Magna Mining (NICU.V): Announces Initial Mineral Resource Estimate on the Denison Project Containing a Total Indicated Mineral Resource of over 31 Million Tonnes
Sudbury, Ontario–(Newsfile Corp. – November 7, 2022) – Magna Mining Inc (TSXV: NICU) (the “Company”) is pleased to announce the initial Mineral Resource Estimate for the Denison Project which includes the past producing Crean Hill NiCu-PGE Mine in Sudbury, Ontario.
The Company recently announced the closing of the acquisition of Lonmin Canada Inc. (“Loncan”), which owns the Denison Project. The Denison Project is centered on the past producing Crean Hill Mine in the Sudbury Basin, which was a significant producer of Ni-Cu-Pt-Pd-Au over a period spanning more than 80 years. Historical production at Crean Hill was focused on the contact-style nickel-copper mineralization. More recent exploration on the property by Loncan has demonstrated the potential for high grade Pt-Pd-Au mineralization in the footwall of the contact nickel zones.
Denison Mineral Resource Estimate Highlights
- Indicated Mineral Resource Estimate:
| Million Tonnes | Ni (%) | Cu (%) | Co (%) | Pt (g/t) | Pd (g/t) | Au (g/t) | NiEq (%)* | |
| OPEN PIT | 16.8 | 0.53 | 0.49 | 0.02 | 0.48 | 0.37 | 0.25 | 1.08 |
| UNDERGROUND | 14.5 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.03 | 0.88 | 1.02 | 0.54 | 2.07 |
- Contained metal (Indicated category) of 500M lbs nickel, 450M lbs copper, and 1.7M oz platinum + palladium + gold
- High grade underground Indicated resource of 14.5 M tonnes at 2.07 % nickel equivalent*
- Resource starts at surface and could be amenable to open pit mining as well as near surface underground mining methods
- The total indicated resource incorporates mineralization from the contact style Ni-Cu dominated zones, as well as the Pt-Pd-Au rich, low sulphide footwall mineralization
- Mineralization is well defined and primarily in the Indicated category from surface to approximately 1200 m below surface
*See notes on Mineral Resource assumptions, at the end of this release, including metal prices and recoveries used.
Magna Mining CEO, Jason Jessup, commented: “We believe that this Mineral Resource Estimate clearly demonstrates that the Denison Project has considerable remaining mineralization, and has the potential to, once again, become a significant producing mine. The proximity of our other project, the permitted mine and mill site at Shakespeare, means that this asset is a natural fit for our company and gives us a unique advantage in exploring and developing Crean Hill. Now that the acquisition has closed, we plan to commence our maiden exploration program at Crean Hill and commission a new technical study to demonstrate the potential synergies between Crean Hill and Shakespeare.”
Figure 1: Map Showing Location of Denison in Relation to Shakespeare.
To view an enhanced version of Figure 1, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/8002/143392_c0ffece604c1eb39_003full.jpg
Figure 2: Map Showing the Denison Property and Local Geology. Source: WSP 2020.
To view an enhanced version of Figure 2, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/8002/143392_c0ffece604c1eb39_004full.jpg
Mineral Resources
The Mineral Resources at Denison were estimated by SGS Geological Services and are summarized in Table 1. Sensitivity to cut-off grade is illustrated in Table 2, and contained metal summarized in Table 3. Mineral Resources include near surface mineralization with potential for open pit mining, as well as higher grade mineralization amenable to conventional underground mining methods (Figure 3). The full technical report, which is being prepared in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”) will be available on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) under the Company’s issuer profile within 45 days from this news release.
Table 1: Denison Mineral Resources as at August 19, 2022 (please see notes on Mineral Resource assumptions at the end of this release, including metal prices and recoveries used).
(A) Open Pit Resources
| Cut-off Grade | Tonnes | Ni % | Cu % | Co % | Pt g/t | Pd g/t | Au g/t | NiEq % |
| Indicated | ||||||||
| 0.3% NiEq | 16,760,000 | 0.53 | 0.49 | 0.02 | 0.48 | 0.37 | 0.25 | 1.08 |
| Inferred | ||||||||
| 0.3% NiEq | 434,000 | 0.43 | 0.49 | 0.02 | 0.29 | 0.14 | 0.07 | 0.82 |
(B) Underground Resources
| Cut-off Grade | Tonnes | Ni % | Cu % | Co % | Pt g/t | Pd g/t | Au g/t | NiEq % |
| Indicated | ||||||||
| 1.1% NiEq | 14,531,000 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.03 | 0.88 | 1.02 | 0.54 | 2.07 |
| Inferred | ||||||||
| 1.1% NiEq | 1,170,000 | 0.61 | 0.46 | 0.02 | 0.64 | 1.09 | 0.21 | 1.41 |
Table 2: Denison Mineral Resources, Sensitivity to Cut-off Grade. Open Pit Resources (A) and Underground Resources (B).
