, Namibia

Bezant Resources Plc ("Bezant Resources", "BZT" or the "Company") is pleased to announce the results of an updated Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate for the Hope and Gorob copper project situated within EPL 5796 ("the "Project") in Namibia, completed by independent consultants Addison Mining Services Ltd ("Addison" or "AMS"). Bezant Resources holds a 70% interest in the Project.

Highlights

The updated Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) has been completed by Addison Mining Services Ltd., an independent consultancy based in the United Kingdom and is reported in accordance with the JORC Code (2012). Resources are of Indicated and Inferred categories and include:

-- A Total Mineral Resource of 15 million tonnes gross at 1.2 % Cu for 190 thousand tonnes of Cu estimated across the Hope, Gorob Vendome and Anomaly deposits and comprising:

o Total Indicated Resources of 1.24 million tonnes at 1.6% Cu and 0.4 g/t Au at the Hope deposit.

o Total Inferred Resources of approximately 14 million tonnes at 1.2% Cu across the Hope, Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly deposits, including approximately 3 million tonnes at 1.7% Cu and 0.4 g/t Au at Hope.

-- The resource estimation has ignored gold content for all prospects other than the Hope target on the basis that many historic boreholes (pre-dating Bezant's involvement) were not assayed for gold and as such Addison could not include gold in the resource compilation. Based on the Bezant drilling programme Addison concur that it would not be unreasonable to anticipate average grades of 0.2 to 0.4 g/t Au. The Company are considering a programme to twin certain holes to give the independent consultant the data to include additional gold in the resource estimate.

-- The MRE identified significant potential for open pit extraction with an open pit resource of 2.4 million tonnes and the potential, assuming favourable Cu grades from further drilling, of increasing the size of the practically open pittable resource for further 700,000 to 1 million tonnes postulating an open pit that could support five years mine life at an annual rate of 500,000 tonnes per year.

-- The MRE identified that deeper parts of the orebody had the potential to be mined underground, utilising a former concrete lined shaft with additional access from the base of the open pit.

-- Total tonnes of contained copper in Mineral Resource Estimate of approximately 190,000 tonnes. AMS postulate that this could be significantly increased by the drilling of untested areas where mineralization is projected and a drilling programme targeted toward increased gold credit, thereby increasing the overall copper equivalent grade.

-- Addison has noted that there is significant exploration potential with extensions to the existing open pit resources being extremely likely and only omitted from the Resource Estimate due to a historic low drill density that precludes conversion to a JORC Resource. Although there are no guarantees, extension drilling could result in further addition to the updated Mineral Resource.

-- The metallurgical results from direct test work are currently in progress and as such Addison have not considered them during the MRE study. The Addsion MRE considers reasonably assumed metallurgical inputs from historic testwork and prior studies. Any new metallurgical testwork will inform future MRE updates and technical studies.

Colin Bird Chairman & CEO said: "We are very pleased with the outcome of our work over the last two years and we now have a JORC (2012) resource, which our consultant agrees is both capable of significant increase and equivalent copper value.

Concurrent with the work on the resource study we have been very active on all aspects of the factors which goes toward building a mine. We are confident that we now have sufficient information, resource modelling, financial modelling and environmental innovative approach to bring a small mine into production, whilst aggressively carrying out further exploration to increase the resource significantly.

We thank Addison for a very detailed study and their work apart from producing the JORC (2012) estimate, has guided the Company in its approach to overall mine design as well as the proposed extension drilling programme."

Addison Mining Services has stated: " We have enjoyed working with Bezant on the Hope & Gorob project and producing the updated JORC (2012) estimate. Our work has shown the project to have significant scope beyond the original independent estimate. Management is well aware of what is necessary to add value both to the current mining study and also the greater exploration potential, including investigation of further gold credits and exploration of the underexplored overturned limb at Hope, which if successful may significantly increase the open pit mining inventory. We wish them well with their efforts."

Project Background

The Hope and Gorob mineral deposits are situated in the Namib Desert of Namibia within the Swakopmund District, Erongo Region. The capital of Namibia, Windhoek, is approximately 250 km northeast of the property and Walvis Bay is about 120 km northwest. The nearest town is Walvis Bay and is the main port city of Namibia. There is an international airport with daily flights to South Africa (Johannesburg and Cape Town) and several international chain hotels.

The Project location can be accessed by road either from Walvis Bay via gravel roads D1983 and D2186, or from Windhoek via highway M36 and connecting gravel road D2186.

The Hope and Gorob Project is situated within Exclusive Prospecting (EPL) 5796, a 243 km(2) license held by Hope and Gorob Mining (Pty) Ltd, a 70% subsidiary of Bezant Resources.

The Hope Copper-Gold Project is located on the southwestern most point of the Matchless Amphibolite Belt (MAB) and the deposit is characterised by surficial quaternary sand and gravel overlying the Swakop Group of the Damara Supergroup. In this area the Matchless Member consists of two main bands of amphibole-bearing schists, metagabbros, and intercalated metapelitic rocks of the Kuiseb Formation. The geology strikes east- north-east through the area, and to the west it has been deformed into a major asymmetrical syncline, known as the Hope Synform. This is over folded towards the southeast. Two distinct amphibolite layers of the southern limb appear to amalgamate on the northern limb, where they locally reach a combined thickness of 500 m.

The Hope and Gorob prospects have undergone numerous phases of exploration, undertaken by 8 or 9 companies within the project history dating back to the late 1800's and early 1900's. The project has seen multiple phases of drilling over its history. Drilling used in the MRE over all prospects is summarized as follows and presented in Figure 1.

   --    28 Diamond Drillholes by Bezant Resources over 2,680 m (2020 and 2023) 
   --    118 Diamond Drillholes by Kuiseb Mining over 36,900 m (2006 to 2008) 
   --    78 Drillholes by JCI over 18,680 m (1973 to 1976) 
   --    26 Drillholes completed by SA Vendome over 5,470 m (1971 to 1973) 

-- 119 Open Hole Percussion drillholes completed by JCI (1971) over 5416 m were used by previous consultants for Resource Estimation. AMS consider this data unreliable due to grade smearing and cross sample contamination and have excluded them from the estimate.

Figure 1 : Summary map of drilling and deposit areas.

No MRE has been completed by AMS for Anomaly East.

Mineral Resource Estimate

An update to the Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for the Hope and Gorob Project has seen Mineral Resources estimated for in-situ mineralisation and reported in accordance with the JORC code (2012). Wireframe restricted block models were generated for the copper and gold mineralization at the Hope, Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly prospects. Gold was not estimated for all areas due to lack of assay data.

Resources are of the Inferred and Indicated category for Hope and Inferred for all other deposits and are set out in Table 1. Open pit Resources are reported at a 0.25% Cu% or CuEq% grade and 0.70% for Underground Resources. Due to the low number of Au assays at Vendome and Anomaly no Au content is reported, but maybe expected to be in the region of 0.2 to 0.4 g/t based on the data at Hope and Bezant and Kuiseb drilling. At Gorob increased gold grades may be realized by continued exploration due to the low number of Au assays.

