oal resources for the chinook projectmontem-resources.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/... ·...

Competent Persons Report Montem

COAL RESOURCES FOR THE

Chinook Project ALBERTA, CANADA

Prepared for Montem Resources Alberta Operations Ltd.

Competent Persons Report

ISSUE DATE: APRIL 9, 2020

EFFECTIVE DATE: MARCH 27TH, 2020

Prepared By:

DAHROUGE GEOLOGICAL CONSULTING SUITE 103, 10183 112TH STREET NW, EDMONTON, ALBERTA T5K 1M1 CANADA TEL: +1 780 434 9808 | FAX: +1 780 439-9789| www.dahrouge.com

PREPARED AND SIGNED BY:

John Gorham, P.Geol., Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd.

Bradley Ulry, P.Geo., Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd.

Matthew Carter, P.Geo., Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd.

Nathan Schmidt, P.Geo., Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd.

http://www.dahrouge.com/


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................................... 10

1.2 Land Tenure ........................................................................................................................................ 10

1.3 Geology and Mineralization .......................................................................................................... 11

1.4 Exploration .......................................................................................................................................... 11

1.5 Development and Operations ...................................................................................................... 12

1.6 Mineral Resource Estimate ........................................................................................................... 13

1.7 Exploration Target ........................................................................................................................... 17

1.8 Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................................... 17

2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 20

3 Reliance on Other Experts ......................................................................................................................... 22

4 Property Description and Location ....................................................................................................... 24

4.1 Location ................................................................................................................................................ 24

4.2 Mineral Tenures ................................................................................................................................ 24

4.3 Chinook Project Mineral Tenures .............................................................................................. 25

4.4 Chinook Project Purchase Agreement ...................................................................................... 28

4.5 Permits, Approvals and Agreements ........................................................................................ 34

4.6 Indigenous Peoples Consultation ............................................................................................... 35

4.7 Coal Development Policy for Alberta ........................................................................................ 36

4.8 Environmental Liabilities .............................................................................................................. 36

4.9 Other Significant Factors and Risks .......................................................................................... 36

4.9.1 Grizzly Bear, Mountain Goat and Sheep .................................................................... 36

4.9.2 Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone ............................................................................ 37

4.9.3 South Saskatchewan Regional Plan ............................................................................ 37

4.9.4 Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve .................................................................................. 37

4.9.5 Alberta Reclamation Regulations ................................................................................ 37

4.9.6 Vicary Quarry ....................................................................................................................... 37

5 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography ......................... 39


5.1 Topography, Elevation, and Vegetation .................................................................................. 39

5.2 Infrastructure and Local Resources .......................................................................................... 39

5.3 Climate .................................................................................................................................................. 39

6 Geological Setting and Mineralization ................................................................................................. 40

6.1 Regional Geology .............................................................................................................................. 40

6.2 Structural Geology............................................................................................................................ 42

6.3 Property Geology .............................................................................................................................. 45

7 Exploration ...................................................................................................................................................... 52

7.1 Prior Ownership................................................................................................................................ 53

7.2 Bulk Samples ...................................................................................................................................... 53

7.3 Mining.................................................................................................................................................... 53

7.3.1 Chinook South ..................................................................................................................... 54

7.3.2 Chinook Vicary .................................................................................................................... 54

8 Drilling ............................................................................................................................................................... 58

9 Previous Resource/Reserve Estimations ........................................................................................... 66

9.1 Chinook South Resource Estimates .......................................................................................... 66

9.1.1 2005 Resource Estimate by Norwest Corp. ............................................................ 66

9.1.2 2018 Resource Estimate by Tamplin Resources Pty. Ltd. ................................. 66

9.2 Chinook Vicary Resource Estimates ......................................................................................... 67

9.2.1 2005 Resource Estimates by Norwest Corp. .......................................................... 67

9.2.2 2018 Resource Estimates by Norwest Corp. .......................................................... 68

10 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security ..................................................................................... 70

10.1 Pre-analysis Sample Preparation and Quality Control................................................. 70

10.2 Laboratory Sample Preparation and Analysis ................................................................. 72

10.3 Quality Control and Quality Assurance .............................................................................. 73

11 Data Verification ........................................................................................................................................... 74

12 Coal Quality Summary ................................................................................................................................ 76

12.1 Raw Coal Quality .......................................................................................................................... 77

12.2 Clean Coal Quality ........................................................................................................................ 78


13 Mineral Resource Estimates ..................................................................................................................... 83

13.1 Resource Database ...................................................................................................................... 83

13.2 Geological Model .......................................................................................................................... 84

13.2.1 Topography .......................................................................................................................... 96

13.2.2 Geological Control.............................................................................................................. 96

13.2.3 Historical Mine Workings ............................................................................................... 97

13.3 Resource Summary ..................................................................................................................... 97

13.3.1 Resource Classification .................................................................................................... 98

13.3.2 Density ................................................................................................................................. 109

13.3.3 Resource Estimate Procedure ................................................................................... 109

13.4 Resource Statements ............................................................................................................... 110

13.5 Resource Comparison ............................................................................................................. 129

14 Exploration Target ..................................................................................................................................... 131

15 Adjacent Properties ................................................................................................................................... 134

16 Interpretation and Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 136

17 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................... 138

18 References ..................................................................................................................................................... 140

19 Competent Persons Statements ........................................................................................................... 143

JORC Code – Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria (2012 Edition) ............................. 144

Appendix 1 ................................................................................................................................................................ 145


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Chinook South Resource and Exploration Target Polygons ...................................... 15

Figure 1-2 Chinook Vicary Resource and Exploration Target Polygons ..................................... 16

Figure 2-1 Location of the Chinook Project............................................................................................. 21

Figure 4-1 Chinook Project Tenures .......................................................................................................... 30

Figure 4-2 Chinook South Tenures ............................................................................................................. 31

Figure 4-3 Chinook Vicary (South) Tenures ........................................................................................... 32

Figure 4-4 Chinook Vicary (North) Tenures ........................................................................................... 33

Figure 4-5 Property Restrictions ................................................................................................................. 38

Figure 6-1 Stratigraphic Column (Modified from Richardson et al., 1992) ............................... 40

Figure 6-2 Regional Geology Map ............................................................................................................... 44

Figure 6-3 Stratigraphic Columns for Chinook South (left) and Chinook Vicary (right). ..... 47

Figure 6-4 Chinook South Geology ............................................................................................................. 48

Figure 6-5 Chinook Vicary (South) Geology............................................................................................ 49

Figure 6-6 Chinook Vicary (North) Geology ........................................................................................... 50

Figure 7-1 Historical Workings – York Creek, International and McGillivray Mines ............ 56

Figure 7-2 Historical Workings –Vicary, Racehorse and Vicary North Mines .......................... 57

Figure 8-1 Chinook South (South) Historical Drilling ......................................................................... 61

Figure 8-2 Chinook South (North) Historical Drilling ........................................................................ 62

Figure 8-3 Chinook Vicary (South) Historical Drilling ....................................................................... 63

Figure 8-4 Chinook Vicary (Middle) Historical Drilling ..................................................................... 64

Figure 8-5 Chinook Vicary (North) Historical Drilling ....................................................................... 65

Figure 9-1 2018 Resource Estimate Areas .............................................................................................. 69

Figure 12-1 Chinook Project Ash-RD Regression .................................................................................... 77

Figure 13-1 Historical Cross-Section in LeapfrogTM ............................................................................... 84

Figure 13-2 Chinook Vicary Stereonet produced in LeapfrogTM using compiled surface

bedding measurements .......................................................................................................................................... 86

Figure 13-3 Chinook South Cross Section Location Map ..................................................................... 87

Figure 13-4 North-Looking Chinook South Geological Cross Section Line +200 ....................... 88

Figure 13-5 North-Looking Chinook South Geological Cross Section Line -1400 ..................... 88

Figure 13-6 North-Looking Chinook South Geological Cross Section Line -2,000 .................... 89



Figure 13-9 Chinook Vicary Cross Section Location Map .................................................................... 91


Figure 13-10 North-Looking Chinook Vicary Cross Section Line CV1 -1,600 ........................... 92


Figure 13-12 North-Looking Chinook Vicary Cross Section Line CV1 -8,400 .......................... 93

Figure 13-13 North-Looking Chinook Vicary Cross Section Lines CV2 -1,200 ........................ 94




Figure 13-17 Chinook South Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S2 ............................. 100



Figure 13-20 Chinook South Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S4A .......................... 103


Figure 13-22 Chinook Vicary Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S2 ............................ 105


Figure 13-24 Chinook Vicary Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S4A ......................... 107


Figure 13-26 Seam 2 Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook South ..................................................... 116



Figure 13-29 Seam 4A Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook South .................................................. 119


Figure 13-31 Seam 2 Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (South) ................................... 121

Figure 13-32 Seam 2 Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (North) .................................. 122



Figure 13-35 Seam 4A Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (South) ................................ 125

Figure 13-36 Seam 4A Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (North) ............................... 126



Figure 14-1 Chinook South Exploration Target..................................................................................... 132

Figure 14-2 Chinook Vicary Exploration Target ................................................................................... 133

Figure 15-1 Adjacent Properties .................................................................................................................. 135


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1 In-Place Coal Resources Summary by Project Area (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...14

Table 1-2 Modelled Conceptual Exploration Targets ........................................................................ 17

Table 4-1 Chinook Project Alberta Coal Leases ................................................................................... 25

Table 4-2 Chinook Project Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold, silver)

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...27

Table 6-1 Summary of Thrust Faults ....................................................................................................... 42

Table 6-2 Summary of Chinook Project Coal Seam Nomenclature .............................................. 46

Table 6-3 Weighted Average Coal Seam True Thickness at Chinook South ............................ 51

Table 6-4 Weighted Average Coal Seam True Thickness at Chinook Vicary ........................... 51

Table 7-1 Summary of Historical Mine Workings .............................................................................. 55

Table 8-1 Historical Drill Campaign Summary .................................................................................... 58

Table 8-2 Typical Core Drillhole Recoveries ....................................................................................... 59

Table 8-3 Chinook South Summary of Drillhole Coal Intersections ............................................ 59

Table 8-4 Chinook Vicary Summary of Drillhole Coal Intersections .......................................... 60

Table 9-1 Previous In-situ Coal Resource Estimates for Chinook South (Norwest) ............ 67

Table 9-2 Previous In-Situ Coal Resource Estimates for Chinook Vicary ................................. 68

Table 11-1 2020 Drillhole Reliability Classification Summary ........................................................ 75

Table 11-2 2020 Chinook Project Modelled Drillholes ....................................................................... 75

Table 11-3 2020 Chinook Project Excluded Drillholes ....................................................................... 75

Table 12-1 Chinook South Raw Coal Quality Properties - Weight Averaged by Seam – adb78

Table 12-2 Chinook Vicary Raw Coal Quality Properties - Weight Averaged by Seam – adb

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...78

Table 12-3 Chinook Project Raw Coal Quality Data .............................................................................. 78

Table 12-4 Chinook South Clean Coal Quality Datapoints ................................................................. 79

Table 12-5 Chinook Vicary Clean Coal Quality Datapoints ................................................................ 79

Table 12-6 Chinook South Clean Coal Quality Summary (Source Koornhof, 2020) ............... 80

Table 12-7 Chinook Vicary Clean Coal Quality Summary (Source Koornhof, 2020) .............. 81

Table 13-1 Compilation Summary of Geological Control Points ..................................................... 97

Table 13-2 Resource Classification Categories Reference (Hughes et al., 1989). .................... 98

Table 13-3 Resource Reporting Criteria ................................................................................................. 110

Table 13-4 In-Place Coal Resources Summary by Area (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23,

2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………111


Table 13-5 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Outside Historical Mining Footprints for

Chinook South by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………111


Chinook South by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………112

Table 13-7 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Inside Historical Mining Footprints for

Chinook South by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………112


Chinook South by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………113


Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as

of Jan. 23, 2020 ........................................................................................................................................................ 113


Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………...114


Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as

of Jan. 23, 2020 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………...114


Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of

Jan. 23, 2020 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..115

Table 13-13 Comparison of Recent Chinook Project Resource Estimates ............................. 129

Table 14-1 Modelled Conceptual Exploration Targets ..................................................................... 131


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation Definition Abbreviation Definition

Amp Ampere km2 square kilometre A Annum kph kilometres per hour Bbl Barrels Kt Kilotonne BC British Columbia L Liter Bcm bank cubic metre L/s litres per second Btu British thermal units LOM life of mine °C degrees Celsius m metre C$ Canadian dollars M mega (million) Cal Calorie m2 square metre CBI Composition Balance Index m3 cubic metre Cfm cubic feet per minute m3/h cubic metres per hour Cm Centimetre Ma million years cm2 square centimetre MASL metres above sea level Cps counts per second Mbcm million bank cubic metres CSI coal strength index MC maximum contraction D day MD maximum dilatation

ddpm dial divisions per minute MDT maximum dilatation temperature

dia. diameter min minute Dlt dry long ton mm millimetre Dmt dry metric tonne mph miles per hour Dst dry short ton MVA megavolt-amperes Dwt dead-weight ton MW megawatt

degree Fahrenheit MWh megawatt-hour FSI free swelling index opt, oz/st ounce per short ton Ft Foot oz Troy ounce (31.1035g) FT fluid temperature oz/dmt ounce per dry metric tonne ft/s foot per second pop population ft2 square foot ppb part per billion ft3 cubic foot ppm part per million g Gram QA quality assurance G giga (billion) QC quality control g/L gram per litre RL relative elevation g/t gram per tonne ROM run of mine Gal Imperial gallon RvMax Maximum reflectance Gpm Imperial gallons per minute s second gr/ft3 grain per cubic foot ST softening temperature gr/m3 grain per cubic metre SG specific gravity Ha Hectare st short ton Hp Horsepower stpa short ton per year Hr Hour stpd short ton per day HT hemispherical temperature t metric tonne

IDT initial deformation temperature

Temp temperature

J Joule tpa metric tonne per year

K kilo (thousand) tpd metric tonne per day Kcal Kilocalorie US$ United States dollar Kg Kilogram USg United States gallon KJ/kg kilojoules per kilogram USgpm US gallon per minute Km Kilometre V Volt Micron W Watt

Microgram wmt wet metric tonne


1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Montem Resources Alberta Operations Ltd. (“Montem”) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Montem

Resources Ltd. Montem is a coal exploration and mine development company which currently holds the

coal rights to the Chinook Project (“Chinook” or “the Project” or “the Property”) which is located within

the Crowsnest Pass region of southwest Alberta. This report is intended to be compliant with the JORC

Code (2012) and meet the 2014 Australian guidelines for estimation and classification of coal resources.

It summarizes historical coal exploration at Chinook and presents a Resource Estimate based on the

historical drilling, trenching and adits.

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Project is centred at 49°46’32”N, 114°31’33”W, and lies directly to the north and south of the town

of Coleman, in the Crowsnest Pass region of Alberta, Canada. North of Coleman, the Project extends for

approximately 30 km, this area of the Project is referred to as Chinook Vicary. South of Coleman the

Project extends for approximately 12 km, this area of the Project is referred to as Chinook South (Figure

2-1). The city of Calgary is located approximately 250 road kilometres to the northeast of the Project.

Access to the northern portion of Chinook South is byway of an unpaved road, informally known as the

York Creek Road, which runs south from Coleman. Access to the southern portion of Chinook South is

byway of an unpaved road, informally known as the Sartoris Road, which runs southwest from the town

of Blairmore (Figure 4-1). Access to Chinook Vicary is byway of numerous unpaved roads that run west

from Highway 40 and intersect the Project (Figure 4-1). Chinook Vicary is also accessed from the south

byway of an unpaved road, informally known as the Prospect Road, which intersects Highway 3 and runs

north into the Project. The main rail line, operated by Canadian Pacific Railway, bisects the Project at

Coleman and provides potential access to coal export terminals in Vancouver and Prince Rupert.

1.2 LAND TENURE

The Property comprises 53 Alberta Coal Leases and 58 Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except

gold, silver) that cover an area of approximately 9,746 ha (Figure 4-1). The Property falls within the

Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve and borders Castle Provincial Park in the south (Figure 4-5).

A portion of Property is located within a Mountain Goat and Bighorn Sheep range (Figure 4-5). In this

area, any disturbances that may have direct or indirect adverse effects, such as permanent alteration of

habitat must be avoided or mitigated. Additionally, most of the Property is located within a grizzly bear

protection zone (Figure 4-5); regulations require that Montem provide and preserve either core or

secondary grizzly bear habitat. Several areas of the Property are in the Key Wildlife and Biodiversity

Zones. The Alberta government outlines guidelines for these areas in order to protect the long-term

integrity and productivity of the ungulate winter ranges and populated areas. New permanent access is

to be avoided and temporary access should minimize disturbance to wildlife habitat. Limited industrial

work can be carried out between December 15th and April 30th.

The Property is primarily located within Category 4 of the Coal Development Policy for Alberta, other

than a small portion of the Property covering and surrounding the town of Coleman which is within

Category 1 and Category 2 (Figure 4-5). Montem is in the process of applying for a Coal Exploration

Permit (CEP) and an ancillary Deep Drilling Permit and Water Withdrawal License to support a planned

exploration program. First Nations engagement, Historical Resources Review and stakeholder

consultations are also underway.


1.3 GEOLOGY AND MINERALIZATION

The Project lies within the Front Ranges of the Canadian Rocky Mountains, in southwestern Alberta, and

spans the north-trending, west-dipping Coleman, Isolation and McConnell Thrust sheets. The area is

characterized by Precambrian to Upper Cretaceous rocks including the Fernie Group, Kootenay Group,

Blairmore Group, Crowsnest Formation, and undivided Upper Cretaceous formations (Figure 6-1 and

Figure 6-2). Economic coal potential in the Front Ranges lies in the Mist Mountain Formation of the

Kootenay Group.

Stratigraphy on the Property was subjected to extensive folding and faulting during the Late Cretaceous

Laramide Orogeny. The major faults, from south to north, across the Property include the westerly

dipping Coleman, Coleman splays, McGillivray, Vicary, West Coleman, and Racehorse, thrust faults. This

major faulting and folding have affected coal seam thickness, lateral continuity, geometry and quality.

The principal coal seams on the Property in descending order are: S1 (S1u and S1l) - Chinook South only;

S2 (S2u, S2m and S2l); S3 (S3u and S3l) - Chinook South only; S4 (S4u, S4m and S4l); S4a (S4au, S4am

and S4al) - Chinook Vicary only; and S5 (S5u, S5m and S5l). All seams, except for S1 have been correlated

and modelled on a coal seam ply basis. Seam thickness is variable and dependant on post-depositional

structural modification. Generally, structural thickenings of coal seams occur around the hinge of folds,

whereas elsewhere coal seam thinning may occur (Figure 6-3).

1.4 EXPLORATION

Historical exploration on the Chinook Project began in the early 1900’s when the International Coal and

Coke Company Ltd. (“ICC”) acquired the coal rights to the area that now makes up Chinook South, and

the McGillivray Creek Coal and Coke Company Ltd. (“MCCC”) acquired the coal rights to the area that now

makes up Chinook Vicary.

In the early 1950’s, Coleman Collieries Ltd. (“Coleman Collieries”) acquired the properties that make up

the Chinook Project from ICC and MCCC. In the 1970’s Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. (“Norcen”) acquired

the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Coleman Collieries. In 1985, Manalta Coal Ltd.

(“Manalta”) acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Norcen (Chinook Coals,

1989), and in 1998, Luscar Ltd. (“Luscar”), acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project

from Manalta. Luscar was a subsidiary of Sherritt International Corp. (“Sherritt International”). In 2014,

Westmoreland Mining LCC (“Westmoreland”) acquired all of Sherritt International’s assets and then in

2016, Montem purchased the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Westmoreland.

Chinook South

Between 1971 and 1982, Norcen conducted exploration at Chinook South, which included drilling, coal

quality testing and coal seam model development for preliminary non-JORC compliant reserve

estimations. Manalta” conducted additional drilling between 1986 and 1989 which included coal quality

analysis of RC chips and drill core. The focus of this early exploration was on determining the extent of

seams X and Y (currently modeled as seams S3 and S2, respectively).

In addition to these drilling campaigns, several geological mapping programs were also carried out,

namely, by V.H. Johnson in 1965, R.L. Dyson in 1973, and L.A. Smith Consulting and Development Ltd.

(“Smith”) in 1980. In 1980, Smith was contracted to prepare an evaluation of all Coleman Collieries’ coal

properties in southern Alberta. The evaluation included coal quality and non-JORC compliant

resource/reserve estimates.


Chinook Vicary

Between 1964 and 1982, Coleman Collieries conducted exploration at Chinook Vicary which included

geological mapping, drilling, adit drivage, coal quality analysis and bulk sampling. Further drilling,

geological mapping and coal quality analysis was carried out by Chinook Coals Ltd. (“Chinook Coals”), a

subsidiary of Manalta, between 1986 and 1991. Additionally, Algas Resources Ltd. undertook a drilling

program in 1977 to assess the coal bed methane potential of the area.

1.5 DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS

Historical mining operations within the Project include, at Chinook South, the International Mine, the

York Creek Mine and the Broun Mine, and, at Chinook Vicary, the McGillivray Mine, the Vicary Mine,

Vicary North and the Racehorse Mine (Figure 7-1; Figure 7-2).

Chinook South

In 1903, ICC commenced underground mining operations south of Coleman at the International Mine

which operated until 1952. An estimated 13.8 Mt of raw coal were extracted from S2 and S4 over the

lifespan of the mine. Prior to 1955, a small underground operation known as the Broun Mine was

operated by ICC and extracted <10 kt of raw coal from S2 south of the International Mine.

Between 1947 and 1952, within Chinook South, open-pit mining was carried out at 4 small pits known

as the York Creek Mine, where seams X and Y (currently modelled as seams S3 and S2, respectively)

merge together into a thick coal seam of 10 to 12 m. It is estimated that 500,000 tonnes of raw coal were

extracted by ICC from these 4 pits.

Chinook Vicary

In 1906, MCCC commenced underground mining operations at the McGillivray Mine, which was located

within Chinook Vicary. The property was purchased by Coleman Collieries in the early 1950’s and

operations continued at the McGillivray Mine until 1958. The Alberta Energy Regulator (“AER”) reports

that a total of 10.8 million tonnes of coal was extracted from the McGillivray Mine.

In 1957, Coleman Collieries commenced underground operations, targeting coal seam S2, at the Vicary

Mine. The mine was purchased and expanded by Norcen in 1971 and produced coking coal for the

Japanese steel market until operations ceased in 1978. The AER reports that approximately 8 Mt of raw

coal were extracted from the Vicary Mine.

Vicary North commenced operations after Norcen purchased the mine in 1971, however was shut down

shortly after in 1972 when faulting was encountered in the underground workings.

Production coal quality data from historical mines on the Property is limited. Within Chinook Vicary,

starting in 1959, coking coal extracted from seam S2 at the Vicary Mine was shipped to Japan. Initially,

59,000 tons per year of coking coal was being shipped but by 1967, the amount being shipped had

increased to 400,000 tons per year. In April 1967, Coleman Collieries signed a 15 year contract with a

consortium of Japanese steel companies for the sale of 13,300,000 long tons of coking coal, and in 1970,

another contract was signed for an additional 5,125,000 long tons of coking coal, with shipments to

commence in April of 1972 (Booth and Leigh, 1973).

Between 1966 and 1971, within Chinook Vicary, open-pit coal mining was carried out at the Racehorse

Mine by Coleman Collieries. According to the AER, an estimated 217 kt of raw coal were extracted from

the Racehorse Mine. Details of historical exploration and mining are presented in Section 7.


1.6 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

The Mineral Resources presented in Section 13 have been prepared in conformity with the JORC Code

(2012) and meet the 2014 Australian Guidelines for Estimation and Classification of Coal Resources.

The drillhole database used in the estimation is of acceptable quality and has been independently verified

by Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. (“Dahrouge”). A three-dimensional geologic model was

constructed using Seequent LeapfrogTM Geo Software (LeapfrogTM) and Maptek VulcanTM Software

(“VulcanTM”). The geological coal seam model was generated using historical drill logs, as well as,

downhole geophysics (density and gamma logs) and surface geological controls.

The Chinook Project Coal Resources are made up of Jurassic-Cretaceous coal seams S2, S3, S4, S4A and

S5 of the Mist Mountain Formation. The Resources have been reported separately for Chinook South and

Chinook Vicary (Figure 1-1 and Figure 1-2). Based on the analysis of historical results, “Most of the coal

at Chinook South is classified as a Semi Hard Coking Coal, with less than 10% deemed suitable as a Hard

Coking Coal. The majority of the coal at Chinook Vicary was found to be good quality Hard Coking Coal, with

FSI of 6 – 7 and CSR above 55. Minor portions of the resource, limited to seam S4/4A, report FSI below 6 and

CSR below 50” (Koornhof, 2020). Although the historical clean coal quality data is indicative to the

product coals defined above, further validation with current methods and standards is required to verify

the historical results and increase the quantity and spatial distribution of data across the Project.

Total In-Place Coal Resources for the Chinook Project are estimated at 103.8 million tonnes classified as

Indicated and 45.3 million tonnes classified as Inferred (Table 1-1). Resources were defined using the

following parameters, a 0.3 m minimum aggregate coal thickness, 300 m maximum vertical depth from

surface and a 20:1 bcm/in-situ tonne cumulative strip ratio. The 300 m maximum vertical depth from

surface cut-off anticipates open-cut mineable resources. These parameters are typical of those used for

the structurally complex coal deposits of the western Canadian Cordillera. Factors influencing the

reasonable prospects for economic extraction include:

• Favourable geology - other nearby producers of coking coal from the same formation and

seams

• Access by road and historical exploration trails is generally good

• Proximity to rail, power, highway and municipal infrastructure and services is good, with the

Project lying directly to the north and south of the town of Coleman

• The main rail line, operated by Canadian Pacific Railway, bisects the Project at Coleman and

provides potential access to coal export terminals in Vancouver and Prince Rupert.

• Nearby labour pool - 4 operating surface coking coal mines in the general area

• Favourable government and social attitude to resource extraction


Table 1-1 In-Place Coal Resources Summary by Project Area (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Area In-Place Coal Resources (kilotonnes)

ASTM Group Measured Indicated Inferred

Chinook South Medium Volatile

Bituminous 0 50,676 12,609

Chinook South - Inside Historical Underground

Mine Boundary

Medium Volatile Bituminous

0 551 479

Chinook Vicary Medium Volatile

Bituminous 0 43,691 24,102

Chinook Vicary - Inside Historical Underground

Mine Boundary


0 8,896 8,138

Total 0 103,814 45,327


Figure 1-1 Chinook South Resource and Exploration Target Polygons


Figure 1-2 Chinook Vicary Resource and Exploration Target Polygons


1.7 EXPLORATION TARGET

Exploration Targets have been defined for the Chinook Project in areas where there is insufficient data

to estimate a Mineral Resource (Figure 1-1 and Figure 1-2). It is important to note that the potential

quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature and that it is uncertain if further

exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource. Exploration Targets, which are in part

down-dip projections of coal resources, are provided for Chinook Vicary and Chinook South (Table 1-2)

and outlined in detail in Section 14 of this report.

The Exploration Targets displayed in Table 1-2 are presented as an upper and lower range and round to

the closest 5 million tonnes. Conceptual Exploration Targets are presented as a range to represent the

uncertainty in seam thickness, quality and location. The upper (larger tonnage) range was generated

using a 20:1 stripping ratio cut-off and the lower (smaller tonnage) range was generated by restricting

the upper range to a 300 m depth cut off. The Exploration Targets were generated using the same

methods and restrictions described for the estimated resources, but the entire Exploration Target falls

outside areas with sufficient data density and valid points of observation that define seam thickness.

Table 1-2 Modelled Conceptual Exploration Targets

Area

Exploration Target (Mt) Lower Range

Exploration Target - 20:1 SR, 300m Depth Cutoff

Upper Range Exploration Target - 20:1 SR, No

Depth Cutoff

Chinook South 1 10

Chinook Vicary 125 450

1.8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The presented Resource at Chinook contains significant thicknesses of Medium Volatile Bituminous coal

under ASTM standards. Based on the analysis of historical results, “Most of the coal at Chinook South is

classified as a Semi Hard Coking Coal, with less than 10% deemed suitable as a Hard Coking Coal. The

majority of the coal at Chinook Vicary was found to be good quality Hard Coking Coal, with FSI of 6 – 7 and

CSR above 55. Minor portions of the resource, limited to seam S4/4A, report FSI below 6 and CSR below 50”

(Koornhof, 2020). Although the historical clean coal quality data is indicative to the product coals defined

above, further validation with current methods and standards is required to verify the historical results

and increase the quantity and spatial distribution of data across the Project.

Significant work has been undertaken to investigate the historical geological interpretations and to

validate historical exposures, trenches, adits, and drill sites in order to model coal seams and plan future

exploration programs. Access to the Project by road and historical exploration trails is generally good.

Proximity to rail and municipal infrastructure and services is also good, with the Project lying within the

Municipality of Crowsnest Pass (population approximately 5,500). The main rail line, operated by

Canadian Pacific Railway, bisects the Project at Coleman and provides potential access to coal export

terminals in Vancouver and Prince Rupert.

There are currently four producing coking coal mines in the Sparwood/Elk Valley area, BC. All four mines

are owned by Teck Coal and they have an aggregate annual capacity of approximately 25 Mt. Mining

personnel for the Project could potentially be sourced from Coleman or other towns within the

Municipality of Crowsnest Pass.


The Project lies almost entirely within Category 4 land zone with respect to coal exploration and

development as designated by the 1976 Coal Development Policy for Alberta. This land category allows

for exploration to be permitted under appropriate control, and surface or underground mining or in-situ

operations may be considered subject to proper assurances respecting protection of the environment

and reclamation of disturbed lands. Additionally, a small portion of the Project covering and surrounding

the town of Coleman lies within Category 1 and Category 2.

The Property contains significant coal resources at extractable depths as supported by historical mining

operations and the current resource. The economics of coal extraction have not been evaluated as part

of this report.

Structurally, the deposit is reasonably well understood, and an alternative interpretation is possible, but

not likely. The main factor affecting coal seam continuity is the interplay of faulting, folding, seam dip,

depth of weathering and surface topography. Seams show a highly variable thickness which reflects

depositional and structural variations as well as the localized thickening of coal seams which occur in the

apex of folds and adjacent to thrust faults.

Both Chinook South and Chinook Vicary have previously been subject to historical mining activities and

contain areas of exposed and partially backfilled open-cut voids, limited waste dumps and extensive

underground workings. The historical extents of underground workings were digitized, and in-situ coal

was included within the Resource. This approach, although technically robust, introduced some

uncertainties in defining the contact between in-situ and disturbed material. This, along with the lack of

current coal quality data and historical drillhole survey locations prevented the declaration of Measured

Resources.

The Property is considered one of merit and further exploration and definition is warranted. The Authors

recommend additional exploration including resource drilling, bulk sampling, geotechnical and

hydrogeological studies and geochemical analysis:

Resource & Historical Workings Drilling:

• 10,000-15,000 m of reverse circulation or rotary air blast drilling. Infill drilling in areas

classified as Inferred to increase the resource classification to Indicated or Measured. Infill

drilling in the Exploration Target area at Chinook Vicary to further understand the resource

potential of the area. Confirm historical drill results and target primary and secondary

geological structures. Currently there are data gaps in the understanding of secondary thrust

faults and how they affect coals seams and interact with the main Coleman Thrust, specifically

to the south of the International Mine and in the area of the Racehorse Mine.

• Approximately 5-10 drillholes should be completed in areas of historical mining to test the

accuracy of the historical mine plans digitized by Dahrouge and ensure pillars that were

incorporated into the geological models were not extracted.

• A subsidence survey is also recommended to determine the extent the underground workings

have affected the topography in the area.

• Downhole geophysical logging and ATV/OTV surveys of all drillholes to consistently identify

coal seams and geologic structures.

• Dahrouge recommends a high-resolution LiDAR survey is flown for the entirety of the Chinook

Project. A LiDAR 15 DEM surface covering the majority of the Project was purchased for the

completion of this Resource statement, however, it did not cover portions of Chinook South.

An airborne LiDAR survey would produce a more accurate and continuous surface for the


Project in comparison to the LiDAR 15 DEM. High resolution aerial imagery could also be

captured during the same survey.

Coal Quality:

• 30-40 large diameter 6” or 9” core (LDC) drillholes. It is recommended a minimum of six 6” or

9” core coal samples be collected across the project, taking even spatial distribution into

account, from each of the S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5 seams. These sample would then undergo size

distribution analysis using the modern method of drop shattering and wet tumbling samples

with steel cubes. Washability and detailed analysis on a range of size fractions will be required

to determine the optimum size and density at which to prepare clean coal composites.

Petrography analysis and detailed coking coal tests, including carbonisation studies, should be

completed on simulated clean coal products to develop preliminary market specifications for

the resource.

• Between 3,000 and 4,000 m of LDC drilling should target areas where target seam depth is

between 30 and 100 m. Pilot drillholes to confirm exact depth to target coal seams will be part

of the resource definition drilling and will minimize coring intervals.

• It is also recommended that Montem obtain bulk samples from near-surface coal seams, either

by excavation or by 6” or 9” large diameter coring. Some coal quality data exists on the Property

for historical bulk samples, however, additional sites are recommended to ensure proper and

current sampling and analysis techniques are employed. The coal from the bulk samples should

be used to complete pilot wash plant testing and build the flowsheet for a coal preparation

plant.

Geotechnical and Geochemical Analysis:

• Between 3,000 and 5,000 m of HQ split-tube diamond drilling is recommended and should be

evenly distributed across the Property targeting primary and secondary geologic structures,

as well as, the hanging wall and footwall of proposed pit shells. Detailed geotechnical logging

should be conducted at the drill rig. Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) samples should

be taken every 30 m, and direct shear samples should be collected as well, when suitable

samples are identified. Point load tests should be taken every 3 m or at every change in

lithology, with more tests made near UCS sample sites.

• The geotechnical drillholes can be multipurpose drillholes and serve for resource and

geochemical analysis. Samples should be submitted for static testing (acid-base accounting and

elemental composition) followed by a subset of samples for phase 2 testing at a later time

(shake flask extractions and kinetic testing).

Hydrogeological Studies:

• A preliminary hydrogeological study should be commenced during the drill campaign with the

installation of monitoring wells and vibrating wire piezometers in select completed drillholes

to establish a relationship between the deposit, historical workings and the surrounding

watershed. A detailed program should be designed and overseen by a hydrogeologist.

• It is also recommended that packer tests are performed as the HQ diamond drillholes are

advanced to evaluate hydraulic conductivity of the bedrock surrounding the coal seams.


2 INTRODUCTION

Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. (“Dahrouge”) of Edmonton, Alberta, has been retained by Montem

Resources Alberta Operations (“Montem”) to prepare a report on the Coal Resources on the Chinook

Project (“Chinook” or “the Project” or “the Property”), located in Alberta, Canada (Figure 2-1). The

Chinook Project is comprised of the properties historically known as Chinook South and Chinook North

and a portion of the property historically known as Vicary-Racehorse. Currently, the Chinook Project

contains two areas, north of Coleman is referred to as Chinook Vicary (previously Chinook North and a

portion of Vicary-Racehorse) and south of Coleman is referred to as Chinook South (previously Chinook

South). The coal resources are comprised of the Jurassic-Cretaceous Mist Mountain Formation coal

seams, S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5. The Chinook Resource Estimate dated January 23, 2020 is contained within

53 Alberta Coal Leases and 58 Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold, silver).

This report was commissioned by Montem to comply with regulatory disclosure and reporting

requirements outlined in the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources

and Ore Reserves: the JORC Code (2012), which is the minimum standard required for the reporting of

Mineral Resources in a public document. In 2018, separate Resource Statements were generated by

Tamplin Resources Pty Ltd. for Chinook South and by Norwest Corp. for Chinook North and Vicary-

Racehorse; all three Resource Statements were reported in accordance with the JORC Code (2012). The

purpose of this report is to provide a Resource Estimate for the entire Chinook Project, incorporating all

available historical coal data. The current Resource Estimate used a database of 483 drillholes, totalling

57,748.73 m of drilling. A total of 11 available drillholes were excluded.

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results and Mineral Resources is based on

information compiled by Mr. Bradley Ulry, Mr. Matthew Carter, and Mr. John Gorham, Competent Persons

and members of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) and Mr.

Nathan Schmidt, Competent Person and a member of Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia

(EGBC); both Recognized Professional Organizations (RPO) where they hold the accreditation of

Professional Geologist.

Mr. Ulry, P. Geo., Mr. Gorham, P. Geol., Mr. Carter, P. Geo. and Mr. Schmidt, P. Geo., of Dahrouge are the

Qualified Persons responsible for preparing this JORC Compliant Competent Persons Report on the

Property.

Mr. Ulry, Mr. Gorham, Mr. Carter and Mr. Schmidt are employees of Dahrouge and are independent of

Montem Resources Alberta Operations Ltd., and its parent company Montem Resources Ltd.

Mr. Ulry, Mr. Gorham, Mr. Carter and Mr. Schmidt have sufficient experience that is relevant to the style

of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activity being undertaken to qualify

as Competent Persons as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of

Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves.

Mr. Ulry, Mr. Gorham, Mr. Carter and Mr. Schmidt consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters

based on their information in the form and context in which it appears.

Mr. Ulry visited the Property on August 13, October 31 and November 1, 2019. Mr. Gorham, Mr. Carter

and Mr. Schmidt have not visited the Property.


Figure 2-1 Location of the Chinook Project


3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

This report has been prepared by Bradley Ulry, P. Geo., Matthew Carter, P.Geo. and Nathan Schmidt,

P.Geo., with Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd, and reviewed by John Gorham, P. Geol. with Dahrouge

Geological Consulting Ltd. The information, conclusions, opinions, and estimates contained herein are

based on field observations as well as published and unpublished data (Section 18: References):

• Information available to the author at the time of preparation of this report,

• Assumptions, conditions, and qualifications as set forth in this report, and

• Data, reports, and other information supplied by Montem

• Primary reports used in this compilation include:

o Kobie Koornhof Associates Inc. (2020) – Assessment of the Chinook Project Clean Coal

Quality

o Tamplin Resources Pty Ltd. (2018) - Competent Persons Report. Coal Resources for the

Chinook South Project Canadian Sedimentary Basin, Alberta, Canada

o Norwest Corp. (2018) – Competent Persons Report. Chinook North Project, Coleman,

Alberta, Canada

o Norwest Corp. (2018) – Competent Persons Report. Vicary-Racehorse Property,

Coleman, Alberta, Canada

o Norwest Corporation (2005) – Technical Report. Chinook North Coal Property, Alberta

o Norwest Corporation (2005) – Technical Report. Chinook South Coal Property, Alberta

o Norwest Corporation (2005) – Technical Report. Vicary-Racehorse Coal Property,

Alberta

o L.A. Smith (1982) - Geological Evaluation of the Racehorse North Area, Volume I;

prepared for Coleman Collieries Ltd.

o L.A. Smith (1982) - Geological Evaluation of the Racehorse North Area, Volume II;

prepared for Coleman Collieries Ltd.

o L.A. Smith (1982) - Geological Evaluation of the Vicary-McGillivray Area; prepared for

Coleman Collieries Ltd.

o R.H. Karst (1988) – 1987 Chinook South Geological Report

The Authors have relied upon the professional quality of the historical work reported in various studies

ranging from exploration reports to NI 43-101 and JORC Compliant Resource Statements. The Authors

have no reason to believe that the information used in the preparation of this report is false or

purposefully misleading, and have relied on the accuracy and integrity of the data referenced in Section

18 of this report.

Dahrouge relied upon the findings of an independent study on product coal quality by Koornhof

Associates Inc. (“Koornhof”) titled Assessment of the Chinook Project Clean Coal Quality. The discussions

and conclusions of this report are incorporated into Section 12.

For the purpose of this report, the authors have relied on ownership information provided by Montem

and verified through the Alberta Government interactive coal tenure map:

https://gis.energy.gov.ab.ca/Geoview/Coal

https://gis.energy.gov.ab.ca/Geoview/Coal


While title documents were reviewed for this study, it does not constitute, nor is it intended to represent

a legal, or any other opinion as to title.

Some relevant information on the Project presented in this report is based on data derived from reports

written by geologists and/or engineers whose professional status may or may not be known in relation

to the JORC definition of a Competent Person. The Authors have made every attempt to accurately convey

the content of those files but cannot guarantee the accuracy or validity of the work contained within

those files; however, the Authors believe that these reports were written with the objective of presenting

the results without any misleading intent. In this sense, the information presented should be considered

reliable, unless otherwise stated, and may be used without any prejudice by Montem.

The results and opinions expressed in this report are based on the Authors’ review of the geological and

technical information listed in Section 18 of this report. Although the Authors have carefully reviewed all

of the information provided by Montem and believe it to be reliable, the Authors have not conducted an

in-depth independent investigation to verify its accuracy and completeness.

Except for the purposes legislated under provincial securities laws, any use of this report by any third

party is at that party’s sole risk.


