centennial deposit surface geochemical study final report

Final Report
May 2014
Calgary, AB – T3E 7J4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 GEOCHEMICAL MODEL, HISTORICAL WORK, AND RATIONALE ....................................................................................... 1 1.2 PROPERTY GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 3
2.0 2013 CENTENNIAL STUDY PROGRAM ................................................................................................. 4
2.1 SURFACE SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 SAMPLING METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.1 Clay Fraction, Bulk Soil, and MET Sampling ........................................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Tree Core Sampling ................................................................................................................................ 9 2.2.3 Gas Sampling ....................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2.4 Field Data and Digital Databases ........................................................................................................ 12 2.2.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) ................................................................................. 12
2.3 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES .................................................................................................................................... 13 2.3.1 Clay-Sized Fraction Analyses ................................................................................................................ 13 2.3.2 Tree Core Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 13 2.3.3 Bulk Soil Analyses ................................................................................................................................. 14 2.3.4 Microbial Exploration Technology (MET) Analyses .............................................................................. 14 2.3.5 In-Situ Gas Sample Analyses ................................................................................................................ 15
3.0 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 15
3.1 MINERALOGY AND GEOCHEMISTRY OF BULK SOIL SAMPLES ........................................................................................ 15 3.2 X-RAY DIFFRACTION RESULTS FROM CLAY-SIZED FRACTIONS OF B- AND C-HORIZON SOILS .............................................. 20 3.3 CLAY-SIZED FRACTIONS OF B- AND C-HORIZON SOILS ............................................................................................... 21 3.4 CARBON, NITROGEN, OXYGEN, AND HYDROGEN ISOTOPES IN CLAY-SIZED FRACTIONS ..................................................... 24 3.5 TREE CORES FROM BLACK SPRUCE AND JACK PINE TREES ........................................................................................... 27 3.6 MET RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................... 29 3.7 IN-SITU GAS ANALYSES ....................................................................................................................................... 32
4.0 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 36
5.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 37
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Samples Names and Types Table 2 Sample Descriptions, Analytical Components, and Rationale Table 3 Summary of Samples Collected Table 4 Summary of In-Situ Gas Samples
Table 5 Distribution of Weight Percentages Following Heavy Liquid Separation of 0.063-0.5 mm Fraction of Bulk Soil Samples
Table 6 Heavy Mineral Components of Bulk Soils by 100 Grain Count Table 7 Distribution of Mineral Components in Clay-Sized Fractions of Soil Samples
Centennial Deposit Surface Geochemical Study Page | i
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Geochemical Model Figure 3 Centennial Deposit Area Figure 4 Distribution of Clay Fraction Samples Figure 5 Distribution of Bulk Soil Samples Figure 6 Distribution of MET Samples Figure 7 Distribution of Tree Core Samples Figure 8 Distribution of In-Situ Gas Samples Figure 9 Mean Element Concentrations in Bulk Soils and Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 10 Spatial Distribution of Common Uranium Pathfinder Elements in Bulk Soils Figure 11 Spatial Distribution of Common Uranium Pathfinder Elements in Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 12 Distribution of Common Clay Mineral Assemblages in Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 13 Anomalous Pb Isotopic Ratios in Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 14 Anomalous Uranium in Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 15 Pathfinder Element Enrichment in Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 16 Alteration Element Enrichment in Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 17 δ13C Values of Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 18 δ15N Values of Clay-Sized Fractions Figure 19 Anomalous Pb Isotopic Ratios in Tree Cores Figure 20 Anomalous Ni in Tree Cores Figure 21 Anomalous K in Tree Cores Figure 22 Anomalous MET Results - Methanol Growth Formula Figure 23 Anomalous MET Results - Butanol Growth Formula Figure 24 Anomalous 4He in In-Situ Gas Samples Figure 25 Anomalous CH4 in In-Situ Gas Samples Figure 26 Compilation Map
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Gas Sampling Methodologies (Kotzer) Appendix B Field Collection Datasheet Appendix C Digital Data Appendix D Analytical Certificates Appendix E EBT Data Description
Centennial Deposit Surface Geochemical Study Page | ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In June 2013, Uravan Minerals Inc. (Uravan), in collaboration with Cameco Corporation (Cameco), the Queen’s Facility for Isotope Research (QFIR) and Environmental BioTechnologies Inc (EBT), conducted a multifaceted surface geochemical study over the Centennial Uranium Deposit (the Centennial Study) (Figure 1). The objectives of the survey were to determine if unique geochemical, microbial and isotopic signatures could be identified in surface media overlying high-grade, unconformity-type uranium deposits at depths greater than 800 m, and determine if those elements and microbial and isotopic signatures could be characterized as distinct, deposit-sourced expressions versus natural geochemical variations related to surficial geology or environmental effects. The study involved systematic sampling of surface soils and tree cores over a predefined grid, as well as in-situ, subsurface gas sampling from historical drill-holes. The Centennial Project is a joint venture between Cameco Corporation (49%), Areva Resources Canada (49%), and Formation Metals Inc. (2%), and is operated by Cameco.
1.1 Geochemical Model, Historical Work, and Rationale
The geochemical sampling and analytical protocols used in the Centennial Deposit Study were initiated in 2009 with an orientation survey over the western portion of the Cigar Lake uranium deposit (the 'Cigar West Study'; Drever et al., 2009). The model on which the study was predicated infers that, throughout the history of basin deposition, basement structural reactivation and subsequent formation of unconformity-type uranium deposits in the Athabasca Basin, elements migrate vertically from buried uranium mineralization and become incorporated in the overlying surface materials, providing geochemical indicators of a deposit at depth. Specifically, microbial activity, occurring within the redox environment of uranium deposits, in combination with other mechanisms, such as basin fluid movement, structural reactivation and corresponding hydrothermal activity, has promoted the migration of elements, metal ions, gaseous complexes and unique isotopic compositions upward along fracture systems and through permeable stratigraphy to the surface (Kelley et al., 2006; Figure 2). These elements are then concentrated in certain soil and vegetation components and create unique
Figure 1. Location Map
Centennial Deposit Surface Geochemical Study Page | 1
geochemical and isotopic signatures that are representative of a deposit at depth, and therefore serve as pathfinders in the search for uranium deposits.
