SRK Consulting (Australasia) Pty Ltd Reg’d No ABN 56 074 271 720 Trading as SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock: Static and Kinetic Testing Report 2 Report Prepared for Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Limited Prepared by SMM004 March 2011
272
Embed
Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and ...€¦ · from the Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Weld Range Project. Overall Objective The overall objective was to determine
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
SRK Consulting (Australasia) Pty Ltd
Reg’d No ABN 56 074 271 720
Trading as SRK Consulting
Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and
Mineralised Rock: Static and Kinetic Testing
Report 2
Report Prepared for
Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Limited
Prepared by
SMM004
March 2011
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste Rock and Low Grade Ore; Static and Kinetic Testing Page i
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock: Static and Kinetic Testing Report 2 Project Code: SMM004 Document Reference: SMM001_ENV_RP_2 Revision: Rev 1 Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Limited
SRK Consulting (Australasia) Pty Ltd Level 2, 44 Market Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Compiled by:
Peer Reviewed by:
Andrew Garvie Principal Consultant (Geo-environmental)
Claire Linklater Principal Consultant (Geo-environmental)
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste Rock and Low Grade Ore; Static and Kinetic Testing Page ii
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
SRK Report Distribution Record
Ref: SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1
Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing
Date: 18 March 2011
Name/Title Company Copy #
Beng Ko Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Limited 0
Beng Ko Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Limited 1
This document is protected by copyright vested in SRK. It may not be reproduced or transmitted in
any form or by any means whatsoever to any person without the written permission of the
copyright holder, SRK.
Rev No. Date Revised By Revision Details
0 11 February 2011 Andrew Garvie
Draft report issued to client as SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev0 Geochemical Characterisation of Waste Rock and Low Grade Ore; Static and Kinetic Testing; Report 2
1 18 March 2011 Simon Hanrahan
Final report issued to client as: SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev0 Geochemical Characterisation of Waste Rock and Low Grade Ore; Static and Kinetic Testing; Report 2
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page iii
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Executive Summary
This report presents results of the geochemical characterisation of waste and mineralised material
from the Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Weld Range Project.
Overall Objective
The overall objective was to determine the potential for waste rock, stockpile material and pit walls
to be sources of acid drainage and metalliferous leachate.
The findings were used to define a simple method of classifying mined rock as potentially acid
forming (PAF) or non acid forming (NAF) during operation of the mine.
Outline of work programme
Design and implementation of a sampling programme – Drill core and the block model were
reviewed to identify samples representative of the major domains and weathering states of waste
rock and mineralised material. Samples identified were within or immediately adjacent to the
Madoonga and Beebyn pit shells designed in the prefeasibility study.
Since collection of the samples, the project has progressed to the bankable prefeasibility value
improvement stage (BFS VI) which includes a larger pit design based on two products (MWB and
Spot Market Ore).
Two hundred and sixty five samples of waste material and 74 samples of mineralised material were
collected for geochemical characterisation. The block model was used to estimate the mass of each
material in each domain.
Design and management of a static test programme – A static test programme provided data for
the assessment of the potential of materials to produce acidic and metalliferous drainage (ADML).
Parameters measured included paste pH and paste electrical conductivity, total sulphur, sulphate
sulphur, total carbon/total inorganic carbon, acid neutralising capacity (NP), net acid generation
(NAG), whole rock chemical assay and the acid buffering characteristic curve (ABCC).
Data interpretation – Static test results were interpreted to identify sources of acid potential and
acid neutralising capacity and to classify samples as potentially acid forming (PAF), non-acid
forming (NAF) or uncertain (UC). Elemental abundances were compared with average global
abundances, and element leachability assessed.
Design and implementation of a kinetic test programme – A subset of 13 samples that included
samples classed as PAF, NAF and UC were tested in columns a) to obtain an indication of rates
oxidation, acid neutralisation and solute release and b) to assist in identifying criteria that separate
PAF materials from NAF materials. The kinetic test programme comprised modified AMIRA-type
column test procedures. Four columns operated for 16 weeks and nine columns had operated for 45
weeks at the time of preparing this report. An assessment of the need to continue column operation
was made.
Development of a simple classification system for use during mine operations – A simple
classification scheme was developed for a) constructing a block model that identified materials
with the potential to produce ADML and b) for classifying materials during mining. Materials
classed as PAF under the simple scheme would be segregated during mining and managed to
control the development and impact of acid and metalliferous drainage.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page iv
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Results
Some materials contain stored acidity and at the time of mining they could have potential to release
acid. These materials include a significant proportion of the detrital (DID) and smaller proportions
of the felsic (FEL), banded iron formation, hydrated and mafic wastes. Similarly, small
proportions of the three mineralised domains (ORE, O_AL, O_SI) could also be marginally net
acid generating.
Generally there are limited quantities of soluble salts present, which indicate that flushing of the
mined materials prior to oxidation will not affect the solute content of water significantly.
Ninety one percent of the samples had a total sulphur content of less than 0.1 wt%. Thus, the
majority of material is expected to have a low maximum potential acidity (less than 3 kg(H2SO4)/t).
Neutralising potential (NP) is generally limited, average NP is often less than 15 kg(H2SO4)/t.
Carbonate-based neutralisation potential (CarbNP) was also calculated, but may overestimate NP
due to the presence of non neutralising carbonates such as siderite. The minimum of the NP and
CarbNP was the most appropriate measure of neutralising capacity available. A small number of
ABCC tests indicated that the actual neutralising capacity for some material may be less than the
minimum of the NP and CarbNP.
Some domains have little neutralisation potential and therefore would not be expected to provide
significant acid buffering capacity. The units include the MAF, DID, FEL, HYD, and high alumina
mineralised (O_Al).
Static and kinetic leach testing indicates that solute release rates are generally low under neutral
conditions and can increase under acidic conditions.
The masses of wastes at the Madoonga and Beebyn deposits classed as NAF, PAF and UC are
presented in the tables immediately below. Two classification schemes were used: the AMIRA and
neutralising potential ratio classification schemes. These schemes require quantification of acid
generation and neutralisation capacity and other parameters.
Madoonga
NAF PAF UC PAF
Domains
Waste Mass % 83 to 90 10 0.5 to 5.5 BIF, HYD,
MAF, SHL, DID Mass (Mt) 108 to 117 13 0.7 to 8
Mineralised Mass % 76 to 100 0 to 24 0
ORE, O_SI Mass (Mt) 38 to 50 0 to 12 0
NAF – non-acid forming. PAF – potentially acid forming, UC – uncertain (screening tests do not clearly identify sample as PAF or NAF).
Beebyn
NAF PAF UC PAF
Domains
Waste Mass % 99 to 100 0 0 to 1
MAF Mass (Mt) 231 to 233 0 0 to 2.5
Mineralised Mass % 98 to 100 0 0 to 2
O_Al Mass (Mt) 47.5 to 48.4 0 0.9
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page v
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Based on the understanding gained from the static test results, a simplified classification scheme is
proposed for classifying samples as PAF or NAF. The classification of materials was based solely
on the total sulphur (total S) content of samples in relation to a total S cut-off grade (Sc).
The lower the value of Sc the larger the volume of material classed as PAF.
Data for Weld Range samples suggests that Sc may lie between 0.1 and 0.36 wt% S. The lower
bound value is based on NAG testing results, whilst the upper bound value is based on data from
kinetic tests.
Based on the lower bound Sc value of 0.1 wt% S and the PSF pit shell design the mass of material
that would be classed as PAF at:
a) Madoonga would be about 21 Mt
b) Beebyn would be about 3.3 Mt.
As the BFS (VI) pit shells contain about twice the mass of waste within the PFS pit shells it is
possible that mass of waste classed as PAF for the BFS (VI) pit shell would be about 49 Mt.
The mass of waste classed as PAF varies little for Sc values in the range 0.1 to 0.25 wt% S.
Examples for the PFS pit shell are given in the following table.
Sc (wt% S)
Mass of Waste Classed as PAF (Mt)
Madoonga Beebyn
0.0 130.7 233.2
0.1 20.6 3.3
0.25 13.1 3.3
It may be possible to obtain data that supports use of a larger value of Sc (and thereby reduce the
mass of waste classed as PAF). Such data could be obtained from the samples that were leach
tested for 45 weeks. A sample of material would be removed from the columns that produced
neutral pH at week 45 and tested to determine the quantity of oxidisable sulphur remaining in each
column sample. Laboratory costs are expected to be less than $2,500.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page vi
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Recommendations
SRK recommends that:
1. That a simple scheme based on a threshold value of total sulphur content (Sc) is used for
classifying materials during mining. In the absence of further information on the acid
producing and acid neutralising capacity of materials the scheme would be as shown in
recommendations 2 and 3.
2. The value of Sc is taken as 0.1 wt% S.
3. Materials with:
a) Total S ≥ 0.1 wt% are classed as PAF and those with
b) Total S < 0.1 wt% are classed NAF.
4. An assessment is undertaken to determine whether use of a larger value of Sc can be justified.
A larger value of Sc would result in a smaller volume of waste being classified PAF. An
approach is presented in recommendation 5.
5. Operation of the long-term (45 week) kinetic columns should cease. Samples should be
obtained from those columns giving neutral leachate. These samples should be sent to a
commercial laboratory to measure the quantity of remaining oxidisable sulphide. The data
obtained will help determine whether a larger Sc can be used.
6. The current review of the quantity and distribution of PAF and NAF materials within the BFS
(VI) pit shell being is completed. Details are given in Section 5.1.
7. An assessment is undertaken of the potential quality of water that comes into contact the waste
and mineralised material. Details are given in Section 5.2.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page vii
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................. iii Disclaimer ................................................................................................................. x List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................ xi
3.1.1 Paste pH and paste EC ................................................................................. 8 3.1.2 Sulphur distribution ......................................................................................10 3.1.3 Acid neutralising capacity ............................................................................13 3.1.4 Acid buffering characteristics ......................................................................14 3.1.5 Net acid generation .....................................................................................16 3.1.6 Elemental analysis ......................................................................................19 3.1.7 Distilled Water Leach Extractions................................................................20 3.1.8 Mineralogical assessment ...........................................................................21 3.1.9 Acid generation classification ......................................................................25 3.1.10 Distribution of Mass .....................................................................................27
Kinetic test results ........................................................................................ 30 3.23.2.1 Sample properties .......................................................................................30 3.2.2 Results and discussion ................................................................................32
Waste Rock Management ............................................................................. 40 4. Simple classification scheme ....................................................................... 40 4.1 Selection of Sc for Weld Range .................................................................... 41 4.2 Mass Dependence on Sulphur Threshold .................................................... 42 4.3 Management Strategies ............................................................................... 45 4.4
Current and Future Work .............................................................................. 48 5. PAF material - mass and distribution and schedule ..................................... 48 5.1 Water Quality Assessment ........................................................................... 48 5.2
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page viii
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Domains of the Weld Range block model ......................................................... 5 Table 2-2: Distribution of rock samples subjected to static tests ....................................... 6 Table 2-3: Distribution of samples over rock domain and weathering class for
samples collected in 2009 .................................................................................... 6 Table 2-4: Test measurements and analytical methods .................................................... 7 Table 3-1: Percentage of samples in each domain with paste pH values between 5
and 6 .................................................................................................................... 9 Table 3-2: Sulphur content by domain in Madoonga waste and mineralised rock ........... 12 Table 3-3: Sulphur content by domain in Beebyn waste and mineralised rock ................ 12 Table 3-4: Summary of NP and CarbNP results .............................................................. 13 Table 3-5: Comparison of estimated neutralising capacities ............................................ 15 Table 3-6: Summary of NAG test results ......................................................................... 17 Table 3-7: Percentage of each waste domain with NAGpH < 4.5 .................................... 17 Table 3-8: Geochemical abundance indices for selected elements ................................. 19 Table 3-9: Summary of leach extraction test results ......................................................... 20 Table 3-10: Mineralogical summary ................................................................................ 22 Table 3-11: NPR classification scheme ........................................................................... 25 Table 3-12: Acid-base accounting classification scheme ................................................ 26 Table 3-13: Classification of all samples according to the NPR using NP ....................... 26 Table 3-14: Classification of all samples according to NPR using minimum of NP
and CarbNP ....................................................................................................... 27 Table 3-15: Classification of waste samples according to the NPR using minimum
of NP and CarbNP ............................................................................................. 27 Table 3-16: Summary of sample classification according to the AMIRA classification
scheme .............................................................................................................. 27 Table 3-17: Estimates of masses of the various domains at Madoonga in each AMD
class ................................................................................................................... 28 Table 3-18: Estimates of masses of the various domains in each AMD class at
Beebyn ............................................................................................................... 29 Table 3-19: Properties of samples selected for kinetic testing ......................................... 31 Table 3-20: Summary of acid generation and neutralisation rates ................................... 36 Table 3-21: Release rates of selected elements ............................................................. 38 Table 4-1: Mass of materials classed as NAF and PAF under simple classification
scheme (Madoonga) .......................................................................................... 43 Table 4-2: Mass of materials classed as NAF and PAF under simple classification
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page ix
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: General location of the Weld Range Project ................................................... 2 Figure 3-1: Frequency and cumulative distribution of paste pH values for all
samples ............................................................................................................... 9 Figure 3-2: Frequency and cumulative distribution of paste EC values for all
samples ............................................................................................................. 10 Figure 3-3: Total sulphur content distribution for all samples ........................................... 11 Figure 3-4: Acid buffering characteristic curves for selected samples ............................. 15 Figure 3-5: Measured NAGpH and sulphur contents ....................................................... 18 Figure 3-6: Kinetic test sample classification relative to all samples ................................ 32 Figure 3-7: Consecutive leachate pH profiles for kinetic tests ......................................... 33 Figure 3-8: Consecutive leachate pH profiles for kinetic tests ......................................... 33 Figure 3-9: Consecutive sulphate concentration profiles for kinetic tests ......................... 34 Figure 3-10: Consecutive sulphate concentration profiles for kinetic tests ....................... 34 Figure 3-11: Arsenic concentrations for kinetic tests ....................................................... 39 Figure 3-12: Arsenic concentrations for kinetic tests ....................................................... 39 Figure 4-1: Distribution of samples within a simple classification scheme ....................... 41 Figure 4-2: Mass PAF waste and indicative MPA as a function of Sc (Madoonga) ........... 44 Figure 4-3: Mass PAF waste and indicative MPA as a function of Sc (Beebyn) ............... 44 Figure 4-4: PAF waste rock surrounded by NAF waste rock ........................................... 46 Figure 4-5: PAF waste rock under water cover in pit with water table rebound................ 46 Figure 4-6: PAF waste rock under water cover in pit without water table rebound
above base of the pit .......................................................................................... 47
List of Appendices
Appendix 1: Nomenclature Appendix 2: Static Testing Methods and Guidelines Appendix 3: Paste pH and Electrical Conductivity Appendix 4: Acid Base Account Test Results Appendix 5: Net Acid Generation (NAG) Test Results Appendix 6: Solid Multi-Element Assay (Major Elements) Appendix 7: Solid Multi-Element Assay (Minor Elements) Appendix 8: Global Abundance Indices (Major Elements) Appendix 9: Global Abundance Indices (Minor Elements) Appendix 10: Multi element Leach Analysis Appendix 11: Acid Buffering Characteristic Curves Appendix 12: Net Acid Production Potential & Classification Appendix 13: Kinetic Test Results Appendix 14: Molar Ratio Plots
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page x
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Report have been based on the information supplied to SRK
Consulting (Australasia) Pty Ltd (SRK) by Sinosteel Midwest Corporation (SMC). The opinions in
this Report are provided in response to a specific request from SMC to do so. SRK has exercised
all due care in reviewing the supplied information. Whilst SRK has compared key supplied data
with expected values, the accuracy of the results and conclusions from the review are entirely
reliant on the accuracy and completeness of the supplied data. SRK does not accept responsibility
for any errors or omissions in the supplied information and does not accept any consequential
liability arising from commercial decisions or actions resulting from them.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page xi
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
List of Abbreviations
Term Definition
ABCC Acid buffering characteristic curve
ALS Australian Laboratory Services
AMD Acid and metalliferous drainage
ANC Acid neutralising capacity
AP Acid potential calculated based on all non sulphate sulphur present as pyrite (kgH2SO4/tonne)
ARD Acid rock drainage
BFS Bankable Feasibility Study
BIF banded iron formation
CarbNP Carbonate neutralisation potential estimated from the measured inorganic carbon concentration and assuming all carbon is present as carbonate (CO3) (kgH2SO4/tonne)
DD Diamond drilling
DID Detrital
DSO Direct shipping ore
EC Electrical conductivity
FEL Felsic
GAI Global abundance index
HYD Hydrated
ICP-MS Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry
carry out a geochemical characterisation programme to assess the potential for acid and
metalliferous drainage (AMD) from rock exposed during mining; including waste rock, mineralised
stockpiles and the pit walls. The assessment is to provide guidance for waste management during
operations and establish closure requirements.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 2
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Background 1.2
1.2.1 Project location
WRP is located 600 km NNE of Perth, 65 km southwest of Meekatharra and 50 km northwest of
Cue in the Mid West region of Western Australia. A location map is provided in Figure 1-1.
