80 Mile PLC Maiden Exploration Target for Ilmenite at Dundas

RNS Number : 1365F

80 Mile PLC

23 September 2024

AIM: 80M

FSE: S5WA

A white crescent moon with blue text Description automatically generated

23 September 2024

80 Mile PLC / Ticker: 80M / Market: AIM / Sector: Mining

Maiden Exploration Target for Hard Rock Ilmenite at Dundas

80 Mile plc ('80 Mile' or the 'Company'), the AIM, FSE listed and Pink-Market traded exploration and development company with projects in Greenland and Finland, is pleased to announce its independent maiden JORC Exploration Target ('Exploration Target') for ilmenite-bearing hard rock sills at the Dundas Ilmenite Project in Northwest Greenland ('Dundas' or the 'Project'). The generation of an Exploration Target is an important milestone and a significant first step towards the development of a Mineral Resource Estimate for the hard rock component of the Dundas Ilmenite Project.

Highlights:

· SRK Exploration Ltd ('SRK EX'), a leading UK-based mineral resources consulting group, completed the data review and geological modelling required to develop the JORC Exploration Target for the ilmenite-bearing hard rock sills.

· This Exploration Target is in addition to the previously disclosed and existing 2019 Mineral Resource Estimate ('MRE') at Dundas. With this update for the hard rock material, when combined with the existing MRE, Dundas represents a truly unique opportunity for the exploitation of ilmenite-bearing material.*

· The integration of multiple exploration datasets that include sonic drilling data from 2017 and 2018, trenching results, diamond drilling data from 2022, and surface sampling data has enabled SRK EX to deliver a robust estimation of the Exploration Target.

· The Exploration Target estimates a potential 170 to 540 million tonnes of ilmenite-bearing material with a TiO₂ grade range of 4.7 to 5.5%. These estimates provide a strong foundation for further exploration efforts and the development of the maiden hard rock MRE at the Dundas Ilmenite Project.

· The Exploration Target is limited to 80 Mile's existing Mining Licence (Moriusaq West Beach, Moriusaq East Beach, Iterlak West Sill 1, Iterlak West Sill 2, and Iterlak East Beach) and relates to the potential for hard rock ilmenite mining beneath and adjacent to the raised beaches.

· Future exploration and development plans will advance the Exploration Target towards a defined Mineral Resource Estimate.

Eric Sondergaard, Managing Director of 80 Mile, commented:

"This independently produced Exploration Target continues to enhance the potential of the Dundas Ilmenite Project. The data compiled and analysed by SRK EX underscores the significant potential of the hard rock ilmenite-bearing sills within our mining license area and represents a major step forward in understanding the full scale of the Dundas ilmenite resource.

Moving forward, we are committed to advancing our exploration efforts to further develop the potential resource and assess the feasibility of incorporating hard rock mining into our existing operational plans. The possibility of leveraging existing infrastructure from the planned beach sand mining operations to exploit the hard rock resource presents a unique opportunity to maximize the value of the Dundas Ilmenite Project, and we look forward to providing further updates as we continue our work."

*For further details, see RNS 'Dundas Ilmenite Resource Update', dated 16 April 2024.

Competent Person Statement

The technical information in this report that relates to the Exploration Target for the Dundas Project has been compiled by Mr. William Kellaway, a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and an employee of SRK Exploration Ltd. Mr. Kellaway has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken 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'. Mr. Kellaway consents to the inclusion in this release of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Mr. Kellaway has no affiliations with any 80 Mile plc employee and has never been employed by 80 Mile plc.

Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) Disclosure

The information contained within this announcement is deemed by the Company to constitute inside information as stipulated under the Market Abuse Regulations (EU) No. 596/2014 ('MAR') which has been incorporated into UK law by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.

For further information please visit http://www.80mile.com or contact:

Eric Sondergaard	80 Mile plc	enquiry@80mile.com
Ewan Leggat / Adam Cowl	SP Angel Corporate Finance LLP (Nominated Adviser and Broker)	+44 (0) 20 3470 0470
Harry Ansell / Katy Mitchell	Zeus Capital Limited (Joint Broker)	+44 (0) 20 38295000
Tim Blythe / Megan Ray / Said Izagaren	BlytheRay (Media Contact)	+44 (0) 20 7138 3205

Exploration Target

The Exploration Target for the Dundas Ilmenite Project was developed by SRK Exploration Ltd ('SRK EX'), part of the SRK Group, a leading international mining consultancy renowned for its expertise in mineral exploration and resource estimation, in accordance with the 2012 JORC Code. This Exploration Target is primarily based on exploration results obtained to date, with the exception of the Iterlak West sills, for which data is limited to mapping and visual observation. Their inclusion is contingent on further exploration being conducted in the foreseeable future, as outlined in the exploration recommendations. The primary rationale for establishing this Exploration Target is to utilize planned infrastructure and equipment intended for the future extraction of Ti-rich mineral sands, to potentially support ilmenite extraction from the underlying hard rock sills. The modelled volumes of potentially mineralised material have been evaluated with consideration of Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction (RPEEE).

The Exploration Target relates to potential ilmenite mineralisation within the hard rock sills underlying and adjacent to the Moriusaq and Iterlak areas. This target incorporates ilmenite-bearing sills identified through a comprehensive exploration approach, including sonic drilling, trenching, and geological mapping. These methods have been supported by various surface sampling programs.

Table 1. Summary of Parameters used in the Exploration Target

Area	Surface area, km2		Thickness, m		Density, g/cm3	Grade, TiO₂%
Area	Min.	Max.	Min.	Max.		Min.	Max.
Moriusaq West Beach	5.58	5.58	5	10	3.07	4.7	5.5
Moriusaq East Beach	0.91	1.77	5	10	3.07	4.7	5.5
Iterlak West Sill 1	2.17	2.17	5	25	3.07	4.7	5.5
Iterlak West Sill 2	1.53	1.53	5	25	3.07	4.7	5.5
Iterlak East Beach	0.89	0.89	5	10	3.07	4.7	5.5
Total	11.08	11.94

The Exploration Target is defined by several distinct areas with varying sill thicknesses and lateral extents, identified as Moriusaq West Beach, Moriusaq East Beach, Iterlak West Sill 1, Iterlak West Sill 2, and Iterlak East Beach. The total area considered spans approximately 11.08 to 11.94 km², with estimated sill thicknesses ranging from 5 to 25 meters. The model has been constrained using geological data obtained from drilling and surface mapping, ensuring that the tonnage estimates reflect the potential mineralisation.

Based on the geological data available, including density measurements and TiO₂ assay results, the estimated range of potential ilmenite mineralisation for the combined Exploration Target is between 170 and 540 million tonnes, grading between 4.7% and 5.5% TiO₂. The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target are conceptual in nature. There has been insufficient exploration to define a Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the Exploration Target being delineated as a Mineral Resource. Further investigation into the lateral continuity and thickness variability of the sills, particularly below the raised beaches, is necessary to refine these estimates.

Figure 1. Areas Included in the Exploration Target

Exploration Data and Techniques

The definition of the Exploration Target has been supported by data collected through various exploration programs, including:

2017 Sonic Drilling Data

§ The 2017 sonic drilling data provided depths to basement levels with "bedrock confidence" attributes, indicating how confident on-site geologists were that bedrock had indeed been intercepted.

§ Where possible, the drilling logs identified bedrock lithologies such as sills, mudstone, and amphibolite. If the lithology was not logged or bedrock was not intercepted, the logs contained "unspecified" data entries.

2018 Sonic Drilling and Trenching Data

§ In 2018, excavator trenches were used to twin sonic drill holes, providing additional indications of the depth to bedrock and information on bedrock lithology.

§ Downhole lithology logs from the 2018 campaign helped define the Iterlak East beach target, giving insights into the subsurface geological structure.

2022 Drilling Data

§ The 2022 drilling data involved several drilling methods; however, the data quality is questionable due to various problems encountered during the drill programme.

§ Despite these issues, the 2022 drilling produced more bedrock samples than earlier programmes, which were later assayed by 80 Mile in 2024.

Surface Sampling Data (Various Years)

§ Surface sampling involved a limited amount of ad hoc grab sampling on outcrops during various site visits. 80 Mile has since assayed these grab samples to gain insights into surface mineralisation.

