Wrap Text
Positive Results from Bengwenyama DFS Metallurgical Test Work
Southern Palladium Limited
Incorporated in the Commonwealth of Australia
Australian Company Number 646 391 899
ASX share code: SPD
JSE share code: SDL
ISIN AU0000220808
("Southern Palladium" or "the Company")
Positive Results from Bengwenyama DFS Metallurgical Test Work
Highlights:
• Metallurgical test work on Southern Palladium's Bengwenyama Platinum Group Metals
(PGM) project UG2 metallurgical sample conducted by RM Process Pty Ltd and MAK
Analytical confirms the high-grade nature of the Bengwenyama UG2 Mineral Resource.
• Test work results show that a significant increase in chromite concentrate recoveries is
achievable from a coarser grind spiral feed. Recoveries of 65% were achieved in the test work
compared with 30% assumed in the Optimised Pre-Feasibility Study (OPFS).
• The doubling of high-grade chrome concentrate recoveries has a materially positive impact
on project revenues, with chrome comprising 12% of revenue in the OPFS.
• Adding a Dense Media Separation (DMS) circuit, which wasn't included in the OPFS
flowsheet, removes a significant proportion of waste rock, thus reducing the size of the
planned downstream mill-float circuit.
Southern Palladium (ASX:SPD and JSE:SDL), 'Southern Palladium' or 'the Company') Southern
Palladium Limited ("Southern Palladium" or "the Company") is pleased to report results from
metallurgical test work undertaken as part of the Definitive Feasibility Study ("DFS") for the
Bengwenyama PGM Project.
Managing Director Johan Odendaal, said: "Southern Palladium continues to make strong and steady
progress across all fronts of the DFS. Results from metallurgical and geotechnical drilling programme —
including consistent UG2 reef intersections at shallow depths — reinforce our confidence in the
robustness of the orebody and show material upside to high-grade chrome production and improved
PGM recoveries".
Metallurgical Samples
Sample Composition
A third and fourth metallurgical sample were collected during the Phase 2 Drilling Programme towards
the end of 2025 for the definitive metallurgical test work for the DFS. This consisted of a 160.6 kg UG2
sample (sample 3), from 12 drillholes, and a 20 kg footwall sample (sample 4), from 9 drillholes. The
footwall sample consisted of 10 kg mineralised footwall pyroxenite and 10 kg non-mineralised footwall
pyroxenite. Figures 1 and 2 show the location of the metallurgical drillholes that were used for the
composite samples for the UG2 reef (undiluted) and UG2 mineralised footwall sample respectively. The
samples were focused on the production area for the first 10 years of the PFS.
The samples were analysed for Pt, Pd & Au (3E) and Cr2O3 for the metallurgical test work.
Figure u: UG2 Metallurgical Sample Locations
Figure 1: Mineralised Footwall Sample Locations.
Sample Analysis
The 160 kg composite undiluted UG2 metallurgical sample returned a Pt, Pd & Au (3E) grade of 7.36 g/t,
with a prill split for Pt:Pd:Au of 47.8% : 50.3% : 1.9% and a Cr2O3 grade of 28.92%.
This metallurgical sample has once again confirmed the grade and robust nature of the UG2 Mineral
Resource. On a 3E basis, the resource reported an average combined Pt, Pd & Au (3E) grade of 7.35 g/t,
with a prill split of 49.9% Pt, 48.6% Pd and 1.5% Au with a Cr2O3 grade of 29.71%. This correlation
between the metallurgical sample grades and the Mineral Resource grades confirms that the
metallurgical sample is representative of the first 10 years of the planned development.
Dense Media Separation
DMS test work results
Dense Media Separation ("DMS") test work was performed on a non-mineralised footwall composite
and on a disseminated footwall composite.
The two composites were made up using material obtained from Metallurgical Sample 4, where one
composite consisted of non-mineralised footwall only and the other composite consisted of
disseminated footwall only. The composites did not contain any UG2 reef.
The non-mineralised footwall sample was tested at a DMS density of 3.4 and the waste reject was 99.6%
with a 3E PGM grade of 0.10 g/t. The concentrate recovered was 0.4% with a 3E PGM grade of 0.30 g/t.
The disseminated footwall was tested at three DMS densities namely 3.0, 3.2 and 3.4. The optimal DMS
density to recover the most PGM's was 3.2. At this density the waste reject was 51.3% with a 3E PGM
grade of 0.51 g/t. Moreover, the concentrate recovered was 48.7% with a 3E PGM grade of 2.26 g/t.
The conclusion from this work is that waste from both non-mineralised and disseminated footwall
mineralisation can be effectively separated using DMS. Consequently:
• the feed grade to the mill will be higher than without DMS; and
• the required mill/float plant size will be smaller.
Accordingly, a DMS will now be included in the DFS flowsheet. It had not been included in the OPFS
circuit as test work had not been completed at that time.
Chromite Recovery
Gravity test work results
Gravity (shaking table) test work was performed on a composite representative of UG2 reef with the aim
of optimising chromite recoveries from the UG2 ore.
A composite was made up using material obtained from Metallurgical Sample 3 and divided into two
batches. Batch 1 was a coarse grind, milled to 20% passing 75 µm and Batch 2 was a finer grind, milled
to 40% passing 75µm. Both batches consisted of UG2 reef only and did not contain any footwall waste.
Both batches had the same composition with a chromite grade of 21.7% and a 3E PGM grade of 5.2 g/t.
RM Process estimated the expected performance from a spiral circuit by applying a proprietary
simulation model, utilising operating and test work data obtained from various operating plants.
The modelling results from the Batch 1 test, the coarser grind, demonstrated a coarse chromite
recovery of 65.7% with a chromite grade of 39.6%, yielding approximately 36,000 tpm of chrome
concentrate from an ore throughput of 100,000 tpm.
The modelling results from the Batch 2 test, the finer grind, showed chromite recovery of 46.4% with a
chromite grade of 39.5% yielding approximately 25,700 tpm of chrome concentrate from an ore
throughput of 100,000 tpm.
The OPFS assumed 30% recovery of chromite.
The impact on the Bengwenyama flow sheet and chromite production
The application of Dense Media Separation (DMS) as a waste rejection stage in UG2 beneficiation is a
well-established industry practice for removing barren footwall and hanging wall material included in
the mining cut. The key benefits of this approach are a substantial reduction in the milling and
flotation circuit load, together with a marked increase in both PGM and chromite head grades to the
concentrator.
The higher mass yield of chromite concentrate, and DMS waste removal, will materially reduce the
quantity of feed to the PGM mill/flotation circuit.
Higher feed grades into the flotation circuit are expected to result in better flotation recovery results,
according to consultants RM Process. This test work is currently underway.
A coarse grind size will reduce the proportion of chromite fines (-32 µm) which can entrain in the
PGM concentrate. This will lessen the risk of PGM concentrate penalties due to elevated chrome
levels.
Next steps
The interim metallurgical report completed by consultants RM Process and MAK Analytical shows a
material upside to chrome concentrate recoveries, enabling a smaller PGM mill/flotation circuit.
These results are being refined into the final DFS level work on plant design and metrics.
JORC Competent Persons Statement
Uwe Engelmann
The information in this report that relates to Exploration Targets, Exploration Results, Mineral Resources
or Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Mr Uwe Engelmann (BSc (Zoo. & Bot.), BSc Hons
(Geol.), Pr.Sci.Nat. No. 400058/08, FGSSA). Mr. Engelmann is a director of Minxcon (Pty) Ltd and a
member of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions. Minxcon provides geological
consulting services to Southern Palladium Limited. Mr. Engelmann has sufficient experience that is
relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being
undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code
for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr. Engelmann consents to
the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it
appears. Mr Engelmann has a beneficial interest in Southern Palladium through a shareholding in
Nicolas Daniel Resources Proprietary Limited.
Daan van Heerden
The scientific and technical information contained in this announcement has been reviewed, prepared,
and approved by Mr Daan van Heerden (B Eng (Min.), MCom (Bus.Admin.), MMC, Pr.Eng. No. 20050318,
AMMSA, FSAIMM). Mr van Heerden is a director of Minxcon (Pty) Ltd and a Registered Professional
Engineer with the Engineering Council of South Africa, a Member of the Association of Mine Managers
South African Council, as well as a Fellow Member of the South African Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy. Minxcon provides geological consulting services to Southern Palladium Limited. Mr van
Heerden has sufficient experience that is relevant to the styles of mineralisation and activities being
undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person, as such term is defined in the 2012 Edition of the
'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr. van
Heerden consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and
context in which it appears. Mr. van Heerden has a beneficial interest in Southern Palladium through a
shareholding in Nicolas Daniel Resources Proprietary Limited.
For further information, please contact:
Johan Odendaal Phone: +27 82 557 6088
Managing Director Email: johan.odendaal@southernpalladium.com
Southern Palladium
Media & investor relations inquiries:
Australia: Ben Jarvis, Six Degrees Investor Relations: +61 413 150 448 , ben.jarvis@sdir.com.au
South Africa: Sherilee Lakmidas, R&A Strategic Communications, +27 79 276 2529 , sherilee@rasc.co.za
15 April 2026
JSE Sponsor
Merchantec Capital
This announcement has been approved for release by the Board of Southern Palladium
Follow @SouthernPalladium on Twitter
Follow Southern Palladium on LinkedIn
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: JORC Checklist – Table 1 Assessment and Reporting Criteria
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels,
random chips, or specific specialised industry 20 cm samples are taken within the reef horizon unless there is a lithological reason to deviate from
standard measurement tools appropriate to the this. A single sample is also taken in the hanging wall and footwall to test for mineralisation in the
minerals under investigation, such as down hole direct waste rock. The samples are split with a core saw and one half is submitted to the laboratory
gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). and the other half keep in the core tray.
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 The core is orientated in such a way that the two halves are equal.
of any measurement tools or systems used.
Sampling techniques Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that
are Material to the Public Report. In cases where
'industry standard' work has been done this would be
relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling
was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was The sampling methodology is standard and as per industry practice in the Bushveld Complex (BC).
pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). The samples are 20 cm in length and are split into two equal halves with one half being submitted
In other cases, more explanation may be required, for analysis. The core size starts as HQ (10 m to 50 m) but is NQ by the time the reef is intersected.
such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent
sampling problems. Unusual commodities or
mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may
warrant disclosure of detailed information.
Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole The drillholes start with HQ (for approximately 10-50 m) in the weathered zone but are then drilled
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) NQ once in the fresher material. The drill rigs that were utilised have been the CS 1500, Delta 520
and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard and a smaller Longyear 44.
Drilling techniques tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by The drill contractor is Geomech Africa.
what method, etc.).