Table 1 : Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate for the Hope and Gorob Project, Namibia. *Gross representing 100% estimated Resources - Bezant has a 70% interest in the Hope and Gorob Project

 
   Area     Cut-off      Type         Tonnes     Density   CuEq%   Cu%    Au     Ag      Cu        Au       Ag 
                                                                          g/t    g/t      t        ozt      ozt 
           --------  ------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  ------- 
                                                          INDICATED 
           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
   HOPE      0.25      Open Pit      290,000       3.0      1.6    1.4   0.30   4.7     4,100    2,800    44,000 
--------- 
             0.70     Underground    950,000       3.0      1.9    1.7   0.40   6.7    17,000    12,000   210,000 
--------- 
                  Subtotal 
                  Indicated         1,240,000      3.0      1.8    1.6   0.4    6.2    21,100    14,800   254,000 
           ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
                                                          INFERRED 
           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
             0.25      Open Pit      140,000       3.0      1.2    1.1   0.30   3.1     1,500    1,400    14,000 
             0.70     Underground   2,800,000      3.0      2.0    1.7   0.43   6.1    49,000    39,000   550,000 
                  Subtotal 
                   Inferred         2,940,000      3.0      2.0    1.7   0.4    6.0    50,500    40,400   564,000 
           ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
                                                   INDICATED PLUS INFERED 
           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
                  Subtotal 
                   Open Pit          430,000       3.0      1.5    1.3   0.3    4.2     5,600    4,200    58,000 
                  Subtotal 
                 Underground        3,750,000      3.0      2.0    1.7   0.4    6.3    66,000    51,000   760,000 
                  Subtotal 
                     Hope           4,200,000      3.0      1.9    1.7   0.4    6.0    71,000    55,000   810,000 
---------  ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
                                                          INFERRED 
           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
  GOROB      0.25      Open Pit      800,000       3.0             1.1   0.1            8,700    2,000 
--------- 
             0.70     Underground   5,100,000      3.0             1.2   0.1           58,700    18,000 
--------- 
                  Subtotal 
                    Gorob           5,900,000      3.0             1.2   0.1           67,400    20,000 
---------  ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
 VOME     0.25      Open Pit      310,000       3.0             1.6                  5,000 
--------- 
             0.70     Underground   3,300,000      3.0             1.0                 35,000 
--------- 
                  Subtotal 
                   Vendome          3,610,000      3.0             1.0                 40,000 
---------  ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
 ANOMALY     0.25      Open Pit      850,000       3.0             0.6                  5,300 
--------- 
             0.70     Underground    680,000       3.0             0.9                  6,000 
--------- 
                  Subtotal 
                   Anomaly          1,530,000      3.0             0.7                 11,300 
---------  ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
  TOTAL      0.25      Open Pit     2,400,000      3.0             1.0                 24,600    6,200    58,000 
--------- 
             0.70     Underground   12,800,000     3.0             1.3                 165,700   69,000   760,000 
--------- 
                 Grand Total        15,200,000     3.0             1.2                 190,300   75,200   818,000 
               Total Indicated      1,200,000      3.0      1.8    1.6   0.4    6.2    21,100    14,800   254,000 
               Total Inferred       14,000,000     3.0             1.2                 169,200   60,400   564,000 
---------  ----------------------  -----------  --------  ------  ----  -----  -----  --------  -------  -------- 
 

Notes relating to Mineral Resource Estimate:

1. The independent Competent Person for the Mineral Resource Estimate, as defined by the JORC Code (2012 edition), is Mr. Richard Siddle, MSc, MAIG, of Addison Mining Services Ltd since November 2014. The effective date of the Mineral Resource Estimate is 30(th) of May 2023 and was signed on the 29(th) of August 2023. Mr Siddle has completed a site visit between 27(th) April and 28(th) April 2023.

2. No mineral reserve estimates have been undertaken. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The quantity and grade of reported Inferred Resources in this Mineral Resource Estimate are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred Resources as Indicated or Measured, however it is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration and verification including infill drilling, further verification of legacy drillholes via twin drilling and metallurgical testing. Following further exploration it may be possible to convert some of the Inferred Mineral Resources to Indicated Mineral Resources.

3. Copper Equivalent is based on assumed prices of US$9,000 per tonne Cu, US$1,800 per oz Au and US$20 per oz. recovery and selling factors (see below) were incorporated into the calculation of Cu Eq values. It is the Company's and Competent Persons' opinion that all the elements included in the metal equivalents calculation (copper, gold and silver) have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold.

   4.     Cu Eq% is calculated as Cu% + (Au×0.512) 

5. Cut off grades assume a Cu price of $9000 per tonne and Au price of $1800 per troy ounce at 85% and 90% payability respectively, a treatment charge of $183.35/t of Cu metal is also applied. Process recovery is assumed as 88% for Cu and 65% for Au. Operating costs are assumed as $14/t for processing and $1.5/t for G&A, $30 for underground mining and $2.5 to 3 for open pit mining. An additional allowance of $0.5 is made for ROM transport assuming a shared processing facility.

6. Indicated and Inferred mineral resource categories set out in the table above at cut-off grades >0.25% CuEq/Cu for open pit and 0.7% CuEq/Cu for underground mining comply with the resource definitions as described in the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. The JORC Code, 2012 Edition. Prepared by: The Joint Ore Reserves Committee of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Minerals Council of Australia (JORC).

7. Numbers are rounded to reflect the fact that an Estimate of Resources is being reported. Rounding of numbers may result in differences in calculated totals and averages. All tonnes are metric tonnes.

8. Pit slopes were assumed as 45 degrees in overburden and fresh rock. No geotechnical studies have been completed to support this assumption and the requirement for shallower pit slopes may serve to materially reduce the open pit mineral resource.

9. The absence of metallurgical results from direct test work currently underway in relation to Hope & Gorob are not incorporated in the report due to delays in receiving them from the laboratory. Their non-inclusion is not considered material for the purpose of reporting updated resources in accordance with JORC (2012).

10. The Mineral Resource Estimate set out above are quoted gross with respect to the Project. Bezant Resources has 70% interest in the Project and accordingly the Net attributable to the Company is 70% of the quoted gross.

Description of Modelling and Estimation Techniques

The Mineral Resource Estimate was based on the wireframe interpretation of the mineralised units at each deposit. At the Hope project mineralisation occurs in a recumbent synform fold structure and consists of 4 mineralized horizons. True thickness is modelled as 1.5 m to approximately 8 m and typically around 5 m. The axial plane of the fold dips 35-40deg towards the 340deg (north-northwest), along strike to the northeast mineralization plunges by around 13deg, extending from surface in the western most part of the deposit to around 450 m below the surface in the eastern most part. The strike length of the deposit is almost 2 km . The Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly deposits are more tabular in nature.