4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

4.1 LOCATION

The Project is centred at 49°46’32”N, 114°31’33”W, and lies directly to the north and south of the town

of Coleman, in the Crowsnest Pass region of Alberta, Canada. North of Coleman, the Project extends for

approximately 30 km, this area of the Project is referred to as Chinook Vicary. South of Coleman the

Project extends for approximately 12 km, this area of the Project is referred to as Chinook South (Figure

2-1). The city of Calgary is located approximately 250 road kilometres to the northeast of the Project. The

Project comprises 53 Alberta Coal Leases and 58 Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold,

silver) that cover an area of approximately 9,746 ha (Figure 4 1). Access to the northern portion of

Chinook South is byway of an unpaved road, informally known as the York Creek Road, which runs south

from Coleman. Access to the southern portion of Chinook South is byway of an unpaved road, informally

known as the Sartoris Road, which runs southwest from the town of Blairmore. Access to Chinook Vicary

is byway of numerous unpaved roads that run west from Highway 40 and intersect the Project. Chinook

Vicary is also accessed from the south byway of an unpaved road, informally known as the Prospect Road,

which intersects Highway 3 and runs north into the Project. The main rail line, operated by Canadian

Pacific Railway, bisects the Project at Coleman and provides potential access to coal export terminals in

Vancouver and Prince Rupert.

4.2 MINERAL TENURES

Mineral Rights Ownership

In Alberta, mineral ownership refers to one’s legal possession as well as the right to win, work and

recover specific minerals from under a parcel of land. There are two types of ownership in Alberta: a

surface rights owner and a mineral rights owner. An individual or entity with surface rights owns the

surface and substances, such as sand and gravel, but not the minerals. An individual or entity with

mineral rights, owns all mineral substances found on and under the property. The mineral owner has the

right to explore for and recover the minerals but must do this in a reasonable manner as to not

significantly affect use of the surface. Individuals or entities may have both types of ownership but there

are often different surface and mineral owners on the same land. Mineral ownership is defined in detail

in the Mines and Minerals Act and its associated regulations. Mineral rights are registered in accordance

with the Land Titles Act.

Freehold Tenements

In Alberta, Freehold Tenements have mineral rights registered with the land ownership. These titles are

identified and described by a unique LINC number (Land Identification Numeric Code). A LINC number

is a unique, non-intelligent system-generated number having no inherent meaning and comprised of 10

numeric characters with the last character being a check digit. The LINC number assigned to a parcel of

land remains as a permanent identifier of that parcel until the parcel boundaries are changed. While this

LINC number is not intended to replace the legal description of a land parcel, it can be used to supplement

the legal description in order to more clearly identify a parcel in cases where similar legal descriptions

exist for multiple parcels.

Coal Lease Agreements

In Alberta, a coal lease grants the right to explore the land for coal within the boundaries of the lease. A

coal lease does not grant surface rights; a surface lease or grant is required. Applications for coal lease

agreements in Alberta must be accompanied by the $625.00 application fee, the first year's rent ($3.50


per hectare with a minimum of $50.00), plus GST as applicable. Once received, an application is

checked to confirm the requested mineral rights are available. The application is then reviewed with

respect to development restrictions or policies, and the appropriate method of disposition. Depending

upon the circumstances, a successful coal lease application may lead to an agreement being issued

directly to the applicant, or may result in competitive bidding.

Coal leases are granted for a term of 10 to 15 years, with option to apply for renewal at expiry. Once the

lease applications have been granted, the holder must pay an annual rent of $3.50/hectare to the Alberta

government to retain the Property, as well as royalties according to the Coal Royalty Regulation if any

production occurs. The current royalty rate for Crown-owned bituminous (Mountain/Foothills) coal is

1% of mine-mouth revenue before mine payout, and 1% of mine-mouth revenue plus 13% of net revenue

after mine payout.

Coal leases in Alberta are also subject to the following legislation and policies:

• Mines and Minerals Act - Parts 2 and 3 pertain specifically to coal leasing.

• Mines and Minerals Administration Regulation

• Coal Conservation Act - A coal lessee requires a Mine Permit and a Mine License to develop a

mine in the location of a lease. Approval for development and mining is administered by the

Alberta Energy Regulator (“AER”).

• 1976 Coal Development Policy for Alberta

• Integrated resource plans, policies, and any local restrictions set by the Government of Alberta

under the Mines and Minerals Act and other legislation.

• Information Letters relating to Mineral Rights Acquisition and Mineral Rights Tenure

4.3 CHINOOK PROJECT MINERAL TENURES

The Project is currently owned by Montem, subject to the purchase agreement conditions outlined below

in Section 4.4. The Project is comprised of 53 Alberta Coal Leases (Table 4-1) and 58 Alberta Freehold

Tenements (all minerals expect gold, silver) (Table 4-2) that encompass an area of approximately 9,746

ha (Figure 4-1 to Figure 4-4).

Two of the Alberta Coal Leases (1306050828 and 306050830) that make up the northern portion of the

Project are located partially within Chinook Vicary and partially within a Property, also owned by

Montem but not discussed within this report, that lies directly to the north of the Chinook Project. The

total area of Alberta Coal Lease 1306050828 is 130 ha with 65 ha lying within Chinook Vicary and the

total area of Alberta Coal Lease 306050830 is 255, with 128 ha lying within Chinook Vicary.

Table 4-1 Chinook Project Alberta Coal Leases

Lease Type

Lease Number

Status Term Date Expiry NTS Map

Sheet Project Area

Area (ha)

13 1307100753 Active 28-Oct-07 28-Oct-22 082G15 Chinook Vicary 129

13 1307110906 Active 10-Nov-07 10-Nov-22 082G15 Chinook Vicary 49

13 1306080813 Active 11-Aug-06 11-Aug-21 082G15 Chinook Vicary 16

13 1306050827 Active 21-May-06 21-May-21 082G15 Chinook Vicary 65



13 1306020556 Active 12-Feb-06 12-Feb-21 082G15 Chinook Vicary 178

13 1306020552 Active 12-Feb-06 12-Feb-21 082G10; 082G15

Chinook Vicary 81


Lease Type

Lease Number

Status Term Date Expiry NTS Map

Sheet Project Area

Area (ha)

13 1305121390 Active 16-Dec-05 16-Dec-20 082G15 Chinook Vicary 129

13 1314030394 Active 3-Mar-14 3-Mar-29 082G10 Chinook Vicary 49






13 1312100465 Active 4-Oct-12 4-Oct-27 082G15 Chinook Vicary 380


13 1306080814 Active 11-Aug-06 11-Aug-21 082G10; 082G15

Chinook Vicary 49






13 1311010589 Active 4-Jan-11 4-Jan-26 082G15 Chinook Vicary 65








13 1312100464 Active 4-Oct-12 4-Oct-27 082G10; 082G15

Chinook Vicary 886

13 1312040484 Active 1-Apr-12 1-Apr-27 082G10 Chinook Vicary 63








13 1307060454 Active 29-Jun-07 29-Jun-22 082G10 Chinook Vicary 162







13 1308050910 Active 1-May-08 1-May-23 082G10 Chinook South 92

13 1316020154 Active 21-Feb-16 21-Feb-31 082G09 Chinook South 146

13 1311120669 Active 2-Dec-11 2-Dec-26 082G09 Chinook South 67

13 1317080314 Active 8-Aug-17 8-Aug-32 082G10 Chinook South 130

13 1311120668 Active 2-Dec-11 2-Dec-26 082G09 Chinook South 114

13 1308090609 Active 4-Sep-08 4-Sep-23 082G09 Chinook South 52 Total Area: 6,316


Table 4-2 Chinook Project Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold, silver)

LINC Number

Land Key Status Term Date

Expiry NTS Map Sheet Project Area Area (ha)

0025221102 504008171 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 12 0024553282 504008171 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 53 0021337738 504008172 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 36 0021372313 504008172 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 28 0021337712 504008173 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0021337720 504008174 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0024340093 504008181 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 36 0025236035 504008201 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025236027 504008202 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0021338330 504008203 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0021338348 504008204 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0021411178 504008321 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0021411160 504008324 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 67 0025250986 504009052 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025250978 504009053 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025251000 504009061 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025250994 504009064 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025251026 504009071 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025251018 504009074 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025255036 504009171 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025255010 504009172 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025255002 504009173 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 64 0025255028 504009174 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 64 0025255052 504009181 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 64 0025255044 504009184 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 65 0025256124 504009201 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook Vicary 64 0025256108 504009202 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook Vicary 64 0025256090 504009203 Active N/A N/A 082G15 Chinook Vicary 64 0025256116 504009204 Active N/A N/A 082G15; 082G16 Chinook Vicary 64 0025251141 504009321 Active N/A N/A 082G15; 082G16 Chinook Vicary 64 0025251166 504009322 Active N/A N/A 082G15 Chinook Vicary 64 0025251159 504009323 Active N/A N/A 082G15 Chinook Vicary 64 0025251133 504009324 Active N/A N/A 082G15; 082G16 Chinook Vicary 64 0025192261 504010051 Active N/A N/A 082G15; 082G16 Chinook Vicary 65 0025192287 504010052 Active N/A N/A 082G14 Chinook Vicary 65 0025192279 504010053 Active N/A N/A 082G15 Chinook Vicary 65 0025192254 504010054 Active N/A N/A 082G15; 082G16 Chinook Vicary 65 0025220682 504007162 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0025220674 504007163 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0025060625 504007212 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0025060617 504007213 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0024339962 504007282 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0024339955 504007283 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0024683055 504007321 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook South 65 0024683047 504007324 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook South 65 0025218793 504007332 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0025218785 504007333 Active N/A N/A 082G09 Chinook South 65 0025217457 504008051 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook South 65 0025284035 504008052 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 65 0021332697 504008053 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 65 0021332705 504008054 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook South 65 0024337966 504008074 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 16


LINC Number

Land Key Status Term Date

Expiry NTS Map Sheet Project Area Area (ha)

0024553316 504008074 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 12 - 504008074 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 0.19

0032317026 504008081 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook South 65 0032317018 504008082 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 65 0032316994 504008083 Active N/A N/A 082G10 Chinook South 65 0032317000 504008084 Active N/A N/A 082G09; 082G10 Chinook South 65

Total Area: 3,430

4.4 CHINOOK PROJECT PURCHASE AGREEMENT

In 2016, Montem entered into an agreement with Prairie Mines & Royalty ULC, subject to certain terms

and conditions, to acquire the Chinook Properties: Chinook South, Chinook North and Vicary-Racehorse,

the subject of this report, and the Isola, Oldman, and Tent Mountain properties. The purchase agreement

was for C$12,000,000 with an initial consideration of C$1,000,000. The remaining C$11,000,000 is

outstanding and payable as described below (Montem Prospectus, 2018):

Licencing Payments - C$5,000,000

o C$5,000,000 payable within thirty days of receipt of a mining licence for any of the

Chinook Properties not including Tent Mountain.

OR

o C$1,500,000 within ninety days of receipt of the Tent Mountain renewed or amended

coal mining licence;

o C$1,500,000 within ninety days of receipt of an amended Alberta Environmental

Protection and Enhancement Act for Tent Mountain; and

o C$2,000,000 on or before the earlier of thirty days receipt of any coal mining licence

related to the Chinook Properties not including Tent Mountain and January 31, 2027.

If none of these licencing payments have been triggered by December 31, 2021 and the relevant mining

applications have not been submitted, then the amounts will be payable on the earlier of the above

triggers or in five equal payments of C$1,000,000, payable annually before January 31, between 2022

and 2026.

If none of the licencing payments have been triggered by December 31, 2021 and the relevant mining

applications have been submitted, then the amounts will be payable on the earlier of the above triggers

or in five equal annual payments of C$1,000,000 before January 31 between 2024 and 2028. If the

submitted applications are rejected by authorities, the licence-related payments will be payable in

accordance with this provision.

Production Payments - C$6,000,000

o C$6,000,000 within thirty days of the first 1,000,000 tonnes of coal from any of the

Chinook Properties, not including Tent Mountain.

o If the first 1,000,000 tonnes of coal comes from Tent Mountain then: C$500,000 is

payable within thirty days of production of first 500,000 tonnes; C$500,000 payable

within thirty days of production of second 500,000 tonnes; C$500,000 payable within

thirty days of first anniversary of such 1,000,000 tonnes; C$500,000 payable within

thirty days of the second anniversary of such 1,000,000 tonnes and the remaining


C$4,000,000 payable within thirty days of production of 1,000,000 tonnes from the

other Chinook Properties.


Figure 4-1 Chinook Project Tenures


Figure 4-2 Chinook South Tenures


Figure 4-3 Chinook Vicary (South) Tenures


Figure 4-4 Chinook Vicary (North) Tenures


4.5 PERMITS, APPROVALS AND AGREEMENTS

All ground-penetrating exploration programs require a Coal Exploration Permit (CEP), granted by the

AER. Currently a CEP application for the Project is in process. The CEP process can cost anywhere from

$20,000 to $35,000, depending on the regulatory requirements, reviewer, and consultations. The CEP

application requires the completion of the following:

• Coal Exploration Permit Application

o Provide detailed description of location and type of work to be performed on the

Property, including legal land descriptions, number and type of drillholes and/or test

pits

o Identify the total area and legal land descriptions for all planned ground disturbances

including new access roads, upgrades to existing access roads, drill pad locations and/or

test pit locations

o Identify and contact all stakeholders with land use rights in the area of planned

exploration

o Outline any wildlife-sensitive areas within the planned exploration area and identify all

stream crossings and proposed water withdrawal sites

o Produce 1:10,000 scale map displaying:

▪ Property boundary, township, range and section lines

▪ Proposed drillhole and/or test pits locations

▪ Proposed new access roads, modified existing access roads, stream crossings

and water withdrawal sites

▪ Land use surface dispositions

▪ Environmentally sensitive areas

• Deep Drilling Permit Application

o Submission required for drillholes to exceed 150 m in vertical depth, to a maximum of

250 m

o Outline reasoning for deep drill permit request and provide detailed geological

background on the Property

o Produce geological map displaying drillhole locations, geological formations, structural

information and historical workings (if present)

o Provide representative cross section and stratigraphic sequence of proposed

exploration area

• Water withdrawal License Application

o Identify location(s) of proposed water withdrawal sites

o Provide information on proposed use of water to be withdrawn and approximate

quantity of water to be used

• Road use agreement confirmation

o Agreement must be obtained with holder of License of Occupation (DLO) on all existing

roads to be used throughout exploration program

o Montem has entered into two road use agreements (RUA) to facilitate access to the

Project. For Chinook South, a RUA covering DLO1291 (the York Creek Road) with

770538 Alberta Ltd. and for Chinook Vicary a RUA covering DLO910594 (accesses the

historical Vicary Mine area) with Pat Dwyer Const. Inc. and Great Excavation Inc.

o Montem is currently in the process of setting up supplementary road use agreements to

facilitate additional access routes to both Chinook Vicary and Chinook South

• Historical Resources (archeological evaluation) Review

o A Historical Resource Impact Assessment (HRIA) must be performed on the Property to

identify potentially significant archaeological locations within the proposed exploration

area


• Stakeholder consultations

o Property owner must provide written notification to all land use stakeholders affected

by the proposed exploration outlining details of planned work, accompanied with map

displaying locations

• Indigenous consultations (ACO)

o Property owner must consult with all Indigenous communities affected by the proposed

exploration program

o The Alberta Consultation Office (ACO) is responsible for determining which Indigenous

communities must be consulted and the level of consultation required

o This can vary from no consultation to an ACO prescribed consultation that is audited

every two weeks by the ACO and Indigenous Peoples involved

Future permits that are not defined in this report are the Mining and Operation approvals required for

the Property.

4.6 INDIGENOUS PEOPLES CONSULTATION

Several Indigenous groups are located within 100 km of the Project. Montem has initiated consultation

with Indigenous peoples that may have interest in the Project and surrounding area, in order to begin

building relationships and develop an understanding of each group’s needs and internal processes.

The Indigenous peoples’ consultation program is an ongoing process, primarily associated with obtaining

licences and permits required for exploration work and mining activities, including an Environmental

and Protection Act approval (EPEA), a Water Act approval (WA) and a Public Lands Act approval (PLA).

The Alberta Consultation Office (ACO) is responsible for determining which Indigenous peoples must be

consulted and the level of consultation required; levels vary from no consultation required to an ACO

prescribed consultation that is audited every two weeks by the ACO and the Indigenous peoples involved.

For the Chinook Project, Montem is currently in the ACO managed Indigenous peoples consultation

process with all Treaty 7 First Nations in Southern Alberta, which includes:

• The Blackfoot (Niitsitapi) peoples

o The Piikani Nation

o The Kainai (Blood) Nation

o The Siksika Nation

• The Stoney Nakoda Nations

o The Chiniki Nation

o The Bearpaw Nation

o The Wesley Nation

• The Tsuut’ina Nation.

Regarding the Chinook Project, Montem has also engaged with:

• All Treaty 7 First Nations (listed above)

• The Ktunaxa people

• The Metis Nation of Alberta


4.7 COAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY FOR ALBERTA

All coal deposits in Alberta are subject to the provisions of the Coal Development Policy for Alberta, which

was originally enacted in 1976. This policy defines different parts of the land area of the province in

which specific regulations for coal development apply. The Project is almost entirely within Category 4

of the Coal Development Policy for Alberta, other than a small portion of the Property covering and

surrounding the town of Coleman which is within Category 1 and Category 2 (Figure 4-5):

Coal Category 4

Exploration may be permitted in Category 4 lands under appropriate control, and surface or

underground mining or in-situ operations may be considered subject to proper assurances respecting

protection of the environment and reclamation of disturbed lands.

Coal Category 2

Within this category limited coal exploration is desirable and may be permitted under strict control but

in which commercial development by surface mining will not normally be considered at the present time.

This category contains lands for which the preferred land or resource use remains to be determined, or

areas where infrastructure facilities are generally absent or considered inadequate to support major

mining operations. In addition, this category contains local areas of high environmental sensitivity in

which neither exploration nor development activities will be permitted. Underground mining or in-situ

operations may be permitted in areas within this category where the surface effects of the operations are

deemed to be environmentally acceptable.

Coal Category 1

No exploration or commercial development is permitted within Category 1. These areas are determined

to have alternative land uses of higher priority than coal activity.

4.8 ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES

The Mist Mountain Formation, the targeted coal-bearing unit, naturally contains selenium. In alkaline,

aerobic conditions, elemental selenium and selenide minerals are oxidized, releasing soluble selenate

ions which can be transported in surface runoff. Large scale surface mining in the Elk Valley, BC has

enriched the Elk River in selenium. Any future mine development on the Property will require the

development of a selenium management plan. Historical access and mine workings have been reclaimed,

with certificates issued. Montem’s ongoing liability is only for disturbance created during current

exploration activities.

4.9 OTHER SIGNIFICANT FACTORS AND RISKS

4.9.1 Grizzly Bear, Mountain Goat and Sheep

The Project is partially located within the Mountain Goat and Bighorn Sheep range (Figure 4-5). In this

area, any disturbances that may have direct or indirect adverse effects, such as permanent alteration of

habitat must be avoided or mitigated. Additionally, most of the Project is located within a Grizzly Bear

Protection Zone (Figure 4-5); regulations require that Montem provide and preserve either core or

secondary grizzly bear habitat.


4.9.2 Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone

Several areas of the Property are located in the Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone. The Alberta

government outlines guidelines for these areas in order to protect the long-term integrity and

productivity of the ungulate winter ranges and populated areas. New permanent access is to be avoided,

temporary access should minimize disturbance to wildlife habitat, and industrial work should be limited

between December 15th and April 30th.

4.9.3 South Saskatchewan Regional Plan

The Project does not fall within the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan (“SSRP”); however the southern

portion of Chinook South borders Castle Provincial Park, which is included in the SSRP (Figure 4-5). The

SSRP was established to manage and monitor the environment and support responsible development of

Alberta’s resources. The strategies developed within the SSRP are designed to minimize the amount of

land used for new development, including the usage of historical roads and trails for future exploration

program access, and progressive reclamation of areas no longer being used.

4.9.4 Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve

The Chinook Project falls within the Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve. This reserve is managed by the

province primarily for resource development management and recreational use purposes, although the

designation of wilderness areas has been used to restrict certain types of access for management of

habitat and conservation purposes.

4.9.5 Alberta Reclamation Regulations

New regulations are being adopted for reclamation certification in Alberta. Reclamation certificates for

Coal Exploration Permits granted after the beginning of 2019 will have to be applied for separately

through the AER’s Digital Data Submission (‘DDS’) system called ‘OneStop’. Following the guidelines of

the “Green Side Up” program, at least two growing seasons will be required before a review of the

reclaimed area can take place. Once a review is complete an application can then be made for the

reclamation certification. An independent environmental consultant will need to be retained to do aerial

and site evaluations and submit Phase 1 Electronic Application Submission documents and a Professional

Declaration by that individual/firm will be required for each permit. This is a substantial departure from

the previous regulatory framework and shifts the responsibility for inspection from the government

agency to contractors at considerably increased cost to the permittee.

The Authors are not aware of any other significant factors or risks that may affect access, title or the right

to perform work on the Chinook Project.

4.9.6 Vicary Quarry

The Vicary Quarry is located within Chinook Vicary near the historical Vicary Mine (Figure 4-5). Access

to the quarry is via the above mentioned DLO910594, it is with the owner and operator of the quarry

that Montem entered into a RUA for this DLO. The aggregate quarry has been in production intermittently

for approximately 20 years. Currently the quarry is in care and maintenance. There is no production data

available for the quarry.


Figure 4-5 Property Restrictions


5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND

PHYSIOGRAPHY

5.1 TOPOGRAPHY, ELEVATION, AND VEGETATION

The Property is situated within Alberta’s sub-alpine and montane sub-region of the larger Rocky

Mountain Natural Region. In general, the terrain is steep and mountainous with highly variable

elevations. The topographic elevation on the Property ranges from 1,350 to 2,500 m. Vegetation on the

Property is dominated by Engelmann spruce and sub-alpine fir at higher elevations and lodgepole pine,

Douglas fir and mixed grasslands at lower elevations.

5.2 INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOCAL RESOURCES

Access to the northern portion of Chinook South is byway of an unpaved road, informally known as the

York Creek Road, which runs south from Coleman. Access to the southern portion of Chinook South is

byway of an unpaved road, informally know as the Sartoris Road, which runs running southwest from

the town of Blairmore. Access to the Chinook Vicary is byway of numerous unpaved roads that run west

from Highway 40 and intersect the Project.

A secondary Canadian Pacific rail line runs through Coleman and connects with the main Canadian

National Railway east-west line for access to coal export terminals in Vancouver and Prince Rupert.

Typically, unit coal trains in this system run from 130 to 150 cars with 100 tonne capacity each. The

nearest airstrip is located in Pincher Creek, Alberta, approximately 50 km east of Coleman along Highway

3.

Accommodations, food, fuel and other necessary services are available in Coleman and Blairmore,

Alberta, which have a combined population of approximately 4,000. The local economy is primarily based

on tourism, forestry, and coal mining. Three waste treatment plants, 2 secondary oxidation ditches and

1 extended-aeration lagoon are available locally. In addition, mobile waste disposal services are available

to manage drill site generated waste.

Several coal mines, including Teck Resources Ltd.’s Elkview mine, are currently in operation in the area.

Mining personnel for the Project could potentially be sourced from Coleman and Blairmore, or other

surrounding settlements including, Sparwood (pop. 4,500), Bellevue (pop. 800) and Cowley (pop. 250).

Sparwood is a major coal mining community located 35 km west of Coleman across the Alberta-BC

border, and has many relevant services available to potentially support the development of the Chinook

Project. There is currently no existing mine infrastructure on the Property except for historical pits,

dumps and underground workings.

5.3 CLIMATE

Climate is sub-humid continental with mild summers and long, cold winters. Average summer

temperatures are 15° to 22°C and average winter temperatures are -5° to -12°C, with extremes of 35°C

and -40°C. Rainfall averages about 400 mm per year; snowfall averages 180 mm per year. Chinook wind

patterns are common in the area.


6 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION

6.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The Property lies within the Front Ranges of the Canadian Rocky Mountains, in southwestern Alberta,

and spans the north-trending, west-dipping Coleman, Isolation and McConnell Thrust sheets.

Stratigraphy on these thrust sheets is highly deformed due to complex folding and fault splays that

displace strata up to 10 km (McDonald et al., 1989). The area is characterized by Precambrian to Upper

Cretaceous rocks of the Fernie Group, Kootenay Group, Blairmore Group, and Crowsnest Formation, and

undivided Upper Cretaceous formations (Figure 6-1 and Figure 6-2). Economic coal potential in the Front

Ranges lies in the Mist Mountain Formation of the Kootenay Group, which is disconformably overlain by

pebble conglomerates of the Cadomin Formation of the Blairmore Group. The Kootenay Group has a

maximum thickness of 1,100 m near Sparwood, with an eastward thinning and grades into the

Nikanassin Formation near the North Saskatchewan River (Stockmal et al., 2001).

Figure 6-1 Stratigraphic Column (Modified from Richardson et al., 1992)

The oldest relevant unit in the area, the Jurassic Fernie Group, is comprised of dark-grey and black shales

locally interbedded with phosphatic sandstones and limestones; cherty limestones, bedded siltstones,


sandstones and oolitic limestones; coquinas; concretionary bands; and glauconitic sandstones (Hall,

1984).

The Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous Kootenay Group overlies the Fernie Group and is subdivided into

three formations, the Morrissey, Mist Mountain and Elk Formations; however, in the Crowsnest Pass

area, the Elk Formation is absent due to either erosion and/or thinning. Faulting and folding in the

Crowsnest area make confirmation of the number of coal seams within the Kootenay Group difficult.

• The Morrissey Formation overlies the Jurassic Fernie Group and is subdivided into the basal

Weary Ridge Member and the upper Moose Mountain Member. The Weary Ridge Member is

comprised of a calcareous sandstone with minor interbedded siltstone and mudstone. The

Moose Mountain Member is comprised of a siliceous sandstone with interbedded

carbonaceous and argillaceous layers (Gibson, 1985). Thin, less than 50 cm thick, coal seams

occur rarely in the Moose Mountain Member.

• The Mist Mountain Formation overlies the Morrissey Formation and bears coal seams with

economic potential (Kim, 1976). Locally this formation can be subdivided, from bottom to top,

into the Adanac, Hillcrest and Mutz Members (Norris, 1959); regionally, these members are

not recognized. The Mist Mountain Formation is comprised primarily of dark-grey siltstone,

with lesser sandstone, mudstone, shale and local conglomerate interbeds (Gibson, 1985). Coal

seams in the Mist Mountain Formation vary in thickness and can be up to 18 m thick; they

range from bituminous in the south to semi-anthracite in rank in the north (Smith et. al, 1994).

Progressive south to north changes in depositional environments cause the Mist Mountain

Formation to grade into the contemporaneous but mainly coal-barren Nikanassin Formation

to the north of Clearwater River (~latitude 52°).

• The Elk Formation overlies the Mist Mountain Formation and is comprised of interbedded

sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, shale and chert-pebble conglomerate; however, it is absent in

the Crowsnest Pass area (Gibson, 1985).

The Early Cretaceous Blairmore Group overlies the Kootenay Group and is divided into four formations:

from bottom to top, the Cadomin, Gladstone, Beaver Mines, and Ma Butte Formations (Gibson, 1985).

• The Cadomin Formation disconformably overlies the Mist Mountain Formation in the

Crowsnest area and is comprised of a resistant pebble conglomerate with local quartzose

sandstone interbeds. This unit is ridge-forming and is a marker unit for the coal-bearing

Kootenay Group immediately below. At Chinook South, this unit forms the Willoughby Ridge

and has a typical thickness of 10 to 30 m.

• The Gladstone Formation is divided into two main lithologies, an interbedded mudstone and

sandstone and a dark-grey, argillaceous limestone with fossiliferous, calcareous shale.

• The Beaver Mines Formation is characterized by interbedded mudstone and very-fine-grained

sandstone, with prominent interbedded coarser sandstone with a sharp base that fines

upwards.

• The Ma Butte Formation is primarily comprised of mudstone and very-fine-grained sandstone

with lesser interbedded coarser sandstone and common tuffaceous mudstones in the upper

part of the formation. The Ma Butte Formation grades into the Crowsnest Formation.

The Late Cretaceous Crowsnest Formation overlies the Blairmore Group and is characterized by bedded

pyroclastic and epiclastic deposits consisting of agglomerates, tuffs and volcanic sandstones with minor

flows and dikes (Pearce, 1969). Common minerals found in the formation include sanidine, melanite


garnet, aegirine-augite and analcime (Adair and Burwash, 1994). The Crowsnest Formation has a

maximum thickness of 426 m.

6.2 STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY

Stratigraphy in the Crowsnest Pass area has been subjected to first and second order faulting, as well as

complex folding. The major faults, the Coleman, Isolation and McConnell thrusts, trend north and dip to

the west at 08°; they displace the stratigraphy approximately 9.5 to 10 km eastward. They have resulted

in the repetition of the Mist Mountain Formation, thickening of coal seams and coal being brought to

depths favorable for modern mining methods. This faulting has also complicated the coal geology

through shearing and increased ash content and oxidation. Major folds, including the Crowsnest Syncline

and Allison Anticline, the Bellevue Syncline and Anticline and the Turtle Mountain Anticline (Rushton et

al., 1972), also trend north. Secondary local thrusts trend north, and occur within each thrust sheet,

resulting in local structure units or packages affecting coal seam thickness and occurrence (Table 6-1).

Table 6-1 Summary of Thrust Faults

Regional Thrusts Faults Regional Structural

Unit Local Thrusts Faults

McConnell Thrust McConnell Thrust Sheet Mutz Thrust

Twin Ridge Thrust

Isolation Thrust Isolation Thrust Sheet Hidden Creek

Coleman Thrust Coleman Thrust Sheet

Vicary

Racehorse

Rim

McGillivray

The Coleman Thrust cuts through the middle of the Mist Mountain Formation and acts as a basal surface

to the Chinook Project geological model, as no significant resources are believed to exist below the

Coleman Thrust.

Chinook South

Local thickening occurs in the York Creek area by thrust faulting, resulting in zones of

uncharacteristically thick coal seams as well as zones of uncharacteristically thin coal seams. At Chinook

South several secondary thrust faults occur west of, and associated with, the basal Coleman Thrust. In

general, the thrusts dip at higher angles than the coal seams, but locally cut along and parallel to the coal

seams. Only one secondary thrust fault at Chinook South was modelled in the 2020 Resource Estimate

due to limited available downhole data. The regional strike at Chinook South is approximately 0 degrees

and strata dip to the west at 30 to 35 degrees (Norwest, 2005).

Chinook Vicary

Several secondary thrust faults exist at Chinook Vicary with the area being more structurally complex

than Chinook South. North of the McGillivray Mine, the Vicary thrust splays off the main Coleman Thrust

causing a small repeat of the Cadomin Formation. In the area around the historical Vicary Mine, surface

mapping indicates complex surface geology with a series of splay faults and a slip fault with large

deformed blocks of Cadomin and Mist Mountain formation. The underground mine plans show coal seam

S2 to be relatively planar, offset by a series of splay thrusts, so it is believed the surface deformation is a


result of near surface slip faulting (Smith, 1991). Multiple splay faults continue north of the historical

Vicary Mine towards the Project boundary where drillhole data is limited.


Figure 6-2 Regional Geology Map


6.3 PROPERTY GEOLOGY

The Chinook Project is dominantly comprised of strata from the Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous

Kootenay Group and Lower Cretaceous Blairmore Group. On the Property, the Mist Mountain Formation

contains economic coal seams and is approximately 100 to 150 m thick (Figure 6-4 to Figure 6-6). No

intrusions have been mapped or interpolated to occur within the Project area.

All three members of the Mist Mountain Formation have been identified on the Property: the Mutz,

Hillcrest and Adanac. The Mutz Member comprises up to 90 m of fluvial siltstone with minor interbedded

claystone and coaly partings. Major coal seam S2 and discontinuous coal seam S1 occur in the Mutz

Member; additionally, several other discontinuous coal seams occur in the Mutz Member, likely the result

of washouts from the overlying, unconformable Cadomin Formation. The Hillcrest Member is ridge-

forming and lies conformably below the Mutz Member. It consists of up to 30 m of fluvial channel

sandstone deposits with interbedded siltstone and claystone. The Hillcrest Member is well exposed in

the northern portion of Chinook South but discontinuous to the south; this may be a depositional or

structural feature. The Hillcrest Member contains no major coal seams. The Adanac Member is recessive

and lies conformably below the Hillcrest Member. It forms the base of the Mist Mountain Formation and

consists of shale, siltstone and fine-grained sandstone. At Chinook South, the Adanac Member is often

truncated by the Coleman Thrust. Coal seams S3, S4, S4A and S5 occur within the Adanac Member.

Conformably below the Mist Mountain Formation, lies the Moose Mountain Member of the Morrissey

Formation. It is comprised of a massive cliff-forming siliceous sandstone with minor amounts of

mudstone, siltstone and coal. The Moose Mountain Member varies from 4 to 36 m in thickness on the

Property. The basal Weary Ridge Member of the Morrissey Formation has not been identified on the

Property.

The Morrissey Formation is conformably underlain by the Jurassic Fernie Group consisting of a recessive

sequence of marine shale, limestone and fine-grained sandstone. The Fernie Group is 150 to 300 m thick

and consists of predominantly fissile black shales, with a fine-grained argillaceous sandstone unit in the

upper portion of the formation. Much of the structural deformation in the Foothills and Front Ranges is

localized within the incompetent strata of the Fernie Group.

On the Property, the complex interplay of thrusting, folding and high relief topography controls the

distribution of coal seams and their associated sub-crops, as well as coal seam thickness. Generally, the

Chinook Project coal resources occur in a north‐south direction along the strike of the western side of

the Coleman Thrust. Seams may be thickened by faulting or folding, or they can be thickened by both

mechanisms. Such an example of thickening by faulting is at Chinook South, approximately 2 km north of

York Creek, where thrust faulting has resulted in the thick coal zone historically referred to as the “Big

Coal” zone.

Five economic coal seams have been identified at Chinook South with a cumulative total true thickness

of approximately 48 m and four economic coal seams have been identified at Chinook Vicary, with a

cumulative total true thickness of approximately 47 m. Nomenclature of these seams has varied through

history and is summarized in Table 6-2. Previous resource estimates, except for Tamplin (2018),

modelled each seam as a single entity rather than on a coal seam ply basis as the current model has done.

Subdivision of seams into plies accommodates the internal partings within each seam and improves

reporting of the coal seam thicknesses. Each seam comprises multiple coal, dirty coal and parting

horizons; average seam and parting (interburden) thicknesses for the Chinook South and Chinook Vicary

are summarized in Table 6-3 and Table 6-4. The principal seams on the Chinook Project, in descending

order are S1, S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5. From south to north there are variations in these seams. At Chinook


South, S1 has not been modelled due to its discontinuous nature; seams S2, S4, and S5 are currently

divided into 3 plies (upper, middle and lower); seams S1 and S3 are currently divided into 2 plies (upper

and lower); and seam S4A is modelled as a single ply. At Chinook Vicary, seams S1 and S3 have not been

identified; and seams S2, S4, S4A and S5 are currently divided into 3 plies (upper, middle and lower).

Although the coal and sediment intervals appear to be complexly interbedded and interfingered, the

seam packages have distinct geophysical signatures that can generally be identified along the currently

known strike length of the Project.

Table 6-2 Summary of Chinook Project Coal Seam Nomenclature

2020 Seam ID

Historical Seam ID

Chinook Vicary Chinook South

Chinook North Vicary

S1 1 V-1 a/b S2 2 V-2 Y S3 - - X/J S4 4 V-3 W

S4A 4A(x) - Z

S5 5 V-4 V

Seam S1, the highest seam in the sequence lies at the top of the Mutz Member. This seam has only been

noted at Chinook South and has not been included in the resource model due to its discontinuous nature

which makes it un-economical. This seam is divided into two coal plies, S1L which averages 0.5 m in

apparent thickness and S1U which averages 0.45 m in apparent thickness.

Seam S2, lies at the base of the Mutz Member and is divided into three plies (S2U, S2M and S2L) at both

Chinook Vicary and Chinook South. Average coal ply thickness is outlined in Table 6-3 and Table 6-4.

Seam S3 lies at the top of the Adanac member and is divided into two plies (S3U and S3L). Seam S3 has

only been identified at Chinook South.

Seam S4 lies near the top of the Adanac Member and is divided into three plies (S4U, S4M and S4L) at

both Chinook Vicary and Chinook South.

Seam S4A lies in the middle of the Adanac Member and is divided into three plies (S4AU, S4AM and S4AL)

at Chinook Vicary and one ply (S4A) at Chinook South.

Seam S5 lies at the base of the Adanac Member and is divided into three plies (S5U, S5M and S5L) at both

Chinook Vicary and Chinook South.


Figure 6-3 Stratigraphic Columns for Chinook South (left) and Chinook Vicary (right).


Figure 6-4 Chinook South Geology


Figure 6-5 Chinook Vicary (South) Geology


Figure 6-6 Chinook Vicary (North) Geology


Table 6-3 Weighted Average Coal Seam True Thickness at Chinook South

Seam Package

Seam Package

Thickness (m)

Composited Coal

Thickness (m)

Composited Interburden

Thickness (m)

Ply Name Ply

Thickness Ave (m)

S2 21.54 15.69 5.85

S2U 4.02

S2M 6.08

S2L 5.59

Midburden 7.97

S3 10.67 6.09 4.58 S3U 3.06

S3L 3.03

Midburden 13.33

S4 19.56 10.92 8.64

S4U 4.26

S4M 3.41

S4L 3.25

Midburden 13.27

S4A 2.57 2.57 S4A 2.57

Midburden 42.67

S5 23.67 12.82 10.85

S5U 3.38

S5M 4.47

S5L 4.97

Total 155.25 48.09 29.92

Table 6-4 Weighted Average Coal Seam True Thickness at Chinook Vicary

Seam Package

Seam Package

Thickness (m)

Composited Coal

Thickness (m)

Composited Interburden

Thickness (m)

Ply Name Ply

Thickness Ave (m)

S2 19.64 12.01 7.63

S2U 6.93

S2M 2.53

S2L 2.55 Midburden 34.98

S4 12.60 8.34 4.26

S4U 3.79

S4M 3.01

S4L 1.54

Midburden 6.74

S4A 8.32 4.08 4.24

S4AU 1.73

S4AM 0.53

S4AL 1.82

Midburden 17.19

S5 33.72 22.60 11.12

S5U 8.77

S5M 6.40

S5L 7.43

Total 133.19 47.03 27.25


7 EXPLORATION

Coal was first noted in southeastern BC around 1845 by Father Pierre-Jean DeSmet, a Jesuit missionary.

In 1873, Michael Phillips found and collected coal samples from exposures along the Elk River and sent

them to Dr. G.M. Dawson with the Geological Survey of Canada; Dawson later evaluated the coal deposits

as part of a mapping program in 1887. Coal mining in the Crowsnest Pass area began in 1898 at Fernie,

BC, and in 1901 at Frank, Alberta. In the study area, coking coal was mined from Kootenay Group seams

at Hillcrest, Coleman, Bellevue, and other smaller communities within Alberta, continuing into the 1950’s.

The final Coleman Collieries mine closure took place in 1983.

Chinook South

Historical exploration at Chinook South began in the early 1900’s when International Coal and Coke

Company Ltd. (“ICC”) acquired coal rights to the area.

In 1903, ICC commenced underground mining operations at the International Mine and Broun Mines.

Additionally, trenching, bulk sampling and geological mapping were carried out; however, no detailed

records exist for this early exploration work (Van Katwyk, 1991).

Between 1971 and 1982, Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. (“Norcen”) conducted exploration at Chinook

South, which included drilling, coal quality testing and coal seam development for preliminary non-JORC

compliant reserve estimations. This work was followed by additional drilling by Manalta between 1986

and 1989 at Chinook South. Results of Manalta’s drilling indicated open-pit mining potential north of

York Creek and that coal south of York Creek and near old open pits was complex due to thrust stacking.

Early exploration focus was on determining the extent of seams X and Y (currently modelled as seams S3

and S2, respectively).

Chinook Vicary

Historical exploration at Chinook Vicary also began in the early 1900’s when McGillivray Creek Coal and

Coke Company Ltd. (“MCCC”) acquired coal rights to the area that now makes up Chinook Vicary.

In 1906, MCCC commenced underground mining operations at the McGillivray Mine, which was located

within Chinook Vicary. The McGillivray Mine was acquired by Coleman Collieries Ltd. (“Coleman

Collieries”) in the early 1950’s and continued operations until 1958 (Chinook Coals, 1989). The AER

reports that a total of 10.8 million tonnes of coal were extracted at the McGillivray Mine.

In 1947, D.J. MacNeil conducted geological mapping in the area that now makes up part of Chinook Vicary.

Between 1964 and 1982, Coleman Collieries conducted exploration at Chinook Vicary which included

geological mapping, drilling, adit drivage and bulk sampling. In 1977, Coleman Collieries contracted Aero

Geometrics Ltd. to complete aerial photography, which was used by R.M. Hardy and Associates Ltd. in

1978, to provide a photogrammetric map at a scale of 1:5000; the map was used as a base for a regional

1978 exploration program which included mapping and diamond drilling. Further drilling and geological

mapping was carried out by Chinook Coals Ltd. (“Chinook Coals”), a subsidiary of Manalta Coal Ltd.