Geological Setting and Mineralisation

The Dundas Project is located within the Thule Black Sand Province in Northwest Greenland, an area characterized by significant deposits of heavy mineral sands derived from the erosion of high-TiO₂ and P₂O₅ tholeiitic basalt dykes and sills. These magmatic intrusive units are part of the Thule Dyke Swarm, which comprises a series of D2 dykes and S1 sills that have been mapped extensively in the hinterland and below the raised beach deposits.

The ilmenite-bearing sills are primarily composed of high-TiO₂ tholeiitic basalt and are interbedded with sedimentary sequences, including black-grey shales, siltstones, fine-grained sandstones, and thin dolomitic units.

D2 Dykes and S1 Sills:

§ The D2 dykes, dated between 675-630 Ma, are the volumetrically dominant magmatic units in the area. These dykes are primarily oriented WNW-ESE and are mostly vertical or sub-vertical, dipping steeply at 75° either north or south. Their alignment is largely parallel to the regional structural grain, particularly the faults associated with the Thule half-graben system. These dykes, composed of high-TiO₂ tholeiitic basalt, have been identified as a key source of ilmenite-bearing sands found in the raised beach deposits.

§ Regionally, the S1 sills vary considerably in thickness, ranging from a few meters to approximately 100 meters, with most sills estimated by historical work to be between 20 and 50 meters thick (Dawes, 2006). These sills are described as deeply weathered, especially in flat tableland areas where the upper chilled margins have been eroded away, leaving behind gabbroic cores that have disintegrated into coarse sand. These sills are notably rich in opaque minerals, with ilmenite concentrations reaching up to 15% by volume. The sills in the project area vary in thickness from a few meters to over 30 meters and display lateral continuity up to several kilometres. However, the extent of these bodies is not fully understood and requires further investigation.

Historical mapping and sampling conducted by Dawes (1991, 2006) provide important baseline data on the compositional characteristics of these intrusions. Analysis of seven samples of D2 dykes and S1 sills indicated TiO₂ content ranging from 3.68 to 5.25 wt.% and P₂O₅ content from 1.21 to 2.63 wt.%.

Mineralisation Style and Distribution

The heavy mineral sands of the Thule Black Sand Province are believed to originate from the mechanical erosion of these D2 dykes and S1 sills. The erosion process liberated high concentrations of ilmenite, which were subsequently transported and deposited within the raised beach environments of the Thule Black Sand Province.

The greatest cumulative thickness and most significant concentration of the S1 sills occurs within the Moriusaq half-graben, where clastic sedimentary strata host approximately 15 master sills that comprise between 30% and 40% of the local stratigraphy (Dawes, 2006). The sedimentary sequence in this region is dominated by black-grey, locally pyritic shales, interbedded with siltstones, fine-grained sandstones, and occasional thin dolomitic layers (Stensgaard et al., 2015). This stratigraphic setting, combined with the presence of high-TiO₂ sills, creates a favourable environment for the accumulation of ilmenite-rich mineral sands.

Further studies by Nielsen et al. (2017) suggest that within the Dundas Formation, the sills account for approximately 31% of the total stratigraphic volume, within a total estimated stratigraphic thickness of 900 meters around the Moriusaq area. This makes the Dundas Formation a highly prospective zone for further exploration, particularly for ilmenite mineralization.

A schematic cross-section of the area north of Moriusaq, as provided by Nielsen et al. (2017), illustrates the complex interplay between the dykes and sills within the Dundas Formation (Figure 3). The cross-section reveals the distribution of multiple stacked sills, some of which reach up to 50 meters in thickness, contributing significantly to the overall potential of the ilmenite resource in this region.

Figure 2. Regional Geological Map of the Dundas Project Area

Figure 3.GEUS- constructed Schematic Cross Section from A1-A2 with Stacked Sill Section

Methodology to Determine Tonnage and Grade Range for the Exploration Target

Tonnage Estimation

Area Calculation

SRK EX utilized GIS software to model 2D shapefiles representing the outlines of the ilmenite-bearing sills included in the Exploration Target. Each shapefile corresponds to a sill located either beneath the Moriusaq raised beaches within 80 Mile's mining licence or sills exposed above the beaches in areas assumed to be accessible. For sills beneath the raised beach deposits, 2D outlines of wireframes used in the 2019 Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) were selected as the initial sill area. A 50-meter-wide buffer zone from the Moriusaq coastline was applied to prevent seawater ingress into the mine pit.

Moriusaq Beach Area (West of Iterlak Delta)

Sonic drilling data suggest that bedrock contacts are predominantly at depths less than 10 meters, with most intervals logged as igneous sills. However, areas where bedrock has been logged as mudstone or amphibolite have been excluded from the Exploration Target. In areas where drilling data is sparse, sill presence is inferred based on nearby exposed sills and geological indicators.

Iterlak Area (East of Iterlak Delta)

Sonic drilling from 2018 indicates the presence of bedrock sill contacts or clay-silt glacial till deposits. The sill has been modelled only where consistently intercepted by drilling.

Iterlak West Sills

Two exposed sills on high ground west of the Iterlak Delta (Iterlak West 1 and Iterlak West 2) have been included in the Exploration Target based on their visibility and potential accessibility for mining.

Thickness and Lateral Continuity

Dolerite sills across the Moriusaq region have a tabular morphology and are laterally discontinuous. Based on geological mapping, imagery, and field observations, the sills generally extend up to 5 km in one direction and taper in thickness towards the edges. A conservative average sill thickness of 20 meters was estimated by GEUS for the Moriusaq area (Nielsen et al., 2017). Thickness estimates applied by SRK EX for the Exploration Target range from 5 meters to 10 meters for the one-sill model to account for lateral and vertical discontinuity.

Moriusaq Beach Target

A minimum sill thickness of 5 meters and a maximum of 10 meters were applied to modelled sill volumes beneath the raised beach deposits.

Iterlak West Target

Sills are assumed to have a minimum thickness of 5 meters and a maximum of 25 meters.

Iterlak East Target

Assumed sill thickness parameters are the same as those for Moriusaq beaches: a minimum of 5 meters and a maximum of 10 meters.

Density

Density data for the sills were obtained from the 2022 sonic drilling program, where 19 samples of bedrock sill material were selected for specific gravity measurements in 2024. The mean specific gravity is 3.07, with a low standard deviation of 0.04, indicating minimal internal differentiation. This value has been applied to both minimum and maximum tonnage estimates.

Table 2. Density Data from 2024 Bedrock Assays

2022

Sampling Programme

Spec. Gravity

Count

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

Lower Quartile

Upper Quartile

2.97

3.12

3.07

0.04

3.06

3.10

Additional Modifying Factors

Several modifying factors, such as the sills' consistent dip to the south-southeast and potential variations in thickness due to erosion, have been considered. However, these factors require further investigation and are not included in the current tonnage estimates.

TiO₂ Grade Estimation

TiO₂ grades for the Moriusaq sills were derived from sonic drilling, trenching, and surface grab sampling conducted between 2018 and 2022. In total, 13 samples from 2018 and 74 samples from 2022 were analysed. The mean TiO₂ grade is 5.2 wt.%, with values ranging between 4.7 wt.% and 6.0 wt.%.

Table 3. TiO₂ Data from 2018-2022 Sampling Programmes

Sampling Programme	TiO₂ Count	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation	Lower Quartile	Upper Quartile
2022	74	0.64	6.93	5.21	1.10	4.72	5.97
2018	12	4.15	8.17	5.46	1.11	4.72	6.04

For the Exploration Target, SRK EX assumed a minimum TiO₂ grade of 4.7 wt.% and a maximum of 5.5 wt.%. The maximum grade was adjusted down from the upper quartile to account for internal differentiation and TiO₂ mineral deportment.

TiO₂ Mineral Deportment

TiO₂ is hosted in ilmenite and titanomagnetite phases within the Steensby Land Complex sills. Alteration processes have transformed titanomagnetite into ilmenite, upgrading the resource. An ilmenite to titanomagnetite ratio of 1±0.4 and a maximum ilmenite content of 9 wt.% were estimated. For TiO₂ extraction, the total in-situ TiO₂ must be downgraded by 10-20% to account for TiO₂ locked in titanomagnetite.

