Announcement PDF ASX ANNOUNCEMENT Date: 21 September 2021 Number: 773/21092021 OUTSTANDING Ni-Cu-PGM and LITHIUM-CAESIUM-TANTALUM SOIL GEOCHEMISTRY RESULTS AT THE ARKUN PROJECT, WA • • • • • Numerous high priority targets for nickel-copper-PGM mineralisation and, for the first time, lithium-caesium-tantalum (LCT) pegmatites, identified at the Arkun project. 11 targets for Ni-Cu-PGM and 11 targets for LCT identified with soil anomalies for both styles extending over significant areas of many hundreds of metres on the reconnaissance traverses. The Arkun project is very poorly explored with no drilling and no previous lithium exploration at all. Follow up work including field checking and rock chip sampling is in progress. Land access negotiations to commence as soon as practicable. Very high success rate of anomaly identification targets validates Impact’s targeting methodology. A significant number of high priority targets for nickel-copper-platinum-metal-group metals-gold (PGM) and, for the first time, lithium-caesium-tantalum pegmatites have been identified in new soil geochemistry results from Impact Minerals Limited’s (ASX:IPT) 100% owned Arkun project in the emerging mineral province of south west Western Australia (Figure 1). Impact Minerals’ Managing Director Dr Mike Jones said “These soil results have exceeded our expectations by a long way and are also a credit to our target generation technology. To have identified 11 targets for nickel-copper-PGM is exciting enough in its own right, but recognising the potential for lithium pegmatites over a very large area is also a significant breakthrough for Impact. The recent Julimar Ni-Cu-PGM discovery and also the presence of the Greenbushes lithium-tantalum mine attest to the potential of this part of Western Australia to host world class deposits across a wide variety of commodity metals and our new results show how poorly explored this region truly is.” “We have already started follow up work given we are unable to operate effectively in NSW because of COVID restrictions and also whilst organising the drill programme at our exciting Doonia gold project near the Burns discovery east of Kambalda.” “I feel confident based on the strength and scale of these new anomalies that further work at Arkun will generate numerous targets for drill testing early in 2022” said Dr Jones. 26 Richardson Street West Perth Western Australia 6005 Tel +61 (8) 6454 6666 Facsimile +61 (8) 6454 6667 Email info@impactminerals.com.au www.impactminerals.com.au Figure 1. Location and Regional Geology of the Arkun Project and showing key nickel-copper-PGE deposits and recent discoveries. Note the large tenement holdings of Anglo American Corporation who applied for the ground on the same day of Impact’s first announcement about Arkun. Previous work by Impact identified 17 targets, principally for Ni-Cu-PGM mineralisation, for follow up work across the Arkun project area (ASX Release 10th June 2021). Fifteen of these targets were covered by a single soil geochemistry traverse up to several kilometres long along gazetted roads and tracks with soil samples taken at 100 metre spacings along the traverses. Each traverse was long enough to extend well away from the target area into areas of “background” in order to establish the relative anomalism of the various metals in the target above background. The overall results of the soil geochemistry survey are described below and presented as additive Z scores in Figures 2 and 3. Further details on some of the priority targets identified and the sampling and analytical techniques used are presented at the end of the report together with plots of the absolute values of the key metals for reference. 1. NICKEL-COPPER-PALLADIUM-PLATINUM-GOLD RESULTS The results for nickel-copper-palladium-platinum and gold are shown as additive Z scores in Figure 2. Gold has been included because it shows a strong mathematical correlation with the other metals. It is evident that the central part of the Arkun project area stands out as being strongly anomalous in all five metals and six high priority targets and five medium priority targets have been identified as warranting follow up work. Of note is that the targets are commonly anomalous in all five metals and in particular palladium and gold (Figure 6). This suggests a potential relationship to sulphide mineralisation rather than being the result of elevated backgrounds of only nickel and copper related to areas of mafic rocks. This is an exceptional result and supports Impact’s original contention that the Arkun area is highly prospective for nickel-copper-PGM mineralisation. N4 N3 N1 N2 Figure 2. Additive Z scores for Ni-Cu-Pd-Pt-Au across the main Arkun project area. Note the large areas of anomalism in the central part of the project area. Six priority areas for follow up work are highlighted. Other areas of elevated response are also evident including the Beau target to the north. Four priority areas, N1 to N4 are shown in more detail in Figure 4 at the back of the report. The soil anomalies all cover extensive areas and are coincident with either gravity highs or magnetic lows which together may represent mafic-ultramafic intrusions that are potential hosts for nickel-copperPGM sulphide mineralisation. 2. LITHIUM-CAESIUM-TANTALUM The results for lithium-caesium-tantalum are shown as additive Z scores in Figure 3. The coincidence of the three metals together suggests the potential for the source of the anomalies to be lithiumcaesium-tantalum (LCT) pegmatites, a key source of hard rock lithium for the emerging battery metals industry. It is evident that numerous areas across the Arkun project stand out as being strongly anomalous in all three metals and six high priority targets and at least five medium priority targets have been identified as warranting follow up work (Figure 3). One of the standout areas is the Beau target, the northern most priority area identified. This target was purchased by Impact in 2020 for its nickel-copper-PGM potential and modest soil responses for those metals were returned (Figure 2). However there are numerous strong LCT responses in the area as well (Figure 3). Beau L2 L3 L1 Figure 3. Additive Z scores for Li-Cs-Ta across the main Arkun project area. Note the large areas with very elevated Z scores in the central east part of the project area and at Beau to the north. Six priority areas for follow up work are highlighted. Other areas of elevated response are also evident. Three priority areas, L1 to L3 are shown in more detail in Figure 5 at the end of the report. There has been no previous exploration for lithium at Arkun. 