Figure 1-1: General location of the Weld Range Project
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 3
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
1.2.2 Regional Setting and Climate
The landscape has contrasting vegetation types, but arid shrub lands make up the vast majority of
vegetation types encountered. The arid shrub lands host a number of native plant species which do
not occur in many other bioregions. There are few or no trees or perennial grasses across much of
the landscape.
Summers are characterised by hot, dry days and mild to warm dewless nights. Maximum daily
temperatures during the summer range from 29 to 38 °C and the minimum daily temperatures range
from 14 to 22 °C. Whilst cyclones are not regarded as regular events in the Meekatharra district;
they do cause widespread heavy rainfall. Cyclones usually occur between November and April
when intense low pressure disturbances develop off the north-west coast of Western Australia.
Winter is characterised by mild days and cool to cold nights. Winter average daily temperatures
range between 6 and 19 °C in July and rise to 13 and 29 °C in October (Department of Agriculture,
WA).
At Cue the average daily temperature ranges from 7 to 18°C in July to 23 to 38°C in January.
Mean annual rainfall is 232 mm with the wettest months being January to July. Average annual
open pan evaporation is about 3 m per year.
1.2.3 Geological setting
The Weld Range Project includes the Madoonga and Beebyn iron ore deposits located in the Weld
Range. Both the Beebyn and Madoonga deposits consist of steeply dipping rock sequences dipping
SE at Beebyn and SSE at Madoonga. The rock sequences include banded iron formations (BIFs)
and dolerite.
At Madoonga sediments and sedimentary rocks lie above deeply weathered rocks. The local rock
sequence comprises, from north to south, a package of felsic (FEL) sedimentary rocks that are
overlain by BIF approximately 60 to 250 m thick. The lower part of the BIF contains a 5 to 10 m
thick shale unit. A 20 to 50 m thick zone of deeply weathered and altered rocks within which the
iron mineralisation is hosted, occurs in the hanging wall of the BIF. Mafic igneous rocks including
dolerite and basalt occur in the hanging-wall to the iron mineralisation.
The Beebyn deposit contains numerous BIFs interlayered with dolerite. The main BIF at the north
is approximately 40 m thick. Thinner BIFs to the south have thicknesses ranging from about 2 to
10 m. Least altered and unweathered BIFs contain millimetre to centimetre-thick iron-, silica-,
Fe-silicate- and locally carbonate-rich bands (Kenworthy and Hodkiewicz, 2008).
The mine plan includes development of open-cut pits, stockpiles and waste rock dumps.
Report scope 1.3
This report documents the findings of the geochemical characterisation tests carried out on samples
representative of waste material and mineralised material from the proposed WRP.
The geochemical investigation comprised both static and kinetic test procedures. The scope of the
geochemical testing programme is presented in Section 2 of this report. Section 3 presents and
discusses the outcomes of the geochemical investigation. Section 4 presents a discussion of
possible waste rock management strategies. Conclusions and recommendations are provided in
Section 6.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 4
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Geochemical Investigation Programme 2.
Overview 2.1
The geochemical characterisation of wastes and mineralised material began in April 2008 with the
selection of the first set of samples (Round A) for laboratory testing. A second set of samples
(round B) was selected in March 2009.
The samples were selected to represent materials within the pit shell of the prefeasibility study
(PFS) which was based on producing Mid West Blend (MWB) ore. Since collection of the samples,
the project has progressed to the bankable prefeasibility value improvement stage (BFS VI) which
includes a pit design based on two products (MWB and Spot Market Ore).
Based on the PFS study a total mass of waste produced at the Madoonga and Beebyn deposits was
approximately 364 Mt. The substantially larger pit of the BFS (VI) would result in a total
production of 712 Mt of waste. Currently a review of the block model is being conducted to assess
the similarities of materials from within the PFS pit and materials from between the PFS and BFS
pit shells.
The geochemical investigation of samples from within the PFS pit shell was carried out in two
phases.
Phase 1 comprised a scoping study to assess the overall magnitude of the potential for acid
generation based primarily on static test procedures. Sample selection was based on a site specific
block model, the available information on lithologies and degree of weathering and estimates of the
mass of each domain that would be mined. The programme was designed to i) identify domains
that may produce acid and those that may consume acid and, ii) determine the overall variability
within each domain.
Phase 2 was designed to establish the net potential for acid generation and determine metal leach
rates using kinetic tests procedures and supplemental static tests. Materials for testing were
selected based on the outcomes of Phase 1.
There are three main objectives of kinetic testing. They are to obtain:
1. Estimates of rates of sulfate release (oxidation).
2. Estimated rates of release of metals.
3. Estimates of times to the onset of acidification of the effluent.
A secondary objective was to identify a sulphur content below which materials can be considered
unlikely to produce acidic effluent. This sulphur content may serve as a criterion for classifying
materials as PAF or NAF during mining.
An initial report on the geochemical characterisation completed as of September 2009 was reported
in October 2009 (SRK, 2009). The current report documents geochemical characterisation work
conducted up to January 2011 including that completed as of September 2009.
Identification of domains 2.2
The Weld Range iron ore deposit is hosted in sedimentary rocks and comprises two mineralised
zones; the Madoonga zone to the west and the Beebyn zone to the east. Table 2-1 presents domain
codes used in the block model and a description of the corresponding rock types. The domain
codes represent a spatial grouping of rock codes and were developed by Sinosteel Midwest
Corporation.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 5
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Table 2-1: Domains of the Weld Range block model
Domain ID General rock type
BIF Bedded sediments (host to the iron ore mineralisation)
DID Detrital, indurated conglomerate/canga material
FEL Felsic volcanic
SHL Shale
HYD Hydrated goethitic clays, non-mineralised BIF 2 material on the south western side at Madoonga
MAF Mafic/basalt/dolerite/ultramafic
O_AL High alumina goethite-hematite, hematite/goethite/limonite Fe > 45% Fe, Al2O3>4%; potentially ore grade or low grade ore
O_SI high silica goethite-hematite, hematite/goethite/limonite Fe > 45% Fe, SiO2 > 5.5%, Al2O3<4%; potentially ore grade or low grade ore
ORE Hematite/goethite/limonite Fe > 45% Fe, SiO2 < 5.5%, Al2O3<4%; ore grade rock
MAG Magnetite > 45% Fe (Beebyn only)
Note: ORE in the context of this report refers to spatially grouped mineralised material meeting certain grade criteria. As used in this report ORE is not intended to imply economic viability according to the JORC definition.
Within this report the three domains ORE, O_AL, O_SI are referred to as mineralised material.
Sampling 2.3
2.3.1 Sampling approach
A primary aim was to select samples from the major domains and a range of spatial locations from
within the planned pit. As some domains were not well represented in the drill core or cuttings
obtained from within the PFS pit shell a small number of samples were gathered from outside the
PFS pit shell.
SRK visited the Weld Range site in April 2008 and identified a total of 59 samples from the
available diamond drill core from the Beebyn and Madoonga deposits (Round A). Another
280 samples were selected in the second quarter of 2009 by SMC staff (Round B). The samples,
selected using the geological database developed during the prefeasibility study (PFS), represented
both the Madoonga and Beebyn zones and were obtained from diamond drill core where available,
reverse circulation (RC) cuttings or surface samples. Core up to 6 m in length was collected.
Table 2-2 presents the estimated mass of each domain (PFS estimate) that would be mined, the
mass distribution and the number of samples from each domain submitted for geochemical testing.
Since sample selection the pit shell has been altered. In the current design the pit is approximately
50 m deeper than in the PFS study. An initial review of drill hole locations and lithologies
indicates that all major lithologies present in the pit of the current design are represented by the
samples selected by the samples selected and reported here. A more detailed investigation of the
representativeness of samples and their spatial distribution to determine location of sulphur bearing
domains is recommended in this report.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 6
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Table 2-2: Distribution of rock samples subjected to static tests
Domain ID
Madoonga Beebyn
Mass (t)
Mass (%)
Number of
samples
% of samples
Mass (t)
Mass (%)
Number of
samples
% of samples
BIF 42,846,416 24 41 21 22,044,812 8 27 18
DID 9,419,835 5 30 16 0 0 0 0
FEL 10,548,108 6 11 6 0 0 0 0
SHL 12,831,818 7 19 10 0 0 0 0
HYD 17,223,346 10 30 16 0 0 0 0
MAF 37,908,914 21 19 10 210,973,420 75 84 57
MAG 0 0 0 0 226,560 0 4 3
O_AL 1,369,288 1 12 6 8,776,403 3 10 7
O_SI 8,471,622 5 15 8 1,947,083 1 9 6
ORE 40,303,640 22 15 8 37,682,867 13 13 9
All 180,922,987 100 192 100 281,651,145 100 147 100
Note: ORE in the context of this report refers to spatially grouped mineralised material meeting certain grade criteria. As used in this report ORE is not intended to imply economic viability according to the JORC definition.
Appendix 1 provides a table showing equivalent nomenclature used elsewhere in this report.
The various weathering states of the domains were also represented in the sampling. Table 2-3
presents the weathering state of samples collected in the second quarter of 2009. The weathering
state of samples collected in April 2008 was not available.
Table 2-3: Distribution of samples over rock domain and weathering class for samples collected in 2009
Domain ID Weathering state
No. of
Samples
Totals EW MW FR
BIF 9 18 11 38
DID 17 10 0 27
FEL 4 6 1 11
SHL 8 6 0 14
HYD 8 11 7 26
MAF 38 31 17 86
O_AL 5 12 5 22
O_SI 9 8 7 24
ORE 9 10 9 28
MAG 0 1 3 4
Totals 107 113 60 280
Note: EW, MW and FR are abbreviations of extremely weathered, moderately weathered and fresh.
2.3.2 Sample preparation
Core samples were crushed to 5 to 10 mm. Samples for static testing were further crushed to less
than 2 mm for paste pH and EC measurements and pulverised to less than 75μm for other chemical
analysis. A total of thirteen samples of core crushed to 5 to 10 mm were subjected to kinetic
testing.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 7
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Static testing methods 2.4
The static test parameters and measurement procedures used in the testing programme are
summarised in Appendix 2. The samples were sent to the SGS Laboratory in Welshpool, Western
Australia and Australian Laboratory Services (ALS), Brisbane for the static tests shown in Table
2-4. All samples from the first and second sampling programme were submitted for static testing.
Table 2-4: Test measurements and analytical methods
Measurement Analytical method[1]
Paste pH and paste electrical conductivity (EC) 1:2 solid: liquid ratio using pH and EC meter
Total sulphur Leco Analyser
Sulphate sulphur ICP-OES
Total carbon/total inorganic carbon (TIC) Leco/IR on hot acid digest
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 39
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Figure 3-11: Arsenic concentrations for kinetic tests
Figure 3-12: Arsenic concentrations for kinetic tests
0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Ars
en
ic C
on
cen
trat
ion
(m
g/l)
Time (Weeks)
A13017
A13019
A13050
A13035
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
0 10 20 30 40 50
Ars
en
ic c
on
cen
trat
ion
(m
g/L)
Time (weeks)
ADML_1B_003
ADML_1B_027
ADML_1B_064
ADML_1B_110
ADML_1B_137
ADML_1B_243
ADML_1B_249
ADML_1B_280
A13059
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 40
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Waste Rock Management 4.
Simple classification scheme 4.1
A simple classification scheme is required for developing a block model of waste types and for classing
materials during mining. Materials classed as PAF under the simple scheme would be segregated during
mining and managed to control the development and impact of acid and metalliferous drainage.
Static test results conducted in 2009 were used to classify the waste and ore samples as potentially acid
forming (PAF), non-acid forming (NAF) or uncertain (UC). The NPR classification scheme was used.
This classification scheme is an internationally accepted method of screening the potential of materials to
be PAF. However, the classification scheme requires the measurement of the acid neutralising capacity
and the acid generating potential.
The acid generating potential can be estimated from the total S content, which can be readily and
routinely measured as part of the resource definition work. The ANC cannot be estimated reliably using
parameters routinely included in resource definition work. Measurement of ANC is potentially more time
consuming than determination of the total S content.
To provide a simple classification scheme, a scheme based on total sulphur content is proposed. A
fundamental assumption is that samples with total S contents less than a threshold value Sc are non-acid
forming and those with total S greater than Sc are potentially acid forming. Figure 4-1 shows the new
simple classification system projected onto the previous classification system. Some low S samples,
previously classed as PAF would now be classed as NAF (Region C) – however, as discussed earlier
(Section 3.1.5), the acid potential associated with these samples is extremely low.
Some samples previously classed as NAF will be classed as PAF (Region B) because their total S content
is greater than Sc. An outcome of this is that a mass of material previously classed as NAF is destined to
be managed as PAF material. However, as will be shown, relatively small masses of material are
involved.
As the value of Sc is increased the mass of material classed and managed as PAF decreases. However,
there is a risk that a portion of the material with a total S content less than Sc is potentially acid forming.
Thus, as Sc increases the risk of not managing potentially acid forming material appropriately increases.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 41
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Figure 4-1: Distribution of samples within a simple classification scheme
Selection of Sc for Weld Range 4.2
Static testing of Weld Range materials suggested that some samples with low total S content are
potentially acid forming. Kinetic testing included PAF-classed samples with total S contents ranging from
0.10 to 23.8 wt%. As of Week 45, only those samples with total S ≥ 0.36 wt% had produced acidic
effluent. Current data thus places an upper bound on the Sc value of 0.36 wt% S. In the case of the PAF
columns with lower total S, it remains possible that acid leachates could be produced. Thus it remains
possible that a Sc should be set to at a value less than 0.36 wt% S.
Only about 3% of samples with total S contents less than 0.1 wt% had NAGpH values less than 4.5 and
the majority of samples had circum neutral of alkaline NAGpH values (Section 3.1.5). This indicates that
0.1 wt% S may be a suitable to value for Sc.
SRK recommend that a lower Sc threshold is used, 0.1 wt% S. This threshold is known to be applied
elsewhere within the Pilbara to differentiate wastes with very low risk of generating ADML. Also, an
International Kinetic Database reported by Morin et al. (1995) showed that no incidences of acidic
leachate were documented for samples with initial sulphur content less than 0.1% (30 such samples were
included, and none generated leachate of pH less than 5).
While a lower value for Sc decreases the risk of not identifying and not managing PAF material it also
results in a larger volume of material being treated as PAF waste. However, Section 4.3 shows that the
increase in the mass of waste treated as NAF is relatively small as for a range of Sc values between 0.1
and 0.25.
0.1
1
10
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
AN
C (
kg
[H2S
O4)/
t[ro
ck
])
Total S(wt%)
NPR=1
NPR=3
Sc =0.1
NAF
UC
PAF
NAF
UC
PAF
Sc=0.1
A
B
C
D
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 42
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
It may be possible to obtain data that supports increasing the value of Sc (and decreasing the mass of
waste classed PAF) from the samples that were leach tested for 45 weeks. Sample material removed from
the columns would be submitted for static testing to determine the quantity of oxidisable sulphur
remaining in each column sample.
The test would be conducted by collecting a subsample from each column of material that has not
produced acidic leachate. Each subsample would then be split and one portion (A) analysed to determine
the total S and sulphate S content. The second portion (B) would be reacted with peroxide to oxidise
available sulphides to sulphates. The quantity of sulphates would be determined.
If the quantity of sulphates determined for the oxidised portion (portion B) does not exceed the quantity
of sulphates in the unreacted portion (portion A) then it can be concluded that there are no sulphides in
the materials that are readily oxidised and could contribute to acid production. Where this is the case it is
unlikely that the samples will produce acidic leachate in the future.
It is expected that results would be available from a commercial laboratory about two to three weeks after
the receipt of samples and that the tests would be relatively inexpensive (less than $2500).
SRK therefore recommends that the operation of columns is stopped and the samples are collected from
all neutral columns that were operating to week 45 and sent to a commercial laboratory to measure the
quantity of remaining oxidisable sulphide.
Mass Dependence on Sulphur Threshold 4.3
For six values of Sc, Table 4-1 presents, estimates for the Madoonga deposit of the:
1. Mass of waste rock that would be classed as PAF under the simple scheme (regions B+D; Figure 4-1)
2. Mass of waste rock that would be classed as PAF under the simple scheme and was classed as NAF
under the NPR scheme (region B; Figure 4-1).
3. Mass of waste rock classed as PAF under the simple scheme and as PAF or UC under the NPR
scheme (region C; Figure 4-1).
The mass of waste classed as PAF at Madoonga under the simple scheme is also shown in Figure 4-2 for
several values of Sc. The figure shows that the mass of waste that would be classed as PAF decreases as
Sc increases. Note that the mass of PAF waste decreases by only a small fraction for Sc values between
0.1 and 0.25 wt% S.
Table 4-2 and Figure 4-3 present similar data for Beebyn.
The masses of waste that would be classed as PAF using a total S cut-off grade of 0.1 wt% S are:
Madoonga - 21 Mt
Beebyn - 3.3 Mt
The above estimates of the masses of PAF material are based on the PFS pit design. The masses may
change as a result of the review of the distribution of PAF material within the BFS pit shell.
