24 Nov

Copper & Uranium Applications, Torrens Projects, SA

24 November 2021 TORRENS PROJECTS, SA - COPPER AND URANIUM EXPLORATION LICENCE APPLICATIONS UPDATE HIGHLIGHTS • Exploration Licences include several historical copper mines and diggings within the North Torrens project, along with a uranium prospect • Limited exploration has been undertaken over the 1,762 km 2 of tenure • Rock chips up to 8.7% Cu from West Mount prospect, and 210ppm U from Seaham prospect have been recorded • Historical drill copper intersections at the West Mont prospects include: o 28m @ 0.34% Cu from 44m (WMRC016) o 14m @ 0.37% Cu from 14m (WMRC010) o 2m @ 1.45% Cu from 10m and 6m @ 0.32% Cu from 58m (WMRC007) o 6m @ 0.36% Cu from 14m (WMRC012) • The Torrens North area is prospective for: o Sediment-hosted copper deposits o Yeelirrie type calcrete-associated uranium deposits o Mississippi Valley type ("MVT") lead-zinc-copper-silver deposits o Structurally hosted gold deposits o IOCG deposits • The company is seeking the granting of exploration licences by Q2 2022. C29 Metals Limited (“ C29 ” or the “ Company ”) is pleased to provide shareholders with an update on the two exploration licence applications, ELA 2020/00219 Torrens North and ELA2020/00205 Mount Samuel group, all located in the highly prospective Olympic Dam IOCG Domain of the Gawler Craton region, South Australia. The Company currently has 1,768 km 2 of tenure under application (Figure 1). Within the licence application areas copper and uranium prospects are known, some of which include historical diggings. Application ELA 2020/00219 has had the most exploration activity historically with six prospects identified. C29’s Executive Director Mark Major commented : “The historical findings are very encouraging as we start planning our exploration programs for the 2022 period once the tenements are fully granted. The exciting part is that only a small proportion of the North Torrens area was explored and only a very small area was drilled. We are looking forward to unlocking the potential of these exploration prospects once granted.” 2 Figure 1: Location of the C29 Metals held ELA’s, relative to known mines and significant projects. The tenement applications reside within the Olympic Dam iron oxide copper gold (uranium) (“IOCG”) province of the Stuart Shelf in central South Australia. The IOCG province is a Palaeoproterozoic and Mesoproterozoic tectonic and lithostratigraphic domain that extends for some 700km along the eastern margin of the Gawler Craton (Figure 1). The Torrens North tenement ELA 2020/00219 is situated approximately 50km north-east of BHP’s Olympic Dam Mine and approximately 30km northeast of the township of Andamooka in South 3 Australia. Torrens North Sub-Project (ELA 2020/00205 part of the Mount Samuel tenement group) is located on the north-eastern side of Lake Torrens, just south of the Torrens North tenement. The Mount Samuel Tenement ELA 2020/00205 separated into four subblocks, mainly located East and South of Lake Torrens (Figure 1). The Torrens North project (ELA 2020/00219) is considered prospective for several types of economic precious and base metal deposits. Within the dominant Adelaidean and Cambrian sediments of this area, possible types of mineralisation could include: • Sediment-hosted copper deposits, of the Zambian Copperbelt style or associated with brecciated diapiric structures • Mississippi Valley type ("MVT") lead-zinc-copper-silver mineralisation systems • Structurally-hosted gold deposits associated with large fault systems in the Adelaidean sediments. • Disseminated sediment-hosted gold deposits • Willemite (zinc silicate) mineralisation similar to the deposits at the Puttapa Mine • Tertiary silcrete carnotite Uranium (Yeerlirrie) style deposits Within the Mesoproterozoic basement rocks under the majority of the tenements, the main exploration target is are the Olympic Dam style Cu-Au deposits also known as IOCG’s. The Torrens North project area is known to host several prospective copper projects. The majority of these are pure copper plays or copper associated with precious metals, including one uranium occurrence. The main 4 prospects are summarised in Table 1 and shown on Figure 2. Figure 2: Torrens North ELA 2020/00219 and subblock ELA2020/00205 location showing known mineral prospects within the area 4 Table 1: Summary geological characteristics of the known dominant prospects within ELA 2020/00219 Prospect Anomalous Elements Regolith Underlying Stratigraphic Unit Airport Claypan Cu, Au, Ag, Pd Claypan with minor outcrop surrounded by sand dunes Bunyeroo Formation West Mount Cu, Au Mostly thin soils over rock Umberatana and Wilpena Groups OK Mine Cu Andamooka