Mineralization at Gorob is hosted in two units dominated by quartz-schist and dipping approximately 38deg to 320deg(northwest). The lower unit is present only in the central part of the modelled area where the upper unit displays a lower degree of continuity. Mineralization ranges from surface and is interpreted to continue down dip for almost 900 m to a depth of approximately 550 m and approximately 850 m along strike. The mineralized units are modelled as having a true thickness of 1.5-8 m with mean thickness of 4 m.

Mineralization at Vendome is hosted in one unit dominated by quartz-schist and magnetite-quartzite and dipping approximately 40deg to 340deg(north-northwest). The unit bifurcates in the deeper southwest portion of the deposit. Mineralization ranges from surface and is interpreted to continue down dip for almost 700 m to a depth of approximately 500 m and approximately 500 m along strike. The are no drilling intercepts in the uppermost southwest quadrant of the model and mineralization here is extrapolated along strike and up dip. The mineralized units are modelled as having a true thickness of 1.5-8 m with mean thickness of 3.5 m.

Mineralization at Anomaly is hosted in sub vertical units with a strike to the northeast. The units bifurcate and join along its length varying between 2 and 3 distinct units. Mineralization is interpreted to extend from surface to approximately 270 m below the surface. Drilling has generally targeted the same level approximately 130 m from surface in the northeast half of the deposit, to the south a set of deeper drillholes test down to a depth of approximately 230 m. Mineralization is modelled as typically being 1.5 to 4 m thick, additional drilling in this deposit may significantly change its geological interpretation.

At all deposits patchy areas of oxidation are observed along fractures but no clear oxide-sulphide transition is observed. The amount of oxide material is expected to either not be material or it is expected that it might be amenable to floatation after sulphidation with sodium hydrosulphide and or ammonium sulphide, subject to further exploration and testwork.

The wireframe volumes were used to restrict the block models and the block models were rotated to fit the geometry of the deposits. Block sizes were selected with the aim of having a block size roughly 1/3 to 1/4 of drill spacing. The models were sub-blocked accordingly to preserve the domain boundaries.

Table 2 : Block Model Parameters

 
               Dimension m        Rotationdeg (left-handed,       Sub Blocks, number 
                                         about axis) 
   Area     East   North   RL        Z          X        Y       East     North    RL 
           -----  ------  ---  ------------  ------  --------  -------  --------  ---- 
   Hope      25      5     5        -18         0        0        5         5       5 
           -----  ------  ---  ------------  ------  --------  -------  --------  ---- 
  Gorob      40     20     2        50          0       40        8         4       4 
           -----  ------  ---  ------------  ------  --------  -------  --------  ---- 
 Vendome     50     20     2        72          0       40        10        4       4 
           -----  ------  ---  ------------  ------  --------  -------  --------  ---- 
 Anomaly     5      25     5        50          0        0        5        10       5 
           -----  ------  ---  ------------  ------  --------  -------  --------  ---- 
 

Grades were estimated using Ordinary Kriging on a volume-by-volume basis, discretization was used to account for change of support. Cu was estimated for all deposits and Au in Hope only due to lack of data in other deposits. Kriging Neighbourhood parameters are presented in Table 3 . Prior to estimation and geostatistical analysis data was composited to 2 m intervals, the minimum accepted composite length was 1 m, residual values were added to the last interval, length weighted averaging was used for grade values. At Anomaly 1 m composites with a minimum length of 0.5 m was used to aid in variogram analysis (due to the spatial distribution and number of data). No top capping was deemed necessary except at Vendome samples over 3% Cu were capped at 3% for 20% of the search distance and used their original value inside that distance.

Table 3 : Kriging Neighbourhood parameters.

 
   Area     Pass   Axis 1 m   Axis 2 m   Axis 3 m   Axis 1    Axis 1    Axis 1    Max comps     Max     Discretization 
                                                     Azi/      Azi/      Azi/        per       comps        Number 
                                                    Plunge    Plunge    Plunge    drillhole     per          E,N,Z 
                                                                                              search 
   Hope      1        75         20         20       72/16     162/0    72/-74        3         12          5,3,3 
           -----  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------  --------  ----------  --------  --------------- 
             2        75         35         35 
           -----  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------  --------  ----------  --------  --------------- 
             3        75         50         50 
           -----  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------  --------  ----------  --------  --------------- 
  Gorob      1       250        250         50       50/0     140/-40   320/-50       3         12          8,4,2 
           -----  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------  --------  ----------  --------  --------------- 
 Vendome     1       250        250         50       72/0     162/-40   342/-50       3         12          10,4,2 
           -----  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------  --------  ----------  --------  --------------- 
 Anomaly     1       200        150         50       0/-90     50/0      320/0        5         20          3,3,3 
           -----  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------  --------  ----------  --------  --------------- 
 

Models were validated by comparison of declustered and clustered statistics, histograms and visual inspection in cross section and 3D.

The amount of data and lower confidence in collar locations for Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly restricts the classification of these Resource to the Inferred Category. No topographic model was available and a low resolution 30 m cell size Digital Terrain Model is used to model elevation.

Areas in the Hope deposit which were informed by recent BZT drilling and Kuiseb drilling are considered for indicated resources. While risk and uncertainty still remain in those parts of the estimates largely informed by the Kuiseb drilling, the sampling has largely been systematic and continuity reasonably well demonstrated in areas covered by this same drilling. Two areas were considered for Indicated resources where the supporting data is considered of sufficient quality to allow for preliminary mine planning. Blocks informed by 2 or more drillholes and having a Kriging Standard error of <0.35 were classified as Indicated. Small, isolated volumes were removed, and 4th lowest mineralized horizon was also excluded due to less apparent continuity.

Exploration Potential

There is significant exploration potential on the Project with opportunities to add tonnes at all prospects and realize an improved Au credit across the Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly prospects which have seen little in the way of assaying for Au. Upside potential amenable to open pit mining is presented in Table 4 . The numbers and ranges are conceptual in nature and may not be realized. Further discussion of the exploration potential follows.

At the Hope deposit the transition to the selected pit and underground mining much of the resource is informed by drilling completed by JCI, ( Figure 1 ). This drilling was selective in its sampling, with sporadic sampling of the upper overturned limb of the plunging fold which hosts the mineralization. The dominant direction of drilling from south to north does not adequately test this upper limb and as a result, potential exists to expand the selected open pit under favourable stripping ratios by drilling from the north of the structure, twinning the JCI drillholes and systematically sampling the drill core. Approximately 3500 m of drilling is recommended and should results be favourable Cu grades may improve by approximately 0.1-0.3 % while increasing the size of the practically open pittable Resource to a range of 700 kt to 1 mt. Additional drilling targeting the overturned limb further down strike has the potential to add additional underground Resource tonnes by approximately 20% to 30% of the current underground Resource tonnes.

At Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly, the potential to add additional open pit tonnage is limited in the modelled areas, however along strike potential exists at all deposits. There has not been systematic sampling of Au, Anomaly has no gold assays, Vendome has only 16/273 assays for Au and Gorob 113/466. Clearly there is potential for additional gold credits in all deposits which may be expected to be in the region of 0.2 to 0.4 g/t with locally higher grades in excess of 1 g/t. Extension drilling also has potential realize to mineralized tonnes in the open pit and underground Resources.