The Cigar West Study exploited a variety of surface media to evaluate if deposit-sourced pathfinder elements could be detected in surface media, where those elements were manifest spatially, and if the resultant geochemical trends could provide a means of vectoring exploration to a subsurface deposit. The media analyzed included A1, A2, B, and C soil horizons, tree cores and vegetation samples from Black Spruce and Jack Pine trees, A2-horizon soil samples for analysis of present-day surface microbial activity using Environmental Bio-Technologies’ (EBT) 'Microbial Exploration Technology’ (MET), and select core and fracture samples from historical drill holes positioned over the deposit. The results of the study showed correlative element enrichment and unique isotopic compositions (207Pb/206Pb, 206Pb/204Pb) within the surface media proximal to the projected surface location of the deposit and along interpreted structural trends. Additionally, correlations among typical uranium pathfinder elements (U, Ni, V, Co, As), alteration elements (Mg, P, Ca, Sr, K, REEs), and Pb isotopic ratios were identified in drill core, which appeared to be supportive of the transport of chemical complexes from a deposit source at depth. Following the Cigar West Study, Uravan, in collaboration with QFIR, conducted six exploratory surface geochemical surveys over active exploration projects in the Athabasca Basin, including the Halliday and Stewardson properties. These surveys advanced and refined the methods initially employed in the Cigar West Study and improved overall understanding of the surface geochemical exploration techniques. However, the surveys also revealed certain limitations in that understanding, such as how effective the methods would be in areas where the depths of exploration exceeded 450 m, and how the variability of surface materials or local environment could affect geochemical signatures or limit discernibility of deposit-sourced surface expressions above a deposit. As a result, the Centennial study was initiated to build on the knowledge gained from the Cigar West Study and successive exploratory surveys with the goal of analyze some of the additional questions uncovered by those surveys in an area of known, deep-seated mineralization.
Figure 2. Geochemical Model
1.2 Property Geology
The Centennial deposit is located on the Virgin River structural trend within the south-central portion of the Athabasca Basin. The deposit was discovered in 2004 when an off-conductor drill-hole (DDH VR- 018), targeting a coincident gradient magnetic low and prominent resistivity breach, intersected approximately 6.4 m of 5.83% U3O8. Further exploration and delineation drilling progressed until 2012, at which time Cameco temporarily ceased operations at the site.
The deposit occurs at the contact between phyllitic and quartzitic lithologies of the Virgin Schist Group and a mylonitic granite of unknown age (Reid et al., 2014). Mineralization is currently defined along a northeast-southwest trend over a strike length of approximately 650 m, with a width ranging from 10 to 52.5 m (Figure 3). The deposit straddles the unconformity surface at a depth of approximately 800 m and extends into basement metasedimentary and metavolcanic units. Local pods of perched mineralization are also present. Typical grades range between 2 and 10% U3O8 throughout the mineralized intervals, with the best intersection occurring in DDH VR-031W3 averaging 8.75% over 33.9 meters (grade-thickness of 295.9).
The Centennial deposit is unique relative to other major uranium deposits in the Athabasca Basin. Perhaps most notable is its lack of association with a major electromagnetic conductor and minimal graphite content in the basement stratigraphy (Alexandre et al., 2012; Reid et al., 2014). The deposit is also associated with smaller, incipient structures east of the Dufferin Lake fault (the primary regional fluid conduit along the Virgin River Shear Zone) rather than a major reverse structure, and has an alteration history defined over several distinct stages (Alexandre et al., 2012). Primary uranium
Figure 3. Centennial Deposit Area
mineralization predominantly occurs as pitchblende, however, subsequent alteration, related to brittle structural reactivation and dyke emplacement and associated hydrothermal fluid movement, resulted in uranium remobilization and precipitation of secondary uranium oxides, such as uranophane and coffinite (Alexandre et al., 2012).
2.0 2013 CENTENNIAL STUDY PROGRAM
2.1 Surface Sample Distribution
The geochemical sampling survey over the Centennial Deposit took place between June 15 and June 29, 2013 and was operated out of Cameco’s Wide Lake Camp. Surface samples for the Study were collected by three teams of two on a predefined, off-set grid totaling 533 survey stations. The grid focused on the primary mineralized trend and was subdivided into zones of varying sample densities based on proximity to the deposit trend. The central grid directly overlying the deposit was sampled on 50 m intervals within a 400 x 500 m primary zone of interest. Samples outside the central grid were collected on 100 and 200 m spacing, with four additional lines collected on traverses that extended approximately 5 km further into background. Despite the drilling activities and historical exploration work, much of the surface area in proximity to the deposit was relatively undisturbed, which allowed for a largely consistent sampling distribution and minimal sample density loss. All areas directly impacted by previous development activities were avoided in the sample collection to limit any potential contamination to the surface media being sampled.
2.2 Sampling Methodology
Sample media targeted at each survey site included approximately 500 g of A2-horizon soil, 1 kg of B2- or C-horizon soil, and 1 tree core collected from a Black Spruce or Jack Pine tree. Additionally, at 45 designated sites, 2 kg of B2- or C-horizon soil was collected to support additional analyses. In-situ gas samples were also collected from a number of drill-holes distributed along the length of the deposit, and in select holes outside of the deposit trend. For the purpose of clarity, Table 1 summarizes the type of samples collected during the survey and the names used to distinguish them, while Table 2 provides a brief summary of the respective analyses and rationale behind each of the sample types collected.