Limestone Wonoka Formation Seaham U Uraniferious silcrete horizons Tertiary Sediments West Mount Prospect West Mount has an area of historical copper workings, where small shafts and pits occur on the eastern flank of West Mount over a strike length of approximately 500m. The mine dumps contain malachite (copper mineral) bearing quartz veins, including breccia. Historical drilling has been limited to the Torrens North area, with several holes recording anomalous copper intersections at the West Mount prospect (Figure 3). Notable intersections include: • 28m @ 0.34% Cu from 44m (WMRC016) • 14m @ 0.37% Cu from 14m (WMRC010) • 2m @ 1.45% Cu from 10m and 6m @ 0.32% Cu from 58m (WMRC007) • 6m @ 0.36% Cu from 14m (WMRC012) Specifics of all drill holes provided in Table 2, Significant drilling results are shown in Table 3 and Figure 3. Details can be found in Appendix A. Rock chip samples of up to 8.7% copper were also recorded at the West Mount area. Significant rock chip assay results are shown in Table 4. Figure 3: Location of West Mount prospects and historical drill hole locations showing significant drill results. 5 Seaham Prospect Considerable areas of Tertiary silcrete outcrop within the Seaham prospect. This area was identified to have favourable conditions for the deposition of secondary uranium mineralisation, and recorded uranium mineralisation in the form of carnotite. An initial scintillometer traversing exploration revealed the presence of the radioactive silcrete horizon in 1979. The tenure was dropped before drilling could be undertaken in 1980. No drilling has been undertaken. Assays taken on the initial rock samples ranged from 65ppm upto 210ppm Uranium. No details of the rock locations are known besides a hand drawn mud map presented in the SARIG report ENV03556. Airport Claypan prospect Copper mineralisation was discovered at or near Airport Claypan in 1974. The initial find was reported to be a low outcrop of malachite-bearing limestone at the base of a sand dune. During a later search (after 1996) additional copper mineralisation was located along the northern and southern shores of Airport Claypan, as flakes and small cupriferous rock chips. Tasman Resources NL submitted a selection of the flakes and various small rock chips (generally less than 1 cm in size) for microscopic examination. It was noted that the pieces were of four main lithologies: atacamite, atacamite-rich arkosic siltstone, pyritic chert and goethite-dominant chips. Atacamite is a rare copper rich mineral that resembles the more common copper rich mineral, malachite. The atacamite content of the siltstone was reported to range from absent to >50%, and some of the chips are composed wholly of atacamite. The identification of atacamite was confirmed by X-ray diffraction analysis. The copper rich flakes occur within gravel along the shores of the claypan as numerous small atacamite and iron oxide rich flakes up to one centimeter in size but usually only a few millimeters or less. Some of the flakes are finely laminated with iron oxide and atacamite rich layers, resembling bedding. The atacamite rich flakes appear to be a natural detrital deposit. The source of the copper minerals remains unexplained. OK Copper Mine propsect The OK copper mine prospect is located 1km north of the northern tip of Lake Torrens. It is reported that the old copper workings occur in Andamooka Limestone and that secondary copper mineralisation is hosted in cavities within limestone. Forward Plan The Company is currently in the process of changing the ownership of the project and has applied completed the regulatory documentation to continue the transfer of the exploration licences. It is expected that the applications process should be completed by April 2022. The company does not believe nor is it aware of any reasoning that the applications won’t be awarded once the regulatory assessment process is completed. 6 Authorised for release by the Board. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: David Lees Non-Executive Chairman info@c29metals.com.au +61 (8) 6559 1792 Competent Person’s Statement The information in this announcement is based on, and fairly represents information compiled by Mark Major, Executive Director of C29 Metals, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and is the technical advisor. Mr Major has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activity which he has undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Major consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears. Forward Looking Statements This report may contain certain “forward-looking statements” which may not have been based solely on historical facts, but rather may be based on the Company’s current expectations about future events and results. Where the Company expresses or implies an expectation or belief as to future events or results, such expectation or belief is expressed in good faith and believed to have a reasonable basis. However, forward looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, assumptions, and other factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from future results expressed, projected or implied by such forward-looking statements. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward looking information. The Company does not undertake any obligation to release publicly any revisions to any “forward looking statement” to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this report, or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as may be required under applicable securities laws 7 Table 2: Drilling Collars Location Drillhole ID Easting Northing Maximum depth (m) Elevation Dip Azimuth Year Company ACRC 2 743755 6664880 77 52 -90 0 2002 Tasman ACRC 4 744021 6664569 65 60 -90 0 2002 Tasman ACRC 5 744022 6664563 65 60 -90 0 2002 Tasman ACRC 6 744878 6665353 119 62 -90 0 2002 Tasman RC03SF002 712680 6668745 173 85 -90 360 2003 Tasman RC03SF005 712869 6668756 70 86 -90 360 2003 Tasman RC03SF006 712869 6668695 70 89 -90 360 2003 Tasman RC03SF007 712867 6668724 70 89 -90 360 2003 Tasman RC-DD03SF001 712681 6668721 153 -90 360 2003 Tasman RC-DD03SF003 712681 6668708 160 -90 360 2003 Tasman RC-DD03SF004 712676 6668684 99 -90 360 2003 Tasman SCYW-79 1A 707763 6665410 1450 61 -90 - 1981 Amoco SFD001 712680 6668723 25 85 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFD002 711880 6668523 168 77 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFRC0001 712118 6669192 251 80 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFRC0002 712369 6669167 179 82 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFRC0003 711814 6669184 143 75 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFRC0004 712284 6669195 173 79 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFRC0005 712380 6669095 167 81 -90 0 2002 Tasman SFRC0005A 712301 6669164 100 81 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 1 757632 6673128 59 98 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 10 758233 6673193 77 103 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 11 758185 6673182 65 102 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 12 758190 6673190 65 102 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 13 757800 6673151 77 105 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 14 758063 6673178 119 102 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 15 758206 6673327 65 106 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 16 758173 6673326 77 105 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 17 758142 6673319 72 105 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 18 757984 6673773 65 106 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 19 757835 6673757 35 109 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 2 757669 6673131 119 102 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 20 757739 6673752 65 109 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 21 758157 6673700 119 119 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 22 758174 6673782 65 115 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 23 758165 6673383 45 107 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 24 757743 6673751 221 109 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 25 757344 6673737 71 107 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 3 757829 6673145 65 103 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 4 758007 6673173 71 99 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 5 758071 6673178 65 101 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 6 758170 6673185 65 101 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 7 758213 6673192 77 103 -90 0 2002 Tasman WMRC 8 758273 6673195 95 105 -90 0 2002 Tasman 8 Drillhole ID Easting Northing Maximum depth (m) Elevation Dip Azimuth Year Company WMRC 9 758380 6673203 77 104 -90 0 2002 Tasman Table 3: Drilling Collars and Significant Results (>0.2% Cu) Prospect Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Cu % West Mount WMRC0007 8 10 0.42 West Mount WMRC0007 10 12 1.45 West Mount WMRC0007 58 60 0.26 West Mount WMRC0007 60 62 0.40 West Mount WMRC0007 68 70 0.22 West Mount WMRC0007 70 72 0.50 West Mount WMRC0007 72 74 0.24 West Mount WMRC0008 36 38 0.28 West Mount WMRC0008 38 40 0.42 West Mount WMRC0008 44 46 0.36 West Mount WMRC0008 46 48 0.25 West Mount WMRC0008 50 52 0.20 West Mount WMRC0010 14 16 0.45 West Mount WMRC0010 