Future Exploration and Development Plans

The proposed exploration activities are aimed at advancing from the current Exploration Target to a Mineral Resource Estimate. These activities will include the following:

§ Conduct detailed mapping to verify the extent and thickness of the exposed sills at Iterlak West included in the Exploration Target. Document the thickness where sill contacts are exposed.

§ Perform outcrop sampling of exposed sills to collect grade data. This may involve channel sampling along vertical profiles on exposed sill margins to evaluate grade variability.

§ Undertake diamond drilling to confirm the presence, thickness, and variability of sills beneath the raised beaches. Obtain samples for assay, density measurements, geotechnical parameters, and processing test work. Some drilling should target areas outside the current Exploration Target to validate previous logging indicating the absence of sills.

§ Carry out drilling on exposed sills to obtain additional data for the same purposes as the drilling beneath the raised beaches.

§ Initiate preliminary test work to determine if a marketable ilmenite concentrate can be produced from the sills. This should also verify assumptions regarding titanium deportment from previous studies. Share results with the mineral sands process plant design team to identify any additional requirements.

§ Reassess existing hydrological, hydrogeological, and mine waste management studies related to mineral sands mining. Evaluate necessary modifications to accommodate hard rock mining.

§ Review current permits and mineral licences to determine if amendments are required to allow for hard rock mining activities.