A water quality assessment will be conducted to assess the potential impact of the PAF wastes and
stockpiles on water contacting the dumps and stockpiles. It is possible that the assessment will find that
some PAF material will not significantly impact water quality and that the mass of material to be
managed to control acid drainage and metalliferous leaching is less than stated above
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 43
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
SRK recommends that Sinosteel plan to manage approximately 21 Mt of PAF waste at Madoonga and 3.3
Mt of PAF waste at Beebyn pending the findings of a) the review of the distribution of PAF material
within the BFS pit shell and b) a water quality assessment.
Table 4-1: Mass of materials classed as NAF and PAF under simple classification scheme (Madoonga)
Sc
wt%
Region
B+D B C
Mass treated
as PAF
(tons)
Mass treated
as PAF
when it is NAF (t)
Mass. of PAF or UC material
with S content < Sc
(tons)
0 130,778,437 66,282,407 0
0.05 34,939,845 3,810,462 31,065,634
0.1 20,577,378 1,720,393 43,966,021
0.15 16,381,258 675,359 48,790,130
0.2 14,188,000 675,359 50,409,276
0.25 13,142,966 675,359 52,028,422
Table 4-2: Mass of materials classed as NAF and PAF under simple classification scheme (Beebyn)
Sc
wt%
Region
B+D B C
Mass treated as
PAF
(tons)
Mass treated
as PAF
when it is NAF (t)
Mass. of PAF or UC material
with S content < Sc
(tons)
0 233,244,792 213,453,703 0
0.05 9,079,070 5,780,555 16,492,574
0.1 3,298,515 816,475 17,309,048
0.15 3,298,515 816,475 17,309,048
0.2 3,298,515 816,475 17,309,048
0.25 3,298,515 816,475 17,309,048
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 44
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Figure 4-2: Mass PAF waste and indicative MPA as a function of Sc (Madoonga)
Figure 4-3: Mass PAF waste and indicative MPA as a function of Sc (Beebyn)
0.0E+00
2.0E+07
4.0E+07
6.0E+07
8.0E+07
1.0E+08
1.2E+08
1.4E+08
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Mas
s P
AF
was
e r
ock
(t)
Sc (S wt% )
Madoonga
0.0E+00
5.0E+07
1.0E+08
1.5E+08
2.0E+08
2.5E+08
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Mas
s P
AF
was
e ro
ck (
t)
Sc (S wt% )
Beebyn
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 45
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Management Strategies 4.4
Current indications are that a small proportion of the waste rock and mineralised material could be PAF.
The impact of the PAF material on water quality has not yet been evaluated. An evaluation of this type is
proposed in the next section.
In the event that a water quality assessment determines that it is necessary to manage PAF material
several options are available including i) covering or isolating the PAF waste with NAF materials to
reduce the quantity of water contacting the PAF waste (Figure 4-4), ii) co-mingling or blending the PAF
waste with NAF waste that has excess neutralisation capacity and iii) segregating and placing the PAF
waste where acid generation can easily be controlled or prevented (e.g. backfilling to the open pit below
the long term water table).
For option i) NAF material would be placed at the base of the dump to reduce contact between PAF waste
and the water that flows at the interface of the waste (base of the dump) and the original ground surface.
PAF material would then be covered with NAF material, graded to enhance runoff and compacted to limit
infiltration, thus reducing the contact between incident rain and PAF waste. Depending on the properties
of the NAF material (e.g. thickness of layer, sulphide mineral content, particle size distribution,
weathering properties etc.), it may also serve to reduce the availability of oxygen to the PAF material thus
reducing the rate of oxidation. This management strategy may be used during mining when the pit is
being constructed and PAF material must be removed from the pit for efficient mining.
Blending PAF material with material containing excess neutralisation capacity generally requires tight
controls on blending ratios and is operationally complex to implement. Success has been limited in the
past due to the fact that it is not always possible to achieve well mixed conditions during placement and
maintain contact between the acid produce and neutralising materials in the longer term. Based on current
information this option would not be recommended.
In-pit disposal could limit to very low levels, or even preclude, oxidation of sulphides if the PAF waste is
placed below the long term steady water level in the pit. Because of the demonstrated performance on
controlling oxidation and acid generation, placement of PAF materials below the water table within the
open pit is believed to be the most effective option for managing PAF waste rock at the site.
The relative levels (RL) of the groundwater prior to digging of the pits at Madoonga and Beebyn were RL
481 and RL 495 m respectively. Preliminary hydrogeology investigations indicate that 25 years after
mining has finished the water level would have risen to RL 430 and RL 480 m at Madoonga and Beebyn
respectively. These levels are below the original groundwater level. Thus, there would be no net
groundwater recharge from the pits for at least 25 years.
Waste placed at the base of the pit would be flooded, reducing the diffusive supply of oxygen to the waste
by about four orders of magnitude and slowing the rate of oxidation greatly. A schematic arrangement of
the waste in the pit is shown in Figure 4-5. Benign or NAF material placed over the PAF material would
reduce the evaporative loss of rain and rising groundwater prior to flooding of the pit as a result of the
recovery of the groundwater levels. The importance of the NAF layer in reducing evaporation increases in
the event that the balance of recharge and evaporation is such that the water level in the pit does not rise
far above the pit floor (Figure 4-6).
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 46
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Figure 4-4: PAF waste rock surrounded by NAF waste rock
Figure 4-5: PAF waste rock under water cover in pit with water table rebound
PAF WASTE ROCK SURROUNDED BY NAF WASTE ROCK
Base seep
LEGEND
PAF or metal leachingUC
NAF and non-metal leaching
Water flux direction
Natural Surface Level
Water Level
Low 's' concentrations = low oxygen consumption rates = widespread distribution of oxygen = PAF oxidation
X:\Projects\SMM001 - Weld Range Iron Ore Project BFS\06_Working_Files_\Drafting
\H_Data in Drafting\Acid Waste Rock Sketches - 24.09.09\A4 Figures 250909.dwg
N.S.L.
W.L.
To groundwater N.S.L.
PAF UNDER WATER COVER IN PIT
PAF / metal leaching
Benign material over PAF
N.S.L.
W.L.
PAF material is placed in bottom
of pit. Water level rebounds to
cover PAF material over time
X:\Projects\SMM001 - Weld Range Iron Ore Project BFS\06_Working_Files_\Drafting
\H_Data in Drafting\Acid Waste Rock Sketches - 24.09.09\A4 Figures 250909.dwg
Pit shellLEGEND
PAF or metal leachingUC
NAF and non-metal leaching
Water flux direction
Natural Surface Level
Water Level
N.S.L.
W.L.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 47
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Figure 4-6: PAF waste rock under water cover in pit without water table rebound above base of the pit
X:\Projects\SMM001 - Weld Range Iron Ore Project BFS\06_Working_Files_\Drafting
\H_Data in Drafting\Acid Waste Rock Sketches - 24.09.09\A4 Figures 250909.dwg
PAF UNDER EVAPORATIVE LOSS POND
N.S.L.
Pit shell
W.L.
Evaporative loss of water RainfallRainfall
Groundwater flow Groundwater flow
PAF / metal leaching
Benign material over PAF
LEGEND
PAF or metal leachingUC
NAF and non-metal leaching
Water flux direction
Natural Surface Level
Water Level
N.S.L.
W.L.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 48
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Current and Future Work 5.
Estimates of the quantities of PAF material in the Madoonga and Beebyn pits in this report are based on
the PFS pit shell. The current (BFS) pit is larger than the PFS pit shell and consequently more waste will
be produced. Thus there is a need to determine how well samples collected from within the PFS pit shell
represent the rock types within the BFS pit shell.
Materials outside the PFS pit shell and inside the BFS (VI) pit shell were not sampled to any significant
degree. Therefore these materials have not been classified as either PAF or NAF. Available information
should be reviewed to determine the distribution of sulphur within these materials
Quantities of PAF material, rates of acid production and neutralisation and rates of solute release have
been estimated from kinetic testing of waste and stockpile material. These quantities are determined in
part for use in assessing the impact of mined materials on the quality of water that they contact. One
possible outcome of a water quality assessment is the need to manage the PAF waste to reduce the
potential impact on waters.
Current and future recommended work includes:
a) The current review of the distribution of PAF material within the BFS pit shell
b) An assessment of the quality of water that contacts the waste and mineralised material.
PAF material - mass and distribution and schedule 5.1
Available drillhole logs, the geological model and the block model will be reviewed to estimate the mass
and spatial distribution of PAF material (based on distribution of sulphur within the materials).
The accuracy of the estimates will depend on the both the accuracy of the classification of the wastes as
PAF and the quantity and locations of relevant geological data obtained from drillhole sampling.
At Weld Range the drillholes collars are typically located to the south of the mineralised zone and
drillholes dip to the north and terminate near the mineralised zone. Thus, wastes in the northern side of
the pit are sparsely sampled. SRK understands there is no block modelling to the north. In the absence of
drillhole and block model data, the geological model will be used to infer masses of the various
lithologies and alteration types. Simulation of sulphur grades in the northern waste may be undertaken if
appropriate.
The objective will be to assign a classification (PAF or not PAF) to waste material at the same spatial
resolution as the block model units. Any assumptions made regarding the spatial distribution of the
geological and the geochemical characteristics will be reported.
The movement of pit waste will then be reported as per the current mining schedule. The time steps in the
scheduling will be one year. The spatial locations of the PAF waste blocks will be tracked and the likely
spatial locations within proposed waste dumps recorded.
Water Quality Assessment 5.2
The findings of the static and kinetic testing of the previous section show that there is potential for acid
drainage or metal leaching being produced from some materials in waste rock dumps, pit walls or
stockpiles at Weld Range. It is necessary therefore to assess how water quality might be affected.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 49
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
A water quality assessment would include:
1. Development of a model to predict water quality from waste rock dumps. It will be necessary to make
assumptions at this stage. For example, the distribution of oxidation and neutralising rates in the
dump will be assumed.
2. Prediction of contaminant release rates from the dump for each lithological unit where possible.
3. Assessment of potential oxygen transport constraints because the contaminant release rate is
dependent on the oxidation rate.
4. Prediction of the potential quality of water seeping from the dump by assessing the rainfall and net
infiltration, seepage evolution through the different lithologies in the dump and by assuming flow
paths through the dump. The geochemical modelling programme PHREEQC will be used where
appropriate.
5. Review of water receptors. Whilst the seepage discharged from the dump may be of poor quality,
there may not be any receptors that will be affected by it both from a negative impact and legal
perspective. With the assistance of Sinosteel Midwest Management possible receptors will be
identified and the potential implications of the seepage on these will be assessed and conceptual
strategies to minimise the impacts will be identified (e.g. reducing seepage volume and impact by
limiting oxygen and water inflow).
6. Identification of strategies for management of waste rock and pit walls. An assessment of the
implications of implementing the various proposed strategies will be conducted taking into account
mine planning, groundwater and surface water conditions and requirements.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 50
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Conclusions and recommendations 6.
Conclusions 6.1
Some materials contain stored acidity and at the time of mining they could have potential to release
acid. These materials include a significant proportion of the detrital (DID) and smaller proportions
of the felsic (FEL), banded iron formation, hydrated and mafic wastes. Similarly, small proportions
of the three mineralised domains (ORE, O_AL, O_SI) could also be marginally net acid generating.
Generally there are limited quantities of soluble salts present, which indicate that flushing of the
mined materials prior to oxidation will not affect the solute content of water significantly.
The majority of waste rock and mineralised materials are expected to have low total sulphur
contents. Of the 339 samples subjected to static tests, 91% of the samples had a total sulphur
content of less than 0.1 wt%.
Non neutralising carbonates are present and therefore the minimum of the neutralising potential NP
and CarbNP was the most appropriate measure of the neutralising capacity available for the
majority of samples. A small number of acid buffering characteristic tests indicated that the actual
neutralising potential for some material may be less than the minimum of the NP and CarbNP.
Static and kinetic leach testing indicates that solute release rates are generally low under neutral
conditions and can increase under acidic conditions.
The masses of PAF, NAF and UC waste and mineralised material were estimated using
conventional static testing and classification methods and are presented in the tables below for the
Madoonga and Beebyn deposits.
Madoonga
NAF PAF UC PAF
Domains
Waste Mass % 83 to 90 10 0.5 to 5.5 BIF, HYD,
MAF, SHL, DID Mass (Mt) 108 to 117 13 0.7 to 8
Mineralised Mass % 76 to 100 0 to 24 0
ORE, O_SI Mass (Mt) 38 to 50 0 to 12 0
NAF – non-acid forming. PAF – potentially acid forming, UC – uncertain (screening tests do not clearly identify sample as PAF or NAF)
Beebyn
NAF PAF UC PAF Domains
Waste Mass % 99 to 100 0 0 to 1
MAF Mass (Mt) 231 to 233 0 0 to 2.5
Mineralised Mass % 98 to 100 0 0 to 2
O_Al Mass (Mt) 47.5 to 48.4 0 0.9
At least some of the materials classed as PAF by static tests did produce acidic effluent in column
tests, verifying their potential to produce acidic drainage in waste dumps. The acid leachates were
produced in column tests involving materials with relatively high total S contents (≥ 0.36 wt%).
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 51
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
It is not clear from investigations on samples from Weld Range whether PAF-classed materials
with lower total S contents will become acidic.
In principal a simple scheme can be established for classifying samples as PAF or NAF based
solely on the total S content of samples. However, for the scheme to be of practical value, it is
necessary to establish a threshold total S content (Sc) below which waste is unlikely to become
acidic in the long term. (In this simple classification scheme material classed as UC in the
conventional schemes is conservatively classed as PAF.)
The lower the value of Sc the larger the volume of material classed as PAF.
Data for Weld Range samples suggests that Sc may lie between 0.1 and 0.36 wt% S.
Based on the lower bound Sc value of 0.1 wt% S and the PSF pit shell design the mass of material
that would be classed as PAF at:
a) Madoonga would be about 21 Mt
b) Beebyn would be about 3.3 Mt.
The mass of waste classed as PAF varies little for Sc values in the range 0.1 to 0.25 wt% S.
Examples are given in the following table.
Sc (wt% S) Mass of Waste Classed as PAF (Mt)
Madoonga Beebyn
0.0 130.7 233.2
0.1 20.6 3.3
0.25 13.1 3.3
It may be possible to obtain data that supports using a larger value of Sc (and thereby reduce the
mass of waste classed PAF) from the samples that were leach tested for 45 weeks. To obtain
suitable data a sample of material would be removed from the columns and statically tested to
determine the quantity of oxidisable sulphur remaining in each column sample.
Recommendations 6.2
SRK recommends that:
1. That a simple scheme based on a threshold value of total sulphur content (Sc) is used for
classifying materials during mining. In the absence of further information on the acid
producing and acid neutralising capacity of materials the scheme would be as shown in
recommendations 2 and 3.
2. The value of Sc is taken as 0.1 wt% S.
3. Materials with:
a) Total S ≥ 0.1 wt% are classed as PAF and those with
b) Total S < 0.1 wt% are classed NAF.
4. An assessment is undertaken to determine whether use of a larger value of Sc can be justified.
A larger value of Sc would result in a smaller volume of waste being classified PAF. An
approach is presented in recommendation 5.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 52
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
5. Operation of the long-term (45 week) kinetic columns should cease. Samples should be
obtained from those columns giving neutral leachate. These samples should be sent to a
commercial laboratory to measure the quantity of remaining oxidisable sulphide. The data
obtained will help determine whether a larger Sc can be used.
6. The current review of the quantity and distribution of PAF and NAF materials within the BFS
(VI) pit shell being is completed. Details are given in Section 5.1.
7. An assessment is undertaken of the potential quality of water that comes into contact the waste
and mineralised material. Details are given in Section 5.2.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Page 53
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
References 7.
AMIRA International Limited, ARD Test Handbook: Project P387A Prediction and Kinetic
Control of Acid Mine Drainage, May 2002.
Bowen, H J M, 1979. Environmental Chemistry of the Elements, (Academic Press: London).
Förstner, U, Ahlf, W and Calmano, W, 1993. Sediment quality objectives and criteria development
in Germany, Water Science & Technology, 28: 307-316.
Li, M, 2000 Acid Rock Drainage Prediction for Low-Sulphide, Low-Neutralisation Potential Mine
Wastes. Proceedings from the Fifth International Conference on Acid Rock Drainage. Society
for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration Inc.
Morin and Hutt, 2007 A Case Study of Important Aluminosilicate Neutralisation, MDAG.com
Internet Case Study 25.
Pontifex, I R, 2008. Mineralogical Report No. 9341.
Price, W A, 1997. Guidelines and Recommended Methods for the Prediction of Metal Leaching
and Acid Rock Drainage at Minesites in British Columbia, Reclamation Section, Energy and
Minerals Division Ministry of Employment and Investment.
SRK Consulting, 2008. Mineralisation Study at the Beebyn and Madoonga Orebodies, Weld
Range, unpublished report by SRK Consulting for Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Limited
(authors: S Kenworthy and P Hodkiewicz).
