Technical Report on the Lac Knife Graphite Project Submitted to: Focus Metals Inc. Prepared by: Guy Saucier, ing. Roche Ltd, Consulting Group Edward Lyons, P. Geo. Tekhne Research Florent Baril, ing. Bumigeme Inc. NI 43-101 Report Ref. : 061975.001-200 Effective Date : December5, 2011 Issue Date: January 18, 2012
87
Embed
NI 43-101 Report - focusgraphite.com · 14) I graduated with a Bachelor of Science (Honours) degree in Geology from the University of Missouri at Rolla located at Rolla, Missouri
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
Technical Report on the
Lac Knife Graphite Project
Submitted to:Focus Metals Inc.
Prepared by:
Guy Saucier, ing.Roche Ltd, Consulting Group
Edward Lyons, P. Geo.Tekhne Research
Florent Baril, ing.Bumigeme Inc.
NI 43-101 Report
Ref. : 061975.001-200
Effective Date : December5, 2011
Issue Date: January 18, 2012
NI 43-101 Report
Technical Report on the Lac Knife Graphite Project
Roche's Ref.: 061975.001-200
Submitted to:
Focus Metals Inc.
Prepared by:
Guy Saucier, ing. Roche Ltd, Consulting Group
Edward Lyons, P. Geo. Tekhne Research
Florent Baril, ing. Bumigeme Inc.
Effective Date: December 5, 2011
Issue Date: January 18, 2012
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report for Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – i – Report January 2012
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE ........................................................................................ 7
2.1 General - Terms of Reference...................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Qualified Persons and Site Visits ................................................................................................................................. 7
2.3 Use of the Report ........................................................................................................................................................ 8
2.4 Units and Abbreviation ................................................................................................................................................ 8
5.3 Local Resources and Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................... 14
6.0 HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................ 16
6.1 General Overview ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
6.2 Historical Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 17
7.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION ................................................................................... 18
7.2 Local Geology ............................................................................................................................................................ 21
8.0 DEPOSIT TYPE .................................................................................................................................... 26
11.3 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ..................................................................................................................... 34
12.0 DATA VERIFICATION .......................................................................................................................... 41
12.1 Field Verification ....................................................................................................................................................... 41
14.4.1 DENSITY ........................................................................................................................................................ 48 14.4.2 COORDINATE SYSTEM ....................................................................................................................................... 49 14.4.3 VERTICAL SECTION ........................................................................................................................................... 50
14.5 Geological Interpretation and Definition of Zones .................................................................................................... 52
14.8 Block Model ............................................................................................................................................................... 59
20.2.1 PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT (QUEBEC).................................................................................................................. 68 20.2.2 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT .................................................................................................................................... 69
21.0 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS....................................................................................................... 70
Figure 11.3 --IOS Duplicate vs. Original Samples for Graphite ........................................................................................................ 36
Figure 11.4 - IOS Duplicate vs. Original Samples for Sulphur .......................................................................................................... 37
Figure 11.5 - Correlation of Blank Samples ..................................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 14.1 - Local Coordinate System ............................................................................................................................................ 49
Table 2.1 - Persons Who Prepared or Contributed to this Technical Report .................................................................................... 7
Table 2.2 - Frequently Used Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 8
Table 4.1 - Lac Knife Mineral Claim Titles ....................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 6.1 – Summary of Exploration Work on the Lac Knife Property ............................................................................................ 16
Table 6.2 – Various Historical Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................................... 17
Table 7.1 - Correlation of Labrador Trough and equivalent Grenville Stratigraphy ........................................................................ 20
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – v – Report January 2012
DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE
This report is effective as of the 5 day of December 2011, which is the cut-off date for all scientific and technical information included in the Technical Report.
“Guy Saucier” (Signed and Seal) “Edward Lyons” (Signed and Seal)
Guy Saucier, ing. Edward Lyons, P. Geo.
Roche Ltd., Consulting Group Tekhne Research
Signed : January 18, 2012 Signed : January 18, 2012
Montréal, Québec Victoria, British Columbia
“Florent Baril” (Signed and Seal)
Florent Baril, ing.
Bumigeme Inc.
Signed : January 18, 2012
Montréal, Québec
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – vi – Report January 2012
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR
Guy Saucier, ing. Roche Ltd., Consulting Group 630, René-Lévèsque West, Suite 1500 Montréal, QC, Canada, H3B 1S6 Phone : 514 393 9110 Fax : 514 393 1511
To Accompany the Report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Lac Knife Graphite Project” dated January 18, 2012 with effective date December 5, 2011.
I, Guy Saucier, do hereby certify that:
1) I am Vice President, Mining and Mineral Processing and carried out this assignment as author/reviewer of Roche Ltd, Consulting Group, Suite 1500, 630, René-Lévesque West, Montréal, QC, Canada, H3B 1S6 Phone : 514 393 9110, Fax : 514 393 1511, E-mail : [email protected].
2) I am a graduate of École Polytechnique, University of Montréal, located in Montréal with a B. Ing in Geological Engineering in 1983;
3) I am a Senior Geological Engineer, Member of the Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec (#37711), and a member of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), PDAC and SME;
4) I have worked as a geological engineer in the mineral industry for 28 years;
5) I have read the definition of "qualified person" set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined by NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a "qualified person" for the purposes of NI 43-101;
6) I am responsible for Sections 14.0 and 20.0 this technical report;
7) I have not visited the site;
8) I have had no prior involvement with the properties that are the subject of this Technical Report.
9) I am an independent of the issuer as defined in section 1.5 of NI 43-101.
10) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with that instrument and form.
11) As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my information, knowledge and belief, the Technical Report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.
12) I consent of the filing of the Technical Report with any Canadian stock exchange and consent other securities regulatory authority and any publication by them for regulatory purposes of the technical report.
Montreal, January 18, 2012
"Guy Saucier"
Guy Saucier, Ing.
OIQ # 37711
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – vii – Report January 2012
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR
To Accompany the Report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Lac Knife Graphite Project” dated January 18, 2012 with effective date December 5, 2011.
I, Edward Lyons, P.Geo., do hereby certify that:
13) I am currently employed as a Geological Consultant for Tekhne Research Inc. with offices at 1067 Portage Road, Victoria, BC V8Z 1L1.