JORC Code, 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 downhole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling § Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representativity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used § Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that is material to the Public Report § In cases where "industry standard" work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. 'RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples from which 3kg was pulverised to produce a 30g 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.	Auger Sampling § Open flight auger drilling using motorised equipment was used to obtain samples of in-situ sediments. Sonic Drill Core Sampling § Sonic core with a diameter of 100 mm was extruded into a clean core tray. Sampling was carried out at 1 m intervals. After it was photographed and logged, each interval of core was split equally down its long axis with one half being retained as a sample and the other half discarded (unless used as a duplicate). Direct Push and Diamond Core Drilling § Drilling was performed using a Geoprobe 6712DT drill rig, capable of direct push tooling (pneumatic hammer) and rotational drilling from an auger head (auger, air- rotary and coring). § The direct push samples were collected over the length of the 152 cm sample barrel. Each sample was cut to 0.5m and 1m intervals (to fit the core box). § Diamond core samples were collected over a nominal interval length of 1m within lithological units. § Outcrop grab samples were collected during site visits to assess surface exposures of ilmenite-bearing sills. § All samples were logged, photographed, weighed, bagged and packed into core boxes for transport to the laboratory. § Sampling assurance included; (i) twin-hole drilling, (ii) core recovery measurements, and (iii) sample weighing for comparison with received samples at the laboratory. Sample Analysis § Sonic core and excavator trench hard rock samples from the 2018 field program were prepared and assayed at MS Analytical in Vancouver, Canada. Thirteen rock samples were crushed, pulverized, and assayed for various oxides, including TiO₂, as well as other oxides by XRF method. Samples were prepared using lithium borate fusion. The analysis included duplicates and blanks for quality control, and internal standards (STD SY-4, STD CaCO₃, and STD OREAS 465) were used to ensure accuracy and reliability. TiO₂ values ranged from approximately 4.15% to 8.17%, with an average of 5.5%. § Seventy-four hard rock samples from the 2022 drilling campaign were crushed, pulverized, and assayed for TiO₂ using fusion XRF analysis. The fusion method involved lithium metaborate-tetraborate flux to ensure complete dissolution of the sample before XRF analysis. The TiO₂ values ranged from approximately 2.48% to 6.93%, with analyses performed at ALS Finland Oy and ALS Loughrea labs, with results reported in 2024.
Drilling Techniques	§ Drill type (e.g. core, RC, 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.).	§ Open flight auger drilling using motorised equipment. The auger flight had a diameter of 15 cm, and the equipment was capable of drilling to 1.10 m. § Sonic drilling using a tractor-mounted CompactRotoSonic Tractor Mast CRS-T sonic drill rig from Eijkelkamp SonicSampDrill producing core with a diameter of 100 mm. Holes were drilled, where possible, through the full thickness of beach sediments and into underlying bedrock far enough to ensure that bedrock had been reached. § The direct push samples were collected using a 7.6 cm inner diameter and a 9.5 cm outer diameter sampler. Markers at 10 cm intervals were drawn on these tools to measure the drill run length prior to the run. The pneumatic hammer on the head of the rig is used to hammer a 152 cm sample barrel containing a PVC liner into the ground (minimising sample mixing and contamination from the melting of ice). The sample barrel was then encased by rotational auger drilling down to the 152 cm depth. The sample barrel was withdrawn from within the auger hole and the sample preserved in the PVC liner then removed. § The diamond core samples were collected using a lead HQ3 outer casing which is 263 cm in length and includes a 152 cm long inner sample barrel with an inner diameter of 6.1 cm. The HQ casing is advanced through the ground using water and bentonite, with the inner tube assembly locked into the lead HQ core barrel. When the desired depth is reached or the inner tube is filled to capacity, the assembly is removed from the core barrel via overshot and wireline and the sample is blown out using water pressure.
Drill Sample Recovery	§ Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. § Measures were taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure the 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.	Auger Sampling § A steel tray or plastic sheet was placed on the ground at every drilling location. The auger was collared through a hole in the centre of the tray/sheet. This meant that any sample material falling from the auger flight when it was pulled from the hole was retained on the tray/sheet and not lost or contaminated by surface material. § The nature of auger sampling in soft sediments prohibits the ability to measure the length of recovered material. It has therefore been assumed that 100% recovery was achieved at every location. SRK ES is not aware of any reasons why significant loss of sample may have occurred. Sonic Drilling § Core was extruded from the core barrel directly into a clean core tray with the aid of vibration from the sonic head. § On-site geologists obtained drilled from and to depths from the driller and assigned these to the recovered core. The length of core was compared to the drilled length in order to assess core recovery. The sonic rig generally achieved close to 100% core recovery in both sediments and bedrock, although rare instances of core loss were recorded, particularly when drilling through large boulders or heavily fractured bedrock. These instances were documented in the geological logs. Direct Push and Diamond Drilling § Both the core and auger samples were collected over the full length of the 1m sampling intervals. § In difficult ground conditions, the direct push samples were brought to the surface by pulling (instead of rotating) the drill string to reduce material loss and contamination. The drill string was also pulled and cleaned at the end of each run. In areas of excessive moisture or oversize, the hole was either re-located, re-drilled by diamond core or abandoned. Each interval was weighed. § For the core samples, the likelihood of core loss was reduced by slow drilling advances, short run lengths, and minimal use of drilling fluids. § Core recovery was closely monitored and measured during the logging process, with a dataset average of 98% for both sediment and bedrock samples. Both methods were assessed by comparing the data from twinned core-auger hole pairs, as well as by periodic weighing of the entire sample. § No evidence of any relationships between sample recovery and grade has been observed.
Logging	§ Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnical 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.	§ All samples were logged for grain size, degree of sorting, grain roundness and colour. Bedrock intercepts were logged with respect to depth and rock type, noting key lithologies. § Larger clasts were measured in order to record their size and shape. A visual estimate of the percentage HM was made, although this has not been used for resource estimation. § Photographs were taken at sampling locations to record the terrain at the collar. For auger samples, the material extracted was photographed as was a small representative amount on scaled paper for logging and the sub-sample in the sample container. Photographs were taken of every interval of sonic core; where necessary, photographs were taken before and after scraping back the outer rind of fine material § SRK EX considers the logging to be quantitative with respect to the description of the samples and qualitative with respect to %HM estimates. § For auger samples, 98% of the 298 sampled locations have adequate sedimentological field descriptions. It is unclear why information was not recorded for the remainder (6 locations) § In total, 1,011.10 m of sonic core has been drilled, all of which has geological logging § All drill samples were transported to the sample storage facility on-site, where they were geologically logged, photographed, weighed, bagged and packed into core boxes for transport to the laboratory. The entire length of recovered core was logged, recording lithology, sedimentological character, mineralisation and mineralogy. § The geological logging data are primarily qualitative. The 2022 drill campaign was accompanied by a detailed exploration report containing photographs and video recordings of all processes. The total length of each 1m sample was 570m and 100% of all intersections were logged. including bedrock intercepts, to provide a comprehensive understanding of both sediment and bedrock geology.
Sub- sampling Techniques and Sample Preparation	§ If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken § 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 maximises representivity of samples § Measures were 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.	§ Sonic core sub-sampling: Whilst sediment samples were split longitudinally and one half submitted for analysis, whole core bedrock was taken and used for laboratory submission. This was because there was not the equipment on site to split hard rock samples representatively. § Direct push and diamond drill core sub-sampling: All wet direct push and diamond core samples were cut in 1m sections to fit the respective drill hole core box. Full core samples were dispatched in the core boxes, with the exception of 16 Field Duplicate samples that were selectively split (by halving the sample with a chisel). No other sample splitting was undertaken on- site. Roughly 10 cm in length whole core bedrock samples were randomly selected from the bedrock length for laboratory assay. Sample Preparation § Hard rock sample preparation was performed by the following laboratories: § 2018: Geolab, Nuuk, Greenland and Met-Solve, Vancouver, Canada § 2024: ALS Finland Oy, Outokumpu, Finland § Whole core samples of 2018 sonic derived bedrock were sent to GeoLAB Greenland ApS for sample preparation. Samples were dried, crushed to 70% passing 2mm, split to a 250g sub-sample, and pulverized to 85% passing 75μm. § Direct push and diamond drill core samples were sent to ALS Finland Oy for sample preparation. The process involved fine crushing to 70% passing <2mm, splitting by Boyd Rotary Splitter, and pulverizing 1000g to 85% passing <75µm. Quality control tests were conducted for both the crushing and pulverizing stages to ensure consistency and accuracy.
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 (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.	§ The XRF analysis for TiO₂ and other oxides in the 2018 sonic core and excavator trench bedrock samples was conducted by MS Analytical at its facilities in Vancouver, British Columbia, using the WRX-310 method. This method employed lithium borate fusion followed by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) detection, which is an industry-standard technique for multi-element analysis of rock samples. • In addition to TiO₂, the assay suite included the following elements: Al₂O₃, BaO, CaO, Cr₂O₃, Fe₂O₃, K₂O, MgO, MnO, Na₂O, P₂O₅, and SO₃, to assess the complete geochemical profile of the bedrock samples. • Quality control measures included the insertion of blanks, duplicates, and certified reference materials (CRMs) such as STD SY-4, STD CaCO₃, and STD OREAS 465. These QA samples were used to monitor the accuracy and precision of the laboratory analysis. • The results from duplicates (such as DUP 18-ET012-3) and other QA samples confirm that the assays were within industry-accepted limits, providing confidence in the reported assay data. § The 2022 direct push and diamond core bedrock samples were assayed in 2024 and sent to ALS Finland Oy labs in Outokumpu, Finland, for sample preparation and transported to ALS Loughrea Geochemistry, Dublin, Ireland for assay. • The analysis of the direct push and diamond core bedrock samples was conducted by ALS Loughrea Geochemistry at its Dublin, Ireland laboratory. The laboratory employed industry-standard techniques to ensure reliable and accurate data. • The assay work for TiO₂ was carried out using fusion X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis, method ME-XRF15b, which utilized lithium borate fusion as a fluxing agent. The analytical suite targeted TiO₂ concentrations specifically. • Additionally, 19 of the 74 samples were analysed for specific gravity using method OA-GRA08 to provide more robust density data for modelling and resource estimation. • Laboratory performance was monitored using QA samples, including field duplicates (e.g., MWRS22059 -DUP, MWRS22087 -DUP, HR22051-DUP, and MWRS22115 -DUP), blanks, and certified reference materials (CRM) such as AMIS0346. These internal quality control measures were supplemented by ALS's internal controls, ensuring accuracy and precision across all sample batches. • Control samples, such as blanks (PALLO, BLANK), and certified reference materials (CCU-1d, RENGAS, MP-1b), were inserted at regular intervals to monitor for contamination, accuracy, and consistency. These checks confirmed that assay precision and reliability were within industry-accepted limits for this project.
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.	§ The project was visited by Mr Bill Kellaway of SRK EX during the 2016 and 2018 exploration programmes. Mr Jon Russill of SRK EX visited during the 2017 and 2018 exploration programmes. Both are independent of 80 Mile. They observed the sampling methods and in-situ mineralisation first-hand. § Twinning has been used extensively on the project, using auger sampling, pitting and sonic drilling at the same locations so that results for these different methods can be compared. § Sample results have been compiled into a database by 80 Mile and sent to SRK EX. SRK EX has audited this database and errors or inconsistencies have been satisfactorily corrected. § The verification of the bedrock samples collected during the 2018 and 2022 drilling campaigns was rigorously performed. The bedrock samples from both years were sent to independent laboratories for preparation and assay. § The twinned auger and diamond core hole pairs, which were typically collared no more than 5m apart, generally show good grade and thickness correlation. § The primary datasets are recorded and stored electronically. No adjustments to the assay data were applied.
Location of Data Points	§ Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drillholes (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.	§ All auger collars were located using a Garmin GPSMAP 64S GLONASS handheld GPS unit prior to sampling. After sampling, the collars were surveyed using a RTK DGPS to give decimetre precision in three dimensions. Where DGPS data are not available, handheld GPS positions have been used. SRK EX considers that this data remains sufficient. § All data were recorded to WGS84, UTM Zone 19 N, and the EGM96-geoid. § 2022 drill collars were surveyed after drilling using Spectra Precision ProMark 120 differential global positioning system ("DGPS") and reported to an accuracy of 30 cm. The base station for the DGPS system was calibrated to permanent ground control points surveyed to an accuracy of 50 mm relative to the International GNSS Service stations. § Because all holes were vertical and shallow, downhole surveying was not considered necessary. § Outcrop sample locations were recorded using handheld GPS which is sufficient for the purposes of the Exploration Target.
Data Spacing and Distribution	§ Data spacing 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.	§ The deposit has been drilled historically using auger and sonic drilling methods, with a nominal grid of 150 x 150 meters for auger and 700 x 100 meters for sonic established. § The deposit was drilled at two spacings during 2022, namely 440 x 100 meter and 100 x 50-meter drill centres. The former wide-spaced drill pattern was designed to improve the confidence in orebody structure (in particular bedrock depth) and grade distribution, whilst the latter provided further understanding of geological variability. All drilling was conducted on a regular grid oriented at approximately 125 degrees to the UTM grid and all holes are vertical. This drill orientation was designed to complement the anisotropy and mineralisation trends identified in historical drill campaigns. § Drill spacing is considered to be sufficient to demonstrate a level of confidence in lithological and grade continuity that is commensurate with defining an Exploration Target. § § Outcrop grab sampling was on an ad hoc basis and has not yet been undertaken in a systematic or fully representative manner (e.g. channel sampling)
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 mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	§ § All drill holes are vertical and located on a regular grid, which means that the sampling is orthogonal to the sub- horizontal or shallow-dipping mineralised sills. § No orientation-based sampling biases have been identified, or are expected for this style of mineralisation.
Sample Security	§ The measures taken to ensure sample security.	§ Auger samples were placed into sealed plastic buckets at the sampling location. These buckets cannot be reopened without breaking a seal and are therefore tamper-evident. Sample numbers were included on tickets that were placed inside the buckets as well as written on the outside of the bucket so that sample numbers could be cross-checked. § Sonic core samples were placed into strong plastic bags with a sample number tag inside and the sample number written on the outside. The bags were sealed with cable ties. § At all stages, a list of sample numbers accompanied the shipments so that they could be checked off by each recipient. As far as SRK EX is aware, no samples were delayed or misplaced between shipping locations. § The chain of custody of direct push and diamond core samples was managed on-site by Arethuse Geology and at the laboratory by NAGROM. § All samples were immediately removed after drilling to the on-site sample storage facility for logging. After logging, photography and weighing samples were bagged and packed into core boxes for transport. The core boxes were labelled, electronically captured and sealed with packing tape in three places. All core boxes were packed into the shipping containers, with the position of each core box in the containers mapped and recorded. § Upon completion of the 2022 drill campaign, the sample containers were sealed before shipping to the sample preparation facility in Denmark.
Audits or Reviews	§ The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	§ Apart from SRK EX review of the exploration methods and results in the course of their reporting the Exploration Target, and various academic studies, SRK EX is not aware of other audits or reviews that may have been conducted with respect to potential hard rock ilmenite Mineral Resources. §

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 downhole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling

§ Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representativity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used

§ Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that is material to the Public Report

§ In cases where "industry standard" work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. 'RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples from which 3kg was pulverised to produce a 30g 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.