SRK Consulting, 2009. Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
- Static and Kinetic Testing. Report SMM001_ENV_RP_1 (Rev 1) prepared for Sinosteel
Midwest Management Pty Ltd.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendices
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendices
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 1
GARV/CHAP SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendix 1: Nomenclature
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 1-1
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Equivalent nomenclatures
BIF BIF
DID Detrital
FEL Felsic
SHL Shale
HYD Hydrated
MAF Mafic
MAG Magnetite
O_AL Ore Hi Al
O_SI Ore Hi SiO2
ORE Ore
Sample ID Column ID
ADML_1B_003 SRK1
ADML_1B_027 SRK5
ADML_1B_064 SRK7
ADML_1B_110 SRK10
ADML_1B_137 SRK15
ADML_1B_243 SRK24
ADML_1B_249 SRK25
ADML_1B_280 SRK330
A13059 SRK 13059
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 2
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendix 2: Static Testing Methods and Guidelines
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 2-1
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
STATIC TESTING METHODS AND GUIDELINES
Paste pH and Paste EC
Paste parameters provide an indication of the degree of weathering the material has experienced as
well as the availability of reactive mineral species and readily soluble salts. Generally, paste pH
values less than pH 5 are indicative of stored acidity (i.e. stored oxidation products) and net acid
generating conditions, whereas high paste pH values suggest the presence of reactive neutralising
minerals.
These characteristics reflect the potential of a sample to impact the quality of water contacting the
sample without the sample undergoing further chemical change/weathering. Such potential exists
whether the sample is classified as NAF, UC or PAF. A method consistent with the AMIRA
(2002) method was used.
Net Acid Producing Potential
The net acid producing potential (NAPP) is the theoretical balance between the capacity of the
sample to generate acid via the oxidation of sulphides and its capacity to neutralise any acid
formed. The maximum potential acidity (MPA) of the sample is calculated from the total sulphur
content, assuming that all sulphur is present as pyrite.
The acid neutralisation capacity (ANC) or neutralisation potential (NP) is measured by reacting the
sample with a known amount of low pH hydrochloric acid. After the pH has stabilized the sample
is back titrated with a base to determine the amount of acid that had been consumed by the sample,
which is assumed to represent the NP.
The NAPP is calculated as follows:
NAPP = MPA – NP (kg H2SO4/t)
Where MPA = 30.6 x S% and the sulphur content is expressed as weight percent (wt %).
The assumption that all sulphur in the sample is present as sulphide (pyrite) generally overestimates
the amount of acid generated, since sulphur will exist in other forms that are not acid generating
(e.g. as sulphate, elemental sulphur and non acid generating sulphides).
Net Acid Generation
Net acid generation (NAG) measures how a sample could behave under highly oxidising
conditions. The sample is contacted with the strong oxidant hydrogen peroxide. The peroxide
oxidises the sulphides contained in the sample which generates acid. Concurrently, neutralising
minerals that may be present consume all or part of the acid generated. Following a predetermined
contact time, the solution pH is recorded and the NAG acidity of the sample is quantified by
titration with a base (sodium hydroxide).
Acid Neutralising Capacity (ANC) and Carbonate Neutralising Potential (CarbNP)
The acid neutralisation capacity (ANC) or neutralisation potential (NP) is a measure of the role that
gangue minerals could play in neutralising acid generated during sulphide oxidation. The ANC
measurement is described above (see Net Acid Producing Potential). The neutralisation potential
of a sample can be sourced from both carbonate and silicate minerals. Calcium and magnesium
carbonates are the most important contributors for domains that generate acid at a high rate since
they are very reactive and readily neutralise acidity at a high rate. Some carbonate minerals, such
as iron and manganese carbonates, do not contribute to neutralisation. Other neutralising minerals
such as silicates react at low pH values and will only contribute to the neutralising capacity after
the leaching solution has become strongly acidic.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 2-2
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
The endpoint pH after the addition of HCl in the NP measurement is very low (typically between
pH values of 1 and 2) and leads to additional reactions that will occur only at a low pH
(i.e. neutralisation due to dissolution of the silicate minerals). The NP measurement may therefore
overestimate the neutralisation capacity that is available.
A more appropriate assessment of the NP that is available to maintain near neutral pH conditions is
to infer the proportion of NP that is sourced from the calcium and magnesium carbonate minerals
directly. The inorganic carbon content can be used to infer the carbonate mineral content and
estimate the carbonate neutralisation potential (CarbNP). Comparison of the CarbNP values with
the NP values can give an indication of the proportion of the neutralising capacity of the sample
that is due to the presence of carbonate minerals.
Acid Buffering Characteristic Curve
The ABCC test involves slow titration of a sample with acid while continuously monitoring pH.
This data provides an indication of what portion of the acid neutralising capacity (ANC) measured
in a sample is readily available for acid neutralisation (AMIRA, 2002).
Global Abundances
Bulk chemical assays were undertaken on all samples. The following elements were included in
the assays:
Major elements – Al, Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, S and Si; and
Minor elements – Ag, As, Au, B, Ba, Be, Bi, C, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, F, Hg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sb, Se, Sn,
Sr, Te, Th, Tl, U, V and Zn.
A direct comparison of the measured abundances of the elements was made with the average
abundance of elements in the Earth’s crust (Bowen, 1979). This provides the global abundance
index (GAI) of elements and indicates which elements are ‘enriched’ in the sample with respect to
the global average. The GAI is calculated using the following formula (Förstner, 1993):
GAI =
Abundance Average5.1
ionConcentrat Measuredlog 2Int
An example of GAI values is provided in the following table. In the table n is the ratio of the
measured abundance in the sample to the reference material abundance.
Ranges of the Ratio of the Measured Concentration to Average Abundance (n) and the Corresponding Global Abundance Index
n range GAI
1 < n < 3 0
3 ≤ n < 6 1
6 ≤ n < 12 2
12 ≤ n < 24 3
Zero or positive GAI values indicate enrichment of the element in the sample when compared to
average-crustal abundances. As a general rule, a GAI of 3 or higher signifies enrichment that
warrants further evaluation.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 2-3
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Leach Extraction Tests
A total of 250 g of sample and 750 mL of distilled water are placed in a 1000 mL container. The
mixture is gently agitated for 24 hours and allowed to stand for a minimum of three hours allowing
suspended material to settle. The supernatant is collected and submitted for multi-element analysis.
Kinetic Testing Procedure
A modified AMIRA procedure (AMIRA, 2002) was utilised with the principle differences relating
to the particle size at which the tests were completed and the flushing regime. The testing
procedure was as follows.
Each sample was coarse crushed (<10 mm) and placed in a large diameter Buchner filter lined with
filter paper to retain the solids. The rock sample was then subjected to a weekly rinsing and drying
cycle. Each week the sample was rinsed with about 1000 ml of deionised water. The water was
added to the top of the sample and allowed to drain under gravity and the leachate collected at the
base of Buchner filter and submitted for analysis as follows:
Weekly – pH, electrical conductivity (EC), sulphate, acidity and total alkalinity.
Every 3 to 4 weeks – Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Ca, Cd, Cl, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, K, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na,
Ni, P, Pb, Sb, Se, Sn, Sr, Th, Tl, U, V and Zn.
Generally column leach tests that exhibit slow rates of reaction require a minimum operating time
of 40 to 50 weeks unless acidity conditions develop fully at an early stage of the test. The criteria
that may be considered to assess whether testing should be discontinued include:
pseudo steady state;
oxidation rates (i.e. acid generation rates) and neutralisation potential depletion rates together
with static test results indicate that net acid generating conditions are unlikely to develop, and
metal leachability is unlikely to change in the future; and
A good understanding of rates of oxidation and leaching has been developed based on the
available data.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 3
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendix 3: Paste pH and Electrical Conductivity
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Paste pH and Paste EC Test Results
SMC Sample Zone Sample Type Domain Weathering HOLE_ID From To Paste pH Paste ECM-Madoonga m m pH Unit µS/cmB-Beebyn 0.1 1.00
A13020 M DD BIF WRRD0524 52 54 7.7 50A13024 M DD BIF WRRD0524 124 126 8 77A13025 M DD BIF WRRD0524 161 163 8.5 82A13028 M DD BIF WRRD0524 203 205 8.5 110A13029 M DD BIF WRRD0524 210 212 8.4 180A13033 M DD BIF WRRD0491 97 99 7.1 36A13034 M DD BIF WRRD0491 125 127 6.7 300A13036 M DD BIF WRRD0491 184 186 8.2 130A13037 M DD BIF WRRD0491 226 228 8 240A13049 M DD BIF WRRD0525 82 84 6.9 110A13050 M DD BIF WRRD0525 152 154 6.8 93A13051 M DD BIF WRRD0525 163 165 7.3 37A13052 M DD BIF WRRD0529 11 13 5.6 65A13054 M DD BIF WRRD0529 50 52 5.9 44A13055 M DD BIF WRRD0529 55 57 5.9 22A13056 M DD BIF WRRD0529 72 74 7.7 79A13057 M DD BIF WRRD0529 96 98 6.4 330A13059 M DD BIF WRRD0529 127 129 7.2 370ADML_1B_012 M DD BIF EW WRRD0262 79.7 83.5 7 201ADML_1B_014 M DD BIF MW WRRD0491 99.7 101.8 7.4 73ADML_1B_015 M DD BIF FR WRRD0524 124.3 126 7.7 103ADML_1B_016 M DD BIF FR WRRD0526 45 46.9 7.5 58ADML_1B_017 M DD BIF FR WRRD0527 90.4 92.35 7.5 55ADML_1B_018 M DD BIF MW WRRD0528 216.6 218.6 7.4 230ADML_1B_019 M DD BIF FR WRRD0529 60.2 63.6 6.8 63ADML_1B_021 M DD BIF MW WRRD0530 15 16.8 6.5 48ADML_1B_022 M DD BIF FR WRRD0530 48.7 50.45 6.1 144ADML_1B_023 M DD BIF EW WRRD0581A 9 12.4 6.1 168ADML_1B_047 M DD BIF FR WRRD0527 45.6 47.9 6.3 13ADML_1B_074 M DD BIF EW WRRD0597 55 57.4 7.5 114ADML_1B_077 M DD BIF MW WRRD0720 37.3 39.4 6.4 66ADML_1B_187 M DD BIF EW WRRD0261 44 46 7.6 93ADML_1B_193 M DD BIF EW WRRD0265 80 80.5 7.5 241ADML_1B_204 M DD BIF MW WRRD0531 23 24 7 62ADML_1B_205 M DD BIF FR WRRD0580 32.5 33.5 6.2 60ADML_1B_211 M DD BIF FR WRRD0580 157.3 158.8 6.8 268ADML_1B_213 M Surface sample BIF MW Field Sample 0 1 6.6 165ADML_1B_214 M Surface sample BIF MW Field Sample 0 1 6.7 127ADML_1B_225 M DD BIF MW WRRD0525 110.4 114.6 7.1 46ADML_1B_227 M DD BIF MW WRRD0581a 27.4 28.4 6.6 28ADML_1B_229 M DD BIF MW WRRD0594 169 170 6.9 21A13019 M DD Detrital WRRD0524 9 11 6.3 210A13030 M DD Detrital WRRD0491 8 10 6.9 50A13047 M DD Detrital WRRD0525 10 12 6 220ADML_1B_010 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0262 2.1 4.1 6 244ADML_1B_024 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0592 11 14 7.2 70ADML_1B_027 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0245 2.7 4.6 5.9 147ADML_1B_035 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0263 1.3 4 6.5 170ADML_1B_036 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0265 1.3 3.1 6.7 113ADML_1B_037 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0491 0 2 6.4 84ADML_1B_038 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0491 2 5.1 6.6 109ADML_1B_040 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0525 8.3 10.9 5.2 156ADML_1B_041 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0525 5.6 8.2 5.2 36ADML_1B_045 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0526 0 2.2 5.8 34ADML_1B_046 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0527 0 3.1 5.6 34ADML_1B_049 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0528 0 2.3 6.2 37ADML_1B_050 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0528 11.5 13.5 7.5 39ADML_1B_051 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0528 17.2 18.9 6.7 22ADML_1B_060 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0530 0 2.1 6.4 65ADML_1B_061 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0590 10.5 22.8 6.7 164ADML_1B_062 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0591 5.3 19.6 7.2 107ADML_1B_063 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0594 0 8 7 81ADML_1B_067 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0595 3 4.4 6.9 101ADML_1B_068 M DD Detrital MW WRRD0595 11 12.8 7 51ADML_1B_206 M DD Detrital EW WRRD0580 3 4.8 5.6 40ADML_1B_212 M Surface sample Detrital EW Field Sample 0 1 5.8 35ADML_1B_215 M Surface sample Detrital EW Field Sample 0 1 5.8 46
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Paste pH and Paste EC Test Results
SMC Sample Zone Sample Type Domain Weathering HOLE_ID From To Paste pH Paste ECM-Madoonga m m pH Unit µS/cmB-Beebyn 0.1 1.00