14) I graduated with a Bachelor of Science (Honours) degree in Geology from the University of Missouri at Rolla located at Rolla, Missouri USA in 1970.
15) I am a Professional Geoscientist in the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (License #21126) and as a Géologue in the Ordre des géologues du Québec (N0. 701).
16) I have worked as a geologist for a total of 39 years since my graduation from university.
17) I have read the definition of “qualified person” set out in National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) and certify that, by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association as defined in NI 43-101 and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a “qualified person” for the purposes of NI 43-101.
18) I am responsible for the preparation of all the sections of the Report except Sections 13.0, 14.0, and 20.0.
19) I visited the Lac Knife Property on 14 October 2010 and on 19 January 2011 for one day each visit plus the IOS core logging facility on 14 January 2011.
20) I have not had prior involvement with the property that is subject to the Technical Report.
21) As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the Technical Report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.
22) I am independent of the issuer applying all the tests in section 1.5 of the National Instrument 43-101.
23) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with that instrument and form.
24) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report with any stock exchange and other regulatory authority and any publication by them, including electronic publication in the public company files on their websites accessible to the public, of the Technical Report.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – viii – Report January 2012
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR
Florent Baril, ing. President Bumigeme Inc. 615, boulevard René-Lévesque Ouest, Bureau 750 Montréal (Québec) H3B 1P5 Phone : 514 393 9110, ext. 512 Fax : 514 393 1511
To Accompany the Report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Lac Knife Graphite Project” dated January 18, 2012 with effective date December 5, 2011.
I, André Roy, do hereby certify that:
1) I am the President of Bumigeme Inc.
2) I am a graduate of Laval University, Quebec City in 1954.
3) I am a Senior Metallurgical Engineer, Member of the Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec (#6972);
4) I have worked as a metallurgical engineer in the mineral industry since 1954;
5) I have read the definition of "qualified person" set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined by NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a "qualified person" for the purposes of NI 43-101;
6) I am responsible for Section 13.0 of this technical report;
7) I have not visited the site;
8) I have had no prior involvement with the properties that are the subject of this Technical Report;
9) I am an independent of the issuer as defined in section 1.5 of NI 43-101.
10) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with that instrument and form.
11) As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my information, knowledge and belief, the Technical Report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.
12) I consent of the filing of the Technical Report with any Canadian stock exchange and consent other securities regulatory authority and any publication by them for regulatory purposes of the technical report.
Montreal, January 18, 2012
"Florent Baril"
Florent Baril, ing.
OIQ # 6972
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report for Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 1 – Report January 2012
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
Focus Metals (Focus) retained the services of Roche Ltd., Consulting Group (Roche) to prepare a Technical Report
to convert historical resources to NI 43-101 Resources for the Lac Knife property. The Lac Knife property is 100%
owned by Focus.
The purpose of this report is to validate historical resources evaluated between 1989 and 1990 by Mazarin, Inc.
The resource estimate presented in this report was done by Roche. Data used to prepare this resource estimate
was provided to Roche by Focus.
Property Location
The Lac Knife property is centered west and south of Lac Knife, located in the North Shore, Québec, Canada.
Fermont is the closest community and is located at 27 Km north-north east of the property. Road distance from
Montreal to Lac Knife is approximately 1,300km and by all season highway 389 there are 500 km between Baie-
Comeau and Fermont.
The property consists to a total of 57 mining claims covering 29,863 hectares. All claims are located in the Quebec
province.
Accessibility
The Lac Knife property is accessible by four-wheel drive vehicles. A 32-km dirt road starts south from Highway 389
about 3.2 km east of the ArcelorMittal Mont-Wright Mine entrance. Constructed in 1989 by Mazarin Inc. it gives
access directly to the deposit.
Climate
The climate in the region is typical of north-central Québec. Winters are harsh, lasting about six to seven months,
with heavy snow from December through April. Summers are generally cool and wet; however, extended day-light
enhances the summer work-day period. Early and late-winter conditions are acceptable for ground geophysical
surveys and drilling operations.
Local Resources and Infrastructure
Since the start of iron mining at Mont-Wright ~50 years ago, important infrastructure has been installed to service
the exploitation of the four iron mines in the region: Mont-Wright (ArcelorMittal Minerals Canada), Carol Mine
(Iron Ore Company of Canada IOCC), Wabush Mine and Lac Bloom Mine (Cliffs Natural Resources).
The Wabush airport is the nearest point for scheduled and charter flights from Sept-Iles, Québec, Montréal, and
Newfoundland-Labrador destinations with four scheduled airlines operating daily flights.
Two railways systems serve the region: the Quebec Cartier Railway Company, the privately-owned and operated
railroad that links. The Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway Co., owned by IOC is a common-carrier railroad.
The Hydro Québec main power line to Fermont and the local mines passes less than five km east of the deposit.
History
The Lac Knife graphite showing was discovered by D.L Murphy during geological survey done by the Québec
Ministry of Energy and Resources. The showing was described as a massive strip of graphite of one meter thick.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 2 – Report January 2012
Between 1986 and 1990, Mazarin conducted exploration work which expanded the Murphy showing. Between
1989 and 1990, Mazarin completed prefeasibility and a feasibility studies.
In August 1990, Cambior signed a joint venture for an equal partnership with Mazarin for the Lac Knife project. In
2001, interest for the property Lac Knife increased as the graphite market was emerging for hydrogen fuel cell and
other uses. Graftech Inc. did a study that demonstrated that the quality of the graphite of Lac Knife was better
than most deposits being mined at that time. In 2002 Graftech and Mazarin planned to joint venture with the goal
of starting production in 2004. However, the graphite market again declined and the project did not proceed.
During those years, IAMGOLD purchased Cambior which included the Lac Knife asset.
IAMGOLD sold its 100% interest in the Lac Knife property to Focus Metals Inc. on 5 October 2010.
Regional Geology
The graphite-rich Menihek Formation (Fm) paraschist and the Sokoman Fm iron formation of the Gagnon Group in
the Grenville Province were derived from the Paleoproterozoic Labrador Trough basin sediments.