(“Manalta”), between 1986 and 1991. Additionally, Algas Resources Ltd. undertook a drilling program in

1977 to assess the coal bed methane potential of the area.

In addition to the drilling campaigns, several geological mapping programs were carried out, namely, by

V.H. Johnson in 1965, R.L. Dyson in 1973, and L.A. Smith Consulting and Development Ltd. (“Smith”) in

1980.


In 1980, L.A. Smith was contracted to prepare an evaluation of all Coleman Collieries’ coal properties in

southern Alberta. The evaluation included coal quality and non-JORC compliant resource/reserve

estimates.

7.1 PRIOR OWNERSHIP

Coal Leases and Freehold Tenements at Chinook South, were initially acquired by ICC in the early 1900’s.

Coal Leases and Freehold Tenements at Chinook Vicary were initially acquired by MCCC in the early

1900’s. At the time Chinook Vicary was made up of the Chinook North Property which began at Coleman

and extended northward for 10 km, and a portion of the Vicary-Racehorse Property, which began at the

northern extent of the Chinook North Property and extended northward for 30 km.

In the early 1950’s, Coleman Collieries acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project from

ICC and MCCC. In 1971, Norcen acquired an 82% interest in the properties that make up the Chinook

Project from Coleman Collieries before subsequently acquiring the remaining 18% in 1977 (Van Katwyk,

1991). In 1985, Manalta acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Norcen (Chinook

Coals, 1989), and in 1998, Luscar Ltd. (“Luscar”), acquired the properties that make up the Chinook

Project from Manalta. Luscar was a subsidiary of Sherritt International Corp. (“Sherritt International”).

In 2014, Westmoreland Mining LCC (“Westmoreland”) acquired all Sherritt International’s assets and

then in 2016, Montem purchased the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Westmoreland.

7.2 BULK SAMPLES

As of the date of this report, Montem has not conducted exploration on the Property. There is limited

information regarding historical bulk sampling from trenches and adits on the Property.

Chinook South

In 1982 at Chinook South, two adits were driven into seam Y (S2) at York Creek and Lyons Creek by

Coleman Collieries and 24 tonne and 10 tonne bulk samples were collected, respectively (Coleman

Collieries, 1982). The bulk sample material was sent to Birtley Coal and Mineral Testing Ltd. in Calgary,

Alberta for coal quality analysis, including detailed sizing and washability. The bulk sample collected

from the seam Y (S2) at Lyons Creek exhibited poor recovery during washability testing.

In 1988 at Chinook South, Manalta excavated two 1 tonne trench bulk samples (Bulk No. 1 and Bulk No.

2) from seam Y (S2) at York Creek. Material was sent to CanmetENERGY for washability testing (Van

Katwyk, 1991). One of the seam Y (S2) bulk samples, collected from the ‘Big Coal’ zone, exhibited poor

recovery during washability testing possibly due to the sample having not been sourced from the clean

upper portion of the coal seam.

Chinook Vicary

In 1982, a 12-tonne bulk sample was collected from coal seam S4 east of the McGillivray Mine (Coleman

Collieries, 1982). The sample was sent to Birtley Coal and Mineral Testing Ltd. in Calgary to determine

the washability characteristics of the coal.

7.3 MINING

As of the date of this report, Montem has not conducted mining on the Property. Underground and open-

pit mining was conducted by previous owners of the properties that now make up the Chinook Project.

Historical mines on the Property include, at Chinook South, the International Mine, the York Creek Mine


and the Broun Mine (just south of the International Mine), and, at Chinook Vicary, the McGillivray Mine,

the Vicary Mine, Vicary North and the Racehorse Mine(Figure 7-1; Figure 7-2).

Coal was extracted from several underground mines on the Property using multi-level and multi-seam

room and pillar technology between 1903 and 1978 (Table 7-1). Extensive structural thickening and

thinning of coal beds are common in this highly deformed region making underground mining difficult

due to unpredictable roof conditions. Dahrouge was able to obtain mine plans of the historical operations

from the AER and incorporate pillars left in-situ in the Resource Estimate in a process described in

Section 13.2 of this report.

7.3.1 Chinook South

Underground Mining

• At Chinook South, underground mining was carried out at the International Mine between

1903 and 1952, targeting seam Y (S2) and seam X (S3/S4); and at the Broun Mine, targeting

seam Y (S2) sometime prior to 1955 by Coleman Collieries (Van Katwyk, 1991)

• Development and depillaring extended south into the York Creek area

• Based on the historical mine plans obtained by Dahrouge, almost all S2 was depillared and

extracted while the S4 workings were less developed (Figure 7-1)

Open Pit Mining

At Chinook South between 1947 and 1952, open-pit mining was carried out at 4 small pits known as the

York Creek Mine, where seams X (S3) and Y (S2) merge together into a thick coal seam of 10 to 12 m (Van

Katwyk, 1991). It is estimated that 500,000 tonnes of raw coal were extracted by ICC from these 4 pits.

7.3.2 Chinook Vicary

Underground Mining

A summary of Booth and Leigh (1973) outlines the development and production history of underground

mining in the Vicary Creek area:

• In 1957, Coleman Collieries began a new underground operation at Vicary Creek, targeting coal

seam S2, to produce coking coal for the Japanese market

• Norcen purchased control of Coleman Collieries in 1971 and began development of Vicary

North and the expansion of the Vicary Mine (made up of the B-Level, No 2 South areas) without

systematic drilling and geological analysis

• Vicary North was abandoned in 1972 due to faulting in workings

• Vicary Mine (B-Level) was abandoned in 1972 when overlying workings began to shift

• Vicary Mine (No 2 South) ceased operations in 1978.

• Figure 7-2 outlines the extracted and remaining coal in the Chinook Vicary mines

Within Chinook Vicary, starting in 1959, coking coal extracted from seam S2 at the Vicary Mine was

shipped to Japan. Initially, 59,000 tons per year of coking coal was shipped but by 1967 the amount being

shipped had increased to 400,000 tons per year. In April 1967, Coleman Collieries signed a 15 year

contract with a consortium of Japanese steel companies for the sale of 13,300,000 long tons of coking

coal, and in 1970, another contract was signed for an additional 5,125,000 long tons of coking coal, with

shipments to commence in April of 1972 (Booth and Leigh, 1973).


The McGillivray Mine, located directly north of Coleman, commenced underground operations on coal

seam S2 and S4 in 1909 by a room and pillar method of extraction. Much of the mine was depillared,

removing most of the coal from S2 and S4 (Figure 7-1). Coleman Collieries acquired the McGillivray Mine

in the early 1950’s from MCCC and continued mining until 1958 (Chinook Coals, 1989).

Open Pit Mining

At Chinook Vicary between 1966 and 1971, open-pit mining was carried out at the Racehorse Mine by

Coleman Collieries. The mine was shut down because haulage and road maintenance had become

uneconomic (Booth and Leigh, 1973)

Table 7-1 Summary of Historical Mine Workings

Area Mine Name Mine

Company Type

Seams Mined

Operational Production (Kt)

Depth (m) From To

Chinook Vicary Vicary Mine Coleman

Collieries Ltd. Underground S2 1957 1978 7,481 308

Chinook Vicary Vicary Mine

(No.2) Coleman

Collieries Ltd. Underground S2 1964 1966 2 -

Chinook Vicary Vicary Mine (No.2 South)


Underground S2 1971 1973 515 -

Chinook Vicary Racehorse Coleman

Collieries Ltd. Open Pit S2 1966 1971 217 -

Chinook Vicary Vicary North Coleman

Collieries Ltd. Underground S2 1972 1974 - -

Chinook South International

Mine

International Coal and Coke

Co. Ltd. Underground S2, S4 1903 1959 13,847 332

Chinook South International

Mine

International Coal and Coke

Co. Ltd. Underground S2, S4 1947 1950 5 30.5

Chinook South York Creek International Coal and Coke

Co. Ltd. Open Pit S2, S4 1949 1951 24 -


Co. Ltd. Open Pit S2, S4 1949 1950 5 -


Co. Ltd. Open Pit S2, S4 1950 1951 9 -


Co. Ltd. Open Pit S2, S4 1950 1952 12 -

Chinook South International International Coal and Coke

Co. Ltd. Underground S2, S4 1949 1949 0 -

Chinook South Broun Mine Underground S2 1955 10 -

Chinook Vicary McGillivray

Mine

McGillivray Creek Coal & Coke Co. Ltd.

Underground S2, S4 1909 1958 10,774 600

Chinook Vicary McGillivray

Mine

McGillivray Creek Coal & Coke Co. Ltd.

Open Pit S4 1940's 1940's Unknown


Figure 7-1 Historical Workings – York Creek, International and McGillivray Mines


Figure 7-2 Historical Workings –Vicary, Racehorse and Vicary North Mines


8 DRILLING

Montem has not conducted drilling on the Project. Dahrouge created a historical drillhole database for

the Property consisting of work completed by 5 coal companies between 1964 and 1991 (Table 8-1).

This regional database includes a total of 494 drillholes located on or adjacent to the Property (Figure

8-1 to Figure 8-5; Table 8-1). Drilling consisted of 57 core drillholes and 437 rotary drillholes. Data was

compiled from the historical reports and displays different degrees of reliability. Uncertainties in the

drillhole dataset resulted from undefined or unavailable collar survey methodologies and down-hole

directional information. Rotary and core drillhole collar information was generally well constrained for

X-Y coordinates, but less reliable for Z coordinates. Downhole directional information was available for

305 drillholes. Not all drillholes in the database were used to constrain the current geological

interpretation as information was lacking or conflicting. It is the Authors’ opinion that the drilling was of

acceptable quality for the purposes of this report.

Historical drillhole locations were georeferenced from historical exploration maps in UTM NAD 83 Zone

11 projection format and then were validated against historical cross-sections and topography. Locations

that could not be confirmed were removed from the model dataset.

Drill intersection results were compiled using available geological logs, geophysical logs, and reported

coal intersection summary logs (Table 8-3 and Table 8-4). Whenever possible, all three logs were

compared for accuracy. Historical coal intersections were reconciled to geophysical logs to identify areas

of core loss and define core recoveries. Core recoveries were extracted from historical reports and

geological logs and summarized in Table 8-2. Recoveries ranged from 10% to 100%, due to the extremely

friable nature of the coal and considerable internal micro-faulting. Poor coal seam recoveries resulted in

many coal intervals that could not be sampled for quality or contained inaccurate quality analysis. Any

future drill programs should use a large diameter (6” or greater) triple tube drilling method to improve

core recovery.

Historical drilling was completed using a network of access roads and trails, many of which have been

deactivated, but not reclaimed. These deactivated access roads might be reactivated in lieu of new road

construction for future drill programs, which would facilitate the permitting process.

Table 8-1 Historical Drill Campaign Summary

Area Campaign # Rotary # DDH Meterage Company

Chinook South 1971 2 - 159.2 Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. Chinook South 1978 - 10 796.53 Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. Chinook South 1982 10 3 1,332.65 Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. Chinook South 1986 32 - 3,373.10 Manalta Coal Ltd. Chinook South 1987 52 - 6,196.00 Manalta Coal Ltd. Chinook South 1988 47 - 5,024.52 Manalta Coal Ltd. Chinook South 1989 119 2 13,603.96 Manalta Coal Ltd.

Chinook Vicary 1964 2 5 891.23 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1965 10 - 847.95 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1966 11 - 1,079.60 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1967 17 - 1047.14 Coleman Collieries Ltd.

Chinook Vicary 1968 1 30.78 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1969 - 6 285.45 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1970 10 - 2,047.65 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1972 - 5 1,842.98 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1973 2 13 3,667.57 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1974 - 3 904.04 Coleman Collieries Ltd.


Area Campaign # Rotary # DDH Meterage Company Chinook Vicary 1977 1 - 359.66 Algas Resources Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1978 - 9 1,885.19 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1982 7 - 832.5 Coleman Collieries Ltd. Chinook Vicary 1988 43 - 4,482.85 Chinook Coal Ltd. (Manalta) Chinook Vicary 1989 2 - 122.85 Chinook Coal Ltd. (Manalta) Chinook Vicary 1990 38 - 3,662.64 Chinook Coal Ltd. (Manalta) Chinook Vicary 1991 32 - 4,641.49 Chinook Coal Ltd. (Manalta)

Total 437 57 59,117.53

Table 8-2 Typical Core Drillhole Recoveries

Area Operator Campaign

Core Drillholes w/

Recovery Data

Average Core Recovery

DDH Recovery Ranges

Chinook South

Norcen Energy Ltd. 1978 10 59% 22% - 90%

1982 3 64% 10% - 100%

Chinook Vicary

Coleman Collieries

1968 1 100% 100%

1969 5 94% 67% - 100%

1972 2 91% 75% - 100%

1973 6 89% 63% - 100%

Table 8-3 Chinook South Summary of Drillhole Coal Intersections

Seam Package

Seam ID # of Drillhole Intersections

Mean Apparent Thickness

(m)

Max Apparent Thickness

(m)

Min Apparent Thickness

(m)

Standard Deviation

Lower Quartile

Upper Quartile

S2

S2U 187 1.64 17.3 0.2 2.27 0.5 1.6

S2M 190 4.12 17.3 0.2 3.68 1.2 6

S2L 201 3.24 18.2 0.1 3.13 1 4.5

S3 S3U 211 2.26 14.26 0.15 2.03 0.8 2.95

S3L 171 1.58 9.52 0.14 1.57 0.6 1.9

S4

S4U 204 2.06 21.55 0.1 2.61 0.53 2.62

S4M 145 2.13 13.9 0.18 2.47 0.6 2.6

S4L 131 1.82 19.35 0.1 2.34 0.55 2

S4A S4A 84 1.21 6.25 0.1 1.19 0.5 1.5

S5

S5U 119 2.2 13.3 0.1 2.29 0.65 3.2

S5M 79 2.28 12.4 0.24 2.51 0.74 3.1

S5L 80 2.28 10.96 0.22 2.34 0.8 2.55


Table 8-4 Chinook Vicary Summary of Drillhole Coal Intersections

Seam Package

Seam ID

# of Drillhole Intersections

Mean Apparent Thickness

(m)

Max Apparent Thickness

(m)

Min Apparent Thickness

(m)

Standard Deviation

Lower Quartile

Upper Quartile

S2

S2u 164 3.07 23.08 0.12 3.45 0.61 4.72

S2m 87 1.62 10.02 0.09 1.77 0.49 1.83

S2l 60 1.32 5.64 0.16 1.31 0.49 1.41

S4

S4u 118 1.79 13.41 0.06 2.22 0.54 2

S4m 61 1.24 8.53 0.15 1.46 0.43 1.52

S4l 34 1.13 4.91 0.16 1.18 0.33 1.42

S4A

S4A 61 0.85 8.8 0.1 1.18 0.3 0.91

S4Am 7 0.45 1.05 0.12 0.35 0.19 0.82

S4Al 34 0.77 2.9 0.15 0.52 0.4 1

S5

S5u 122 4.66 28.65 0.1 6.20 0.61 5.64

S5m 62 3.21 21.49 0.14 4.13 0.48 4.3

S5l 47 3.39 25.1 0.16 4.98 0.55 3.76


Figure 8-1 Chinook South (South) Historical Drilling


Figure 8-2 Chinook South (North) Historical Drilling


Figure 8-3 Chinook Vicary (South) Historical Drilling


Figure 8-4 Chinook Vicary (Middle) Historical Drilling


Figure 8-5 Chinook Vicary (North) Historical Drilling


9 PREVIOUS RESOURCE/RESERVE ESTIMATIONS

From the 1970’s to the early 1990’s Coleman Collieries, Norcen and Manalta completed internal non-

JORC compliant Resource/Reserve estimations for the properties that currently make up the Chinook

Project. Subsequent Mineral Resource Estimates were completed in 2005 by Norwest Corp. (“Norwest”)

for the properties that currently make up the Chinook Project and in 2018 by Tamplin Resources Pty Ltd.

(“Tamplin”) for Chinook South and by Norwest for the properties that currently make up Chinook Vicary.

These Resource Estimates are summarized below while Figure 9-1 outlines the historical resource

polygons.

9.1 CHINOOK SOUTH RESOURCE ESTIMATES

9.1.1 2005 Resource Estimate by Norwest Corp.

In 2005, Sherritt International Corp. contracted Norwest Corp. to evaluate and verify the historical data

and geological interpretation of Chinook South and generate an internal Technical Report according to

NI 43-101 guidelines for the Chinook South coal deposit.

The Resource Estimate incorporated geophysical logs and/or geological logs from a total of 276 historical

drillholes. Most of the data was acquired from the Alberta Energy and Utilities Boards (now called the

AER) and was supplemented with field maps and cross-sections from L.A. Smith Consulting and

Development (1981) and Manalta Coal Ltd. (1988 and 1989).

The 2005 Chinook South Coal Resource was estimated at 27.9 Mt Measured, 15.8 Mt Indicated and 17.2

Mt Inferred (Table 9-1) surface mineable medium-volatile bituminous coal. Six coal seams with

commercial importance identified on the Property were included in the Resource Estimate, in descending

order: seams Y, X, J, W, Z and V. These seams correlate with the currently modelled seams S2, S3, S4, S4A

and S5 (Table 6-2).

The 2005 Resource Estimate for Chinook South utilized the standardized coal resource/reserve

reporting system guidelines for Canada (Geological Survey of Canada Paper 88-21). The Chinook South

Coal Resource was classified as a ‘complex’ geology type and Norwest applied modelling parameters of a

minimum coal seam thickness of 0.6 m and a stripping ratio of 20:1 bcm/tonne in-situ coal. A cut-off

resource depth is not stated in the report by Norwest.

9.1.2 2018 Resource Estimate by Tamplin Resources Pty. Ltd.

In 2018, Montem contracted Tamplin Resources Pty Ltd. to provide a comprehensive review of the

historical data and complete a Resource Estimate in accordance with the JORC Code (2012) for the

Chinook South coal deposit.

The Resource Estimate incorporated geophysical logs and/or geological logs from a total of 276 historical

drillholes. Most of the data was acquired from the AER and was supplemented with field maps and cross-

sections from the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The 2018 Chinook South Coal Resource was estimated at 38 Mt Indicated and 10 Mt Inferred (Table 9-1)

surface mineable high to medium volatile bituminous coal. Five coal seams with commercial importance

were identified on the Property and were included in the Resource Estimate, in descending order: seam

Y, X, W, Z and V.


The 2018 Resource Estimate for Chinook South applied modelling parameters of an in-situ coal density

of 1.45 t/m3, a minimum coal seam thickness of 0.3 m, a maximum resource depth of 250 m, a stripping

ratio of 20:1 bcm/tonne in-situ coal and a 300 m offset from the Castle Park Boundary.

Table 9-1 Previous In-situ Coal Resource Estimates for Chinook South (Norwest)

2005 Resource Estimate (Norwest)

2018 Resource Estimate (Tamplin)

Area Measured

(Mt) Indicated

(Mt) Inferred

(Mt) Measured

(Mt) Indicated

(Mt) Inferred

(Mt)

Chinook South 27.89 15.8 17.2 - 38 10

Total: 27.89 15.8 17.2 - 38 10

The reduced tonnage estimate by Tamplin (2018) in comparison to the Norwest 2005 estimate is

attributed to several factors, including: the use of pinching out of the structurally complex W, Z and V

coal seams rather than using interpolation; limiting the resources to 100 m down-dip of the last drillhole

in each traverse, rather than using a nominal strip ratio; and not estimating resources within the area

now designated as, and within 300m of, Castle Park. Additionally, Tamplin did not report any Measured

Resources for Chinook South due to questionable drillhole survey data and heavy reliance on coal quality

data sourced from reverse circulation drilling.

9.2 CHINOOK VICARY RESOURCE ESTIMATES

9.2.1 2005 Resource Estimates by Norwest Corp.

In 2005, Sherritt International Corp. contracted Norwest Corp. to evaluate and verify the historical data

and geological interpretation of the properties that currently make up Chinook Vicary (Chinook North

and a portion of Vicary-Racehorse) and generate internal Technical Reports and Resource Estimates

according to NI 43-101 guidelines for the Chinook North and Vicary-Racehorse coal deposits. Norwest

utilized MineSight® software to create the geological model and Resource Estimate for the two

properties.

The Resource Estimate for the Chinook North Property incorporated geophysical logs and/or geological

logs from a total of 95 historical drillholes; the Resource Estimate for the Vicary-Racehorse Property

incorporated geophysical logs and/or geological logs from a total of 162 historical drillholes. Most of the

data acquired and used was from the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (now called the AER); additional

data included hard-copy geological data provided by Luscar Ltd., and hard-copy geological cross sections

by L.A. Smith (1982).

The 2005 Chinook North Coal Resource was estimated at 26.2 Mt Measured, 21.7 Mt Indicated and 14.3

Mt Inferred (Table 9-2). This resource estimate incorporated three seams considered to be of commercial

importance, seams 2, 4 and 5. The 2005 Vicary-Racehorse Coal Resource was estimated at 21.9 Mt

Indicated and 6.1 Mt Inferred (Table 9-2). This Resource Estimate incorporated two seams considered

to be of commercial importance, seams V-2 and V-3.

The 2005 Resource Estimate for the properties that currently make up Chinook Vicary utilized the

standardized coal resource/reserve reporting system guidelines for Canada (Geological Survey of

Canada Paper 88-21). Both properties were classified as ‘complex’ geology types and as such applied

modelling parameters of a minimum coal seam thickness of 0.6 m and a stripping ratio of 20:1 bcm/tonne

in-situ coal.


9.2.2 2018 Resource Estimates by Norwest Corp.

In 2018, Montem contracted Norwest Corp. to provide a Resource Estimate in accordance with the JORC

Code (2012) for the Chinook North and Vicary-Racehorse properties.

The Resource Estimate for Chinook North Property incorporated geophysical logs and/or geological logs

from a total of 95 historical drillholes. Most of the data was acquired from the AER and was supplemented

by a series of geological cross-sections from L.A. Smith Consulting and Development Ltd. (1982). The

Resource Estimate for the Vicary-Racehorse Property incorporated geophysical logs and/or geological

logs from a total of 62 historical drillholes. Most of the data was acquired from the AER and was

supplemented by digitized geological cross-sections from Chinook Coals Ltd. (April and May 1991) and

Coleman Collieries (February 1982).

The 2018 Chinook North Coal Resource was estimated at 20 Mt Measured, 11.4 Mt Indicated and 11.9 Mt

Inferred (Table 9-2). The geological model was constructed using a grid model with a grid size of 25 m

and the Resource Estimates used a derivative HARP (Horizontal Adaptive Rectangular Prism) block

model. This Resource Estimate incorporated four seams considered to be of commercial importance,

seams 2, 4, 4A and 5. Measured Resources were only estimated for seam 5 as there was insufficient coal

quality data to classify the other seams 2, 4 and 4A as Measured Resources. The Vicary-Racehorse Coal

Resource was estimated at 11.4 Mt Measured, 12.3 Mt Indicated and 3 Mt Inferred (Table 9-2). This

Resource Estimate incorporated two seams considered to be of commercial importance, seams 2 and 3.

The 2018 Resource Estimates for the properties that currently make up Chinook Vicary applied

modelling parameters of an in-situ coal density of 1.4 t/m3, a minimum coal seam thickness of 0.3 m, a

maximum resource depth of 300 m and a stripping ratio of 20:1 bcm/tonne in-situ coal.

Table 9-2 Previous In-Situ Coal Resource Estimates for Chinook Vicary 2005 Resource Estimate 2018 Resource Estimate

Area Measured

(Mt) Indicated

(Mt) Inferred

(Mt) Measured

(Mt) Indicated

(Mt) Inferred

(Mt)

Vicary-Racehorse - 21.91 6.13 11.4 12.3 3

Chinook North 26.24 21.68 14.27 20 11.4 11.9

Total: 26.24 43.59 20.4 31.4 23.7 14.9


Figure 9-1 2018 Resource Estimate Areas


10 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY

Dahrouge has not performed any sampling or coal quality investigations on the Property. Instead,

Dahrouge completed a compilation and review of the available historical coal sample procedures and

analytical work reported by Coleman Collieries and Norcen. Information concerning sampling

procedures and sample security measures was obtained from historical exploration reports prepared by

the staff of Coleman Collieries, and Norcen, or the independent coal testing laboratories engaged to

analyse the coal samples. No special sample security measures were adopted on this project because the

industry regards coal as a low value bulk commodity, the exploration samples for which do not require

special or elaborate sample security measures.

Coal sample data was available for 36 of the 57 cored (diamond) drillholes and 196 of 437 RC drillholes.

10.1 PRE-ANALYSIS SAMPLE PREPARATION AND QUALITY CONTROL

Historical Drill Core Sampling

Historical core sampling was completed between 1964 and 1989, by Norcen Energy, Manalta Coal,

Coleman Collieries, or their contractors. The sampling took place over many different drill campaigns as

such, the Authors have no direct knowledge of the historical sampling methods undertaken during each

drilling campaign however have no reason to believe that industry standard processes were not followed.

Cores were examined following retrieval and all field sub-samples were then sealed before being

forwarded to the laboratory for testing and analysis. Samples collected from drill core were submitted

for analysis using methods that are standard for the coal industry. The industry standard process is

described below:

• Core from the drillhole was geologically logged (i.e. measured and described) using standard

descriptive terms to document rock type, color, brightness, hardness and grain size.

• Geophysical logs were run downhole to collect caliper, density (gamma-gamma), natural gamma

and deviation surveys. The geophysical logs were used to identify rock types, including coal

intersected in the drillhole.

• Coal intervals were collected in split inner tube sampling barrels. The core tubes were opened and

logged by a geologist. The geologist’s core log consisted of the measured thickness and description

of the coal, inter-seam partings, adjacent roof and floor rock, and details of any sample intervals

removed for analysis.

• Recovered core was measured to determine an overall recovery (reported in percent) by comparing

the recovered core length with the coring run length recorded by the driller. Recovered core was

measured and compared to the coal interval thickness determined from the geophysical log suite.

• Collected samples were placed in pre-labelled sample bags with the drillhole number and sample

identifier clearly marked. The sample bags were placed together in a collection bag or 5-gallon

pail(s) for the drillhole before being placed in palletized containers and shipped to an independent

laboratory for analysis.

• No special security methods were identified for the shipping and storage of samples.

Historical RC Coal Sampling

Historical RC coal sampling took place during the same period as the core sampling by the same

operators. Coal quality data was collected for some of these drillholes. RC coal chip samples are prone to

contamination and oxidation; and therefore, have limited value for coal quality except as a determination


of seam rank. Sampling took place over many different drill campaigns and, although the Authors have

no direct knowledge of the historical sampling methods undertaken during each drill campaign, they

have no reason to believe that industry standard processes were not followed.

Typically, RC samples miss a small portion of the top of the seam as there is a delay between when the

driller acknowledges the intersection of coal and when the drill stops advancing. The industry standard

process is described below:

• Coal chips are collected in one to three-foot intervals as the drill is slowly advanced and put in cloth

bags to drain.

• A small portion of each interval is put in the lithological sample tray for subsequent geological

logging and comparison to geophysical logs.

• After draining, the bagged samples from the individual intersected seams are evaluated by the site

geologist and composited with the aid of downhole logs to eliminate partings and seam floor

material.

• Collected samples are placed in pre-labelled sample bags with the drillhole number and sample

identifier clearly marked. The sample bags are placed together in a collection bag or 5-gallon

pail(s) for the drillhole before being placed in palletized containers and shipped to an

independent laboratory for analysis.

• Typically, no special security methods were identified for the shipping and storage of samples.

Bulk Sampling Procedure

The Authors have no direct knowledge of the bulk sampling methods undertaken by the previous

operators and site crews. A total of 3 bulk samples were collected; two by Coleman Collieries in 1982 and

one by Manalta in 1988, for which no sampling methods were described. Coleman Collieries methods

were as follows:

• Upon completion of the crosscut, the seam was described by estimating the ash content of the

coal and noting rock partings.

• Geological boundaries were marked by flagging tape and spray paint. The geological

descriptions provided the basis for channel sampling. A total of 18 channel samples (5 cm x 5

cm x unit length) were collected representing the different descriptive units.

• These samples were bagged and taken to the Coleman Collieries' laboratory for ash (%)

analyses. This information was used to select the 5 major bulk sampling units within the coal

seam

• The bulk sampling was based upon the parallelogram sampling method with roof and floor

contacts forming the top and bottom of the parallelogram.

• Samples of the initial 20 cm of the hanging and footwall were also collected

• Test drillholes (1.5 metres) were drilled at each end of the crosscut to ensure the boundaries

of the coal seam were encountered.

• Specific gravities were estimated from the average ash content of each bulk sample.

• The resultant sample was expected to be less in total weight due to coal loss during handling

and the rounding of cuts in the coal seam.

• Each bulk sample was placed in lined 45-gallon drums for shipment to Birtley Labs in Calgary.

Each bulk sample is identified by identification numbers on the outside of the barrels (i.e. 1 to

5) and a sample number tag in each barrel.


10.2 LABORATORY SAMPLE PREPARATION AND ANALYSIS

Historical laboratory test work that was performed was completed by Birtley Coal & Mineral Testing

Laboratories (“Birtley”) and Loring Laboratories (Alberta) Ltd. (“Loring”) in Calgary, Alberta; both

laboratories are still in operation. As part of both Birtley’s and Loring’s current certification by the Coal

Association of Canada (CAC), there is an obligation to complete relevant round robin checks and other

routine checking procedures to ensure that they meet the required accuracy for each test. Both labs have

been part of these tests since their inception; however, Birtley and Loring have advised they are unsure

if this quality control check applied in the 1970’s. As such, it is unclear if the laboratories involved in the

Chinook Project historical analysis had a system of blind assaying as part of their quality control.

The sample preparation methods utilized for the historical samples were industry standard at the time.

Details of the sample preparation are not known other than the descriptions provided by the laboratories

(Coleman Collieries, 1982). Detailed composite sample information is available in hard copy.

Drillhole Sample Preparation and Analysis:

• The received samples were dried, split, and crushed to top size 65 Mesh or 100 Mesh following

owner’s direction

• For each interval of coal splits/plies and composite sample, raw coal analysis of ADM, RM, Ash,

VM, S, CV, SG, and FSI were done, which varied by owners. All results were reported in air dry

basis, as receive basis and dry basis.

• For each interval of rock partings, analysis of ADM, RM, Ash and SG was done. All results were

reported in air dry basis, as receive basis and dry basis.

• After reviewing the above proximate analysis results for raw coal splits and rock partings, lab

composite samples were made and determined.

• Composite samples into two size fractions: above and below 65M/100M were screened.

• Head raw analysis (AM, RM, Ash, VM, FC, CV and Equilibrium Moisture) on the lab composite

samples for each size fraction was run.

• Float-sink analysis was done on size faction above 65M/100M at different SG, ranging from

1.3-1.6 (or 1.8) with interval of 0.1.

• Froth flotation test on size fractions below 65M/100M at 60s, 120s and tailings was done.

• After reviewing the washability results by owners, clean coal composites were made and

determined.

• Proximate, ultimate, petrology test, Gieseler and Ruhr test, and ash fusion temperatures

analysis on the lab-made clean coal composites as well as Chlorine and phosphorous content

were carried out.

Bulk Sample Preparation and Analysis:

• Each sample interval was screened at 100mm. The oversized portion were crushed to pass

100mm and mechanically homogenized.

• Size (in mm) screening to different fractions: 100-50mm, 50-38mm, 38-25mm, 25-19mm, 19-

12mm, 12-6.3mm, 6.3-3mm, 3-1mm, 1-0.6mm, 0.6-0.25mm, 0.25-0.15mm, 0.15-0mm.

• A representative sample for each size fraction was extracted for analysis of air-dried loss

moisture, proximate analysis, caloric value, sulphur, FSI and HGI.

• Any residual sample from the head sample was reserved for composite bulk sample for 3

circuit (heavy media feed, water cyclone feed, and froth flotation feed) pilot plant washing.


• A second representative bulk composite sample for each interval was extracted for detailed

screening, attrition and washability tests. Any rock partings with thickness above 0.6 m or coal

plies with ash content above 40% were excluded from the composite samples.

• The sample for washability was crushed to top size of 2”and screen to size 28 Mesh and 65

Mesh, each size portion weighed, and ash content measured for each size fraction.

• Australian Wet Drum method (ASA #1661) was used for attrition test.

• The clean coal material obtained from washability tests at 1.6SG went through further analysis:

Gieseler Plastometer test, Ruhr Dilatometer test, Ash Fusion temperatures test, Ash mineral

analysis, trace element analysis.

10.3 QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

Minimal preparation is usually performed in coal sampling. As is customary for Canadian coal-

exploration practices, samples are recovered by means of drilling, trenching or tunnelling; they are then

usually subdivided according to visually apparent geological boundaries, and submitted for analysis

without any effort to pre-clean or otherwise alter the sample.

Various analytical protocols have been developed to assess coals for industrial use. In North American

practice, most of these protocols have been standardized by the American Society for Testing and

Materials (ASTM). Data obtained from coal analysis form the basis for establishing the commercial value

of a coal, as well as controlling the operations of mines, coal-preparation plants, and the industrial

facilities which use the coal.

Birtley and Loring Laboratories adhere to ASTM and ISO preparation and testing specifications and have

quality control processes in place. They have participated in the International Canadian Coal

Laboratories Round Robin Series (CANSPEX) since its inception. Birtley is also part of the ISO Technical

Committee for Canada for TC27 and its associated subcommittees for coal preparation and coal testing.

Birtley and Loring laboratories are both independent of the issuer.


11 DATA VERIFICATION

This report is a compilation and evaluation of historical exploration on the Property. The Authors of this

report, have relied on the professional quality of the historical data and work, including reviews of this

historical work: 2018 JORC Compliant Resource Statements, internal 2005 NI 43-101 Technical Reports

and several historical technical reports produced by Coleman Collieries, Norcen and Manalta.

Mr. Bradley Ulry visited the site October 31 and November 1, 2019 and evaluated some Property access

both from the ground and via helicopter. Mr. Matthew Carter, Mr. Nathan Schmidt and Mr. John Gorham

did not visit the Property.

The Resource Estimates which form part of this report were based on the historical drilling, select

trenching data, adit data, and mapping data. Dahrouge received an existing database in Microsoft Excel®

format from the previous Tamplin and Norwest Resource Estimates. Dahrouge completed a 100%

validation of the historical drillhole locations and an approximately 75% spot check of coal seam

intersections, creating an independent database. The data sets, including analytical data, are incomplete

in some instances, and analytical certificates and details of QA/QC programs were not necessarily

included in the historical summary reports. The 2020 models incorporate data that was not available to

Tamplin and Norwest during the 2018 Resource Estimate, these include downhole deviation surveys and

mine plans for both Chinook South and Chinook Vicary and coal quality reports and drillhole data from

Chinook Vicary.

Historical drillholes were qualified using a reliability indicator classification system, from 1-4. The

reliability was based on the quantity and quality of data available and the known accuracy of each collar

location (Table 11-1).

• Reliability of 1 has not been assigned to any historical drillholes. It would be used for drillholes

that have collar surveys using a Topcon RTK or Trimble system, geological logs, downhole

geophysical logs and downhole deviation surveys.

• Reliability of 2 was assigned to drillholes that had collar locations, geophysical logs, geological

logs, and downhole deviation surveys.

• Reliability of 3 was assigned to drillholes that had collar locations, geological logs, geophysical

logs, but lacked downhole deviation surveys.

• Reliability of 4 was assigned to drillholes that had collar locations and geological logs but

lacked downhole deviation surveys and geophysical logs.

Drillholes assigned a reliability of 2 and 3 had the ability to be converted to Indicated and Inferred

Resource classifications and reliability of 4 were restricted to use as geological control. The geological

and Resource models were constructed using a database of 483 drillholes totalling 57,748.73 m (Table

11-2). A total of 11 available drillholes were excluded from the model due to insufficient or conflicting

location information (Table 11-3). For these drillholes no surveyed location or mapped reference could

be found. Table 11-1 outlines the number of drillholes assigned to each reliability category. Mine survey

points were used for Seam S2 in the historical Vicary Mine. These survey points were used for geological

seam control, but could not be used as points of observation, since they lacked seam thickness records.


Table 11-1 2020 Drillhole Reliability Classification Summary

Reliability Total Drillholes (RC + DDH)

1 0 2 298 3 131 4 65

Excluded 11

Not all data addressed in the historical summary reports and technical reports could be located by

Dahrouge, and therefore, could not be used in this report. Summaries of the 2020 modelled drillholes

and excluded drillholes are shown in Table 11-2 and Table 11-3, respectively. The Authors have reviewed

the data for consistency between the different projects and companies and eliminated data that could

not be constrained or confirmed in reports or government databases. The Authors have concluded that

work completed by the coal production and exploration companies was conducted in a professional

manner that was consistent with the data collection and reporting standards at that time.

Table 11-2 2020 Chinook Project Modelled Drillholes

(See Appendix 1)

Table 11-3 2020 Chinook Project Excluded Drillholes

(See Appendix 1)


12 COAL QUALITY SUMMARY

Dahrouge compiled and evaluated a comprehensive coal quality database for the Chinook Project that is

made up of historical cored drillholes (HQ and NQ), RC drillholes, adits, bulk samples and wash plant

production data. These works are underpinned by the earlier coal quality evaluation works of Tamplin

(2018) for Chinook South and Norwest (2018) for Chinook Vicary. The coal quality data was

independently reviewed by Kobie Koornhof Associates Inc. (Koornhof, 2020) and their conclusions are

incorporated in this discussion.

The resultant database appears to have a valid range of data and exhibits sound regression relationships

such as ash - RD, ash - volatile matter and washability - ash. There is also basic comparability of data for

parameters such as ash, sulphur and CSN values. It is considered that there is sufficient historical coal

quality data to perform a preliminary characterization of the product (Koornhof, 2020), specifically for

seams with larger datasets. Further work is required to bring the data up to current standards of

reporting and increase the number and spatial distribution of datapoints across the Project.

Raw, float and clean coal composite data is stored in an Excel database for each ply and working section

(as analysed). Ash, raw sulphur, CSN, ash chemistry, washability, petrography and clean coal composite

data is also available for all seams, albeit based on samples with low recoveries. To date, Montem have

not conducted any coal quality testing for the Project.

The Chinook quality database consists of 232 coal quality boreholes made up predominantly of RC drill

samples. Compared to cored samples, RC derived samples are limited in respect to their data validity

and their suitability for some types of analysis such as washability and product ash determinations. The

authors consider these datasets suitable for a preliminary characterization of the Project’s coal quality.

Further drilling is recommended to increase confidence in coal quality spatial variations and historical

sampling methods.

The RC drilling method is limited by the following constraints:

• Coal sample intervals are generally sampled at plus or minus 0.25m leading to cross

contamination across lithological boundaries. That is, most coal samples in an RC dataset will

include some waste from overlying and underlying non-coal material and vice versa.

• RC samples are crushed by the drilling action resulting in non-representative size grading. This

aspect makes it difficult to predict coal preparation plant yields from RC data. Generally, the

crushing liberates ash causing the resultant washability tests to be optimistic relative to ROM

conditions. In this context, wash simulation and product ash results from RC drilling should

be used with caution.

• Generally, RC drilling recovers most of the sampled interval, with the higher rheology-

performing coal fines typically making up most of the unrecovered sampled interval.

The Chinook coal quality database contains 36 cored drillholes. Coal recoveries in cored drillholes was

poor to moderate ranging from a low of 10% to a high of 100%, for the identified seam groups. This poor

HQ and NQ core coal recovery is typical of coals in the Rocky Mountain Front Ranges and places coal

quality estimates based purely on slim core drillhole data at risk. In order to improve coal seam

recoveries, future drill programs should employ a large diameter (6” or greater) triple tube drilling

method


12.1 RAW COAL QUALITY

The Chinook raw coal quality database is made up of 120 historical drillholes at Chinook South and 112

historical drillholes at Chinook Vicary.

The raw coal quality database for both Chinook South and Chinook Vicary can be found in Appendix 1

while the ash-RD regression created using the raw coal quality data is presented in Figure 12-1.

Figure 12-1 Chinook Project Ash-RD Regression

Historically, most of the coal intervals were sampled on a full-seam basis rather than a more detailed ply

basis that is now the standard for geological investigations. This resulted in the inclusion of thick

partings and inferior coal bands (up to 2m in thickness) in many of the thicker coal intersections. This

dilution of historical samples increased raw ash and constrained the ability to assess the variability of

coal quality within a seam.

Historically, raw coal drillhole samples were analysed for ash content and relative density, some samples

were also analysed for Proximate analysis (i.e., moisture %, ash %, volatiles %, fixed carbon %), total

sulphur (S) % and crucible swelling number (CSN).

Historical coal analysis was completed by certified laboratories in Canada. These included Birtley and

Loring in Calgary, Alberta. For testing work that required it, both laboratories used or continue to use

the procedures of the A.S.T.M.