Auger Sampling

§ Open flight auger drilling using motorised equipment was used to obtain samples of in-situ sediments.

Sonic Drill Core Sampling

§ Sonic core with a diameter of 100 mm was extruded into a clean core tray. Sampling was carried out at 1 m intervals. After it was photographed and logged, each interval of core was split equally down its long axis with one half being retained as a sample and the other half discarded (unless used as a duplicate).

Direct Push and Diamond Core Drilling

§ Drilling was performed using a Geoprobe 6712DT drill rig, capable of direct push tooling (pneumatic hammer) and rotational drilling from an auger head (auger, air- rotary and coring).

§ The direct push samples were collected over the length of the 152 cm sample barrel. Each sample was cut to 0.5m and 1m intervals (to fit the core box).

§ Diamond core samples were collected over a nominal interval length of 1m within lithological units.

§ Outcrop grab samples were collected during site visits to assess surface exposures of ilmenite-bearing sills.

§ All samples were logged, photographed, weighed, bagged and packed into core boxes for transport to the laboratory.

§ Sampling assurance included; (i) twin-hole drilling, (ii) core recovery measurements, and (iii) sample weighing for comparison with received samples at the laboratory.

Sample Analysis

§ Sonic core and excavator trench hard rock samples from the 2018 field program were prepared and assayed at MS Analytical in Vancouver, Canada. Thirteen rock samples were crushed, pulverized, and assayed for various oxides, including TiO₂, as well as other oxides by XRF method. Samples were prepared using lithium borate fusion. The analysis included duplicates and blanks for quality control, and internal standards (STD SY-4, STD CaCO₃, and STD OREAS 465) were used to ensure accuracy and reliability. TiO₂ values ranged from approximately 4.15% to 8.17%, with an average of 5.5%.

§ Seventy-four hard rock samples from the 2022 drilling campaign were crushed, pulverized, and assayed for TiO₂ using fusion XRF analysis. The fusion method involved lithium metaborate-tetraborate flux to ensure complete dissolution of the sample before XRF analysis. The TiO₂ values ranged from approximately 2.48% to 6.93%, with analyses performed at ALS Finland Oy and ALS Loughrea labs, with results reported in 2024.

Drilling Techniques

§ Drill type (e.g. core, RC, 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.).

§ Open flight auger drilling using motorised equipment. The auger flight had a diameter of 15 cm, and the equipment was capable of drilling to 1.10 m.

§ Sonic drilling using a tractor-mounted CompactRotoSonic Tractor Mast CRS-T sonic drill rig from Eijkelkamp SonicSampDrill producing core with a diameter of 100 mm. Holes were drilled, where possible, through the full thickness of beach sediments and into underlying bedrock far enough to ensure that bedrock had been reached.

§ The direct push samples were collected using a 7.6 cm inner diameter and a 9.5 cm outer diameter sampler. Markers at 10 cm intervals were drawn on these tools to measure the drill run length prior to the run. The pneumatic hammer on the head of the rig is used to hammer a 152 cm sample barrel containing a PVC liner into the ground (minimising sample mixing and contamination from the melting of ice). The sample barrel was then encased by rotational auger drilling down to the 152 cm depth. The sample barrel was withdrawn from within the auger hole and the sample preserved in the PVC liner then removed.

§ The diamond core samples were collected using a lead HQ3 outer casing which is 263 cm in length and includes a 152 cm long inner sample barrel with an inner diameter of 6.1 cm. The HQ casing is advanced through the ground using water and bentonite, with the inner tube assembly locked into the lead HQ core barrel. When the desired depth is reached or the inner tube is filled to capacity, the assembly is removed from the core barrel via overshot and wireline and the sample is blown out using water pressure.

Drill Sample Recovery

§ Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.

§ Measures were taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure the 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.

Auger Sampling

§ A steel tray or plastic sheet was placed on the ground at every drilling location. The auger was collared through a hole in the centre of the tray/sheet. This meant that any sample material falling from the auger flight when it was pulled from the hole was retained on the tray/sheet and not lost or contaminated by surface material.

§ The nature of auger sampling in soft sediments prohibits the ability to measure the length of recovered material. It has therefore been assumed that 100% recovery was achieved at every location. SRK ES is not aware of any reasons why significant loss of sample may have occurred.

Sonic Drilling

§ Core was extruded from the core barrel directly into a clean core tray with the aid of vibration from the sonic head.

§ On-site geologists obtained drilled from and to depths from the driller and assigned these to the recovered core. The length of core was compared to the drilled length in order to assess core recovery. The sonic rig generally achieved close to 100% core recovery in both sediments and bedrock, although rare instances of core loss were recorded, particularly when drilling through large boulders or heavily fractured bedrock. These instances were documented in the geological logs.

Direct Push and Diamond Drilling

§ Both the core and auger samples were collected over the full length of the 1m sampling intervals.

§ In difficult ground conditions, the direct push samples were brought to the surface by pulling (instead of rotating) the drill string to reduce material loss and contamination. The drill string was also pulled and cleaned at the end of each run. In areas of excessive moisture or oversize, the hole was either re-located, re-drilled by diamond core or abandoned. Each interval was weighed.

§ For the core samples, the likelihood of core loss was reduced by slow drilling advances, short run lengths, and minimal use of drilling fluids.

§ Core recovery was closely monitored and measured during the logging process, with a dataset average of 98% for both sediment and bedrock samples. Both methods were assessed by comparing the data from twinned core-auger hole pairs, as well as by periodic weighing of the entire sample.

§ No evidence of any relationships between sample recovery and grade has been observed.

Logging

§ Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnical 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.

§ All samples were logged for grain size, degree of sorting, grain roundness and colour. Bedrock intercepts were logged with respect to depth and rock type, noting key lithologies.

§ Larger clasts were measured in order to record their size and shape. A visual estimate of the percentage HM was made, although this has not been used for resource estimation.

§ Photographs were taken at sampling locations to record the terrain at the collar. For auger samples, the material extracted was photographed as was a small representative amount on scaled paper for logging and the sub-sample in the sample container. Photographs were taken of every interval of sonic core; where necessary, photographs were taken before and after scraping back the outer rind of fine material

§ SRK EX considers the logging to be quantitative with respect to the description of the samples and qualitative with respect to %HM estimates.

§ For auger samples, 98% of the 298 sampled locations have adequate sedimentological field descriptions. It is unclear why information was not recorded for the remainder (6 locations)

§ In total, 1,011.10 m of sonic core has been drilled, all of which has geological logging

§ All drill samples were transported to the sample storage facility on-site, where they were geologically logged, photographed, weighed, bagged and packed into core boxes for transport to the laboratory. The entire length of recovered core was logged, recording lithology, sedimentological character, mineralisation and mineralogy.

§ The geological logging data are primarily qualitative. The 2022 drill campaign was accompanied by a detailed exploration report containing photographs and video recordings of all processes. The total length of each 1m sample was 570m and 100% of all intersections were logged. including bedrock intercepts, to provide a comprehensive understanding of both sediment and bedrock geology.

Sub- sampling Techniques and Sample Preparation

§ If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken

§ 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 maximises representivity of samples

§ Measures were 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.

§ Sonic core sub-sampling: Whilst sediment samples were split longitudinally and one half submitted for analysis, whole core bedrock was taken and used for laboratory submission. This was because there was not the equipment on site to split hard rock samples representatively.

§ Direct push and diamond drill core sub-sampling: All wet direct push and diamond core samples were cut in 1m sections to fit the respective drill hole core box. Full core samples were dispatched in the core boxes, with the exception of 16 Field Duplicate samples that were selectively split (by halving the sample with a chisel). No other sample splitting was undertaken on- site. Roughly 10 cm in length whole core bedrock samples were randomly selected from the bedrock length for laboratory assay.