In the Labrador Trough, the original sedimentary textures show that the iron formation units were deposited
principally as chemical sediments with high iron and silica (chert) and characteristically low aluminum in a series of
linked basins. The Menihek Formation formed from pelitic sediments filling basins.
Local Geology
The property is underlain principally by the mica-quartz-feldspar schist and paragneiss of the Menihek Formation.
Mineralogy locally includes garnet and kyanite (or sillimanite?) plus minor bands of calcsilicate. The host rock of
the graphite zones appears the same with the only significant variation being the amount of graphite and
variations in calcsilicate bands.
Murphy interpreted the Menihek Fm as infilling a complexly folded, Y-shaped syncline with one arm trending
north-northwest, the second striking west-northwest and the third striking south to south-southeast. The limit of
the syncline is marked by the contact with the underlying Sokoman Fm with variable iron-mineral facies.
Previous interpretations of the detailed drilling by Mazarin showed a number of closed folds that formed part of
their initial resource estimation in 1989. The present interpretation recognizes that the graphite zones may be
sheared en echelon along the northern trend and may, in fact, be more isolated bands. The present study
maintained a tighter constraint with less interpretation as to potential fold closures. Further drill testing will aid in
resolving the relations among the graphite bands.
Mineralization
The graphite occurs as part of the metasediments integral to the Menihek Formation. It forms as part of local
anoxic basins in the pelitic sediments. There is no indication of secondary hydrothermal or other transported, post-
metamorphic deposition or upgrading. The present distribution and crystallinity of the graphite units are due to
the Grenville metamorphic events.
The margins of the graphite lenses and bands are sharp to rapid grade changes with background graphite on the
order on <1% carbon-as-graphite (Cgr) increasing to ~5% Cgr near the lenses contacts. Grades within the lenses
range from 5-60% Cgr with thin waste bands included. The lenses form elongate lozenges with lateral continuity
from 90 to over 300 m length based on the limited geometry tested to date. The depth of the lenses ranges from
40 to over 120 metres on the dip plane, while thickness of individual lenses ranges from < 1.5 m to 35 m.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 3 – Report January 2012
Graphite occurs as flakes ranging from 2 mm to very fine in hand sample. Commonly the coarser flakes appear to
form with Cgr grades below ~25% and finer flakes above that. The industrial term for coarse flake is 0.2 mm (200
microns), so that even “fine-grained” to the eye can still provide high quality industrial material.
Focus 2010-2011 Drill Program
The drilling program was planned by Roche with the support of Focus Metals. The drilling campaign for Focus
Metals Inc. was conducted under contract by IOS Services Géoscientifique Inc. (IOS) of Chicoutimi, QC between
December 7, 2010 and February 4, 2011.
The drilling program was planned to total 1000 m. Roche selected the historical drillholes showing the maximum
length into the graphite mineralisation. These historical drill holes were selected to collect as much graphite
possible to verify the correlation between the historical holes and the new holes. Sixteen (16) targets, including
substitutes, were selected from which 12 drillholes were completed for a total length of 1233.92 m. The other sites
were rejected due to access issues.
Twin Holes Results
The 12 twinned holes were compared with corresponding Mazarin 1989 holes. Most of the twinned holes show
significant ranges in values between the corresponding original drillhole. In the detail within a mineralised range or
composite interval, the high values will generally match high values, but the individual absolute grades can vary as
much as 75%.
The twin-hole program was reasonably successful. It would have been better if the Mazarin hole locations had
been documented better and the twinned hole location spotted at the same time. The twin-hole collars were
surveyed with DGPS instruments.
Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security
Sampling was done primarily at 1.5 metre length to match the Mazarin intervals. However, when the interval of
interest was narrower or longer, or had significant lithological changes, the sample length may range with a
minimum of 0.5 metres and a maximum of 2.4 metres.
Samples of adjacent unmineralised rock at the margins of the mineralisation as well as low grade intervals within
the mineralised interval were taken separately if the length was > 1-m
The marked samples were cut with a diamond blade rock saw lengthwise and perpendicular to the structural trend
of the core. Half of the core went into marked sample bags and the other half placed in the core box for reference.
A total of 634 samples were collected and sent for analysis with additional QA/QC materials inserted into the
sample stream under the IOS protocol.
Inspectorate Exploration and Mining Services Ltd., based in Richmond, British Columbia, received the samples,
verified against the client’s shipping documents, and logged into their tracking system.
Samples were analysed for graphite carbon analysis, sulphur by LECO Induction, and 30-element Inductively
Coupled Plasma (ICP) techniques.
Inspectorate duplicated 103 carbon analyses or about 13% of the whole sample set. The average paired difference
is 0.47% Cgr, with a standard deviation of 0.70%. This is about half the amount for sample duplicates introduced by
IOS. The average relative paired difference is not meaningful, due to the presence of numerous very low grade or
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 4 – Report January 2012
blank samples. The noted paired difference is then in excess of the measured grade, leading to erroneous relative
paired difference.
Field Verification
The original drill sites for the Mazarin holes were located from several locations with existing drill casing or
definitive evidence of drilling. The grid coordinates were reconstructed by IOS, and these new coordinates were
validated in the field.
The drill core was properly marked with legible metrage blocks correctly placed and core trays were legibly marked
and handled with due care by both the contractor and by IOS personnel. The core was shipped by truck transport
from Fermont to Chicoutimi for more detailed processing.
At the IOS laboratory in Chicoutimi, the core was received with a reception tracking system. The core was logged in
a systematic way with data input on computers. The logging geologist followed as much as one could the names
and divisions used in the original Mazarin logs. Samples were selected on the same lengths and contacts as was
done by Mazarin. Samples were saw-cut with half in the sample bag and the other half replaced in the core box.
Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing
A series of the metallurgical testwork was conducted in the past on the Lac Knife Graphite project, by Mazarin. In
1989, a first series of metallurgical testwork were conducted at Corem using drill core and material from a 35 T
bulk sample. Grinding, flotation and gravity tests were conducted and a preliminary flowsheet was developed. Few
months after, in 1989-1990, a second series of pilot plant test work were conducted from another bulk sample.