Coal seam raw coal quality and thicknesses vary considerably over the Property due to the structurally

controlled variations in seam development and due to localized structural thickening. Generally, across

the Chinook Project the raw ash content of the coal seams varies from 15% to 40%, with the higher ash

intersections occurring in the structurally thickened zones.

y = 0.0132x + 1.1978R² = 0.9313

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

RD

ad

b

Ash % adb

Ash-Density Regression


The Chinook South and Chinook Vicary raw coal quality properties are summarized in Table 12-1 and

Table 12-2 with full results displayed in .

Table 12-1 Chinook South Raw Coal Quality Properties - Weight Averaged by Seam – adb

Parameters Units S2 S3 S4 S4A S5

Moisture % 0.75 0.57 0.60 - - Ash % 24.46 25.43 29.53 34.96 29.45 Sulphur % 0.28 0.40 - - -

Volatile Matter % 25.65 23.22 - - -

Fixed Carbon % 51.42 52.31 - - -

Table 12-2 Chinook Vicary Raw Coal Quality Properties - Weight Averaged by Seam – adb

Parameters Units S2 S4 S4A S5

Moisture % 0.82 0.61 0.42 0.56 Ash % 14.68 17.9 21.44 28.13 Sulphur % - - - 0.26

Volatile Matter % - - - 21.11

Fixed Carbon % - - - 51.91

Table 12-3 Chinook Project Raw Coal Quality Data

(See Appendix 1)

12.2 CLEAN COAL QUALITY

Kobie Koornhof Associates Inc. (Koornhof), was commissioned by Montem to review and interpret the

Chinook Project historical clean coal quality data. Koornhof’s findings make up Section 12.2 of this report

(Koornhof, 2020).

The Chinook Project clean coal quality datapoints (summarized in Table 12-4 and Table 12-5) includes

proximate, rheology, petrographic and ash chemistry analysis from cored drillholes (HQ and NQ), RC

drillholes, adits and bulk samples completed between 1972 and 1991. It should be noted that during

Koornhof’s review and interpretation of the database:

• Clean coal results that included anomalously low CSN results (~ less than 2) and had

correspondingly shallow coal seam intersection depths (~ less than 25 m), were removed from

the database on the basis that the coal could potentially be oxidized at these shallow depths.

• Clean coal results that included anomalously high ash results (~ greater than 14%) and had

correspondingly low CSN results (~ less than 2), were removed from the database on the basis

that the ash content was not representative of a typical clean coal (~ 8% to 10% ash).

In total, 10 samples were removed from the Chinook Vicary clean coal quality database and 9 samples

were removed from the Chinook South clean coal quality database, for the above mentioned anomalous

results.

The reliance on RC data means that the reliability of the Chinook Project clean coal quality data does not

meet current standards, and further work is required to verify historical results. It can be assumed that

employing modern methods of drilling, sampling, sample preparation, washability testing and coal

quality analysis could improve the rheology performance of the Chinook coals, particularly for the CSN

results of some coal seams.


As is typical for the area, cored drillhole coal seam recoveries varied from drillhole to drillhole, ranging

from approximately 10% to 100%. For the most part, the cored drillhole coal quality evaluation

datapoints were limited to cored drillhole coal intersections with greater than 75% recovery, although,

in some areas of the Chinook Project, where data density was an issue, lower recovered cored drillhole

coal seam intersections were considered.

The clean coal quality parameters of the Chinook South and Chinook Vicary coal seams are presented in

Table 12-6 and Table 12-7, respectively, and the number of datapoints available for each summarized

parameter are presented in Table 12-4 and Table 12-5. Drillhole clean coal quality evaluations were

supplemented with bulk sample analysis and Petrographics when available. It should be noted that due

to a lack of clean coal data, similarities in clean coal results and the relatively small portion of the

Resource that seam S4A makes up (0.77% at Chinook South and 4.04% at Chinook Vicary), the clean coal

quality of seams S4A and S4 have been assessed together.

Table 12-4 Chinook South Clean Coal Quality Datapoints Coal Seam ID S2 S3 S4/S4A S5

Analysis Total

Samples

Total Drillholes

Bulk Sample

Total Samples

Total Drillholes

Total Samples

Total Drillholes

Bulk Sample

Total Samples

Total Drillholes

RC Core RC Core RC Core RC Core Proximate Analysis 64 44 9 - 26 22 1 36 20 - - 14 10 - Sulphur 31 44 9 - 25 19 1 36 20 - - 13 10 - Phosphorous 30 22 - - 22 19 - 33 18 - - 13 9 - CSN 43 28 7 - 25 19 1 36 20 - - 13 9 - Fluidity 46 25 7 - 25 19 - 36 19 - - 13 6 - Dilatation 19 5 7 - 8 6 1 9 7 - - 5 3 - Ash Chemistry 10 13 - - 4 6 - 8 3 - 4 5 2 - Ro Max 13 11 - 2 3 3 - 4 3 - - 1 1 - Petrography 12 11 - 2 3 3 - 4 3 - 1 1 -

Table 12-5 Chinook Vicary Clean Coal Quality Datapoints

Coal Seam ID S2 S4/S4A S5

Analysis Total

Samples

Total Drillholes

Total Samples

Total Drillholes

Total Samples

Total Drillholes

Bulk Sample

RC Core RC Core RC Core

Proximate Analysis 48 2 13 12 4 4 16 5 4 -

Sulphur 11 2 5 12 4 4 10 5 3 -

Phosphorous 2 2 - 4 4 - 7 7 - -

CSN 48 2 14 12 4 4 11 - 4 -

Fluidity 11 2 5 12 4 4 4 - 2 -

Dilatation 11 2 5 12 4 4 5 - 3 -

Ash Chemistry 2 2 - 4 4 - 7 7 - -

Ro Max 1 1 - 2 2 - 1 - - 1

Petrography 1 1 - 2 2 - - - - -


Table 12-6 Chinook South Clean Coal Quality Summary (Source Koornhof, 2020)

% of Resource

Seam 2

(61.8%)

Seam 3

(21.7%)

Seam 4/4A

(10.1%)

Seam 5

(6.5%)

Chemistry

VM (air dry) % 26.3 25.2 25.7 26.0

Ash (air dry) % 10.0 9.9 9.0 9.5

Sulphur (air dry) % 0.37 0.43 0.48 0.52

Phosphorus (dry) % 0.067 0.025 0.042 0.066

Rheology

CSN 4 4 4.5 5.5

Max Fluidity Average ddpm 6 5 22 37

Max Fluidity Range ddpm 5 - 20 5 - 20 20 - 80 20 - 80

Total Dilatation % 15 - 20 45 - 50 45 - 50 70 - 75

Ash Chemistry

SiO2 in Ash % 52.63 54.47 60.03 54.42

Fe2O3 in Ash % 5.12 2.43 2.18 4.11

CaO in Ash % 4.34 2.40 1.72 4.77

Base/Acid Ratio % 0.14 0.08 0.06 0.13

Ash Basicity Index 1.42 0.75 0.55 1.22

Petrography

Reflectance Ro 1.05 1.00 1.06 1.05

Vitrinite % 40.6 34.8 34.9 50.7

Reactive Semifusinite % 22.4 25.5 26.6 20.7

Total Reactives % 65.1 63.0 63.1 72.5

Inert Semifusinite % 22.4 25.5 26.6 20.7

Total Inerts % 34.9 37.0 36.9 27.6

Coke Strength

Stability Index (Calc.) 36 13 23 51

DI 30/15 (Calc.) % 87.7 70.8 79.7 93.2

CSR (Estimated) % 45 - 50 45 - 50 45 - 55 55-60


Table 12-7 Chinook Vicary Clean Coal Quality Summary (Source Koornhof, 2020)

Seam 2 Seam 4/4A Seam 5

% of Resource (17.5%) (25.3%) (57.1%)

Chemistry

VM (air dry) % 23.8 20.7 22.0

Ash (air dry) % 7.8 12.2 8.8

Sulphur (air dry) % 0.51 0.56 0.50

Phosphorus (dry) % 0.092 0.046 0.016

Rheology

CSN 7 4 6

Max Fluidity Average ddpm 60 10 5

Max Fluidity Range ddpm 50 - 100 10 - 20 5 – 15

Total Dilatation % 55 - 60 35 - 40 10 - 15

Ash Chemistry

SiO2 in Ash % 49.1 59.26 58.2

Fe2O3 in Ash % 2.6 1.2 2.7

CaO in Ash % 5.1 1.6 2.5

Base/Acid Ratio % 0.11 0.04 0.09

Ash Basicity Index 0.84 0.54 0.76

Petrography

Reflectance Ro 1.28 1.30 1.25

Vitrinite % 43 24.1 n.a.

Reactive Semifusinite % 24 32 n.a.

Total Reactives % 68 57 n.a.

Inert Semifusinite % 24 32 n.a.

Total Inerts % 32 43 n.a.

Coke Strength DI 30/15 (Calculated) % 93.6 85.3 n.a.

CSR (Estimated) % 60 - 65 45 - 50 55 - 60

Based on a review of the historical clean coal proximate, rheology, petrographic and ash chemistry

analysis of the Chinook Project coal seams by Kobie Koornhof Associates Inc. (Koornhof, 2020), the

quality of the coal and predicted coal classification are summarized below. As mentioned previously, the

quality of the data that has been reviewed does not meet current standards of reporting. The available

historical data is limited by preponderance of RC data as opposed to core data. The core was NQ and HQ

diameter, and recoveries were generally poor, which may have skewed results. RC coal quality data can

underrepresent fines, which generally display better rheological properties than coarser fractions. There

is limited petrographic data available, especially for Chinook Vicary, and datapoints are not evenly

distributed across the Resource.

Chinook South:

Based on the analysis of historical results, “Most of the coal at Chinook South is classified as a Semi Hard

Coking Coal, with less than 10% deemed suitable as a Hard Coking Coal” (Koornhof, 2020).

Seam S2 (61.8% of the Chinook South Resource):


• Semi Soft to Semi Hard Coking Coal, with CSN of 4 and estimated CSR of 45 - 50 (Koornhof,

2020)


• Semi Soft to Semi Hard Coking Coal, with CSN of 4 and estimated CSR of 45 – 50 (Koornhof,

2020)

Seam S4/4A (10.1% of the Chinook South Resource):

• Semi Hard Coking Coal, with CSN of 4.5 and estimated CSR of 45 - 55 (Koornhof, 2020).


• Hard Coking Coal, with CSN of 5.5 and estimated CSR of 55 – 60 (Koornhof, 2020)

• Limited sample set and spatial representativeness

Chinook Vicary:

Based on the analysis of historical results, “The majority of the coal at Chinook Vicary was found to be good

quality Hard Coking Coal, with FSI of 6 – 7 and CSR above 55. Minor portions of the resource, limited to seam

S4/4A, report FSI below 6 and CSR below 50” (Koornhof, 2020).

Seam S2 (17.5% of the Chinook Vicary Resource):

• Hard Coking Coal, with CSN of 7 and estimated CSR in the range 60 – 65 (Koornhof, 2020)

• Supported by the fact that historically the Vicary Mine shipped coking coal to Japan from S2

prior to its closure in 1978.

Seam S4/4A (25.3% of the Chinook Vicary Resource):

• Semi Soft to Semi Hard Coking Coal, with CSN of 4 and estimated CSR of 45 – 50 (Koornhof,

2020)


Seam S5 (57.1% of the Chinook Vicary Resource):

• Hard Coking Coal with an average CSN of 6 and estimated CSR in the range 55 - 60 (Koornhof,

2020),

• Sample results supported with a historical bulk sample


It is the Authors opinion, that although the historical clean coal quality data is indicative to the product

coals listed above, further validation with current methods and standards is required to verify the

historical results and increase the quantity and spatial distribution of data across the Project.


13 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

This section describes the Mineral Resource estimation methodology and summarizes the key

assumptions considered by Dahrouge. Dahrouge has prepared two Mineral Resource Estimates, one for

Chinook South and one for Chinook Vicary. The Chinook South Resource Estimate is a reasonable

representation of the In-Place Coal Resources of seams S2, S3, S4, S4a and S5 contained within 6 Alberta

Coal Leases (Table 4-1) and a collection of Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold, silver).

The Chinook Vicary Resource Estimate is a reasonable representation of the In-Place Coal Resources of

seams S2, S4, S4a and S5 contained within 47 Alberta Coal Leases (Table 4-1) and a collection of Alberta

Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold, silver).

The Mineral Resources have been estimated in conformity with generally accepted CIM “Estimation of

Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Best Practices” guidelines and the Australian Guidelines for the

Estimation and Classification of Coal Resources. These are preliminary resource estimations. Factors

affecting reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction are discussed in Section13.3.

Mineral Resource Estimates for the Chinook Project in this report are based on historical drilling,

historical mine plans and surface mapping that were collected on the Property from 1964 onwards.

Separate geological models were constructed for Chinook South and Chinook Vicary. Resource models

and estimates were generated for each area from the geological models.

13.1 RESOURCE DATABASE

The historical database compilation was generated under oversight by Competent Persons of Dahrouge

Geological Consulting Ltd. Dahrouge constructed and validated the data (Table 11-2; Table 11-3) and

generated a historical coal quality database. Drillholes were qualified using a reliability indicator

classification system, from 1 to 4. Reliability was based on the quantity and quality of data available and

the known accuracy of each drillhole location (collar and downhole deviation).

• Reliability of 1 has not been assigned to any historical drillholes. Drillholes would require collar

surveys using a high precision differential global positioning (DGPS) system (Topcon, Trimble),

geological logs, downhole geophysical logs and downhole deviation surveys.

• Reliability of 2 was assigned to drillholes that had collar locations, geophysical logs, geological

logs, and downhole deviation surveys.

• Reliability of 3 was assigned to drillholes that had collar locations, geological logs, geophysical

logs, but lacked downhole deviation surveys.

• Reliability of 4 was assigned to drillholes that had collar locations and geological logs but

lacked downhole deviation surveys and geophysical logs.

Drillholes assigned a reliability of 2 and 3 had the ability to be converted to Indicated and Inferred

Resource classifications and those with a reliability of 4 were restricted to use as geological control.

The geological and resource models were constructed using a database of 483 drillholes, totalling

57,748.73 m (Table 11-2). A total of 11 available drillholes were excluded from the model due to

insufficient or conflicting location information (Table 11-3).


13.2 GEOLOGICAL MODEL

The geological model was constructed using an implicit 3-D modelling software, Seequent’s Leapfrog

GeoTM. A vetted database was imported into LeapfrogTM, where it was validated, and any erroneous or

conflicting data was amended.

The geological model incorporated the following data into its control points and interpretation:

• Historical surface maps, cross-sections, and mine plans

• Surface mapping datapoints

• Drilling and trenching datapoints

• Underground mine seam datapoints

The historical surface maps, cross-sections and mine plans were used to evaluate the geological

structures and stratigraphic orientations, using 3-D modelling software. In addition, seam S2 data from

the underground Vicary Mine was used as controls for the geological model but could not be used in the

resource model due to a lack of seam thickness information.

Figure 13-1 Historical Cross-Section in LeapfrogTM

Surface mapping control points and structure lines (faults, fold axes, seam outcrops and stratigraphic

member contacts) were incorporated into the model. Historical surface data points were georeferenced

and used to generate stratigraphic trends in LeapfrogTM structural modelling. The summarized modelling

methodology used for the Geological Model for all areas of the Property consisted of following steps:

• Digitized historical and current surface datapoints were loaded into the model

• Resource database was imported and validated for visual and Leapfrog-identified errors

• Database collar locations were snapped to surface topography that was constructed from the

LiDAR15 6TM and open source Canadian Federal Geospatial Platform

• The UTM NAD83 Zone 11 geographic coordinate system was used for project data

• Regional faults were modelled using surface and drillhole datapoints and orientations


• Structural trend stereonet and form interpolants were generated in LeapfrogTM using oriented

surface measurements in the structural modeling toolbox. (Figure 13-2)

• The stratigraphic Formations/Members were modelled using the LeapfrogTM Stratigraphic

Sequence geological modelling method with the exception of the Hillcrest Member in Chinook

South, which was modelled using the LeapfrogTM Vein System as it pinches out to the south. The

modelled members and formations in order of youngest to oldest included:

o Blairmore Group (KBL)

o Cadomin Formation (KCD)

o Mutz Member (JKKMU),

o Hillcrest Member (JKKH),

o Adanac Member (JKKA),

o Morrissey Formation (JKKM),

• The coal seams solids were modelled using the LeapfrogTM Vein System geological modelling

method, where individual plies were modelled as veins within a seam package (or vein system)

and the modelled seam packages included:

o S2 (S2u, S2m, S2l)

o S3(S3u, S3l) – Chinook South


o S4A (S4Au, S4Am, S4Al) – Chinook Vicary and S4A – Chinook South


• The stratigraphic model and coal seam model were created using the same structural trends

and were controlled using interpreted polyline controls in areas where control datapoint

density decreased

• Historical mine dumps were modelled using LeapfrogTM Intrusion geological modelling method

and were constrained by limited drill intersections, surface mapping, historical cross-sections

and mine plans

• Overburden solids were modelled using LeapfrogTM Erosional Contact geological modelling

method and were constrained by drill intersections, surface mapping and historical cross

sections. In areas where no overburden was present the overburden surface was merged with

the topographic surface

• The basal surface of overburden and historical dumps were used to generate an approximate

bedrock surface that was used to build the base of weathering surface, determined to be 8 m

below bedrock surface

• The Stratigraphic model, Seam Model, and historical workings were combined into a single

model

• Coal seam solids were generated for each ply and clipped to the base of weathering surface,

which included the historical workings, removing historically extracted zones and the upper

oxidized coal

• LeapfrogTM generated coal seam and stratigraphic solids were validated using LeapfrogTM solid

evaluation tools; detailed visual inspection; and VulcanTM solid triangulation tools testing for

conservation of volume, consistency, closure, and crossing/self-intersections


Figure 13-2 Chinook Vicary Stereonet produced in LeapfrogTM using compiled surface bedding measurements

Representative geological cross-sections are presented in Figure 13-6 to Figure 13-8 for Chinook South

and Figure 13-11 to Figure 13-16 for Chinook Vicary. Section locations are presented in Figure 13-3 and

Figure 13-9. Geological sections were generated in LeapfrogTM and are set up as north looking cross-

sections.


Figure 13-3 Chinook South Cross Section Location Map


Figure 13-4 North-Looking Chinook South Geological Cross Section Line +200

Figure 13-5 North-Looking Chinook South Geological Cross Section Line -1400


Figure 13-6 North-Looking Chinook South Geological Cross Section Line -2,000



Figure 13-9 Chinook Vicary Cross Section Location Map


Figure 13-10 North-Looking Chinook Vicary Cross Section Line CV1 -1,600



Figure 13-13 North-Looking Chinook Vicary Cross Section Lines CV2 -1,200



13.2.1 Topography

The topographic surface utilized for the geological model was a combination of LiDAR15 DEM purchased

by Dahrouge as well as an open source topographic surface from the Canadian Federal Geospatial

Platform. LiDAR was unavailable for purchase for the southern half of Chinook South; therefore, the open

source data was required. The surfaces were merged using LeapfrogTM merge mesh function creating one

continuous surface running the length of the Property. All drillholes at Chinook Vicary and 210 drillholes

at Chinook South were encompassed by the purchased LiDAR15 DEM, while 60 drillholes at Chinook

South were underlain by the open-sourced surface. All drillholes were snapped to the newly created

topographic surface.

The LiDAR15 DEM features 30 cm vertical accuracy and 50 cm horizontal accuracy while the open

sourced data is provided on 5 m contours. A visual comparison was performed, and the LiDAR15 DEM

is significantly more detailed than the open sourced surface. The previous Resource Estimates completed

in 2018 for the Vicary-Racehorse, Chinook North and Chinook South properties all utilized the less

accurate open sourced data.

13.2.2 Geological Control

A detailed geological compilation was completed for the 2020 Resource. Dahrouge collected and digitized

available historical project records that included legacy geological maps, cross sections, mine plans and

historical workings.

• Primary digitized surface maps Included:

o 1981 Coleman Collieries Chinook South Geology

o 2018 Tamplin Chinook South Structural Interpretation and Seam Outcrops

o 1983 Coleman Collieries Racehorse North Area – Surface Geology and Drillholes

o 1983 Coleman Collieries Racehorse Geology (3 maps)

o 1982 Coleman Collieries Vicary-McGillivray Area Geological Map

• Primary digitized Cross-sections Included:

o 1981 Coleman Collieries cross sections (Chinook South, 13 Sections)

o 1988 Coleman Collieries cross-sections (Chinook South, 38 sections)

o 1990 Chinook Coals cross sections (Chinook South, 33 sections)

o 1981 Coleman Collieries cross sections (Chinook Vicary, 12 sections)

o 1983 Coleman Collieries cross sections (Chinook Vicary, 11 sections)

o 1991 Chinook Coals cross sections (Chinook Vicary, 12 sections)

o 2005 Luscar cross sections (Chinook Vicary, 6 sections)

• Primary digitized Mine Plans Included:

o International Mine Plan – 1903 to 1959

o McGillivray Mine Plan – 1909 to 1960

o 1974 Vicary Mine Coleman Collieries B Level Mine Plan

o 1974 Vicary Mine Coleman Collieries 2 Level Mine Plan

The digitized maps, cross sections and mine plans were added to the Leapfrog models and cross

referenced against the historical drillhole database and topographic features. All supported structural


measurements, traces and stratigraphic units were added to the geological models and incorporated into

the current interpretation.

Table 13-1 Compilation Summary of Geological Control Points

Measurement Type Area Surface Points Subsurface Points

(Geologs/Mine Survey)

Bedding Chinook Vicary 1525 -

Chinook South 401 -

Fault Chinook Vicary - 99

Chinook South - 151

Underground Mine Survey Chinook Vicary - 60

13.2.3 Historical Mine Workings

Dahrouge obtained detailed mine plans of the historical Vicary, McGillivray and International

underground mines from the AER. By digitizing the mine plans, Dahrouge was able to incorporate coal

that was left in-situ into the 2020 Resource Estimate by the following process:

• Georeference historical mine plans received in PDF format in ArcGISTM software, using known

topographic features and Alberta Township grids displayed on historical plans

• Evaluate mine plans and determine extracted seams and identify coal that remains. Each mine

plan predominantly had separate plans for each seam and identified extracted areas by

differing symbology such as cross hatching, with a year of extraction noted

• Create shapefiles outlining the extents of each coal seam’s workings by tracing georeferenced

mine plans (Figure 7-1 and Figure 7-2). As some mine plans were from the early 1900’s and of

poorer quality, coal was deemed extracted if symbology was not clearly identified

• Export mine plans from ArcGISTM as AutoCADTM drawings and import into Maptek’s VulcanTM

software as design data.

• Create 3D solids of extracted and in-situ coal for each mine and each coal seam from design

data

• Boolean extracted and in-situ coal 3D solids against coal seam solid models, removing

extracted coal and limiting in-situ coal to the extent of coal seam solid models

13.3 RESOURCE SUMMARY

As the stratigraphic and structural complexity of a coal deposit increases, a greater number of data points

are required to assign the coal to Measured, Indicated, or Inferred resource categories. Data points are

defined as locations where a coal seam, or marker horizon indicating the proximity to a coal seam, is

exposed. Valid data points were obtained from drillhole intersections and surface outcrops. Table 13-2

outlines the resource classification reference criteria for different geology types, which are supported at

the Chinook Project with structural measurements, structural trend interpolants, oriented ID² search

ellipsoids and multiple (3) seam intersection control requirements.

Consideration for reasonable prospects for production at the Chinook Project include favourable geology

(other nearby producers of coking coal from the same formation and seams), nearby infrastructure

(road, rail and power), a nearby labour pool (four nearby operating surface coking coal mines),

favourable land-use categories, and a favourable government and social attitude to resource extraction.


Table 13-2 Resource Classification Categories Reference (Hughes et al., 1989).

Geology Type Resource Classification (Distance from Point)

Measured Indicated Inferred

Moderate 0-450 m 450-900 m 900-2,400 m

Complex 0-100 m 100-200 m 200-400 m

Severe 0-50 m 50-100 m 100-200 m

A moderate geology type occurs where the deposit has only been subjected to limited tectonic

deformation. This may include faults with displacements of less than 10 m, although these should be

uncommon. Homoclines and broad open folds with wavelengths less than 1.5 km may also be present

and bedding should not exceed 30°.

A complex geology type occurs where a deposit has been subjected to relatively high levels of tectonic

deformation. Fault bounded blocks within this deposit type generally retain their normal stratigraphic

sequence and seams will have only rarely been modified from their pre-deformational thickness. Tight

folds with steeply dipping or overturned limbs can be present and offsets by faults are common.

A severe geology type occurs where extreme tectonic deformation has occurred. The stratigraphic

sequence is commonly disturbed and difficult to ascertain, whereas coal seams are often structurally

thickened and thinned from their pre-deformational state. Tight folds, steeply inclined and overturned

beds, and large displacement faults are common.

13.3.1 Resource Classification

For the purpose of this Resource classification the Chinook Project has been assigned a complex geology

type, due to the presence of regional and local faulting, folding and deformational seam thickening.

Resource classifications were determined using an Inverse Distance Estimator (ID2) with the follow

criteria:

• Datapoints used were restricted to confirmed coal seam intersections, where three coal seam

intersections were required to generate a marker horizon within a given search radius for

classification, given the complex geology type assignment

• Search definitions were set as a minimum of 3 confirmed coal seam points of observation must

be intersected within the defined search radius and restricted to one point of observation per

drillhole

• A single point of observation was not considered adequate for the structural complexity and

the recorded seam orientation changes

• Search ellipsoids were oriented at 264° dip azimuth and 31° dip (based off structural trends

and drill trends)

• A drillhole reliability filter was used to selectively control which coal seam data points were

used in the Resource classification:

o Measured required reliability classification = 1 (no control points were given reliability

of 1)

o Indicated required reliability classification = 2 and 3

o Inferred used reliability classifications = 2 and 3

o Reliability classification of 4 was restricted to use as geological controls and not

included in resource classifications


• ID2 search ellipsoids were set to the following ranges

o Indicated - Maximum 300 m; Intermediate 300 m; Minimum 100 m

▪ Maximum search radius was increased to 300 m along the geological trend of

the deposit

▪ The search radius was restricted to coal seam intersections

o Inferred - Maximum 500 m; Intermediate 500 m; Minimum 100 m

• The ID2 classified blocks were exported from LeapfrogTM to VulcanTM where triangulated solid

grade shells were created

• Each generated grade shell solid was checked to confirm consistency, closure, and no

crossing/self-intersections

• Grade shells were used as bounding solid models to classify Resource confidence in the

VulcanTM HARP model

The base-of-weathering clipped Resource classification grade shell (polygons) by coal seam are

illustrated in Figure 13-17 to Figure 13-25, presenting the near surface distribution of Indicated and

Inferred resource categories.


Figure 13-17 Chinook South Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S2


Figure 13-20 Chinook South Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S4A


Figure 13-22 Chinook Vicary Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S2


Figure 13-24 Chinook Vicary Resource Classification Plan Map – Seam S4A


13.3.2 Density

The current 2020 Resource Estimate utilized an assumed constant bulk density across the Property of

1.45 g/cm3. This value was determined from the coal rank and average ash contents as defined in GSC

88-21. Average dried ash content was determined to be 25-30 percent by weight, with a rank

classification of medium volatile bituminous coal. This produced a conservative bulk density estimate of

1.45 g/cm3. The historical Resource Estimates also utilized an assumed bulk density across the Property

(Table 13-13).

The decision to use a constant bulk density was made after a comprehensive review of the historical coal

quality data by Dahrouge. Following the review, it was determined that the historical coal quality data

was not of a high enough standard to produce reliable and accurate coal quality grids. This decision was

made based on a lack of cored drillhole coal quality data and a heavy reliance on RC drillhole and poorly

recovered cored drillhole coal quality data. This was supported by the fact that the majority of the RC

drillholes lacked nearby twinned cored drillholes to evaluate, validate and confirm the RC drillhole coal

quality results.

13.3.3 Resource Estimate Procedure

Maptek’s VulcanTM 12 was utilized to generate the block models for the Chinook Project. The modelling

database, topography, seam and structural models from the Leapfrog Geo TM Chinook South and Chinook

Vicary geologic models were imported into Vulcan TM. Imported data was evaluated to confirm the correct

model extents, coordinate system, location of drill collars, and coal seam intersections relative to seam

solid and structural models. Additionally, any imported triangulated solids were validated to ensure

conservation of original volumes, closure of the solids, consistency of the solids, and no crossing or self-

intersections. The LeapfrogTM seam models for each ply were converted into VulcanTM seam roof and

seam floor surfaces. Each resultant VulcanTM roof and floor surface was evaluated to ensure no crossing

or self-intersections had been created during the conversion process. Seam roof and floor surfaces were

overlaid and visually compared to their original parent LeapfrogTM solids to confirm surface geometries

and extents were honoured.

The validated VulcanTM seam roof and seam floor surfaces, along with the structural controls, were used

to generate a 5 m x 5 m Vulcan HARP block model. A HARP model registers to triangulated surfaces, in

this case, a seam roof and a seam floor, to create a HARP seam solid model; seam volumes generated by

the VulcanTM HARP model were visually and volumetrically compared back to the original LeapfrogTM

seam solid models for verification. HARP seam volumes and geometries preserved the LeapfrogTM parent

volumes and geometries for the modelled coal seams in all areas with a total volume difference of less

than 1%.

After validation, cumulative and incremental stripping ratios were assigned to each block containing coal

in the HARP model, using the Integrated Stratigraphic Modelling (ISM) module in VulcanTM. Stripping

ratios for each seam were visually validated through block display against the depth to the modelled coal

seam for relative highs and lows.

The summarized modelling methodology used for the Resource estimation for all areas of the Property

consisted of the following steps:

• Import validated LeapfrogTM modelling database, topography, seam solid triangulations, and

structural model into Maptek Vulcan 12TM

• Verify correct coordinate system (UTM NAD83 Zone 11) and model extents for imported data


• Validate seam solid triangulations, testing for conservation of volume, consistency, closure, and

crossing/self-intersection

• Validate structural fault blocks, testing for conservation of volume, consistency, closure, and

crossing/self-intersection

• Validate structural fault surfaces by applying a Boolean test against the corresponding fault

block

• Visually confirm placement of drill collars relative to topography and assigned model

coordinates

• Visually confirm drill intersections correspond to seam solid and structural models

• Build the VulcanTM Horizon List (gdc_glob)

• Convert LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulations into VulcanTM seam roof and floor surfaces

• Validate VulcanTM seam roof and seam floor surfaces by visual comparison to the original

LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulations

• Clip seam roof and seam floor surfaces to remove extracted coal in areas of underground

workings

• Create a HARP block model. Blocks were 5 m x 5 m.

• Validate HARP generated seam volumes against original LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulation

volumes

• Superimpose and visually verify HARP generated seam solid triangulations honour original

LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulations

• Determine the cumulative stripping ratio for each block of coal within the model (total volume

of waste/total tonnage of product)

• Generate VulcanTM grade shells for each resource classification – Indicated, and Inferred from

the LeapfrogTM ID2 generated Resource classification

• Apply a maximum Resource depth cut-off of 300 m from topography accommodating for the

steep topographic terrain.

• Constrain Resource estimation by Montem Coal Lease and Freehold Tenement boundaries

• Constrain Resource estimation to a seam aggregate thickness greater than 0.3 m with a

maximum internal ply interburden < 0.45 m.

• Classify Resource blocks by bounding Indicated and Inferred solid models

Table 13-3 Resource Reporting Criteria

Area

Resource Criteria

Coal Bed Thickness

Stripping Ratio

Partings

Chinook Project

Aggregate Thickness > 0.3 m

SR < 20:1

Seams modelled as individual plies with average contained partings less than 0.2 m;

Aggregate coal thickness > 0.3 m;

Maximum internal ply interburden < 0.45 m

13.4 RESOURCE STATEMENTS

These statements cover Chinook South and Chinook Vicary. These Resource Estimates were reported as

of January 23, 2020. For the purpose of resource classification, an open cut minable resource was used.


Open cut resources are those resources with a cumulative stripping ratio of less than 20:1 (cubic metres

of waste to a tonne of coal), an aggregate seam thickness greater than 0.3 m, and a vertical depth from

topography less than 300 m. A minimum seam thickness cut-off of 0.3 m was used for the Resource

Estimate. A definitive evaluation of the mining methods has not been completed and included in this

report. Mining losses and dilutions have not been factored into the Resource Estimates.

The in-place Coal Resources for Chinook South and Chinook Vicary are summarized in Table 13-4 and

detailed by seam in Table 13-5 to Table 13-12.

Table 13-4 In-Place Coal Resources Summary by Area (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Area In-Place Coal Resources (kilotonnes)

ASTM Group Measured Indicated Inferred

Chinook South Medium Volatile

Bituminous 0 50,676 12,609

Chinook South - Inside Historical Mine Boundary


0 551 479

Chinook Vicary Medium Volatile

Bituminous 0 43,691 24,102

Chinook Vicary - Inside Historical Mine Boundary


0 8,896 8,138

Total 0 103,814 45,327

Table 13-5 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Outside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook South by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook South

Indicated - Outside Historical Mine Footprints

Depth 0 - 100 m 100 m - 200 m 200 m - 300 m Total

Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage

(m) (Ktonnes) (m) (Ktonnes) (m) (Ktonnes) (Ktonnes)

s5u 2.8 606 3.8 955 0.9 14 1,575

s5m 4.6 246 4.8 707 0.7 24 977

s5l 4.3 117 5.4 818 4.5 283 1,218

s4a 2.9 314 2.0 172 0.1 1 488

s4u 4.5 1,594 4.1 715 3.2 397 2,707

s4m 3.4 978 3.8 343 1.5 16 1,336

s4l 3.4 739 3.1 340 0.5 2 1,081

s3u 3.8 3,160 2.5 2,498 2.3 1,257 6,915

s3l 3.6 1,628 2.9 1,378 2.2 836 3,842

s2u 3.8 2,194 5.4 382 5.8 19 2,594

s2m 6.1 7,960 6.1 6,654 5.8 1,060 15,674

s2l 5.9 6,351 5.6 4,954 3.9 962 12,268

Sub Total 25,888 19,917 4,871 50,676


Table 13-6 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Outside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook South by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook South

Inferred - Outside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u 0.8 13 - 0 - 0 13

s5m - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s5l 0.5 4 0.2 0 - 0 4

s4a - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4u 2.0 96 - 0 3.6 4 100

s4m 0.5 12 - 0 - 0 12

s4l 2.0 72 - 0 - 0 72

s3u 3.6 442 3.6 809 2.9 1292 2,543

s3l 1.6 73 1.3 149 1.2 428 651

s2u 1.1 31 - 0 - 0 31

s2m 9.5 2031 9.5 2471 7.6 2476 6,979

s2l 2.3 313 2.4 348 3.9 1544 2,205

Sub Total 3,087 3,777 5,745 12,609

Table 13-7 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Inside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook South by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook South

Indicated - Inside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u 1.0 2 2.1 43 0.3 0 45

s5m 3.4 22 3.1 105 2.2 11 138

s5l 0.7 3 3.6 53 4.5 99 155

s4a - 0 1.9 9 - 0 9

s4u 3.9 29 6.0 96 - 0 124

s4m 2.5 11 1.6 16 - 0 26

s4l 1.5 4 2.1 50 - 0 53

s3u - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s3l - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s2u - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s2m - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s2l - 0 - 0 - 0 0

Sub Total 71 371 109 551


Table 13-8 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Inside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook South by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook South

Inferred - Inside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u 0.6 7 0.3 5 - 0 12

s5m - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s5l 0.4 4 0.3 5 - 0 9

s4a - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4u 2.1 94 3.1 13 - 0 108

s4m 0.6 19 0.5 9 - 0 28

s4l 1.7 118 2.0 204 - 0 322

s3u - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s3l - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s2u - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s2m - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s2l - 0 - 0 - 0 0

Sub Total 242 237 0 479

Table 13-9 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Outside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook Vicary

Indicated - Outside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u 7.6 7,992 7.9 6,028 8.9 1,949 15,969

s5m 5.6 3,105 7.5 2,096 3.5 272 5,473

s5l 4.5 1,160 8.2 2,954 10.0 1,319 5,433

s4au 1.0 563 3.2 576 0.6 26 1,165

s4am 0.5 8 - 0 - 0 8

s4al 0.6 123 2.0 342 0.8 25 489

s4u 2.7 2,089 4.4 1,829 3.0 790 4,707

s4m 2.5 382 2.1 369 2.6 407 1,158

s4l 1.7 212 1.9 355 1.3 116 684

s2u 7.8 3,670 7.7 1,067 8.4 1,010 5,747

s2m 2.7 1,032 1.8 161 3.0 174 1,368

s2l 3.0 813 3.6 509 2.4 168 1,490

Sub Total 21,148 16,288 6,256 43,691


Table 13-10 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Outside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Table 13-11 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Inside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Indicated Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook Vicary

Indicated - Inside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u - 0 10.1 5,984 10.2 374 6,358 s5m - 0 8.2 2,038 1.8 1 2,039 s5l - 0 4.7 207 - 0 207

s4au - 0 - 0 - 0 0 s4am - 0 - 0 - 0 0 s4al - 0 - 0 - 0 0 s4u 4.6 34 3.9 17 - 0 50 s4m 4.1 0 3.5 122 3.7 26 148 s4l - 0 2.4 73 0.8 7 80 s2u 3.2 12 - 0 - 0 12 s2m 1.0 2 - 0 - 0 2 s2l 0.5 0 - 0 - 0 0

Sub Total 48 8,440 407 8,896

Chinook Vicary

Inferred - Outside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u 9.1 1434 6.2 2469 6.6 1325 5,228

s5m 1.4 292 2.7 128 4.1 312 732

s5l 1.0 8 5.8 573 7.0 1614 2,195

s4au 0.7 138 1.3 210 0.7 168 516

s4am - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4al 2.0 673 2.1 451 0.7 123 1,246

s4u 1.5 452 4.3 2701 4.1 1804 4,958

s4m 3.4 419 2.5 1076 3.2 858 2,352

s4l 1.0 109 1.7 647 1.3 516 1,272

s2u 5.3 1647 6.0 1885 5.1 185 3,717

s2m 2.3 782 2.6 325 1.3 1 1,109

s2l 1.6 480 1.2 285 0.6 13 778

Sub Total 6,434 10,749 6,919 24,102


Table 13-12 In-Place Coal Resources Summary Inside Historical Mining Footprints for Chinook Vicary by Coal Seam and Inferred Resource Classification (kilotonnes), Reported as of Jan. 23, 2020

Chinook Vicary

Inferred - Inside Historical Mine Footprints


Tonnage Seam

True Thick.

Tonnage True

Thick. Tonnage

True Thick.

Tonnage


s5u - 0 11.3 2715 12.5 2093 4,808

s5m - 0 0.8 5 0.7 8 12

s5l - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4au - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4am - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4al - 0 - 0 - 0 0

s4u 2.6 64 5.6 682 3.2 189 935

s4m 4.1 72 3.8 776 3.3 308 1,156

s4l 0.8 11 1.4 468 1.1 122 601

s2u 5.3 121 5.6 471 - 0 592

s2m 2.2 18 0.7 3 - 0 21

s2l 1.7 11 0.4 1 - 0 13

Sub Total 298 5,121 2,719 8,138


Figure 13-26 Seam 2 Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook South


Figure 13-29 Seam 4A Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook South


Figure 13-31 Seam 2 Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (South)


Figure 13-32 Seam 2 Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (North)


Figure 13-35 Seam 4A Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (South)


Figure 13-36 Seam 4A Cumulative Strip Ratio – Chinook Vicary (North)


13.5 RESOURCE COMPARISON

Table 13-13 presents a summary comparison of the most recent resource estimations for the Chinook

Project. No mining has taken place on the Property since 1981.