Initially the core was scanned in with the software ScanIT which scans the core with high resolution
photos and the geologists reconcile the depths and core losses per 3 m run. The Core recoveries
Method of recording and assessing core and chip and RQD are then calculated for the drillhole. ScanIT has however, been discontinued, and the
Drill sample recovery sample recoveries and results assessed. core is now photographed and the core recovery and RQD is calculated manually by the geological
assistants.
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and The geologist informs the drilling supervisor at what depth the reef is expected so that they can take
ensure representative nature of the samples. extra precautions around the anticipated reef depth.
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
The core recoveries are measured per 3 m run and if there is excessive core loss in the reef
horizon it is marked as a non-representative sample and will not be used in the resource estimation
process.
Whether a relationship exists between sample The core recoveries for the intersections submitted to the laboratory are all above 98%. If the core
recovery and grade and whether sample bias may loss is excessive the sample is not submitted to the laboratory for Mineral Resource estimation
have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of purposes. Therefore, there will not be any sample bias due to poor recoveries.
fine/coarse material.
Whether core and chip samples have been The core was initially scanned into ScanIT software which produced high resolution images. This
geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of has however been discontinued. The logging is conducted on paper log sheets or tablets at the
detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource core yard with dropdown menus. Legends have been set up in excel that cover the necessary
estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. detailed required for Mineral Resource estimation. Alpha angles and structure detail is also
observed and logged. The beta angle is not measured as the core is not orientated but the
Logging downhole televiewer survey supplies structural orientation information which is incorporated into the
logs.
Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in Core logging is qualitative and utilises excel spreadsheets on tablets.
nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography.
The total length and percentage of the relevant The total drillhole is geologically logged and photographed and the televiewer survey is conducted
intersections logged. from 100 m above the reef horizon for additional structural information.
If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half
or all cores taken. The core is cut in two equal halves for sampling and storage purposes.
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, This project only makes use of core drilling.
etc. and whether sampled wet or dry.
The sample preparation code at ALS is PREP-31H which has the following procedure: -
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. Login of samples into the system, weighing, fine crushing of entire sample to 70% - 2 mm, split off
500 g and pulverize split to better than 85% passing 75 microns.
The QAQC sequence is as follows: -
Sub-sampling techniques Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- If the batch is less than 20 samples the batch starts and ends with a blank and a CRM and
and sample preparation sampling stages to maximise representivity of duplicate are inserted into the sample stream. If the batch is great than 20 samples then the batch
samples. starts and ends with a blank and every tenth sample is either a CRM, duplicate or blank. This
equates to between 20% and 10% QAQC samples.
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is The sampling of the reef is reef material only except for the first and last sample of the reef as it will
representative of the in-situ material collected, have 2 cm of hanging wall or footwall material to ensure the entire mineralisation is captured. This 2
including for instance results for field cm dilution will be calculated into the reef width. The hanging wall and footwall are sampled
duplicate/second-half sampling. separately to the reef. Hence the reef samples are representative of the in-situ reef horizon.
Requested duplicates are pulp duplicates and the CRMs are material from the UG2 and MR from
African Mineral Standards ("AMIS").
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain The reef horizon is sampled in 20 cm increments so that the grade distribution can be observed if a
size of the material being sampled. mining cut is required. The UG2 reef is approximately 70 cm wide and will have three to four
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
samples which will be composited later. The MR is wider at around 200 cm and will have about ten
individual samples to determine the grade distribution. These will also be composited later for
Mineral Resource Estimation purposes. Hanging wall and footwall samples are also taken to check
if there is any mineralisation in the direct surrounding waste rock.
This is industry best practice for the BC.
The nature, quality and appropriateness of the The UG2 reef will be assayed for 4E and 7E as well as for Cu, Ni, Co, Cr and Fe. The MR will be
assaying and laboratory procedures used and assayed for the same except the Cr and Fe as it is not a chromitite seam but a pyroxenite layer.
whether the technique is considered partial or total.
The ALS methods are as follows: -
PGM-ICP23 - Pt, Pd, Au package using lead fire assay with ICP-AES finish. 30 g nominal sample
weight.
Rh-ICP28 - Fire assay fusion using lead flux with Pd collector for Rh determination by ICPAES. 10
g nominal sample weight.
PGM-MS25NS - The Platinum Group Metals are separated from the gangue material using the
Nickel Sulphide Fire Assay procedure. After dissolution of the pulp with aqua regia, PGMs are
determined by ICP-MS.
ME-XRF26s - Analysis of Chromite ore samples by fused disc / XRF. This method is suitable for the
determination of major and minor elements in ore samples which require a high dilution digest such
as Chromite ores. Elements that will be analysed are Cr, Cu, Ni, Fe and Co.
Quality of assay data and
laboratory tests The overall pass rate of the various QAQC samples is 90%.
All methodologies are total.
For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF All analytical work is undertaken by ALS Chemex South Africa (Pty) Ltd, located in Johannesburg,
instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining which is part of the ALS group. The South African laboratory is ISO 17025 accredited by SANAS
the analysis including instrument make and model, (South African National Accreditation System).
reading times, calibrations factors applied and their
derivation, etc. The historical Anglovaal samples were sent to the Anglovaal Research Laboratory (AVRL), which
was located in Florida, South Africa when it existed, for analysis.
Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g.
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory QAQC procedure has been described above. In addition to the QAQC samples the analytical
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy methodologies are also correlated with each other i.e. PGM-ICP23 and RH-ICP28 is compared to
(i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been PGM-MS25NS. There is a good correlation and on average are within 1 - 2% of each other over the
established. 4E grade.
The verification of significant intersections by either Two umpire laboratories were used, Suntech and Mintek. The umpire samples showed good
independent or alternative company personnel. correlation for the overall 4E grades as well as the individual elements for the prill splits.
Verification of sampling and Discuss any adjustment to assay data. No adjustments have been made to the assayed results.
assaying Documentation of primary data, data entry The assay results are received from the laboratory in pdf format and excel format. The excel form is
procedures, data verification, data storage (physical imported into the Minxcon excel database. These are checked by the senior geologist. The assay
and electronic) protocols. certificates are stored in the project folder.
8
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
No twinning has been undertaken to date. However, statistics was utilised to confirm that the Nkwe
The use of twinned holes. dataset and new SPD dataset can be combined.
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate Drillhole collar positions are initially recorded by handheld Garmin GPS. Drillhole collar survey was
drillholes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, conducted by Aero Geomatics (Pty) Ltd. All completed drillholes were surveyed by post-processing
mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Kinematic methodology. ("PPK"). The accuracy of PPK is 5 mm + 0.5 ppm horizontally and 10 mm
Resource estimation. + 1 ppm vertically. The survey was based on the World Geodetic System 1984 ellipsoid, commonly
Location of data points known as WGS84.
Specification of the grid system used. The coordinate system used is LO31.
Regional three-dimensional ("3D") topography was constructed from regional surface contours and
Quality and adequacy of topographic control. Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) data. The surface was trimmed 300–500 m beyond the
Project perimeter. A Lidar DTM will however be flown for the mining studies.
The final drillhole spacing will be between 200 m and 350 m. There could be gaps in this grid if
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. there is sufficient confidence in the structure of the fault / structural block.
Whether the data spacing, and distribution is
sufficient to establish the degree of geological and Geological continuity is based on the knowledge of the surrounding area and 3D model constructed
Data spacing and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource from historical data. 82 drillholes and 50 deflections have been completed confirming the position of
distribution and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and the UG2 and Merensky reefs. The total drilling meters is 30,746m.
classifications applied.
The 20 cm (or larger) samples are composited to obtain the weighted average of the entire
Whether sample compositing has been applied. intersection.
Whether the orientation of sampling achieves
unbiased sampling of possible structures and the The drillholes are vertical drillholes and intersect the reef close to right angles. The sample is
extent to which this is known, considering the deposit therefore unbiased. If the reef is faulted it will be noted and if the reef intersection is not
Orientation of data in type. representative, it will not be used in Mineral Resource estimations.
relation to geological If the relationship between the drilling orientation and
structure the orientation of key mineralised structures is No sampling bias will be introduced based on the drilling orientation as they are close to
considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this perpendicular.
should be assessed and reported if material.
Samples are only handled by the drilling contractor and the Minxcon geological staff. There is a
Sample security The measures taken to ensure sample security. strict chain of custody that is followed from the time the core leaves the drill site to the time the
sample is received by the laboratory.
An audit on the exploration processes and geological interpretations was undertaken by Dr. Richard
Hornsey from Richard Hornsey Consulting (Pty) Ltd from 17 to 19 January 2024. No issues were
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling identified in terms of the procedures and data but valuable geological input around the geology of
Audits or reviews techniques and data.
the dome structure was supplied.
Additional historical Anglovaal drilling data was shared by Dr. Richard Hornsey with SPD for the
utilisation in the geological interpretation, 3D modelling and estimation of the Nooitverwacht area.
9
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Type, reference name/number, location and The Company has submitted a Mining Right Application to the Competent Authority, Department of
ownership including agreements or material issues Mineral Resources and Energy for the proposed Bengwenyama Mine Underground Project. To
with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, date, the following environmental milestones have been achieved. The granting of the Preferent
overriding royalties, native title interests, historical Prospecting Right number LP30/5/1/1/3/2/1/002PPR under Section 104 of the Mineral and
sites, wilderness or national park and environmental Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 as amended issued June 2015 and execution and
settings. completion of exploration activities with respective environmental compliance monitoring was
Mineral tenement and land February 2024. The Prospecting Right covers all elements of potential economic interest and has
tenure status expired but an application for a Mining Right is pending approval. Assessments have been
undertaken to determine the status of the environment and to determine any potential sensitivities
to be avoided and / or mitigated.
The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting
along with any known impediments to obtaining a The prospecting right was valid until February 2024. However, the application for the Mining Right
licence to operate in the area. has begun and is in progress.
Exploration done by other Drilling was undertaken by Rustenburg Platinum Mines from 1966 to 1985. Trojan exploration
parties completed drilling on Eerstegeluk between 1990 and 1993. Drilling prior to 1994 was not used as
part of this Mineral Resource estimate (MRE) due to the incomplete nature or availability of the
drillhole data. Nkwe completed drillholes in 2007–2008. This drilling supports the MRE.
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by Reconnaissance mapping has been completed by previous operators.
other parties. However, new historical drilling data from 1988 to 1991 from Anglovaal has been discovered
through Dr. Richard Hornsey and has been utilised in the estimation of the Nooitverwacht
extension inferred Mineral Resource. The drilling that was completed was a joint venture between
Anglovaal through Midvaal Mining Company and Severin Mining and Development Company (Pty)
Ltd.
The target UG2 and Merensky reefs occur within the Upper Critical Zone of the Rustenburg
Layered Suite of the BC. These reefs are laterally continuous for tens to hundreds of kilometres.