16 18 0.80 West Mount WMRC0010 18 20 0.28 West Mount WMRC0010 20 22 0.43 West Mount WMRC0010 22 24 0.24 West Mount WMRC0010 26 28 0.25 West Mount WMRC0012 0 2 0.21 West Mount WMRC0012 2 4 0.23 West Mount WMRC0012 14 16 0.39 West Mount WMRC0012 16 18 0.48 West Mount WMRC0012 18 20 0.21 West Mount WMRC0012 32 34 0.29 West Mount WMRC0012 34 36 0.34 West Mount WMRC0016 44 46 0.21 West Mount WMRC0016 50 52 0.64 West Mount WMRC0016 52 54 0.59 West Mount WMRC0016 54 56 0.36 West Mount WMRC0016 56 58 0.23 West Mount WMRC0016 60 62 0.68 West Mount WMRC0016 62 64 0.47 West Mount WMRC0016 66 68 0.43 West Mount WMRC0016 68 70 0.42 West Mount WMRC0021 30 32 0.34 West Mount WMRC0021 52 54 0.22 West Mount WMRC0021 56 58 0.23 West Mount WMRC0023 8 10 0.20 West Mount WMRC0023 10 12 0.57 West Mount WMRC0023 32 34 0.27 NB: Lengths shown for mineralisation are downhole lengths and not true thicknesses. 9 Table 4: Rock Chip samples with Significant Cu (>3000 ppm) from West Mount area. Sample No Easting MGA 9 4 Northing MGA94 Date Sampled Au ( ppb ) Co ppm Cu ppm Description WM0710 758153.1 6673714 10 - Apr - 02 4 12 3355 None taken WM0716 758130.1 6673714 10 - Apr - 02 3 5 29082 None taken WM0717 758126.1 6673714 10 - Apr - 02 0 3 5223 None taken WM0718 758110.1 6673714 10 - Apr - 02 0 3 6141 None taken WM0719 758105.1 6673714 10 - Apr - 02 1 6 8064 None taken WM0736 758146.1 6673684 10 - Apr - 02 0 16 3407 None taken WM0738 758133.1 6673684 10 - Apr - 02 4 62 3437 None taken WM0739 758128.1 6673684 10 - Apr - 02 4 10 13676 None taken WM0740 758127.1 6673684 10 - Apr - 02 0 7 4658 None taken WM0792 758150.1 6673757 10 - Apr - 02 0 25 7138 None taken WM0795 758126.1 6673746 10 - Apr - 02 1 37 4321 None taken WM0805 758122.1 6673698 10 - Apr - 02 3 25 4088 None taken WM0988 757465.1 6674238 15 - Nov - 02 30 5 41400 None taken WM0999 757034.1 6677054 15 - Nov - 02 10 22 87800 None taken WM1034 757030.1 6677057 1 - Jan - 02 11 6035 None taken WM1035 757031.1 6677057 1 - Jan - 02 9 6399 None taken WM1036 757032.1 6677056 1 - Jan - 02 39 46687 None taken WM1039 757015.1 6677049 1 - Jan - 02 10 9760 None taken WM1040 757015.7 6677048 1 - Jan - 02 10 6941 None taken WM1041 757016.2 6677046 1 - Jan - 02 10 8528 None taken WM1042 757016.8 6677044 1 - Jan - 02 10 6549 None taken WM1043 757017.3 6677043 1 - Jan - 02 9 6284 None taken WM1044 757017.9 6677041 1 - Jan - 02 9 5244 None taken WM1045 757018.4 6677039 1 - Jan - 02 11 5275 None taken WM1047 757019.5 6677036 1 - Jan - 02 14 3468 None taken WM1088 758193.1 6673761 8 - Aug - 01 8 10.5 48000 Siderite with Cu WM1089 758140.1 6673722 8 - Aug - 01 8 11.5 54200 Gossan with Cu in pit WM1090 758122.1 6673704 8 - Aug - 01 7 26 6250 Quartz with Cu in upper n workings WM1092 758163.1 6673559 8 - Aug - 01 19 35 38400 Country rock pit WM1094 758172.1 6673481 8 - Aug - 01 3 130 4300 Quartz breccia WM1095 758245.1 6673158 8 - Aug - 01 2 17.5 7150 Quartz breccia & Cu in s workings WM1096 758138.1 6673394 8 - Aug - 01 5 240 3950 Quartz on SE of knob Appendix A: JORC Code, 2012 Table 1 Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Sampling was undertaken u sing i ndustry - standard practices utilising mostly reverse circulation (RC) drilling and diamond drilling (DD). • Rock chip samples were taken randomly at outcrops. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Given the historical nature of the drilling and other geochemical sampling, no information is available about sample representivity and calibration. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • The drilling was completed by composite sampling normally 2 -4m with resampling to single metres for anomalous zones. • Rock samples were random and are not material. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • From the information reviewed, it appears that drilling and sampling was conducted using industry-standard techniques. • Where information was available in historical reports, samples were taken from a rig-mounted cyclone. Composite samples were generally via a spear sampled. In general, the target was for samples weighing approximately 2.5kg. Drilling techniques • Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). • Most of the drilling was based on reverse circulation (RC) drilling and diamond drilling (DD). • From the information reviewed, it appears that drilling was conducted using industry-standard techniques. Drill sample recovery • Method of rec ording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. • Given the historical nature of the drilling, no information is available about sample recoveries for specific drill programs • No bias was noted between sample recovery and grade. Logging • Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. • Logs for the drill holes were generally of reasonable quality. • Qualitative logging of lithology, alteration, mineralisation, regolith and veining was undertaken at various intervals. Sub - sampling • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • Limited data is avai l able for subsampling techniques. 