Table 13-13 Comparison of Recent Chinook Project Resource Estimates

Resource Area Year Measured

Mt Indicated

Mt Inferred

Mt

# drillholes

Depth cut-off

Min. Seam Thickness

S.R. Density g/cm3

Dahrouge Chinook Vicary

2020 - 52.59 32.24 217 300 0.3 20:1 1.45

Norwest Chinook

North 2018 20 11.4 11.9 95 300 0.3 20:1 1.4

Norwest Vicary-

Racehorse 2018 11.4 12.3 3 62 300 0.3 20:1 1.4

Dahrouge Chinook

South 2020 - 51.23 13.09 270 300 0.3 20:1 1.45

Tamplin Chinook

South 2018 - 38 10 276 250 0.3 20:1 1.45

A comparison of the 2020 Dahrouge Chinook South Geological Model and the 2018 Tamplin Chinook

South model is outlined below:

• Both models were created using VulcanTM modelling software and assumed a complex geology

type and bulk density of 1.45 g/cm³

• Both modelled 5 coal seams; however, Dahrouge adapted nomenclature of seam IDs to

correlate with Chinook Vicary coal seams. Dahrouge also split S4 (W) and S5 (V) into 3 separate

plies while Tamplin left each seam as an individual ply

• Dahrouge acquired additional data not incorporated in the Tamplin Resource Estimate,

including:

o The addition of downhole deviation survey data for 217 drillholes

o The acquisition of higher resolution LiDAR15 DEM topographic surface underlying 210

of the drillholes in the area

• The 2020 Resource shows an approximately 35% increase compared from the Tamplin

resource reflected by:

o No 300 m buffer zone was used surrounding Castle Provincial Park

o A depth cut-off of 300 m was used by Dahrouge while Tamplin utilized a 250 m cut-off

o Dahrouge digitized historical mine plans from the International Mine and incorporated

coal left in-situ within the historical mine into the Resource Estimate

• Dahrouge modelled one splay thrust fault off the main Coleman Thrust, while Tamplin

modelled 4 splay faults. It is likely that several secondary minor offset structures exist at

Chinook South, particularly within the Big Coal zone due to the variability in coal seam

thickness. These structures were not modelled due to a lack of downhole data and the

reasoning that minor offset structures would not significantly affect the Resource

• Dahrouge produced a stratigraphic model of Chinook South defining each member of the Mist

Mountain Formation

A comparison between the 2020 Dahrouge Chinook Vicary Geological Model and the 2018 Norwest

Chinook North and Vicary-Racehorse Models is outlined below:


• Dahrouge utilized a bulk density of 1.45 g/cm³ while Norwest utilized a bulk density of 1.4

g/cm³

• Dahrouge acquired a significant amount of data not previously incorporated into the historical

Resource Estimates, including:

o The addition of downhole deviation survey data for 81 drillholes

o The purchase of higher resolution LiDAR15 DEM topographic surface for the entire area

o Acquisition of geological logs for an additional 62 drillholes in the area surrounding the

historical Vicary Mine, totalling 7,028 m

o Surveyed locations from underground workings

• Dahrouge created a coal quality database from bulk samples and downhole drill data

• Dahrouge digitized historical mine plans from the McGillivray and Vicary Mines and

incorporated coal left in-situ into the Resource Estimate

• The historical Resource Estimates did not split the coal seams into plies, while Dahrouge split

S2, S4, S4A and S5 into 3 plies each, which reduced the interburden and overall tonnage.

• Dahrouge produced a stratigraphic model for Chinook Vicary defining each member of the Mist

Mountain Formation


14 EXPLORATION TARGET

Exploration Targets have been defined for the Chinook Project in areas where there has been insufficient

exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource. It is important to note that the potential quantity and grade

of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature and that it is uncertain if further exploration will result

in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.

Exploration Targets, which are in part down-dip projections of coal resources, are provided for Chinook

Vicary and Chinook South (Table 14-1). For the two locations, data density restricted estimation to

Exploration Targets only. The targets were controlled by:

• Surficial geology maps; primarily using the Cadomin Formation as a marker unit;

• Down-dip and along strike extensions of the coal resource; and

• Historically mapped coal outcrops

The Chinook South Exploration Target (Figure 14-1) covers an area of approximately 537 ha and is bound

to the south, west and north by the Property boundary, to east by the truncating Coleman Thrust and

current Resource footprint. The Chinook Vicary Exploration Target (Figure 14-2) covers an area of

approximately 4,250 ha and is bound to the east by the truncating Coleman Thrust and to the north by

geology, down-dip depth restrictions and the Property boundary.

The Exploration Targets displayed in Table 14-1 are presented as an upper and lower range and round

to the closest 5 million tonnes. Conceptual Exploration Targets are presented as a range to represent the

uncertainty in seam thickness, quality and location. The upper (larger tonnage) range was generated

using a 20:1 stripping ratio cut-off and the lower (smaller tonnage) range was generated by restricting

the upper range to a 300 m depth cut off. The Exploration Targets were generated using the same

methods and restrictions described for the estimated resources, but the entire Exploration Target falls

outside areas with sufficient data density and valid points of observation that define seam thickness.

Table 14-1 Modelled Conceptual Exploration Targets

Area

Exploration Target (Mt) Lower Range

Exploration Target - 20:1 SR, 300 m Depth Cut-off

Upper Range Exploration Target - 20:1 SR, No

Depth Cut-off

Chinook South 1 10

Chinook Vicary 125 450

The Exploration Targets should be assessed by drilling over the next two exploration campaigns once

the appropriate permits are received. Reccomended exploration would include:

• 5,000 to 10,000 m of rotary air blast or reverse circulation drilling to evalute the

presence/absence of the conceptual coal seams idenfitied within the Exploration Targets

• Downhole geophysics on all completed drillholes to accurately identify coal seam intersections

• Large diameter coring of confirmed coal intersections to evaluate coal quality of each identifed

coal seam, evenly distributed across the Exploration Targets


Figure 14-1 Chinook South Exploration Target


Figure 14-2 Chinook Vicary Exploration Target


15 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

There is an extensive history of coking coal exploration and production from the Mist Mountain

Formation south and west of the Chinook Project, both in southwestern Alberta and southeastern BC.

Several coal exploration projects occur near the Chinook Project that closely reflect geologic conditions

on the Property; these include Benga Mining Ltd.’s (Riversdale Resources Ltd.) Grassy Mountain Coal

Project and Atrum Coal Ltd.’s Elan Coal Project (Figure 15-1).

The Grassy Mountain Coal Project is located 7 km north-northeast of Blairmore and lies east of the

Chinook Project. Between 1947 and 1960, Western Canadian Collieries removed approximately 3.5 Mt

of coal from small surface pits at stripping ratios of less than 2:1. Scurry-Rainbow Oil Ltd. purchased the

property in 1966, and conducted drilling, trenching and bulk sampling of four adits in 1971. In 1973,

Consolidation Coal Company (now CONSOL Energy Corp.) acquired an option on the property and

undertook extensive drilling, trenching, and bulk sampling. In December 2012, Benga Mining Ltd.

(subsidiary of Riversdale Resources Ltd., Australia) acquired a portfolio of coal assets from Consol

Energy Corp. and Devon Canada that includes the Grassy Mountain Project. Since the acquisition, Benga

has focused on the development of feasibility and optimization studies. Benga is currently working on

meeting regulatory requirements for an Environmental Impact Assessment. Coal Resources on the

Grassy Mountain Project are estimated to be 85 Mt Measured, 110 Mt Indicated at a maximum depth of

400 m. According to Riversdale Resources Ltd., July 31, 2015 News Release (Riversdale Resources, 2015),

Coal Reserves are estimated at 88 Mt. The Authors have not been able to verify the above-mentioned

production figures or any reserve/resource information and these figures are not necessarily indicative

of any Coal Resources for the Chinook Project.

The Elan Coal Project is located approximately 13 km north of Coleman and covers a 55 km strike length.

Exploration on the Elan Coal Project began in 1949 and was conducted intermittently by various

companies until 1976. More recently, Elan Coal Ltd. conducted exploration and drilling in 2013 and 2014,

and subsequently Atrum Coal (Atrum) conducted mapping in 2017 and drilling in 2018 and 2019 on the

Property. No coal production, aside from domestic use is known from the Elan Coal Project. The Elan

Property is estimated to have 110 Mt Indicated and 285 Mt Inferred Coal Resources with a stripping ratio

less than 20:1 and resource at less than 200 m depth (Atrum News Release, December 2, 2019). The coal

is classified as low to medium volatile bituminous. Atrum is currently in the process of completing a

Scoping Study incorporating additional drilling completed on the Elan Property in 2019. The Authors

have not been able to verify the above-mentioned reserve/resource figures and these figures are not

necessarily indicative of any Coal Resources for the Chinook Project.


Figure 15-1 Adjacent Properties


16 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

This report presents a review of available historical reports and data. Not all the historical exploration

information was available, but the Authors are satisfied that the information used to create the Resource

Estimates in this report are reflective of coal seam thicknesses and quality on the Property. The Authors

consider the historical exploration to be of professional quality and can see no reason for the results

presented to have been intentionally misleading.

The presented Resource at Chinook contain significant thicknesses of Medium Volatile Bituminous coal

under ASTM standards. Based on the analysis of historical results, “most of the coal at Chinook South is

classified as a Semi Hard Coking Coal, with less than 10% deemed suitable as a Hard Coking Coal. The

majority of the coal at Chinook Vicary was found to be good quality Hard Coking Coal, with FSI of 6 – 7 and

CSR above 55. Minor portions of the resource, limited to seam S4/4A, report FSI below 6 and CSR below 50”

(Koornhof, 2020). Although the historical clean coal quality data is indicative to the product coals defined

above, further validation with current methods and standards is required to verify the historical results

and increase the quantity and spatial distribution of data across the Project.

Significant work has been undertaken to investigate the historical geological interpretations and to

validate historical exposures, trenches, adits, and drill sites in order to model coal seams and plan future

exploration programs. Proximity to rail and municipal infrastructure and services is also good, with the

Project lying within the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass (population approximately 5,500). The main rail

line, operated by Canadian Pacific Railway, bisects the Project at Coleman and provides potential access

to coal export terminals in Vancouver and Prince Rupert.

There are currently four producing coking coal mines in the Sparwood/Elk Valley area, BC. All four mines

are owned by Teck Coal and they have an aggregate annual capacity of approximately 25 Mt. Mining

personnel for the Project could potentially be sourced from Coleman or other towns within the

Municipality of Crowsnest Pass.

The Property lies in an area with several restrictions. The Property is located within a Mountain Goat and

Bighorn Sheep range (Figure 4-5). In this area, any disturbances that may have direct or indirect adverse

effects, including permanent alteration of habitat must be avoided or mitigated. The entire Property is

located within a Grizzly Bear Protection Zone; regulations require that Montem provide and preserve

either core or secondary grizzly bear habitat. Additionally, sections of the Property are located in the Key

Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone. Access and disturbance in these areas must be limited between December

15th and April 30th.

The Property lies almost entirely within the Coal Category 4 land zone with respect to coal exploration

and development as designated by the 1976 Coal Development Policy for Alberta. Coal Category 4 allows

for exploration to be permitted under appropriate control and surface or underground mining or in-situ

operations may be considered subject to proper assurances respecting protection of the environment

and reclamation of disturbed lands. Additionally, a small portion of the Project covering and surrounding

the town of Coleman lies within Category 1 and Category 2. Coal Category 2 allows limited coal

exploration which may be permitted under strict control but in which commercial development by

surface mining will not normally be considered at the present time. This category contains lands for

which the preferred land or resource use remains to be determined, or areas where infrastructure

facilities are generally absent or considered inadequate to support major mining operations. In addition,

this category contains local areas of high environmental sensitivity in which neither exploration nor

development activities will be permitted. Underground mining or in-situ operations may be permitted in


areas within this category where the surface effects of the operations are deemed to be environmentally

acceptable. No exploration or commercial development is permitted on Category 1 lands.

The Authors conclude that the Property contains significant coal resources which warrant further

exploration. The Property is considered one of merit.


17 RECOMMENDATIONS

The Property contains significant coal resources at extractable depths as supported by historical mining

operations and the current 2020 resource. The economics of coal extraction have not been evaluated as

part of this report. Mining losses and dilutions have not been factored into the Resource Estimates. The

Property is considered one of merit and further exploration and definition is warranted. The Authors

recommend further work in several categories as detailed below.

Resource Definition

Drilling is recommended in areas where the resource remains in the Inferred category to increase the

resource classifications to Indicated and Measured. 10,000 to 15,000 m of rotary air blast or reverse

circulation drilling should be completed to assess possible coal seams within the Exploration Targets at

Chinook Vicary and Chinook South, confirm historical drill results and to target primary and secondary

geological structures. Currently there are data gaps in the understanding of secondary thrust faults and

how they affect coals seams and interact with the main Coleman Thrust, specifically in the area to the

south of the International Mine and in the area surrounding the historical Racehorse Mine.

Downhole geophysical logging and acoustic and optical televiewer surveys of all drillholes is

recommended to consistently identify coal seams and geological structures.

LiDAR Survey

Dahrouge recommends a high-resolution LiDAR survey is flown for the entirety of the Chinook Project.

A LiDAR15 DEM surface covering most of the Property was purchased for this Resource statement,

however it did not cover portions of Chinook South. An airborne LiDAR survey would produce a more

accurate and continuous surface on the Property in comparison to the LiDAR15 DEM and is

recommended as the project advances. High resolution aerial imagery could also be captured during the

same survey.

Historical Workings Definition

Approximately 5-10 drillholes should be completed in areas of historical mining to test the accuracy of

the historical mine plans digitized by Dahrouge and ensure pillars that were incorporated into the

geological models were not extracted.

A subsidence survey is also recommended to determine the extent the underground workings have

affected the topography in the area.

Coal Quality

Large diameter coring (LDC) of 30 to 40 drillholes is recommended to collect a minimum of six spatially

distributed 6” or 9” coal core samples from each of the S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5 seams. These samples would

then undergo size distribution analysis using the modern method of drop shattering and wet tumbling

samples with steel cubes. Washability and detailed analysis on a range of size fractions will be required

to determine the optimum size and density at which to prepare clean coal composites. Petrography

analysis and detailed coking coal tests, including carbonisation studies, should be completed on

simulated clean coal products to develop preliminary market specifications for the resource.

Between 3,000 and 4,000 m of LDC drilling should target areas where the target seam depth is between

30 and 100 m. Pilot drillholes to confirm exact depth to target coal seams will be part of the resource

definition drilling and will minimize coring intervals.


It is also recommended that Montem obtain bulk samples on near-surface coal seams, either by

excavation or by 6” or 9” LDC. Some coal quality data exists on the Property for historical bulk samples,

however, additional sites are recommended to ensure proper and current sampling and analysis

techniques are employed. The coal from the bulk samples should be used to complete pilot wash plant

testing and build the flowsheet for a coal preparation plant.

Geotechnical and Geochemical Analysis

As a mine plan develops for the Property, between 3,000 and 5,000 m of HQ split-tube diamond drilling

is recommended and should be evenly distributed across the Property targeting both the hanging wall

and footwall of the proposed pit shells, as well as, primary and secondary geological structures. Detailed

geotechnical logging should be conducted at the drill rig. Unconfined compressive strength (UCS)

samples should be taken every 30 m, and direct shear samples should be collected when suitable samples

are identified. Point load tests should be taken every 3 m or at every change in lithology, with more tests

made near UCS sample sites. A detailed program should be designed and overseen by a hydrogeologist.

The geotechnical drillholes can be multipurpose drillholes and serve for geochemical analysis. Samples

should be submitted for static testing (acid-base accounting and elemental composition) followed by a

subset of samples for phase 2 testing at a later time (shake flask extractions and kinetic testing).

Hydrogeological Study

A preliminary hydrogeological study should be commenced during the drill campaign with the

installation of monitoring wells and vibrating wire piezometers in select completed drillholes to establish

a relationship between the deposit, historical workings and the surrounding watershed. A detailed

program should be designed and overseen by a hydrogeologist.

It is also recommended that packer tests are performed as the HQ diamond drillholes are advanced to

evaluate hydraulic conductivity of the bedrock surrounding the coal seams.


18 REFERENCES

Adair, R.N. and Burwash, R.A., 1996, Evidence for Pyroclastic Emplacement of the Crowsnest

Formation, Alberta: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v.33, p715-728.

Atrum Coal Ltd. News Release. “97 Mt Increase in Isolation South Resource” (2019, December 2).

Retrieved from https://atrumcoal.com/investor-information/announcements/

Booth, J.K.B., and Leigh, O.E., 1973. Report on Coleman Collieries Ltd – Prepared for Northern and

Central Gas Corporation.

Cameron, D and Williams, A. 2019. Tent Mountain Legacy Coal Quality Data Assessment. Internal

Report prepared for Montem Resource Corp.

Chinook Coals Ltd. 1989. Chinook Project – Preliminary Disclosure and Application for

Reclassification of Lands Under “A Coal Development Policy For Alberta”

Chinook Coals Ltd., 1990. Chinook Coal Project, Coal Quality Evaluation Program Final Report.

Coleman Collieries Ltd., 1982. McGillivray Project, Alberta, 1982 Exploration Program Final Report.

Coleman Collieries Ltd., 1982. Drill Hole and Bulk Sample Analytical Compilation, McGillivray and

Lyons Creek Areas.

Coleman Collieries Ltd., 1983. Summary Report Bulk Sampling Program, Lyons Creek Project.

Dyson, P.L. 1973. Geological Summary of the Vicary South Area.

Gibson, D.W. 1985. Stratigraphy, Sedimentology and Depositional Environments of the Coal-

Bearing Jurassic-Cretaceous Kootenay Group, Albert and British Columbia. Geological Survey

of Canada Bulletin 357, p. 108.

Hall, R.L. 1984. Lithostratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Fernie Formation (Jurassic) in the

Southern Canadian Rocky Mountains: In: The Mesozoic of Middle North America, D.F. Stott and D.

Glass (eds.). Calgary, Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 9, p. 233-247.

Hughes, J.D., Klatzel-Mudry, L. and Nikols, D.J. 1989. A Standardized Coal Resource/Reserve

Reporting System for Canada. Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 88-21, p. 18.

Johnson, V.H. 1965. Vicary-Racehorse mine area, geological investigations, 1965; prepared for


Karst, R.H. 1988. 1987 Chinook South Geologic Report. Prepared for Manalta Coal Ltd.

Kim H., 1976. Granridge Metallurgical Coal Property, Alberta, Geological Report: internal report,

Granby Mining Corp., 70p plus appendices.

Kobie Koornhof Associates Inc., 2020. Assessment of the Chinook Project Clean Coal Quality.

Prepared for Montem Resources.

Macdonald, D.E., Langenberg, C. W., Gentzis, T., 1989, A Regional Evaluation of Coal Quality in the

Foothills/Mountains Region of Alberta. Alberta Research Council Earth Sciences Report 89-2, p.

49 plus appendices and maps.

MacNeil, D.J. 1947. The geology of the Kootenay Coal Seams As They Occur North of Coleman,

Alberta. Prepared for McGillivray Creek Coal and Coke Co.

https://atrumcoal.com/investor-information/announcements/


Minev, I. and Ennis, S. 2018. Competent Persons Report, Chinook North Project, Coleman, Alberta,

Canada. JORC Competent Persons Report.

Minev, I. and Ennis, S. 2018. Competent Persons Report, Vicary-Racehorse Property, Coleman,

Alberta, Canada. JORC Competent Persons Report.

Montem Resources Limited, 2018, Montem Resources Prospectus.

Norris, D.K., 1955. Blairmore Alberta, G.S.C. Preliminary map 55-18

Norris, D.K. 1959. Type Section of the Kootenay Formation, Grass y Mountain, Alberta; Journal of

Alberta Society of Petroleum Geologists, vol. 7, p. 223-233.

Norwest Corporation. 2005. Technical Report, Chinook North Coal Property, Alberta. Draft

Technical Report prepared for Sherritt International Corporation.

Norwest Corporation. 2005. Technical Report, Chinook South Coal Property, Alberta. Draft


Norwest Corporation. 2005. Technical Report, Vicary-Racehorse Coal Property, Alberta. Draft


Pearce, T.H., 1969, The Analcite-Bearing Volcanic Rocks of the Crowsnest Formation, Alberta:

Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 7, 46 (1970), p46-66.

Richardson, R. J. H., Langenberg, C.W., Chao, D. K. and Fietz, D. 1992. Coal Compilation Project –

Blairmore. Alberta Geological Survey, Open File Report 1992-5, p. 26 plus appendices.

Riversdale Resources Ltd., July 31. 2015 News Release

Riversdale Resources. 2015. Benga Mining Ltd, Grassy Mountain Coal Project, Section B: Geology

and Geotechnical. Submitted as part of Environmental Impact Assessment, Nov 2015.

Rushton, H.G., Wright, J.Y., and Martonhegyi, F., 1972. Report on Isolation Ridge Project: internal

report, CanPac Minerals Ltd., 52p plus appendices.

Smith, LA. 1982a. Geological Evaluation of the Racehorse North Area, Volume I; prepared for


Smith, LA. 1982b. Geological Evaluation of the Racehorse North Area, Volume II; prepared for


Smith, LA. 1982c. Geological Evaluation of the Vicary-McGillivray Area; prepared for Coleman

Collieries Ltd.

Smith, LA. 1991. Surface Geological Evaluation of the Vicary-Racehorse Area. Prepared for Manalta

Coal Ltd.

Stockmal, G.S., Osadetz, K.G., Lebel, D., and Hannigan, P.K., 2001, Structure and Hydrocarbon

Occurrence, Rocky Mountain Foothills and Front Ranges, Turner Valley to Waterton Lakes:

Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 4111, 161p.

Tamplin Resources Pty Ltd. 2018. Competent Person Report. Coal Resources for the Chinook South

Project, Canadian Sedimentary Basin, Alberta and British Columbia, Canada. JORC Competent

Person Report.

Van Katwyk, P. 1991. Chinook Project Exploration Report. Prepared for Manalta Coal Ltd.


“Westmoreland completes acquisition of Sherritt coal operations; announces intention to prepay

WML Notes” (2014, April 29). Retrieved from http://westmoreland.com


19 COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENTS

The information in the report, to which this statement is attached, that relates to the Coal Resources and Exploration Targets, is based on information compiled under the supervision of Mr. Bradley Ulry, Mr. Matthew Carter, and Mr. John Gorham: Competent Persons who are registered as Professional Geologists with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta and Mr. Nathan Schmidt; Competent Person and a member of Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (EGBC); Mr. Bradley Ulry, Mr. Matthew Carter, Mr. Nathan Schmidt and Mr. John Gorham are employed by Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. and are all Competent Persons independent from the issuer of this statement, Montem Resources Alberta Operations Ltd. Mr. Bradley Ulry, Mr. Matthew Carter, Mr. Nathan Schmidt and Mr. John Gorham have sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralization 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 JORC code. Mr. Bradley Ulry, Mr. Matthew Carter, Mr. Nathan Schmidt and Mr. John Gorham have acquired experience principally from coal exploration programs in central and southern Alberta. Mr. Bradley Ulry, Mr. Matthew Carter, Mr. Nathan Schmidt and Mr. John Gorham consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears. The Coal Resources and Exploration Targets for coal seams S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5 on the Chinook Project, presented in this report, have been classified and reported in accordance with the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (December 2012), prepared by the Joint Ore Reserves Committee of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Minerals Council of Australia. ‘Signed and Sealed’ ‘Signed and Sealed’

___________________________ ___________________________

Matthew Carter, P. Geo Nathan Schmidt, P. Geo

Dated: April 9, 2020 Dated: April 9, 2020

__________________________ __________________________

Bradley Ulry, P. Geo John Gorham, P. Geol.

Dated: April 9 , 2020 Dated April 9, 2020

‘Signed and Sealed’ ‘Signed and Sealed’


JORC CODE – CHECKLIST OF ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING CRITERIA (2012

EDITION)

1

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Sampling techniques

• Nature and quality of sampling (eg 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.

• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.

• 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 (eg ‘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 (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

• The historical database used for geological and resource modelling was compiled from drilling by Coleman Collieries, Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. and Manalta Coal Ltd. between 1964 and 1989. It consists of 494 drillholes (57 core holes and 437 rotary holes) from which 11 were excluded because of insufficient data. See Section 7, 8, 10 and 11 of the report for details.

• Coal core samples were collected for 36 of the 57 core holes. Sampling took place over many different drill campaigns and although the Authors have no direct knowledge of the historical sampling methods, they have no reason to believe that industry standard practices were not followed. The industry standard process is described below:

o Core from the drillholes were geologically logged (i.e. measured and described) using standard descriptive terms to document rock type, colour, brightness, hardness and grain size.

o Geophysical logs were run downhole to collect caliper, density (gamma-gamma) and natural gamma data. The geophysical logs are used to identify rock types, including coal intersected in the drillhole.

o Coal intervals were collected and logged by a geologist. The geologist’s core log consisted of the measured thickness and description of the coal, inter-seam partings, adjacent roof and floor rock, and details of any sample intervals removed for analysis.

o Recovered core was measured to determine an overall recovery (reported in percent) by comparing the recovered core length with the coring run length recorded by the driller. Recovered core was measured and compared to the coal interval thickness determined from the geophysical log suite.

o Collected samples were placed in pre-labelled sample bags with the hole number and sample identifier clearly marked. The sample bags were placed together in a collection bag or 5-gallon pails for the hole before being

2


placed in palletized containers and shipped to an independent laboratory for analysis.

• Coal chip samples were collected from 196 of the 440 RC drillholes. Sampling took place over many different drill campaigns and although the authors have no direct knowledge of the historical sampling methods, they have no reason to believe that industry standard practices were not followed. The industry standard process is described below:

o Coal chip samples were collected in one to three-foot

intervals as the drill was slowly advanced and put in

cloth bags to drain.

o A small portion of each interval was put in the lithological

sample tray for subsequent geological logging and

comparison to geophysical logs.

o After draining, the bagged samples were evaluated by

the site geologist and composited by seam with the aid

of downhole logs to eliminate partings and seam floor

material.

o Collected chip samples were placed in pre-labelled

sample bags with the hole number and sample identifier

clearly marked. The sample bags were placed together

in a collection bag or 5-gallon pail(s) for the hole before

being placed in palletized containers and shipped to an

independent laboratory for analysis.

o Typically, no special security methods were identified for the shipping and storage of samples.

• Geophysical logs are available for 374 rotary drillholes and the majority of diamond drillholes used in the geological model.

• Coal sample intervals for RC drillholes were generally sampled at plus or minus 0.25 m leading to cross contamination across lithological boundaries; samples included some waste from overlying and underlying non-coal material.

• Cored holes were sampled seam by seam. Chips were logged in the

field and then corrected to geophysics. Coal brightness was not

generally recorded on open holes. Sample top and base records exist

for all holes, but sample depths were generally uncorrected to

3


geophysics resulting in some discrepancies between coal samples

and the recorded sample top and base.

• Sampled intervals were assigned unique sample numbers and recorded for each seam.

Drilling techniques

• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg 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).

• Cored holes were HQ (63.5 mm) single tube core. Rotary holes were generally 125-165 mm diameter, drilled by reverse circulation.

• All holes were drilled at a range of inclinations and directions in an attempt to intersect strata perpendicular to dip.

Drill sample recovery

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

• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.

• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.

• 494 historical drillholes (57 core holes and 437 rotary holes) were georeferenced and validated. Drillholes were sampled for coal quality across all seams in the deposit.

• Coal recovery in cored holes was poor to moderate ranging between

10% to 100% with an average coal recovery ranging from 59 to 100%

depending on the drill campaign. This is due to the extremely friable

nature of the coal and considerable internal micro-faulting within the

seams in this area.

• Primarily, the cored drillhole coal quality evaluation datapoints were

limited to cored drillhole coal intersections with greater than 75%

recovery, although, in some areas of the Chinook Project, where data

density was an issue, lower recovered cored drillhole coal seam

intersections were considered.

• Coal quality data from coal cores with recoveries of less than 75% has reduced value, but volatile matter, inherent moisture and reflectance are not adversely affected by poor recovery.

• Observations suggest that core loss is concentrated on the more fragile bright coal bands, which may have biased those samples to higher ash content than high recovery samples.

• For RC chip coal samples, recovery data was poorly recorded

historically. Generally, RC drilling recovers most of the sampled

interval, with the higher rheology-performing coal fines typically

making up most of the unrecovered sampled interval. RC coal sample

intervals are generally sampled at plus or minus 0.25 m leading to

cross contamination across lithological boundaries. That is, most coal

samples in an RC dataset will include some waste from overlying and

4


underlying non-coal material and vice versa.

Logging • Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.

• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.

• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.

• Chips and cores were logged in the field and corrected to downhole geophysics.

• All holes were wireline logged where possible for density, and gamma neutron. Coal and rock lithologies from chip and core descriptions were entered into a lithology database. Coal seams were identified and correlated between holes. The standard and level of detail is considered appropriate for mineral resource estimation.

• No photographs exist of samples of core or chip holes.

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 maximise representivity of samples.

• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.

• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.

• As the sampling occurred over many different drill campaigns, the Authors have no direct knowledge of the sampling methods undertaken during each drill campaign but have no reason to believe the operators and the laboratories did not follow industry standard practices.

• For these samples, preparation, subsampling and quality control procedures were ensured by the use of certified commercial labs in Canada and the US, employing recognized QA procedures and following international standards for coal testing (ASTM). Collected samples were placed in pre-labelled sample bags with the hole number and sample identifier clearly marked. The sample bags werre placed together in a collection bag or 5-gallon pail(s) for the hole before being placed in palletized containers and shipped to an independent laboratory for analysis.

• The sample preparation methods utilized for the historical samples were industry standard at the time. Details of the sample preparation are not known other than the descriptions provided by the laboratories (Coleman Collieries, 1982). The laboratories that performed the historical exploration are all independent commercial laboratories and are not connected in any corporate way to Coleman Collieries, Manalta, Norcen or Luscar Ltd, the companies for which the work was originally performed. The quality control procedures employed by the laboratories were in the past and remain standard for the coal testing industry in Canada. All Canadian coal laboratories are subject to periodic testing and certification by an agency of the Canadian Federal Government.

Quality of assay data

• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered

• All coal analysis was based on the accepted International standards at the time of analysis (ASTM).

5


and laboratory tests

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 (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.

• The coal quality database is in excel format. The resultant database appears to have a valid range of data and exhibits sound regression relationships such as washability – ash.

• Birtley Coal and Minerals Testing and Loring Laboratories Ltd. in Calgary, where most of the analytical work was done, are still in operation. As part of their current certification by the Coal Association of Canada (CAC) there is an obligation to complete relevant round robin checks and other routine checking procedures to ensure they meet the required accuracy for each test since their inception. Both labs have advised that they are unsure if this quality control check applied in the 1970’s. Birtley confirmed that this system was in place for the Chinook Coal Ltd. (Manalta subsidiary) reverse circulation programs (1986-1990). This system was apparently not yet developed when the earlier programs were conducted.

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.

• Coal intersections used in the geological model were verified against geophysical measurements. Montem’s consultant, Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. (Dahrouge) completed a 100% validation of historical drillhole locations: and an approximate 75% spot check of coal seam intersections, creating an independent database for resource modelling.

• Not all data addressed in the historical summary reports and technical reports could be located by Dahrouge, and therefore, could not be used in this report. Twinned holes were not used.

• Drillhole collar, lithology and basic raw coal quality data is stored in a Vulcan and Excel database. All available source field records, lab reports, survey data etc., are stored in electronic form.

Location of data points

• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.

• Specification of the grid system used.

• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

• The topographic surface utilized for the geological model was a combination of LiDAR15 DEM as well as an open source topographic surface from the Canadian Federal Geospatial Platform used for the southern half of the Chinook South area where LiDAR was unavailable for purchase. The surfaces were merged using LeapfrogTM merge mesh function creating one continuous surface running the length of the Property. All drillholes in Chinook Vicary area and 210 drillholes in the Chinook South area were encompassed by the purchased LiDAR, while 60 drillholes in Chinook South were underlain by the open-sourced surface data. All drillholes were snapped to the newly created topographic surface.

• Data is stored in UTM NAD 83 Zone 11N projection format.

6


• Historical drill collars, historical surface mapping points, trenching points and mine plans were georeferenced and validated against topography.

• Reverse circulation and core hole collar information was generally well constrained for X-Y coordinates, but less reliable for Z coordinates. Downhole directional information was available for 305 drillholes. Not all drillholes in the database were used to constrain the current geological interpretation as information was lacking or conflicting.

• The generally close alignment collars and LiDAR data support the notion that the validation process undertaken by previous studies is generally reliable. These historical collar locations are incorporated into the geological model.

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 Chinook Project described in this report is comprised of the properties historically known as the Chinook South, Chinook North and Vicary-Racehorse, comprising a total area of 9,746 ha.

• The geological and resource models were constructed using a database of 483 drillholes, totalling 57,748.73 m (Table 11-2). A total of 11 drillholes were excluded from the model due to insufficient or conflicting location information (Table 11-3).

• The historical dataset reflects the standards and exploration targets of the time. There is a bias in the drillhole dataset towards information on S2 and S3 seams in Chinook South which represents the principal open-cut targets. There are also high concentrations of data around shallower coal occurrences which likely were amenable to shorter term open-cut operations. Due to the geological complexity of the deposit, the combined dataset exhibits a high level of variability in data distribution and reliability both in plan and stratigraphically.

• Where coal intersections have been sampled in multiple sections per seam, compositing of samples has been applied.

• The data spacing and distribution are considered by the Competent Persons to be collectively sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the mineral resource estimate and classifications applied.

Orientation of data in relation to

• 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

• The coal Resource on the Chinook Project is bounded by the Coleman, Isolation and McConnell thrusts which strike north-south and results in a marked anisotropy to the deposit. This east-west anisotropy to the deposit is geostatistically significant but it is also

7


geological structure

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

reasonably consistent and well understood.

• One subsidiary splay thrust is interpreted to ramp off the Coleman Thrust in the geologically complex York Creek area, resulting in zones of uncharacteristically thick coal seams as well as zones of uncharacteristically thin coal seams. The possibility exists for several additional small-scale thrusts in the area, however little is known about the structure other than the expression of coal seams as fault repeats in some drillholes.

• Several secondary thrust faults exist at Chinook Vicary with the area being more structurally complex than Chinook South. North of the McGillivray Mine, the Vicary thrust splays off the main Coleman Thrust causing a small repeat of the Cadomin Formation. In the area around the historical Vicary Mine, surface mapping indicates complex surface geology with a series of splay faults and a slip fault with large deformed blocks of Cadomin and Mist Mountain formation. The underground mine plans show coal seam S2 to be relatively planar, offset by a series of splay thrusts, so it is believed the surface deformation is a result of near surface slip faulting (Smith, 1991)

• Drilling of the deposit has occurred in east-west traverses of closely spaced drillholes approximately perpendicular to the strike of the coal.

Many holes were drilled at angles to intersect seams as nearly perpendicular as feasible (Figure 8-1 through 8-5). Downhole deviation logs and collar surveys constrain drillhole data in 3D space.

Sample security

• The measures taken to ensure sample security. • No known special sample security measures were adopted during historical exploration programs because the industry regards coal as a low value bulk commodity.

• Samples have a unique sample number that is provided for analysis. Each sample tag listed project name, drillhole, top and base of sample interval, and sample number.

Audits or reviews

• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • The drillhole database was created and validated by Manalta geological personnel during the early 1990’s with a review by Norwest consultants on behalf of Luscar Ltd. and Sherritt International Corp. in 2005. This dataset is based entirely on historical drilling and outcrop data collected from 1964 to 1989. Data from this period appears to be of a professional and consistent quality but due to its age the data used in the resource estimation cannot be directly confirmed. Data has been excluded where the datasets are incomplete or could not be constrained or confirmed.

8


• In 2019, the geological dataset and model was validated by Dahrouge, using reports, tables, contour plans and cross-sections. The Resource Estimates which form part of this report were based on the historical drilling, select trenching data, adit data, and mapping data. Dahrouge completed a 100% validation of the historical drillhole locations; and an approximate 75% spot check of coal seam intersections, creating an independent database.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results


Mineral tenement and land tenure status

• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.

• The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.

• The Chinook Project is a narrow north-south trending parcel from 1 to 5 km wide and about 42 km long. It consists of 53 Alberta Coal Leases and 58 Alberta Freehold Tenements (all minerals except gold,

silver) held by Montem (Tables 4-1, 4-2 and Figures 4-1 to 4-4) and is

subject terms and conditions of an agreement outlined Section 4.4. Coal leases are valid between Dec. 2020 and Sept. 2032 and can be renewed (Table 4-1).

• Two of the Alberta Coal Leases (1306050828 and 306050830) that make up the northern portion of the Project are located partially within Chinook Vicary and partially within a Property, also owned by Montem but not discussed within this report, that lies directly to the north of the Chinook Project.

• A coal exploration permit (CEP) application is in process to undertake a drilling and exploration program. A Deep Drilling Permit (for holes deeper than 150 m vertically), a water Withdrawal Licence. A Road Use Agreement and Historical Resources Review will also be required. No impediments to obtaining these are anticipated.

• All coal deposits in Alberta are subject to the provisions of the Coal Development Policy for Alberta, which was originally enacted in 1976. This policy defines different parts of the land area of the province in which specific regulations for coal development apply. The Project is almost entirely within Category 4 of the Coal Development Policy for Alberta, other than a small portion of the Project covering and surrounding the town of Coleman which is within Category 1 and Category 2 (Figure 4 5).

o In Coal Category 4 lands, exploration may be permitted under appropriate control, and surface or underground mining or in-situ operations may be considered subject

9


to proper assurances respecting protection of the environment and reclamation of disturbed lands.

o In Coal Category 2 lands, limited coal exploration is desirable and may be permitted under strict control but in which commercial development by surface mining will not normally be considered at the present time. This category contains lands for which the preferred land or resource use remains to be determined, or areas where infrastructure facilities are generally absent or considered inadequate to support major mining operations. In addition, this category may contain local areas of high environmental sensitivity in which neither exploration nor development activities will be permitted. Underground mining or in-situ operations may be permitted in areas within this category where the surface effects of the operations are deemed to be environmentally acceptable.

o In Category 1 lands, no exploration or commercial development is permitted.

• Several Indigenous groups are located within 100 km of the project area. Montem is currently in the ACO managed Indigenous peoples consultation process with all Treaty 7 First Nations in Southern Alberta, which includes:

• The Blackfoot (Niitsitapi) peoples

o The Piikani Nation

o The Kainai (Blood) Nation

o The Siksika Nation

• The Stoney Nakoda Nations

o The Chiniki Nation

o The Bearpaw Nation

o The Wesley Nation

o The Tsuut’ina Nation.

• The targeted coal-bearing Mist Mountain Formation is naturally rich in selenium. In alkaline, aerobic conditions, elemental selenium and selenide minerals are oxidized releasing soluble selenate ions which can be transported in surface runoff. Large scale surface mining in the Elk Valley, British Columbia has enriched the Elk River in selenium. Any future mine development on the Project will require the

10


development of a selenium management plan. Montem’s ongoing liability is only for disturbance created during current exploration activities.

• The Project is partially located within the Mountain Goat and Bighorn Sheep Range (Figure 4-5). In this area, any disturbances that may have direct or indirect adverse effects, such as permanent alteration of habitat must be avoided or mitigated. Additionally, most of the Property is located within a grizzly bear protection zone (Figure 4-5); regulations require that Montem provide and preserve either core or secondary grizzly bear habitat.

• Several areas of the Property are located in the Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone. The Alberta government outlines guidelines for these areas in order to protect the long-term integrity and productivity of the ungulate winter ranges and populated areas. New permanent access is to be avoided, temporary access should minimize disturbance to wildlife habitat and limited industrial work is to be carried out between December 15th and April 30th.

• The Project does not fall within the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan (“SSRP”); however the southern portion of Chinook South borders Castle Provincial Park, which is included in the SSRP (Figure 4-5). The SSRP was established to manage and monitor the environment and support responsible development of Alberta’s resources. The strategies developed within the SSRP are designed to minimize the amount of land used for new development, including the usage of historical roads and trails for future exploration program access, and progressive reclamation of areas no longer being used.

Exploration done by other parties

• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. • Historical work on the Chinook Project began in the early 1900’s when International Coal and Coke Company Ltd. (“ICC”) acquired coal rights to the Chinook South area, and McGillivray Creek Coal and Coke Company Ltd. (“MCCC”) acquired coal rights to Chinook Vicary area (Vicary-Racehorse and Chinook North).

• In 1903, ICC commenced underground mining operations south of Coleman at the International Mine which operated until 1952. An estimated 13.8 Mt of raw coal were extracted from S2 and S4 over the lifespan of the mine. Prior to 1955, a small underground operation known as the Broun Mine was operated by ICC and extracted <10 kt of raw coal from S2 south of the International Mine (Van Katwyk, 1991).

• In 1906, MCCC commenced underground mining operations at the

11


McGillivray Mine, which was located within Chinook Vicary. The property was purchased by Coleman Collieries in the early 1950’s and operations continued at the McGillivray Mine until 1958. The Alberta Energy Regulator (“AER”) reports that a total of 10.8 million tonnes of coal was extracted from the McGillivray Mine.

• Between 1947 and 1952, within Chinook South, open-pit mining was carried out at 4 small pits known as the York Creek Mine, where seams X and Y (currently modelled as seams S3 and S2, respectively) merge together into a thick coal seam of 10 to 12 m. It is estimated that 500,000 tonnes of raw coal were extracted by ICC from these 4 pits.

• In the early 1950’s, Coleman Collieries acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project from ICC and MCCC

• Between 1964 and 1982, Coleman Collieries conducted exploration at the Chinook Vicary, which included geological mapping by consultants, drilling, adit drivage and bulk sampling.

• In 1971, Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. (“Norcen”) acquired an 82% interest in the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Coleman Collieries before subsequently acquiring the remaining 18% in 1977 (Van Katwyk, 1991).

• In 1977, Coleman Collieries contracted Aero Geometrics Ltd. to complete aerial photography, which was used by R.M. Hardy and Associates Ltd. in 1978, to provide a photogrammetric map at a scale of 1:5000; the map was used as a base for a regional exploration program including mapping and the 1978 diamond drilling. Additional drilling was carried out by Algas Resources Ltd. in 1977 to assess coal bed methane potential of the area.