Deposit type, geological setting and style of The UG2 comprises mineralised chromitite, whereas the Merensky Reef is defined as the
Geology mineralisation. mineralised pyroxenitic zone between upper and lower chromitite stringers. The BC is the world's
largest igneous intrusion and also the largest global repository of PGEs and chromitite. Both reefs
are stratiform with relatively minor disruptive structural features and replacement deposits.
A summary of all information material to the Drilling
Northing Easting Elevation Dip Azimuth From To Drilled Metres
understanding of the exploration results including a BHID
WG31
Comment
m º º m m m
tabulation of the following information for all E001 -87997 -2734366 856 -90 0 0.00 554.75 554.75 EOH, completed
Material drillholes: E001D1 -87997 -2734366 856 -90 0 508.00 552.02 44.02 EOH, Completed
* easting and northing of the drillhole collar E003 -87886 -2735050 841 -90 0 0.00 563.75 563.75 EOH, Completed
* elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation E004 -87545 -2734954 836 -90 0 0.00 524.50 524.50 EOH, completed
E004D1 -87545 -2734954 836 -90 0 457.00 518.75 61.75 Deflection completed
above sea level in metres) of the drillhole collar E007 -87016 -2735561 823 -90 0 0.00 422.80 422.80 EOH, completed
* dip and azimuth of the hole E010 -86653 -2735835 815 -90 0 0.00 365.90 365.90 EOH, Completed
* down hole length and interception depth E010D1 -86653 -2735835 815 -90 0 301.00 363.96 62.96 EOH, Completed
* hole length. E010D2 -86653 -2735835 815 -90 0 295.00 365.90 70.90 EOH, Completed
E011 -86918 -2736242 815 -90 0 0.00 407.75 407.75 EOH, Completed
E011D1 -86918 -2736242 815 -90 0 74.00 100.00 26.00 EOH, Completed
E011D2 -86918 -2736242 815 -90 0 68.00 98.75 30.75 EOH, Completed
E013 -86433 -2736520 805 -90 0 0.00 327.22 327.22 EOH, completed
E014 -86585 -2736211 811 -90 0 0.00 354.10 354.10 EOH, completed
E014D1 -86585 -2736211 811 -90 0 302.00 344.04 42.04 EOH, Completed
E014D2 -86585 -2736211 811 -90 0 292.00 346.55 54.55 EOH, Completed
E015 -86175 -2736459 801 -90 0 0.00 298.72 298.72 EOH, completed
E016 -87176 -2736677 812 -90 0 0.00 454.68 454.68 EOH, completed
E017 -87228 -2736278 820 -90 0 0.00 461.65 461.65 EOH, Completed
E019 -86451 -2736870 802 -90 0 0.00 32.42 32.42 Abandoned
E019a -86446 -2736871 802 -90 0 0.00 323.77 323.77 EOH, completed
E020 -86719 -2737286 796 -90 0 0.00 350.75 350.75 EOH, completed
E021 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 0.00 249.05 249.05 EOH, Completed
Drillhole Information E021D1 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 203.00 247.00 44.00 EOH, Completed
E021D2 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 197.00 247.00 50.00 EOH, Completed
E021D3 -85783 -2736771 790 -90 0 187.00 247.55 60.55 EOH, Completed
E024 -86103 -2737214 799 -90 0 0.00 284.75 284.75 EOH, completed
E025 -85961 -2737488 793 -90 0 0.00 267.58 267.58 EOH, completed
E027 -86336 -2737554 789 -90 0 0.00 290.75 290.75 EOH, completed
E028 -86763 -2736874 804 -90 0 0.00 383.75 383.75 EOH, completed
E029 -86619 -2737663 789 -90 0 0.00 320.78 320.78 EOH, Completed
E029D1 -86619 -2737663 789 -90 0 248.00 320.78 72.78 EOH, Completed
E030 -87118 -2737703 798 -90 0 0.00 413.75 413.75 EOH, completed
E031 -87055 -2737304 800 -90 0 0.00 423.22 423.22 EOH, completed
E032 -87186 -2737011 807 -90 0 0.00 467.75 467.75 EOH, Completed
E033 -85929 -2737822 784 -90 0 0.00 261.58 261.58 EOH, completed
E034 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 0.00 298.38 298.38 EOH, Completed
E034D1 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 232.00 296.88 64.88 EOH, Completed
E034D2 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 227.00 296.51 69.51 EOH, Completed
E035 -85755 -2738095 773 -90 0 0.00 260.62 260.62 EOH, Completed
E035D1 -85755 -2738095 773 -90 0 213.00 257.62 44.62 EOH, Completed
E036 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 0.00 276.47 276.47 EOH, Completed
E036D1 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 231.00 273.47 42.47 EOH, Completed
E036D2 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 225.00 277.97 52.97 EOH, Completed
E036D3 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 219.00 276.99 57.99 EOH, Completed
E037 -86265 -2738275 774 -90 0 0.00 282.45 282.45 EOH, completed
E039 -87036 -2738502 781 -90 0 0.00 249.30 249.30 EOH, Completed
E039D1 -87036 -2738502 781 -90 0 166.00 229.23 63.23 EOH, Completed
E041 -86452 -2738759 768 -90 0 0.00 258.77 258.77 EOH, completed
E043 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 0.00 266.14 266.14 EOH, Completed
E043D1 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 193.00 263.00 70.00 EOH, Completed
E043D2 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 182.00 263.89 81.89 EOH, Completed
E044 -86399 -2739001 774 -90 0 0.00 263.73 263.73 EOH, completed
E045 -86703 -2738971 779 -90 0 0.00 206.55 206.55 EOH, Completed
E046 -86818 -2738720 781 -90 0 0.00 245.68 245.68 EOH, Completed
E048 -85474 -2737965 769 -90 0 0.00 236.70 236.70 EOH, Completed
11
E049 -85950 -2739599 769 -90 0 0.00 322.75 322.75 EOH, completed, extended to UG1 for
E050 -85990 -2739275 768 -90 0 0.00 193.31 193.31 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E050D1 -85990 -2739275 768 -90 0 185.00 279.98 94.98 EOH, Completed
E034 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 0.00 298.38 298.38 EOH, Completed
E034D1 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 232.00 296.88 64.88 EOH, Completed
E034D2 -86501 -2737763 787 -90 0 227.00 296.51 69.51 EOH, Completed
E035 -85755 -2738095 773 -90 0 0.00 260.62 260.62 EOH, Completed
E035D1 -85755 -2738095 773 -90 0 213.00 257.62 44.62 EOH, Completed
E036 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 0.00 276.47 276.47 EOH, Completed
E036D1 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 231.00 273.47 42.47 EOH, Completed
E036D2 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 225.00 277.97 52.97 EOH, Completed
E036D3 -86252 -2737800 781 -90 0 219.00 276.99 57.99 EOH, Completed
E037 -86265 -2738275 774 -90 0 0.00 282.45 282.45 EOH, completed
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF
E039
EXPLORATION
-87036 -2738502
RESULTS
781 -90 0 0.00 249.30 249.30 EOH, Completed
Criteria Explanation E039D1 -87036 -2738502 781 -90 0 Detail
166.00 229.23 63.23 EOH, Completed
E041 -86452 -2738759 768 -90 0 0.00 258.77 258.77 EOH, completed
E043 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 0.00 266.14 266.14 EOH, Completed
E043D1 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 193.00 263.00 70.00 EOH, Completed
E043D2 -86097 -2738943 767 -90 0 182.00 263.89 81.89 EOH, Completed
E044 -86399 -2739001 774 -90 0 0.00 263.73 263.73 EOH, completed
E045 -86703 -2738971 779 -90 0 0.00 206.55 206.55 EOH, Completed
E046 -86818 -2738720 781 -90 0 0.00 245.68 245.68 EOH, Completed
E048 -85474 -2737965 769 -90 0 0.00 236.70 236.70 EOH, Completed
E049 -85950 -2739599 769 -90 0 0.00 322.75 322.75 EOH, completed, extended to UG1 for
E050 -85990 -2739275 768 -90 0 0.00 193.31 193.31 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E050D1 -85990 -2739275 768 -90 0 185.00 279.98 94.98 EOH, Completed
E051 -86256 -2739690 774 -90 0 0.00 105.56 105.56 EOH, Completed
E051D1 -86256 -2739690 774 -90 0 50.00 99.36 49.36 EOH, Completed
E052 -86338 -2739349 774 -90 0 0.00 252.55 255.55 EOH, Completed
E054 -85732 -2739268 762 -90 0 0.00 287.57 287.57 EOH, Completed
E056** -87026 -2739473 784 -90 0 0.00 335.70 335.70 EOH, Completed
E057** -87351 -2739458 789 -90 0 0.00 299.68 299.68 EOH, Completed
E058 -86128 -2740387 776 -90 0 0.00 158.25 158.25 EOH, completed
E059 -85913 -2739975 770 -90 0 0.00 99.55 99.55 EOH, Completed
E060 -85837 -2740293 773 -90 0 0.00 206.72 206.72 EOH, completed
E060D1 -85837 -2740293 773 -90 0 139.00 185.53 46.53 EOH, completed
E062 -86184 -2740003 775 -90 0 0.00 120.34 120.34 EOH, completed, extended to UG1 for
E062D1 -86184 -2740003 775 -90 0 18.30 34.92 16.62 Deflection completed, faulted UG2
E062D2 -86184 -2740003 775 -90 0 13.30 33.00 19.70 Deflection completed, faulted UG2
E064 -84844 -2738000 749 -90 0 0.00 166.40 166.40 EOH, completed
E065 -85573 -2738426 762 -90 0 0.00 239.75 239.75 EOH, completed
E066 -85299 -2738831 753 -90 0 0.00 225.32 225.32 EOH, Completed
E066D1 -85299 -2738831 753 -90 0 161.00 225.62 64.62 EOH, Completed
E067 -85466 -2739534 760 -90 0 0.00 306.45 306.45 EOH, completed
E069 -85315 -2740512 761 -90 0 0.00 305.45 305.45 EOH, Completed
E069D1 -85315 -2740512 761 -90 0 180.00 251.65 71.65 EOH, Completed
E070 -85144 -2737715 763 -90 0 0.00 191.90 191.90 EOH, Completed
E070D1 -85144 -2737715 763 -90 0 125.00 191.90 66.90 EOH, Completed
E071 -85049 -2738331 749 -90 0 0.00 188.80 188.80 EOH, completed
E072 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 0.00 254.75 254.75 EOH, Completed
E072D1 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 208.00 251.75 43.75 EOH, Completed