Table 1 – Summary of Sample Names and Types
Sample Name Media
Clay Fraction Sample
- Multielement geochemical analysis of clay-sized (<2 µm) fractions - XRD analysis
Bulk Soil Sample
45 Designated Sites
MET Sample A2-Horizon
Tree Core Sample
- Multielement geochemical analysis of select tree rings
Gas Sample Down-hole 30 Designated
Drill-holes - In-situ gas analysis (methane, helium, carbon dioxide)
Table 2 - Sample Descriptions, Analytical Components, and Rationale
Sample Sample Details Analytical Facility Analysis Rationale
B- / C-Horizon Soils
Clay-Sized Fraction (<2 micron) Separation QFIR Geochemical Analysis of Clay-Sized Fraction Acme Laboratories
- Group 1F-MS (ICP-MS), AR digestion - 53 elements, REE and Pb isotopes (204, 206, 207, 208)
Potential identification of deposit-sourced mobile elements transported to surface and sorbed to clay mineral species in the upper soil profiles.
Tree Cores Full tree width Preparation, Ring Counting, Geochemical Analysis QFIR
- High resolution ICP-SFMS, Nitric acid / Hydrogen Peroxide digestion - 50 elements, REE and Pb isotopes (204, 206, 207, 208)
Potential identification of deposit-sourced mobile elements taken up by vegetation from surrounding soils. Potentially provides broader representation of local area than the soil samples due to expanded root networks.
Bulk Soil Samples
B-/C-horizon sample)
Fractioning + 100 Grain Count Mineral Identification Overburden Drilling Management Ltd. Geochemical Analysis of Clay-Sized Fraction Acme Labs
Overburden Drilling - Mineral component analysis of size fractions by 100 grain count - Local SEM confirmation of individual grain components Acme Labs - Bulk sample - Group 1F-MS (ICP-MS), AR digestion - 53 elements, REE and Pb isotopes
Identification of the mineralogical variation of separate soil fractions and could provide insight into the potential mineral contributors to the overall geochemical signature of the soil. Will help to identify any relationship between the compositional / geochemical variations between the broader soil and the <2 micron fraction. Can also aid in the determination of soil provenance.
MET (A2-Horizon Sample)
- Microbial extraction via water flush and centrifuge, inoculation (HC-selective), incubation with redox indicator die - Proprietary 96 compartment plate computer analyzed and ranked based on coloured indicator corresponding to O2 consumption
Potential identification of enhanced surface microbial activity from deposit-related hydrocarbon generation via radiolytic methane production.
XRD Subsplit of clay separate
X-Ray Diffraction Analysis QFIR - Compositional analysis of clay separates
Definition of clay fraction mineralogy which could allow for the evaluation of geochemical data in the context of potential mineralogical contributors from various clay species and will help define the clay-type distribution within the survey area.
Carbon (13C/12C) and Nitrogen (15N/14N) Isotopes
Subsplit of clay separate
Isotope Measurement QFIR
- Analysis of isotopic ratios via Stable Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (IRMS)
Identification of microbially-derived isotopic ratios potentially indicative of enhanced surface populations related to element migration and transport.
Helium / Radon / Methane Gas Sampling
Down-hole in-situ gas sample
- Gas concentration analyses via ICPMS
Provide a framework with which to evaluate the temporal component of potential gas-phase transport of elements from a subsurface source to the surficial environment. Radionuclide analysis could be indicative of alternative sources other than deep-seated deposits contributing to Pb isotopic signatures recorded in the clay fractions.
The sample media and number of samples collected are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 – Summary of Samples Collected
Sample Type Number Collected
Peat 7 Total 502
C Horizon 1 Total 45
MET
standard) 24 Total 557
Total 478
Gas Samples
10 m 17 100 m 8*
Lake Bottom Samples 2 Total 30
* Four 100 m samples compromised by hole in tubing
2.2.1 Clay Fraction, Bulk Soil, and MET Sampling
Soils in the Athabasca Basin are podsols typical of northern boreal forests and are characterized by very high sand content. Characteristic soil profiles in the Centennial Study area consisted of a very poorly developed or absent A1-horizon, a 5-10 cm A2-horizon, a thin, ferruginous B1-horizon, and a thick, sand-rich B2-horizon. In some locations, a moderately clay-rich C-horizon was present below the B2-horizon. Two soil samples were collected at each site: (i) approximately 500 g of A2-horizon soil to support surface microbial analysis (MET), and (ii) approximately 1 kg of B2- or C-Horizon soil to support multielement geochemical analysis of the clay-sized (<2 µm) fractions. At 45 designated sample sites, an additional kilogram of soil was collected from the B2- or C-horizon to support further geochemical and mineralogical analysis. The primary target for the clay fraction samples was the C-horizon, due to slightly stronger geochemical responses observed in the Cigar West Study when compared to results from the A1, A2, and B soil horizons. However, due to the poorly developed and often absent C-horizon, most samples were collected from the B2-horizon between 40 and 60 cm depth. Analytical comparisons between the B2- and C-horizons from previous surveys suggest little distinction between
these horizons in terms of geochemical response. In a number of locations proximal to river floodplains, an extremely thick A2-horizon prohibited the collection of the B- or C-horizon for the clay fraction samples. At these locations, the A2-horizon was taken as a substitute. Stainless steel shovels were used to access soils in the subsurface at each sampling station. After removing the outer disturbed material, approximately 500 g of A2-horizon soil was collected from the side of the hole with a stainless steel scoop and placed in an airtight, double zipper Ziploc bag. Crews were careful to avoid any vegetation or organic content in the soils and any personal, direct contact with the sample. Following collection of the MET sample, approximately 1 kg of soil was collected from the C soil horizon, where present. In areas where the C- horizon was absent, too deep, or too difficult to access, samples were taken from the B2-horizon. These samples were collected at maximum drill- hole depth from fresh, undisturbed material on the side of the hole. Samples were collected using a stainless steel scoop and placed in double zipper Ziploc bags. Distributions of the clay fraction soil samples, bulk soil samples, and MET samples are shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6.