ADML_1B_216 M Surface sample Detrital EW Field Sample 0 4 5.5 69ADML_1B_217 M Surface sample Detrital EW Field Sample 0 2 5.7 34ADML_1B_218 M Surface sample Detrital EW Field Sample 0 1 5 56ADML_1B_219 M Surface sample Detrital EW Field Sample 0 1 5.4 81ADML_1B_032 M DD Felsic FR WRRD0594 60 61 8.8 103ADML_1B_033 M DD Felsic EW WRRD0594 65 66.2 8.3 86ADML_1B_034 M DD Felsic MW WRRD0594 66.6 67.5 8.5 84ADML_1B_257 M Surface sample Felsic EW 0 0 0 6.3 90ADML_1B_258 M Surface sample Felsic MW 0 0 0 7.1 203ADML_1B_259 M Surface sample Felsic EW 0 0 0 5.6 83ADML_1B_260 M Surface sample Felsic MW 0 0 0 7.5 176ADML_1B_261 M Surface sample Felsic MW 0 0 0 7 184ADML_1B_262 M Surface sample Felsic EW 0 0 0 6.7 186ADML_1B_265 M Surface sample Felsic MW 0 0 0 7.2 397ADML_1B_270 M Surface sample Felsic MW 0 0 0 7.6 100A13021 M DD Hydrated WRRD0524 74 76 7.4 83A13023 M DD Hydrated WRRD0524 91 93 7.2 72A13035 M DD Hydrated WRRD0491 163 165 6.6 4200A13053 M DD Hydrated WRRD0529 35 37 5.2 120ADML_1B_043 M DD Hydrated MW WRRD0526 15.4 19 6.8 33ADML_1B_044 M DD Hydrated FR WRRD0526 19 21.1 6.9 29ADML_1B_048 M DD Hydrated MW WRRD0527 104.1 105.6 6.8 79ADML_1B_075 M DD Hydrated MW WRRD0720 41.6 44.3 6.7 79ADML_1B_076 M DD Hydrated EW WRRD0720 20.1 22.4 6.7 97ADML_1B_078 M DD Hydrated FR WRRD0720 51.95 53.7 6.9 129ADML_1B_226 M DD Hydrated EW WRRD0526 6.5 8.3 7 61ADML_1B_228 M DD Hydrated MW WRRD0525 99.8 102.5 7 36ADML_1B_241 M RC Hydrated EW WRRC0850 1 2 7.4 224ADML_1B_242 M RC Hydrated EW WRRC0850 9 10 7.1 146ADML_1B_243 M RC Hydrated MW WRRC0875 132 133 6.7 861ADML_1B_244 M RC Hydrated MW WRRC0875 117 118 6.7 370ADML_1B_245 M RC Hydrated MW WRRC0876 130 131 7 324ADML_1B_246 M RC Hydrated MW WRRC0876 113 114 7 165ADML_1B_247 M DD Hydrated FR WRRC0962d 211.4 213 6.9 80ADML_1B_248 M DD Hydrated MW WRRC0883d 124.6 126 6.8 96ADML_1B_249 M DD Hydrated MW WRRC0880d 129.4 130.2 4.6 1000ADML_1B_250 M DD Hydrated FR WRRC0880d 130 132.3 7.5 242ADML_1B_251 M DD Hydrated MW WRRC0979d 134.8 136.4 7.3 90ADML_1B_252 M DD Hydrated EW WRRC0868d 111.4 114.9 7.2 221ADML_1B_254 M DD Hydrated FR WRRC0852ad 148.4 150 7.4 84ADML_1B_255 M DD Hydrated FR WRRC0852ad 158.5 160 7.6 134ADML_1B_256 M RC Hydrated FR WRRC0881 98 100 6.9 142ADML_1B_271 M RC Hydrated EW WRRC1006 79 81 6.4 310ADML_1B_272 M RC Hydrated EW WRRC1006 64 66 6.6 425ADML_1B_273 M RC Hydrated EW WRRC0888 69 70 6.5 74A13022 M DD Mafic WRRD0524 81 83 7.3 140A13031 M DD Mafic WRRD0491 44 46 7.3 250A13032 M DD Mafic WRRD0491 61 63 7.4 150A13048 M DD Mafic WRRD0525 40 42 6.1 73ADML_1B_009 M DD Mafic EW WRRD0491 19.35 20.4 7 178ADML_1B_011 M DD Mafic EW WRRD0262 23.4 27.3 6.1 461ADML_1B_025 M DD Mafic EW WRRD0592 19 23 7 170ADML_1B_026 M DD Mafic MW WRRD0592 77.5 79.1 6.9 1700ADML_1B_039 M DD Mafic EW WRRD0524 24.6 30.3 6.9 129ADML_1B_056 M DD Mafic FR WRRD0528 238.6 240.1 8.5 372ADML_1B_069 M DD Mafic EW WRRD0595 29.1 31.2 7.8 69ADML_1B_070 M DD Mafic FR WRRD0595 51.8 53.9 9.2 162ADML_1B_071 M DD Mafic FR WRRD0595 121.2 123.3 9.2 126ADML_1B_191 M DD Mafic MW WRRD0264 124.7 125.8 6.1 125ADML_1B_200 M DD Mafic EW WRRD0525 33.4 36 6 50ADML_1B_208 M DD Mafic EW WRRC0580 40.2 42.8 6.8 146ADML_1B_237 M DD Mafic FR WRRD0528 249.1 250.8 8 1200ADML_1B_238 M DD Mafic MW WRRD0595 81.7 83 8.4 55ADML_1B_008 M DD Ore FR WRRD0271 90.1 92.5 7.7 537ADML_1B_029 M DD Ore FR WRRD0245 34 36 6.3 620ADML_1B_031 M DD Ore FR WRRD0261 35.5 38.3 7 269ADML_1B_042 M DD Ore EW WRRD0525 69.6 72.8 6.9 52
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Paste pH and Paste EC Test Results
SMC Sample Zone Sample Type Domain Weathering HOLE_ID From To Paste pH Paste ECM-Madoonga m m pH Unit µS/cmB-Beebyn 0.1 1.00
ADML_1B_054 M DD Ore EW WRRD0528 101.5 106.2 6.9 66ADML_1B_055 M DD Ore EW WRRD0528 144.6 147.1 7 70ADML_1B_057 M DD Ore EW WRRD0529 28.6 29.8 5 103ADML_1B_064 M DD Ore MW WRRD0594 174 176.1 6.8 187ADML_1B_066 M DD Ore EW WRRD0594 213 216.5 7 638ADML_1B_072 M DD Ore MW WRRD0597 2.5 5 7.4 170ADML_1B_188 M DD Ore FR WRRD0262 51.3 52.3 7.4 283ADML_1B_189 M DD Ore MW WRRD0264 27.2 30.5 6.8 123ADML_1B_192 M DD Ore FR WRRD0265 50 51 6.8 222ADML_1B_209 M DD Ore MW WRRD0580 59.7 61.7 7.1 155ADML_1B_210 M DD Ore MW WRRD0580 108 109.3 7.1 110ADML_1B_030 M DD Ore Hi Al FR WRRD0245 71 73.5 6.5 264ADML_1B_053 M DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0528 61 64 7.2 20ADML_1B_058 M DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0529 49 53 6.4 46ADML_1B_190 M DD Ore Hi Al FR WRRD0264 40.5 42 5 126ADML_1B_194 M DD Ore Hi Al FR WRRD0491 121 122.2 7.3 162ADML_1B_195 M DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0491 12 13.5 7.2 34ADML_1B_198 M DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0524 121 122.2 7.2 71ADML_1B_202 M DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRC0527 14.6 17 6.4 33ADML_1B_231 M DD Ore Hi Al EW WRRD0524 84.6 87.3 7.4 55ADML_1B_234 M DD Ore Hi Al FR WRRD0271 40 42 7.1 246ADML_1B_235 M DD Ore Hi Al EW WRRD0261 3.1 5 5.7 66ADML_1B_236 M DD Ore Hi Al FR WRRD0246 59.3 61.3 7 82ADML_1B_013 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0262 93 95 6.9 382ADML_1B_020 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0529 107 109 6.9 42ADML_1B_028 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0245 5.6 7.9 5.6 55ADML_1B_052 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0528 47 49 7 27ADML_1B_059 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0529 65 67 5.7 24ADML_1B_065 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0594 193 195 6.9 166ADML_1B_073 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0597 7 11.5 7 193ADML_1B_196 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0491 109.3 111.6 7.2 74ADML_1B_199 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRDo524 99-100 107.5 7.2 31ADML_1B_201 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0527 10 11 6.4 54ADML_1B_203 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0528 70.8-73.1 94.2 7.2 60ADML_1B_207 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0580 17.3 18.5 5.8 36ADML_1B_230 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0244 85.3 87 7.2 318ADML_1B_232 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0524 46 47 7.3 46ADML_1B_233 M DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0529 4 6 5.5 38A13026 M DD Shale WRRD0524 180 182 8.6 150A13027 M DD Shale WRRD0524 194 196 8.7 710A13038 M DD Shale WRRD0491 249 251 9 210A13039 M DD Shale WRRD0491 262 264 8.8 250A13058 M DD Shale WRRD0529 119 121 7.3 68ADML_1B_274 M DD Shale MW WRRC0719d 100 102 6.6 520ADML_1B_275 M DD Shale MW WRRC0719d 105.3 107.5 8.2 287ADML_1B_276 M DD Shale MW WRRC0719d 111.3 113.3 6.9 633ADML_1B_277 M DD Shale MW WRRC0719d 115.4 116.6 6.9 452ADML_1B_280 M DD Shale MW WRRC0963d 196.8 199 4.3 1490ADML_1B_281 M DD Shale MW WRRC0963d 194.2 196 8 166ADML_1B_282 M DD Shale EW WRRC0963d 190 192.2 6.6 291ADML_1B_283 M DD Shale EW WRRC0963d 178.4 180 7.7 145ADML_1B_284 M DD Shale EW WRRC0963d 171.7 173.9 7.2 210ADML_1B_285 M DD Shale EW WRRC0966d 138 140 7.2 162ADML_1B_286 M DD Shale EW WRRC0966d 143.2 144.9 6.8 357ADML_1B_287 M DD Shale EW WRRC0966d 146.7 142.8 7 240ADML_1B_288 M DD Shale EW WRRC0964d 145.9 147.4 7.1 122ADML_1B_289 M DD Shale EW WRRC0964d 150 151 7.2 118A13003 B DD BIF WRRD0493 41 43 6.5 30A13004 B DD BIF WRRD0493 64 66 6.7 21A13005 B DD BIF WRRD0493 92 94 7.1 48A13006 B DD BIF WRRD0493 110 112 7.2 30A13011 B DD BIF WRRD0488 56 58 8 100A13013 B DD BIF WRRD0488 121 123 9.1 260A13014 B DD BIF WRRD0488 141 143 9.2 220A13015 B DD BIF WRRD0488 163 165 9.2 320A13016 B DD BIF WRRD0488 171 173 8.8 250A13042 B DD BIF WRRD0520 65 67 9 160
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Paste pH and Paste EC Test Results
SMC Sample Zone Sample Type Domain Weathering HOLE_ID From To Paste pH Paste ECM-Madoonga m m pH Unit µS/cmB-Beebyn 0.1 1.00
A13043 B DD BIF WRRD0520 85 87 9.2 190A13044 B DD BIF WRRD0520 99 101 8.2 120ADML_1B_083 B DD BIF EW WRRD0610 183 186.3 7.2 56ADML_1B_084 B DD BIF MW WRRD0610 175.8 178.1 7.3 50ADML_1B_098 B DD BIF MW WRRD0493 30.3 32.2 8 97ADML_1B_100 B DD BIF MW WRRD0493 67.7 73.8 7.1 62ADML_1B_107 B DD BIF EW WRRD0494 40.5 44.3 7.4 83ADML_1B_130 B DD BIF EW WRRD0521 29.9 32.8 8.3 194ADML_1B_138 B DD BIF MW WRRD0587 27.7 28.5 5.8 104ADML_1B_138 B DD BIF MW WRRD0587 21.9 23.8 4.6 128ADML_1B_149 B DD BIF FR WRRD0640 49 50.3 9 104ADML_1B_156 B DD BIF EW WRRD0731 39.6 41.2 8.5 404ADML_1B_174 B DD BIF MW WRRD0489 119.3 120.8 9 381ADML_1B_185 B DD BIF MW WRRD0499 39 41 6.2 145ADML_1B_186 B DD BIF FR WRRD0499 51 52 7.4 77ADML_1B_197 B DD BIF FR WRRD0493 36 38 7.2 51ADML_1B_221 B DD BIF MW WRRD0640 34.7 36.3 6.1 23A13001 B DD Mafic WRRD0493 14 16 6.3 130A13002 B DD Mafic WRRD0493 25 27 6.6 70A13007 B DD Mafic WRRD0493 127 129 7.9 60A13008 B DD Mafic WRRD0493 137 139 8.3 70A13009 B DD Mafic WRRD0488 6 8 6.8 170A13010 B DD Mafic WRRD0488 39 41 8.5 80A13012 B DD Mafic WRRD0488 81 83 8.6 90A13017 B DD Mafic WRRD0488 174 176 8.4 150A13018 B DD Mafic WRRD0488 194 196 9.5 260A13040 B DD Mafic WRRD0520 14 16 7.7 280A13041 B DD Mafic WRRD0520 36 38 8.7 180A13045 B DD Mafic WRRD0520 108 110 8.5 150A13046 B DD Mafic WRRD0520 119 121 8.3 170ADML_1B_001 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0489 39.4 41 7 110ADML_1B_005 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0523 92.3 93.9 7.6 162ADML_1B_006 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0523 86.1 87.3 8.4 92ADML_1B_007 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0488 42.7 47.5 8.1 108ADML_1B_079 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0577 70 75 7.6 125ADML_1B_080 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0577 89.6 92.1 8.4 84ADML_1B_081 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0603 171 173.9 7.4 105ADML_1B_082 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0610 116 121.1 7.3 132ADML_1B_085 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0630 177 179.05 9.3 101ADML_1B_086 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0667 89.3 91.7 8.6 130ADML_1B_087 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0670 119.1 122.05 7.5 129ADML_1B_088 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0675 160.2 162.6 8.7 103ADML_1B_089 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0488 63 65.1 8.7 82ADML_1B_090 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0488 72.7 75.1 8.7 90ADML_1B_091 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0488 189.9 192.7 9.7 231ADML_1B_092 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0490 11.5 13.4 7.2 81ADML_1B_093 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0490 27.9 29 8.3 111ADML_1B_094 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0490 15.7 118 9.1 96ADML_1B_095 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0492 38 38.5 8 131ADML_1B_096 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0492 41.5 43.5 8.9 89ADML_1B_097 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0493 25 28.1 7 79ADML_1B_103 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0493 126.4 129.4 8.1 78ADML_1B_104 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0493 133 135 8.8 86ADML_1B_105 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0494 22.8 25.6 8.4 375ADML_1B_106 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0494 54.6 57.1 7.6 76ADML_1B_108 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0496 15.4 18.4 7.7 119ADML_1B_112 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0496 135 138.4 7.4 125ADML_1B_113 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0496 156.4 157.8 8.7 91ADML_1B_114 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0496 165.9 168.15 9.2 148ADML_1B_116 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0497 9.1 12.2 8.8 100ADML_1B_117 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0497 15.3 18 8.7 107ADML_1B_119 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0500 9.1 13.1 7.4 1280ADML_1B_120 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0500 15.4 17.95 9 170ADML_1B_121 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0500 38.9 41.6 8.1 96ADML_1B_122 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0500 80.4 83 9.3 153ADML_1B_123 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0520 9.8 12.8 7.9 463ADML_1B_124 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0520 21.8 24.1 8.6 119
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Paste pH and Paste EC Test Results
SMC Sample Zone Sample Type Domain Weathering HOLE_ID From To Paste pH Paste ECM-Madoonga m m pH Unit µS/cmB-Beebyn 0.1 1.00
ADML_1B_126 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0520 32.9 34.8 8.9 93ADML_1B_128 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0520 110.8 112.2 8.8 70ADML_1B_129 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0521 19 21.4 7.2 126ADML_1B_131 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0521 66.4 68.4 8.6 98ADML_1B_132 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0522 60.6 62.2 9.3 148ADML_1B_133 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0522 63.9 65.2 9 78ADML_1B_134 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0522 10.6 12.1 8.7 405ADML_1B_135 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0523 50.2 51.7 8.7 105ADML_1B_136 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0523 81.9 83.6 7.8 142ADML_1B_137 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0587 9 11.7 8.4 128ADML_1B_139 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0582 10 13 8.4 636ADML_1B_140 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0588 3.4 6.1 6.8 52ADML_1B_141 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0583 3.5 6 9 193ADML_1B_142 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0583 14 16.5 9.2 107ADML_1B_143 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0583 24 25 5.3 126ADML_1B_144 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0640 1 8 6.3 89ADML_1B_146 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0490 19 20 6.9 147ADML_1B_150 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0731 93.6 95 9 111ADML_1B_151 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0731 57.1 58.35 9.3 71ADML_1B_152 B DD Mafic FR WRRD0732 94.6 95.6 9.4 114ADML_1B_153 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0731 16 17 7.8 2800ADML_1B_154 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0731 24.5 25.5 7.8 72ADML_1B_155 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0731 32 33.5 7.9 1140ADML_1B_157 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0732 15.5 17.5 9.4 127ADML_1B_158 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0731 26 30 7.9 264ADML_1B_159 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0731 52 53 7.1 104ADML_1B_160 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0732 71.8 73.2 8.1 131ADML_1B_161 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0642 3.2 6 8.9 83ADML_1B_162 B DD Mafic EW WRRD0642 32.4 34 7.4 74ADML_1B_163 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0642 39.5 40.5 8 50ADML_1B_164 B DD Mafic EW WRRC0641 36 37.5 9.2 124ADML_1B_167 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0522 38.3 39.6 8.5 62ADML_1B_168 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0500 58 59.3 9.1 54ADML_1B_169 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0731 49.8 50.9 7.3 35ADML_1B_175 B DD Mafic MW WRRD0489 143 145 8.6 64ADML_1B_179 B DD Magnetite FR WRRD0488 169 170.5 9.1 268ADML_1B_180 B DD Magnetite MW WRRD0488 150.8 152 9.3 161ADML_1B_181 B DD Magnetite FR WRRD0488 161 162 9 195ADML_1B_222 B DD Magnetite FR WRRD0489 99.1 100.8 8.6 303ADML_1B_002 B DD Ore MW WRRD0489 78 79.4 7.2 59ADML_1B_102 B DD Ore MW WRRD0493 118.3 121.3 7.3 47ADML_1B_109 B DD Ore MW WRRD0496 37.4 42.3 7.6 96ADML_1B_111 B DD Ore EW WRRD0496 74.6 78.9 7.6 130ADML_1B_115 B DD Ore EW WRRD0497 1.2 5 7.4 84ADML_1B_118 B DD Ore FR WRRD0497 57.2 59.7 7.6 89ADML_1B_125 B DD Ore FR WRRD0520 68.1 70.5 9.2 247ADML_1B_147 B DD Ore MW WRRD0640 20.3 23 9.2 94ADML_1B_171 B DD Ore EW WRRD0496 67.9 70.1 7.6 41ADML_1B_173 B DD Ore FR WRRD0497 96 97.3 7.3 31ADML_1B_177 B DD Ore MW WRRD0290 146.7 147.7 8.1 86ADML_1B_178 B DD Ore FR WRRD0488 135 136.2 9.1 142ADML_1B_224 B DD Ore EW WRRD0520 49.5 51.9 7.9 73ADML_1B_110 B DD Ore Hi Al EW WRRD0496 45.3 48.3 8 260ADML_1B_127 B DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0520 97 99 8.1 151ADML_1B_145 B DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0640 12.4 14 6.3 140ADML_1B_145 B DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0640 8.6 10.7 6.2 88ADML_1B_172 B DD Ore Hi Al EW WRRD0496 109.5 110.8 7.5 81ADML_1B_182 B DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0497 46.1 48 7.7 107ADML_1B_183 B DD Ore Hi Al MW WRRD0520 5.9 7.7 8 88ADML_1B_184 B DD Ore Hi Al EW WRRD0520 5.9 7.7 8 140ADML_1B_278 B RC Ore Hi Al MW WRRC1097 6 7 5.4 99ADML_1B_279 B RC Ore Hi Al MW WRRC1097 17 18 6.7 186ADML_1B_003 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0489 105 106.5 8.4 493ADML_1B_004 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0489 131.9 134.5 8.1 227ADML_1B_099 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0493 52.5 56.5 6.8 35ADML_1B_101 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0493 82.3 84.3 7.4 70ADML_1B_148 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0640 43.1 44.6 9.4 128