E072D2 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 203.00 251.75 48.75 EOH, Completed
E076 -85482 -2738844 755 -90 0 0.00 239.75 239.75 EOH, Completed
E077 -85821 -2738313 769 -90 0 0.00 264.22 264.22 EOH, Completed
E077D1 -85821 -2738313 769 -90 0 191.00 263.68 72.68 EOH, Completed
E079 -85446 -2739178 756 -90 0 0.00 270.13 270.13 EOH, Completed
E080 -85065 -2738654 746 -90 0 0.00 195.17 195.17 EOH, Completed
E082 -85905 -2738776 760 -90 0 0.00 248.90 248.90 EOH, Completed
E082D1 -85905 -2738776 760 -90 0 177.00 245.90 68.90 EOH, Completed
E085 -86750 -2738523 776 -90 0 0.00 251.90 251.90 EOH, Completed
E086 -86127 -2739438 770 -90 0 0.00 68.75 68.75 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E086A -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 0.00 260.75 260.75 EOH, Completed
E086AD1 -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 195.00 259.75 64.75 EOH, Completed
E086AD2 -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 190.00 257.75 67.75 EOH, Completed
E087 -86730 -2738203 782 -90 0 0.00 294.37 294.37 EOH, Completed
E091 -85179 -2740650 752 -90 0 0.00 350.75 350.75 EOH, Completed
E091D1 -85179 -2740650 752 -90 0 190.00 275.00 85.00 EOH, Completed
E092 -85027 -2740115 750 -90 0 0.00 360.05 360.05 EOH, Completed
E100 -88989 -2734027 895 -90 0 0.00 503.35 503.35 EOH, Completed
E101 -88735 -2735092 860 -90 0 0.00 507.40 507.40 EOH, Completed
E101D1 -88735 -2735092 860 -90 0 460.00 510.40 50.40 EOH, Completed
E105 -89028 -2736913 832 -90 0 0.00 744.08 744.08 EOH, Completed
E113 -87934 -2738339 793 -90 0 0.00 497.60 497.60 EOH, Completed
E114 -87909 -2738842 796 -90 0 0.00 101.68 101.68 EOH, Completed
E070D1 -85144 -2737715 763 -90 0 125.00 191.90 66.90 EOH, Completed
E071 -85049 -2738331 749 -90 0 0.00 188.80 188.80 EOH, completed
E072 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 0.00 254.75 254.75 EOH, Completed
E072D1 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 208.00 251.75 43.75 EOH, Completed
E072D2 -85670 -2738947 759 -90 0 203.00 251.75 48.75 EOH, Completed
E076 -85482 -2738844 755 -90 0 0.00 239.75 239.75 EOH, Completed
E077 -85821 -2738313 769 -90 0 0.00 264.22 264.22 EOH, Completed
E077D1 -85821 -2738313 769 -90 0 191.00 263.68 72.68 EOH, Completed
E079 -85446 -2739178 756 -90 0 0.00 270.13 270.13 EOH, Completed
E080 -85065 -2738654 746 -90 0 0.00 195.17 195.17 EOH, Completed
E082 -85905 -2738776 760 -90 0 0.00 248.90 248.90 EOH, Completed
E082D1 -85905 -2738776 760 -90 0 177.00 245.90 68.90 EOH, Completed
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
E085 -86750 -2738523 776 -90 0 0.00 251.90 251.90 EOH, Completed
E086 -86127 -2739438 770 -90 0 0.00 68.75 68.75 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E086A -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 0.00 260.75 260.75 EOH, Completed
E086AD1 -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 195.00 259.75 64.75 EOH, Completed
E086AD2 -86130 -2739442 770 -90 0 190.00 257.75 67.75 EOH, Completed
E087 -86730 -2738203 782 -90 0 0.00 294.37 294.37 EOH, Completed
E091 -85179 -2740650 752 -90 0 0.00 350.75 350.75 EOH, Completed
E091D1 -85179 -2740650 752 -90 0 190.00 275.00 85.00 EOH, Completed
E092 -85027 -2740115 750 -90 0 0.00 360.05 360.05 EOH, Completed
E100 -88989 -2734027 895 -90 0 0.00 503.35 503.35 EOH, Completed
E101 -88735 -2735092 860 -90 0 0.00 507.40 507.40 EOH, Completed
E101D1 -88735 -2735092 860 -90 0 460.00 510.40 50.40 EOH, Completed
E105 -89028 -2736913 832 -90 0 0.00 744.08 744.08 EOH, Completed
E113 -87934 -2738339 793 -90 0 0.00 497.60 497.60 EOH, Completed
E114 -87909 -2738842 796 -90 0 0.00 101.68 101.68 EOH, Completed
E115 -87331 -2738719 788 -90 0 0.00 93.30 93.30 EOH, Completed
E117 -85092 -2738849 746 -90 0 0.00 225.00 225.00 EOH, Completed
E118 -85830 -2739673 768 -90 0 0.00 294.18 294.18 EOH, Completed
E119 -89586 -2737994 850 -90 0 0.00 809.85 809.85 EOH, Completed
E120 -86593 -2739333 777 -90 0 0.00 218.68 218.68 EOH, Completed
E120D1 -86593 -2739333 777 -90 0 95.00 182.68 87.68 EOH, Completed
E121 -89429 -2735773 871 -90 0 0.00 515.79 515.79 Abandoned due to lost equipment
E121D1 -89429 -2735773 871 -90 0 426.00 628.56 202.56 EOH, Completed
E122 -86925 -2738886 782 -90 0 0.00 185.70 185.70 EOH, Completed
E124 -86874 -2737771 793 -90 0 0.00 356.65 356.65 EOH, Completed
E124D1 -86874 -2737771 793 -90 0 290.00 356.65 66.65 EOH, Completed
E125 -86540 -2739132 776 -90 0 0.00 233.75 233.75 EOH, Completed
E125D1 -86540 -2739132 776 -90 0 168.00 233.75 65.75 EOH, Completed
E126 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 0.00 268.42 268.42 EOH, Completed
E126D1 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 203.00 268.25 65.25 EOH, Completed
E126D2 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 195.45 268.00 72.55 EOH, Completed
E126D3 -86419 -2738207 773 -90 0 189.00 268.00 79.00 EOH, Completed
E128 -88317 -2734759 858 -90 0 0.00 536.75 536.75 EOH, Completed
E128D1 -88317 -2734759 858 -90 0 490.00 536.00 46.00 EOH, Completed
E128D2 -88317 -2734759 858 -90 0 484.00 533.75 49.75 EOH, Completed
E130 -88491 -2734387 869 -90 0 0.00 506.65 506.65 EOH, Completed
E130D1 -88491 -2734387 869 -90 0 441.00 505.00 64.00 EOH, Completed
E130D2 -88491 -2734387 869 -90 0 435.00 505.00 70.00 EOH, Completed
E131 -89026 -2734386 885 -90 0 0.00 497.75 497.75 EOH, Completed
E131D1 -89026 -2734386 885 -90 0 429.00 494.75 65.75 EOH, Completed
E132 -89652 -2734972 877 -90 0 0.00 749.55 749.55 EOH, Completed
E134 -89369 -2734315 894 -90 0 0.00 557.75 557.75 EOH, Completed
E134D1 -89369 -2734315 894 -90 0 512.00 556.00 44.00 EOH, Completed
E144 -88380 -2738325 800 -90 0 0.00 543.80 543.80 EOH, Completed
All drillholes were drilled -90 degrees.
The UG2 and MR geological and estimation models have been updated to include drilling and
assaying data as at end of May 2024. The structural / geological model utilised 20 historical
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Nkwe drillholes and 82 SPD drillholes while the estimation model utilised 10 historical Nkwe
drillholes and 73 SPD drillholes for the UG2 and 10 historical Nkwe drillholes and 18 SPD
drillholes for the MR. 9 historical Anglovaal drillholes were used in the estimation of the
Nooitverwacht extension.
Anglovaal Data - UG2 Reef composites
Anglovaal Data - Merensky Reef Composites
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
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 N/A
the report, the Competent Person should clearly
explain why this is the case.
In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging With the Mineral Resource update the statistical analysis recommended no top cutting of the grade
techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade for the UG2 reef. However, there is an instance (E121D1) within the MR where one sample had to
truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off be capped. The Mineral Resource has been declared at a paylimit of 2.2 g/t for the UG2 and 1.6 g/t
grades are usually Material and should be stated. for the MR.
Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths
Data aggregation methods of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade The individual 20cm samples are combined per drillhole per reef intersection for the composite
results, the procedure used for such aggregation grades used in the estimation process.
should be stated and some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
The assumptions used for any reporting of metal No metal equivalent has been reported but the various elements have been combined for
equivalent values should be clearly stated. 3PGE+Au grades (4E) and 6PGE+Au grades (7E).
15
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to
the drillhole angle is known, its nature should be
Relationship between reported. The intersection lengths stated are the downhole lengths. The drillholes are drilled at -90 degrees
mineralisation widths and and the reef dip is expected to be approximately 6 degrees. Therefore, the difference will be
intercept lengths If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are minimal.
reported, there should be a clear statement to this
effect (e.g. 'down hole length, true width not known').
Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and
tabulations of intercepts should be included for any
A map of the drillhole positions and the stratigraphic column was included in the previous press
Diagrams significant discovery being reported These should releases. A section has also been included in previous press releases.
include, but not be limited to, a plan view of drillhole
collar locations and appropriate sectional views.
Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration
Results is not practicable, representative reporting Reef intersection depths for all the drillholes have been reported in the table below.
Balanced reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should
be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
Exploration Results.