Figure 4. Distribution of Clay Fraction Samples
Figure 5. Distribution of Bulk Soil Samples
Figure 6. Distribution of MET Samples
Legend
2.2.2 Tree Core Sampling
Vegetation in the area predominantly consists of Jack Pine (Pinus bansksiana) forest with more minor Black Spruce (Picea mariana) forest and scattered Paper Birch (Betula papyrifera). Undergrowth consists of Labrador Tea (Ledum groenlandicum), Mountain Alder (Alnus crispa), and Reindeer Moss (Cladonia rangiferina) covering the forest floor. Portions of the property have been affected by historical forest fires leaving portions of immature to semi-mature jack pine forest in various stages of regeneration. Tree core samples were collected from Black Spruce or Jack Pine trees at each sample site. However, not all areas of the property proved conducive to tree core collection. Areas of immature pine forest limited sampling in some areas due to trees of insufficient age and diameter (>6 cm) for sampling. Sample crews targeted the most mature trees at each sampling location. Tree core samples were collected using a Haglof increment borer. Cores were taken through the middle of the tree on a north-south bearing and were oriented in plastic straws sealed with tape for storage and transport. Distribution of the tree core sample locations is illustrated in Figure 7.
2.2.3 Gas Sampling
The passive, in-situ, head-space diffusion samplers used for the gas sampling were designed and constructed by Dr. Tom Kotzer and consisted of two 0.25 inch diameter copper tubes, approximately 3 inches in length and sealed on the outer ends, separated by a semi-permeable silicon membrane approximately 2 inches in length. Samplers were deployed in 16 drill-holes distributed along the length of the deposit trend in both mineralized and non-mineralized holes (Figure 8). Additionally, two samplers were placed in local lakes east and west of the deposit to measure natural surface and
Figure 7. Distribution of Tree Core Samples
background concentrations. The drill-holes in which the samplers were deployed and the depths of the samplers below the water table are included in Table 4.
Table 4 – Summary of In-situ Gas Samples
Sample # Sample Depth (m below water table) VR-004 10 VR-018 1, 3, 5, 10, 100 VR-019 10, 100 VR-027 10, 100 VR-029 10, 100 VR-031 10, 100 VR-025 10 VR-030 10, 100 VR-033 10 VR-036 10, 100 VR-041 10 VR-042 10 VR-044 10 VR-047 10 VR-048 10 VR-050 10 Wide Lake - Bottom Sample 1 Eastern Lake - Bottom Sample 1 Total Number 30
Figure 8. Distribution of In-Situ Gas Samples
Residence time of the gas samplers was between six and seven days, well beyond the time required for diffusion and equilibration (Kotzer, 2000). Once removed, the copper tubes were cut using a crimping tool, creating sealed, gas-tight containers for storage and transport of the samples. Both sides of the sampler were crimped, thus providing two gas samples from each apparatus. A detailed description of the sampling protocols and extensive background information on gas sampling methodologies developed by Dr. Tom Kotzer are included in Appendix A.
2.2.4 Field Data and Digital Databases
Handheld Garmin GPS units were used by the sampling crews to locate the predefined sampling locations. UTM coordinates were then collected at the location from which the sample was actually collected and pictures were taken of the soil sampling holes for future reference. Detailed sampling records and metadata were also collected from each sample site, including duplicate information, location details, local radiometric parameters, environmental/physiographic parameters, sample media collected, and notes regarding the local topography or other notable features of the sampling site. Radiometric parameters included max counts per second (cps) recorded in the air (~1 m above ground) and in the soil hole (~40-60 cm below ground surface), as well as potassium, uranium, and thorium content measured in the soil hole as determined by a 120 second assay from a Radiation Solutions RS-125 Super-Scint Scintillometer. Environmental conditions recorded included relative soil wetness, ground boulder density, boulder lithological type, dominant local tree type, average tree diameter, and general forest density. All parameters were recorded on a field sheet using predefined metrics designed to characterize each site in a consistent manner. The field collection sheet and a summary spreadsheet with detailed descriptions of the appropriate input/metric for each parameter are included in Appendix B. All field records and metadata were recorded into a digital database following each sampling day, which are included along with the geochemical data in Appendix C.
2.2.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)
Field duplicates of tree core, clay fraction, and MET samples were collected at pre-established sample sites distributed evenly over the survey grid at a frequency of 1 duplicate per 20 samples. Each duplicate was given a blind duplicate name in the field prior to forwarding the samples to the appropriate laboratory. In addition to the field duplicates, analytical and method blanks, lab duplicates, and standard reference materials were inserted into the analytical sequences at both QFIR and Acme Laboratories at a minimum of 1 per 20 samples. QFIR also prepared preparation blanks to monitor for potential contamination throughout both clay separation and tree core preparation/digestion procedures. In the absence of a control standard for the MET analyses, Uravan used an A2-horizon sample collected from the survey area at the time of the sampling program. Approximately 7 kg of sample was collected from a single hole within the survey area. It was then homogenized and split into 500 g subsamples that were inserted into the analytical sequence. The control samples were stored in the same location and under the same conditions as the other MET samples in order to accurately reflect the conditions experienced by the regular MET samples.
2.3 Analytical Procedures
The Centennial Study incorporated a number of analytical components to support the scientific objectives of the study.
2.3.1 Clay-Sized Fraction Analyses
The B- and C-horizon soil samples were shipped to the Queen’s Facility for Isotope Research (QFIR) where they underwent clay separation in preparation for geochemical analysis. The clay-sized fraction (<2μm) was targeted due to the higher surface reactivity of clay minerals relative to other components making up the bulk of the soil sample. This enhanced reactivity has the potential to serve as an effective trap for many geochemical compounds and may correspondingly enhance any anomalous geochemical signals that may be present within the sample. The clay separation procedure was developed in-house by QFIR and Uravan during the Cigar West Study. A portion of the soil sample is added to purified (reverse osmosis) water and mixed with Calgon (sodium hexametaphosphate) to aid flocculation and separation of the clay component. The mixture is then run through a series of sonic agitators to promote clay fraction particles into solution and then centrifuged to separate the clay-sized fraction from the larger fractions. The clay-rich solution is then decanted and dried, leaving a <2µm clay-sized fraction for analysis. If the requisite 100 mg weight required for analysis was not achieved via the first separation, the procedure was repeated. Following separation at QFIR, the clay-sized fractions were forwarded to Acme Laboratories (Acme) in Vancouver, B.C., where they were analyzed according to Acme’s 1F analytical package. The 1F procedure involves an Aqua Regia digest and analysis of 53 elements, plus rare earth elements and Pb isotopes (204Pb, 206Pb, 207Pb, 208Pb) by ICP-MS. QFIR also ran X-ray diffraction (XRD) and carbon (13C/12C) and nitrogen (15N/14N) stable isotope on subsplits of each clay-fraction. Isotope analyses were conducted using an Element Analyzer attached directly to an Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometer (IRMS).