Tests were conducted during a 39-day period with the purpose of improving the flowsheet developed in the
beginning of 1989. In 2002, through SNC-Lavalin, a three-phase program was developed by Mazarin and its partner
UCAR-Graphtec. The program was to test two samples coming from a 3500 tonnes bulk sample extracted from two
different areas of the mineralized zones. The first phase involved physical and mineralogical characterisation of the
material. The second phase involved preliminary laboratory ore testing to develop the process flow diagram prior
to pilot plant testing. The third phase was the pilot plant itself but was never conducted.
Mineral Resources Estimate
Three historical resource estimates were performed for the Lac Knife by Mazarin Inc. and its successor company,
Cambior Ltd. in the period 1990-1992.
In winter 2010-2011, Focus drilled 12 BTW diamond drillholes twinned with the original Mazarin sites in order to
confirm the historical data. These twinned holes were designed to test historical drilling. These sections and data
are included in the Resource Estimation herein for Lac Knife. The historical and twinned hole data were used in the
estimation process. Roche revised the interpretation previously done and construct a block model with revised
parameters and rules to adjust the resource classification.
Exploration Database and Interpretation
Data used to estimate the mineral resource was provided by the client in the form of a Microsoft Excel
Spreadsheet. The drillhole database contains 111 exploration diamond drillholes: 99 historical drillholes from the
Mazarin exploration campaign of 1989 and 12 drillholes from the twin-hole drilling campaign executed between
December 2010 and February 2011. In addition to the electronic format, Roche received a hard copy of the
historical database. The database consists to 8611 metres of core and 3240 assays for Cgr% (2606 historical and
634 new). Most drillholes were sampled in 1.5 metres intervals for assays inside the zone which showed
mineralization.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 5 – Report January 2012
A total of 23 vertical sections were defined for the Lac Knife property. Those sections were defined along the
drillhole pattern with a spacing of 25m. Sections were used for the geological interpretation. The present
interpretation includes five mineralized zones. The two new zones were formed by the separation of the original
west zone into three simpler shapes separated by waste host rock. Mineralized zones were defined using a cut-off
grade of 5% Cgr. On each drillhole section, the boundary polylines were digitized for each mineralized zones.
Interpretations of the mineralized zones were mainly supported by grade continuity in strike and dip.
Diamond drillhole assay data were composited in equal lengths of 3 metres constrained by the mineralized zones
described above.
Block Model and Grade Interpolation
The 3D block model was developed using GEMS. Blocks are 5 metres long, 7 metres wide and 5 metres high. Rock
Type values were assigned to each block. The grade interpolation was completed by using 3 metres composites for
Cgr with the software GEMS. The methodology used applied was the inverse distance power square (‘’ID2”).
Mineral Resources Estimate
The mineral resource estimate presented in this report is effective as of 5 December 2011. The CIM Standards for
Mineral Estimations were used in order to complete this mineral resource estimate. Table 1.1 presents the
resources within the 5% cut-off mineralized zones using various cut-off grades.
Substantial work has been carried out in the past on the Lac Knife property. Drilling and metallurgical testwork
including pilot plant testing gave positive results in the evaluation of a graphite resource having a relatively high
graphite content compared to other graphite mineralised occurrences.
The 2010-2011 drilling program with the twinning of some of the previous holes had confirmed the validity of the
work conducted in the past.
However, the market has changed and the basis of the testworks and pilot plant completed in the 90’s to produce
products with various granulometry in the range of 92 to 96% Cgr has probably to be reconsidered in relation with
current markets. If it is the intention of Focus to produce marketable products in the range of 95% to 98% Cgr,
Roche recommends to properly evaluate the type of products which can be marketed through a market study and
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 6 – Report January 2012
to conduct in parallel laboratory testworks and eventually pilot plant testwork, in order to develop a process
flowsheet which can produce saleable graphite grades for the actual and future markets. This will provide data for
the potential market available and what could be the graphite recovery related to the production of material
associated with these markets.
A drilling program to collect a sufficient amount of samples to get a composite of the deposit for the next phase of
testwork and an infill drilling program are recommended to better understand the graphite mineralisation trend.
In parallel to these studies, a review of the economics parameters should be done to evaluate the various
scenarios required to bring the project into production. This evaluation should be summarized into a Preliminary
Economic Assessment (PEA) which will include a cost evaluation as well as a financial analysis.
Recommendations
Roche recommend pursuing the development of the project in two phases. Phase I will consist in an evaluation of
the economic parameters by conducting a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) of the project along with
metallurgical testwork and a market study.
Contingent to a positive PEA, an additional drilling program and pilot plant testwork should be conducted in order
to increase the quantity of indicated and measured resources and to also have a better understanding of the
geometry of the mineralised lenses.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 7 – Report January 2012
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE
2.1 General - Terms of Reference
Focus Metals (Focus) retained the services of Roche Ltd., Consulting Group (Roche) to prepare a Technical Report
to convert historical resources to NI 43-101 Resources for the Lac Knife property. The Lac Knife property is 100%
owned by Focus and consists of a total of 57 claims. The property is located in Northern Québec near the
municipality of Fermont. Lac Knife is a graphite project.
The purpose of this report is to validate historical resources evaluated between 1989 and 1990 by Mazarin. The
resource estimate presented in this report was done by Roche. Data used to prepare this resource estimate was
provided to Roche by Focus. Historical data was verified and an updated resource estimate was done in
compliance with CIM standards.
In 1988-1990, Mazarin completed 99 diamond drillholes and three historical resource estimates. Mazarin reported
8.1 million metric tonnes with an average grade of 16.7% Cgr with a ‘’proven’’ resource of 3.5 million at a grade of
17.4% Cgr. The historical resource was prepared prior to the implementation of the Canadian Securities
Administrator’s National Instrument 43-101 (“NI-43-101’’) and is shown for comparison purposes only. In 2010,
Focus Metals retained the services of Roche and IOS to plan and supervise a twin hole drilling campaign to verify
the resource estimate previously done by Mazarin in 1989.
2.2 Qualified Persons and Site Visits
The names and details of persons who prepared, or on whom the Qualified Persons have relied in the preparation
of this Technical Reported are listed in Table 2.1. The Qualified Persons meet the requirements of independence as
defined in NI 43-101.