16
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Drilling Merensky Reef UG2 Reef
From To Width From To Width
BHID Comment Comment
m m m m m m
E001 259.82 261.64 1.82 Complete intersection 548.07 549.21 1.14 Complete intersection
E001D1 - - - Deflection below MR 547.78 548.26 0.48 Complete Intersection
E003 272.02 274.20 2.18 Complete intersection 558.16 559.16 1.00 Complete intersection
E004 210.77 212.90 2.13 Complete intersection 517.33 517.57 0.24 Pothole
E004D1 - - - Deflection below MR 515.83 516.52 0.69 Pothole
E007 100.38 102.54 2.16 Complete intersection 417.42 418.14 0.72 Complete intersection
E010 48.24 50.42 2.18 Complete intersection 361.67 362.20 0.52 Complete intersection
E010D1 - - - Deflection below MR 361.89 362.49 0.60 Complete intersection
E010D2 - - - Deflection below MR 361.25 361.90 0.64 Complete intersection
E011 94.89 96.88 1.99 Incomplete intersection, Grinding 399.23 400.43 1.20 Complete intersection
E011D1 94.89 96.91 2.02 Incomplete intersection, Grinding - - - Deflection drilled for MR
E011D2 94.99 97.20 2.22 Complete intersection - - - Deflection drilled for MR
E013 12.43 14.53 2.10 Highly weathered & friable, 321.26 321.76 0.50 Complete intersection
E014 37.28 39.68 2.40 Complete intersection 342.62 343.68 1.06 Complete Intersection
E014D1 - - - Deflection below MR 343.29 343.74 0.45 Incomplete intersection,
E014D2 - - - Deflection below MR 342.19 343.06 0.87 Complete Intersection
E015 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 291.89 292.63 0.74 Complete intersection
E016 159.68 160.59 0.91 Pothole 449.24 450.01 0.77 Complete intersection
E017 154.50 156.55 2.05 Complete intersection 452.63 453.35 0.73 Complete intersection
E019 20.25 22.45 2.20 Highly weathered & friable, - - - Hole stopped short
E019a 19.55 22.35 2.80 Highly weathered & friable, 315.85 316.61 0.76 Complete intersection
E020 54.20 55.39 1.19 Faulted 342.90 343.56 0.66 Complete intersection
E021 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.25 243.94 0.69 Complete intersection
E021D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.27 243.92 0.64 Incomplete Intersection
E021D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.19 243.65 0.46 Complete intersection
E021D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.32 243.98 0.66 Complete intersection
E024 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 278.77 279.26 0.49 Complete intersection
E025 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 260.42 261.32 0.90 Complete intersection
E027 9.58 12.04 2.46 Highly weathered, friable, core loss & 284.47 285.04 0.57 Complete intersection
E028 66.70 68.66 1.96 Complete intersection 373.26 373.79 0.53 Complete intersection
E029 40.03 42.00 1.97 Highly weathered, friable, core loss & 314.68 314.88 0.20 Pothole
E029D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 315.08 315.10 0.02 Pothole
E030 143.00 144.68 1.68 Complete intersection 409.55 410.07 0.52 Complete intersection
E031 122.40 124.29 1.89 Complete intersection 416.57 417.19 0.62 Complete intersection
E032 171.69 173.78 2.09 Complete intersection 462.66 463.98 1.32 Complete Intersection
E033 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.62 254.25 0.63 Complete intersection
E034 25.67 28.00 2.33 Highly weathered & friable, 292.00 292.94 0.94 complete intersection
E034D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 292.38 292.97 0.59 Incomplete intersection,
E034D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 292.74 293.27 0.53 Incomplete intersection,
E035 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.92 254.43 0.51 Incomplete intersection,
E035D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.94 254.44 0.50 Incomplete intersection,
E036 0.00 1.98 1.98 Highly weathered & friable, 271.34 271.65 0.31 Complete intersection
E036D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.26 271.80 0.55 Complete intersection
E036D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.30 271.90 0.60 Complete intersection
E036D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.21 271.64 0.43 Complete intersection
E037 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E039 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 226.54 226.89 0.34 Incomplete intersection,
E039D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 226.85 227.56 0.71 Complete intersection
E041 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 250.95 251.60 0.65 Complete intersection
E043 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.25 258.41 0.15 Pothole
E043D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 257.55 258.36 0.81 Pothole
E043D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.00 258.32 0.32 Pothole
E044 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.75 259.42 0.67 Complete intersection
E045 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 202.21 202.82 0.61 Complete Intersection
E046 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 238.66 239.22 0.56 Complete Intersection
E048 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 229.77 230.36 0.59 Complete Intersection
E049 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E034D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 292.74 293.27 0.53 Incomplete intersection,
E035 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.92 254.43 0.51 Incomplete intersection,
E035D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 253.94 254.44 0.50 Incomplete intersection,
E036 0.00 1.98 1.98 Highly weathered & friable, 271.34 271.65 0.31 Complete intersection
E036D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.26 271.80 0.55 Complete intersection
E036D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.30 271.90 0.60 Complete intersection
E036D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 271.21 271.64 0.43 Complete intersection
E037 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E039 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 226.54 226.89 0.34 Incomplete intersection,
E039D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 226.85 227.56 0.71 Complete intersection
E041 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 250.95 251.60 0.65 Complete intersection
E043 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.25 258.41 0.15 Pothole
E043D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 257.55 258.36 0.81 Pothole
E043D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.00 258.32 0.32 Pothole
E044 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 258.75 259.42 0.67 Complete intersection
E045 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 202.21 202.82 0.61 Complete Intersection
E046 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 238.66 239.22 0.56 Complete Intersection
E048 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 229.77 230.36 0.59 Complete Intersection
E049 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E050 - - - Abandoned in the hanging wall - - - Hole stopped short
E050D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 276.37 276.90 0.53 Complete Intersection
E051 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 95.09 95.60 0.51 Incomplete intersection,
E051D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 95.22 95.97 0.75 Complete intersection
E052 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 246.01 246.65 0.64 Complete Intersection
E054 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 280.52 280.94 0.42 Complete Intersection
324.59 325.02 0.43 LG6A reef
E056** - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 325.29 325.56 0.27 LG6 reef
325.82 326.54 0.72 LG6 reef
29.96 30.76 0.80 Highly weathered & friable,
237.73 238.06 0.33 LG6A reef
E057** - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop
238.30 238.63 0.33 LG6 reef
238.66 239.85 1.19 LG6 reef
E058 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 140.88 141.29 0.41 Complete intersection
E059 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 95.17 95.70 0.53 Complete Intersection
E060 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Reef Missing
E060D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 178.78 179.29 0.51 Complete intersection
E062 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 31.27 32.30 1.03 Complete intersection,
E062D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 31.45 32.27 0.82 Moderately weathered &
E062D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 31.16 31.56 0.40 Moderately weathered &
E064 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 156.19 157.05 0.86 Complete intersection
E065 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 231.81 232.50 0.69 Complete intersection
E066 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 221.30 221.64 0.34 Incomplete Intersection
E066D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 221.19 221.63 0.44 Complete Intersection
E067 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 299.70 300.20 0.50 Complete intersection
E069 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 240.98 241.39 0.41 Complete intersection
E069D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 241.33 241.63 0.30 Complete Intersection
E070 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 185.15 185.72 0.57 Incomplete intersection,
E070D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 185.29 186.08 0.79 Complete intersection
E071 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 180.04 180.73 0.69 Complete intersection
E072 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 248.48 249.01 0.53 Incomplete intersection,
E072D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 248.71 249.44 0.73 Complete Intersection
E072D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 248.64 249.22 0.58 Complete Intersection
E076 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 233.22 233.68 0.46 Complete Intersection
E077 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 259.56 259.93 0.37 Incomplete intersection,
E077D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 259.82 261.07 1.25 Complete intersection
E079 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.00 263.39 0.39 Complete intersection
E080 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 188.64 189.12 0.49 Complete intersection
E082 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.15 243.47 0.32 Incomplete intersection,
E082D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 243.25 243.67 0.42 Complete intersection
E085 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 247.34 247.91 0.57 Complete intersection
E086 - - - Abandoned in the hanging wall - - - Abandoned in the hanging
E086A - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 255.62 255.78 0.16 Complete intersection
E086AD1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 256.01 256.34 0.33 Complete intersection
E086AD2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 255.46 255.71 0.25 Complete intersection
E087 24.05 27.90 3.85 Highly weathered & friable, 287.97 288.43 0.46 Complete intersection
E091 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 270.10 270.29 0.19 Pothole
E091D1 - - - Deflection below MR 268.29 268.68 0.39 Pothole
E092 69.88 71.70 1.82 NS (Incomplete intersection, faulted 352.81 352.85 0.04 Pothole
E100 283.31 284.66 1.34 Complete intersection 498.58 499.04 0.46 Complete intersection
E101 242.73 244.48 1.75 Incomplete intersection (IRUP) 505.06 505.64 0.58 Complete intersection
E101D1 - - - Deflection below MR 506.06 506.57 0.51 Pothole
E105 - - - Not developed - - - Not developed
E113 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 289.62 289.69 0.07 Pothole
E114 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop - - - Pothole
E115 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 87.75 88.52 0.77 Complete intersection
E117 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 215.44 216.05 0.62 Complete intersection
E118 27.64 29.65 2.01 Incomplete intersection, core loss 288.56 289.34 0.78 Complete intersection
E119 - - - Not developed - - - Not developed
E120 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 155.65 155.74 0.09 Pothole
E120D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 156.10 156.69 0.59 Pothole
E121 - - - Abandoned in the hanging wall - - - Hole stopped short
E121D1 548.12 548.92 0.80 Narrow Facies (faulted) - - - Not developed
E122 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 179.19 179.75 0.56 Complete intersection
E124 - - - Faulted 350.06 350.65 0.59 Incomplete intersection
E124D1 - - - Deflection below MR 349.67 350.28 0.61 Incomplete intersection
E125 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 228.25 228.50 0.25 Incomplete intersection,
E125D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 228.44 229.03 0.59 Complete intersection
E126 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.43 264.07 0.63 Complete intersection
E126D1 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.49 264.03 0.54 Incomplete intersection
E126D2 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.10 263.59 0.48 Incomplete intersection
E126D3 - - - No MR expected - East of MR subcrop 263.27 263.68 0.41 Incomplete intersection
E128 309.53 311.69 2.16 Complete intersection 530.05 530.64 0.59 Complete intersection
E128D1 - - - Deflection below MR 530.09 530.68 0.59 Complete intersection
E128D2 - - - Deflection below MR 529.19 529.75 0.57 Complete intersection
E130 287.11 287.60 0.49 Pothole 501.09 501.47 0.38 Complete intersection
E130D1 - - - Deflection below MR 499.63 500.04 0.41 Complete intersection
E130D2 - - - Deflection below MR 500.96 501.25 0.29 Complete intersection
E131 235.82 236.83 1.01 Narrow facies (faulted) 489.86 489.92 0.06 Pothole
E131D1 - - - Deflection below MR 489.97 490.24 0.27 Pothole
E132 - - - Faulted out - - - Not developed
E134 - - - Pothole 552.08 552.61 0.52 Complete intersection
E134D1 - - - Deflection below MR 551.86 552.15 0.28 Complete intersection
E144 370.16 371.55 1.39 Narrow facies (faulted) - - - Pothole
Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, A high-definition helicopter borne Total Magnetic Field (TMF) gradient and gamma-ray
Other substantive should be reported including (but not limited to): spectrometry survey was completed by New Resolution Geophysics (Pty) Ltd (NRG) in January of
exploration data geological observations; geophysical survey results; 2022 which highlighted the major structural features that could be expected.
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and
method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk The total line kilometres flown was 1,425 lkm over the farms Eerstegeluk 327 KT and
density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock Nooitverwacht 324 KT with the survey being flown at a height between 25 m and 80 m due to the
characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating topography and residential areas with an average height of approximately 35 m to 40 m and a line
substances. spacing of 50 m.
The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. The PFS drilling campaign has been completed with 30,746m of drilling consisting of 82 drillholes
tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or and 50 deflections. Deflections will now be drilled for short range variability work.
large-scale step-out drilling).
Further work Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible
extensions, including the main geological
interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this
information is not commercially sensitive.