Table 4 : Exploration potential summary across all prospects.

 
 Area       Extension   Thickness      Down      Volume    Density    Tonnage     Cu      Cu       Au 
               (m)         (m)       Dip Depth     (m3)     (t/m3)    (t) +/-     (%)     (t)      g/t 
                                        (m)                             25%       +/-     +/- 
                                                                                  25%     25% 
 Anomaly 
  NE           200          3           50       30,000       3       90,000     0.6     540     0.2-0.4 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 Anomaly 
  SW           200          9           50       90,000       3       270,000    0.6    1,620    0.2-0.4 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 Gorob 
  NE           200          4           80       64,000       3       192,000    1.2    2,304    0.2-0.4 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 Vendome 
  NE           200         2.5          60       30,000       3       90,000     1.4    1,260    0.2-0.4 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 Vendome 
  SW           200          6           40       48,000       3       144,000    1.4    2,016    0.2-0.4 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 Hope                                            165,000      3       500,000    1.3    6,500    0.3-0.6 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 Grand 
  Total                                                              1,286,000   1.11   14,240 
           ----------  ----------  -----------  --------  --------  ----------  -----  -------  -------- 
 

Figure 2 : Exploration potential at Hope

Comparison to Previous Mineral Resource Estimate

The previous Mineral Resource estimates for the Hope and Gorob Project were completed by Measured Group and dated October 2019 prior to Bezant Resources involvement in the project. All Mineral Resources were reported using a cut-off grade of 0.7% Cu. Over all deposits the Updated AMS models contain almost the same contained metal as the Measured Group models. However, between deposits there are significant differences in the contained Resource tonnage, metal and Cu grade ( Table 5 ). Generally, the AMS models contain 1.4 times the tonnage and seven tenths of the Cu grade.

Reasons for the differences in the estimate are described as follows:

-- Drillholes with missing samples within the interval were ignored and in places the wireframes appear to cut across sections of drillholes with no sampling. No missing intervals have been inserted into the composite file.

-- Wireframe modelling appears to have focused on preserving the higher grades, the models pinch and swell and zig zag to avoid areas of lower grade between drillholes. In places extremely narrow sub-meter intervals, as thin as 30 cm are included in the model with no account for a minimum selective mining unit.

-- The composite file includes the open hole percussion drilling, where these drillholes display clear smearing down the hole and have been used for wireframing and block model interpolation. This results in enlarged volumes which are likely not present.

-- A Comparison of the composite mean and block model mean for the Hope deposit shows the composite mean was 1.83% Cu while the volume weighted mean of the block model was 2.05% Cu. Indicating over estimation, 47% of the tonnage in the model and 52% of the contained Cu is attributed to blocks which were informed by 1 drillhole. Only 6% of the tonnage in the model is informed by 3 drillholes. This is indicative of local conditional bias brought about by tight search neighbourhoods which do not span between drill fences, resulting in undersmoothing. Wireframe modelling appears to have biased the input data toward the higher grades and this is further compounded by the undersmoothing, preserving higher grade areas in an unrealistic fashion.

-- Similar problems were identified at the other deposits, particularly with respect to local conditional bias. The Gorob and Vendome deposits were modelled as one despite being 1km apart and used drillhole data from both deposits stacked on top of each other.

Table 5: Comparison, Measured Group vs AMS MREs.

AMS models reported at 0.7% Cu cut-off over all material.

 
                        Classification        Tonnes      Cu%       Cu t 
 Measured Group 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Hope                   Indicated          3,090,000     2.53     78,300 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Hope Extension         Inferred           1,220,000     1.77     21,600 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
  Sub total                                4,310,000     2.31     99,900 
 --------------------------------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Gorob and Vendome      Inferred           3,830,000     1.91     73,200 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Anomaly                Inferred           2,030,000     0.97     19,700 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
  TOTAL                                   10,180,000     1.89    192,800 
 --------------------------------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 AMS 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Hope                                      3,800,000      1.8     71,000 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Gorob and Vendome                         9,500,000     1.13    106,800 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Anomaly                                     930,000     0.91      8,400 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Total                                    14,230,000     1.30    186,200 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Absolute Difference 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Hope                                       -510,000   - 0.51    -28,900 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Gorob and Vendome                         5,670,000   - 0.78     33,600 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Anomaly                                  -1,100,000   - 0.06   - 11,300 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Total                                     4,050,000   - 0.59     -6,600 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Relative Percentage 
                       ----------------  -----------  -------  --------- 
 Hope                                            88%      78%        71% 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Gorob and Vendome                              248%      59%       146% 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Anomaly                                         46%      94%        43% 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 Total                                          140%      69%        97% 
                                         -----------  -------  --------- 
 

Technical Sign off

The technical information in this release has been reviewed by Mr R. J. Siddle, MSc, MAIG Principal Resource Geologist for Addison Mining Services Ltd. Mr. Siddle is an independent Competent Person within the meaning of the JORC (2012) code and a Qualified Person under the AIM rules, having over 15 years' experience in the industry. Mr. Siddle has reviewed and verified the technical information that forms the basis of, and has been used in the preparation of, the Mineral Resource Estimate and this announcement, including analytical data, drilling logs, QC data, density measurements, and sampling. Mr. Siddle consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on the information, in the form and context in which it appears. Mr Siddle was assisted in the preparation of the estimate by Ms P. M. Mierzwa, Mr L. D. Harvey and Mr J. N. Hogg who worked under the direction of the Competent Person and are thanked for her involvement and contribution to the study.

Glossary

 
 "CuEq"                 Copper Equivalent is based on assumed prices 
                         of US$9,000 per tonne Cu, US$1,800 per oz Au 
                         and US$20 per oz Ag. Recovery and selling factors 
                         (see below) were incorporated into the calculation 
                         of Cu Eq values. It is the Company's and Competent 
                         Persons' opinion that all the elements included 
                         in the metal equivalents calculation (copper, 
                         gold and silver) have a reasonable potential 
                         to be recovered and sold. 
                       ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "g/t"                  Grammes per tonne 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "Indicated Resource"   An 'Indicated Mineral Resource' is that part 
                         of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade 
                         (or quality), densities, shape and physical 
                         characteristics are estimated with sufficient 
                         confidence to allow the application of Modifying 
                         Factors in sufficient detail to support mine 
                         planning and evaluation of the economic viability 
                         of the deposit. 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "Inferred Resource"    That part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity 
                         and grade (or quality) are estimated on the 
                         basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. 
                         Geological evidence is sufficient to imply 
                         but not verify geological and grade (or quality) 
                         continuity. It is based on exploration, sampling 
                         and testing information gathered through appropriate 
                         techniques from locations such as outcrops, 
                         trenches, pits, workings and drill holes. 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "JORC"                 The Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee 
                         Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, 
                         Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves 2012 (the 
                         "JORC Code" or "the Code"). The Code sets out 
                         minimum standards, recommendations and guidelines 
                         for Public Reporting in Australasia of Exploration 
                         Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "Kriging"              Geostatistical process to extrapolate numerical 
                         values from samples into areas of no data 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "Mineral Resource"     A concentration or occurrence of material of 
                         economic interest in or on the earth's crust 
                         in such form and quantity that there are reasonable 
                         and realistic prospects for eventual economic 
                         extraction. The location, quantity, grade, 
                         continuity, and other geological characteristics 
                         of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated 
                         from specific geological evidence and knowledge, 
                         or interpreted from a well-constrained and 
                         portrayed geological model. 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "oz"                   Troy Ounce, unit of mass for selling of precious 
                         metals ( 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "t"                    Tonnes (metric) 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 "$/t"                  US dollars per tonne 
---------------------  ------------------------------------------------------ 
 