2.3.2 Tree Core Analysis
Tree core preparation and analysis was performed by QFIR personnel at Queen’s University. Prior to digestion, tree cores were run through a series of documentation procedures in which the size, age, and variation in tree ring widths were recorded and the cores digitally scanned for future reference. Once documented, select intervals of the tree were removed for analysis. Intervals were chosen based on the age of the trees, targeting a minimum of 25 years from the youngest (outer) portion of the tree, where available, thereby avoiding the sapwood. In trees of sufficient age (>55 years) and width, multiple intervals from a single tree core were analyzed. Where possible, samples were preferentially selected from intervals corresponding to ages between 1970 and 1985, prior to significant mining and development in the Athabasca Basin. Following the selection of the intervals, the tree cores were digested and analyzed at QFIR according to procedures refined from the initial Cigar West Study. After sample selection the tree rings were submerged in an ultrasonic bath and dried to constant weight. They were then dissolved using a distilled nitric acid digestion, with a later addition of hydrogen peroxide to breakdown organic constituents. These solutions were then microwaved to help speed up and improve digestion of the more resistive components of the samples. The samples were subsequently dried and then put back into solution using a 2% nitric acid solution and analyzed for 50 elements and Pb isotopes using high- resolution ICP-SFMS.
2.3.3 Bulk Soil Analyses
Bulk soil samples collected at the 45 predefined sample sites were taken from the same B2 or C soil horizon as collected at the normal clay fraction sites. However, in addition to undergoing the same clay separation procedure at QFIR and subsequent 1F analysis at Acme Laboratories, a 500 g split sample underwent size fraction mineralogical analysis at Overburden Drilling Management Ltd. (ODM) in Ottawa, Ontario. The intended analysis of the samples forwarded to ODM was to screen the samples into a series of grain-size fractions and perform 100 grains mineralogical identification to classify differences in modal mineral abundance in varying size fractions. However, due to the preponderance of quartz in the soil samples, initial test analyses failed to produce meaningful data, leading to revised analytical procedures. In the final procedures, after bathing each sample in a weak oxalic acid solution to remove oxidation stains, samples were sieved using 0.063 and 0.5 mm screens to produce three size fractions (<0.063, 0.063-0.5, and >0.5 mm). Heavy liquid separation at specific gravities (SG) of 2.6 and 3.2 was then performed on the most abundant of the fractions (0.063-0.5 mm) to isolate the heavy mineral components from feldspar (<2.6) and quartz (S.G. 2.6-3.2). The heavy mineral fraction was then further sieved using 0.18 mm and 0.25 mm screens to produce three subfractions. Finally, 100 grains count were performed on the 0.063 to 0.18 mm subfraction to identify the fine heavy mineral components that could potentially contribute to the background geochemical signatures of the surface samples. Another 500 g split of the soil sample was forwarded directly to Acme Laboratories and underwent separate geochemical analyses from the clay-sized fraction prepared by QFIR. The samples were screened using an 80 mesh to remove pebbles and coarse fractions and were analyzed using Acme’s 1F analytical package to allow for comparison of the geochemical signatures of the broader soil horizon and isolated clay-sized fractions.
2.3.4 Microbial Exploration Technology (MET) Analyses
The MET analysis is a proprietary technology that was developed by Dr. Doug Munnecke of Environmental BioTechnologies Inc. (EBT) to identify areas of higher hydrocarbon potential as related to oil and gas exploration. The MET system measures the metabolic activity in soils towards the metabolism of hydrocarbon gases, particularly light hydrocarbons (methane-pentane). Areas of elevated hydrocarbon-related metabolic activity at the surface are considered indicative of enhanced surface hydrocarbon gas flux through the sedimentary column, which provide nutrients for hydrocarbon-metabolizing microbes in surface soils. The application of the MET technology to uranium exploration is predicated on the production of hydrocarbons, specifically methane, as a byproduct of mineralization. The inferred mechanism of methane production is by the reduction of carbon to methane via the radiolysis effect within an ore zone. Samples were collected within the aerobic zone from the A2 soil horizon, which commonly comprised the top 10 cm of the soil profile. The samples were shipped in airtight plastic bags to EBT in Lodi, California. To liberate the microbes from the soil and put them into solution, a 10 g homogenized subsample was added to a buffer solution and agitated using a sonic finger. After settling, 45 µL of solution was diluted with sterile deionized (DI) water and centrifuged at 1200 rpm for 15 minutes to separate the remaining suspended sediment and isolate the microbes in solution. Alcohol-based growth formula, which is selective for hydrocarbon-metabolizing bacteria and inhibitory for common soil bacteria, was added with a redox-sensitive indicator dye to 20 µL of the microbe solution and pipetted to 96 well Titertek plates. Four replicates (i.e. four Titertek wells) of each sample were then incubated for 120 hours in sealed Titertek plates. Throughout the incubation period, the redox- sensitive indicator dye changes colour from blue to pink in accordance with the microbial population density and the associated oxygen consumption of that population. Following incubation, samples were analyzed using a spectrophotometer to measure the oxygen consumed and assigned a numeric MET value between 0 (no oxygen consumed) and 40 (100% oxygen consumed) to each sample well. Each of the four replicates were then averaged to produce a final MET rank for each sample between
0 and 40, with high values indicative of high microbial activity, and therefore used as proxies for areas of higher exploration potential. In the analyses of the Centennial samples, two hydrocarbon-based growth formulas (methanol and butanol) were used to target specific microbial populations. Each sample was run with both the methanol- and butanol-based growth formulas to evaluate potential variations in hydrocarbon- specific microbial populations.