• In addition to the drill programs, several mapping programs were carried out on the Property by V.H. Johnson in 1965, R.L. Dyson in 1973, and L.A. Smith Consulting and Development Ltd. (“Smith’) in 1980.

• Between 1971 and 1982, Norcen conducted exploration at Chinook South, which included drilling, coal quality testing and coal seam development for preliminary non-JORC compliant reserve estimations.

• In 1985, Manalta acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Norcen (Chinook Coals, 1989), and its subsidiary Chinook Coals Ltd. completed additional drilling between 1986 and 1989 in the Chinook South area, as well as an evaluation of coal

12


resources/reserves. Results of Manalta’s drilling indicated open-pit mining potential north of York Creek and that coal south of York Creek and near old open pits was complex due to thrust stacking. Early exploration focus was on determining the extent of seams X and Y (currently modelled as seams S3 and S2, respectively). Chinook Coals also conducted geological mapping north of Coleman during this time.

• In 1998, Luscar Ltd. (“Luscar”), acquired the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Manalta. Luscar was a subsidiary of Sherritt International Corp. (“Sherritt International”).

• In 2014, Westmoreland Mining LCC (“Westmoreland”) acquired all Sherritt International’s assets and then

• In 2016, Montem purchased the properties that make up the Chinook Project from Westmoreland.

Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. • The Chinook Project is roughly bounded by the Carbondale River in the south and the Oldman River in the north, the Livingston Thrust in the east and the Erickson Fault in the west. Strata ranging from the Precambrian Purcell Lava to the Upper Cretaceous Belly River Formation are exposed in the area.

• The Jurassic-Cretaceous Mist Mountain Formation of the Kootenay Group hosts the economic coal seams on the Property. It consists of interbedded sandstone, siltstone, mudstone and coal up to 1000 m thick and is interpreted as deltaic and/or fluvial-alluvial-plain deposits. Economically important coal seams occur throughout the succession. Regionally, the seams are up to 18 m thick and vary in rank from south to north, from high volatile bituminous to semi anthracite.

• On the Property, the formation is between 100 to 150 m thick and is subdivided into 3 members:

o The Mutz Member is the stratigraphically, uppermost unit of the Mist Mountain Formation and comprises up to 90 m of fluvial siltstone with minor interbedded claystone and coaly partings. The Mutz Member contains coal in the laterally extensive S2 (formerly known as the #2 seam) as well as the overlying but intermittently occurring A and B (S1) seams. No resources were declared in S1 due to its poor continuity along strike. This lateral inconsistency is most likely a result of washouts from the overlying and disconformable Cadomin Formation.

o The Hillcrest Member lies conformably below the Mutz

13


Member and consists of up to 30 m of fluvial channel sandstone deposits with interbedded siltstone and claystone. The Hillcrest Member is well exposed at Chinook Vicary and the northern portion of Chinook South but discontinuous to the south; this may be a depositional or structural feature. The Hillcrest Member contains no major coal seams.

o The recessive Adanac Member lies conformably below the Hillcrest Member. It forms the base of the Mist Mountain Formation and consists of shale, siltstone and fine-grained sandstone. In the Chinook South and Chinook Vicary, the Adanac Member is often truncated by the Coleman Thrust. Coal seams S3, S4, S4A and S5 occur within the Adanac Member.

• The principal seams on the Chinook Project, in descending order are S1, S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5 (Table 6-2). From south to north there are variations in these seams. Five economic coal seams have been identified at Chinook South with an average cumulative total true thickness of approximately 48 m and four economic coal seams have been identified at Chinook Vicary, with an average cumulative total true thickness of approximately 47 m

• The Chinook Project is located within the Front Ranges of the Rocky Mountain Foreland Thrust and Fold Belt, on a series of small thrust faults within the Lewis Thrust Sheet. The thrusting is evident as a succession of generally west-dipping thrust faults and associated folds with predominantly west‐dipping axial surfaces. The strata have been strongly folded and faulted, resulting in sediments and coal zones repeated in parallel north south striking bands. Coal deposits of this type are generally characterized by linear strikes along thrusts and associated tight folds, some with steeply inclined or overturned limbs.

• The Coleman Thrust cuts through the middle of the Mist Mountain Formation and acts as a basal surface to the Chinook Project geological model, as no significant resources are believed to exist below the Coleman Thrust.

• Major faults have resulted in repetition of the Kootenay Group and have brought coal measures of the Mist Mountain Formation to depths accessible by modern mining methods. Although extensive deformation of coal-bearing strata has enhanced the economic

14


potential of the region, it has also complicated mining and exploration. Bedding slip surfaces, joints and cleats, and extension, contraction and wrench faults have been recognized as the fundamental fabric elements within many of the major coal beds of the Kootenay Group (Norris, 1971). Notably, in other areas, shearing of coals has resulted in increased ash yields, locally promoted in-situ oxidation and resulted in unpredictable roof conditions, making underground mining difficult.

• Geological Survey of Canada Paper 88-21 (GSC 88-21) outlines criteria that may be used to classify coal deposits on the basis of “geology type” (degree of geological complexity) and “deposit type” (potential mining methods). Based on these criteria, the Chinook Project is probably best classified as a complex, surface mineable deposit, as the deposit has been subjected to relatively high levels of tectonic deformation with tight folds and steeply inclined or overturned limbs. Individual fault-bounded plates generally retain normal stratigraphic sequences although coal seam thicknesses are commonly structurally thickened or thinned.

• The Chinook Project coals are considered Medium Volatile Bituminous coal under ASTM standards. Based on the analysis of historical results, “Most of the coal at Chinook South is classified as a Semi Hard Coking Coal, with less than 10% deemed suitable as a Hard Coking Coal. The majority of the coal at Chinook Vicary was found to be good quality Hard Coking Coal, with FSI of 6 – 7 and CSR above 55. Minor portions of the resource, limited to seam S4/4A, report FSI below 6 and CSR below 50” (Koornhof, 2020). Although the historical clean coal quality data is indicative to the product coals defined above, further validation with current methods and standards is required to verify the historical results and increase the quantity and spatial distribution of data across the Project.

• Details of coal quality analysis are presented in Section 12.

Drill hole Information

• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in

metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth

• Detailed drillhole information and coal intersections compiled for the current resource model are presented in Section 8 and Tables 8-1, to 8-4 of this Report.

• The historical drilling compilation consists of 57 core holes and 437 rotary holes. Eleven holes were excluded from this database due to insufficient/conflicting information

• Historical drillhole data was extracted from original exploration reports, geological logs, and geophysical logs when available. Collar

15


o hole length.

• If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

locations were georeferenced from historic exploration maps in UTM NAD 83 Zone 11N projection format.

• A LiDAR survey of most of the Property was purchased and combined with available government DEM surface data to validate drillhole locations and constrain the resource model.

Data aggregation methods

• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg 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.

• Coal intersections for RC drillholes were generally sampled at one metre segments and composited as one sample per seam. Where applied, compositing of density was aggregated by volume; proximate analysis results, sulphur and washability aggregated by sample length; and clean coal results aggregated by the sum product of yield and mass. These approaches are industry standards. Where quoted coal quality is for the full seam. Grade cut-offs were not applied to exploration results in the database. For resource modelling, a minimum seam thickness of 0.3 m; maximum internal ply interburden of 0.45 m and maximum stripping ratio of 20:1 were used. Depth cut-off was 300 m.

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 (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).

• All thicknesses in the geological model from historical drilling data are apparent thickness (Table 8-3 and 8-4). Unless otherwise specified all thicknesses in this document are apparent thicknesses. Structural thickening of seams is known to occur on the Project. Many of the drillholes have been inclined in an attempt to intersect strata perpendicular to the strata dip. The geological modelling software combines drillhole orientation and intercepts from downhole logs with known and extrapolated structural information from surface mapping to project geometry of coal seams. Resource modelling takes these geometries and, with constraints, calculates in-place volumes for the seams, with calculated interburden volumes removed.

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.

• See Figures 1-1 through 15-1 and Tables 1-1 through 14-1

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.

• There is no preferential reporting of results. The current Chinook Project geological model is both a tool for creating Resource Estimates over the Property, and for targeting future exploration. Data has been extensively validated against raw records. Key further validation tools include the generation of cross sections and isopach plans and generic Leapfrog and Vulcan drillhole validation checks. No material information has been excluded and outputs from the model honor data.

16


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.

• Montem has not yet conducted any exploration on the Project.

• No material potentially deleterious or contaminating substances have been identified other than those specified below.

• A field mapping dataset exists across the Chinook Project which has been utilized to develop and refine the structural framework of the geological interpretation.

• Aerial and topographic interpretation demonstrate the north south striking regional geology of the deposit as it relates to the north south striking westerly dipping thrust belts.

• There is a substantial historical dataset of geological and mine related reports that supports and builds on the results detailed in this study.

• A 1989 study by Piteau Engineering identified the Cadomin strata as having a moderate acid-forming potential due its moderate (1-1.5%) sulphur content and lack of neutralizing components.

Further work • The nature and scale of planned further work (eg 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.

• Recommend: 10,000-15,000 m of RAB or RC drilling to increase resource classifications to indicated and measured, and to better define structure.

• 5-10 drillholes should be completed in areas of historical mining to test the accuracy of the historical mine plans.

• A subsidence survey to determine the extent the underground workings have affected the topography in the area.

• Downhole geophysical logging and ATV/OTV surveys of all holes to consistently identify coal seams and geologic structures.

• Recommend a high resolution LiDAR survey is flown for the entirety of the Chinook Project.

• Large diameter 6” or 9” coring (LDC) of 30 to 40 holes is recommended to collect a minimum of six spatially distributed 6” coal samples from each of the S2, S3, S4, S4A and S5 seams. These samples would then undergo size distribution analysis using the modern method of drop shattering and wet tumbling samples with steel cubes. Washability and detailed analysis on a range of size fractions will be required to determine the optimum size and density at which to prepare clean coal composites. Petrography analysis and detailed coking coal tests, including carbonisation studies, should be completed on simulated clean coal products to develop preliminary market specifications for the resource.

• Between 3000 and 4000 m of LDC drilling should target areas where target seam depth is between 30 and 100 m. Pilot holes to constrain exact depth to target seams will be part of the resource definition

17


drilling and will minimize coring intervals

• Between 3000 and 5000 m of HQ split-tube diamond drilling is recommended and should be spatially distributed across the Project targeting both the hanging wall and footwall of proposed pit shells as a mine plane is developed, in addition to primary and secondary geological structures.

• A preliminary hydrogeological study should be commenced during the drill campaign with the installation of monitoring wells and vibrating wire piezometers in select completed drillholes to establish a relationship between the deposit, historical workings and surrounding watershed.

• Packer tests are recommended as the HQ diamond drillholes are advanced to evaluate hydraulic conductivity of the bedrock surrounding the coal seams.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources


Database integrity

• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.

• Data validation procedures used.

• The Competent Persons have relied on the professional quality of the historical data compilation work, including reviews of this historical work. The Resource Estimates which form part of this report were based on historical drilling, select trenching data, adit data, and mapping data. Dahrouge completed a 100% validation of historic drillhole locations; and an approximate 75% spot check of coal seam intersections, creating an independent database. The data sets, including analytical data, are incomplete in some instances, and analytical certificates and details of QA/QC programs were not necessarily included in the historic summary reports.

• Drillholes were qualified using a reliability indicator classification system, from 1-4. The reliability was based on the quantity and quality of data available and the known accuracy of each collar location (see Section 11). Results are summarized below:

Reliability Total Drillholes (RC + DDH)

1 0

2 298

18


3 131

4 65

Excluded 11

• Not all data addressed in the historical summary reports and technical reports could be located by Dahrouge, and therefore, could not be used in this report. The Authors have reviewed the data for consistency between the different projects and companies and eliminated data that could not be constrained or confirmed in reports or government databases. The Authors have concluded that work completed by the coal production and exploration companies was conducted in a professional manner that was consistent with the data collection and reporting standards at that time.

• All drillhole, geological and structural data is contained in an Excel

and Vulcan database.

Site visits • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.

• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.

• Competent person Mr. Bradley Ulry visited the Property August 13 and October 31-November 1, 2019. Mr. Nathan Schmidt, Mr. Matthew Carter and Mr. John Gorham have not visited the Property.

• Mr. Ulry’s visits were conducted to evaluate existing access and for planning future exploration and permitting.

Geological interpretation

• Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.

• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.

• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.

• The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.

• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.

• Details of the geological interpretation and its use in resource estimation are presented in section 13. The geological model was constructed using an implicit 3-D modelling software, Seequent - Leapfrog GeoTM. A vetted database was imported into LeapfrogTM, where it was validated, and any erroneous or conflicting data was amended. The geological model incorporated historical surface maps, cross-sections and mine plans; surface mapping datapoints; drilling and trenching datapoints. The historical surface maps, cross-sections and mine plans were used to evaluate the geological structures and stratigraphic orientations (Figure 13-3 through 13-16).

Dimensions • The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.

• The Chinook Project covers a narrow north-south trending belt of the Kootenay Group from 1 to 5 km wide and about 42 km in length. The strike trend on the Project is more or less north-south.

• The maximum plan length and width of the estimated resources are about 10.7 km and 0.75 km respectively for Chinook South (Figure 13-17 through Figure 13-21), and 20.0 km and 0.9 km respectively for

19


Chinook Vicary (Figure 13-22 through 13-25). Plan extent of individual seam resources varies.

• Resources are limited to Project boundaries; subcrop clipped against base of weathering (8 m); a minimum coal thickness of 0.3 m, a maximum depth of 300 m from topography, and a cumulative strip ratio of 20:1 bcm/t. This approach approximately reflects existing practical recovery limits for thin seam open cut mining.

Estimation and modelling techniques

• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used.

• The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data.

• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.

• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (eg. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation).

• In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed.

• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.

• Any assumptions about correlation between variables.

• Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates.

• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.

• The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.

• Details of the resource modelling and estimation techniques are presented in Section 13. For the purpose of this Resource Estimate, the Chinook Project Resource has been assigned as a complex geology type, due to the presence of regional and local faulting, folding and deformation seam thickening. Resource classifications were determined using an Inverse Distance Estimator (ID2). The base-of-weathering clipped resource classification grade shell (polygons) is illustrated in Figures 13-17 through 13-25 presenting the near surface distribution Indicated and Inferred category resources.

• Historical density information for deposits on the Project was relatively sparse, particularly in Chinook Vicary and all past resource estimations used a constant bulk density value that was assumed across the Property. This value was determined from the coal rank and average ash contents as defined in GSC 88-21. Average dried ash content was determined to be 25-30 percent by weight, with a rank classification of medium volatile bituminous coal. This produced a bulk density of 1.45 g/cm3.

• The current Resource Estimation used a constant bulk density following an extensive review, as it was determined that the historical

coal quality data was not of a high enough standard to produce reliable and accurate coal quality grids (Section 13.3.2).

• Maptek VulcanTM 12 was utilized to generate the block model for the Chinook Project. The modelling database, topography, seam and structural models from the Leapfrog GeoTM Chinook South and Chinook Vicary geologic models were imported into VulcanTM. Imported data was evaluated to confirm the correct model extents, coordinate system, location of drill collars, and coal seam intersections relative to seam solid and structural models. Additionally, any imported triangulated solids were validated to ensure conservation of original volumes, closure of the solids, consistency of the solids, and no crossing or self-intersections. The LeapfrogTM seam models for each ply were converted into VulcanTM

20


seam roof and seam floor surfaces. Each resultant VulcanTM roof and floor surface was evaluated to ensure no crossing or self-intersections had been created during the conversion process. Seam roof and floor surfaces were overlaid and visually compared to their original parent LeapfrogTM solids to confirm surface geometries and extents were honoured (see Section 13.3.3 for details).

• The summarized modelling methodology used for the Resource Estimation for all areas of the Project consisted of the following steps:

• Import validated LeapfrogTM modelling database, topography, seam solid triangulations, and structural model into Maptek Vulcan 12TM

• Verify correct coordinate system (UTM NAD83 Zone 11N) and model extents for imported data.

• Validate seam solid triangulations, testing for conservation of volume, consistency, closure, and crossing/self-intersection.

• Validate structural fault blocks, testing for conservation of volume, consistency, closure, and crossing/self-intersection.

• Validate structural fault surfaces by applying a Boolean test against the corresponding fault block.

• Visually confirm placement of drill collars relative to topography and assigned model coordinates.

• Visually confirm drill intersections correspond to seam solid and structural models.

• Build the VulcanTM Horizon List (gdc_glob).

• Convert LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulations into VulcanTM seam roof and floor surfaces.

• Validate VulcanTM seam roof and seam floor surfaces by visual

comparison to the original LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulations. • Clip seam roof and seam floor surfaces to remove extracted coal in

areas of underground workings.

• Create a HARP (Horizontal Adaptive Rectangular Prism) block model. Blocks were 5 m x 5 m.

• Validate HARP generated seam volumes against original LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulation volumes.

• Superimpose and visually verify HARP generated seam solid triangulations honour original LeapfrogTM seam solid triangulations

• Determine the cumulative stripping ratio for each block of coal within the model (total volume of waste/total tonnage of product).

• Generate VulcanTM grade shells for each resource classification –

21


Measured, Indicated, and Inferred from the LeapfrogTM ID2 generated Resource classification.

• Apply a maximum Resource depth cut-off of 300 m from topography accommodating for the steep topographic terrain.

• Constrain resource estimation by Montem Coal Lease and Freehold Tenement boundaries.

• Constrain resource estimation to a seam aggregate thickness greater than 0.3 m with a maximum internal ply interburden < 0.45 m.

• Classify Resource blocks by bounding Indicated and Inferred solid models.

• For the purpose of resource classification, an open cut minable resource was used. Open cut resources are those resources with a cumulative stripping ratio of less than 20:1 (cubic metres of waste to a tonne of coal), an aggregate seam thickness greater than 0.3 m, and a vertical depth from topography less than 300 m. A minimum seam thickness cut-off of 0.3 m was used for the Resource Estimate. A definitive evaluation of the mining methods has not been completed and included in this report. The in-place resources for the Chinook Project are summarized in Table 13-4 and detailed by seam in Table 13-5 through 13-12 and in Figures 13-26 to 13-38.

• Exploration Targets have been defined for the Chinook Project in areas where there is insufficient data to estimate a Mineral Resource (Figure 1 1 and Figure 1 2). It is important to note that the potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature and that it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.

• Conceptual Exploration Targets are presented as a range to represent the uncertainty in seam thickness, quality and location. The upper (larger tonnage) range was generated using a 20:1 stripping ratio cut-off and the lower (smaller tonnage) range was generated by restricting the upper range to a 300 m depth cut off.

• The Exploration Targets are summarized in Section 14

Moisture • Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.

• The current 2020 Resource utilized an assumed constant bulk density across the Property of 1.45 g/cm3. This value was determined from the coal rank and average ash contents as defined in GSC 88-21. This produced a conservative bulk density estimate of 1.45 g/cm3. The historical Resource Estimates also utilized an assumed bulk density across the Property (Table 13-12).

• The decision to use a constant bulk density was made following a

22


comprehensive review of the historical raw coal quality data by Dahrouge. Following the review, it was determined that the historical coal quality data was not of a high enough standard to produce reliable and accurate coal quality grids. This decision was made based on a lack of cored drillhole coal quality data and a heavy reliance on RC drillhole and poorly recovered cored drillhole coal quality data. This was compiled by the fact that the majority of the RC drillholes lacked nearby twinned cored drillholes to evaluate, validate and confirm the RC drillhole coal quality results.

Cut-off parameters

• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.

• Resources are limited to coal tenement boundaries; subcrop against base of weathering; a minimum coal thickness of 0.3 m, a maximum internal ply interburden < 0.45 m, a maximum depth of 300 m and a cumulative strip ratio of 20:1bcm/t. This approach approximately reflects existing practical recovery limits for thin seam open-cut mining.

Mining factors or assumptions

• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.

• For the purpose of Resource classification, an open cut minable Resource was used. Open cut resources are those with a cumulative stripping ratio of less than 20:1 (cubic metres of waste to a tonne of coal), an aggregate seam thickness greater than 0.3 m, and a vertical depth from topography less than 300 m. A minimum seam thickness cut-off of 0.3 m was used for the Resource Estimate. A definitive evaluation of the mining methods has not been completed and included in this report.

• Consideration of reasonable prospects for production include favourable geology (other nearby producers of coking coal from the same formation, nearby infrastructure (road, rail and power) abundant available water, a nearby labour pool (4 operating surface coking coal mines), favourable land-use categories, and a favourable government and social attitude to resource extraction.

• Mining losses and dilution have not been factored into the resource estimates.

Metallurgical factors or assumptions

• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.

• Montem has not conducted any coal quality analysis.

• Coal quality from historical data was compiled by Dahrouge. This included a validated database from hardcopy laboratory and exploration reports, including drillhole, trench, bulk and wash-plant samples. This data was obtained from historical records from Norcen, Manalta, Coleman Collieries and others. Though coal quality data was available for historical mine workings, the data was excluded from the compiled database as survey information was unavailable.

23


Coal quality varies from south to north on the Property and between the different seams.

• The principle seam packages are seam S1, S2, S3, S4, S4a and S5. Analytical and petrographic analyses were completed at ASTM certified labs; however, the analyses pre-date the current ISO laboratory certification requirements. Core intervals and RC chips were sampled using historical project-defined procedures.

• The Chinook Project raw coal quality database consists of 232 coal quality boreholes, 120 drillholes from Chinook South and 112 drillholes from Chinook Vicary, made up predominantly of RC drill samples

• Compared to cored samples, RC derived samples are limited in respect to their data validity and their suitability for some types of analysis such as washability and product ash determinations.

• The RC drilling method is limited by the following constraints: o Coal sample intervals are generally sampled at plus or

minus 0.25 m leading to cross contamination across

lithological boundaries. That is, most coal samples in an

RC dataset will include some waste from overlying and

underlying non-coal material and vice versa.

o RC samples are crushed by the drilling action resulting

in non-representative size grading. This aspect makes it

difficult to predict coal preparation plant yields from RC

data. Generally, the crushing liberates ash causing the

resultant washability tests to be optimistic relative to

ROM conditions. In this context, wash simulation and

product ash results from RC drilling should be used with

caution.

o Generally, RC drilling recovers most of the sampled

interval, with the higher rheology-performing coal fines

typically making up most of the unrecovered sampled

interval.

• Historically, raw coal drillhole samples were analysed for ash content and relative density, some samples were also analysed for Proximate analysis (i.e., moisture %, ash %, volatiles %, fixed carbon %), total sulphur (S) % and crucible swelling number (CSN).

• Historical coal analysis was completed by certified laboratories in

24


Canada. These included Birtley and Loring in Calgary, Alberta. For testing work that required it, both laboratories used or continue to use the procedures of the A.S.T.M.

• Dahrouge relied upon the findings of an independent study on product coal quality by Koornhof Associates Inc. titled Assessment of the Chinook Project Clean Coal Quality (Koornhof, 2020).

• The Chinook Project clean coal quality database includes proximate, rheology, petrographic and ash chemistry analysis from cored drillholes (HQ and NQ), RC drillholes, adits and bulk samples completed between 1972 and 1991.

• Clean coal results that included anomalously low CSN results (~ less than 2) and had correspondingly shallow coal seam intersection depths (~ less than 25 m), were removed from the database on the basis that the coal could potentially be oxidized at these shallow depths.

• Clean coal results that included anomalously high ash results (~ greater than 14%) and had correspondingly low CSN results (~ less than 2), were removed from the database on the basis that the ash content was not representative of a typical clean coal (~ 8% to 10% ash.

• Due to a lack of data, similarities in results and the relatively small portion of the Resource that seam S4A makes up (0.77% at Chinook South and 4.04% at Chinook Vicary), the coal quality of seams S4A and S4 have been assessed together.

• The quality of the data that has been reviewed does not meet current standards of reporting. The available historical data is limited by preponderance of RC data as opposed to core data. The core was NQ and HQ diameter, and recoveries were generally poor, which may have skewed results. RC coal quality data often underrepresents fines, which generally display better rheological properties than coarser fractions. There is limited petrographic data available, especially for Chinook Vicary, and datapoints are not evenly distributed across the Property.

• The authors consider these datasets suitable for a preliminary characterization of the Project’s coal quality. Further drilling is recommended to increase confidence in coal quality spatial variations and historical sampling methods.

• Based on the analysis of historical results, “Most of the coal at Chinook South is classified as a Semi Hard Coking Coal, with less

25


than 10% deemed suitable as a Hard Coking Coal. The majority of the coal at Chinook Vicary was found to be good quality Hard Coking Coal, with FSI of 6 – 7 and CSR above 55. Minor portions of the resource, limited to seam S4/4A, report FSI below 6 and CSR below 50” (Koornhof, 2020). Although the historical clean coal quality data is indicative to the product coals defined above, further validation with current methods and standards is required to verify the historical results and increase the quantity and spatial distribution of data across the Project

• Details of coal quality for the Chinook Project are summarized in Section 12.

Environmen-tal factors or assumptions

• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.

• Section 4.8 and 4.9 detail environmental liabilities and other significant factors and risks

• The targeted coal-bearing Mist Mountain Formation is naturally rich in selenium. In alkaline, aerobic conditions, elemental selenium and selenide minerals are oxidized releasing soluble selenate ions which can be transported in surface runoff. Large scale surface mining in the Elk Valley, British Columbia has enriched the Elk River in selenium. Any future mine development on the Property will require the development of a selenium management plan. Montem’s ongoing liability is only for disturbance created during current exploration activities.

• The Project is partially located within the Mountain Goat and Bighorn Sheep Range (Figure 4-5). In this area, any disturbances that may have direct or indirect adverse effects, such as permanent alteration of habitat must be avoided or mitigated. Additionally, most of the Property is located within a grizzly bear protection zone (Figure 4-5); regulations require that Montem provide and preserve either core or secondary grizzly bear habitat.

• Several areas of the Property are located in the Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zones. The Alberta government outlines guidelines for these areas in order to protect the long-term integrity and productivity of the ungulate winter ranges and populated areas. New permanent access is to be avoided, temporary access should minimize disturbance to wildlife habitat and limited industrial work is to be carried out between December 15th and April 30th.

• The Project does not fall within the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan (“SSRP”); however the southern portion of Chinook South borders Castle Provincial Park, which is included in the SSRP (Figure

26


4 5). The SSRP was established to manage and monitor the environment and support responsible development of Alberta’s resources. The strategies developed within the SSRP are designed to minimize the amount of land used for new development, including the usage of historical roads and trails for future exploration program access, and progressive reclamation of areas no longer being used.

Bulk density • Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples.

• The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit.

• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.

• Historical density information for deposits on the Property was relatively sparse, particularly in Chinook Vicary and all past Resource Estimates used a constant bulk density value that was assumed across the Property. This value was determined from the coal rank and average ash contents as defined in GSC 88-21. Average dried ash content was determined to be 20-25 percent by weight, with a rank classification of medium volatile bituminous coal. This produced a bulk density of 1.45 g/cm3.

• The current 2020 Resource Estimate utilized an assumed constant bulk density across the Project of 1.45 g/cm3. This value was determined from the coal rank and average ash contents as defined in GSC 88-21. This produced a conservative bulk density estimate of 1.45 g/cm3.

• In-situ moisture was estimated at 8%.

Classification • The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories.

• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data).

• Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.

• As the stratigraphic and structural complexity of a coal deposit increases, a greater number of data points are required to assign the coal to measured, indicated, or inferred resource categories. Data points are defined as locations where a coal seam, or a marker horizon indicating the proximity to a coal seam, is exposed. Valid data points were obtained from drillhole intersections, trenches, and surface outcrop.

• For the purpose of this Resource Estimate, the Chinook Project has been assigned as a complex geology type, due to the presence of regional and local faulting, folding and deformation seam thickening. Resource classifications were determined using an Inverse Distance Estimator (ID2) with the criteria provided in Section 13-3-1 (see Tables 13-3 to 13-11 and Figures 13-17 to 13-25).

• ID2 search ellipsoids were set to the following ranges, where the maximum search range is along the geological trend of the deposit:

o Indicated - Maximum 300 m; Intermediate 300 m; Minimum 100 m

o Inferred - Maximum 500 m; Intermediate 500 m; Minimum 100 m

27


• The classified geological complexity, structural trend, and seam thickness variograms were used to support the search ellipsoid for classification. Geostatistical analysis was conducted in tandem with resource modelling and supports the classification.

Audits or reviews

• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. • This study and Resource Estimates were independently reviewed by Tamplin Resources Pty. Ltd. Recommendations were reviewed and incorporated into reporting.

Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence

• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.

• The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used.

• These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.

• Structurally, the Chinook South and Chinook Vicary deposits are moderately well understood, and the Competent Persons regard the interpretation as valid. The main factors affecting coal seam continuity are the interplay of faulting, folding, seam dip, depth of weathering and surface topography. Seams show a highly variable thickness which reflects depositional and structural variations as well as the localized thickening of coal seams which occur in the apex of folds and adjacent to reverse faults. These provided substantial tonnage benefits during past mining.

• Historical coal recovery in cored holes was poor to good, ranging from a low of 10% to a high of 100% for the identified seam groups, with an average coal recovery ranging from 59% to 100% depending on the drill campaign (Table 8-2). This is due to the extremely friable nature of the coal and considerable internal micro faulting within the seams. This core coal recovery is typical of coals in this area.

• All remaining coal resources on the Chinook Project have open cut potential. Resources have a moderate level of confidence. Drillholes are spaced closely enough for coal seam continuity and quality to justify Indicated and Inferred status within the declaration areas. The extent of coal washouts and faulting may negatively affect the coal resource tonnage for each affected coal seam. Significant faulting and folding is likely to exist throughout the deposit.


Page 145

APPENDIX 1

(Table 11-2, Table 11-3, Table 12-3)

Table 11-2 - Included Drillholes

Year Hole ID ReliabilityHole

Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY

1987 C2001 2 RC 680845.00 5496770.00 1556.18 0 -90 142.3 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.



1987 C2003B 3 RC 680888.00 5496808.00 1561.23 0 -90 27.5 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.

1987 C2004 2 RC 682448.00 5489029.00 1920.00 0 -90 112.8 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.


1987 C2006 2 RC 682497.00 5489039.00 1918.38 0 -90 135 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.








1987 C2014 3 RC 681585.00 5492704.00 1657.81 0 -90 80.2 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.







1987 C2021 3 RC 681272.00 5495683.00 1696.48 80 -55 119.8 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.















1987 C2036 2 RC 680692.00 5497279.00 1524.62 0 -90 17 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.



1987 C2039 3 RC 680987.00 5497041.00 1592.52 0 -90 36.4 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.




1987 C2043 2 RC 681187.00 5496039.00 1642.46 0 -90 64 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.


Chinook South Area Drillholes


Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY








1986 CS8601 2 RC 680188.00 5499926.00 1415.29 0 -90 55.5 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.



1986 CS8604 3 RC 680392.00 5499036.00 1430.57 0 -90 59.5 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.

1986 CS8605 2 RC 680475.00 5498747.00 1457.13 0 -90 72.95 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.

1986 CS8606 2 RC 680670.00 5497826.00 1464.12 0 -90 89 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.

1986 CS8607 2 RC 680332.00 5499385.00 1413.49 0 -90 42 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.



1986 CS8610 3 RC 680709.00 5497151.00 1521.00 0 -90 156.8 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.





1986 CS8615 3 RC 681100.00 5496236.00 1608.67 0 -90 55.8 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.


















1982 DDH82-1 3 DDH 681643.00 5491685.00 1688.00 0 -90 168.6 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.



1989 L89-01 2 RC 681509.00 5492581.00 1675.95 0 -90 115.43 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.



1989 L89-04 2 RC 681480.00 5492279.00 1636.17 0 -90 110.4 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.



Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY

1989 L89-06 2 RC 682062.00 5490704.00 1850.14 0 -90 171 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.


1989 L89-08 2 RC 682052.00 5491215.00 1806.88 0 -90 92 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.












1982 RDH82-10 3 RC 681580.37 5491985.35 1637.31 0 -90 64 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.

1982 RDH82-11 3 RC 681546.36 5491727.32 1659.78 0 -90 125.5 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.




1982 RDH82-15 3 RC 681857.88 5491707.97 1746.45 0 -90 68 Map Yes Yes No No Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.



1982 RDH82-9A 3 RC 681561.79 5492295.88 1624.82 0 -90 27.9 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.

1988 S88-01 2 RC 680949.00 5497353.00 1543.16 0 -90 64.01 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.


















1988 S88-21 2 RC 681211.00 5495688.00 1700.78 0 -90 96 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.



1988 S88-24 2 RC 681053.00 5496184.00 1603.84 0 -90 78 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.


1988 S88-28 2 RC 681370.00 5495552.00 1771.36 0 -90 69.2 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.


Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY



1988 S88-32 3 RC 680857.00 5496821.00 1553.76 80 -60 64.3 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.

1988 S88-73 4 RC 680990.00 5497443.00 1511.81 0 -90 17.7 Map No Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.

1988 S88-74 3 RC 680942.00 5497433.00 1514.05 0 -90 36.5 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.

















1989 Y89001 2 RC 681057.00 5496394.00 1632.18 0 -90 59.8 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.

1989 Y89002 2 RC 681010.00 5496383.00 1632.39 0 -90 92 Map Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.


1989 Y89004 3 RC 681027.00 5496166.00 1600.80 0 -90 110 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.



1989 Y89007 2 RC 681174.00 5495934.00 1659.77 0 -90 105.2 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.


1989 Y89009 3 RC 680703.00 5496851.00 1546.91 0 -90 197.2 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.





1989 Y89014 3 RC 680984.00 5496632.00 1589.30 0 -90 92 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.











1989 Y89025 3 RC 680828.00 5496291.00 1579.96 0 -90 172.8 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.



Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY



1989 Y89029 2 RC 680829.00 5497482.00 1500.08 0 -90 102 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.










1989 Y89039 3 RC 680666.00 5496742.00 1556.28 0 -90 124 Map Yes Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.



1989 Y89042 3 RC 680783.00 5497227.00 1526.64 0 -90 175.7 Map Yes No Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.

































Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY










1989 Y89083 3 RC 681092.00 5496758.00 1628.72 0 -90 46 Map Yes Yes No Yes Manalta Coal Ltd.






1989 Y89089 4 RC 680703.00 5497380.00 1498.14 0 -90 32.5 Map No Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.


1989 Y89091 4 RC 680751.00 5496861.00 1545.97 0 -90 38.6 Map No Yes No No Manalta Coal Ltd.










1978 YC1 3 DDH 682357.00 5489248.00 1913.82 0 -90 121.01 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.



1978 YC4 3 DDH 681495.00 5492449.00 1663.66 80 -60 89 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.




1978 YC7A 3 DDH 681573.00 5494891.00 1841.87 90 -60 72.85 Map Yes Yes No Yes Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.



1978 DC10 3 DDH 675705.00 5530672.00 1592.82 0 -90 245.97 Map Yes Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.



1967 G1 4 RC 678931.04 5517241.33 2320.10 0 -90 27.43 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1967 G2 4 RC 678977.35 5517229.96 2304.61 0 -90 28.65 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.




1967 G6 4 RC 678803.29 5517692.73 2257.50 0 -90 48.77 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

Chinook Vicary Area Drillholes


Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY


1973 McGD-73-01 4 RC 679912.00 5504711.00 1578.22 0 -90 95.1 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1973 McGD-73-02 3 DDH 679741.00 5503668.00 1499.52 0 -90 214.88 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1973 McGD-73-03 3 DDH 679552.00 5504432.00 1564.43 0 -90 322.2 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1973 MD73-1 3 DDH 679810.00 5511843.00 2337.57 0 -90 170.08 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.


1973 MD73-3 3 DDH 679231.00 5510237.00 1953.68 0 -90 365.76 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.


1973 MDH73-5 3 RC 679584.00 5510107.00 2073.16 0 -90 244.8 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1988 N88-26 2 RC 679691.00 5505106.00 1566.89 0 -90 187.8 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.

1988 N88-27 2 RC 679631.00 5506526.00 1668.03 0 -90 174.04 Map Yes Yes Yes No Chinook Coal Ltd.



1988 N88-34 4 RC 679830.00 5506539.00 1659.13 0 -90 58 Map No Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.


1988 N88-36 3 RC 680087.00 5504986.00 1670.83 0 -90 50.6 Map Yes Yes No Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.


1988 N88-38 2 RC 679956.00 5505485.00 1716.29 0 -90 128 Map Yes Yes Yes No Chinook Coal Ltd.



1988 N88-41 2 RC 680124.00 5505178.00 1729.33 0 -90 78 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.



1988 N88-44 3 RC 680203.00 5505508.00 1791.74 0 -90 29.5 Map Yes Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.








1988 N88-52 4 RC 679988.00 5504447.00 1638.63 0 -90 89 Map No Yes No Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.

1988 N88-53 3 RC 679593.00 5508492.00 1806.22 0 -90 70 Map Yes Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.


1988 N88-55 3 RC 680065.00 5509533.00 2148.91 0 -90 64 Map Yes Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.

1988 N88-56 4 RC 679621.00 5506239.00 1625.92 0 -90 103 Map No Yes No Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.










1988 N88-66 4 RC 679713.00 5507664.00 1740.55 0 -90 96.6 Map No Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.



Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY






1989 N8901 3 RC 680324.00 5502901.00 1670.81 0 -90 49.7 Map Yes Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.

1989 N8902 3 RC 680297.00 5503146.00 1668.09 0 -90 73.15 Map Yes Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.





























1990 N90-30 3 RC 679616.00 5508227.00 1775.78 0 -90 123 Map Yes Yes No Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.









1982 RDH82-1 2 RC 680080.00 5505713.00 1785.96 0 -90 93 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1982 RDH82-2 2 RC 680060.00 5505471.00 1756.68 0 -90 97.9 Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1982 RDH82-3 2 RC 680028.00 5504984.00 1665.80 0 -90 113.6 Map Yes Yes Yes No Coleman Collieries Ltd.


Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY





1968 RH1 3 DDH 677883.79 5520871.96 1604.62 90 -60 30.78 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1978 RH10 3 DDH 677669.00 5521087.00 1600.63 90 -60 166.42 Map Yes Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1978 RH11 3 DDH 677888.00 5521722.00 1720.33 0 -90 185.01 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.




1978 RH15 3 DDH 678150.00 5523622.00 1960.41 0 -90 256.64 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.




1969 RH5 3 DDH 678045.96 5520813.11 1683.72 82 -55 28.96 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1969 RH6 3 DDH 678069.24 5520807.82 1695.25 0 -90 41.61 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.


1964 S10 3 DDH 678495.80 5517413.84 2104.04 0 -90 115.82 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.


1964 S12 4 RC 678591.32 5517640.06 2172.28 0 -90 138.68 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.



1967 S1-67 4 RC 678953.80 5517004.27 2303.15 0 -90 43.59 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.







1965 S23 4 RC 678625.19 5517926.87 2201.77 0 -90 74.98 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.




1967 S2-67 4 RC 678927.34 5516658.98 2299.77 0 -90 41 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.















Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY
















1964 S7 3 DDH 678463.96 5515935.82 2101.56 0 -90 119.79 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1964 S8 3 DDH 678213.23 5516598.13 2029.50 0 -90 66.14 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.


1973 V10-73 3 DDH 678262.00 5513820.00 1812.23 0 -90 344.4 Map Yes No No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1973 V11-73 3 DDH 678860.00 5513298.00 1851.74 0 -90 89 Map Yes No No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1973 V12-73 3 DDH 678638.00 5513481.00 1906.01 0 -90 247.5 Map Yes No No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1972 V1-72 3 DDH 677880.38 5517460.14 2058.76 0 -90 392.28 Map No Yes No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.



1972 V4-72 3 DDH 678672.45 5512777.75 1970.68 0 -90 363.63 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1972 V5-72 3 DDH 678811.47 5512793.90 1904.21 90 -70 232.41 Map No Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1973 V6-73 3 DDH 678807.00 5512794.00 1905.49 0 -90 263 Map Yes No No Yes Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1974 V-74-1 3 DDH 678451.00 5513653.00 1799.00 0 -90 295.05 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.

1974 V-74-2 3 DDH 678442.00 5513331.00 1878.84 0 -90 399.9 Map Yes Yes No No Coleman Collieries Ltd.



1991 V91-01C 2 RC 678725.00 5513537.00 1878.80 0 -90 167.75 Survey Yes Yes Yes Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.

1991 V91-02 2 RC 679876.00 5511861.00 2350.27 0 -90 206.04 Survey Yes Yes Yes Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.


1991 V91-04C 2 RC 678793.00 5513551.00 1847.27 0 -90 99.74 Survey Yes Yes Yes Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.