For further information, please contact:

 
 Bezant Resources PLC 
  Colin Bird, Executive Chairman       +44 (0) 20 3416 3695 
 Beaumont Cornish Limited - Nomad 
  Roland Cornish/Asia Szusciak         +44 (0) 20 7628 3396 
 Novum Securities Limited - Joint 
  Broker 
  Jon Belliss                          +44 (0) 20 7399 9400 
 Shard Capital Partners LLP - Joint 
  Broker 
  Damon Heath                          +44 (0) 20 7186 9952 
 

or visit https://www.bezantresources.com/

The information contained within this announcement is deemed by the Company to constitute inside information as stipulated under the Market Abuse Regulations (EU) No. 596/2014 as it forms part of UK Domestic Law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 ("UK MAR").

JORC 2012 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,            *    Sampling of BZT drilling and was by sawn 1/2 HQ or NQ 
                      random chips, or specific specialised industry                   core. 
                      standard measurement tools appropriate to the 
                      minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma 
                      sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These            *    All samples were sent to ALS Okahandja, Namibia for 
                      examples should not be taken as limiting the broad               sample preparation and ALS Johannesburg, South Africa 
                      meaning of sampling.                                             for analysis. All samples were assayed for 
                                                                                       multi-element suite (ME-ICP61a) as well as gold 
                                                                                       (Au-AA23). Details of the methods provided below. 
                 *    Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample 
                      representivity and the appropriate calibration of any 
                      measurement tools or systems used.                          *    CRU-31 - Fine crushing - 70% 
 
 
                 *    Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that         *    PUL-31 - Pulverize up to 250 g 85% 
                      are Material to the Public Report. 
 
                                                                                  *    Analytical Method Details: 
                 *    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         *    ME-ICP61a - High Grade Four Acid ICP-AES 
                      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         *    Au-AA23 - Au 30 g FA-AA finish 
                      coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. 
                      Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg 
                      submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed       *    Sampling was typically 1 m in length with variation 
                      information.                                                     to meet lithological contacts. 
 
 
                                                                                  *    Exact analysis and sample preparation procedures for 
                                                                                       the pre Kuiseb (2004) exploration are unknown. Kuiseb 
                                                                                       drilling was analysed at ALS in Windhoek, analytical 
                                                                                       codes equivalent to modern ALS procedures are not 
                                                                                       provided in the certificates, but gold was assayed by 
                                                                                       Fire Assay and ICP and Cu by ICP with Aqua Regia 
                                                                                       digestion. 
 Drilling 
 techniques       *    Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole      *    All drilling by BZT was HQ diamond drilling with NQ 
                       hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)          tails 
                       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       *    Legacy drilling was diamond drilling with core sizes 
                       what method, etc).                                            approximately equal to NQ. 
 
 
                                                                                *    119 Open hole percussion drilling by previous 
                                                                                     operators was not used in the estimate 
 Drill sample 
 recovery        *    Method of recording and assessing core and chip           *    BZT Drillholes were logged for total core recovery 
                      sample recoveries and results assessed.                        (TCR) and rock quality designation (RQD), TCR mean 
                                                                                     was 96% and RQD mean was 78%. No relationship between 
                                                                                     core recovery and grade was identified. 
                 *    Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure 
                      representative nature of the samples. 
                                                                                *    Shorter drill runs were used in broken ground to 
                                                                                     improve recovery. 
                 *    Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery 
                      and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred 
                      due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse              *    No relationship was identified between recovery and 
                      material.                                                      grade. 
 
 
                                                                                *    Details of legacy drilling are unknown 
 Logging 
                  *    Whether core and chip samples have been geologically     *    All BZT drilling was geotechnically and geologically 
                       and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to             logged. 
                       support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, 
                       mining studies and metallurgical studies. 
                                                                                *    29/78 JCI and 100/118 Kuiseb Drillholes had lithology 
                                                                                     logs. 
                  *    Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in 
                       nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. 
                                                                                *    BZT logging contained qualitative and quantitative 
                                                                                     logging. 
                  *    The total length and percentage of the relevant 
                       intersections logged. 
 Sub-sampling 
 techniques       *    If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter,          *    All BZT drilling is of half sawn core and help sample 
 and sample            half or all core taken.                                         representivity. 
 preparation 
 
                  *    If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary         *    No field duplicates were taken. 
                       split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. 
 
                                                                                  *    HQ core size is appropriate for the material under 
                  *    For all sample types, the nature, quality and                   investigation. 
                       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. 
 Quality of 
 assay data      *    The nature, quality and appropriateness of the            *    During 2020 - 2022 diamond drilling Bezant collected 
 and                  assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether            493 half core samples and inserted 58 control samples 
 laboratory           the technique is considered partial or total.                  (29 CRMs and 29 blanks), which respectively 
 tests                                                                               represents 5.8% of the whole sample population. 
 
                 *    For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF 
                      instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining      *    CRM and Blank material performed adequately. 
                      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. 
 Verification 
 of sampling     *    The verification of significant intersections by          *    The CP inspected BZT drill core and found visual 
 and assaying         either independent or alternative company personnel.           agreement with assay data. 
 
 
                 *    The use of twinned holes.                                 *    All assay data was managed electronically in a 
                                                                                     relational database from digital certificates. 
 
                 *    Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, 
                      data verification, data storage (physical and 
                      electronic) protocols. 
 
 
                 *    Discuss any adjustment to assay data. 
 Location of 
 data points     *    Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill      *    BZT drillhole were surveyed by hand held GPS. 
                      holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine 
                      workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource 
                      estimation.                                               *    The 51 legacy collars at Hope were surveyed by 
                                                                                     Differential GPS and converted to WGS84 UTM 33s 
 
                 *    Specification of the grid system used. 
                                                                                *    Other legacy collars were transformed from the local 
                                                                                     grid and a number of locations identified in the 
                 *    Quality and adequacy of topographic control.                   field and confirmed to be within a few meters of the 
                                                                                     expected. 
 Data spacing 
 and             *    Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.        *    Data spacing is highly variable over the project area 
 distribution                                                                        and is suitable for inferred resource estimation with 
                                                                                     minor areas of indicated. 
                 *    Whether the data spacing and distribution is 
                      sufficient to establish the degree of geological and 
                      grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource     *    Drill fence spacing is typically 25 to 50 at Hope 
                      and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and                    with variable vertical coverage. 
                      classifications applied. 
 