Sample Preparation

§ Hard rock sample preparation was performed by the following laboratories:

§ 2018: Geolab, Nuuk, Greenland and Met-Solve, Vancouver, Canada

§ 2024: ALS Finland Oy, Outokumpu, Finland

§ Whole core samples of 2018 sonic derived bedrock were sent to GeoLAB Greenland ApS for sample preparation. Samples were dried, crushed to 70% passing 2mm, split to a 250g sub-sample, and pulverized to 85% passing 75μm.

§ Direct push and diamond drill core samples were sent to ALS Finland Oy for sample preparation. The process involved fine crushing to 70% passing <2mm, splitting by Boyd Rotary Splitter, and pulverizing 1000g to 85% passing <75µm. Quality control tests were conducted for both the crushing and pulverizing stages to ensure consistency and accuracy.

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 (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.

§ The XRF analysis for TiO₂ and other oxides in the 2018 sonic core and excavator trench bedrock samples was conducted by MS Analytical at its facilities in Vancouver, British Columbia, using the WRX-310 method. This method employed lithium borate fusion followed by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) detection, which is an industry-standard technique for multi-element analysis of rock samples.

• In addition to TiO₂, the assay suite included the following elements: Al₂O₃, BaO, CaO, Cr₂O₃, Fe₂O₃, K₂O, MgO, MnO, Na₂O, P₂O₅, and SO₃, to assess the complete geochemical profile of the bedrock samples.

• Quality control measures included the insertion of blanks, duplicates, and certified reference materials (CRMs) such as STD SY-4, STD CaCO₃, and STD OREAS 465. These QA samples were used to monitor the accuracy and precision of the laboratory analysis.

• The results from duplicates (such as DUP 18-ET012-3) and other QA samples confirm that the assays were within industry-accepted limits, providing confidence in the reported assay data.

§ The 2022 direct push and diamond core bedrock samples were assayed in 2024 and sent to ALS Finland Oy labs in Outokumpu, Finland, for sample preparation and transported to ALS Loughrea Geochemistry, Dublin, Ireland for assay.

• The analysis of the direct push and diamond core bedrock samples was conducted by ALS Loughrea Geochemistry at its Dublin, Ireland laboratory. The laboratory employed industry-standard techniques to ensure reliable and accurate data.

• The assay work for TiO₂ was carried out using fusion X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis, method ME-XRF15b, which utilized lithium borate fusion as a fluxing agent. The analytical suite targeted TiO₂ concentrations specifically.

• Additionally, 19 of the 74 samples were analysed for specific gravity using method OA-GRA08 to provide more robust density data for modelling and resource estimation.

• Laboratory performance was monitored using QA samples, including field duplicates (e.g., MWRS22059 -DUP, MWRS22087 -DUP, HR22051-DUP, and MWRS22115 -DUP), blanks, and certified reference materials (CRM) such as AMIS0346. These internal quality control measures were supplemented by ALS's internal controls, ensuring accuracy and precision across all sample batches.

• Control samples, such as blanks (PALLO, BLANK), and certified reference materials (CCU-1d, RENGAS, MP-1b), were inserted at regular intervals to monitor for contamination, accuracy, and consistency. These checks confirmed that assay precision and reliability were within industry-accepted limits for this project.

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.

§ The project was visited by Mr Bill Kellaway of SRK EX during the 2016 and 2018 exploration programmes. Mr Jon Russill of SRK EX visited during the 2017 and 2018 exploration programmes. Both are independent of 80 Mile. They observed the sampling methods and in-situ mineralisation first-hand.

§ Twinning has been used extensively on the project, using auger sampling, pitting and sonic drilling at the same locations so that results for these different methods can be compared.

§ Sample results have been compiled into a database by 80 Mile and sent to SRK EX. SRK EX has audited this database and errors or inconsistencies have been satisfactorily corrected.

§ The verification of the bedrock samples collected during the 2018 and 2022 drilling campaigns was rigorously performed. The bedrock samples from both years were sent to independent laboratories for preparation and assay.

§ The twinned auger and diamond core hole pairs, which were typically collared no more than 5m apart, generally show good grade and thickness correlation.

§ The primary datasets are recorded and stored electronically. No adjustments to the assay data were applied.

Location of Data Points

§ Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drillholes (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.

§ All auger collars were located using a Garmin GPSMAP 64S GLONASS handheld GPS unit prior to sampling. After sampling, the collars were surveyed using a RTK DGPS to give decimetre precision in three dimensions. Where DGPS data are not available, handheld GPS positions have been used. SRK EX considers that this data remains sufficient.

§ All data were recorded to WGS84, UTM Zone 19 N, and the EGM96-geoid.

§ 2022 drill collars were surveyed after drilling using Spectra Precision ProMark 120 differential global positioning system ("DGPS") and reported to an accuracy of 30 cm. The base station for the DGPS system was calibrated to permanent ground control points surveyed to an accuracy of 50 mm relative to the International GNSS Service stations.

§ Because all holes were vertical and shallow, downhole surveying was not considered necessary.

§ Outcrop sample locations were recorded using handheld GPS which is sufficient for the purposes of the Exploration Target.

Data Spacing and Distribution

§ Data spacing 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.

§ The deposit has been drilled historically using auger and sonic drilling methods, with a nominal grid of 150 x 150 meters for auger and 700 x 100 meters for sonic established.

§ The deposit was drilled at two spacings during 2022, namely 440 x 100 meter and 100 x 50-meter drill centres. The former wide-spaced drill pattern was designed to improve the confidence in orebody structure (in particular bedrock depth) and grade distribution, whilst the latter provided further understanding of geological variability. All drilling was conducted on a regular grid oriented at approximately 125 degrees to the UTM grid and all holes are vertical. This drill orientation was designed to complement the anisotropy and mineralisation trends identified in historical drill campaigns.

§ Drill spacing is considered to be sufficient to demonstrate a level of confidence in lithological and grade continuity that is commensurate with defining an Exploration Target.

§ Outcrop grab sampling was on an ad hoc basis and has not yet been undertaken in a systematic or fully representative manner (e.g. channel sampling)

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 mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

§ All drill holes are vertical and located on a regular grid, which means that the sampling is orthogonal to the sub- horizontal or shallow-dipping mineralised sills.

§ No orientation-based sampling biases have been identified, or are expected for this style of mineralisation.

Sample Security

§ The measures taken to ensure sample security.

§ Auger samples were placed into sealed plastic buckets at the sampling location. These buckets cannot be reopened without breaking a seal and are therefore tamper-evident. Sample numbers were included on tickets that were placed inside the buckets as well as written on the outside of the bucket so that sample numbers could be cross-checked.

§ Sonic core samples were placed into strong plastic bags with a sample number tag inside and the sample number written on the outside. The bags were sealed with cable ties.

§ At all stages, a list of sample numbers accompanied the shipments so that they could be checked off by each recipient. As far as SRK EX is aware, no samples were delayed or misplaced between shipping locations.

§ The chain of custody of direct push and diamond core samples was managed on-site by Arethuse Geology and at the laboratory by NAGROM.

§ All samples were immediately removed after drilling to the on-site sample storage facility for logging. After logging, photography and weighing samples were bagged and packed into core boxes for transport. The core boxes were labelled, electronically captured and sealed with packing tape in three places. All core boxes were packed into the shipping containers, with the position of each core box in the containers mapped and recorded.

§ Upon completion of the 2022 drill campaign, the sample containers were sealed before shipping to the sample preparation facility in Denmark.

Audits or Reviews

§ The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.

§ Apart from SRK EX review of the exploration methods and results in the course of their reporting the Exploration Target, and various academic studies, SRK EX is not aware of other audits or reviews that may have been conducted with respect to potential hard rock ilmenite Mineral Resources.

JORC Code, Table 1: 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.

§ Dundas currently owns one Exploitation and two Exploration licences in the project area.

§ Exploration Licence MEL 2015-08, granted in June 2021 as addendum number 5 on renewal and valid until 31 December 2026 (five-years, with option to renew for successive two- year periods up a total of nineteen years). The licence covers an area of 86 km² and grants exclusive exploration rights for the offshore areas.