Table 2.1 - Persons Who Prepared or Contributed to this Technical Report
Qualified Persons responsible for the preparation of this Technical Report
Qualified Person Position and Employer
Professional Designation
Independent of Focus
Date of Last Site Visit
Sections of Report
Edward Lyons, P.Geo Tekhne Research
P. Geo. Yes 14 October 2010 14 January 2011 19 January 2011
All sections of the Report, except Sections 13.0, 14.0, and 20.0 of the Report.
Guy Saucier,ing Vice-President, Mining and Mineral Processing Roche Ltd., Consulting Group
Ing. Yes None Sections 14.0 and 20.0 of the Report.
Florent Baril, ing. President Bumigeme inc.
Eng. Yes None Section 13.0 of the Report.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 8 – Report January 2012
2.3 Use of the Report
This report is intended to be used by Focus subject to the terms and conditions of its agreement with Roche. Focus
may file this report as an NI 43-101 Technical Report with the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) pursuant to
provincial securities legislation. Except for the purposes legislated under provincial securities laws, any other use of
this report, by any third party, is at that party’s sole risk.
2.4 Units and Abbreviation
All measurements in this report are presented in metres (m), metric tonnes (tonnes), and grams per tonne (g/t)
unless mentioned otherwise. Monetary units are in Canadian dollars ($CAD) unless when specified in United States
dollars ($USD). Abbreviations used in this report are listed in Table 2.1.
Table 2.2 - Frequently Used Acronyms and Abbreviations
Abbreviations Description
Cgr Carbon as graphite
ft Feet
g Grams
g/t Grams/tonne
ha Hectares
in Inches
kg Kilograms
km Kilometres
m Metres
m³ Cubic metres
NSR Net Smelter Return
ppm, ppb Parts per million, parts per billion
S Sulphur
Tonnes or t Metric tonnes
tpd Tonnes per day
2.5 Notice
This Report has been prepared by Roche at the request of Focus. The report may be used by Focus in connection
with the Lac Knife Project and shall not be used nor relied upon by any other party without the written consent of
Roche. Roche accepts no responsibility for damages if any suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made
or actions based on this report.
It should be understood that the information, conclusions, opinions and estimates contained are based on
preliminary information available to Roche at the time of preparation of this report which will change once
additional information will be available.
It should be understood that the mineral resources, which are not mineral reserves, do not have demonstrated
economic viability. The mineral resources presented in this Technical Report are estimates based on available
sampling and on assumptions and parameters available to the author. The comments in this Technical Report
reflect Roche’s best judgement in light of the information available.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 9 – Report January 2012
3.0 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS
Roche has prepared this study using the resource materials, reports and documents as noted in the text and
“References” at the end of this report.
Although, the authors have made every effort to accurately convey the content of those reports, they cannot
guarantee either the accuracy or the validity of the work described within the report.
Roche has not verified the title to the Property, nor has it verified the status of Focus’ property agreements, but
has relied on the information supplied by the Company in this regard. Roche has no reason to doubt the title
situation is other than what is reported by the Company.
The information related with the 2010-2011 drilling program have been provided by Focus and IOS Services
Géoscientifiques Inc.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 10 – Report January 2012
4.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
4.1 Property Location
The Lac Knife property is centered around, south and west Lac Knife, located in the North Shore, Québec, Canada.
Fermont is the closest community and is located at 27 Km north-north east of the property. The Lac Knife project is
situated in Esmanville township on NTS map sheet 23B11. Road distance from Montreal to Lac Knife is
approximately 1,300km and by all season highway 389 500 km from Baie-Comeau to Fermont. The property is
centred at 52°33’N and 67°11’W. The property covers 29,863 km2.
Figure 4.1 - Location Map
4.2 Claim Titles
The property consists to a total of 57 mining claims covering 29,863 hectares. All claims are located in the Quebec
province on NTS map and are registered as CDC (Claim designation sur Carte). The claims are registered under
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 11 – Report January 2012
3765351 Canada Inc. (original name of Focus Metals Inc.) as Québec claims client 18758. The data in the following
table was verified as of 8 January 2012.
Table 4.1 - Lac Knife Mineral Claim Titles
Title No. Surface area Registration Date Expiration Date Range Column
1028540 52.40 21/09/01 20/09/13 6 40
1028541 52.40 21/09/01 20/09/13 6 41
1033237 52.42 01/11/01 31/10/13 4 38
1033238 52.42 01/11/01 31/10/13 4 39
1033239 52.42 01/11/01 31/10/13 4 40
1033244 52.41 01/11/01 31/10/13 5 36
1033245 52.41 01/11/01 31/10/13 5 37
1033259 52.37 01/11/01 31/10/13 9 40
1052769 52.42 26/03/02 11/12/13 4 41
1052770 52.42 26/03/02 11/12/13 4 42
1052771 52.41 26/03/02 11/12/13 5 38
1052772 52.41 26/03/02 11/12/13 5 39
1052773 52.41 26/03/02 11/12/13 5 40
1052774 52.41 26/03/02 11/12/13 5 41
1052775 52.41 26/03/02 11/12/13 5 42
1052776 52.41 26/03/02 11/12/13 5 43
1052777 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 34
1052778 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 35
1052779 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 36
1052780 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 37
1052781 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 38
1052782 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 39
1052783 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 42
1052784 52.40 26/03/02 11/12/13 6 43
1052785 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 32
1052786 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 33
1052787 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 34
1052788 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 35
1052789 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 36
1052790 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 37
1052791 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 38
1052792 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 39
1052793 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 40
1052794 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 41
1052795 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 42
1052796 52.39 26/03/02 11/12/13 7 43
1052797 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 32
1052798 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 33
1052799 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 34
1052800 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 35
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 12 – Report January 2012
Title No. Surface area Registration Date Expiration Date Range Column
1052801 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 36
1052802 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 37
1052803 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 38
1052804 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 39
1052805 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 40
1052806 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 41
1052807 52.38 26/03/02 11/12/13 8 42
1052808 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 32
1052809 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 33
1052810 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 34
1052811 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 35
1052812 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 36
1052813 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 37
1052814 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 38
1052815 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 39
1052816 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 41
1052817 52.37 26/03/02 11/12/13 9 42
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 13 – Report January 2012
Figure 4.2 - Claims Map
The expenditure credits to date total $168,319 applied against statutory work obligations of $136,900. Taxes of
$7,011 are due on the expiration date of the claims.