                                                                                *    Anomaly fence spacing is 60 m with one DH per fence 
                 *    Whether sample compositing has been applied.                   in most parts. 
 
 
                                                                                *    Spacing at Gorob and Vendome is approximately 50 to 
                                                                                     100 m 
 Orientation 
 of data in      *    Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased     *    Drilling has a variable angle to mineralization at 
 relation to          sampling of possible structures and the extent to              Hope due to the fold hosting mineralization. 
 geological           which this is known, considering the deposit type. 
 structure 
                                                                                *    At other prospects drilling is typically 90 to 70 
                 *    If the relationship between the drilling orientation           degrees to mineralization. 
                      and the orientation of key mineralised structures is 
                      considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this 
                      should be assessed and reported if material.              *    The orientation of drilling is not assumed to have 
                                                                                     introduced a sample bias but true widths may vary by 
                                                                                     up to 50% 
 Sample 
 security         *    The measures taken to ensure sample security.            *    BZT Samples were transported by company personnel to 
                                                                                     the lab in labelled bags. Lab standard submission 
                                                                                     forms were used. 
 Audits or                                                                    *    No such reviews have been completed. 
 reviews          *    The results of any audits or reviews of sampling 
                       techniques and data. 
=============  ============================================================  =============================================================== 
 

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

 
 Criteria         JORC Code explanation                                            Commentary 
 Mineral 
 tenement and       *    Type, reference name/number, location and ownership         *    The Hope and Gorob projects is situated within 
 land tenure             including agreements or material issues with third               Exclusive Prospecting (EPL) 5796, a 243 km(2) license 
 status                  parties such as joint ventures, partnerships,                    held by Hope and Gorob Mining (Pty) Ltd, a subsidiary 
                         overriding royalties, native title interests,                    of Bezant Resources. 
                         historical sites, wilderness or national park and 
                         environmental settings. 
                                                                                     *    The Licence is Valid to 19/10/2024 
 
                    *    The security of the tenure held at the time of 
                         reporting along with any known impediments to               *    On 19 June 2020 Bezant announced the acquisition of 
                         obtaining a licence to operate in the area.                      100% of Virgo Resources Ltd and its interests in the 
                                                                                          Hope Copper-Gold Project in Namibia. Virgo Resources 
                                                                                          Ltd is incorporated in Australia (ACN 626 148 347) 
                                                                                          ("Virgo"). The acquisition of Virgo completed on 14 
                                                                                          August 2020. Virgo, through its 100% owned Australian 
                                                                                          subsidiary Hepburn Resources Pty Ltd (ACN 624 189 
                                                                                          162), owns i) 70% of Hope and Gorob Mining Pty Ltd 
                                                                                          incorporated in Namibia which owns EPL5796, ii) 80% 
                                                                                          of Hope Namibia Mineral Exploration Pty Ltd 
                                                                                          Incorporated in Namibia which owns EPL6605 and 
                                                                                          iEPL7170. The balance of the project is held by local 
                                                                                          Namibian partners. 
 Exploration 
 done by other      *    Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other        *    The project area has a long history, exploration 
 parties                 parties.                                                         completed by other parties is discussed in the 
                                                                                          documentation. 
 Geology 
                    *    Deposit type, geological setting and style of               *    The Hope and Gorob Project lies on the Matchless Belt, 
                         mineralisation.                                                  which is located within the late Neoproterozoic 
                                                                                          Damaran orogenic belt in central Namibia 
 Drill hole 
 Information           *    A summary of all information material to the            *    No exploration results are presented in this 
                            understanding of the exploration results including a         announcement. 
                            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. 
 Data 
 aggregation        *    In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging      *    No exploration results are presented in this 
 methods                 techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations            announcement. 
                         (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. 
 Relationship 
 between            *    These relationships are particularly important in the      *    No exploration results are presented in this 
 mineralisation          reporting of Exploration Results.                               announcement. 
 widths and 
 intercept 
 lengths            *    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'). 
 Diagrams 
                    *    Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and            *    No exploration results are presented in this 
                         tabulations of intercepts should be included for any            announcement. 
                         significant discovery being reported These should 
                         include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill 
                         hole collar locations and appropriate sectional 
                         views. 
 Balanced 
 reporting          *    Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration           *    No exploration results are presented in this 
                         Results is not practicable, representative reporting            announcement. 
                         of both low and high grades and/or widths should be 
                         practiced to avoid misleading reporting of 
                         Exploration Results. 
 Other 
 substantive        *    Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,        *    No exploration results are presented in this 
 exploration             should be reported including (but not limited to):              announcement. 
 data                    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. 
 Further work 
                    *    The nature and scale of planned further work (eg              *    Further drilling is required in areas of sparse data. 
                         tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or 
                         large-scale step-out drilling). 
                                                                                       *    Re-sampling of any mineralized unsampled drill core 
                                                                                            or core that does not have Au assays held in storage 
                    *    Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible                at the geological survey should be completed if 
                         extensions, including the main geological                          possible 
                         interpretations and future drilling areas, provided 
                         this information is not commercially sensitive. 
===============  ===============================================================  =============================================================== 
 

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section.)

 
 Criteria         JORC Code explanation                                         Commentary 
 Database 
 integrity          *    Measures taken to ensure that data has not been          *    BZT sampling was imported into a relational database 
                         corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying            from digital certificates. 
                         errors, between its initial collection and its use 
                         for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. 
                                                                                  *    Legacy data was provided in poor shape in multiple 
                                                                                       excel spreadsheets. Not all drillholes had assays and 
                    *    Data validation procedures used.                              there were significant problems with overlapping 
                                                                                       intervals. The coordinate systems were poorly defined 
                                                                                       and provided in 4 different formats without a 
                                                                                       complete coordinate set for every drillhole. 
 
 
                                                                                  *    DGPS coordinates were found for the legacy hope data 
                                                                                       and this was transformed to support estimation. Other 
                                                                                       coordinates derived and verified in the field. See 
                                                                                       the technical report for further information. 
 
 
                                                                                  *    Overlapping intervals were fixed following cross 
                                                                                       reference across multiple data sets and scans/copies 
                                                                                       of company reports. 
 Site visits 
                    *    Comment on any site visits undertaken by the             *    The CP completed a site visit to inspect drill core 
                         Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.             and verify collar locations in the field. 
 
 
                    *    If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why 
                         this is the case. 
 Geological 
 interpretation    *    Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of )        *    Hope is the most complex of the deposits and is 
                        the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.          interpreted to be hosted in a recumbrant fold 
                                                                                       structure. Interpretation of the fold is aided by the 
                                                                                       presence of a distinct amphibolite unit and 3 to4 
                   *    Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.           distinct magnetite schist units that are mineralized. 
 
 
                   *    The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on     *    Alternative interpretation would see the lenses as 
                        Mineral Resource estimation.                                   tabular rather than folded but this is not considered 
                                                                                       likely due to the outcropping fold closures visible 
                                                                                       at surface and the supporting structural 
                   *    The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral          measurements. 
                        Resource estimation. 
 