1991 V91-07 2 RC 679727.00 5512204.00 2251.73 0 -90 142.13 Survey Yes Yes Yes No Chinook Coal Ltd.











Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY










1991 V91-27 2 RC 678879.00 5513070.00 1878.37 0 -90 201 Survey Yes Yes Yes No Chinook Coal Ltd.



1991 V91-30 3 RC 678866.00 5513235.00 1861.17 0 -90 158.6 Survey Yes Yes No Yes Chinook Coal Ltd.

1991 V91-31 3 RC 678394.00 5513864.00 1809.04 0 -90 250.71 Survey Yes Yes No No Chinook Coal Ltd.




Type

Easting

NAD83 Z11

Northing

NAD83 Z11

Elevation

(m)Az Dip

Depth

(m)

Collar

Survey Geophysics

Geological

Log

Deviation

Survey

Coal

QualityCOMPANY

1971 L1 4 RC 681456.00 5493134.00 1723.92 0 -90 73.2 Map No Yes Yes No Coleman Collieries

1971 L2 4 RC 681464.00 5493057.00 1703.92 0 -90 86 Map No Yes Yes No Coleman Collieries

1982 RDH82-9 4 RC 681560.79 5492293.88 1624.70 0 -90 49.8 Map Yes Yes No No Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.

1988 S88-05 4 RC 680771.00 5497160.00 1533.56 0 -90 31.4 Map No No No No Manalta Coal Ltd.


1989 89042W 4 DDH 680783.00 5497227.00 1526.64 0 -90 177 - Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.

1989 89067W 4 DDH 680891.00 5496435.00 1592.50 0 -90 95 - Yes Yes Yes No Manalta Coal Ltd.


1977 EX-8-19 3 RC 678388.00 5513538.00 1825.78 0 -90 359.66 Map Yes Yes No No Algas Resources Ltd.



Chinook South Area Drillholes

Chinook-Vicary Area Drillholes

Table 11-3 Excluded Drillholes

Table 12-3 Summary of Chinook South Raw Coal Quality Data

Hole IDSample ID

(Dahrouge)Status SEAM DGC

From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM

(%)HGI P (%) Calculation_Notes

C2001 C2001_001 Included S3U 76.00 77.00 1.00 - 0.73 39.3 36.42 1.76 1.75 1.75 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

C2001 C2001_002 Excluded S3L/NC 81.00 82.00 1.00 - 0.73 55.8 51.71 1.96 1.96 1.95 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


C2002 C2002_002 Included S3L 12.55 13.50 0.95 - 0.73 22.8 21.13 1.55 1.54 1.54 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



C2003 C2003_001 Included S2L 21.50 23.50 2.00 - 0.73 25 23.17 1.58 1.57 1.57 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




C2006 C2006_001 Included S2M 108.50 109.00 0.50 - 0.73 38.6 35.77 1.75 1.74 1.74 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




C2006 C2006_005 Excluded NC/S2L 117.92 119.50 1.58 - 0.73 36.9 34.20 1.72 1.72 1.71 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

C2007 C2007_001 Excluded NC/S2U 91.00 91.50 0.50 - 0.73 51.8 48.01 1.91 1.91 1.90 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

C2007 C2007_002 Included S2 91.50 92.50 1.00 - 0.73 21.2 19.65 1.53 1.52 1.52 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




C2007 C2007_006 Excluded S2M/NC 105.00 106.50 1.50 - 0.73 45 41.70 1.83 1.82 1.82 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



C2007 C2007_009 Included NC 112.00 113.00 1.00 - 0.73 55.1 51.06 1.95 1.95 1.94 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


C2007 C2007_011 Excluded S3U/NC 117.50 118.50 1.00 - 0.73 47.3 43.84 1.86 1.85 1.85 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

C2007 C2007_012 Excluded S3U/NC/S3L 118.50 119.50 1.00 - 0.73 77 71.36 2.23 2.23 2.21 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct










C2009 C2009_005 Included S2L 177.00 179.50 2.50 - 0.73 14 12.97 1.44 1.43 1.44 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

C2009 C2009_006 Included NC 181.00 181.50 0.50 - 0.73 45.7 42.35 1.84 1.83 1.83 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct






C2010 C2010_006 Excluded S2M/NC 94.50 95.00 0.50 - 0.73 39.6 36.70 1.76 1.75 1.75 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


C2010 C2010_008 Excluded NC/S3U 113.40 114.00 0.60 - 0.6 48.2 44.61 1.87 1.86 1.86 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

C2010 C2010_009 Included S3U 114.00 117.50 3.50 - 0.6 30.2 27.95 1.64 1.63 1.63 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

C2010 C2010_010 Excluded S3U/NC 117.50 120.00 2.50 - 0.6 39.9 36.93 1.76 1.76 1.75 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

C2010 C2010_011 Excluded S3L/NC 121.48 122.50 1.02 - 0.73 44.2 40.96 1.82 1.81 1.81 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


C2011 C2011_002 Excluded S2M/NC 110.68 111.25 0.57 - 0.73 54.2 50.23 1.94 1.94 1.93 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct










C2012 C2012_005 Excluded S2M/NC/S2L 96.50 97.50 1.00 - 0.73 38.8 35.96 1.75 1.74 1.74 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct





Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM




C2013 C2013_002 Included S2M 85.50 88.00 2.50 - 0.73 18 16.68 1.49 1.48 1.48 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct








C2014 C2014_001 Included S2M 15.40 25.22 9.82 - 0.9 25.8 23.95 1.59 1.58 1.58 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs




C2015 C2015_004 Included S2L 76.70 78.00 1.30 - 0.6 25.4 23.51 1.58 1.57 1.57 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

C2015 C2015_005 Included NC 78.00 79.70 1.70 - 0.6 27.9 25.82 1.61 1.60 1.60 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs








C2017 C2017_002 Excluded NC/S2M 45.00 47.00 2.00 - 0.73 56.1 51.99 1.97 1.96 1.96 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct























C2020 C2020_006 Included S3U 110.40 112.20 1.80 - 0.73 33 30.58 1.68 1.67 1.67 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



C2028 C2028_003 Excluded S3L 39.10 42.00 2.90 - 0.73 30 27.80 1.64 1.63 1.63 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

C2028 C2028_004 Excluded S3L 42.00 42.90 0.90 - 0.73 34 31.51 1.69 1.68 1.68 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct
















Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM



CS8601 CS8601_001 Included S4U 41.65 42.15 0.50 - 0.73 42.3 39.20 1.65 1.79 1.64 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




CS8602 CS8602_001 Included NC 28.45 29.00 0.55 - 0.73 29.6 27.43 1.97 1.63 1.96 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct






CS8602 CS8602_007 Excluded S5U/NC 55.20 55.60 0.40 - 0.73 55.2 51.16 2.36 1.95 2.34 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


CS8603 CS8603_002 Included S5M 56.90 58.80 1.90 - 0.73 34.3 31.79 1.69 1.69 1.68 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


CS8603 CS8603_004 Excluded NC/S5M 59.20 59.80 0.60 - 0.73 44 40.78 1.81 1.81 1.80 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




CS8603 CS8603_008 Included NC 64.07 64.80 0.73 - 0.73 73 67.65 2.18 2.18 2.16 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

CS8603 CS8603_009 Excluded NC/S5L 64.80 66.16 1.36 - 0.73 52.3 48.47 1.92 1.91 1.91 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


CS8607 CS8607_001 Excluded S5U/NC 17.40 18.00 0.60 - 0.73 53 49.12 1.93 1.92 1.92 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



CS8607 CS8607_004 Excluded NC/S5U 19.00 19.50 0.50 - 0.73 57.9 53.66 1.99 1.99 1.97 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



CS8607 CS8607_007 Excluded NC/S5M 20.50 23.00 2.50 - 0.73 44.8 41.52 1.82 1.82 1.81 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

CS8607 CS8607_008 Excluded S5M/NC 23.00 24.00 1.00 - 0.73 40.7 37.72 1.77 1.77 1.76 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



CS8607 CS8607_011 Excluded S5L/NC 27.43 28.08 0.65 - 0.73 51 47.27 1.9 1.90 1.89 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



CS8610 CS8610_002 Included S2M 48.45 49.00 0.55 - 0.73 23 21.32 1.55 1.54 1.54 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct





CS8610 CS8610_007 Included S2L 55.80 57.00 1.20 - 0.73 20.8 19.28 1.52 1.51 1.51 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



CS8610 CS8610_010 Excluded S2L/NC 61.25 61.80 0.55 - 0.73 58 53.75 1.99 1.99 1.97 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct













CS8611 CS8611_006 Included S2U 49.80 51.30 1.50 - 0.73 23 21.32 1.55 1.54 1.54 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

CS8611 CS8611_007 Included NC 51.35 51.80 0.45 - 0.73 58.4 54.12 2 1.99 1.98 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




CS8611 CS8611_011 Excluded NC/STRAY 60.10 60.60 0.50 - 0.73 40.7 37.72 1.77 1.77 1.76 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

CS8611 CS8611_012 Excluded NC/STRAY 60.60 62.00 1.40 - 0.73 39.3 36.42 1.76 1.75 1.75 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM






CS8611 CS8611_020 Included S3L 81.00 82.00 1.00 - 0.73 18 16.68 1.49 1.48 1.48 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




CS8611 CS8611_024 Excluded S4U 118.35 121.70 3.35 - 0.73 52.7 48.84 1.92 1.92 1.91 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



















CS8611 CS8611_043 Included S5L 166.40 168.00 1.60 - 0.73 35 32.44 1.7 1.69 1.69 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

CS8611 CS8611_044 Excluded S5L/NC 168.00 168.50 0.50 - 0.73 54.8 50.79 1.95 1.95 1.94 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct






































Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM












































CS8623 CS8623_018 Included S4A 77.15 78.60 1.45 - 0.73 32.1 29.75 1.66 1.66 1.65 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


CS8624 CS8624_001 Excluded S2U 35.80 37.00 1.20 - 0.73 47.8 44.30 1.86 1.86 1.85 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct






















Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM














CS8625 CS8625_021 Excluded STRAY/NC 89.10 91.50 2.40 - 0.73 53.1 49.21 1.93 1.92 1.92 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


















CS8626 CS8626_012 Excluded S5U/NC/S5L 135.50 142.05 6.55 - 0.73 48.8 45.23 1.87 1.87 1.86 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



































CS8631 CS8631_007 Excluded S4M/NC/S4L 61.30 68.50 7.20 - 0.73 40 37.07 1.76 1.76 1.75 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM







DDH82-1 DDH82-1_013 Included S1L 51.38 52.36 0.98 76 0.7 19.1 17.70 1.44 1.49 1.44 25.9 54.3 1.1 6675 4 1.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_014 Included S1L 57.13 58.24 1.11 32.4 0.7 18.1 16.77 1.43 1.48 1.43 25.9 55.3 0.78 6613 3.5 2.7 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_001 Excluded S2U/NC 70.22 70.64 0.42 14.3 0.7 69.8 64.67 2.1 2.14 2.08 15 14.5 0.15 1625 1 5.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_002 Included NC 70.64 71.00 0.36 100 0.8 81.8 75.86 2.34 2.29 2.31 9.3 8.1 0.11 - 0 4 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_003 Excluded S2U/NC/S2M 71.00 71.78 0.78 9.7 0.6 42.1 38.97 1.7 1.78 1.69 20.4 36.9 0.21 4434 1 5.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_004 Included S2M 71.78 72.23 0.45 100 0.7 13.8 12.79 1.4 1.42 1.40 27.6 57.9 0.39 7044 6.5 6.7 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_005 Included S2M 72.23 75.06 2.83 15.2 0.7 15.5 14.36 1.42 1.45 1.42 31 52.8 0.35 6741 7 1.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_006 Included NC 75.06 75.68 0.62 40.9 0.6 70.3 65.07 2.18 2.14 2.16 - - - - - 1.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_007 Included S2M 75.68 79.24 3.56 61.7 0.6 28.4 26.29 1.56 1.61 1.55 26.9 44.1 0.24 5461 4 3.8 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_008 Excluded NC 79.24 80.18 0.94 91.5 0.7 92.9 86.07 2.57 2.43 2.54 - - - - - 1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_009 Included S2L 80.18 81.04 0.86 40.7 0.7 25.3 23.44 1.53 1.57 1.52 22.2 51.8 0.22 6005 1 14.8 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-1 DDH82-1_010 Included S2L 81.04 84.26 3.22 60.8 0.7 27.8 25.76 1.57 1.60 1.56 27 44.5 0.18 5502 3 5.3 - - No RD or IM calcs


DDH82-1 DDH82-1_012 Included S2L 86.82 90.58 3.76 63.6 0.9 19.6 18.20 1.46 1.50 1.45 24.3 55.2 0.3 6519 2.5 8.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_001 Included S2U 77.43 77.68 0.25 84 0.8 38.5 35.71 1.66 1.74 1.65 18.9 41.8 0.31 4985 1 0.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_002 Included S2U 77.68 78.45 0.77 20.1 0.9 18.8 17.45 1.46 1.49 1.45 24.4 55.9 0.4 6698 2 6.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_003 Excluded S2U/NC 78.45 79.10 0.65 23.1 0.9 62.7 58.21 2.03 2.05 2.01 - - - - - 2.6 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_004 Included NC 79.10 79.20 0.10 44 0.9 63.2 58.67 2.14 2.05 2.12 - - - - - 1.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_005 Included S2M 79.35 81.92 2.57 32.7 1 17 15.80 1.45 1.47 1.44 28.2 53.8 0.35 6633 6 1.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_006 Excluded NC 81.92 83.48 1.56 51.9 0.9 85.7 79.56 2.48 2.34 2.44 - - - - - 0.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_007 Included S2M 83.48 83.64 0.16 81.3 0.8 24.9 23.09 1.55 1.57 1.54 28.2 46.1 0.27 5861 3.5 0.3 - - No RD or IM calcs


DDH82-2 DDH82-2_009 Included S2M 83.78 85.85 2.07 31.4 0.8 17.2 15.95 1.46 1.47 1.45 26.6 55.4 0.26 6551 2 0.3 - - No RD or IM calcs



DDH82-2 DDH82-2_012 Excluded NC 90.76 90.84 0.08 100 0.5 49.9 46.14 1.99 1.88 1.98 - - - - - 4.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-2 DDH82-2_013 Excluded S2L/NC 91.15 93.16 2.01 12.9 0.8 47.1 43.68 1.78 1.85 1.77 21.6 30.5 0.2 3768 1.5 11.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_001 Excluded STRAY/NC 54.97 55.38 0.41 44.1 0.7 69.7 64.58 2.05 2.13 2.03 - - - - - 6.9 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_002 Included S2U 55.40 55.48 0.08 100 0.9 19 17.64 1.43 1.49 1.42 24 56.1 0.6 6787 2.5 8.6 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_003 Included S2U 55.48 55.92 0.44 75 1 42.7 39.68 1.67 1.79 1.66 19.2 37.1 0.41 4601 2 7.9 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_004 Included S2U 55.92 56.96 1.04 70 0.7 30 27.79 1.53 1.63 1.52 24 45.3 0.59 5805 3 8.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_005 Included NC 56.96 57.60 0.64 85.9 1.2 87.7 81.66 2.48 2.36 2.43 - - - - - 1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_006 Included S2M 57.60 58.92 1.32 30 1 29.6 27.51 1.56 1.63 1.55 24.8 44.6 0.4 5614 3 12.3 - - No RD or IM calcs


DDH82-3 DDH82-3_008 Included NC 61.91 62.14 0.23 100 1.2 86.7 80.73 2.42 2.35 2.38 - - - - - 1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_009 Excluded NC/STRAY 62.14 62.38 0.24 100 0.9 43 39.92 1.66 1.80 1.65 22 34.1 0.32 4569 4.5 9.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_010 Excluded NC 62.38 63.13 0.75 56 1 83.1 77.22 2.39 2.31 2.35 - - - - 0 1.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_011 Included NC 63.13 63.20 0.07 100 0.8 42.6 39.51 1.75 1.79 1.74 19.3 37.3 0.39 4610 1 6.4 - - No RD or IM calcs




DDH82-3 DDH82-3_015 Included S2L 65.38 68.84 3.46 24.2 0.8 21.5 19.94 1.54 1.52 1.53 27 50.7 0.22 6109 2 10.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_016 Included NC 68.84 70.04 1.20 79.1 0.8 89.2 82.73 2.59 2.38 2.55 - - - - 0 0.6 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_017 Excluded NC/S3U 70.04 70.26 0.22 100 1 71.8 66.72 2.15 2.16 2.12 - - - - - 17.6 - - No RD or IM calcs

DDH82-3 DDH82-3_018 Included S3U 70.26 70.75 0.49 100 0.8 23.6 21.89 1.55 1.55 1.54 26.9 48.7 0.25 5872 3.5 9.3 - - No RD or IM calcs


DDH82-3 DDH82-3_020 Included S3L 72.09 73.00 0.91 100 0.8 20.2 18.73 1.49 1.51 1.48 24 55 0.29 6514 1.5 6 - - No RD or IM calcs

L89-04 L89-04_001 Excluded S2U/NC 71.90 72.90 1.00 - 0.73 41 38.49 1.78 1.77 1.77 - - - - 2 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-04 L89-04_002 Included S2M 76.63 78.70 2.07 - 0.73 37.5 35.03 1.73 1.73 1.72 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



L89-04 L89-04_005 Excluded S2M/NC 80.20 80.90 0.70 - 0.73 69.5 64.59 2.14 2.13 2.12 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-04 L89-04_006 Included S2M 80.90 85.10 4.20 - 0.73 24.1 22.86 1.56 1.56 1.55 - - - - 3 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-04 L89-04_007 Included NC 85.10 85.92 0.82 - 0.73 86.4 79.49 2.35 2.35 2.33 - - - - 0 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-04 L89-04_008 Included S2L 85.92 89.10 3.18 - 0.73 31.4 29.33 1.66 1.65 1.65 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


L89-04 L89-04_010 Included S3U 89.70 92.23 2.53 - 0.73 30.2 28.21 1.64 1.63 1.63 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct





Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM




L89-07 L89-07_006 Included S2L 122.30 122.80 0.50 - 0.73 45.1 41.91 1.83 1.82 1.82 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


L89-07 L89-07_008 Excluded NC/S3U 134.80 135.30 0.50 - 0.73 52 48.32 1.91 1.91 1.90 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-07 L89-07_009 Included S3U 135.30 138.80 3.50 - 0.73 29.3 27.51 1.63 1.62 1.62 - - - - 2 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-07 L89-07_010 Excluded S3U/NC 138.80 139.62 0.82 - 0.73 57.6 53.53 1.99 1.98 1.97 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-07 L89-07_011 Excluded S3L/NC 139.80 141.80 2.00 - 0.73 39.6 36.80 1.76 1.75 1.75 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


L89-08 L89-08_002 Included NC 29.10 29.80 0.70 - 0.73 86 79.12 2.34 2.34 2.32 - - - - 0 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



L89-08 L89-08_005 Included S2L 34.20 36.20 2.00 - 0.73 42 39.03 1.79 1.78 1.78 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



L89-08 L89-08_008 Excluded S3L/NC 58.60 61.40 2.80 - 0.73 52.5 48.79 1.92 1.92 1.91 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct






L89-14 L89-14_001 Included NC 18.20 18.90 0.70 - 0.73 61.3 56.68 2.03 2.03 2.01 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



L89-14 L89-14_004 Included S2M 27.00 30.50 3.50 - 0.73 32 29.74 1.66 1.66 1.65 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



L89-16 L89-16_001 Excluded S2U/NC 3.50 4.90 1.40 - 0.73 63 57.96 2.05 2.05 2.03 - - - - 0 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

L89-16 L89-16_002 Excluded S2M/NC 5.50 8.00 2.50 - 0.73 39.7 36.71 1.76 1.75 1.75 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct









L89-17 L89-17_006 Included S2L 68.70 75.20 6.50 - 0.73 26 24.41 1.59 1.58 1.58 - - - - 2 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


RDH82-10 RDH82-10_001 Included S2M 42.13 43.13 1.00 36 1.6 34.9 32.63 1.59 1.69 1.57 19.9 43.6 0.69 5078 1.5 18.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_002 Included S2M 43.13 44.13 1.00 42 2.9 17.7 16.77 1.45 1.47 1.43 25.7 53.7 0.28 6320 2 13.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_003 Included S2M 44.13 45.13 1.00 27 1 14.6 13.57 1.44 1.44 1.43 28.2 56.2 0.25 6676 2 13.1 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-10 RDH82-10_005 Included NC 46.13 47.20 1.07 100 1.2 77.4 72.07 2.22 2.23 2.19 - - - - - 40 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_006 Included S2L 47.20 47.70 0.50 76 1.3 35 32.62 1.64 1.69 1.63 19.9 43.8 0.31 4731 2 10.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_007 Included S2L 47.70 48.72 1.02 54 0.9 28.5 26.46 1.58 1.61 1.57 26.5 44.1 0.27 5414 3.5 11.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_008 Excluded S2L/NC 48.72 48.96 0.24 100 1 60.8 56.50 2.11 2.02 2.09 - - - - - 8.8 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-10 RDH82-10_010 Included S2L 49.96 51.55 1.59 68 0.7 25.1 23.25 1.56 1.57 1.55 25.1 49.1 0.19 5694 1.5 13 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_011 Included NC 51.55 52.52 0.97 95 0.6 90.5 83.76 2.52 2.40 2.50 - - - - - 4.7 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_012 Included S2L 52.52 53.67 1.15 75 1.1 30.8 28.65 1.58 1.64 1.57 22.4 45.7 0.22 5328 1 15.5 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-10 RDH82-10_014 Excluded S2L 54.67 55.17 0.50 100 1 43.5 40.42 1.73 1.80 1.72 21.8 33.7 0.15 4069 2 11.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_015 Included S2L 55.17 55.67 0.50 100 1.1 23.4 21.77 1.5 1.55 1.49 25.5 50 0.21 6006 1 18 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_016 Excluded S2L 55.67 56.17 0.50 78 1.4 40.4 37.70 1.69 1.76 1.67 20.9 37.3 0.15 4422 1.5 13.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-10 RDH82-10_017 Included S2L 56.17 57.17 1.00 100 0.4 14 12.93 1.43 1.43 1.43 24.1 61.5 0.27 7123 1.5 13.4 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-11 RDH82-11_001 Excluded NC/S2M 99.40 101.50 2.10 16 0.6 76.3 70.62 2.19 2.22 2.17 - - - - - 4.1 - - No RD or IM calcs







RDH82-11 RDH82-11_008 Included NC 110.15 111.10 0.95 100 0.6 91.7 84.87 2.58 2.41 2.55 - - - - - 2 - - No RD or IM calcs


Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM



RDH82-11 RDH82-11_011 Included S2L 114.50 115.50 1.00 100 0.4 25.9 23.92 1.52 1.58 1.52 26 47.7 0.24 6050 3.5 6.9 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-11 RDH82-11_013 Included S2L 116.50 117.25 0.75 67 0.3 33 30.45 1.61 1.67 1.61 31.7 35 0.2 4720 1.5 8.8 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-12 RDH82-12_001 Excluded NC/S2U 44.97 45.85 0.88 12.5 0.9 74.8 69.44 2.19 2.20 2.17 - 24.3 - - - 10.6 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_002 Included NC 45.85 46.13 0.28 100 0.9 82.3 76.40 2.43 2.29 2.40 - 16.8 - - - 6.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_003 Included S2U 46.13 47.58 1.45 86 1.4 20.6 19.22 1.47 1.51 1.46 23 55 0.45 6426 1.5 8 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_004 Included S2U 47.58 48.48 0.90 100 1.2 15.2 14.15 1.42 1.44 1.41 27 56.6 0.35 9850 3 9.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_005 Included S2U 48.48 48.58 0.10 100 0.7 40 37.06 1.91 1.76 1.90 29.7 28.8 0.21 3491 1 2.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_006 Included S2U 48.58 50.10 1.52 100 0.7 15.6 14.45 1.45 1.45 1.45 24 59.7 0.38 6879 1.5 10.3 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-12 RDH82-12_008 Included S2M 50.75 51.58 0.83 100 1.5 16.6 15.50 1.47 1.46 1.46 23.8 58.1 0.31 6660 1 9 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_009 Included S2M 51.58 52.98 1.40 86 1.5 16 14.94 1.46 1.45 1.45 25.6 56.9 0.34 6613 1.5 8.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-12 RDH82-12_010 Included NC 53.00 53.68 0.68 - 0.7 84.7 78.47 2.46 2.33 2.43 - 14.6 - - - 2.6 - - No RD or IM calcs





RDH82-12 RDH82-12_015 Included S2L 57.63 58.30 0.67 100 1 20.9 19.42 1.46 1.52 1.45 27.7 50.4 0.25 6362 4.5 8.5 - - No RD or IM calcs








RDH82-13 RDH82-13_001 Included S2M 73.75 74.95 1.20 100 1 17.4 16.17 1.49 1.47 1.48 26.4 55.2 0.24 6465 1.5 3.7 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-13 RDH82-13_002 Included NC 74.95 75.35 0.40 100 0.9 83.3 77.33 2.43 2.31 2.40 - 15.8 - - - 2 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-13 RDH82-13_004 Excluded S2L/NC 76.16 76.34 0.18 100 0.7 69.9 64.76 2.15 2.14 2.13 - 29.4 - - - 3.6 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-13 RDH82-13_006 Excluded S2L/NC 77.62 77.82 0.20 100 0.7 65 60.22 2.08 2.08 2.06 - 34.3 - - - 3.5 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-13 RDH82-13_008 Included S2L 78.22 79.00 0.78 100 0.8 14.2 13.17 1.43 1.43 1.42 25 60 0.22 7007 1.5 4.7 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-13 RDH82-13_009 Included S2L 79.00 79.75 0.75 100 0.8 24.2 22.44 1.54 1.56 1.53 23 52 0.2 5948 1 4.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-13 RDH82-13_010 Included S2L 79.75 80.20 0.45 100 1 12 11.15 1.43 1.40 1.42 25.9 61.1 0.21 7030 1.5 2.4 - - No RD or IM calcs




RDH82-13 RDH82-13_014 Included S2L 81.60 82.42 0.82 100 0.8 24 22.26 1.52 1.55 1.51 24 51.2 0.17 5973 2 4 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-13 RDH82-13_015 Included S2L 82.42 83.55 1.13 100 0.8 17.9 16.60 1.45 1.48 1.44 27.3 54 0.23 6630 3.5 4.6 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-13 RDH82-13_017 Included S2L 83.84 84.00 0.16 100 0.5 33.7 31.16 1.81 1.68 1.80 37.8 28 0.16 4068 3 1.8 - - No RD or IM calcs



RDH82-13 RDH82-13_020 Included S2L 85.42 85.67 0.25 100 0.5 24.7 22.84 1.48 1.56 1.48 23.5 51.3 0.33 6140 3 5 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-14 RDH82-14_002 Excluded S2M/NC 146.38 146.68 0.30 83 0.5 78.4 72.49 2.19 2.25 2.18 - - - - - 7.2 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-14 RDH82-14_004 Included S2M 148.08 148.94 0.86 100 0.4 21.6 19.95 1.48 1.52 1.48 25 53 0.2 6249 1.5 12.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-14 RDH82-14_005 Included S2M 148.94 149.14 0.20 65 0.3 54.7 50.48 2.04 1.94 2.03 - - - - - 6.3 - - No RD or IM calcs



RDH82-14 RDH82-14_008 Included S2L 150.86 151.68 0.82 83 0.3 33 30.45 1.63 1.67 1.63 24.1 42.6 0.17 4942 1.5 14 - - No RD or IM calcs



RDH82-14 RDH82-14_011 Included S2L 153.36 155.36 2.00 69.5 0.4 22.6 20.88 1.49 1.54 1.49 26 51 0.19 6052 1.5 8.4 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-15 RDH82-15_001 Included S2L 30.60 35.00 4.40 100 0.6 18.1 16.75 1.45 1.48 1.45 25.3 56 0.51 6766 3 9 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-16 RDH82-16_002 Included S2U 139.08 139.40 0.32 100 0.9 87.8 81.51 2.44 2.36 2.41 - - - - - 7.7 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-16 RDH82-16_003 Included S2U 139.40 140.40 1.00 91 1 26.2 24.35 1.51 1.58 1.50 21.7 51.1 0.3 5831 1.5 13.9 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-16 RDH82-16_004 Included S2U 140.40 141.25 0.85 100 1.1 13.4 12.47 1.39 1.42 1.38 29.3 56.2 0.37 7071 5.5 12.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-16 RDH82-16_005 Included NC 141.25 141.60 0.35 100 0.9 79 73.34 2.24 2.25 2.21 - - - - - 8.9 - - No RD or IM calcs


Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM



RDH82-16 RDH82-16_008 Included S2M 142.95 144.04 1.09 100 1 16.9 15.71 1.44 1.46 1.43 25.5 56.6 0.23 6547 2 15.9 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-16 RDH82-16_010 Included S2 144.90 146.20 1.30 100 1.3 28.6 26.66 1.55 1.61 1.54 20.8 49.3 0.18 5608 1 11.4 - - No RD or IM calcs




RDH82-7 RDH82-7_001 Excluded NC/S2U 102.70 103.70 1.00 100 0.4 39.9 36.86 1.69 1.76 1.68 25.8 33.9 0.26 4659 3 19.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-7 RDH82-7_002 Included S2U 103.70 104.70 1.00 100 0.3 34.1 31.47 1.65 1.68 1.65 24.5 41.1 0.24 5118 2 26.3 - - No RD or IM calcs












RDH82-7 RDH82-7_014 Included S2M 115.70 116.70 1.00 100 0.5 20 18.49 1.46 1.50 1.46 27.8 51.7 0.27 6533 4 25.6 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-7 RDH82-7_015 Included S2M 116.70 117.70 1.00 100 0.6 32.7 30.27 1.6 1.66 1.59 24.7 42 0.29 5396 2 27.6 - - No RD or IM calcs


RDH82-7 RDH82-7_017 Excluded S2M/NC 118.70 119.70 1.00 100 0.5 71 65.65 2.21 2.15 2.20 - - - - - 17.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_001 Included S2M 7.10 9.10 2.00 20 0.9 16.5 15.32 1.4 1.46 1.39 23.4 59.2 0.26 6575 0 25.9 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_002 Included NC 9.10 10.20 1.10 23 0.6 80.3 74.32 2.22 2.27 2.20 - - - - - 10.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_003 Included S2L 10.20 11.28 1.08 15 0.7 32.2 29.83 1.48 1.66 1.47 22 45.1 0.57 5418 2 26.5 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_004 Included S2L 11.28 12.28 1.00 75 0.5 17.4 16.09 1.42 1.47 1.42 24.4 57.7 0.66 6740 2 14.1 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_005 Included S2L 12.28 13.22 0.94 85 0.4 11.6 10.71 1.38 1.40 1.38 24.9 63.1 0.45 7364 3.25 14.4 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_006 Included NC 13.22 14.10 0.88 92 0.5 92.7 85.71 2.54 2.43 2.52 - - - - - 4.2 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_007 Excluded S3U/NC 14.10 15.28 1.18 32 0.5 61.3 56.68 1.89 2.03 1.88 - - - - - 10.8 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_008 Included S3U 15.28 16.28 1.00 85 0.4 35.5 32.79 1.62 1.70 1.62 20.5 43.8 0.35 4997 1.5 15.9 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_009 Included S3U 16.28 18.08 1.80 28 0.4 18.7 17.27 1.43 1.49 1.43 23.2 57.7 0.49 6610 1.5 13.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_010 Included S3U 18.08 18.25 0.17 88 0.4 38.1 35.19 1.66 1.73 1.66 25.4 36.1 1.95 4571 2 13.3 - - No RD or IM calcs

RDH82-9A RDH82-9A_011 Included S3U 18.25 19.18 0.93 81 0.4 14 12.93 1.38 1.43 1.38 24.3 61.3 0.32 7229 2 21.9 - - No RD or IM calcs

S88-24 S88-24_001 Excluded S4M/NC 19.44 20.44 1.00 - 0.6 43.1 39.89 1.8 1.80 1.79 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

S88-24 S88-24_002 Included S4L 20.44 22.40 1.96 - 0.6 22.7 21.01 1.55 1.54 1.54 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

S88-24 S88-24_003 Included S4A 40.30 43.50 3.20 - 0.73 41.3 38.28 1.78 1.77 1.77 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



S88-28 S88-28_001 Included NC 10.50 11.37 0.87 - 0.73 63.5 58.85 2.06 2.06 2.04 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-28 S88-28_002 Included S2U 11.50 12.50 1.00 - 0.73 19.9 18.44 1.51 1.50 1.50 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-28 S88-28_003 Included S2M 12.50 13.50 1.00 - 0.73 31.4 29.10 1.66 1.65 1.65 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-28 S88-28_004 Included S2L 13.50 16.20 2.70 - 0.73 20.3 18.81 1.52 1.51 1.51 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-28 S88-28_005 Included S3U 53.55 54.50 0.95 - 0.5 25.2 23.30 1.58 1.57 1.58 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs





S88-29 S88-29_002 Included S3U 17.70 18.58 0.88 - 0.6 13 12.03 1.42 1.41 1.42 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

S88-29 S88-29_003 Included S3U 18.58 20.58 2.00 - 0.73 14 12.97 1.44 1.43 1.44 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct






S88-31 S88-31_005 Excluded S2L/NC 25.35 26.50 1.15 - 0.73 43.9 40.69 1.81 1.81 1.80 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-31 S88-31_006 Excluded NC/S2L 26.50 27.50 1.00 - 0.73 65.5 60.70 2.09 2.08 2.07 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



S88-31 S88-31_009 Included S2L 29.50 30.50 1.00 - 0.73 39 36.14 1.75 1.75 1.74 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


S88-31 S88-31_011 Excluded NC/S2U 37.10 41.00 3.90 - 0.73 49.9 46.25 1.89 1.88 1.88 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-31 S88-31_012 Included S2M 41.00 57.00 16.00 - 0.6 31.1 28.78 1.65 1.64 1.64 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs


S88-31 S88-31_014 Included S2L 60.00 63.00 3.00 - 0.6 39.8 36.84 1.76 1.76 1.75 - - - - - - - - No RD or IM calcs

Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM



S88-31 S88-31_016 Included S4M 78.00 80.50 2.50 - 0.73 46 42.63 1.84 1.83 1.83 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct







S88-32 S88-32_007 Included S2L 19.00 22.00 3.00 - 0.73 39 36.14 1.75 1.75 1.74 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct





S88-32 S88-32_012 Excluded S3U/NC/S3L 50.50 55.50 5.00 - 0.73 53.3 49.40 1.93 1.93 1.92 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-81 S88-81_001 Excluded S4U/NC 20.15 21.30 1.15 - 0.73 53.4 49.49 1.93 1.93 1.92 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


S88-84 S88-84_001 Excluded S4U/NC/S4M 1.35 3.75 2.40 - 0.73 60.2 55.79 2.02 2.01 2.00 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

S88-84 S88-84_002 Included S4 3.75 8.05 4.30 - 0.73 24.2 22.43 1.56 1.56 1.55 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89007 Y89007_001 Excluded NC/S2L 4.80 6.20 1.40 - 0.73 51.2 47.58 1.9 1.90 1.89 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89007 Y89007_003 Included S3L 46.20 48.20 2.00 - 0.73 27.7 26.68 1.61 1.60 1.60 - - - - 4.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89007 Y89007_005 Included NC 57.70 59.40 1.70 - 0.73 50.1 47.03 1.89 1.89 1.88 - - - - 2 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89010 Y89010_001 Included S3U 7.40 13.50 6.10 - 0.73 35.5 32.99 1.71 1.70 1.70 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89010 Y89010_003 Included S3L 14.50 16.20 1.70 - 0.73 28.8 26.76 1.62 1.62 1.61 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89010 Y89010_006 Included S4M 32.00 32.50 0.50 - 0.73 25.6 24.79 1.58 1.57 1.57 - - - - 5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89014 Y89014_001 Included S3U 3.10 4.60 1.50 - 0.73 19.9 19.37 1.51 1.50 1.50 - - - - 5.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89014 Y89014_004 Included NC 8.50 8.70 0.20 - 0.73 71.4 66.02 2.16 2.16 2.14 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89014 Y89014_006 Excluded NC/S4A 55.00 56.00 1.00 - 0.73 56.4 52.41 1.97 1.97 1.96 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89014 Y89014_008 Included NC 69.00 70.30 1.30 - 0.73 39 36.24 1.75 1.75 1.74 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89020 Y89020_001 Excluded NC/S2U 59.90 62.20 2.30 - 0.73 59.1 54.92 2 2.00 1.98 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89020 Y89020_002 Excluded S2U/NC/S2M/NC/S2L 62.20 71.70 9.50 - 0.73 39.8 36.99 1.76 1.76 1.75 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89020 Y89020_005 Included S5U 136.20 138.90 2.70 - 0.73 34 31.60 1.69 1.68 1.68 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct







Y89025 Y89025_004 Excluded S2M/NC 82.20 84.40 2.20 - 0.73 65.8 61.15 2.09 2.09 2.07 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct










Y89025 Y89025_014 Excluded NC/S4M 124.20 125.70 1.50 - 0.73 52.3 49.35 1.92 1.91 1.91 - - - - 2.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89025 Y89025_015 Included NC 125.70 126.70 1.00 - 0.73 77 71.20 2.23 2.23 2.21 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89025 Y89025_017 Included S4A 128.70 132.10 3.40 - 0.73 37.8 35.31 1.74 1.73 1.73 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89027 Y89027_001 Excluded NC/S4U 23.60 25.10 1.50 - 0.73 50.7 47.12 1.9 1.89 1.89 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89027 Y89027_002 Excluded S5U/NC/S5M 33.81 37.80 3.99 - 0.73 45.8 42.56 1.84 1.83 1.83 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89027 Y89027_003 Excluded S5M/NC/S5L 38.25 40.90 2.65 - 0.73 60 55.76 2.02 2.01 2.00 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM




Y89030 Y89030_003 Included S2M 79.60 84.10 4.50 - 0.73 25 23.83 1.58 1.57 1.57 - - - - 3.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89030 Y89030_004 Excluded S2M/NC/S2L 84.10 85.90 1.80 - 0.73 54.9 51.02 1.95 1.95 1.94 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89030 Y89030_006 Excluded S2U/NC/S2L 89.10 91.00 1.90 - 0.73 62.3 57.89 2.04 2.04 2.02 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89030 Y89030_009 Excluded S3L/NC 102.20 106.90 4.70 - 0.73 60.3 56.04 2.02 2.02 2.00 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89036 Y89036_001 Excluded S4U/NC/S4L 13.40 17.60 4.20 - 0.73 67.4 63.07 2.11 2.11 2.09 - - - - 1.68 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




Y89040 Y89040_001 Included S3U 3.50 4.60 1.10 - 0.73 43 39.76 1.8 1.80 1.79 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89040 Y89040_002 Excluded S3L/NC 6.40 8.00 1.60 - 0.73 68.3 63.15 2.12 2.12 2.10 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89040 Y89040_003 Excluded S4U/NC 38.30 39.50 1.20 - 0.73 77.5 71.66 2.24 2.23 2.22 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89040 Y89040_004 Excluded S4M/NC/S4L 60.81 62.11 1.30 - 0.73 58.4 54.27 2 1.99 1.98 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct













Y89044 Y89044_008 Included S5M 118.00 120.20 2.20 - 0.73 33 30.67 1.68 1.67 1.67 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89046 Y89046_001 Included S2M 30.80 31.70 0.90 - 0.73 16.4 15.47 1.47 1.46 1.46 - - - - 2.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct








Y89046 Y89046_009 Excluded S4M/NC/S4U 89.70 95.70 6.00 - 0.73 40.7 37.82 1.77 1.77 1.76 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89046 Y89046_011 Included S4A 127.10 134.70 7.60 - 0.73 40.1 37.64 1.77 1.76 1.76 - - - - 2 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89055 Y89055_001 Excluded S4M/NC/S4L 44.60 49.45 4.85 - 0.73 40.3 37.64 1.77 1.76 1.76 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89056 Y89056_001 Included S2 2.80 6.80 4.00 - 0.73 20.7 19.43 1.52 1.51 1.51 - - - - 2 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct










Y89058 Y89058_006 Included S2L 18.70 22.40 3.70 - 0.73 18 17.07 1.49 1.48 1.48 - - - - 3 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




Y89058 Y89058_010 Excluded STRAY/NC 63.50 65.00 1.50 - 0.73 37 34.38 1.73 1.72 1.72 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89058 Y89058_011 Excluded STRAY/NC 65.00 69.00 4.00 - 0.73 34.3 31.87 1.69 1.69 1.68 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89058 Y89058_013 Excluded STRAY/NC 69.80 70.80 1.00 - 0.73 27.2 25.41 1.6 1.60 1.59 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM




Y89059 Y89059_002 Excluded NC/S4A 27.20 28.00 0.80 - 0.73 56.4 52.41 1.97 1.97 1.96 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89064 Y89064_001 Excluded S4U/NC 20.70 21.20 0.50 - 0.73 77.3 71.12 2.23 2.23 2.21 - - - - 0 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct











Y89066 Y89066_009 Excluded NC 91.70 92.70 1.00 - 0.73 59.7 55.48 2.01 2.01 1.99 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct













Y89068 Y89068_011 Excluded S4U/S4M/NC/S4L 77.30 82.00 4.70 - 0.73 37.7 35.03 1.74 1.73 1.73 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct








Y89073 Y89073_005 Excluded S4A/NC 87.30 89.00 1.70 - 0.73 48.3 44.88 1.87 1.86 1.86 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct




Y89075 Y89075_004 Excluded S2M/NC 15.60 17.50 1.90 - 0.73 68.7 63.52 2.13 2.12 2.11 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89075 Y89075_005 Included S2L 17.50 21.30 3.80 - 0.73 32 29.89 1.66 1.66 1.65 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct









Y89078 Y89078_005 Included NC 37.70 38.10 0.40 - 0.73 58.9 54.74 2 2.00 1.98 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct













Y89078 Y89078_018 Excluded NC/S4M 70.40 71.90 1.50 - 0.73 43.4 40.33 1.81 1.80 1.80 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89078 Y89078_019 Excluded S4L 71.90 76.60 4.70 - 0.73 23.2 22.12 1.55 1.54 1.54 - - - - 3.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM





Y89078 Y89078_025 Included S4A 95.70 98.80 3.10 - 0.73 39 36.43 1.75 1.75 1.74 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct












Y89080 Y89080_012 Excluded S4U/NC/S4M 134.20 137.20 3.00 - 0.73 37.3 34.66 1.73 1.72 1.72 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct








Y89082 Y89082_001 Excluded S3L 40.70 42.10 1.40 - 0.73 49.3 45.81 1.88 1.88 1.87 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct












Y89083 Y89083_002 Excluded S5U 35.50 36.80 1.30 - 0.73 43.3 40.04 1.81 1.80 1.80 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct





Y89085 Y89085_005 Excluded S5U/NC 98.70 100.20 1.50 - 0.73 59.9 55.38 2.01 2.01 1.99 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89086 Y89086_001 Excluded STRAY/NC 41.80 43.10 1.30 - 0.73 31.7 30.07 1.66 1.65 1.65 - - - - 3 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct








Y89086 Y89086_009 Included S3U 77.20 77.90 0.70 - 0.73 17.1 15.85 1.48 1.47 1.47 - - - - - - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

















Hole IDSample ID


From (m)

CORR

To (m)

CORR

Length (m)

CORR

Recovery

(%)

IM

(%)

adb

Ash (%)

adb

Ash_pct_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

RD

adb

RD_Reg

CALC

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

VM

(%)

adb

FC

(%)

adb

S (%)

adb

CV

kCal/kg

adb

FSIADM







Y89093 Y89093_008 Excluded S4L 60.80 62.45 1.65 - 0.73 47.2 43.86 1.85 1.85 1.84 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct















Y89095 Y89095_015 Excluded S5M/NC 140.70 142.30 1.60 - 0.73 43 39.96 1.8 1.80 1.79 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89095 Y89095_017 Excluded S5M/NC 147.70 153.20 5.50 - 0.73 46 42.75 1.84 1.83 1.83 - - - - 1 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct








Y89098 Y89098_001 Excluded NC/STRAY 55.20 57.00 1.80 - 0.73 26.9 25.12 1.6 1.59 1.59 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89099 Y89099_002 Excluded S2U 3.80 5.10 1.30 - 0.73 39.8 37.17 1.76 1.76 1.75 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct


Y89099 Y89099_004 Excluded NC/STRAY 10.90 11.00 0.10 - 0.73 27.2 26.62 1.6 1.60 1.59 - - - - 6 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct



Y89100 Y89100_003 Excluded NC/S3U 35.70 37.00 1.30 - 0.73 62.5 57.79 2.05 2.04 2.03 - - - - 0.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

Y89100 Y89100_004 Excluded S3L/NC 39.30 41.00 1.70 - 0.73 62.4 58.28 2.05 2.04 2.03 - - - - 1.5 - - - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct

YC2 YC2_001 Excluded S2M/NC/S2L 96.10 111.73 15.63 64 0.73 51.5 47.73 1.85 1.90 1.84 - - - - - - 69 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC2 YC2_002 Included S3U 122.90 124.00 1.10 - 0.73 23.2 21.50 1.52 1.54 1.51 - - - - - - 92 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC2 YC2_003 Included S3U 124.00 125.00 1.00 90 0.73 23.6 21.87 1.53 1.55 1.52 - - - - - - 75 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC2 YC2_004 Included S3L 125.00 125.50 0.50 - 0.73 25.8 23.91 1.55 1.58 1.54 - - - - - - 71 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC2 YC2_005 Included S3L 125.50 126.70 1.20 70 0.73 18.3 16.96 1.46 1.48 1.46 - - - - - - 68 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC2 YC2_006 Included S3L 126.70 127.70 1.00 - 0.73 30 27.80 1.60 1.63 1.59 - - - - - - 75 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC3 YC3_001 Included S2 39.50 58.40 18.90 59 0.73 38.4 35.59 1.70 1.74 1.69 - - - - - - 62 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD



YC4 YC4_002 Excluded S2M/S2L/S3U/S3L/NC 55.30 73.30 18.00 69 0.73 23.7 21.96 1.53 1.55 1.52 - - - - - - 73 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

YC5 YC5_001 Included S2 46.50 56.80 10.30 67 0.73 30.2 27.99 1.60 1.63 1.59 - - - - - - 65 - wgtAve_IM_0.73pct; ReggressionCalc_RD

Table 12-3 Summary of Chinook Vicary Raw Coal Quality Data -

DrillholeSample ID

(Dahrouge)Status Seam DGC

From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment

RDH82-1 RDH82-1_005 Include NC 79.00 79.50 0.50 - 0.2 0.2 84.3 77.71 - - - - 2.41 2.22 2.41 2.17 - - -

V91-30 V91-30_001 Include S2 90.60 91.04 0.44 - 38.92 0.26 11.75 10.84 - - - - - 1.34 1.34 1.31 6 - - Calc RD



V91-05 V91-05_003 Exclude S2l/NC 62.60 64.90 2.30 - 28.98 0.29 43.73 40.35 - - - - - 1.73 1.73 1.64 3.5 - - Calc RD

V91-22 V91-22_022 Exclude S4A/NC 143.40 143.90 0.50 - 23.02 0.3 32.45 29.94 - - - 5420.52 - 1.59 1.59 1.52 1 - - Calc RD



V91-22 V91-22_023 Include S4A 143.90 146.90 3.00 - 22.58 0.34 19.66 18.15 - - - 6352.62 - 1.44 1.44 1.39 2.5 - - Calc RD

V91-24 V91-24_004 Include S5 44.00 45.00 1.00 - 19.6 0.34 15.16 13.99 - - - - - 1.38 1.38 1.34 7.5 - - Calc RD

V91-25 V91-25_012 Include S4l 175.00 179.10 4.10 - 23.36 0.35 23.55 21.74 - - - - - 1.48 1.48 1.43 1.5 - - Calc RD

V91-25 V91-25_010 Exclude S4m/NC 173.20 173.70 0.50 - 20.09 0.36 52.03 48.04 - - - - - 1.83 1.83 1.72 1 - - Calc RD

V91-25 V91-25_013 Exclude S4l/NC 179.10 179.40 0.30 - 18.85 0.36 68.15 62.92 - - - - - 2.03 2.03 1.88 1 - - Calc RD

V91-30 V91-30_007 Exclude S4l 138.13 139.23 1.10 - 25.56 0.36 77.01 71.11 - - - - - 2.14 2.14 1.97 0 - - Calc RD



V91-22 V91-22_032 Include S5l 204.70 207.70 3.00 - 19.24 0.38 28.8 26.60 - - - - - 1.55 1.55 1.49 1 - - Calc RD



V91-04C V91-04C_001 Include S2l/NC 33.23 33.92 0.69 - 15.56 0.39 36.63 33.83 - - - - - 1.64 1.64 1.57 3 - - Calc RD

V91-04C V91-04C_003 Include S2l 37.56 37.80 0.24 - 6.6 0.39 7.79 7.19 - - - - - 1.29 1.29 1.26 7.5 - - Calc RD





V91-22 V91-22_019 Include S4m 115.85 116.10 0.25 - 22.52 0.4 17.76 16.40 - - - 6964.46 - 1.41 1.41 1.37 1 - - Calc RD

V91-22 V91-22_027 Include S4Al/NC 163.10 165.50 2.40 - 24.52 0.4 24.9 23.00 - - - 5585.43 - 1.50 1.50 1.45 3 - - Calc RD



V91-11 V91-11_004 Include S2l 98.00 98.50 0.50 - 20.95 0.41 17.64 16.30 - - - 7067.23 - 1.41 1.41 1.37 4.5 - - Calc RD

V91-30 V91-30_006 Include S2l 101.00 103.20 2.20 - 19.23 0.41 46.41 42.87 - - - - - 1.76 1.76 1.67 3.5 - - Calc RD

V91-16 V91-16 _006 Include S4 45.10 47.20 2.10 - 22.07 0.42 12.77 11.80 - - - - - 1.35 1.35 1.32 7 - - Calc RD





V91-16 V91-16 _005 Include S2l 24.80 25.30 0.50 - 7.68 0.44 32.79 30.30 - - - - - 1.60 1.60 1.53 6 - - Calc RD

V91-22 V91-22_017 Include S2 84.28 85.89 1.61 - 24.91 0.44 28.78 26.59 - - - 5955.88 - 1.55 1.55 1.49 0 - - Calc RD



V91-25 V91-25_009 Include NC 169.70 173.20 3.50 - 22.87 0.45 35.26 32.59 - - - - - 1.63 1.63 1.55 1 - - Calc RD

V91-05 V91-05_001 Exclude NC/S2m 58.50 61.70 3.20 - 6 0.46 46.97 43.41 - - - - - 1.77 1.77 1.67 2 - - Calc RD





V91-22 V91-22_028 Include NC 177.70 178.20 0.50 - 21.13 0.48 38.21 35.32 - - - 5210.2 - 1.66 1.66 1.58 5 - - Calc RD

V91-30 V91-30_008 Exclude S4l 139.23 140.30 1.07 - 21.87 0.48 56.4 52.14 - - - - - 1.89 1.89 1.77 1.5 - - Calc RD



V91-22 V91-22_026 Include S4Al 160.20 160.80 0.60 - 30.4 0.49 11.97 11.07 - - - 7528.5 - 1.34 1.34 1.31 2.5 - - Calc RD

DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment


V91-25 V91-25_005 Exclude S2/NC 157.10 157.90 0.80 - 21.42 0.49 55.44 51.26 - - - - - 1.87 1.87 1.76 1 - - Calc RD

V91-25 V91-25_006 Exclude S2m 158.60 159.00 0.40 - 18.21 0.49 61.85 57.18 - - - - - 1.95 1.95 1.82 1 - - Calc RD

N88-41 N88-41_003 Include S5 50.00 55.10 5.10 - - 0.5 40.1 37.08 - - - - - 1.69 1.69 1.60 - - - Calc RD

N88-41 N88-41_004 Exclude S5 55.10 58.50 3.40 - - 0.5 54.5 50.39 - - - - - 1.86 1.86 1.75 - - - Calc RD



N88-45 N88-45_002 Exclude S2m 23.60 24.30 0.70 - - 0.5 63.6 58.81 - - - - - 1.97 1.97 1.84 - - - Calc RD

N88-50 N88-50_001 Include NC 117.20 129.00 11.80 - - 0.5 28.9 26.72 - - - - - 1.55 1.55 1.49 - - - Calc RD



N88-59 N88-59_001 Include S4 42.20 43.25 1.05 - - 0.5 15 13.87 - - - - - 1.38 1.38 1.34 - - - Calc RD

N88-60 N88-60_003 Include S4A 24.50 25.90 1.40 - - 0.5 43.1 39.85 - - - - - 1.72 1.72 1.63 - - - Calc RD



N88-64 N88-64_004 Include S5m 70.50 71.30 0.80 - - 0.5 42.1 38.93 - - - - - 1.71 1.71 1.62 - - - Calc RD



RDH82-1 RDH82-1_001 Include NC 74.01 74.27 0.26 - 2.1 0.5 37.3 34.49 30.7 31.7 0.11 3644 1.86 1.65 1.86 1.75 1 - -


RDH82-1 RDH82-1_003 Exclude S5m 78.28 79.00 0.72 - 12.2 0.5 66.8 61.76 - - - - 2.1 2.01 2.1 1.94 - - -

RDH82-1 RDH82-1_006 Include S5m 79.50 80.50 1.00 - 1.1 0.5 41.5 38.37 23.4 34.6 0.24 4216 1.78 1.70 1.78 1.68 2.5 - -

RDH82-1 RDH82-1_007 Include NC 80.50 81.00 0.50 - 2 0.5 92 85.07 - - - - 2.14 2.32 2.14 1.97 - - -



RDH82-1 RDH82-1_010 Exclude S5l 82.00 83.00 1.00 - 0.3 0.5 85.9 79.43 - - - - 2.54 2.25 2.54 2.28 - - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_001 Include NC 56.64 56.72 0.08 - 3.1 0.5 69.1 63.89 15 23 0.09 - 2.12 2.04 2.12 1.95 0 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_002 Include NC 56.72 58.64 1.92 - 5.2 0.5 21.3 19.69 20.2 57.1 0.33 6481 1.44 1.46 1.44 1.39 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_003 Include S5 58.64 60.68 2.04 - 3.8 0.5 24 22.19 20.5 54.6 0.29 6237 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.44 2 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_004 Include NC 60.82 60.92 0.10 - 3 0.5 68.3 63.15 16.3 14.6 0.08 - 2.11 2.03 2.11 1.95 0.5 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_006 Include S5 61.63 62.16 0.53 - 4.6 0.5 44.7 41.33 16.8 37.5 0.19 4335 1.71 1.74 1.71 1.62 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_007 Include S5 62.16 63.50 1.34 - 3.5 0.5 28.4 26.26 18.7 51.4 0.27 5800 1.54 1.54 1.54 1.48 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_008 Include S5 63.50 63.70 0.20 - 4.1 0.5 36.2 33.47 22.4 40.6 0.22 4981 1.65 1.64 1.65 1.57 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_009 Include S5 63.70 63.91 0.21 - 5.6 0.5 17.7 16.37 19.9 61.7 0.31 6851 1.43 1.41 1.43 1.39 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_010 Include S5 63.91 64.06 0.15 - 4.5 0.5 24.3 22.47 21.2 53.7 0.28 6075 1.51 1.49 1.51 1.45 1.5 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_011 Include S5 64.06 65.7 1.64 - 6 0.5 24.3 22.47 21.2 55.9 0.27 6256 1.5 1.49 1.5 1.45 1.5 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_012 Include S5 65.70 66.30 0.60 - 4.1 0.5 23 21.27 19.1 56.4 0.26 6293 1.47 1.48 1.47 1.42 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_013 Include S5 66.30 68.16 1.86 - 4.4 0.5 41.7 38.56 18.8 38.8 0.16 4400 1.7 1.71 1.7 1.61 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_014 Include S5 68.16 69.27 1.11 - 3.6 0.5 23.1 21.36 18.7 57.2 0.27 6326 1.49 1.48 1.49 1.44 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_015 Include NC 69.27 69.54 0.27 - 1 0.5 81 74.89 7.9 10 0.12 - 2.28 2.19 2.28 2.08 0 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_016 Include S5m 69.54 70.12 0.58 - 3.5 0.5 27.6 25.52 18.9 52.7 0.24 5829 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.47 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_017 Include NC 70.12 70.30 0.18 - 1.9 0.5 58.6 54.18 13.7 26.8 0.16 - 1.9 1.91 1.9 1.78 1 - -






RDH82-2 RDH82-2_023 Include NC 78.05 78.26 0.21 - 1.8 0.5 58.5 54.09 13 27.6 0.35 - 1.91 1.91 1.91 1.79 0.5 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_024 Include NC 78.26 79.12 0.86 - 2.6 0.5 27.5 25.43 19 52.8 0.22 5967 1.52 1.53 1.52 1.46 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_025 Include NC 79.12 79.88 0.76 - 4.7 0.5 62.2 57.51 12 24.9 0.23 - 1.97 1.96 1.97 1.84 1.5 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_026 Include S5l 79.88 80.72 0.84 - 5.6 0.5 30 27.74 18.3 51.1 0.34 5747 1.55 1.56 1.55 1.49 0.5 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_027 Include S5l 80.72 80.88 0.16 - 0.9 0.5 39 36.06 22.8 37.6 0.19 4228 1.72 1.67 1.72 1.63 1 - -

DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_028 Include S5l 80.88 82.39 1.51 - 2 0.5 26.2 24.23 18.7 53.7 0.31 6010 1.51 1.52 1.51 1.45 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_029 Exclude S5l 82.39 82.52 0.13 - 1.1 0.5 60.9 56.31 14.5 23.9 0.28 - 1.97 1.94 1.97 1.84 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_030 Include S5l 82.52 83.80 1.28 - 1.2 0.5 33.3 30.79 18.2 47.7 0.3 5317 1.58 1.60 1.58 1.51 1 - -

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_031 Exclude S5l 83.80 83.97 0.17 - 0.7 0.5 57.7 53.35 15.4 26.2 0.25 - 1.92 1.90 1.92 1.80 0.5 - -



RDH82-2 RDH82-2_034 Exclude S5l 86.40 86.72 0.32 - 0.6 0.5 53.8 49.74 15.1 30.2 0.21 - 1.82 1.85 1.82 1.71 1 - -



RDH82-4 RDH82-4_001 Include S5 104.75 104.93 0.18 100 12.14 0.5 40.3 37.26 16.4 42.1 0.25 4861 1.66 1.69 1.66 1.58 1.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_002 Include NC 106.75 107.16 0.41 100 6.05 0.5 80.3 74.25 - - - - 2.3 2.18 2.3 2.09 - - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_003 Include S5 107.33 107.90 0.57 100 8.77 0.5 38.5 35.60 18 43.1 0.19 4823 1.66 1.67 1.66 1.58 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_004 Include NC 107.90 108.05 0.15 100 6.37 0.5 51.5 47.62 - - - - 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.72 1.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_005 Include S5 108.05 109.12 1.07 67 11.36 0.5 25.6 23.67 20.6 53.4 0.23 6037 1.51 1.51 1.51 1.45 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_006 Exclude S5 109.12 111.50 2.38 53 9.14 0.5 27.6 25.52 20.4 51.3 0.19 5845 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.47 1 - -


RDH82-4 RDH82-4_008 Include S5 111.86 112.09 0.23 100 8.03 0.5 30 27.74 - - - - 1.97 1.56 1.97 1.84 - - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_009 Include NC 112.09 112.44 0.35 100 10.53 0.5 30.8 28.48 19.8 48.7 0.2 5470 1.58 1.57 1.58 1.51 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_010 Include S5 112.44 113.34 0.90 64 11.34 0.5 33.3 30.79 19.3 46.8 0.18 5335 1.6 1.60 1.6 1.53 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_011 Include S5 113.34 115.31 1.97 73 5.66 0.5 21.7 20.06 21.9 55.5 0.22 6326 1.99 1.46 1.99 1.85 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_012 Exclude S5 115.31 116.11 0.80 59 13.01 0.5 26.7 24.69 20.8 51.8 0.18 5704 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.46 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_013 Exclude S5 116.11 117.13 1.02 62 7.86 0.5 21 19.42 19 59.5 0.21 6515 1.48 1.45 1.48 1.43 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_014 Exclude S5 117.13 118.13 1.00 24 9.64 0.5 25.9 23.95 19.2 54.2 0.22 6060 1.52 1.51 1.52 1.46 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_015 Exclude S5 118.13 118.94 0.81 53 10.33 0.5 34 31.44 17.9 47.4 0.2 5211 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.54 0.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_016 Include S5 118.94 119.28 0.34 100 7.55 0.5 35.7 33.01 17.5 46.1 0.21 5117 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.56 1.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_017 Include NC 119.30 119.90 0.60 62 13.91 0.5 40.2 37.17 17.4 41.7 0.2 4798 1.66 1.69 1.66 1.58 1.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_018 Include S5 119.91 121.87 1.96 68 12.12 0.5 33.3 30.79 18.8 47.2 0.23 5336 1.58 1.60 1.58 1.51 1 - -


RDH82-4 RDH82-4_020 Include NC 122.09 122.54 0.45 76 3.09 0.5 65 60.10 - - - - 2.35 1.99 2.35 2.13 - - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_021 Include S5m 122.55 123.20 0.65 65 4.98 0.5 39.4 36.43 18.9 41.2 0.21 4636 1.69 1.68 1.69 1.61 1.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_022 Exclude S5m 123.72 124.10 0.38 13 7.56 0.5 24.4 22.56 18.7 56.3 0.26 6220 1.51 1.50 1.51 1.45 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_023 Include S5m 124.10 124.60 0.50 70 7.25 0.5 26 24.04 19.4 53.9 0.25 6046 1.53 1.52 1.53 1.47 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_024 Exclude S5m 124.60 124.70 0.10 100 5.26 0.5 53.4 49.37 - - - - 1.86 1.85 1.86 1.75 - - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_025 Include S5m 124.70 126.77 2.07 97 4.38 0.5 26.3 24.32 1.8 54.3 0.27 6041 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.46 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_026 Include S5m 126.77 127.98 1.21 100 3.09 0.5 28.4 26.26 19.7 51.4 0.25 5809 1.56 1.54 1.56 1.50 - - -


RDH82-4 RDH82-4_028 Include S5l 129.78 132.50 2.72 100 5.07 0.5 25.1 23.21 19.6 54.6 0.25 6127 1.51 1.50 1.51 1.45 1 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_029 Include NC 132.52 132.76 0.24 100 2.58 0.5 78 72.12 - - - - 2.26 2.15 2.26 2.06 - - -



RDH82-4 RDH82-4_032 Include S5l 134.06 136.69 2.63 100 4.97 0.5 29.1 26.91 18.6 51.5 0.27 5767 1.56 1.55 1.56 1.50 0.5 - -

RDH82-4 RDH82-4_033 Exclude S5l 136.69 137.20 0.51 100 3.68 0.5 56.1 51.87 - - - - 1.9 1.88 1.9 1.78 - - -



RDH82-6 RDH82-6_003 Include S5 107.70 108.70 1.00 74 4.18 0.5 33.9 31.34 19.1 46.3 0.25 5259 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.54 1 - -

RDH82-6 RDH82-6_004 Include S5 108.70 110.35 1.65 100 2.69 0.5 23.2 21.45 21.3 54.8 0.29 6318 1.49 1.48 1.49 1.44 1.5 - -

RDH82-6 RDH82-6_005 Include S5 110.35 111.50 1.15 100 3.28 0.5 25 23.12 22.1 52.2 0.29 6079 1.51 1.50 1.51 1.45 3 - -

RDH82-6 RDH82-6_006 Include S5 111.50 112.00 0.50 100 3.38 0.5 35.9 33.19 19.5 43.8 0.26 5110 1.63 1.64 1.63 1.56 1 - -

RDH82-6 RDH82-6_007 Include S5 112.00 112.63 0.63 100 3.68 0.5 27.1 25.06 20.1 52.2 0.28 5986 1.52 1.53 1.52 1.46 1 - -

RDH82-6 RDH82-6_008 Include S5 112.63 113.70 1.07 100 2.59 0.5 30.6 28.29 -21.7 47.1 0.2 5399 1.59 1.57 1.59 1.52 1 - -

RDH82-6 RDH82-6_009 Include S5m 113.70 114.70 1.00 100 2.29 0.5 16.2 14.98 22 61.3 0.24 6926 1.46 1.40 1.46 1.41 1 - -


DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment



RDH82-6 RDH82-6_013 Include S5m 118.02 118.63 0.61 100 1.5 0.5 25.1 23.21 20.4 54 0.27 6199 1.51 1.50 1.51 1.45 1 - -



RDH82-8 RDH82-8_001 Include S5 117.35 118.40 1.05 73 9.46 0.5 28.7 26.54 19.1 51.7 0.25 5858 1.57 1.55 1.57 1.51 1 - -

RDH82-8 RDH82-8_002 Include S5 118.40 119.40 1.00 100 6.17 0.5 23.5 21.73 19.8 56.2 0.26 6291 1.51 1.48 1.51 1.45 1 - -

RDH82-8 RDH82-8_003 Include S5 119.40 120.05 0.65 100 8.97 0.5 30.5 28.20 19.1 50 0.24 5673 1.58 1.57 1.58 1.51 1 - -




RDH82-8 RDH82-8_007 Include S5l 121.10 122.27 1.17 97 8.47 0.5 29.1 26.91 19.5 51 0.28 5856 1.54 1.55 1.54 1.48 1 - -

V1-72 V1-72_006 Include S4 384.40 385.90 1.50 - - 0.5 22.8 21.08 - - - - - 1.48 1.48 1.42 1.5 - - Calc RD

V3-72 V3-72_006 Include S4 301.10 303.60 2.50 100 - 0.5 37.6 34.77 - - - - - 1.66 1.66 1.58 2 - - Calc RD

V91-04C V91-04C_008 Include S4m 50.25 53.41 3.16 - 7.6 0.5 12.54 11.59 - - - - - 1.35 1.35 1.32 4.5 - - Calc RD

V91-06 V91-06_001 Include S4A 19.30 22.00 2.70 - 6.84 0.5 16.7 15.44 - - - - - 1.40 1.40 1.36 4 - - Calc RD


V91-04C V91-04C_006 Include S4m 48.65 49.10 0.45 - 5.9 0.51 5.98 5.53 - - - - - 1.27 1.27 1.25 7.5 - - Calc RD

V91-04C V91-04C_007 Exclude NC/S4m 49.30 49.49 0.19 - 6.98 0.51 39.84 36.84 - - - - - 1.68 1.68 1.60 6.5 - - Calc RD


V91-06 V91-06_002 Exclude S4A/NC 22.00 23.20 1.20 - 5.73 0.52 78.44 72.54 - - - - - 2.16 2.16 1.98 0 - - Calc RD

V91-16 V91-16 _008 Include S5 98.23 100.00 1.77 - 22.31 0.52 12.97 11.99 - - - - - 1.36 1.36 1.32 3.5 - - Calc RD


V91-13 V91-13_005 Exclude S4/NC 58.70 59.60 0.90 - 16.58 0.53 41.3 38.20 - - - - - 1.70 1.70 1.62 3.5 - - Calc RD


V3-72 V3-72_005 Include S4 299.60 301.10 1.50 100 - 0.54 14.9 13.78 - - - - - 1.38 1.38 1.34 6.5 - - Calc RD

V91-04C V91-04C_005 Exclude S4 48.08 48.59 0.51 - 3.66 0.54 54.85 50.74 - - - - - 1.87 1.87 1.75 1 - - Calc RD

V91-11 V91-11_002 Include S2l 96.85 97.20 0.35 - 16.76 0.54 32.91 30.44 - - - 5437.25 - 1.60 1.60 1.53 4 - - Calc RD

V91-13 V91-13_004 Include NC 49.10 50.40 1.30 - 8.69 0.54 32.55 30.11 - - - - - 1.60 1.60 1.53 4.5 - - Calc RD


V91-06 V91-06_003 Exclude NC/S5l 42.70 44.00 1.30 - 12.14 0.55 52.64 48.70 - - - - - 1.84 1.84 1.73 0.5 - - Calc RD



V91-04C V91-04C_004 Include S4 46.95 48.08 1.13 - 9.76 0.56 38.84 35.93 - - - - - 1.67 1.67 1.59 4 - - Calc RD

V91-11 V91-11_006 Include S4 110.60 112.50 1.90 - 24.1 0.56 21.24 19.65 - - - 6711.12 - 1.46 1.46 1.41 6.5 - - Calc RD

V91-16 V91-16 _004 Exclude S2m 16.50 17.50 1.00 - 5.27 0.56 64.47 59.65 - - - - - 1.99 1.99 1.85 1 - - Calc RD

V91-19 V91-19_001 Include S2m 52.49 57.00 4.51 - 19.81 0.56 24.23 22.42 - - - - - 1.49 1.49 1.44 3 - - Calc RD



G3 G3_001 Include S2 23.80 25.30 1.50 87 - 0.5 11 10.17 - - - - - 1.33 1.33 1.30 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

G3 G3_002 Include S2 25.30 28.30 3.00 87 - 0.5 14.9 13.78 - - - - - 1.38 1.38 1.34 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM



N88-69 N88-69_003 Include S5m 75.00 79.35 4.35 - - 0.5 30.7 28.39 - - - - - 1.57 1.57 1.51 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

N88-70 N88-70_001 Include S5 124.00 131.00 7.00 - - 0.5 30.4 28.11 - - - - - 1.57 1.57 1.50 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

N88-70 N88-70_002 Include S5 131.00 132.50 1.50 - - 0.5 37.7 34.86 - - - - - 1.66 1.66 1.58 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

RDH82-2 RDH82-2_005 Include S5 60.95 61.63 0.68 - - 0.5 25 23.12 - - - - 1.55 1.50 1.55 1.49 - - - WgtAve IM

RH1 RH1_001 Include NC 19.80 20.40 0.60 100 - 0.5 10.1 9.34 - - - - - 1.32 1.32 1.29 8.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM


RH1 RH1_003 Include S2m 25.00 26.50 1.50 100 - 0.5 11.7 10.82 - - - - - 1.34 1.34 1.31 5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM


RH2 RH2_002 Include NC 33.83 34.44 0.61 100 - 0.5 100 92.46 - - - - - 2.42 2.42 2.19 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment


RH3 RH3_001 Include S2 18.30 20.10 1.80 100 - 0.5 8.2 7.58 - - - - - 1.30 1.30 1.27 5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

RH3 RH3_002 Include S2 20.10 20.40 0.30 100 - 0.5 14.8 13.68 - - - - - 1.38 1.38 1.34 7.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM






RH4 RH4_004 Include S2l 43.74 46.00 2.26 100 - 0.5 12.2 11.28 - - - - - 1.35 1.35 1.31 5.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

RH4 RH4_005 Include S2l 46.00 49.38 3.38 100 - 0.5 8.2 7.58 - - - - - 1.30 1.30 1.27 7 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM




S16 S16_001 Include S2 42.06 48.77 6.71 - - 0.5 13.1 12.11 - - - - - 1.36 1.36 1.32 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

S1-67 S1-67_001 Include S2 37.34 40.84 3.50 - - 0.5 9.2 8.51 - - - - - 1.31 1.31 1.28 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM


S17 S17_002 Include S2m 29.26 33.22 3.96 - - 0.5 9.4 8.69 - - - - - 1.31 1.31 1.28 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

S17 S17_003 Include S2m 33.38 33.53 0.15 - - 0.5 9 8.32 - - - - - 1.31 1.31 1.28 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM


S18 S18_002 Include S2 36.58 38.40 1.82 - - 0.5 10.2 9.43 - - - - - 1.32 1.32 1.29 6.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

S19 S19_001 Include S2 7.01 13.11 6.10 - - 0.5 8 7.40 - - - - - 1.30 1.30 1.27 0 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

















S21 S21_012 Include S4m 120.40 123.44 3.04 - - 0.5 15.5 14.33 - - - - - 1.39 1.39 1.35 1.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM











S29 S29_002 Include S2 32.61 36.42 3.81 - - 0.5 9 8.32 - - - - - 1.31 1.31 1.28 5.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM




DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment




















S38 S38_003 Include S2l 75.90 78.94 3.04 - - 0.5 7.3 6.75 - - - - - 1.29 1.29 1.26 8 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

S38 S38_004 Include S2l 78.94 80.16 1.22 - - 0.5 6.1 5.64 - - - - - 1.27 1.27 1.25 9 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM













S43 S43_003 Include S2l 71.32 73.15 1.83 - - 0.5 10.4 9.62 - - - - - 1.32 1.32 1.29 4.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

S4-67 S4-67_001 Include S2 34.75 37.80 3.05 - - 0.5 6.4 5.92 - - - - - 1.28 1.28 1.25 6.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM







S47 S47_006 Include S4l 62.06 62.79 0.73 - - 0.5 11 10.17 - - - - - 1.33 1.33 1.30 2 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM



S6-67 S6-67_003 Include S3 75.59 77.11 1.52 - - 0.5 14 12.94 - - - - - 1.37 1.37 1.33 2 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V10-73 V10-73_001 Include S2 240.15 242.29 2.14 86 - 0.5 11.8 10.91 - - - - - 1.34 1.34 1.31 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM





V10-73 V10-73_006 Include S2m 251.80 252.62 0.82 89 - 0.5 12.7 11.74 - - - - - 1.35 1.35 1.32 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM


DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment






V10-73 V10-73_015 Exclude S5m/NC 332.80 334.40 1.60 88 - 0.5 49.3 45.58 - - - - - 1.80 1.80 1.70 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V12-73 V12-73_001 Exclude S2m/NC 220.70 221.60 0.90 89 - 0.5 56.8 52.52 - - - - - 1.89 1.89 1.77 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V12-73 V12-73_002 Include S2m 221.60 223.10 1.50 87 - 0.5 19 17.57 - - - - - 1.43 1.43 1.39 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V12-73 V12-73_003 Include S2l 223.10 224.90 1.80 89 - 0.5 12.1 11.19 - - - - - 1.35 1.35 1.31 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V12-73 V12-73_004 Include S2l 224.90 226.80 1.90 79 - 0.5 27.1 25.06 - - - - - 1.53 1.53 1.47 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V12-73 V12-73_005 Include NC 226.80 227.40 0.60 63 - 0.5 82.2 76.00 - - - - - 2.20 2.20 2.02 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V12-73 V12-73_007 Include NC 241.37 242.68 1.31 - - 0.5 84 77.67 - - - - - 2.22 2.22 2.04 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V1-72 V1-72_001 Include S2 337.41 340.10 2.69 75 - 0.5 11 10.17 - - - - - 1.33 1.33 1.30 7.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM

V1-72 V1-72_002 Include S2 340.10 341.50 1.40 79 - 0.5 14.3 13.22 - - - - - 1.37 1.37 1.33 6 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM


V3-72 V3-72_001 Include S2 278.90 283.10 4.20 100 - 0.5 12.9 11.93 - - - - - 1.36 1.36 1.32 4.5 - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM




V6-73 V6-73_001 Include S2 224.91 226.50 1.59 94 - 0.5 14 12.94 - - - - - 1.37 1.37 1.33 - - - Calc RD; WgtAve IM






















N88-41 N88-41_001 Include NC 39.10 44.00 4.90 - - 0.6 26 24.06 - - - - - 1.52 1.52 1.46 - - - Calc RD











DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment

N88-65 N88-65_003 Include NC 88.50 90.25 1.75 - - 0.6 82 75.90 - - - - - 2.20 2.20 2.02 - - - Calc RD


RDH82-5 RDH82-5_001 Include S5 99.40 100.50 1.10 87 4.47 0.6 21.2 19.62 18.1 59.9 0.29 6794 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.41 1.5 - -


RDH82-5 RDH82-5_003 Include S5 101.40 102.95 1.55 100 7.37 0.6 21.1 19.53 19.3 59.1 0.27 6690 1.45 1.46 1.45 1.40 1.5 - -

RDH82-5 RDH82-5_004 Include S5 102.95 104.89 1.94 96 5.87 0.6 19.4 17.96 35.7 44.4 0.23 5063 1.62 1.43 1.62 1.55 1 - -















RDH82-5 RDH82-5_019 Exclude 126.17 127.17 1.00 100 3.68 0.6 15.3 14.16 48.3 35.7 0.27 4054 1.8 1.38 1.8 1.70 1 - -

V1-72 V1-72_007 Include S4 386.10 386.79 0.69 - - 0.6 38.3 35.45 - - - - - 1.67 1.67 1.59 4 - - Calc RD


V91-11 V91-11_003 Exclude S2l/NC 97.20 97.70 0.50 - 19.18 0.61 43.44 40.21 - - - 4617.48 - 1.73 1.73 1.64 2.5 - - Calc RD

V91-11 V91-11_005 Exclude NC/S4 109.90 110.30 0.40 - 16.72 0.61 45.13 41.77 - - - 4536.22 - 1.75 1.75 1.66 5.5 - - Calc RD

V91-22 V91-22_016 Include S2l 71.20 71.90 0.70 - 16.52 0.63 31.97 29.60 - - - 5750.34 - 1.59 1.59 1.52 4.5 - - Calc RD


V91-22 V91-22_015 Include S2l 64.90 65.80 0.90 - 20.93 0.64 31.7 29.35 - - - 5616.5 - 1.59 1.59 1.52 2 - - Calc RD

V91-04C V91-04C_009 Include S4m 55.24 56.20 0.96 - 10.71 0.67 51.01 47.25 - - - - - 1.82 1.82 1.72 2 - - Calc RD



V91-25 V91-25_008 Exclude S4/NC 168.70 169.70 1.00 - 23 0.68 66.46 61.56 - - - - - 2.01 2.01 1.87 1 - - Calc RD



N88-36 N88-36_004 Include S5l 40.00 43.00 3.00 - - 0.7 28.9 26.78 - - - - - 1.55 1.55 1.49 - - - Calc RD









V91-16 V91-16 _003 Exclude S2/NC 11.20 12.60 1.40 - 4.1 0.7 62.26 57.68 - - - - - 1.96 1.96 1.83 1 - - Calc RD


V91-02 V91-02_001 Include S2m 100.45 101.70 1.25 - 3.38 0.71 30.07 27.86 - - - - - 1.57 1.57 1.50 3.5 - - Calc RD

V91-13 V91-13_002 Exclude NC 45.30 45.60 0.30 - 4.42 0.72 55 50.97 - - - - - 1.87 1.87 1.76 1 - - Calc RD

V91-22 V91-22_014 Exclude S2m 45.50 45.70 0.20 - 1.96 0.72 60.06 55.66 - - - 3157.19 - 1.93 1.93 1.81 2 - - Calc RD

V91-13 V91-13_001 Include S2m 42.50 45.25 2.75 - 5.65 0.74 23.24 21.54 - - - - - 1.48 1.48 1.43 2 - - Calc RD


V91-22 V91-22_012 Include S2m 33.50 36.00 2.50 - 2.88 0.76 21.18 19.63 - - - 6608.35 - 1.46 1.46 1.41 3.5 - - Calc RD


DrillholeSample ID


From

(m)To (m)

Length

(m)

Core Rec

(%)TM (%)

IM

(%)

Ash_adb

_%

Ash_pct_i

nsitu

CALC

VM acd

(%)

FC

adb

(%)

S adb

(%)

CV_adb_

CAL_G

RD

adb

RD

RegCALC

RD

Meas &

Calc

RD_IS-

CALC

8pctMis

FSI HGI P_% Comment

V91-22 V91-22_009 Exclude S2/NC 25.90 26.50 0.60 - 2.49 0.79 47.81 44.34 - - - 4251.81 - 1.78 1.78 1.69 1 - - Calc RD





N88-59 N88-59_002 Exclude S5 72.20 74.80 2.60 - - 0.8 51.1 47.39 - - - - - 1.82 1.82 1.72 - - - Calc RD

V12-73 V12-73_008 Include S4m 242.68 244.80 2.12 - - 0.8 30.4 28.19 - - - - - 1.57 1.57 1.51 2 - - Calc RD


V91-01C V91-01C_001 Exclude S2l 122.35 125.29 2.94 - 10.83 0.85 58.01 53.83 - - - - - 1.91 1.91 1.79 1 - - Calc RD


V91-03 V91-03_003 Exclude S2l/NC 45.00 45.40 0.40 - 3.64 0.87 65.12 60.44 - - - - - 2.00 2.00 1.86 1 - - Calc RD

V91-01C V91-01C_002 Include S2l 127.07 131.20 4.13 - 4.75 0.88 49.06 45.54 - - - - - 1.80 1.80 1.70 1 - - Calc RD





V91-05 V91-05_004 Exclude S4 77.00 77.50 0.50 - 17.43 0.92 64.66 60.04 - - - - - 1.99 1.99 1.86 1 - - Calc RD

V91-01C V91-01C_003 Include S2l 132.15 133.15 1.00 - 4.74 0.97 65.59 60.93 - - - - - 2.00 2.00 1.87 1 - - Calc RD

V91-03 V91-03_002 Exclude NC/S2m 41.80 45.00 3.20 - 3.74 0.97 50.51 46.92 - - - - - 1.82 1.82 1.72 1 - - Calc RD


N88-56 N88-56_001 Exclude S2 57.70 60.60 2.90 - - 1 60.6 56.32 - - - - - 1.94 1.94 1.82 - - - Calc RD

N88-60 N88-60_002 Include NC 9.30 11.70 2.40 - - 1 62.5 58.08 - - - - - 1.96 1.96 1.84 - - - Calc RD

N88-67 N88-67_002 Include S5 55.00 59.25 4.25 - - 1 33 30.67 - - - - - 1.60 1.60 1.54 - - - Calc RD

N88-69 N88-69_001 Include S5 62.65 67.00 4.35 - - 1 31.6 29.37 - - - - - 1.59 1.59 1.52 - - - Calc RD

V10-73 V10-73_008 Include S4 266.94 268.80 1.86 - - 1 18.7 17.38 - - - - - 1.43 1.43 1.39 6 - - Calc RD




V91-11 V91-11_008 Exclude NC/S4l 112.90 113.22 0.32 - 16.15 1.1 78.22 72.76 - - - 1242.8 - 2.16 2.16 2.00 0 - - Calc RD


V91-03 V91-03_001 Exclude NC 41.30 41.80 0.50 - 9.43 1.34 88.62 82.64 - - - - - 2.29 2.29 2.11 0 - - Calc RD




oal resources for the chinook projectmontem-resources.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/... ·...

Documents