3. DISCUSSION AND NEXT STEPS The results of Impact’s first ever soil geochemistry programme at Arkun have outlined a significant number of areas for follow up work for both nickel-copper-PGM mineralisation and also for LCT pegmatites. First pass follow up field checking and sampling is now in progress with the aim of prioritising areas for more detailed soil geochemistry and ground geophysics that will extend away from the roads and into the surrounding paddocks. In order to explore in the paddocks, land access agreements will be required with the relevant landowners and this process will commence. At present much of the region is under crop and access to many of the targets for detailed follow up will be limited until after the harvest period later in the year. About the Soil Geochemistry Survey The soil samples were submitted to ALS in Perth for analysis by the ionic leach method. This method is a so-called “partial digest” technique that uses very dilute chemical solutions that only extract weakly bound ions from the sample for analysis. Many case studies have shown that partial digests tend to give better discrimination of soil geochemical anomalies over background values. However the weak nature of the chemical solutions used, means that the absolute values of metals returned in the analysis are much lower than those returned from more aggressive digestion techniques such as aqua regia and four acid digests. It is the background-to-anomaly ratio that is the critical factor to consider. Figure 6 shows the absolute values of the soil assays for reference. About Z Scores Z scores are a standard statistical calculation of the number of standard deviations a raw data (assay) value is from the mean of the data. For example a Z score of 2 indicates a value 2 standard deviations above the mean. The higher the Z score, the more anomalous the data point is with respect to the dataset. Z scores are a standard method of normalising data so that statistically meaningful associations between datasets can be made. In this case the Z scores for individual metals that occur within assemblages specific to nickel-copper-PGM-gold and lithium-caesium-tantalum mineralisation respectively are simply added together in order to amplify the metal associations. N1 N2 N4 N3 Figure 4. Priority Targets for Ni-Cu-PGM-Au shown on images of regional gravity data and regional magnetic data (bottom right). Top left: Target N1. Strongly elevated soil geochemistry responses extend over an area of at least 600 metres by 300 metres and occurring close to a significant gravity high (warmer colours). Top right: Target N2. Multiple moderate to strongly elevated soil geochemistry responses extend over several line kilometres with about six areas of interest within the one target identified and all coincident with a broad gravity high. Bottom Left: Target N3. Moderate soil responses over about 1,000 metres are coincident with a moderate gravity high. The gravity highs in Targets N1, N2 and N3 may all be caused by dense mafic to ultramafic rocks and are potential hosts for deposits of nickel-copper-PGM sulphide mineralisation. Bottom Right: Target N4. Moderate soil responses coincident with the western edge of a magnetic low (cooler colours). The magnetic low may represent a mafic intrusion with elevated nickel-copperPGM at its base on the western side. Figure 5. Priority Targets for Li-Cs-Ta shown on images of regional magnetic data and regional gravity data (lower image). Top Left: Target L1. Strongly elevated soil geochemistry responses extend over many hundreds of metres of extent along the traverses. The prominent magnetic NW trending magnetic unit is a banded iron formation suggesting much of the area may be a deformed and metamorphosed greenstone belt which are hosts to major lithium deposits in Western Australia. Top Right: Target L2. Moderate soil geochemistry responses occur over several hundred metres in about four places along the traverse. The responses are centred over an ovoid feature in the magnetic data interpreted as a granite intrusion that may represent a parent intrusion to LCT pegmatites. Lower Image: Target L3. Moderate soil responses over a prominent gravity low. The low may be caused by a granite intrusion. Note this is the same traverse as Target N4 (Figure 4). Figure 6. Ionic leach assays results for individual metals with maximum and minimum values. The low values reflect the dilute nature of the digest used in the ionic leach method. About the Arkun Project The Arkun Project, which covers about 1,900 square kilometres, is centred between York and Corrigin 130 km east of Perth and was staked following the recent significant PGE discovery at Julimar just 75 km north east of Perth by Chalice Mining NL (Figures 1 and 7). Impact is now one of the larger groundholders in the region. Figure 7. Location of Impact’s Arkun project within the emerging Ni-Cu-PGM province of WA and main tenement holders. Impact has one of the larger ground holdings in the region. An interpretation of magnetic data by Impact identified a possible mobile belt that is about 500 km long and up to 30 km wide that cuts through the Arkun project area. The belt is of a scale that suggests it may mark an ancient terrane boundary or proto-craton margin. Such geological provinces (of varying ages) are well known around the world as prospective terranes for hosting major nickelcopper-PGE deposits with examples such as Nova-Bollinger and Mawson (Proterozoic age), the Thomson fold belt in Canada and the recent discoveries at Yarawindah and Julimar in Western Australia. Anglo American plc, one of the world’s leading mining companies lodged Exploration Licence applications covering a vast area of some 10,130 square kilometres surrounding three sides of the Arkun project on the afternoon of 29 May 2020 a few hours after Impact made its first announcement on Arkun (Figure 1 and ASX Release 10th June 2020). COMPLIANCE STATEMENT This report contains new Exploration Results for soil samples from the Arkun Project. Dr Mike Jones Managing Director The review of exploration activities and results contained in this report is based on information compiled by Dr Mike Jones, a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. He is a director of the company and works for Impact Minerals Limited. He has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposits under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the JORC Code). Mike Jones has consented to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. APPENDIX 1 - SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA Criteria Sampling techniques Drilling techniques Drill sample recovery Logging JORC Code explanation 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. Commentary Soil samples of a weight of about 250 grams were taken from a depth of about 15-20 cm below surface. They were sieved on site to -2 mm and placed in plastic snap seal bags for transport to the laboratory. Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used The soil samples were taken on 100 metre spacings along gazetted roads and tracks across 15 priority targets. Although there is only one line of samples per target area, enough samples were taken to establish the background values of the metals and elements that can be used to determine levels of anomalism. Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. 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 The soil samples were taken using industry standard procedures. 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). N/A Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed N/A Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples Standard field procedures for soil samples were used. 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. No sample bias has been established. 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. N/A Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. N/A Criteria Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation Quality of assay data and laboratory tests Verification of sampling and assaying JORC Code explanation Commentary The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged N/A If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. N/A If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. N/A For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. The size and distribution of the soil samples is appropriate for regional exploration. Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. Laboratory QC procedures for soil samples involve the use of internal certified reference material as assay standards, along with blanks, duplicates and replicates. Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/secondhalf sampling. No field duplicates were taken as this is not warranted at this early stage of exploration. Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. Sample sizes are appropriate The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. Samples were submitted to ALS Laboratories in Perth for analysis by the ionic leach method ME-MS23 with ICP-MS finish for 61 elements including: Ag, Au, Bi, Cd, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Li, Mo, Ni, Pb, Pd, Pt, Sn, Ta, W, Zn. Sample preparation involved weighing out of 50 g of the soil sample and adding a fixed aliquot of the digest. 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. N/A Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. Duplicate samples are not required at this early stage of exploration. The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. The results have not been verified by independent or alternative companies. This is not required at this stage of exploration. The use of twinned holes. N/A Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. Primary assay data has been entered into standard Excel templates for plotting in QGIS and IOGAS. Discuss any adjustment to assay data. There are no adjustments to the assay data. Criteria Location of data points JORC Code explanation Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and downhole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. Commentary Sample locations were located by hand held GPS. Specification of the grid system used. The grid system for ARKUN is MGA_GDA94, Zone 50. Quality and adequacy of topographic control. N/A Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. The samples were taken at 100 metre spacings along the traverses. 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. N/A Whether sample compositing has been applied. N/A Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. Not relevant to soil results. If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. Not relevant to soil results. Sample security The measures taken to ensure sample security. Samples were taken by Impact contractors and delivered by them directly to the laboratory. Audits or reviews The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. At this stage of exploration a review of the sampling techniques and data by an external party is not warranted. Data spacing and distribution Orientation of data in relation to geological structure SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS Criteria Mineral tenement and land tenure status Exploration done by other parties JORC Code explanation Commentary 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 Arkun Project currently comprises 7 exploration licences covering about 1,900 km2. The tenements are held 100% by Aurigen Pty Ltd a 100% owned subsidiary of Impact Minerals Limited. Impact has signed Land Access agreements in place with the various Native Title claimants that cover the area. 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 tenements are in good standing with no known impediments. Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. There has been no significant previous work at this project. Criteria Geology Drill hole Information Data aggregation methods JORC Code explanation Commentary Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. Nickel-copper-PGE sulphide mineralisation associated with mafic to ultramafic intrusions and goldcopper in deformed and metamorphosed greenstone belts. 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: • easting and northing of the drill hole collar • elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar • dip and azimuth of the hole • down hole length and interception depth • hole length. N/A 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. N/A 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. N/A The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. N/A 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’). 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. Refer to Figures in body of text. 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 results reported are representative Balanced reporting N/A Criteria JORC Code explanation 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. 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 commercially sensitive Commentary Assessment of other substantive exploration data is not yet complete however considered immaterial at this stage. Follow-up work programmes will be subject to interpretation of results which is ongoing.