§ Exploration Licence MEL 2019-114, granted in August 2019 and valid until 31 December 2025 (five-years). The licence covers an area of 19 km² and grants exclusive exploration rights for the onshore areas.

§ Exploitation Licence MIN 2021-08, granted in December 2020 and valid until December 2050 (thirty-years, with option to extend the licence for an additional period of no more than twenty years). The licence covers an area of 64 km² and grants the exclusive right to exploit (only) Heavy Minerals.

Exploration Done by Other Parties

§ Acknowledgement and appraisal of exploration by other parties.

§ Heavy mineral sand deposits were first identified on Steensby Land Peninsular in 1916 and the presence of Ilmenite-rich sands were confirmed near the current Thule Air Base site in 1950. The GGU (the former Greenland Geological Survey) further defined the sand province through various heavy- mineral mapping and sampling surveys up until 1978. Exploration Licences were granted to several private companies between 1985 to 2010, with Dundas commencing fieldwork in August-2015 under an Exploration Licence approved earlier in the same year.

§ Dundas conducted exploration work in its licence areas from 2015 to 2024 with the support of various contractors / consultants, namely; The Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland ("GEUS"), Orbicon, SRK and Palaris. Fieldwork included bathymetry surveys, grab sampling, photogrammetry, geophysical surveys (ground penetrating radar), trench / bulk sampling and various drill hole sampling campaigns (vibracore, auger, sonic and core).

Geology

§ Deposit type, geological setting, and style of mineralization.

§ The regional geology comprises a Precambrian gneiss-supracrustal complex that is unconformably overlain by the mid- to late-Proterozoic Thule Supergroup, a thick sedimentary and volcanic succession. The Thule Supergroup is cut by two series of basaltic dykes and sills: the Melville Bugt Dyke Swarm ("MBDS", 1,200 - 1,000 Ma) and the Thule Dyke Swarm ("TDS", 750 - 650 Ma).

§ The TDS has a high titanium content, reportedly up to 6% in whole rock analysis, and can comprise up to 50% of the total Thule Supergroup stratigraphy in coastal areas. Sills may be over 100 m thick and dykes have been mapped up to 150 m wide. Ilmenite in coastal sediments in the Thule Black Sand Province is thought to have been eroded and liberated from the TDS and subsequently concentrated as part of heavy mineral accumulations by fluvial and marine and processes.

§ In the area of interest, the sills are mostly overlain by marine sediments in which heavy minerals have accumulated in layers or disseminations in beach sands. Heavy mineral sand occurrences are known along an 80 km long stretch of coastline on the southwestern coast of Steensby Land, leading to the area being referred to as the Thule Black Sand Province. Relative changes in sea level have resulted in extensive development of raised beaches that extend for up to 1.2 km inland. For the same reason, it is possible that drowned beaches exist offshore.

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 drillholes:

□ easting and northing of the drillhole collar

□ elevation or reduced level ("RL" - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drillhole collar

□ dip and azimuth of the hole

□ downhole length and interception depth.

□ 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 CP should clearly explain why this is the case.

§ Assay data from 83 drill holes and 4 excavator trenches intercepting bedrock has been used in the Exploration Target.

§ All holes were drilled vertically.

§ The following table shows bedrock intercepts in drill holes and trenches.

Hole ID	Source	Easting	Northing	From	To
2018
18-ET008-4	Excavator Trench	477815	8520032		3.40
18-ET009-1	Excavator Trench	477218	8520508		1.02
18-ET010-2	Excavator Trench	476992	8520082		1.90
18-ET012-3	Excavator Trench	480017	8519345		3.00
18IS007	Sonic Core	491571	8513363	1.72	3.00
18IS023	Sonic Core	493062	8511935	4.85	5.20
18IS008	Sonic Core	491640	8513467	1.50	3.00
18IS057	Sonic Core			2.80	4.30
18IS020	Sonic Core	492739	8512348	1.15	1.55
18IS009	Sonic Core	491676	8513538	0.98	2.38
18IS003	Sonic Core	491248	8513797	2.50	2.93
18IS120	Sonic Core	490986	8513918	1.50	3.00
18IS058	Sonic Core	490806	8514038	1.50	3.00
2022
MWRS22060	Diamond/Direct Push	479850	8519295	1.32	3.53
MWRS22061	Diamond/Direct Push	479820	8519435	5.68	7.65
MWRS22062	Diamond/Direct Push	479850	8519476	6.20	7.10
MWRS22027	Diamond/Direct Push	477816	8520034	3.50	6.15
MWRS22038	Diamond/Direct Push	478992	8519706	2.55	5.12
MWRS22046	Diamond/Direct Push	479366	8519734	13.60	17.07
MWRS22056	Diamond/Direct Push	479975	8519452	13.26	14.23
MWRS22057	Diamond/Direct Push	479924	8519422	9.92	12.96
MWRS22058	Diamond/Direct Push	479902	8519378	5.20	7.09
MWRS22059	Diamond/Direct Push	479870	8519337	1.60	3.83
MWRS22066	Diamond/Direct Push	480319	8519271	3.50	5.52
MWRS22067	Diamond/Direct Push	480283	8519230	1.70	3.45
MWRS22068	Diamond/Direct Push	480168	8519257	1.85	3.50
MWRS22069	Diamond/Direct Push	480190	8519297	2.20	3.55
MWRS22070	Diamond/Direct Push	480242	8519344	4.35	5.50
MWRS22071	Diamond/Direct Push	480139	8519382	5.50	7.00
MWRS22072	Diamond/Direct Push	480125	8519344	2.90	4.10
MWRS22073	Diamond/Direct Push	480094	8519289	1.60	3.40
MWRS22074	Diamond/Direct Push	479985	8519320	1.75	3.62
MWRS22075	Diamond/Direct Push	479968	8519257	1.80	3.70
MWRS22076	Diamond/Direct Push	479928	8519234	1.50	3.90
MWRS22077	Diamond/Direct Push	480059	8519254	1.80	3.70
MWRS22078	Diamond/Direct Push	480040	8519220	2.35	4.00
MWRS22079	Diamond/Direct Push	480146	8519203	2.10	3.32
MWRS22080	Diamond/Direct Push	480263	8519174	2.50	4.00
MWRS22082	Diamond/Direct Push	480122	8519162	2.47	3.95
MWRS22083	Diamond/Direct Push	480066	8519137	2.00	2.70
MWRS22084	Diamond/Direct Push	480011	8519178	1.40	2.50
MWRS22085	Diamond/Direct Push	479944	8519159	2.15	2.90
MWRS22087	Diamond/Direct Push	480055	8519061	2.35	3.00
MWRS22088	Diamond/Direct Push	480364	8519127	2.52	3.32
MWRS22089	Diamond/Direct Push	480364	8519126	2.35	3.15
MWRS22091	Diamond/Direct Push	480717	8519066	2.45	3.30
MWRS22092	Diamond/Direct Push	480767	8519151	3.70	4.65
MWRS22095	Diamond/Direct Push	480566	8518805	1.50	2.40
MWRS22096	Diamond/Direct Push	480529	8518728	1.45	2.35
MWRS22097	Diamond/Direct Push	480479	8518643	1.90	3.25
MWRS22099	Diamond/Direct Push	481136	8518955	3.10	3.95
MWRS22100	Diamond/Direct Push	481067	8518857	2.40	3.20
MWRS22101	Diamond/Direct Push	481065	8518856	3.20	4.10
MWRS22102	Diamond/Direct Push	481009	8518771	2.65	3.50
MWRS22103	Diamond/Direct Push	480948	8518695	2.80	3.10
MWRS22105	Diamond/Direct Push	481377	8518709	2.35	3.05
MWRS22106	Diamond/Direct Push	481315	8518620	3.05	3.55
MWRS22107	Diamond/Direct Push	481268	8518517	2.10	3.30
MWRS22108	Diamond/Direct Push	481243	8518433	2.30	3.45
MWRS22109	Diamond/Direct Push	481817	8518626	14.30	15.30
MWRS22113	Diamond/Direct Push	481593	8518340	1.85	3.00
MWRS22114	Diamond/Direct Push	481524	8518253	2.15	2.85
MWRS22112	Diamond/Direct Push	481648	8518414	2.00	2.55
MWRS22115	Diamond/Direct Push	481475	8518276	2.50	3.45
MWRS22116	Diamond/Direct Push	481467	8518256	2.85	3.85
MWRS22123	Diamond/Direct Push	481419	8518092	1.35	2.30
MWRS22124	Diamond/Direct Push	481363	8518012	1.35	2.10
MWRS22125	Diamond/Direct Push	481149	8518347	1.55	2.35
MWRS22126	Diamond/Direct Push	481074	8518261	1.50	2.25
MWRS22127	Diamond/Direct Push	481073	8518165	1.70	2.50
MWRS22130	Diamond/Direct Push	480833	8518529	1.90	3.00
MWRS22132	Diamond/Direct Push	480649	8518276	1.85	2.50
MWRS22133	Diamond/Direct Push	480603	8518213	1.55	2.40
MWRS22134	Diamond/Direct Push	480415	8518552	2.10	2.80
MWRS22136	Diamond/Direct Push	480318	8518360	4.50	4.90
MWRS22138	Diamond/Direct Push	480248	8518945	1.30	2.00
MWRS22139	Diamond/Direct Push	480181	8518915	1.10	1.90
MWRS22140	Diamond/Direct Push	480133	8518800	1.70	2.20
MWRS22141	Diamond/Direct Push	480077	8518718	2.50	2.85
MWRS22144	Diamond/Direct Push	477703	8520585	2.50	3.70
MWRS22146	Diamond/Direct Push	477940	8520310	3.85	5.35
MWRS22147	Diamond/Direct Push	477917	8520211	3.00	4.00
MWRS22148	Diamond/Direct Push	477863	8520131	2.45	3.90
MWRS22150	Diamond/Direct Push	478675	8519910	2.20	3.70
MWRS22151	Diamond/Direct Push	478617	8519839	2.10	3.10
MWRS22152	Diamond/Direct Push	478528	8519793	1.43	2.35
MWRS22153	Diamond/Direct Push	478374	8519514	1.60	2.45