11 techniques and sample preparation • If non - core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. • Sampling appears to have been carried out using industry-standard practise. • No QA/QC procedures have been reviewed on for the historical sampling. • The sample size is considered appropriate for the material being sampled. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. • Where information has been provided in SARIG reports, the analytical techniques appear appropriate for the stage of exploration being conducted using industry-standard techniques. • Uranium assays were tested in AMDEL Adelaide, using analysis code B1/1. • Rock and drill samples selected by Tasman Resources we assayed by AMDEl using Au by AA9, rest by analysis code B/AAs. Verification of sampling and assaying • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data. • No twinned holes were identified from the data reviewed, although given the early stage of exploration this is to be expected. • No adjustments have been made to original assay data. Location of data points • Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control. • Most of the drilling was undertaken using MGA grid and while not reported, it is believed that hole locations were measured by hand-held GPS. • No field validation has been undertaken. • Topographic control is considered adequate for the early stage of exploration. Data spacing and distribution • Data s pacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied. • Drillhole spacing is highly variable over the project with sporadic drilling only surrounding the historical workings. • There has been insufficient sampling and no significant results to date to support the estimation of a resource. It is unknown if additional exploration will result in the definition of a Mineral Resource. • Assays have been composited into significant intersections. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key min eralised structures is considered to • No orientation - based sampling bias is known at this time. 12 have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. • Details of measures taken for the chain of custody of samples is unknown for the previous explorers' activities. Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • No Audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data have been undertaken. Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status • Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • The Torrens North Project comprises two exploration licence applications (ELA 00219 and 00205) which collectively cover 1,768km 2 in the World Class Olympic Dam IOCG Domain in Gawler Craton of South Australia. • The Torrens North tenement ELA00219 is located approximately 30km northeast of the township of Andamooka in South Australia on the north-eastern side of Lake Torrens. • The applications are in the name of Phoenix Minerals Pty Ltd, which is owned 100% by C29 Metals Pty Ltd. Exploration done by other parties • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. • Copper minerals were found in 1974 near a small claypan, known locally as Airport Claypan Prospect (Gray, 1997). • Copper and Uranium minerals were identified near the Mulgaria homestead – preville hut area, later called the Seaham prospect area in 1979, by Seaham explorations Pty Ltd. Rock samples were the focus of the exploration methods. • In 1981, Amoco Minerals Aus tralia Co. (“Amoco”) drilled hole SCYW- 79 1A approximately 45 km northeast of Olympic Dam. It failed to reach basement and ended at 1450m in tillite and quartzo-feldspathic sandstone of the lower part of the Umberatana Group (Adelaidean). • During 1986 and 1988, the Electricity Trust of South Australia (“ETSA”) drilled a series of coal exploration holes that were aligned along a broad traverse, 65 km long and east- west trending. Some holes ended in probable Adelaidean rocks, the rest ended in the overlying B ulldog Shale or Algebuckina Sandstone. No assays are reported. • Tasman Resources NL (“Tasman”) has explored the current tenement area between 2005 and 2013. Tasman used a wide range of remote sensing geochemical and geophysical methods. These include mobile metal ion (“MMI”) and rock chip analysis, aeromagnetic interpretation, radiometric survey and induced polarisation (“IP”) surveys. IP traverses were completed to confirm drill targets. In most instances, drilling was only undertaken where chargeability an omalies inferred sulphide mineralisation. Tasman drilled 44 drillholes 13 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary (mostly RC holes) for 4,322m on the current tenement between 2002 and 2003. 