4.2.1 AGREEMENTS
Focus Metals Inc. is the sole owner of the property with no option, royalty or other outstanding agreements.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 14 – Report January 2012
5.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY
5.1 Accessibility
Route 389 is the only all-season highway that connects the towns of Fermont and Baie-Comeau, QC with Labrador
City and Wabush, NL. The Lac Knife property is accessible by four-wheel drive vehicles. A 32-km dirt road starts
south from Highway 389 about 3.2 km east of the ArcelorMittal Mont-Wright Mine entrance. Constructed in 1989
by Mazarin Inc. it gives access directly to the deposit. The road is presently accessible by four-wheel drive vehicles
and is maintained as a major snowmobile route by the snowmobile club in Fermont in the winter. Float planes can
land on Lac Knife adjacent to the deposit.
Commercial air service is available to the Wabush Airport 32 km northeast of Fermont.
5.2 Climate
The climate in the region is typical of north-central Québec. Winters are harsh, lasting about six to seven months,
with heavy snow from December through April. Summers are generally cool and wet; however, extended day-light
enhances the summer work-day period. Early and late-winter conditions are acceptable for ground geophysical
surveys and drilling operations.
Table 5.1 - Climate
Month Daily temperature (°C) Precipitation
Average Minimum Maximum Rainfall (mm) Snowfall (cm) Total (mm)
January -23.2 -29.4 -17 1.1 50.1 51.2
February -20.6 -27.4 -13.8 0.5 30.9 31.4
March -14 -20.7 -7.3 0.9 42 42.8
April -3.9 -9.8 2 13.8 26.7 40.5
May 3.1 -2.5 8.7 35.3 11.3 46.6
June 9.6 3.5 15.6 86.6 1.2 87.7
July 13.2 7.5 19 118.7 0 118.7
August 12.2 6.7 17.8 103.7 0 103.7
September 6.2 1.6 10.8 102.9 3 106
October -0.5 -4.4 3.5 43.3 23.9 67.2
November -8.7 -13 -4.4 6.8 51.8 58.6
December -18.7 -24.4 -13.1 1.5 50.7 52.2
Year -3.8 -9.4 1.8 515 291.5 806.5
5.3 Local Resources and Infrastructure
Since the start of iron mining at Mont-Wright ~50 years ago, important infrastructure has been installed to service
the exploitation of the four iron mines in the region: Mont-Wright (ArcelorMittal Minerals Canada), Carol Mine
(Iron Ore Company of Canada IOCC), Wabush Mine and Lac Bloom Mine (Cliffs Natural Resources).
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 15 – Report January 2012
Fermont, QC is the closest municipality with about 3,200 inhabitants. Including Labrador City and Wabush towns in
Labrador, located 30 km away, the regional population is about 15,000. These municipalities have the
infrastructure to provide services for accommodations, community services, a skilled mining labour force, as well
as mining contractors and related services. Several truck transportation companies regularly service the region
from Baie-Comeau. The Wabush airport is the nearest point for scheduled and charter flights from Sept-Iles,
Québec, Montréal, and Newfoundland-Labrador destinations with four scheduled airlines operating daily flights.
Two railway systems serve the region: the Quebec Cartier Railway Company, the privately-owned and operated
railroad that links ArcelorMittal’s Mont-Wright facility to their Port Cartier pellet plant and port (416 km) at
approximately 15 km from the property. The Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway Co., owned by IOC is a
common-carrier railroad that links Labrador City to the Port of Sept-Iles (360 km), and is located at approximately
30km from the property.
The Hydro Québec main power line to Fermont and the local mines passes less than five km east of the deposit.
5.4 Physiography
Most of the Lac Knife area lies within a rolling glacial peneplain at about 670 metres above sea level with local
relief in the order of 75 m. More specifically, the deposit is situated on the north-trending ridge about 200 metres
west of Lac Knife.
Glaciation left a veneer of silt-sand and sand-cobble-boulder moraine till covering the local bedrock. Much of the
glacial cover is lacking gravel in the region. The average overburden depth estimated from the Mazarin drillholes
and trenches is about 4 m. The glacial deposits dominate the local topography and control most of the surface
drainage. Lakes, swamps and grassy meadows fill bedrock and drift depressions.
Most of the area on the property and surrounding terrain is treed with moss and grass-cover. The intact forest
includes the typical boreal mixture of fir and tamarack, with local stands of aspen and yellow birch. Ground cover is
generally in the form of grasses, caribou moss, and shrubs, the latter typically comprising willow, arctic birch,
alders and Labrador Tea.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 16 – Report January 2012
6.0 HISTORY
6.1 General Overview
The Lac Knife graphite showing was discovered by D.L Murphy during geological survey done by the Québec
Ministry of Energy and Resources. The showing was described as a massive strip of graphite of one meter thick.
Between 1959 and 1960 only mapping work was done (Murphy, 1960).
Interest in the discovery of a graphite deposits increased in the 1980s due to the price increase for graphite flakes.
In 1985, in the aim of discovering other metallic or industrial prospects other than iron, Mazarin, Inc. and “Le
Fonds d’Exploration Minière du Nouveau Québec’’ (Les Fonds) made an exploration agreement wherein Mazarin
retained 100% of the mineral rights and Les Fonds retained a 10% net profit royalty. Between 1986 and 1990,
Mazarin conducted exploration work summarized in Table 6.1 which expanded the Murphy showing. Between
1989 and 1990, Mazarin completed prefeasibility and a feasibility studies.
In December 1989, Mazarin and Princetown Mining Corporation signed an agreement to put the deposit in
production. At the end of February 1990, Princetown retired from the project. In August 1990, Cambior signed a
joint venture for an equal partnership with Mazarin for the Lac Knife project. Cambior retained Magloire Bérubé to
review the original Mazarin mineral resource. In 1991, Mazarin hoped to bring the deposit in production, but
economy went in recession and graphite prices declined.