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Paste pH and Paste EC Test Results
SMC Sample Zone Sample Type Domain Weathering HOLE_ID From To Paste pH Paste ECM-Madoonga m m pH Unit µS/cmB-Beebyn 0.1 1.00
ADML_1B_170 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0493 106 109 7.6 26ADML_1B_176 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 MW WRRD0489 94 95.5 8.3 342ADML_1B_220 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 FR WRRD0640 40 41.2 5.7 34ADML_1B_223 B DD Ore Hi SiO2 EW WRRD0489 123.4 126.4 8.1 62
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 4
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendix 4: Acid Base Account Test Results
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Acid Base Account Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Total S SO4 Total C TIC CarbNP ANC MPA NPR
Unit % mg/kg % % kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t
LOR 0.01 100 0.02 0.02A13020 M BIF 0.007 0.08 0.055 4.49 <0.49 0.21 1.17A13024 M BIF 0.084 1.39 1.365 111.42 13.72 2.57 5.34A13025 M BIF 0.062 0.899 0.874 71.34 15.68 1.90 8.26A13028 M BIF 0.116 2.62 2.595 211.83 12.74 3.55 3.59A13029 M BIF 0.267 4.28 4.255 347.34 13.72 8.17 1.68A13033 M BIF 0.0025 0.04 0.015 1.22 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13034 M BIF 0.112 880 0.05 0.025 2.04 <0.49 3.43 0.07A13036 M BIF 0.02 3.81 3.785 308.97 14.7 0.61 24.02A13037 M BIF 0.619 0.287 0.262 21.39 8.82 18.94 0.47A13049 M BIF 0.055 340 0.064 0.039 3.18 <0.49 1.68 0.15A13050 M BIF 0.051 205 0.122 0.052 4.24 <0.49 1.56 0.16A13051 M BIF 0.0025 0.006 -0.019 0.00 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13052 M BIF 0.096 580 0.108 0.028 2.29 <0.49 2.94 0.09A13054 M BIF 0.008 0.043 0.018 1.47 <0.49 0.24 1.02A13055 M BIF 0.0025 0.016 -0.009 0.00 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13056 M BIF 0.089 0.016 -0.009 0.00 <0.49 2.72 0.09A13057 M BIF 0.228 0.006 -0.019 0.00 <0.49 6.98 0.04A13059 M BIF 0.778 0.07 0.045 3.67 <0.49 23.81 0.01ADML_1B_012 M BIF 0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.82 0.8 0.61 1.31ADML_1B_014 M BIF <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_015 M BIF 0.16 1.7 1.66 135.51 7.3 4.90 1.49ADML_1B_016 M BIF 0.05 0.04 0.04 3.27 1.4 1.53 0.92ADML_1B_017 M BIF 0.1 0.64 0.62 50.61 6.8 3.06 2.22ADML_1B_018 M BIF <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 1.5 0.15 9.80ADML_1B_019 M BIF <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_021 M BIF 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.6 0.92 1.74ADML_1B_022 M BIF 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.31 0.82ADML_1B_023 M BIF 0.02 0.02 0.02 1.63 2.4 0.61 3.92ADML_1B_047 M BIF <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_074 M BIF <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 1.7 0.15 11.11ADML_1B_077 M BIF 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 0.5 0.31 1.63ADML_1B_187 M BIF <0.01 0.12 <0.02 0.82 3.4 0.15 22.22ADML_1B_193 M BIF <0.01 0.07 <0.02 0.82 1.8 0.15 11.76ADML_1B_204 M BIF <0.01 0.05 <0.02 0.82 1 0.15 6.54ADML_1B_205 M BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.4 0.15 9.15ADML_1B_211 M BIF 0.02 0.12 0.09 7.35 3.8 0.61 6.21ADML_1B_213 M BIF 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.2 0.31 3.92ADML_1B_214 M BIF <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 1.7 0.15 11.11ADML_1B_225 M BIF <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 2 0.15 13.07ADML_1B_227 M BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 0.6 0.15 3.92ADML_1B_229 M BIF <0.01 0.05 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63A13019 M Detrital 0.065 550 0.261 0.151 12.33 <0.49 1.99 0.13A13030 M Detrital 0.011 <100 0.156 0.066 5.39 <0.49 0.34 0.74A13047 M Detrital 0.057 0.266 0.086 7.02 2.94 1.74 1.69ADML_1B_010 M Detrital 0.05 0.11 <0.02 0.82 0.5 1.53 0.33ADML_1B_024 M Detrital <0.01 0.06 <0.02 0.82 2.4 0.15 15.69ADML_1B_027 M Detrital 0.1 0.1 <0.02 0.82 0.8 3.06 0.26ADML_1B_035 M Detrital 0.05 0.18 0.03 2.45 1.9 1.53 1.24ADML_1B_036 M Detrital 0.05 0.17 0.03 2.45 0.8 1.53 0.52ADML_1B_037 M Detrital 0.02 0.06 <0.02 0.82 1.1 0.61 1.80ADML_1B_038 M Detrital <0.01 0.05 <0.02 0.82 2.1 0.15 13.73ADML_1B_040 M Detrital 0.07 0.24 <0.02 0.82 0.5 2.14 0.23ADML_1B_041 M Detrital 0.04 0.13 0.03 2.45 <0.5 1.22 0.20ADML_1B_045 M Detrital 0.06 0.11 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 1.84 0.14ADML_1B_046 M Detrital 0.06 0.26 0.05 4.08 <0.5 1.84 0.14ADML_1B_049 M Detrital 0.04 0.1 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 1.22 0.20ADML_1B_050 M Detrital 0.02 0.11 0.03 2.45 <0.5 0.61 0.41ADML_1B_051 M Detrital 0.01 0.16 0.03 2.45 1.1 0.31 3.59ADML_1B_060 M Detrital 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.31 0.82ADML_1B_061 M Detrital <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_062 M Detrital <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 2.4 0.15 15.69ADML_1B_063 M Detrital <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 1.1 0.15 7.19ADML_1B_067 M Detrital 0.01 0.06 <0.02 0.82 2.7 0.31 8.82
Where TIC, ANC or S contents were less than the laboratory limit of reporting the values used to calculate CarbNP and NPR were half the LOR.
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Acid Base Account Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Total S SO4 Total C TIC CarbNP ANC MPA NPR
Unit % mg/kg % % kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t
LOR 0.01 100 0.02 0.02ADML_1B_068 M Detrital 0.01 0.1 0.02 1.63 1.1 0.31 3.59ADML_1B_206 M Detrital 0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 3.4 0.31 11.11ADML_1B_212 M Detrital 0.04 0.14 <0.02 0.82 1.9 1.22 1.55ADML_1B_215 M Detrital 0.07 0.19 0.02 1.63 1.4 2.14 0.65ADML_1B_216 M Detrital 0.01 0.22 0.02 1.63 3.6 0.31 11.76ADML_1B_217 M Detrital 0.05 0.17 0.03 2.45 3.8 1.53 2.48ADML_1B_218 M Detrital 0.1 0.27 <0.02 0.82 2.9 3.06 0.95ADML_1B_219 M Detrital 0.08 0.11 <0.02 0.82 4.3 2.45 1.76ADML_1B_032 M Felsic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 9.4 0.15 61.44ADML_1B_033 M Felsic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 8 0.15 52.29ADML_1B_034 M Felsic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 9.9 0.15 64.71ADML_1B_257 M Felsic 0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 4.7 0.31 15.36ADML_1B_258 M Felsic 0.03 0.02 0.02 1.63 2.5 0.92 2.72ADML_1B_259 M Felsic 0.03 0.06 0.03 2.45 2.2 0.92 2.40ADML_1B_260 M Felsic 0.02 0.03 0.03 2.45 1 0.61 1.63ADML_1B_261 M Felsic 0.01 0.07 0.04 3.27 1.5 0.31 4.90ADML_1B_262 M Felsic 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2 0.31 6.54ADML_1B_265 M Felsic 0.03 0.04 0.04 3.27 1.3 0.92 1.42ADML_1B_270 M Felsic 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 0.8 0.92 0.87A13021 M Hydrated 0.053 190 0.045 0.02 1.63 <0.49 1.62 0.15A13023 M Hydrated 0.056 110 0.034 0.009 0.73 <0.49 1.71 0.15A13035 M Hydrated 0.09 370 0.137 0.057 4.65 <0.49 2.75 0.09A13053 M Hydrated 0.056 0.164 0.074 6.04 <0.49 1.71 0.15ADML_1B_043 M Hydrated <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_044 M Hydrated <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 0.5 0.15 3.27ADML_1B_048 M Hydrated <0.01 0.05 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_075 M Hydrated 0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.82 1.6 0.61 2.61ADML_1B_076 M Hydrated 0.01 0.11 <0.02 0.82 0.5 0.31 1.63ADML_1B_078 M Hydrated <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_226 M Hydrated 0.01 0.06 <0.02 0.82 2.2 0.31 7.19ADML_1B_228 M Hydrated <0.01 0.08 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_241 M Hydrated 0.01 0.05 0.02 1.63 6.7 0.31 21.90ADML_1B_242 M Hydrated <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 7.2 0.15 47.06ADML_1B_243 M Hydrated 0.47 2.09 2.06 168.16 6.4 14.38 0.45ADML_1B_244 M Hydrated 0.01 0.06 0.02 1.63 2.5 0.31 8.17ADML_1B_245 M Hydrated 0.03 1.84 1.84 150.20 7.7 0.92 8.39ADML_1B_246 M Hydrated 0.06 0.09 0.09 7.35 2.5 1.84 1.36ADML_1B_247 M Hydrated 0.16 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.2 4.90 0.25ADML_1B_248 M Hydrated <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 0.7 0.15 4.58ADML_1B_249 M Hydrated 8.56 0.15 0.03 2.45 <0.5 261.94 0.00ADML_1B_250 M Hydrated 0.2 2.82 2.77 226.12 6.9 6.12 1.13ADML_1B_251 M Hydrated 0.04 0.06 0.04 3.27 1.7 1.22 1.39ADML_1B_252 M Hydrated 0.03 0.07 0.03 2.45 2.7 0.92 2.94ADML_1B_254 M Hydrated 0.03 0.11 0.11 8.98 1.7 0.92 1.85ADML_1B_255 M Hydrated 0.02 0.05 0.05 4.08 2 0.61 3.27ADML_1B_256 M Hydrated <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 3.2 0.15 20.92ADML_1B_271 M Hydrated 0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.3 0.61 2.12ADML_1B_272 M Hydrated 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1 0.31 3.27ADML_1B_273 M Hydrated <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 <0.5 0.15 1.63A13022 M Mafic 0.022 <100 0.05 0.025 2.04 <0.49 0.67 0.37A13031 M Mafic 0.0025 0.043 0.018 1.47 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13032 M Mafic 0.0025 0.031 0.006 0.49 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13048 M Mafic 0.0025 0.042 0.017 1.39 <0.49 0.08 3.27ADML_1B_009 M Mafic <0.01 0.13 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_011 M Mafic <0.01 0.1 0.02 1.63 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_025 M Mafic <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 0.8 0.15 5.23ADML_1B_026 M Mafic 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.1 0.31 3.59ADML_1B_039 M Mafic <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 0.5 0.15 3.27ADML_1B_056 M Mafic 0.48 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 7.5 14.69 0.51ADML_1B_069 M Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 16.2 0.15 105.88ADML_1B_070 M Mafic 0.03 0.02 0.02 1.63 11.5 0.92 12.53ADML_1B_071 M Mafic 0.01 0.04 0.04 3.27 10.5 0.31 34.31ADML_1B_191 M Mafic <0.01 0.09 <0.02 0.82 8.2 0.15 53.59
Where TIC, ANC or S contents were less than the laboratory limit of reporting the values used to calculate CarbNP and NPR were half the LOR.
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Acid Base Account Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Total S SO4 Total C TIC CarbNP ANC MPA NPR
Unit % mg/kg % % kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t
LOR 0.01 100 0.02 0.02ADML_1B_200 M Mafic <0.01 0.12 <0.02 0.82 3.6 0.15 23.53ADML_1B_208 M Mafic <0.01 0.02 <0.02 0.82 3.8 0.15 24.84ADML_1B_237 M Mafic 0.14 0.08 0.06 4.90 8.9 4.28 2.08ADML_1B_238 M Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 4.2 0.15 27.45ADML_1B_008 M Ore 0.07 0.04 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 2.14 0.12ADML_1B_029 M Ore 0.07 0.04 <0.02 0.82 0.8 2.14 0.37ADML_1B_031 M Ore 0.05 0.09 <0.02 0.82 0.8 1.53 0.52ADML_1B_042 M Ore 0.01 0.09 <0.02 0.82 0.8 0.31 2.61ADML_1B_054 M Ore 0.11 0.06 <0.02 0.82 0.5 3.37 0.15ADML_1B_055 M Ore 0.1 0.03 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 3.06 0.08ADML_1B_057 M Ore 0.11 0.1 0.02 1.63 <0.5 3.37 0.07ADML_1B_064 M Ore 0.18 0.02 0.02 1.63 <0.5 5.51 0.05ADML_1B_066 M Ore 0.09 0.03 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 2.75 0.09ADML_1B_072 M Ore 0.07 0.12 0.03 2.45 0.9 2.14 0.42ADML_1B_188 M Ore <0.01 0.08 <0.02 0.82 2.2 0.15 14.38ADML_1B_189 M Ore 0.02 0.05 <0.02 0.82 1.4 0.61 2.29ADML_1B_192 M Ore 0.05 0.06 <0.02 0.82 2.4 1.53 1.57ADML_1B_209 M Ore 0.08 0.05 <0.02 0.82 3.1 2.45 1.27ADML_1B_210 M Ore 0.06 0.03 <0.02 0.82 3.6 1.84 1.96ADML_1B_030 M Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.09 <0.02 0.82 1.3 0.15 8.50ADML_1B_053 M Ore Hi Al 0.04 0.03 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 1.22 0.20ADML_1B_058 M Ore Hi Al 0.02 0.1 0.02 1.63 <0.5 0.61 0.41ADML_1B_190 M Ore Hi Al 0.05 0.03 <0.02 0.82 4.1 1.53 2.68ADML_1B_194 M Ore Hi Al 0.09 0.24 0.03 2.45 3.4 2.75 1.23ADML_1B_195 M Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.19 0.07 5.71 3.6 0.15 23.53ADML_1B_198 M Ore Hi Al 0.05 0.03 <0.02 0.82 2.4 1.53 1.57ADML_1B_202 M Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.19 <0.02 0.82 2.7 0.15 17.65ADML_1B_231 M Ore Hi Al 0.02 0.07 <0.02 0.82 1.7 0.61 2.78ADML_1B_234 M Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.08 <0.02 0.82 3 0.15 19.61ADML_1B_235 M Ore Hi Al 0.08 0.1 <0.02 0.82 1.8 2.45 0.74ADML_1B_236 M Ore Hi Al 0.02 0.14 <0.02 0.82 1.4 0.61 2.29ADML_1B_013 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.08 0.26 0.05 4.08 2.3 2.45 0.94ADML_1B_020 M Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_028 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.1 0.05 <0.02 0.82 1.1 3.06 0.36ADML_1B_052 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.01 0.07 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.31 0.82ADML_1B_059 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 <0.5 0.31 0.82ADML_1B_065 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.08 0.03 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 2.45 0.10ADML_1B_073 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.08 0.05 <0.02 0.82 1.6 2.45 0.65ADML_1B_196 M Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.07 <0.02 0.82 2.4 0.15 15.69ADML_1B_199 M Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 1.2 0.15 7.84ADML_1B_201 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.04 0.14 <0.02 0.82 1.9 1.22 1.55ADML_1B_203 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.03 0.03 <0.02 0.82 1.9 0.92 2.07ADML_1B_207 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.02 0.25 0.05 4.08 2.4 0.61 3.92ADML_1B_230 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.08 0.03 <0.02 0.82 1.4 2.45 0.57ADML_1B_232 M Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.05 <0.02 0.82 0.6 0.15 3.92ADML_1B_233 M Ore Hi SiO2 0.1 0.13 <0.02 0.82 0.6 3.06 0.20A13026 M Shale 1.17 1.07 1.045 85.30 47.04 35.80 1.31A13027 M Shale 1.3 3.78 3.755 306.52 117.6 39.78 2.96A13038 M Shale 1.14 1.92 1.895 154.69 117.6 34.88 3.37A13039 M Shale 1.87 2.52 2.495 203.67 127.4 57.22 2.23A13058 M Shale 0.0025 0.009 -0.016 0.00 <0.49 0.08 3.27ADML_1B_274 M Shale 3.18 0.05 <0.02 0.82 5.3 97.31 0.05ADML_1B_275 M Shale 0.4 0.04 0.04 3.27 5.6 12.24 0.46ADML_1B_276 M Shale 2.97 0.06 <0.02 0.82 4.8 90.88 0.05ADML_1B_277 M Shale 2.04 0.05 <0.02 0.82 4.8 62.42 0.08ADML_1B_280 M Shale 23.8 0.1 0.02 1.63 <0.5 728.28 0.00ADML_1B_281 M Shale 0.09 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 6.9 2.75 2.51ADML_1B_282 M Shale 0.39 0.71 0.61 49.79 2.5 11.93 0.21ADML_1B_283 M Shale <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.3 0.15 15.03ADML_1B_284 M Shale 0.07 0.02 0.02 1.63 2.3 2.14 1.07ADML_1B_285 M Shale <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 3 0.15 19.61ADML_1B_286 M Shale 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.5 0.92 2.72ADML_1B_287 M Shale 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.8 0.31 9.15
Where TIC, ANC or S contents were less than the laboratory limit of reporting the values used to calculate CarbNP and NPR were half the LOR.