29 of these drillholes was around West Mount and Airport Clay Prospects. • All exploration reported and associated SARIG report numbers included SARIG ENV09288, ENV9710, ENV9786 and ENV03556. Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. • The project lies within the Olympic Dam iron oxide copper gold (uranium) (“IOCG”) province of the Stuart Shelf in central South Australia. The IOCG province is a Palaeoproterozoic and Mesoproterozoic tectonic and lithostratigraphic domain. Locally surface exposures within the project area are dominated by sedimentary rocks that were deposited in four broad periods: Quaternary/Tertiary, Mesozoic (the Eromanga Basin), Cambrian (the Arrowie Basin) and Adelaidean (the Adelaide Geosyncline and Stuart Shelf). • The Lake Torrens Project is prospective for several types of economic precious and base metal deposits. Within the Adelaidean and Cambrian sediments they include, in approximate order of importance: • Sediment-hosted copper deposits, in particular of the Zambian Copperbelt style, or associated with brecciated diapiric structures. • Yeelirrie type calcrete uranium depositis. • Mississippi Valley type ("MVT") lead- zinc-copper-silver mineralisation. • Structurally-hosted gold deposits associated with large fault systems in the Adelaidean • sediments. • Disseminated sediment- hosted gold deposits. • Willemite (zinc silicate) mineralisation similar to the deposits at the Puttapa Mine. Within the Mesoproterozoic basement rocks the main exploration target is: • Olympic Dam style Cu-Au deposits Drill hole Information • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case. • All drill hole collar locations and s ignificant drill results have been identified in Table 2 and 3 of this announcement. • No relevant data has been excluded from this Report. 14 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Data aggregation methods • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. • Significant intersections (> 0.2 % Cu ) have been calculated with no edge dilution and a minimum of 1m downhole length. • No top cuts have been applied. • No metal equivalent values are reported. Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths • These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’). • Only downhole lengths are reported. • The exact geometry of the mineralisation is not known as such true width is not known. Diagrams • Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. • Appropriate plans are included in this announcement. Balanced reporting • Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results. • All drill holes information including collar location is included. • Significant exploration drill results (>0.2% Cu) are included in this Report. • All significant exploration rock chip samples are presented in this report. Other substantive exploration data • Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. • To date , only exploration drilling , rock chip geochemistry and geophysical surveys (and associated activities) have been undertaken on the project. No other modifying factors have been investigated at this stage. Further work • The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not c ommercially sensitive. • Further work will include systematic exploration drilling. • Appropriate plans are included in this announcement. • Future exploration activities will be determined once the licence are granted; but will include geophysical studies, drilling, and geochemical surveys
Information on this Website is provided for general information purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice. ASX Information (including company announcements and prices) is delayed by at least 20 minutes. JSE Information (including company announcements and prices) is delayed by at least 15 minutes. Reliance on the information you access on or from this Website is solely at your own risk. We make no representation or warranty in relation to the future performance of the companies that appear on this Website. Investment in securities involves risk and you should obtain independent professional legal, financial, investment or company advice before acting on any of the information you access on this Website. Using, browsing or otherwise accessing this Website is subject to our Terms and Conditions and our Privacy Policy.

© 2021 Listcorp. ABN 60 166 140 307

Never miss news from C29 Metals Limited (ASX:C29) when you join Listcorp.