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.

§ A single bedrock sample was taken from each drill hole, thus no weighting averaging or data aggregation has been done.

§ TiO₂ grades reported from analysis of bedrock have can be used to estimate ilmenite content using the following assumptions, however the grades in the Exploration Target have been expressed as TiO₂:

□ Ilmenite from this project typically contains 46.89% TiO₂.

□ 80-90% of the TiO₂ reported in analytical results is derived from ilmenite.

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 drillhole angle is known, its nature should be reported.

§ If it is not known and only the downhole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'downhole length, true width not known').

§ The hard rock mineralisation at the Dundas Ilmenite Project is hosted within high-TiO₂ sills and dykes of the Thule Dyke Swarm. The mineralised widths vary significantly due to the tabular morphology and lateral discontinuity of the dolerite sills. These sills range from a few meters to over 30 meters in thickness, with lateral continuity extending up to several kilometres in some areas, as observed in the Moriusaq and Iterlak regions.

§ Insufficient drilling has been done to confirm the true thickness of the sills, and thickness estimates for the Exploration Target are based on surface-shallow observations and published research

§ The logged intercepts from sonic drilling and surface outcrop sampling confirm the presence of significant mineralised intervals, correlating with the mapped sills. Further work, including diamond drilling and geological mapping, is proposed to refine the understanding of these relationships.

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 drillhole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.

§ Appropriate maps and cross sections with scale are included in the report, showing the areas included in the Exploration Target, including the distribution of D2 dykes and S1 sills within the Thule Dyke Swarm.

§ The regional geological map and schematic cross section illustrate the spatial relationship between the drilling and the geological structures, highlighting the variability in thickness, lateral continuity of the sills, and their position relative to 80 Mile's Licence.

§ The cross sections from GEUS show the stacked sill sections and their depth, as well as the location of the drill holes used to inform the Exploration Target, providing a comprehensive understanding of the sub-surface structure in the Dundas Formation.

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.

§ The results have been reported in a balanced manner, providing a clear representation of the range of grades found within the Exploration Target. Additionally, both high- and low-grade areas are clearly illustrated in the figures produced for the Exploration Target.

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 substance.

§ No other substantive exploration work has been incorporated into the estimation of the Exploration Target beyond the data already referenced.

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.

§ The proposed work to advance from the Exploration Target to a Mineral Resource Estimate includes detailed mapping and sampling of exposed sills, diamond drilling to confirm sill presence and variability, and test work to evaluate the production of marketable ilmenite concentrate. Hydrological and waste management studies will be reassessed, and current permits may be amended to accommodate hard rock mining activities.

About 80 Mile Plc:

80 Mile Plc, listed on the London AIM market, Frankfurt Stock Exchange, and the U.S. Pink Market, is an exploration and development company focused on high-grade critical metals in Tier 1 jurisdictions. With a diversified portfolio in Greenland and Finland, 80 Mile's strategy is centred on advancing key projects while creating value through partnerships and strategic acquisitions.

The Disko-Nuussuaq nickel-copper-cobalt-PGE project in Greenland is a primary focus for 80 Mile, developed in partnership with KoBold Metals. 80 Mile, through its wholly owned subsidiary Disko Exploration Ltd., has a definitive Joint Venture Agreement with KoBold Metals to guide and fund exploration efforts. The JV has completed intensive analysis and interpretation of the extensive geochemical, geophysical, and geological data collected during the previous exploration campaigns. Leveraging KoBold's proprietary artificial intelligence and machine learning platforms, this comprehensive analysis has resulted in the identification of seven initial priority targets within the project area. These seven priority targets exhibit spatial characteristics indicative of potential deposits on a scale comparable to renowned mining operations such as Norilsk, Voisey's Bay, and Jinchuan. The JV is now planning a focused ground-loop electromagnetic survey to refine and prioritize each locality appropriately.

In Finland, 80 Mile currently holds three large scale multi-metal projects through its wholly owned subsidiary FinnAust Mining Finland Oy. 80 Mile's Finland portfolio includes the Outokumpu project, where the discovery of industrial gases like helium and hydrogen adds significant economic potential to the already prospective copper-nickel-cobalt-zinc-gold-silver targets. 80 Mile is conducting further exploration to fully assess these resources.

80 Mile's recent acquisition of White Flame Energy expands its portfolio into the energy sector, adding large-scale licenses for industrial gas, natural gas, and liquid hydrocarbons in East Greenland. Approved by shareholders in July 2024, this acquisition diversifies the Company's assets and aligns with its strategy to contribute to sustainable energy solutions, while also exploring conventional energy resources.

The Dundas Ilmenite Project, 80 Mile's most advanced asset in northwest Greenland, is fully permitted and progressing towards near-term production. With a JORC-compliant Mineral Resource of 117 Mt at 6.1% ilmenite and an offshore Exploration Target of up to 530 Mt, Dundas is poised to become a major supplier of high-quality ilmenite. Recent discoveries of hard rock titanium mineralization, with bedrock samples showing nearly double the ilmenite content of previous estimates, further enhance the project's world-class potential. 80 Mile owns 100% of the Dundas Ilmenite Project under its subsidiary Dundas Titanium A/S in Greenland.

The Thule Copper Project is a significant component of 80 Mile's portfolio in northwest Greenland, focused on exploring and developing high-grade copper deposits within the Thule Basin in northwest Greenland. Leveraging existing infrastructure and exploration credits, the project is strategically positioned in an underexplored region with substantial mineral potential. 80 Mile's established basecamp at Moriusaq will support cost-effective exploration, aligning with the Company's broader strategy to secure high-quality copper and industrial gas projects.

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services. For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange use the personal data you provide us, please see our Privacy Policy.

END

DRLEAFNAASKLEFA

Grafico Azioni 80 Mile (LSE:80M)
Storico
Da Nov 2024 a Dic 2024

Grafico Azioni 80 Mile (LSE:80M)
Storico
Da Dic 2023 a Dic 2024

80M 80 Mile Plc

Notizie 80 Mile PLC - 80M

La tua Cronologia

Più Attivi

Toplist

80M 80 Mile Plc

Notizie 80 Mile PLC - 80M

La tua Cronologia