                                                                                  *    Tighter or looser folding may effect open pit 
                   *    The factors affecting continuity both of grade and             stripping ratios. 
                        geology. 
 
                                                                                  *    Grade continuity maybe influenced by the folding due 
                                                                                       to remobilisation. 
 
 
                                                                                  *    Other prospects have much simpler geology and are 
                                                                                       tabular in nature, mineralization is associated with 
                                                                                       magnetite schists. 
 Dimensions 
                   *    The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource                  *    Hope: True thickness is modelled as 1.5 m to 
                        expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan                    approximately 8 m and typically around 5 m. The axial 
                        width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower                    plane of the fold dips 35-40 deg towards the 340 deg 
                        limits of the Mineral Resource.                                          (north-northwest), along strike to the northeast 
                                                                                                 mineralization plunges by around 13 deg , extending 
                                                                                                 from surface in the western most part of the deposit 
                                                                                                 to around 450 m below the surface in the eastern most 
                                                                                                 part. The strike length of the deposit is almost 2 
                                                                                                 km. 
 
 
                                                                                            *    Gorob. Mineralization at Gorob is hosted in two units 
                                                                                                 dominated by quartz-schist and dipping approximately 
                                                                                                 38 deg to 320 deg (northwest). The lower unit is 
                                                                                                 present only in the central part of the modelled area 
                                                                                                 where the upper unit displays a lower degree of 
                                                                                                 continuity. There were many instances of selective 
                                                                                                 sampling where the unit was not sampled despite 
                                                                                                 adjacent drillholes showing the unit to be present 
                                                                                                 and mineralized. Mineralization was modelled using an 
                                                                                                 approximate 0.2% Cu cut-off and was pushed through 
                                                                                                 non-sampled intervals where it was deemed appropriate 
                                                                                                 based on the surrounding evidence. Mineralization 
                                                                                                 ranges from surface and is interpreted to continue 
                                                                                                 down dip for almost 900 m to a depth of approximately 
                                                                                                 550 m and approximately 850 m along strike. The 
                                                                                                 mineralized units are modelled as having a true 
                                                                                                 thickness of 1.5-8 m with mean thickness of 4 m. 
 
 
                                                                                            *    Vendome. Mineralization at Vendome is hosted in one 
                                                                                                 unit dominated by quartz-schist and 
                                                                                                 magnetite-quartzite and dipping approximately 40 deg 
                                                                                                 to 340 deg (north-northwest). The unit bifurcates in 
                                                                                                 the deeper southwest portion of the deposit. 
                                                                                                 Mineralization was modelled using an approximate 0.2% 
                                                                                                 Cu cut-off. Mineralization ranges from surface and is 
                                                                                                 interpreted to continue down dip for almost 700 m to 
                                                                                                 a depth of approximately 500 m and approximately 500 
                                                                                                 m along strike. The are no drilling intercepts in the 
                                                                                                 uppermost southwest quadrant of the model and 
                                                                                                 mineralization here is extrapolated along strike and 
                                                                                                 up dip. The mineralized units are modelled as having 
                                                                                                 a true thickness of 1.5-8 m with mean thickness of 
                                                                                                 3.5 m. 
 
 
                                                                                            *    Mineralization at Anomaly is hosted in sub vertical 
                                                                                                 units with a strike to the northeast. The units 
                                                                                                 bifurcate and join along its length varying between 2 
                                                                                                 and 3 distinct units. Mineralization is interpreted 
                                                                                                 to extend from surface to approximately 270 m below 
                                                                                                 the surface. Drilling has generally targeted the same 
                                                                                                 level approximately 130 m from surface in the 
                                                                                                 northeast half of the deposit, to the south a set of 
                                                                                                 deeper drillholes test down to a depth of 
                                                                                                 approximately 230 m. Mineralization is modelled as 
                                                                                                 typically being 1.5 to 4 m thick, additional drilling 
                                                                                                 in this deposit may significantly change its 
                                                                                                 geological interpretation. 
 Estimation and 
 modelling         *    The nature and appropriateness of the estimation               *    The wireframe volumes were used to restrict the block 
 techniques             technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including                 models and the block models were rotated to fit the 
                        treatment of extreme grade values, domaining,                       geometry of the deposits. Block sizes were selected 
                        interpolation parameters and maximum distance of                    with the aim of having a block size roughly 1/3 to 
                        extrapolation from data points. If a computer                       1/4 of drill spacing. The models were sub-blocked 
                        assisted estimation method was chosen include a                     accordingly to preserve the domain boundaries See 
                        description of computer software and parameters used.               Technical report for details. 
 
 
                   *    The availability of check estimates, previous                  *    Grades were estimated using Ordinary Kriging. See 
                        estimates and/or mine production records and whether                technical report for details on neighbourhoods used 
                        the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate                     for each deposit. 
                        account of such data. 
 
                                                                                       *    No grade capping was used, thresholds were used to 
                   *    The assumptions made regarding recovery of                          prevent over smearing of high grades in the sparsely 
                        by-products.                                                        drilled Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly deposits. 
 
 
                   *    Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade          *    No assays are available for deleterious elements. 
                        variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for 
                        acid mine drainage characterisation). 
                                                                                       *    Minimum SMU is considered to be 1.5 m 
 
                   *    In the case of block model interpolation, the block 
                        size in relation to the average sample spacing and             *    It is assumed Au will be recovered in the Cu 
                        the search employed.                                                concentrate or by gravity. 
 
 
                   *    Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining           *    Models were validated by comparison of declustered 
                        units.                                                              and clustered statistics, histograms and visual 
                                                                                            inspection in cross section and 3D. 
 
                   *    Any assumptions about correlation between variables. 
 
 
                   *    Description of how the geological interpretation was 
                        used to control the resource estimates. 
 
 
                   *    Discussion of basis for using or not using grade 
                        cutting or capping. 
 