(A) Open Pit Resources
| Cut-off Grade NiEq (%) | Tonnes | Ni% | Cu% | Co% | Pt g/t | Pd g/t | Au g/t |
| Indicated | |||||||
| 0.2 | 17,241,000 | 0.52 | 0.48 | 0.02 | 0.47 | 0.36 | 0.25 |
| 0.3 | 16,760,000 | 0.53 | 0.49 | 0.02 | 0.48 | 0.37 | 0.25 |
| 0.4 | 16,080,000 | 0.55 | 0.5 | 0.02 | 0.49 | 0.38 | 0.26 |
| 0.5 | 14,977,000 | 0.57 | 0.52 | 0.02 | 0.5 | 0.39 | 0.27 |
| 0.6 | 13,528,000 | 0.61 | 0.55 | 0.02 | 0.53 | 0.42 | 0.28 |
| 0.8 | 9,961,000 | 0.7 | 0.62 | 0.02 | 0.62 | 0.5 | 0.32 |
| Inferred | |||||||
| 0.2 | 440,000 | 0.43 | 0.48 | 0.02 | 0.28 | 0.14 | 0.07 |
| 0.3 | 434,000 | 0.43 | 0.49 | 0.02 | 0.29 | 0.14 | 0.07 |
| 0.4 | 410,000 | 0.45 | 0.51 | 0.02 | 0.3 | 0.15 | 0.08 |
| 0.5 | 326,000 | 0.49 | 0.58 | 0.02 | 0.29 | 0.19 | 0.1 |
| 0.6 | 283,000 | 0.53 | 0.62 | 0.02 | 0.33 | 0.22 | 0.11 |
| 0.8 | 192,000 | 0.61 | 0.7 | 0.02 | 0.32 | 0.16 | 0.16 |
(B) Underground Resources
| Cut-off Grade NiEq (%) | Tonnes | Ni% | Cu% | Co% | Pt g/t | Pd g/t | Au g/t |
| Indicated | |||||||
| 0.8 | 21,678,000 | 0.78 | 0.7 | 0.03 | 0.73 | 0.82 | 0.45 |
| 1 | 16,789,000 | 0.89 | 0.79 | 0.03 | 0.82 | 0.94 | 0.51 |
| 1.1 | 14,531,000 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.03 | 0.88 | 1.02 | 0.54 |
| 1.2 | 12,581,000 | 1.02 | 0.9 | 0.03 | 0.94 | 1.1 | 0.58 |
| 1.3 | 10,909,000 | 1.09 | 0.95 | 0.04 | 1.01 | 1.18 | 0.61 |
| 1.5 | 8,278,000 | 1.23 | 1.06 | 0.04 | 1.14 | 1.37 | 0.68 |
| Inferred | |||||||
| 0.8 | 4,039,000 | 0.5 | 0.41 | 0.02 | 0.44 | 0.64 | 0.15 |
| 1 | 1,779,000 | 0.58 | 0.47 | 0.02 | 0.56 | 0.89 | 0.19 |
| 1.1 | 1,170,000 | 0.61 | 0.46 | 0.02 | 0.64 | 1.09 | 0.21 |
| 1.2 | 754,000 | 0.67 | 0.5 | 0.02 | 0.62 | 1.32 | 0.21 |
| 1.3 | 539,000 | 0.73 | 0.51 | 0.02 | 0.63 | 1.44 | 0.23 |
| 1.5 | 340,000 | 0.82 | 0.56 | 0.03 | 0.73 | 1.65 | 0.18 |
(1) In-pit Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 0.3% NiEq within a conceptual pit shell and underground (below-pit) Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 1.1% NiEq from the bottom of the conceptual pit shell. Values in this table reported above and below the cut-off grades should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource Statement. The values are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of cut-off grade. All values are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.
(2) NiEq Cut- off grades are based on metal prices of $8.50/lb Ni, $3.75/lb Cu, $22.00/lb Co, $1000/oz Pt, $2000/oz Pd and $1,750/oz Au and consider metal recoveries of 78% for Ni, 95.5% for copper, 56% for Co, 69.2% for Pt, 68% for Pd and 67.7% for Au.
(3) All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate. Composites have been capped where appropriate.
Table 3: Denison Mineral Resources, Contained Metal in Open Pit Resources (A) and Underground Resources (B).