2.3.5 In-Situ Gas Sample Analyses
The two gas samples collected from each diffusion sampler were forwarded to separate laboratories. Analysis of methane, carbon dioxide, and carbon isotopic compositions (13C/12C) were conducted at QFIR, while the measurements of helium (4He, 3He) and neon (20Ne) were conducted at the University of Ottawa. New laboratory procedures were developed by QFIR to facilitate the transfer of the gas sample directly into the injection apparatus of the IRMS instruments without contamination from atmospheric or other gases during the analysis.
3.0 RESULTS
Results from the study are summarized in the following sections. Digital data from the study is included in Appendix C. All analytical certificates from Acme Laboratories are included in Appendix D.
3.1 Mineralogy and Geochemistry of Bulk Soil Samples
Bulk soil samples were collected at 45 sites distributed on 200 m spacing over the primary survey area. All but two samples were collected from B2-horizon soils, with one C- and one A2-horizon sample also collected. Due to significant differences between the element concentrations observed between A2- horizon and the B2-/C-horizon soils, the sample collected from the A2-horizon was not included in the analysis of the geochemical results (44 sites compared). When comparing the mean values of the element concentrations between the bulk soil samples and the clay-sized fractions at the same 44 sites, the bulk soil samples are an order of magnitude lower than the mean element concentrations of the clay-sized fractions. However, the variations in element concentration, in terms of each element’s overall contribution to the geochemical signature of the population, are comparable (Figure 9).
Spatial distribution of the element concentrations however, differ significantly between the two populations, with anomalous concentrations in both the bulk soil and clay-sized fraction rarely occurring at the same site (Figures 10 and 11). Notable nugget effects are observed in the bulk soil samples, creating distinct point anomalies of commonly elevated elements in particular samples which dominate the spatial distribution plots. The same nugget effects and common point anomalies are not observed in the clay-sized fractions. Additionally, despite showing similar trends in mean element variation, the overall variance in element concentrations is markedly higher in the bulk soil geochemistry than the clay-sized fraction samples. Test 100 and 200 grain mineral ID counts on sieved fractions of the bulk soil samples were dominated by quartz, necessitating heavy mineral separation to produce meaningful data on additional mineral components. Heavy liquid separation completed at specific gravities of 2.6 and 3.2, to separate the heavy minerals (S.G. >3.2) from the feldspars (S.G. <2.6) and the quartz (S.G. 2.6-3.2), were completed on the most abundant size fraction (0.063–0.5 mm) for each sample. On average, over 97% of each sample was comprised of quartz, with the heavy mineral fraction comprising only 0.10 % of the sample by weight (Table 5). Table 5 – Distribution of Weight Percentages Following Heavy Liquid Separation of 0.063-0.5 mm Fraction of Bulk Soil Samples
S.G. <2.6* S.G. 2.6 - 3.2** S.G. >3.2***
Average % of total weight 2.18 97.72 0.10
Max % of total weight 12.35 99.61 0.28
Min % of total weight 0.30 87.52 0.03
Figure 9. Mean Element Concentrations in Bulk Soils and Clay-Sized Fractions
Figure 10. Spatial Distribution of Common Uranium Pathfinder Elements in Bulk Soils
Figure 11. Spatial Distribution of Common Uranium Pathfinder Elements in Clay-Sized Fractions
The heavy minerals identified by the 100 grains count on the 0.063-0.25 mm fraction identified a number of common resistive species, as well as common oxide and rock-forming minerals. The most common species identified are hematite, followed closely by garnet and lesser hornblende, ilmenite, pyroxene, and epidote, which together comprise roughly 95% of the total heavy mineral components in each sample. Less common minerals include limonite, monazite, rutile, zircon, and titanite (Table 6).
Table 6 – Heavy Mineral Components of Bulk Soils by 100 Grain Count
Garnet Epidote Pyroxene Hornblende Ilmenite Hematite Limonite/ Goethite
Rutile/ Anatase Zircon Monazite Titanite/
Leucoxene
(Fe,Mg,Mn, Ti)O3 Fe2O3 FeO(OH)·n
H2O TiO2 ZrSiO4 (Ce,La)PO4 CaTiSiO5
AVERAGE 33.80 2.64 3.43 10.43 6.39 39.23 1.68 0.86 0.55 1.20 0.28 MEDIAN 33 2 2 7 2 39 1 1 0 1 0
TYPICAL RANGE 25-40 1-3 3-5 6-15 2-15 30-60 1-5 trace-1 0-1 0-2 trace-1
MAX 63 8 22 42 55 83 16 4 3 5 2 MIN 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
While mean element variation in the bulk soils and clay fractions showed similar relative geochemical signatures, the significantly lower element concentrations observed in the bulk soils indicates a significant muting of the element signal relative to the clay fractions. This is interpreted to be related to quartz comprising the majority of the bulk soil sample analyzed, resulting in a depressed geochemical signature. The preponderance of quartz could also account for the nugget effect and higher variance observed in the bulk soil geochemistry, as the coarser grain-size and lower element concentrations could make the sample more susceptible to individual rock or mineral fragments swamping the chemical signal of individual samples. Overall, the clay-sized fractions offer a more homogeneous, consistent sample, with decreased noise in the element chemistry, thus providing a better baseline for the evaluation of truly anomalous geochemical features. Analysis of the heavy mineral components of the 0.063 – 0.25 mm fraction of the bulk soils indicates the heavy mineral components comprised <<1% of the total weight of the bulk soil samples and predominantly consisted of common oxide and rock-forming minerals, with few phases capable of hosting U, radiogenic Pb or pathfinder elements. Moreover, these did not show any notable, discernible correlation with anomalous chemical signatures of the clay fractions or bulk soil samples from which they were derived.