 
                   *    The process of validation, the checking process used, 
                        the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and 
                        use of reconciliation data if available. 
 Moisture                                                                       *    Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis. 
                    *    Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or 
                         with natural moisture, and the method of 
                         determination of the moisture content. 
 Cut-off 
 parameters         *    The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality        *    Cut-off grades assume a Cu price of $9000 per tonne 
                         parameters applied.                                              and Au price of $1800 per troy ounce at 85% and 90% 
                                                                                          payability respectively, a treatment charge of 
                                                                                          $183.35/t of Cu metal is also applied. Process 
                                                                                          recovery is assumed as 88% for Cu and 65% for Au. 
                                                                                          Operating costs are assumed as $14/t for processing 
                                                                                          and $1.5/t for G&A, $30 for underground mining and 
                                                                                          $2.5 to 3 for open pit mining. Underground Mining 
                                                                                          assumes a combination of room and pillar in shallow 
                                                                                          dipping areas at a cost of $20/t and open stoping at 
                                                                                          $40/t at a weighting of 60/40% respectively to give 
                                                                                          $28/t, this is rounded to $30. An additional 
                                                                                          allowance of $0.5 is made from ROM transport assuming 
                                                                                          a shared processing facility. Dilution and loss are 
                                                                                          assumed at 5% and open pit slopes assumed at 45deg. 
                                                                                          The following yield an estimated break-even cut-off 
                                                                                          grade of 0.25% for Cu at the mill, which is used for 
                                                                                          open pit resources, a 0.7% Cu cut-off is used for 
                                                                                          underground mining. 
 Mining factors 
 or assumptions    *    Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods,       *    Pit optimization tests were used to determine the 
                        minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if                 likely open pit to underground transitions. At Hope 
                        applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always            the selected pit has a stripping ratio of 
                        necessary as part of the process of determining                approximately 1:7, a much larger open pit with 
                        reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction          resource tonnage of approximately 2.5 Mt at 1.5% Cu 
                        to consider potential mining methods, but the                  and 0.3 g/t Au (diluted and recovered) would optimize 
                        assumptions made regarding mining methods and                  but with stripping ratios of 1:18, which is not 
                        parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not           considered practical. As such a smaller pit was 
                        always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this               selected. 
                        should be reported with an explanation of the basis 
                        of the mining assumptions made. 
                                                                                  *    Other deposits would also optimize with much larger 
                                                                                       pits but considering the local uncertainty in the 
                                                                                       resource estimates AMS considered restricting the 
                                                                                       open pit potential to a given elevation more 
                                                                                       meaningful than a pit optimization wireframe. These 
                                                                                       values were as follows: 
 
 
                                                                                  *    Gorob and Vendome, >695 RL (50 m depth) 
 
 
                                                                                  *    Anomaly >569 RL (50 m depth) 
 Metallurgical 
 factors or        *    The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding        *    No modern testwork was completed at the time of the 
 assumptions            metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as           MRE. 
                        part of the process of determining reasonable 
                        prospects for eventual economic extraction to 
                        consider potential metallurgical methods, but the         *    Process recovery is assumed as 88% for Cu and 65% for 
                        assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment                  Au 
                        processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral 
                        Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is 
                        the case, this should be reported with an explanation 
                        of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made. 
 Environmen-tal 
 factors or        *    Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process     *    The project is located in a sensitive ecosystem and 
 assumptions            residue disposal options. It is always necessary as            permitting will require robust environmental studies. 
                        part of the process of determining reasonable                  In particular water is scares and as such dry 
                        prospects for eventual economic extraction to                  preconcentration with floatation off site maybe 
                        consider the potential environmental impacts of the            required. 
                        mining and processing operation. While at this stage 
                        the determination of potential environmental impacts, 
                        particularly for a greenfields project, may not 
                        always be well advanced, the status of early 
                        consideration of these potential environmental 
                        impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have 
                        not been considered this should be reported with an 
                        explanation of the environmental assumptions made. 
 Bulk density 
                   *    Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis      *    A total of 5900 density determinations are available 
                        for the assumptions. If determined, the method used,           over the project. The exact determination method is 
                        whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements          not known, and the density is recorded as Specific 
                  ,                                                                    Gravity rather than Bulk Density. It is not clear if 
                        the nature, size and representativeness of the                 porosity was considered during density determination, 
                        samples.                                                       while some of the wall rock schist and amphibolite is 
                                                                                       highly permeable zones of more massive magnetite and 
                                                                                       sulphides are less permeable. Upper and lower 
                   *    The bulk density for bulk material must have been              outliers are present across all deposits. Inspection 
                        measured by methods that adequately account for void           of the mean values indicate that a density of 3 t/m3 
                        spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and                     is appropriate for resource estimation and although a 
                        differences between rock and alteration zones within           large number of density determinations are present, 
                        the deposit.                                                   interpolation or variable density estimation would 
                                                                                       not be appropriate until further validation of the 
                                                                                       density values is completed, and the process of data 
                   *    Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used            collection better understood. 
                        in the evaluation process of the different materials. 
 Classification 
                   *    The basis for the classification of the Mineral           *    The amount of data and lower confidence in collar 
                        Resources into varying confidence categories.                  locations for Gorob, Vendome and Anomaly restricts 
                                                                                       the classification of these Resource to the Inferred 
                                                                                       Category. No topographic model was available and a 
                   *    Whether appropriate account has been taken of all              low resolution 30 m DTM is used to model elevation. 
                        relevant factors (ie relative confidence in 
                        tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, 
                        confidence in continuity of geology and metal values,     *    Areas in the Hope deposit which were informed by 
                        quality, quantity and distribution of the data).               recent BZT drilling and Kuiseb drilling are 
                                                                                       considered for indicated resources. While risk and 
                                                                                       uncertainty still remain in those parts of the 
                   *    Whether the result appropriately reflects the                  estimates largely informed by the Kuiseb drilling, 
                        Competent Person's view of the deposit.                        the sampling has largely been systematic and 
                                                                                       continuity reasonably well demonstrated in areas 
                                                                                       covered by this same drilling. Two areas were 
                                                                                       considered for Indicated resources where the 
                                                                                       supporting data is considered of sufficient quality 
                                                                                       to allow for preliminary mine planning. Blocks 
                                                                                       informed by 2 or more drillholes and having a Kriging 
                                                                                       Standard error of 
 
 
                                                                                  *    Geotechnical pit slope analysis may serve to 
                                                                                       materially change the open pit resource estimate. 
 Audits or                                                                      *    The have been no such audits or reviews. 
 reviews            *    The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral 
                         Resource estimates. 
 Discussion of 
 relative          *    Where appropriate a statement of the relative             *    The estimate is local estimate and is accurate to 
 accuracy/              accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource          those typical of an inferred estimate with errors of 
 confidence             estimate using an approach or procedure deemed                 +/-30 on a local basis and +/- 20-30% on a global 
                        appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the          basis. 
                        application of statistical or geostatistical 
                        procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the 
                        resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such     *    Indicated Resources are considered +/- 15% on a local 
                        an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative           basis. 
                        discussion of the factors that could affect the 
                        relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. 
 
 
                   *    The statement should specify whether it relates to 
                        global or local estimates, and, if local, state the 
                        relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to 
                        technical and economic evaluation. Documentation 
                        should include assumptions made and the procedures 
                        used. 
 
 
                   *    These statements of relative accuracy and confidence 
                        of the estimate should be compared with production 
                        data, where available. 
===============  ============================================================  ======================================================================= 
 

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services. For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange use the personal data you provide us, please see our Privacy Policy.

END

UPDBBBDGDBDDGXL

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

October 27, 2023 02:00 ET (06:00 GMT)

Bezant Resources (AQSE:BZT.GB)
Historical Stock Chart
From Nov 2024 to Dec 2024 Click Here for more Bezant Resources Charts.
Bezant Resources (AQSE:BZT.GB)
Historical Stock Chart
From Dec 2023 to Dec 2024 Click Here for more Bezant Resources Charts.