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Above are the structural blocks modelled from the drillhole database (UG2 on top and MR the
second). The entire UG2 and MR area is now a Mineral Resource so there is limited upside
potential within the project boundaries.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Geological data in the form of drillhole collar surveys, downhole surveys and geological logs
Measures taken to ensure that data has not been captured on paper records was compared to data captured and saved in soft copy Excel
corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying spreadsheets that form the geological repository which informs the modelling database. Any
errors, between its initial collection and its use for errors, omissions, and invalid transcriptions identified were returned to the exploration team for
Mineral Resource estimation purposes. rectification before the data was processed any further for use in 3D-structural modelling and
grade estimation processes.
Base geological data informing the estimate was validated using in-built functionality in Datamine
StudioRM software. Validation routine involved checking spatial location of drillholes collars and
Database integrity intersections, validity of stratigraphic logging, checking for repetition of logged intersections,
reasons for the absence of analytical data, negative thicknesses and an assessment of the
correlation of all aspects of the new drilling data to the historic drilling data from the Nkwe
Data validation procedures used. drillhole database. The Nkwe database was inspected for erroneous / non representative
datapoints and removed based on the knowledge gained from the recent SPD drilling.
The historical Anglovaal drilling database was captured from scanned copies into an excel
spreadsheet and verified as much as possible with the surrounding reef intersection depths. The
database reviewed to check for representative intersections that could be used in the resource
estimation.
Comment on any site visits undertaken by the The Competent Person regularly visits the project site with the latest visit having been carried
Competent Person and the outcome of those out on 20 May 2024.
Site visits visits.
If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why Refer to above.
this is the case.
The Bengwenyama project is bounded to the northern extremity by a mine that is in current
operation and economically exploiting the same UG2 reef. Several SPD drillholes are sited in
Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) areas in which similar drilling was completed by Nkwe Platinum during the early 2000s.
the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. Geological interpretation as informed from the current SPD holes, correlates well with
interpretation from the historic Nkwe drill data. The historical Anglovaal data also confirms the
3D geological model of the reefs.
The consolidated SPD database informing this estimate incorporates data from historic Nkwe
drilling. This data was compiled by transcribing information from documents available in the
public domain. Analytical data in the Nkwe drillholes is presented as 4E only. Individual PGEs
Geological interpretation were not reported. Results from QQ plots (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest
that SPD data is highly comparable to the Nkwe data. Accordingly, the data has been
consolidated into a single geological database.
Nature of the data used and of any assumptions
made.
Additional historic exploration drilling data from Anglovaal, although spatially located outside the
licence footprint, has been incorporated into the database informing the estimate. Analysis of this
data suggests, a change of the UG2 morphology into a main chromitite seam and multiple
stringers in the hanging wall of the UG2 bearing a materially different PGE mineralisation 4E prill
split over the south-west section of farm Nooitverwacht compared to PGE mineralisation over
farm Eestergeluk. This suggests different facies warranting modelling of the section as a
22
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
separate domain. Consequent of low data density, grade interpolation for this section was
achieved through Simple Kriging ("SK") techniques with the resultant block model then
appended to the rest of the block model completed via Ordinary Kriging techniques.
The Anglovaal data provides support of insights into geological and grade continuity over
undrilled west sections over farm Nooitverwacht with the quality of the data enabling declaration
of Mineral Resources over farm Nooitverwacht.
The MR data from the Anglovaal database was treated in the same manner as the UG2 data.
The MR did however seem to be more similar to the SPD MR intersections but the area was still
modelled separately as per the UG2 methodology.
The recently completed drilling campaign by SPD has confirmed that the dome structure on
Eerstegeluk is larger than initially expect and this area has been excluded from the Mineral
The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Resource. In the case of the MR there is a portion of the dome structure that does still have MR
Mineral Resource estimation. present.
The additional Anglovaal drillhole data has however confirmed that the UG2 and MR continue to
the southern boundary of Nooitverwacht.
Contouring of the elevation of the UG2 reef and MR top contact as interpreted from geological
logging, knowledge of the regional structural geology, incorporation of mapped faults, dykes,
The use of geology in guiding and controlling sills, and the use of data from the TMF gradient and gamma-ray spectrometry survey completed
Mineral Resource estimation. by New Resolution Geophysics (Pty) Ltd (NRG) in January of 2022, highlighting the major
structural features, guided delineation of fault blocks and culminated in the generation of the
associated UG2 and MR 3D wireframe model.
The project area is bisected by faults and several dyke swarms with throws in excess of 200m.
Current structural interpretation postulates the Eerstegeluk Dome area comprises a stack of
The factors affecting continuity both of grade and several upthrow faults culminating in an overall upthrow of the UG2 reef to a location as shallow
geology. as 30m below surface. Other than potholing observed in the areas limited to the northern
periphery, the PGE grades appear unaffected. The dome structure does however disrupt the
reefs and has been excluded from the resource in these areas.
The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource The Bengwenyama project covers an area of approximately 52.9km 2. with a strike of
expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), approximately 4km. Data from the drillholes suggests a down-dip continuity of UG2 and MR reef
plan width, and depth below surface to the upper over approximately 11km at an average true dip of approximately 6-7?, north-west. A typical
Dimensions
and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. West-East cross section through the deposit showing separation of the UG2 and Merensky reefs
is provided below. This section does not show the dome structure to the south of Eerstegeluk.
23
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Location of the UG2 reef is shallowest in the south-east corner of the project area at
approximately 30m below surface and deepest in the north-west corner where it is in excess of
1,000m below surface. The MR is approximately 260m above the UG2 reef and subcrops in the
central portion of the farm Eerstegeluk.
The nature and appropriateness of the estimation The 3D wireframe modelling process was completed in Seequent's LeapFrog Geo ® Version
technique(s) applied and key assumptions, 2023.2.3 geological modelling software.
including treatment of extreme grade values,
domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum Statistical analysis (CoV<1) on the base geological data informing UG2 grade estimates
distance of extrapolation from data points. If a suggests no capping or treatment of extreme values is necessary. However, for the MR one
computer assisted estimation method was chosen sample needed capping to values as provided below.
include a description of computer software and
parameters used.
Estimation and modelling
techniques
Ordinary Kriging, an industry best choice for evaluation of PGEs, has been applied for all grade
interpolation with all grade estimation processes completed in Datamine StudioRM TM Version
2.1.125.0 geological modelling software. No geological domains, except for the Nooitverwacht
split reef domain (simple kriging domain) have been defined and anisotropy has not been
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
identified. A facies plan has been developed with the majority (77%) of the UG2 reef falling into
the massive UG2 facies. The Merensky reef also has defined facies but not separate geological
domains, except for the Nooitverwacht extension for the simple kriging.
Kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA) recommended a parent block size of 350m (in X and Y
directions) with a minimum and maximum number of samples of 5 and 15 respectively for the
first search volume which is matched to the range of the 4E modelled variogram (approximately
2,000m). Three search volumes with decreasing samples were used for the estimation.
All PGE elements, Pt, Pd, Rh, Au, Ir, Os and Ru as well as base metals Cu, Ni, Cr and Fe were
individually estimated in addition to estimation of combined 4E (Pt, Pd, Rh & Au) and 7E (Pt, Pd,
Rh, Ir, Os, Ru & Au) grades, density and reef thickness. Extrapolation has been carried out to
half the average drillhole spacing and where applicable terminated on the major geological
structures.
The availability of check estimates, previous The Bengwenyama Project is a green field project with no mining activity ever recorded. As such
estimates and/or mine production records and no depletion of Mineral Resources is applicable.
whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes
appropriate account of such data. The previous estimate for the Bengwenyama Project declared as at 01 December 2023
presented 20.8Mt at 8.08g/t 4E (5.4 Moz) Indicated Resources and 29.99Mt at 7.87g/t 4E (7.58
Moz) Inferred Resources.
Concerted effort with the additional SPD drilling completed to date resulted in filling of gaps
within the previous wide spaced grid (approximately 500 m x 500 m) reducing it to approximately
350 m x 350 m on farm Eestergeluk. This has resulted in significant elevation of confidence in
structural interpretation enabling upgrading of various sections of the Minerals Resources to
higher categories. Although the direct reconciliation of the current estimate to previous estimates
is now convoluted, consistency in 4E and 7E grade between the current and all previous
estimate remains notable.
Metallurgical testwork is currently underway to establish the viability of recovery of any by-
The assumptions made regarding recovery of by- products, in particular chromite. There is no record of previous similar testwork completed in the
products. Bengwenyama project area. However, the UG2 on the eastern limb of the BC is well known and
understood and the average recoveries have been assumed for now.
Estimation of deleterious elements or other non- Other than the base metals Cu, Ni and Fe, no deleterious elements have been identified. The
grade variables of economic significance (e.g. base metals have all been estimated on elemental basis with the Cr:Fe ratio of the UG2
sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). chromitite horizon, from modelled Cr and Fe analysis, observed to be around 1.21.
In the case of block model interpolation, the block Drillhole spacing is not on a defined grid owing to challenges drilling in a populated space. The
size in relation to the average sample spacing and well drilled areas are typically informed by an average drillhole spacing of approximately 350m
the search employed. with areas even closer at approximately 200m spacing with poorly informed areas informed by
drilling spacing in excess of 750m to 1,000m.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Kriging neighbourhood analysis (QKNA) recommended a parent block size of 350m (in X and Y
directions) with a minimum and maximum number of samples of 5 and 15 respectively for the
first search volume which is matched to the range of the 4E modelled variogram (approximately
1,000m). Three search volumes with decreasing samples were used for grade estimation.
A study to test the viability of several possible options and in some cases combinations of mining
Any assumptions behind modelling of selective methods is currently underway. The current modelling does not incorporate guidance from
mining units. knowledge of any possible proposed mining method or selective mining approach.
The QQ plot results (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest SPD data is highly
comparable to the Nkwe historic drill data.
Any assumptions about correlation between
variables.
Estimation and modelling Accordingly, the data was consolidated into a single database. The consolidation enabled
techniques (continued) expansion of the database to incorporate back-calculated individual Pt, Pd, Rh and Au grades
from the single analytical 4E grade in the Nkwe drillholes basing on prill splits as established
from the complete empirical SPD analytical dataset. The grades for Os, Ir and Ru were then
determined from regression relationships enabling the estimation and eventual reporting to 7E
grade and including base metals.
Major structural discontinuities were identified from interpretation of the TMF gradient and
gamma-ray spectrometry survey, field mapping and contouring of elevation of the UG2 reef top
contact. Knowledge of regional structural geology and regional geological losses guided
delineation of fault blocks and the generation of the resultant UG2 and MR 3D wireframe model.
Description of how the geological interpretation
was used to control the resource estimates. The additional historic Anglovaal drilling data informed UG2 and MR wireframe models
generated for areas located spatially outside the licence footprint. The models provide support of
geological and grade continuity over undrilled west sections over farm Nooitverwacht with the
quality of the Anglovaal data enabling declaration of Mineral Resources over Nooitverwacht.