3.2 X-Ray Diffraction Results from Clay-Sized Fractions of B- and C-Horizon Soils
Following isolation of the clay-sized fractions, QFIR completed X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis on all samples along with scanning electron microprobe (SEM) work on select samples. The data show a mix of species predominantly comprised of quartz and clay mineral species typical of the Athabasca Basin, including chlinochlore kaolinite, and illite. Fine organic carbon, mixed clays, and minor hematite/rutile also comprise components of the clay-sized fractions (Table 7). In total, quartz makes up a relatively consistent component of the clay-sized fractions, averaging nearly 43% of the samples. Chlinochlore makes up the majority (~51%) of the remaining components after quartz, with lesser kaolinite (~23%), and illite (~11%). Table 7 – Distribution of Mineral Components in Clay-Sized Fractions of Soil Samples Components
Quartz Chlinochlore Kaolinite Illite Organic Carbon Mixed Rutile/
Hematite
Average Percentage 43 29 13 6 5 3 1 Percentage In absence
of Quartz -- 51 23 11 9 5 2
The association of chlinochlore and kaolinite with lesser illite is also analogous to the clay mineral assemblage present in Centennial drill core, supporting the common, detrital nature of the clay species present in the soils and Athabasca Group Stratigraphy. The organic components included in the clay fractions are of unknown origin, however, research currently being done at QFIR suggests these could be important components for trapping elements and gaseous complexes transported from a deposit due to their significant surface reactivity and sorption capacity. Viewed spatially, the major mineral species comprising each sample show a relatively consistent distribution with no discernible spatial trend (Figure 12).
Figure 12. Distribution of Common Clay Mineral Assemblages in Clay-Sized Fractions
LEGEND Major XRD clay Species
3.3 Clay-Sized Fractions of B- and C-Horizon Soils
Soil samples were collected at 502 sample locations throughout the study area. A total of 455 of the samples were collected from the B2-horizon, 10 from the C-horizon and 30 from the A2-horizon (Figure 4). A2-horizon samples were predominantly collected at sample sites along the alluvial plane of the Karras River and Crazy Charlie Creek. In these locations, the B- and C-horizons were either not present or were too deep to access below the thick A2-horizon. Geochemical results from the A2- horizon samples showed significant differences in element concentrations when compared to the results from the B2- and C-horizon samples, often being significantly depleted. As a result, samples collected from A2-horizon were not included in the analysis of geochemical trends. A number of anomalous spatial trends are recorded by the clay-sized fractions that could suggest potential transport of deposit-sourced elements via structural conduits and incorporation into surface soils. Of particular note is the distribution of anomalous, radiogenic Pb isotope ratios (207Pb/206Pb of <0.59), which show strong correlation with a roughly east-west-trending cross-structure interpreted from historic gravity data (Figure 13). A series of radiogenic samples are distributed in proximity to this interpreted lineament, which is proximal to the highest grade portion of the deposit. Additionally, a group of samples with elevated U concentrations (>4.25 ppm) occurs slightly west of the dominant radiogenic trend, proximal to the deposit and the western strike of the interpreted cross-structure (Figure 14).
Figure 13. Anomalous Pb Isotopic Ratios in Clay-Sized Fractions
Spatial distributions of pathfinder elements, including U, Co, Ni, W, Mg, Dy, and Ce, and alteration elements, including K and Rb, were analyzed both independently and by summing the median- normalized concentrations of each element to identify samples with collective, coincident enrichment of multiple elements. Samples showing collective pathfinder enrichment and alteration element enrichment correlate locally with the deposit, particularly in the case of the alteration elements, and more robustly with the interpreted cross-structure (Figures 15 and 16). In addition to the anomalous geochemical corridor defined above, samples with radiogenic Pb isotopic ratios, elevated U concentrations, and collective alteration/pathfinder enrichment correlate approximately 2 km north of the deposit in a northwest-southeast-trending low resistivity corridor, possibly related to a hydrothermal breach (Figures 13 – 16). The anomalous area is displaced approximately 250-500 meters east of the C1 conductor and the projected strike of the deposit, where recent geophysical surveys have identified additional conductive trends.
Figure 14. Anomalous Uranium in Clay-Sized Fractions
Surficial features in the Centennial area are dominated by glaciofluvial outwash plain deposits which forms the flat, shallowly undulating topography in the area (Jiricka et al., 2005; Figure 20). Alluvial plain deposits along the Karras River and Crazy Charlie Creek, and till moraine/ridge deposits that define the local topographical highs, are also notable features in the area (Jiricka et al., 2005). Comparisons of these features to the distribution of mineralogical and geochemical data from both the bulk soils and clay-sized fractions, do not show any apparent association between the distribution of clay minerals, or anomalous chemical signatures and the surficial units.
Figure 15. Pathfinder Element Enrichment in Clay-Sized Fractions
3.4 Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen, and Hydrogen Isotopes in Clay-Sized Fractions
Analysis of carbon and nitrogen isotopes were measured to identify potential areas of enhanced microbial populations at the surface, which may be reflective of enhanced microbial activity associated with the deposit at depth. Carbon and nitrogen derived from microbial sources are isotopically distinct from plant and atmospheric sources (Hoefs, 2009; Nelson et al, 2009). In the case of carbon isotopes, more negative δ13C values are representative of microbial isotopic signatures, due to their preference for the lighter, 12C isotope. Typical microbial-derived δ13C values range between -100 and -38‰ compared to -7 and -3‰ for atmospheric carbon and -25 to -15‰ for plant material (Drever et al., 2009). For nitrogen isotopes, more positive δ15N values are representative of a microbial source due to the preference of the heavier 15N isotope in metabolic processes, compared to the δ15N value typical of atmospheric and crustal sources of 0‰. The δ13C values from the clay fractions of the soil samples ranged between -27.8 and -18.9‰, higher than the range typically representative of microbial carbon. When analyzed spatially, a number of the of the lowest δ13C values (<-25.9‰) show spatial correlation with the deposit, but also show correlation with the alluvial plains of the local river system and local anomalous areas east of the
Figure 16. Alteration Element Enrichment in Clay-Sized Fractions
primary sampling grid (Figure 17). Given the range of isotopic compositions, these could be more representative of plant-based organic carbon potentially included in the isolated clay-sized fractions.