(A) Open Pit Resources
| Cut-off Grade | Category | Tonnes | Ni lbs (Millions) | Cu lbs (Millions) | Co lbs (Millions) | Pt ozs (Thousands) | Pd ozs (Thousands) | Au ozs (Thousands) |
| 0.3% NiEq | Indicated | 16,760,000 | 195.78 | 181 | 7.39 | 258.65 | 199.38 | 134.71 |
| 0.3% NiEq | Inferred | 434,000 | 4.11 | 4.69 | 0.19 | 4.05 | 1.95 | 0.98 |
(B) Underground Resources
| Cut-off Grade | Category | Tonnes | Ni lbs (Millions) | Cu lbs (Millions) | Co lbs (Millions) | Pt ozs (Thousands) | Pd ozs (Thousands) | Au ozs (Thousands) |
| 1.1% NiEq | Indicated | 14,531,000 | 307.45 | 269.02 | 9.61 | 411.12 | 476.53 | 252.28 |
| 1.1% NiEq | Inferred | 1,170,000 | 15.73 | 11.86 | 0.52 | 24.07 | 41.00 | 7.90 |
Figure 3: Denison Project Longitudinal Section Showing Current Open Pit and Underground Mineral Resource Blocks Coloured by Nickel Equivalent Grade. (As of August 19, 2022)
To view an enhanced version of Figure 3, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/8002/143392_c0ffece604c1eb39_011full.jpg
Figure 4: Denison Project Vertical Section Looking West, Showing the 109 FW Zone and Diamond Drilling Composites Greater than 0.8% Ni Equivalent over Greater than 10 feet Core Length. Selected Loncan Diamond Drillhole Intercepts are Highlighted. Section Location Shown on Figure 4.
To view an enhanced version of Figure 4, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/8002/143392_c0ffece604c1eb39_012full.jpg
Notes on Mineral Resource Assumptions:
(1) The classification of the current Mineral Resource Estimate into Indicated and Inferred is consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards – For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.
(2) All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.
(3) All Resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.
(4) Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.
(5) It is envisioned that parts of the Denison deposit may be mined using open pit mining methods. In-pit mineral resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 0.3 % NiEq within a conceptual pit shell.
(6) The results from the pit optimization are used solely for the purpose of testing the “reasonable prospects for economic extraction” by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade.
(7) Underground (below-pit) Mineral Resources are estimated from the bottom of the pit and are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 1.1 % NiEq. The underground Mineral Resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below the constraining pit shell and within the constraining mineralized wireframes. At this base case cut-off grade the deposit shows good deposit continuity with limited orphaned blocks. Any orphaned blocks are connected within the models by lower grade blocks.
(8) Based on the size, shape, location and orientation of the Denison deposit, it is envisioned that the deposit may be mined using longhole open stoping (a bulk mining method that has long been utilized in the Sudbury region).
(9) High grade capping was done on 10 ft (3.05 m) composite data.
(10) Bulk density values were determined based on physical test work from each deposit model and waste model.
(11) NiEq cut-off grades are based on metal prices of $8.50/lb Ni, $3.75/lb Cu, $22.00/lb Co, $1000/oz Pt, $2000/oz Pd and $1,750/oz Au and considers metal recoveries of 78% for Ni, 95.5% for copper, 56% for Co, 69.2% for Pt, 68% for Pd and 67.7% for Au.
(12) The in-pit base case cut-off grade of 0.3% NiEq considers a mining cost of US$2.50/t rock and processing, treatment and refining, transportation and G&A cost of US$38.00/t mineralized material, and an overall pit slope of 55 degrees. The below-pit base case cut-off grade of 1.1 % NiEq considers a mining cost of US$80.00/t rock and processing, treatment and refining, transportation and G&A cost of US$42.50/t mineralized material.
(13) The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.
Qualified Person
The Denison project 2022 Mineral Resource Estimate was prepared by Allan Armitage, Ph.D., P.Geo., of SGS Geological Services, an independent Qualified Person, in accordance with the guidelines of the Canadian Securities Administrators’ NI 43-101, with an effective date of August 19th, 2022. Armitage conducted a site visit to the property on May 25 – May 26, 2022.
Certain technical information in this press release has been reviewed and approved by David King, M.Sc., P.Geo. Mr. King is the Senior Vice President, Technical Services for Magna Mining Inc. and is a qualified person under NI 43-101.
About Magna Mining Inc.
Magna Mining is an exploration and development company focused on nickel, copper and PGM projects in the Sudbury Region of Ontario, Canada. The Company has two advanced assets in the Sudbury region; the past producing Shakespeare Mine which has major permits for the construction of a 4500 tonne per day open pit mine, processing plant and tailings storage facility and the past producing Crean Hill Mine. Additional information about the Company is available on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on the Company’s website (www.magnamining.com).
For further information, please contact:
Jason Jessup
Chief Executive Officer
or
Paul Fowler, CFA
Senior Vice President
Email: [email protected]
Cautionary Statement
This press release contains certain forward-looking information or forward-looking statements as defined in applicable securities laws. Forward-looking statements are not historical facts and are subject to several risks and uncertainties beyond the Company’s control, including statements regarding the potential production at the Shakespeare Mine and the Denison Mine the economic and operational potential of the Shakespeare Mine and the Denison Mine, potential acquisitions, plans to complete exploration programs, potential mineralization, exploration results and statements regarding beliefs, plans, expectations, or intentions of the Company. Resource exploration and development is highly speculative, characterized by several significant risks, which even a combination of careful evaluation, experience and knowledge may not eliminate. All forward-looking statements herein are qualified by this cautionary statement. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information or future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law.
Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this press release.
To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/143392