In 2001, interest for the property Lac Knife increased as the graphite market was emerging for hydrogen fuel cell
and other uses. Graftech Inc. did a study that demonstrated that the quality of the graphite of Lac Knife was better
than most deposits being mined at that time. In 2002 Graftech and Mazarin planned to joint venture with the goal
of starting production in 2004. However, the graphite market again declined and the project did not proceed.
During those years IAMGOLD purchased Cambior which included the Lac Knife asset.
IAMGOLD sold its 100% interest in the Lac Knife property to Focus Metals Inc. on 5 October 2010.
Table 6.1 – Summary of Exploration Work on the Lac Knife Property
Year Company Type of work Summary Result
1959 Regional Geological Mapping D.L. Murphy found at the Lac Knife Showing
1982 Le Fonds Geophysical survey (Mag, EM-VLF)
Geological Mapping
1986 Le Fonds/Mazarin Prospection
1987 Le Fonds/Mazarin
Prospection Lac Knife showing is found again. The area is detailed prospect
Geological Mapping
Geophysical survey (Mag, EM-VLF)
Trench Trench on 5 metres with a grade of 12.8%
1988 Le Fonds/Mazarin Prospection The Lac knife showing extended on 120 metres with an average width of 8 metres. The best trench has a 16.5% Cgr on 25 m.
1989 Mazarin
Diamond drill Campaign. 99 holes for a total of 7367 metres.
Bulk samples of 25 tonnes
Historical Reserve Estimation 8.5 millions of tonnes at 16.7% Cgr.
Pre-Feasibility Study (Roche)
Feasibility Study (Roche and Davy) 8.1 millions of tonnes at 16.7%
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 17 – Report January 2012
1. Coordinate system: UTM NAD 27 zone 19 2. Collar coordinates surveyed by DGPS by Raynald Babin & Associe (RBA)of Baie-Comeau, QC, values rounded to nearest metre
for table 3. LK-10-102 is about equidistant between LK-89-65 (18m), K-89-67 (20m), and K-89-77 (22m). The others are <9 m from the
twinned hole
The Mazarin drill grid coordinates were reconstructed to UTM coordinates by IOS using several known old drill
sites marked by casing as well as likely clearings, as well as DGPS surveying by Raynald Babin & Associe of Baie-
Comeau, QC, who has experience in mining surveying in the region. The new holes were generally within 2-9
metres of the Mazarin coordinates. One holes, LK-10-102 was farther from its twin than expected for unknown
reasons.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 29 – Report January 2012
The analytical results were incorporated into Mazarin’s 1989 database for the purposes of the Resource Estimation
in this Report.
Services de forage D.V. Inc. of St-Honoré, QC used one skid-mounted hydraulic drill rig to drill BTW core (40.7 mm
diameter). The rig was operated on two 12-hour shifts, seven days a week. Drill holes were intended to duplicate
Mazarin holes, using same collar location as much as possible with the same azimuth, inclination, and depth. The
program was supervised by Mr. Steeve Lavoie, geologist in training for IOS. The 12 drillholes were labelled LK-10-
101 to LK-10-112, sequential with Mazarin’s 1989 holes.
Hole deviation was measured with the use of a Flex-It surveying instrument measuring magnetic orientation and
inclination with readings approximately 25 metres in average. Information on the ground temperature and
magnetic intensity of the rock was collected as well.
Core was shipped by truck to the IOS facility in Chicoutimi, QC where it was received, logged and stored for logging
and sampling. The core was been logged by Mr. Jean-Paul Barrette, P.Geo, assisted by Mr. Lavoie. Logging was
done with reference to the Mazarin drill log of the drill hole being twinned for comparison. Lithological names are
based on those used in the 1989 as much as possible and coded according to a legend adapted from the Québec
Department of Natural Resources. Core angles of significant structures were measured with a core protractor.
Pictures of the core, both general and detailed view were taken with digital camera. Percentage of graphite and
sulphides were estimated on a systematic manner.
Descriptions and logs were captured in Excel spreadsheet and imported in Access database compatible with
Gemcom software. Sections were drafted using GEM’s Explorpac software, and then imported in Bentley
Microstation for editing.
10.2 Twin-Hole Results
The 12 twinned holes were compared with corresponding Mazarin 1989 holes. Two typical comparison examples
are shown in Figures 10.1 and 10.2. The statistical comparison between the corresponding intersections is shown
in Figure 10.3.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 30 – Report January 2012
Figure 10.1 - Twin Hole Comparison between LK-10-107 vs. LK-89-34
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 31 – Report January 2012
Figure 10.2 - Twin Hole Comparison between LK-10-106 vs. LK-89-14
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 32 – Report January 2012
The comparison is influenced by several factors:
Reproducibility between laboratories, discussed in Section 11.0;
Intralab errors and reproducibility issues within one laboratory discussed in Section 12.0;
Variability in grades over short distances, as seen in the geostatistics in Section 14.0.
Figure 10.3 – Focus (2011) vs. Mazarin 1989 Graphite Analysis
Focus (2011) vs. Mazarin (1989) Graphite Analyses
R2 = 0.7734
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
Focus %Cgr
Mazarin %
Cgr
Most of the twinned holes show significant ranges in values between the corresponding original drillhole. In the
detail within a mineralised range or composite interval, the high values will generally match high values, but the
individual absolute grades can vary as much as 75%. Figure 10.3 illustrates that the composite grades as used in
the resource estimation shows a systematic bias of 15% (at r²= 0.7734) higher grades in the 1989 Mazarin data
compared with the 2010 Focus data. This likely reflects differences between laboratory methods discussed in
Section 11.0.
The higher individual grades differences then also have the geological variations beyond the +15% bias. Analysis of
the block models by variograms and other tests show that the grades do not show anisotrophy, even though the
deposit lenses form distinct tabular bodies. The geological variation is often broader than the lab methods bias.
Another factor could be intralab variations. There is not sufficient data to constrain that factor at this time.