Further analysis of the Anglovaal data suggests a different UG2 facies towards the west
warranting modelling of the section as a separate domain. Due to low data density, grade
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
interpolation for this section has been completed through Simple Kriging (SK) techniques with
the resultant block model appended to the rest of the block model which was completed via
Ordinary Kriging techniques. The MR was treated in a similar fashion even though the MR facies
seem to be more similar.
Guidance from kriging quality parameters such as spatial continuity of kriging efficiencies,
assessment of bias through analysis of the slope of regression results, sample search volume
used and number of samples informing a grade estimate underpin constraint of grade
extrapolations beyond known drilling.
Other than one MR sample, statistical analysis (CoV<1) on raw data informing the estimate
Discussion of basis for using or not using grade suggests that no capping or treatment of extreme values is necessary.
cutting or capping.
The process of validation, the checking process Integrity of grade estimation was validated through swath plots in the X and Y directions,
used, the comparison of model data to drillhole sample-to-model box-whisker plots on global means for all estimated grades and the visual
data, and use of reconciliation data if available. analysis of grade plans for the 4E and 7E grades as well as plans showing the spatial
distribution of the UG2 reef thickness, Slope of Regression, Kriging Efficiencies, Search Volume
and the number of samples used to inform grades estimates.
Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry
Moisture basis or with natural moisture, and the method of All tonnages are reported on a dry basis.
determination of the moisture content.
Zone specific geological losses have been applied and the Mineral Resources are declared at a
paylimit of 2.2 g/t and 1.6 g/t 4E using a basket price of USD 2,691/oz and USD 1,969/oz for the
UG2 Reef and MR respectively. The Mineral Resource has been stated as in-situ or over reef
widths. However, a mining cut has been estimated for the UG2 which includes the low-grade
PGE mineralisation in the footwall as part of the mining dilution. The mining is being planned at a
stope width of 1m.
The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality Below are the parameters used for the basket price and pay limit calculation.
Cut-off parameters
parameters applied. Element Resource price (USD/oz) 4E prill split_UG2 7E prill split_UG2 Recovery Payability
Platinum 1,074 45.0% 37.0% 85% 86%
Palladium 2,309 45.0% 37.0% 85% 86%
Rhodium 12,751 9.0% 8.0% 85% 86%
Gold 2,116 1.0% 1.0% 85% 86%
Ruthenium 400 0.0% 12.5% 71% 55%
Iridium 4,700 0.0% 2.5% 75% 45%
Osmium 400 0.0% 2.0% 75% 45%
Assumptions made regarding possible mining It is envisaged that the Mineral Resource mining cut will be approximately 1 m for the UG2 due
Mining factors or methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal to the absence of stringers in the footprint of the currently drilled area. The hanging wall contact
assumptions (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is is a distinct Leuconorite plane referred to as the Leuconorite Parting Plane ("LPP") and forms a
27
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
always necessary as part of the process of distinct sharp hanging wall contact with no chromitite stringers above it. For the MR the mining
determining reasonable prospects for eventual cut will probably be the reef width, which is approximately 2,00 m plus 10 cm hanging wall and
economic extraction to consider potential mining 10 cm footwall dilution.
methods, but the assumptions made regarding
mining methods and parameters when estimating Mining studies on the possible practical mining methods or a combination thereof are currently
Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. being concluded.
Where this is the case, this should be reported
with an explanation of the basis of the mining The current geological modelling does not incorporate any assumptions or provide any form of
assumptions made. guidance for a chosen specific mining method.
The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that process to the style of the
metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary mineralisation.
as part of the process of determining reasonable
prospects for eventual economic extraction to The PGM content of the UG2 reef is mined and treated for recovery of PGM on an economic
consider potential metallurgical methods, but the basis for multiple decades and by very many UG2 mining operations, on a very similar treatment
assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment process named as a Mill-Float-Two ("MF2") process and which is defined as requiring a primary
processes and parameters made when reporting mill and primary flotation circuit and a secondary mill and secondary flotation circuit. The PGM
Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. content in the UG2 reef is associated with various sulphides, which are recoverable by flotation
Where this is the case, this should be reported processes. The MF2 process requires sufficient fineness to ensure optimal liberation of the PGM
Metallurgical factors or with an explanation of the basis of the grains to facilitate optimal recovery by flotation.
assumptions metallurgical assumptions made.
The chromite associated with the UG2 reef is mined and treated on a for recovery of chromite
(Cr2O3) on an economic basis for multiple decades and by very many UG2 mining operations, on
a very similar treatment process named as a gravity separation process. The chrome content in
the UG2 reef is associated with chromite, which is recoverable by a gravity separation process.
The gravity process requires sufficient optimised liberation of the chromite to facilitate optimal
recovery by gravity separation, where the optimised liberation is described as having a particle
size distribution of 20% by mass smaller than 75 micrometres, which constitutes a coarse feed
size distribution to the gravity circuit.
Assumptions made regarding possible waste and The following specialist assessments, inter alia, were considered as part of the S&EIA
process residue disposal options. It is always authorisation process to ensure legal compliance and best practice: geohydrological, waste,
necessary as part of the process of determining hydrological, watercourse and hydropedological, aquatic, terrestrial biodiversity, soils and
reasonable prospects for eventual economic agricultural agro-ecosystem, noise, blasting, traffic air quality, socio-economic assessment,
extraction to consider the potential environmental heritage (Stage 1), palaeontological (Stage 1) and visual impact. Preliminary potential impacts
impacts of the mining and processing operation. were rated and include but limited to water quality deterioration, habitat (floral and faunal) loss,
Environmental factors or While at this stage the determination of potential decline of functionality of the critical biodiversity areas ("CBA") and ecological sensitive areas
assumptions environmental impacts, particularly for a ("ESA") sites, reduced floral diversity and loss of threatened and protected floral species,
greenfields project, may not always be well spreading and encroachment of alien invasive species, fragmentation of existing ecological
advanced, the status of early consideration of corridors, loss of ephemeral watercourses, soil erosion, compaction and sedimentation of
these potential environmental impacts should be watercourses, contamination of surface water and groundwater, potential decline of surface
reported. Where these aspects have not been water and groundwater quantity, loss of land capability, change to the sense of place, air quality
considered this should be reported with an and noise impacts, change of social fabric, relocation of people, loss of heritage resources.
28
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
explanation of the environmental assumptions
made. The positive impacts noted were the creation of employment opportunities, skills development
and work experience. Mining methods, inclusive of optimal and practical extractions have been
identified based on social, environmental and production-proximity factors. Additional permit
applications are in progress and will be completed at a later stage and include a Waste
Management License and a Water Use License.
The current geological modelling supporting this estimate does not incorporate any assumptions
or provide guidance to achieve the least environmental impact.
Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the The density for the UG2 was modelled and the average density is 3.92 t/m 3 for the UG2 and an
basis for the assumptions. If determined, the average density of 3.28 t/m3 was used for the MR in the tonnage estimation. The density was
method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of determined empirically using the Archimedes method on UG2 reef and MR intersection samples
the measurements, the nature, size and from the SPD drillholes. The determination of density is an ongoing exercise conducted by the
representativeness of the samples. field exploration team to expand the database for use to support tonnage estimates.
Limited bulk density information was available for the Anglovaal drillholes. An average density of
3.77 t/m3 and 3.18 t/m3 for the UG2 and MR respectively, was used for the simple krige portion
of the estimation.
Bulk density
The bulk density for bulk material must have been
measured by methods that adequately account for
void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and The density was determined empirically using the Archimedes method on UG2 reef and MR
differences between rock and alteration zones intersection samples.
within the deposit.
Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates
used in the evaluation process of the different Not applicable
materials.
The Mineral Resource categories were determined based on drillhole density, data quality,
QAQC, slope of regression ("SOR"), kriging efficiency ("KE"), sample search volumes and
Classification The basis for the classification of the Mineral knowledge of the continuity of the UG2 reef horizon.
Resources into varying confidence categories.
Mineral Resource Classification – UG2 Reef
29
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Mineral Resource Classification – UG2 Reef
The Measured Mineral Resources are based on a drill spacing of 200 m x 200 m (in structurally
complex areas) and 350 m x 350 m (in less structural complex areas), SOR greater than 0.75,
sample search within first volume (4E variogram range), a minimum of 5 drillholes and high
confidence in UG2 structural interpretation.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The Indicated Mineral Resources are based on a general drill spacing of 350m x 350m, a SOR
between 0.6 and 0.75, a KE greater than 0.25, sample search within second volume, high
confidence in UG2 structural interpretation and application of local knowledge of areas with high
confidence in UG2 reef continuity.
The Inferred Mineral Resources are based on drill spacing greater than 500 m x 500 m, a SOR
of less than 0.6, extrapolation based on one and a half the distance of the range of the 4E grade
variogram with termination on major structural discontinuities such as interpreted or mapped
major faults and dykes.
The extrapolated inferred is beyond the inferred criteria, up to project boundary.
Whether appropriate account has been taken of all Geological losses have been applied to the resource to account for the effects of faults, dykes,
relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in and potholes. This was estimated by considering the successful drillhole intersections, identified
tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, major faults and dykes from the TMF geophysics and additional minor losses. The project area
confidence in continuity of geology and metal was divided into larger blocks representing various degrees of geological losses. The geological
values, quality, quantity and distribution of the losses for the UG2 range from 15% to 50% with the Eerstegeluk Dome area completely
data). excluded at this stage of reporting.
For the MR the geological losses range from 25% to 50% for the extrapolated inferred portion
and the top 40 m (vertically) at the subcrop for the MR is also excluded due to weathering and
oxidation.
Geological Losses – UG2 Reef
Geological Losses – Merensky Reef
31
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The CP is of the opinion that the Mineral Resource classification criteria and associated results
Whether the result appropriately reflects the
are a true reflection of the Bengwenyama orebody and demonstrate the current levels of
Competent Person's view of the deposit.
confidence as informed by drill data.
The Mineral Resources estimate, as well as processes associated with estimation work as
contained in this press release has been reviewed by an independent third party, Mr. Garth
The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Mitchell, of ExplorMine Consultants (Pty) Ltd. Mr. Mitchell confirms validity and reasonableness
Audits or reviews
Resource estimates. of estimate and confirms that due care and diligence was applied in the compilation.
SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd in South Africa have also reviewed the Mineral Resource estimation
and have not found any fatal flaws.