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Acid Base Account Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Total S SO4 Total C TIC CarbNP ANC MPA NPR
Unit % mg/kg % % kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t
LOR 0.01 100 0.02 0.02ADML_1B_288 M Shale <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.5 0.15 9.80ADML_1B_289 M Shale 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.3 0.31 7.52A13003 B BIF 0.009 0.014 -0.011 0.00 <0.49 0.28 0.91A13004 B BIF 0.01 0.018 -0.007 0.00 <0.49 0.31 0.82A13005 B BIF 0.006 <100 0.036 0.011 0.90 <0.49 0.18 1.36A13006 B BIF 0.0025 0.048 0.023 1.88 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13011 B BIF 0.0025 0.006 -0.019 0.00 4.9 0.08 64.05A13013 B BIF 0.0025 1.46 1.435 117.14 98 0.08 1281.05A13014 B BIF 0.007 1.13 1.105 90.20 91.14 0.21 425.49A13015 B BIF 0.008 1.86 1.835 149.79 117.6 0.24 480.39A13016 B BIF 0.474 0.647 0.622 50.77 47.04 14.50 3.24A13042 B BIF 0.0025 0.528 0.503 41.06 40.18 0.08 525.23A13043 B BIF 0.0025 1.1 1.075 87.75 88.2 0.08 1152.94A13044 B BIF 0.0025 0.044 0.019 1.55 <0.49 0.08 3.27ADML_1B_083 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_084 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.1 0.15 7.19ADML_1B_098 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 0.9 0.15 5.88ADML_1B_100 B BIF <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 0.7 0.15 4.58ADML_1B_107 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.2 0.15 7.84ADML_1B_130 B BIF <0.01 0.31 0.27 22.04 28.6 0.15 186.93ADML_1B_138 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 0.7 0.15 4.58ADML_1B_138 B BIF 0.07 0.03 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 2.14 0.12ADML_1B_149 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 11.6 0.15 75.82ADML_1B_156 B BIF <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 13.6 0.15 88.89ADML_1B_174 B BIF <0.01 6.29 6.26 511.00 67.7 0.15 442.48ADML_1B_185 B BIF 0.02 0.03 <0.02 0.82 1.4 0.61 2.29ADML_1B_186 B BIF <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 1.9 0.15 12.42ADML_1B_197 B BIF <0.01 0.1 <0.02 0.82 3.4 0.15 22.22ADML_1B_221 B BIF <0.01 0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.3 0.15 15.03A13001 B Mafic 0.023 <100 0.141 0.041 3.35 0.98 0.70 1.39A13002 B Mafic 0.008 0.093 0.013 1.06 <0.49 0.24 1.02A13007 B Mafic 0.0025 0.016 -0.009 0.00 4.9 0.08 64.05A13008 B Mafic 0.0025 0.006 -0.019 0.00 6.86 0.08 89.67A13009 B Mafic 0.0025 0.009 -0.016 0.00 <0.49 0.08 3.27A13010 B Mafic 0.0025 0.033 0.008 0.65 14.7 0.08 192.16A13012 B Mafic 0.0025 0.005 -0.02 0.00 22.54 0.08 294.64A13017 B Mafic 0.015 0.154 0.129 10.53 38.22 0.46 83.27A13018 B Mafic 0.064 0.128 0.103 8.41 32.34 1.96 16.51A13040 B Mafic 0.0025 0.047 0.022 1.80 3.92 0.08 51.24A13041 B Mafic 0.0025 0.034 0.009 0.73 12.74 0.08 166.54A13045 B Mafic 0.0025 0.089 0.064 5.22 20.58 0.08 269.02A13046 B Mafic 0.045 0.036 0.011 0.90 29.4 1.38 21.35ADML_1B_006 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 5.2 0.15 33.99ADML_1B_007 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 3.8 0.15 24.84ADML_1B_079 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_080 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 7.8 0.15 50.98ADML_1B_081 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.8 0.15 18.30ADML_1B_082 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 4.3 0.15 28.10ADML_1B_085 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 12.5 0.15 81.70ADML_1B_086 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 19.7 0.15 128.76ADML_1B_087 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 3.2 0.15 20.92ADML_1B_088 B Mafic 0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 22 0.61 35.95ADML_1B_089 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 14.6 0.15 95.42ADML_1B_090 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 20.2 0.15 132.03ADML_1B_091 B Mafic 0.02 0.04 0.04 3.27 18.2 0.61 29.74ADML_1B_092 B Mafic <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 5.7 0.15 37.25ADML_1B_093 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 11.2 0.15 73.20ADML_1B_094 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.6 0.15 69.28ADML_1B_095 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 16.9 0.15 110.46ADML_1B_096 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_097 B Mafic <0.01 0.1 0.1 8.16 1.9 0.15 12.42ADML_1B_103 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 5.7 0.15 37.25ADML_1B_104 B Mafic <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 12.4 0.15 81.05
Where TIC, ANC or S contents were less than the laboratory limit of reporting the values used to calculate CarbNP and NPR were half the LOR.
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Acid Base Account Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Total S SO4 Total C TIC CarbNP ANC MPA NPR
Unit % mg/kg % % kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t
LOR 0.01 100 0.02 0.02ADML_1B_105 B Mafic <0.01 0.4 0.4 32.65 35.3 0.15 230.72ADML_1B_106 B Mafic <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 2.5 0.15 16.34ADML_1B_108 B Mafic <0.01 0.1 <0.02 0.82 1.8 0.15 11.76ADML_1B_112 B Mafic <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 7.2 0.15 47.06ADML_1B_113 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 14.9 0.15 97.39ADML_1B_114 B Mafic <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 12.5 0.15 81.70ADML_1B_116 B Mafic <0.01 0.09 0.07 5.71 11.6 0.15 75.82ADML_1B_117 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 13.1 0.15 85.62ADML_1B_119 B Mafic 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 8.4 0.31 27.45ADML_1B_120 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.5 0.15 68.63ADML_1B_121 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.6 0.15 69.28ADML_1B_122 B Mafic 0.04 0.09 0.09 7.35 12.7 1.22 10.38ADML_1B_123 B Mafic <0.01 0.2 0.16 13.06 18.9 0.15 123.53ADML_1B_124 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.6 0.15 69.28ADML_1B_126 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 14 0.15 91.50ADML_1B_128 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 18.3 0.15 119.61ADML_1B_129 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 4.3 0.15 28.10ADML_1B_131 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 15.4 0.15 100.65ADML_1B_132 B Mafic <0.01 0.12 0.12 9.80 22.7 0.15 148.37ADML_1B_133 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.3 0.15 67.32ADML_1B_134 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 13.6 0.15 88.89ADML_1B_135 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 7.3 0.15 47.71ADML_1B_136 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 9.8 0.15 64.05ADML_1B_137 B Mafic 0.36 0.03 0.03 2.45 0.6 11.02 0.05ADML_1B_139 B Mafic 0.02 0.74 0.64 52.24 61.8 0.61 100.98ADML_1B_140 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.2 0.15 7.84ADML_1B_141 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 11.1 0.15 72.55ADML_1B_142 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 12.5 0.15 81.70ADML_1B_143 B Mafic <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 1 0.15 6.54ADML_1B_144 B Mafic <0.01 0.06 <0.02 0.82 1.4 0.15 9.15ADML_1B_146 B Mafic <0.01 0.02 <0.02 0.82 0.7 0.15 4.58ADML_1B_150 B Mafic 0.06 0.02 0.02 1.63 11.8 1.84 6.43ADML_1B_151 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.8 0.15 70.59ADML_1B_152 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 16 0.15 104.58ADML_1B_153 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 9.6 0.15 62.75ADML_1B_154 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 3.9 0.15 25.49ADML_1B_155 B Mafic <0.01 0.08 0.08 6.53 9.6 0.15 62.75ADML_1B_157 B Mafic <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 10.3 0.15 67.32ADML_1B_158 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 11 0.15 71.90ADML_1B_159 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 2.7 0.15 17.65ADML_1B_160 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 11.5 0.15 75.16ADML_1B_161 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 10.9 0.15 71.24ADML_1B_162 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 6.2 0.15 40.52ADML_1B_163 B Mafic <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 3.8 0.15 24.84ADML_1B_164 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 12.7 0.15 83.01ADML_1B_167 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 13.1 0.15 85.62ADML_1B_168 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 6.8 0.15 44.44ADML_1B_169 B Mafic <0.01 0.02 <0.02 0.82 4.4 0.15 28.76ADML_1B_175 B Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 8.2 0.15 53.59ADML_1B_005 B Mafic <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 1.9 0.15 12.42ADML_1B_179 B Magnetite 0.02 2.12 2.12 173.06 90.6 0.61 148.04ADML_1B_180 B Magnetite <0.01 0.73 0.73 59.59 91.8 0.15 600.00ADML_1B_181 B Magnetite <0.01 1.55 1.55 126.53 96.7 0.15 632.03ADML_1B_222 B Magnetite <0.01 2.71 2.71 221.22 193 0.15 1261.44ADML_1B_002 B Ore <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_102 B Ore <0.01 0.06 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_109 B Ore 0.02 0.03 <0.02 0.82 1.8 0.61 2.94ADML_1B_111 B Ore <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 1.9 0.15 12.42ADML_1B_115 B Ore 0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.2 0.61 1.96ADML_1B_118 B Ore <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 1.7 0.15 11.11ADML_1B_125 B Ore <0.01 1.49 1.47 120.00 117 0.15 764.71ADML_1B_147 B Ore <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 12.3 0.15 80.39ADML_1B_171 B Ore <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 5.3 0.15 34.64
Where TIC, ANC or S contents were less than the laboratory limit of reporting the values used to calculate CarbNP and NPR were half the LOR.
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Acid Base Account Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Total S SO4 Total C TIC CarbNP ANC MPA NPR
Unit % mg/kg % % kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t kg(H2SO4)/t
LOR 0.01 100 0.02 0.02ADML_1B_173 B Ore <0.01 0.02 <0.02 0.82 42.3 0.15 276.47ADML_1B_177 B Ore <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 3.2 0.15 20.92ADML_1B_178 B Ore <0.01 0.13 0.13 10.61 55.6 0.15 363.40ADML_1B_224 B Ore <0.01 0.1 <0.02 0.82 3.1 0.15 20.26ADML_1B_110 B Ore Hi Al 0.12 0.09 0.05 4.08 5.5 3.67 1.50ADML_1B_127 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.04 0.02 1.63 5.6 0.15 36.60ADML_1B_145 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.09 <0.02 0.82 0.7 0.15 4.58ADML_1B_145 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.02 0.02 1.63 <0.5 0.15 1.63ADML_1B_172 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.04 0.04 3.27 4.4 0.15 28.76ADML_1B_182 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.05 <0.02 0.82 3.9 0.15 25.49ADML_1B_183 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 4.4 0.15 28.76ADML_1B_184 B Ore Hi Al <0.01 0.34 0.24 19.59 10.7 0.15 69.93ADML_1B_278 B Ore Hi Al 0.05 0.12 0.03 2.45 2.3 1.53 1.50ADML_1B_279 B Ore Hi Al 0.06 0.16 0.04 3.27 4.1 1.84 2.23ADML_1B_003 B Ore Hi SiO2 0.19 2.22 2.22 181.22 168 5.81 28.90ADML_1B_004 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.11 0.07 5.71 4.9 0.15 32.03ADML_1B_099 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.03 0.03 2.45 1.5 0.15 9.80ADML_1B_101 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.04 <0.02 0.82 0.6 0.15 3.92ADML_1B_148 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.04 0.04 3.27 11.2 0.15 73.20ADML_1B_170 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.24 0.03 2.45 4.7 0.15 30.72ADML_1B_176 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 1.53 1.5 122.45 65.2 0.15 426.14ADML_1B_220 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 2.9 0.15 18.95ADML_1B_223 B Ore Hi SiO2 <0.01 0.03 <0.02 0.82 4.4 0.15 28.76ADML_1B_001 Mafic <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.82 <0.5 0.15 1.63
Where TIC, ANC or S contents were less than the laboratory limit of reporting the values used to calculate CarbNP and NPR were half the LOR.