The twin-hole program was reasonably successful. It would have been better if the Mazarin hole locations had
been documented better and the twinned hole location spotted at the same time.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 33 – Report January 2012
11.0 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY
11.1 Sample Collection
The drill crew put the core in wooden half-height boxes by the drillers with a length bloc in feet placed at the end
of each run, typically 10 ft (3.0 m). Core boxes were collected by the IOS crew and returned to the Fermont facility
where the metre blocks were verified and the recovery and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) were measured and
recorded. The core was shipped by truck to the IOS facility at Chicoutimi, QC where it was received and logged in
digitally. The core boxes were organised on pallets until the logging process was started.
Prior to core logging, additional geotechnical data was collected, including fracture counts and types, and rock
hardness (qualitative scale). Data was entered using the Geotic software which integrates with MapInfo and
Gemcom. Core boxes are labelled with aluminum tags showing the drillhole number, box number and from-to
metres.
Logging was augmented with the Mazarin drill log of the drill hole being twinned for comparison. Lithological
names are based on those used in the 1989 as much as possible and coded according to a legend adapted from the
Québec Department of Natural Resources. The core was logged for lithology, structure, alteration, and
mineralization. Pictures of the core, both with full-box and detailed views were taken with a digital camera. Data
was entered into Geotic for integration with Access database software.
Sampling was done primarily at 1.5 metre length to match the Mazarin intervals. However, when the interval of
interest was narrower or longer, or had significant lithological changes, the sample length may range with a
minimum of 0.5 metres and a maximum of 2.4 metres.
Samples of adjacent unmineralised rock at the margins of the mineralisation as well as low grade intervals within
the mineralised interval were taken separately if the length was > 1-m. Three-part uniquely and sequentially
numbered sample tags were used with one part stapled in the core box at the start of the sample interval, one in
the sample bag, and the last retained in the sample book. Data was entered into Geotic for integration with the
Access database.
The marked samples were cut with a diamond blade rock saw lengthwise and perpendicular to the structural trend
of the core. Half of the core went into marked sample bags and the other half placed in the core box for reference.
A total of 634 samples were collected and sent for analysis with additional QA/QC materials inserted into the
sample stream under the IOS protocol.
Samples were shipped by truck to Inspectorate Exploration and Mining Services Ltd., based in Richmond, British
Columbia, in consignments of one drillhole per shipment. Shipping information was recorded and entered into the
database.
Once the sampling is completed, both the sampled and unsampled core was stored sequentially on core racks
inside the secure IOS warehouse to reduce oxidation of the sulphides.
In Roche’s opinion, the core handling and sampling procedures were conducted very well with thorough
monitoring controls.
11.2 Sample Preparation
Inspectorate Exploration and Mining Services Ltd., based in Richmond, British Columbia, received the samples,
verified against the client’s shipping documents, and logged into their tracking system.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 34 – Report January 2012
Preparation was done under code SP-PU-PULP. Every sample was dried if necessary prior to staged crushing to
P70% at -10 mesh. The sample was blended then riffle-split for a 250 g portion. The portion was pulverised to P85
of -200 mesh and placed in marked bags.
The coarse reject greater than 6 mesh material and the fine rejects were stored in labelled plastic bags. The bags
were flushed with nitrogen to inhibit oxidation of sulphides. They were stored in a refrigerated place, until the
assaying process is completed and results accepted in regard of QAQC. Pulps and rejects were shipped by truck to
IOS at Chicoutimi, QC in sealed steel drums.
Samples were analysed for graphite carbon analysis, sulphur by LECO Induction, and 30-element Inductively
Coupled Plasma (ICP) techniques. The methods are:
Graphite carbon analysis code C-GP-OR) uses the LECO furnace infrared spectrometry method with either a regular
loss on ignition (LOI) method for samples with < 40% graphite or double loss on ignition (DLOI) method on high-
grade samples. The sample is digested in HCl to remove carbonates. In the LOI method, the sample is weighed into
a ceramic crucible, ashed at 550oC to remove Organic Carbon content, leached with known amount of diluted hot
HCl solution, and washed 10 times with de-mineralized water. When complete, the sample is dried at low
temperature prior to analysis. The sample is placed in a LECO induction furnace, typically set at 1050oC, in order to
convert the graphite to CO2. The weight difference is reported.
The double lost on ignition method for samples above 40% Cgr uses the same HCl leaching of carbonate then is
heated in the LECO furnace 450oC, in order to evaporate organic carbon. The sample is weighed. This is referred as
first loss on ignition. The partly roasted sample is then heated in the furnace to 900oC and graphitic carbon is
burnt-off. The sample is weighed again; this is the second loss on ignition.
A correction is calculated from the sulphur content (LECO furnace), in order to take into account the oxidation of
iron.
Sulphur analysis by LECO (code S-LECO) uses the LECO Induction furnace to oxidise the sample. The sample is
roasted in an oxidising atmosphere and the sulphur is converted to SO2.
Trace elements (code 30-AR-TR) were used on every second sample. The ICP-AES method uses a 4-acid aqua-regia
digestion with 30 elements measured at trace levels.
11.3 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Inspectorate Exploration and Mining Services Ltd., based in Richmond, British Columbia, is an ISO-9001-2008
certified laboratory, but is not indicated as ISO-17025.
Inspectorate duplicated 103 carbon analyses or about 13% of the whole sample set. The average paired difference
is 0.47% Cgr, with a standard deviation of 0.70%. This is about half the amount for sample duplicates introduced by
IOS. The average relative paired difference is not meaningful, due to the presence of numerous very low grade or
blank samples. The noted paired difference is then in excess of the measured grade, leading to erroneous relative
paired difference.
Inspectorate did not disclose any analytical results in regard of carbon reference material or calibration. It is
uncertain if such material was introduced and not disclosed, or simply not analysed. Results on reference material
were disclosed for sulphur and trace elements analyses.
Focus Metals Inc. Technical Report on the Lac Knife Project Rep_LacKnife_PEA-000a_20120118.doc – 35 – Report January 2012
Figures 11.1 and 11.2 show the duplicates by Inspectorate for carbon as graphite (Cgr) and for sulphur (S). The
slope of the regression lines and the r² coefficient (degree of fit) is very close to unity which indicates very high
reproducibility.
Figure 11.1 - Graphite Correlation for 29 Sample Pairs