Where appropriate a statement of the relative The QQ plot results (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest the SPD data is
accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral highly comparable to the Nkwe historic drill data and that the two datasets can be consolidated
Resource estimate using an approach or into a single database without any issues.
procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent
Person. For example, the application of statistical The consolidation enabled back-calculation of individual Pt, Pd, Rh and Au grades from the
or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative single analytical 4E grade in the Nkwe drillholes basing on prill splits established from the
Discussion of relative
accuracy of the resource within stated confidence complete empirical SPD analytical dataset as well at determining individual grades for Os, Ir and
accuracy/ confidence
limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed Ru from regression relationships. This has enabled reporting to 7E grade.
appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors
that could affect the relative accuracy and In contrast to the Nkwe data, analysis of the Anglovaal data suggests a change in the PGE
confidence of the estimate. mineralisation 4E prill split and UG2 reef morphology into a split reef comprising a main
chromitite seam and multiple stringers in the hanging wall over the south-west section of farm
Nooitverwacht. As this suggests different facies, modelling of the section as a separate domain
32
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
was warranted. In addition, due to low data density, grade interpolation for this section has been
completed through the Simple Kriging ("SK") technique with the resultant block model appended
to the rest of the block model which was completed via the Ordinary Kriging technique.
Accordingly, 4E grade and UG2 reef thickness estimates within this west section approach
global means of the Anglovaal dataset. However, the quality of the supporting data is of such
high standard it provided insights into geological and grade continuity to enable successful
declaration of Mineral Resources over undrilled sections of Nooitverwacht.
The statement should specify whether it relates to The CP is of the opinion that geological modelling underlying the estimate contained in this press
global or local estimates, and, if local, state the release is a true reflection of the Bengwenyama orebody and considers the grade and tonnage
relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to estimates robust. The table indicates the combined mineral resource for the project.
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 Not applicable
with production data, where available.
33
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The PGM content of the UG2 reef is mined and treated for recovery of PGM on an economic basis
for multiple decades and by very many UG2 mining operations, on a very similar treatment process
named as a MF2 process. The PGM content in the UG2 reef is associated with various sulphide
minerals, which are recoverable by flotation processes. The MF2 process requires sufficient
fineness to ensure optimal liberation of the PGM grains to facilitate optimal recovery by flotation.
The chromite associated with the UG2 reef is mined and treated for recovery of chromite on an
economic basis for multiple decades and by very many UG2 mining operations, on a very similar
treatment process by a gravity separation process. The chromite content in the UG2 reef is
associated with chromite, which is recoverable by a gravity separation process. The gravity
The metallurgical process proposed and the
process requires sufficient fineness to ensure optimal liberation of the chromite to facilitate optimal
appropriateness of that process to the style of
recovery by gravity separation.
mineralisation.
The testwork conducted for the definitive feasibility study has provided support to include a dense
media separation circuit to reduce the mining waste contained in the RoM. This has resulted in a
reduction in the feed capacity requirement of the primary mill. The testwork further supported a
coarser primary mill discharge size distribution which resulted in a further reduction of the reduction
of the primary mill size. This further supported the inclusion of gravity recovery of chromite via a
spiral circuit upstream from the primary flotation circuit. The coarser primary mill discharge size
distribution also supported a higher recovery of chromite which reduced the feed capacity
Metallurgical factors
requirement of the primary flotation circuit, the secondary mill and the secondary flotation circuit.
or assumptions
The MF2 treatment process proposed during the pre-feasibility study is described and illustrated
below. It should be noted that the definitive feasibility study is not yet complete and the definitive
feasibility testwork results obtained with coarser primary flotation feed size distribution and also the
testwork with heavy media separation, where the RoM waste contained in the primary ball mill feed
is reduced, have provided indication of a conventional MF2 treatment process that is optimized by
employing a dense media separation circuit ahead of the primary mill and a coarser primary mill
discharge size distribution. Dense media separation is well tested and not novel in any respect as
demonstrated by various UG2 sulphide operations.
The MF2 treatment process for recovery of PGM content associated with UG2 sulphide minerals is
Whether the metallurgical process is well-
very well tested and not novel in any respect as demonstrated by the many UG2 sulphide
tested technology or novel in nature.
operations proximate to the Bengwenyama orebody, such as the Two Rivers and Modikwa
operations amongst many others located on both the Eastern and Western limbs of the Bushveld
Igneous Complex.
The gravity separation treatment process for recovery of chromite associated with chromitite is very
well tested and not novel in any respect as demonstrated by the many chromite operations
proximate to the Bengwenyama orebody, such as the Two Rivers and Modikwa operations
amongst many others located on both the Eastern and Western limbs of the Bushveld Igneous
Complex.
34
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The definitive feasibility testwork has indicated positive results that have led to a material increase
of chromite recovery at the required grade and PGE recovery similar to that previously obtained
with the pre-feasibility study testwork.
Dense Media Separation (DMS) test work was performed on a non-mineralised footwall composite
and on a disseminated footwall composite.
The two composites were made up using material obtained from Metallurgical Sample 4, where
one composite consisted of non- mineralised footwall only and the other composite consisted of
disseminated footwall only. The composites did not contain any UG2 reef.
The non-mineralised footwall sample was tested at a DMS density of 3.4 and the waste reject was
99.6% with a3E PGM grade of 0.10 g/t. The concentrate recovered was 0.4% with a 3E PGM
grade of 0.30 g/t. The table below indicates the test data.
The nature, amount and representativeness of
metallurgical test work undertaken, the nature
of the metallurgical domaining applied and the
corresponding metallurgical recovery factors
applied. The disseminated footwall was tested at three DMS densities namely 3.0, 3.2 and 3.4. The optimal
DMS density to recover the most PGM's was 3.2. At this density the waste reject was 51.3% with a
3E PGM grade of 0.51 g/t. Moreover, the concentrate recovered was 48.7% with a 3E PGM grade
of 2.26 g/t. The table below indicates the test data.
35
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The DMS testwork was completed by MAK Analytical at the Johannesburg laboratory.
Surface modification testwork was also conducted to verify the effect of surface cleaning to
enhance the flotation efficiency of minerals associated with PGM. The test results indicated
increased PGM deportment sized 75 µm and smaller, increased from 45.6% by mass (as contained
in the primary mill discharge) to 73.4% by mass after 20 stages of pumping. The mill discharge
PGM grade was 20.5 g/t 3E and after 20 stages of pumping the PGM grade increased to 21 g/t 3E.
This enhanced PGM deportment allows for interstage recovery of coarse chromite crystals in the
fraction sized 75 µm and larger, which significantly enhances the chromite recovery by gravity in a
spiral circuit. The table below indicates the test data.
The surface modification testwork was completed by Maelgwyn South Africa at the Johannesburg
laboratory.
Shaking table (gravity) test work was performed on a composite representative of UG2 reef.
The expected performance from a spiral circuit and utilised a proprietary simulation model, utilising
operating and testwork data obtained from various chrome operating plants, including UG2 spiral
circuits where significant spiral-specific testwork was performed. The circuit layout derived from the
model is illustrated in the figure below.
36
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
A composite was made up using material obtained from Metallurgical Sample 3 and divided into
two batches. Batch 1 was milled to 20% -75 µm and Batch 2 was milled to 40% -75µm. Both
batches consisted of UG2 reef only. The batches did not contain any footwall waste. Both batches
had the same composition with a chromite grade of 21.7%.
The results from the Batch 1 test were that the coarse or primary chromite recovery was 65.7%
with a chromite grade of 39.6%. The table below indicates the Batch 1 test data.
37
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The results from the Batch 2 test were that the coarse or primary chromite recovery was 46.4%
with a chromite grade of 39.5%. The table below indicates the Batch 2 test data.
Metallurgical Sample 3 consisted of a composite of material from drill cores and consisted of only
the chromitite seam from the UG2 reef with a minimal allowance of hanging and footwall.
Metallurgical Sample 3 was a composite sample with material derived from drill cores with a total
mass of 160.6 kilograms from 12 drillholes.
38
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Metallurgical Sample 4 consisted of a composite of material from drill cores and consisted of only
footwall from the UG2 reef with a minimal allowance for chromitite seam. Metallurgical Sample 4
was a composite sample with material derived from drill cores with a total mass of 21.6 kilograms
from 9 drillholes.
The samples were focused on the production area for the first 10 years of the PFS. The samples
were analysed for 2PGE+Au (3E) and Cr2O3 for the metallurgical testwork.
The composite UG2 metallurgical sample returned a 2PGE+Au (3E) grade of 7.36 g/t, with a prill
split for Pt:Pd:Au of 47.8%:50.3%:1.9% and a Cr2O3 grade of 28.92%. This metallurgical sample
has once again confirmed the grade and robust nature of the UG2 Mineral Resource which has an
average 2PGE+Au (3E) grade of 7.35 g/t with a prill split for Pt:Pd:Au of 49.9%:48.6%:1.5% with a
Cr2O3 grade of 29.71%.
This good correlation between the metallurgical sample grades and the Mineral Resource grades
confirms that the metallurgical sample is representative. The drillholes of Metallurgical Sample 3
are illustrated in the diagram below.
39
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The drillholes of Metallurgical Sample 4 are illustrated in the diagram below.
40
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
No assumptions were made for deleterious elements testwork was performed on the chromitite
Any assumptions or allowances made for
seam with only a minimal allowance for the presence of hanging and footwall to ensure no part of
deleterious elements.
the chromitite seam was omitted from the metallurgical sample material.
No pilot scale test work was performed, or bulk sample was obtained due to the nature of the
The existence of any bulk sample or pilot scale orebody and the location, making it practically challenging to obtain a bulk sample. The confidence
test work and the degree to which such level required by PFS study has been achieved with the 2-off composites tested being sufficiently
samples are considered representative of the representative of the orebody in the payback area. The orebody is being mined by other proximate
orebody as a whole. operations and is well understood in relation to non-novel MF2 recovery methods and associated
performance.
The PGM process plant could produce a PGM concentrate with a 6E grade of 100 g/t. The
For minerals that are defined by a
chromite spiral circuit, which forms part of the PGM process plant and is utilised for chromite
specification, has the ore reserve estimation
recovery could produce a chromite concentrate with a grade of 40% Cr 2O3. The testwork performed
41
SECTION 4: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES
Criteria Explanation Detail
been based on the appropriate mineralogy to provides the required support for this statement. The Metallurgical Sample 3 is representative of
meet the specifications? the appropriate mineralogy that will be mined and processed, and Metallurgical Sample 4 is
representative of the appropriate mineralogy of the non-mineralised footwall and the disseminated
footwall that will be efficiently removed in the dense media separation circuit and subsequently fed
to the tailings storage facility as waste.
42
Date: 15-04-2026 09:47:00
Produced by the JSE SENS Department. The SENS service is an information dissemination service administered by the JSE Limited ('JSE').
The JSE does not, whether expressly, tacitly or implicitly, represent, warrant or in any way guarantee the truth, accuracy or completeness of
the information published on SENS. The JSE, their officers, employees and agents accept no liability for (or in respect of) any direct,
indirect, incidental or consequential loss or damage of any kind or nature, howsoever arising, from the use of SENS or the use of, or reliance on,
information disseminated through SENS.
Sharenet Sites 