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 5
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendix 5: Net Acid Generation (NAG) Test Results
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Net Acid Generation (NAG) Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Sample Type NAGpH NAG [pH 4.5] NAG [pH 7.0] MPA B - Beebyn pH Unit kg H2SO4/t kg H2SO4/t kg(H2SO4)/tM- Madoonga 0.1
A13020 M BIF DD 6.3 <0.5 <0.5 0.21A13024 M BIF DD 7.7 <0.5 <0.5 2.57A13025 M BIF DD 7.7 <0.5 <0.5 1.90A13028 M BIF DD 7.9 <0.5 <0.5 3.55A13029 M BIF DD 7 <0.5 <0.5 8.17A13033 M BIF DD 5.3 <0.5 <0.5 0.08A13034 M BIF DD 6.1 <0.5 <0.5 3.43A13036 M BIF DD 8.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.61A13037 M BIF DD 3 2 5 18.94A13049 M BIF DD 6 <0.5 <0.5 1.68A13050 M BIF DD 5.7 <0.5 <0.5 1.56A13051 M BIF DD 4.8 <0.5 <0.5 0.08A13052 M BIF DD 4.7 <0.5 <0.5 2.94A13054 M BIF DD 5 <0.5 <0.5 0.24A13055 M BIF DD 4.6 <0.5 <0.5 0.08A13056 M BIF DD 2.9 1 3 2.72A13057 M BIF DD 2.3 5 7 6.98A13059 M BIF DD 1.9 14 17 23.81
ADML_1B_012 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_014 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_015 M BIF DD 7.2 <0.1 <0.1 4.90ADML_1B_016 M BIF DD 4.1 <0.1 2.1 1.53ADML_1B_017 M BIF DD 6.9 <0.1 0.2 3.06ADML_1B_018 M BIF DD 5.8 <0.1 1.2 0.15ADML_1B_019 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_021 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.92ADML_1B_022 M BIF DD 5.6 <0.1 1.4 0.31ADML_1B_023 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_047 M BIF DD 5.4 <0.1 1.1 0.15ADML_1B_074 M BIF DD 6.7 <0.1 0.2 0.15ADML_1B_077 M BIF DD 8.8 <0.1 <0.1 0.31ADML_1B_187 M BIF DD 5 <0.1 1 0.15ADML_1B_193 M BIF DD 5.8 <0.1 0.4 0.15ADML_1B_204 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_205 M BIF DD 5 <0.1 1.8 0.15ADML_1B_211 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_213 M BIF Surface sample --- --- --- 0.31ADML_1B_214 M BIF Surface sample --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_225 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_227 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_229 M BIF DD --- --- --- 0.15
A13019 M Detrital DD 5.3 <0.5 <0.5 1.99A13030 M Detrital DD 5.3 <0.5 <0.5 0.34A13047 M Detrital DD 5.7 <0.5 <0.5 1.74
ADML_1B_010 M Detrital DD 6.2 <0.1 1.4 1.53ADML_1B_024 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_027 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 3.06ADML_1B_035 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 1.53ADML_1B_036 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 1.53ADML_1B_037 M Detrital DD 5.8 <0.1 0.6 0.61ADML_1B_038 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_040 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 2.14ADML_1B_041 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 1.22ADML_1B_045 M Detrital DD 5.3 <0.1 1 1.84ADML_1B_046 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 1.84ADML_1B_049 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 1.22ADML_1B_050 M Detrital DD --- --- --- 0.61
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Net Acid Generation (NAG) Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Sample Type NAGpH NAG [pH 4.5] NAG [pH 7.0] MPA B - Beebyn pH Unit kg H2SO4/t kg H2SO4/t kg(H2SO4)/tM- Madoonga 0.1
A13048 M Mafic DD 5 <0.5 <0.5 0.08ADML_1B_009 M Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_011 M Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_025 M Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_026 M Mafic DD 6.4 <0.1 0.2 0.31ADML_1B_039 M Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_056 M Mafic DD 3.3 7 16.3 14.69ADML_1B_069 M Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_070 M Mafic DD 7.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.92ADML_1B_071 M Mafic DD 7.3 <0.1 <0.1 0.31ADML_1B_191 M Mafic DD 8 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_200 M Mafic DD 5.7 <0.1 0.8 0.15ADML_1B_208 M Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_237 M Mafic DD 5.5 <0.1 0.4 4.28ADML_1B_238 M Mafic DD 6.6 <0.1 0.4 0.15ADML_1B_008 M Ore DD 6.9 <0.1 0.4 2.14ADML_1B_029 M Ore DD --- --- --- 2.14ADML_1B_031 M Ore DD --- --- --- 1.53ADML_1B_042 M Ore DD 6.9 <0.1 0.4 0.31ADML_1B_054 M Ore DD --- --- --- 3.37ADML_1B_055 M Ore DD --- --- --- 3.06ADML_1B_057 M Ore DD --- --- --- 3.37ADML_1B_064 M Ore DD --- --- --- 5.51ADML_1B_066 M Ore DD 6.9 <0.1 0.1 2.75ADML_1B_072 M Ore DD --- --- --- 2.14ADML_1B_188 M Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_189 M Ore DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_192 M Ore DD --- --- --- 1.53ADML_1B_209 M Ore DD --- --- --- 2.45ADML_1B_210 M Ore DD 7 <0.1 <0.1 1.84ADML_1B_030 M Ore Hi Al DD 3.7 0.2 1.6 0.15ADML_1B_053 M Ore Hi Al DD 6.4 <0.1 1.2 1.22ADML_1B_058 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_190 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 1.53ADML_1B_194 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 2.75ADML_1B_195 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_198 M Ore Hi Al DD 6.6 <0.1 0.4 1.53ADML_1B_202 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_231 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_234 M Ore Hi Al DD 6.8 <0.1 0.4 0.15ADML_1B_235 M Ore Hi Al DD 6.4 <0.1 1.8 2.45ADML_1B_236 M Ore Hi Al DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_013 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 2.45ADML_1B_020 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_028 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 3.06ADML_1B_052 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.31ADML_1B_059 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.31ADML_1B_065 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 2.45ADML_1B_073 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 2.45ADML_1B_196 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_199 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_201 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 1.22ADML_1B_203 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD 6.8 <0.1 0.2 0.92ADML_1B_207 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_230 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 2.45ADML_1B_232 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_233 M Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 3.06
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Net Acid Generation (NAG) Test Results
SMC Sample ID Zone Domain ID Sample Type NAGpH NAG [pH 4.5] NAG [pH 7.0] MPA B - Beebyn pH Unit kg H2SO4/t kg H2SO4/t kg(H2SO4)/tM- Madoonga 0.1
ADML_1B_157 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_158 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_159 B Mafic DD 6.1 <0.1 0.6 0.15ADML_1B_160 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_161 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_162 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_163 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_164 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_167 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_168 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_169 B Mafic DD 5.6 <0.1 5.8 0.15ADML_1B_175 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_005 B Mafic DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_179 B Magnetite DD 9 <0.1 <0.1 0.61ADML_1B_180 B Magnetite DD 8.6 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_181 B Magnetite DD 8.6 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_222 B Magnetite DD 6.3 <0.1 0.4 0.15ADML_1B_002 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_102 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_109 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.61ADML_1B_111 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_115 B Ore DD 5.5 <0.1 0.8 0.61ADML_1B_118 B Ore DD 6.8 <0.1 0.3 0.15ADML_1B_125 B Ore DD 11.3 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_147 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_171 B Ore DD 5.3 <0.1 0.7 0.15ADML_1B_173 B Ore DD 6.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_177 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_178 B Ore DD 7.9 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_224 B Ore DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_110 B Ore Hi Al DD 8 <0.1 <0.1 3.67ADML_1B_127 B Ore Hi Al DD 8 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_145 B Ore Hi Al DD 0 0 0 0.15ADML_1B_145 B Ore Hi Al DD 6.5 <0.1 0.2 0.15ADML_1B_172 B Ore Hi Al DD 5.3 <0.1 1.7 0.15ADML_1B_182 B Ore Hi Al DD 6.6 <0.1 0.5 0.15ADML_1B_183 B Ore Hi Al DD 7.4 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_184 B Ore Hi Al DD 7.4 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_278 B Ore Hi Al RC 4.9 <0.1 1.9 1.53ADML_1B_279 B Ore Hi Al RC 5.9 <0.1 1 1.84ADML_1B_003 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 5.81ADML_1B_004 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_099 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD 5.3 <0.1 <0.1 0.15ADML_1B_101 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_148 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_170 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_176 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_220 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_223 B Ore Hi SiO2 DD --- --- --- 0.15ADML_1B_001 Mafic DD 5 <0.1 0.8 0.15
SMC Sample ID Domain IDA13020 M BIF 3A13024 M BIF 2A13025 M BIF 2A13028 M BIF 1 1A13029 M BIF 2 2A13033 M BIF 1A13034 M BIF 3A13036 M BIF 1 1A13037 M BIF 2 1 1A13049 M BIF 3 1A13050 M BIF 2A13051 M BIFA13052 M BIF 3A13054 M BIF 3A13055 M BIF 3A13056 M BIF 2A13057 M BIF 2A13059 M BIF 5 1 1 1ADML_1B_012 M BIF 2ADML_1B_014 M BIF 2ADML_1B_015 M BIF 2ADML_1B_016 M BIF 1ADML_1B_017 M BIF 1ADML_1B_018 M BIF 2ADML_1B_019 M BIF 1ADML_1B_021 M BIF 1ADML_1B_022 M BIF 1ADML_1B_023 M BIF 2ADML_1B_047 M BIF 1ADML_1B_074 M BIFADML_1B_077 M BIF 1ADML_1B_187 M BIFADML_1B_193 M BIFADML_1B_204 M BIFADML_1B_205 M BIF 1ADML_1B_211 M BIFADML_1B_213 M BIF 2ADML_1B_214 M BIF 2ADML_1B_225 M BIFADML_1B_227 M BIF 2ADML_1B_229 M BIFA13019 M Detrital 3A13030 M Detrital 3A13047 M Detrital 3 1ADML_1B_010 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_024 M Detrital 1ADML_1B_027 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_035 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_036 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_037 M Detrital 1
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
SMC Sample ID Domain IDADML_1B_038 M Detrital 1ADML_1B_040 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_041 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_045 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_046 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_049 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_050 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_051 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_060 M Detrital 1ADML_1B_061 M Detrital 1ADML_1B_062 M Detrital 1ADML_1B_063 M Detrital 1ADML_1B_067 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_068 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_206 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_212 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_215 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_216 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_217 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_218 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_219 M Detrital 2ADML_1B_032 M FelsicADML_1B_033 M FelsicADML_1B_034 M FelsicADML_1B_257 M FelsicADML_1B_258 M FelsicADML_1B_259 M FelsicADML_1B_260 M FelsicADML_1B_261 M FelsicADML_1B_262 M FelsicADML_1B_265 M FelsicADML_1B_270 M FelsicA13021 M Hydrated 3A13023 M Hydrated 3A13035 M Hydrated 3A13053 M Hydrated 2ADML_1B_043 M HydratedADML_1B_044 M HydratedADML_1B_048 M Hydrated 2ADML_1B_075 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_076 M HydratedADML_1B_078 M Hydrated 2ADML_1B_226 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_228 M HydratedADML_1B_241 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_242 M HydratedADML_1B_243 M Hydrated 2ADML_1B_244 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_245 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_246 M Hydrated
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
SMC Sample ID Domain IDADML_1B_247 M Hydrated 2ADML_1B_248 M HydratedADML_1B_249 M Hydrated 1 4ADML_1B_250 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_251 M HydratedADML_1B_252 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_254 M Hydrated 2ADML_1B_255 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_256 M HydratedADML_1B_271 M HydratedADML_1B_272 M Hydrated 1ADML_1B_273 M Hydrated 1A13022 M Mafic 3A13031 M Mafic 1A13032 M Mafic 1A13048 M Mafic 2ADML_1B_009 M Mafic 1ADML_1B_011 M MaficADML_1B_025 M Mafic 1ADML_1B_026 M MaficADML_1B_039 M Mafic 2ADML_1B_056 M Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_069 M Mafic 1ADML_1B_070 M Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_071 M Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_191 M Mafic 1 1 1ADML_1B_200 M Mafic 2ADML_1B_208 M MaficADML_1B_237 M Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_238 M MaficADML_1B_008 M Ore 2ADML_1B_029 M Ore 2ADML_1B_031 M Ore 2ADML_1B_042 M Ore 2ADML_1B_054 M Ore 2ADML_1B_055 M Ore 2ADML_1B_057 M Ore 2ADML_1B_064 M Ore 2ADML_1B_066 M Ore 2ADML_1B_072 M Ore 2ADML_1B_188 M Ore 2ADML_1B_189 M Ore 2ADML_1B_192 M Ore 2ADML_1B_209 M Ore 2ADML_1B_210 M Ore 2ADML_1B_030 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_053 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_058 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_190 M Ore Hi Al 2 1ADML_1B_194 M Ore Hi Al 2
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
SMC Sample ID Domain IDADML_1B_195 M Ore Hi Al 2 2ADML_1B_198 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_202 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_231 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_234 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_235 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_236 M Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_013 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_020 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_028 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_052 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_059 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_065 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_073 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_196 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_199 M Ore Hi SiO2 1ADML_1B_201 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_203 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_207 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_230 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_232 M Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_233 M Ore Hi SiO2 2A13026 M Shale 1A13027 M Shale 1 1 2A13038 M Shale 1A13039 M Shale 2A13058 M ShaleADML_1B_274 M Shale 3ADML_1B_275 M ShaleADML_1B_276 M Shale 2ADML_1B_277 M Shale 1 2ADML_1B_280 M Shale 1ADML_1B_281 M Shale 1 1ADML_1B_282 M Shale 1ADML_1B_283 M ShaleADML_1B_284 M ShaleADML_1B_285 M Shale 1ADML_1B_286 M Shale 1ADML_1B_287 M Shale 1ADML_1B_288 M Shale 1A13003 B BIF 2A13004 B BIF 2A13005 B BIF 3A13006 B BIF 3A13011 B BIF 3A13013 B BIF 3A13014 B BIF 3A13015 B BIF 3A13016 B BIF 3A13042 B BIF 3
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
SMC Sample ID Domain IDA13043 B BIF 3A13044 B BIF 3ADML_1B_083 B BIF 2ADML_1B_084 B BIF 2ADML_1B_098 B BIF 2ADML_1B_100 B BIF 2ADML_1B_107 B BIF 2ADML_1B_130 B BIF 2ADML_1B_138 B BIF 2ADML_1B_138 B BIFADML_1B_149 B BIFADML_1B_156 B BIF 1ADML_1B_174 B BIF 2 1ADML_1B_185 B BIF 2ADML_1B_186 B BIF 2ADML_1B_197 B BIF 2ADML_1B_221 B BIF 2A13001 B MaficA13002 B Mafic 1A13007 B Mafic 1A13008 B MaficA13009 B Mafic 1A13010 B Mafic 1 2 2A13012 B Mafic 1 2A13017 B Mafic 1 2A13018 B Mafic 1A13040 B Mafic 1 2A13041 B Mafic 1 2A13045 B Mafic 1 2A13046 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_006 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_007 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_079 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_080 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_081 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_082 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_085 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_086 B MaficADML_1B_087 B MaficADML_1B_088 B MaficADML_1B_089 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_090 B Mafic 1 2ADML_1B_091 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_092 B MaficADML_1B_093 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_094 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_095 B MaficADML_1B_096 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_097 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_103 B Mafic 1
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
SMC Sample ID Domain IDADML_1B_104 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_105 B MaficADML_1B_106 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_108 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_112 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_113 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_114 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_116 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_117 B Mafic 1 1ADML_1B_119 B MaficADML_1B_120 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_121 B MaficADML_1B_122 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_123 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_124 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_126 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_128 B Mafic 1 2ADML_1B_129 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_131 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_132 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_133 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_134 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_135 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_136 B MaficADML_1B_137 B MaficADML_1B_139 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_140 B MaficADML_1B_141 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_142 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_143 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_144 B Mafic 2 1ADML_1B_146 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_150 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_151 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_152 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_153 B MaficADML_1B_154 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_155 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_157 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_158 B MaficADML_1B_159 B MaficADML_1B_160 B MaficADML_1B_161 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_162 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_163 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_164 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_167 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_168 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_169 B Mafic 2ADML_1B_175 B Mafic 1 1
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
SMC Sample ID Domain IDADML_1B_005 B Mafic 1ADML_1B_179 B Magnetite 2ADML_1B_180 B Magnetite 3ADML_1B_181 B Magnetite 2ADML_1B_222 B Magnetite 2ADML_1B_002 B Ore 2ADML_1B_102 B Ore 2ADML_1B_109 B Ore 2ADML_1B_111 B Ore 2ADML_1B_115 B Ore 2ADML_1B_118 B Ore 2ADML_1B_125 B Ore 2ADML_1B_147 B Ore 1ADML_1B_171 B Ore 2ADML_1B_173 B Ore 2ADML_1B_177 B Ore 2ADML_1B_178 B Ore 2ADML_1B_224 B Ore 2ADML_1B_110 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_127 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_145 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_145 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_172 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_182 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_183 B Ore Hi Al 2 3ADML_1B_184 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_278 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_279 B Ore Hi Al 2ADML_1B_003 B Ore Hi SiO2 3ADML_1B_004 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_099 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_101 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_148 B Ore Hi SiO2 1 1ADML_1B_170 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_176 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_220 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_223 B Ore Hi SiO2 2ADML_1B_001 Mafic 1
SRK Consulting Geochemical Characterisation of Waste and Mineralised Rock; Static and Kinetic Testing Appendix 9
GARV/CHAP/kami/dick SMM004_ENV_RP_2_Rev1.docx March 2011
Appendix 9: Global Abundance Indices (Minor Elements)
SRK ConsultingSMM001_Geochemical Characterisation of Weld Range Waste and Mineralised Rock
Minor Element GAI
Zone Analyte Ag As Be Cd Co Cr Cs Cu Ga Ge Hf Hg In La Li Nb Ni
:Project ---- QC Level : NEPM 1999 Schedule B(3) and ALS QCS3 requirement
:Order number ----
:C-O-C number ---- Date Samples Received : 20-FEB-2009
Sampler : ---- Issue Date : 18-MAR-2009
Site : ----
30:No. of samples received
Quote number : BN/012/09 V2 28:No. of samples analysed
This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted. All pages of this report have been checked and approved for
release.
This Certificate of Analysis contains the following information:
l General Comments
l Analytical Results
NATA Accredited Laboratory 825
This document is issued in
accordance with NATA
accreditation requirements.
Accredited for compliance with
ISO/IEC 17025.
SignatoriesThis document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories indicated below. Electronic signing has been
carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.
The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house
developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by client request.
Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.
Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insuffient sample for analysis.
Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.
When date(s) and/or time(s) are shown bracketed, these have been assumed by the laboratory for processing purposes. If the sampling time is displayed as 0:00 the information was not provided by client.
CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.
LOR = Limit of reporting
^ = This result is computed from individual analyte detections at or above the level of reporting
Key :
All results reported in mg/L and the pH under EA005, have been determined on a 1:3 soil to DI water leachate, tumbled end over end for 24 hours.l
EA011S (Sequential Net Acid Generation): Both samples were stopped after stage 1 as the NAG at pH 7 was <2 kg H2SO4/t.l
LCS recovery for Sulphate as SO4- Total (ED040T) fall outside Dynamic Control Limits. They are however within ALS Static Control Limits and hence deemed acceptable.l
3 of 24:Page
Work Order :
:Client
EB0902908
SRK CONSULTING (AUSTRALASIA) PTY LTD
----:Project
Analytical Results
A13019
WRRD0524 9-11
A13050B
WRRD0525 152-154
A13050
WRRD0525 152-154
A13013B
WRRD0488 121-123
A13013
WRRD0488 121-123
Client sample IDSub-Matrix: DI WATER LEACHATE
11-MAR-2009 11:2311-MAR-2009 11:2311-MAR-2009 11:2311-MAR-2009 11:2311-MAR-2009 11:23Client sampling date / time
:Project ---- QC Level : NEPM 1999 Schedule B(3) and ALS QCS3 requirement
:Order number PO 3392
:C-O-C number ---- Date Samples Received : 20-NOV-2009
Sampler : ---- Issue Date : 18-DEC-2009
Site : ----
36:No. of samples received
Quote number : BN/180/09 34:No. of samples analysed
This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted. All pages of this report have been checked and approved for
release.
This Certificate of Analysis contains the following information:
l General Comments
l Analytical Results
NATA Accredited Laboratory 825
This document is issued in
accordance with NATA
accreditation requirements.
Accredited for compliance with
ISO/IEC 17025.
SignatoriesThis document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories indicated below. Electronic signing has been
carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.
Signatories Accreditation CategoryPosition
Kim McCabe Senior Inorganic Chemist Inorganics
Stephen Hislop Senior Inorganic Chemist Inorganics
The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house
developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by client request.
Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.
Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insuffient sample for analysis.
Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.
When date(s) and/or time(s) are shown bracketed, these have been assumed by the laboratory for processing purposes. If the sampling time is displayed as 0:00 the information was not provided by client.
CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.
LOR = Limit of reporting
^ = This result is computed from individual analyte detections at or above the level of reporting
Key :
All leachate analytical results reported in mg/l have been determined on a 1:3 solid/water leach that has been tumbled end over end for 24 hours before analysis.l
ED045G (Chloride): LCS recovery falls outside Dynamic Control Limits. It is however within ALS Static Control Limits and hence deemed acceptable.l
LCS recovery for EG020A-W (Water Leachable Metals) fall outside Dynamic Control Limits for Antimony, Silver and Strontium. They are however within ALS Static Control Limits and
hence deemed acceptable. No further action is required.