Accordingly, δ13C values can contain a component related to mineralization but may be dominated by surface vegetation or microbial signatures. Samples with the highest δ15N values (>9.6‰), however, show strong correlation with the deposit and other multielement anomalies observed in the clay-sized fractions of the soil samples (Figure 18). This could suggest a potential relationship with deposit-sourced element migration and unique microbial populations.
Oxygen and hydrogen isotopic compositions can be used as indicators of the environmental conditions and associated water compositions under which certain mineral species formed. Clay minerals in the clay-sized fractions of the surface soils generally have δ18O and δ2H values ranging from 12 to 20‰ and -90 to -145‰, respectively. These lie outside the interpreted δ18O and δ2H ranges for peak diagenetic fluids in the Athabasca Basin of -6±4‰ and -60±20‰, respectively (Kotzer and Kyser, 1995), indicating partial recrystallization since initial formation. Furthermore, research conducted by QFIR suggests that the isotopic composition of the majority of the clay fractions reflects equilibrium with dominantly summer meteoric waters in the Athabasca Basin, reflecting interaction with the local environment.
Figure 17. δ13C Values of Clay-Sized Fractions
Figure 18. δ15N Values of Clay-Sized Fractions
3.5 Tree Cores from Black Spruce and Jack Pine Trees
Trees cores were collected from the most mature trees available within a radius of approximately 5 m around the soil sampling location. Trees of a suitable size were available at most sampling sites throughout the survey area despite local areas affected by historical forest fires. As is typical of the Athabasca Basin, the majority of the survey area is dominated by pine forest. Accordingly, 413 of the 478 tree cores collected were taken from pine trees. In addition, a total of 36 tree cores were collected from burnt pine trees. In most cases, these consisted of living trees that showed evidence of having been previously affected by forest fire, such as burnt portions of the trunk. Finally, a total of 29 tree cores were collected from black spruce trees. These were predominantly limited to the alluvial planes of the Karras River and Crazy Charlie Creek, where higher moisture contents allow for spruce- dominated forest (Figure 7). However, due to the limited distribution of spruce samples, spatial analyses were done using only pine trees, with the exception of Pb isotope analyses, which were completed using the full sample population because there should be no fractionation of Pb isotopes among various tree species. In general, Pb isotope ratios (207Pb/206Pb) in tree cores over the Centennial survey area are high relative to populations from other survey areas. While mean 207Pb/206Pb values are comparable between the Stewardson, Halliday, and Centennial populations — 0.831, 0.829, and 0.845, respectively — only one tree core sample at Centennial returned a 207Pb/206Pb ratio of less than 0.80, compared to 7% and 10% of the tree core populations at the Stewardson and Halliday properties, respectively. In fact, the entire Centennial population is above the 207Pb/206Pb values that define the upper limits of the anomalous populations on the Stewardson and Halliday properties (<0.70 and <0.78, respectively). Despite the relatively high 207Pb/206Pb ratios of the Centennial tree core population, samples with the lowest 207Pb/206Pb ratios (<0.83; ~3.7 percent of the population) on the Centennial property do correlate spatially with radiogenic clay fractions and multielement geochemical anomalies (Figure 19). This correlation, despite the significant difference in the population range relative to other properties, could potentially reflect the greater dilution of any ore signature with common Pb by the trees in the Centennial area, thus muting the radiogenic signature. Although, total Pb concentrations do not markedly differ between the project areas. Spatial correlations are limited among other elements in the tree cores. Select pathfinder elements, including Ni and W, show local correlation with the deposit and weak to moderate correlation with the multielement anomalies recorded by the clay fractions (Figure 20). Likewise, K and Rb show local enrichment proximal to the deposit and the interpreted cross-structure (Figure 21), although these associations are less robust than in the clay fractions.
Figure 19. Anomalous Pb Isotopic Ratios in Tree Cores
Figure 20. Anomalous Ni in Tree Cores
Figure 21. Anomalous K in Tree Cores
3.6 MET Results
Samples for the MET analyses were collected from the A2-horizon, well within the aerobic zone of the soil profile required to support aerobically active microbe populations. The A2-horizon was the most consistent sampling medium included in the study and was available at all sample sites. EBT completed the analyses at their in-house lab in Lodi, California, using two distinct growth formulas for all 533 samples: a methanol-based growth formula and a butanol-based formula. Butanol is EBT’s standard growth formula, which targets populations that utilize light hydrocarbons (C1-C5) or hydrocarbon derivatives, such as butanol, as their fuel source for aerobic respiration. However, considering the primary hydrocarbon species expected to be associated with uranium deposits is methane, a methanol- based formula was also used to target microbe populations that can only metabolize single carbon hydrocarbon species, such as methane. Data from EBT included results from the 4 replicates of each sample, each one associated with a value between 0 and 40 based on spectrophotometer readings correlated to the redox-sensitive indicator (i.e. oxygen consumption). A ‘Raw MET’ value for each sample is then given as the average of the 4 replicates, along with percent rank values and a number of in-house, probability-based parameters. An explanation of the data parameters provided by EBT is included in Appendix E. Uravan worked exclusively with the Raw MET score to evaluate local anomalies potentially indicative of higher surface microbial activity. Anomalous values, which represent the top 3% of the data, are shown for the methanol- and butanol-based growth formulas in Figures 22 and 23. These correspond to Raw MET score cutoffs of >7.5 and >5.9, respectively. Spatial correlation among the anomalies between the two growth media is strong, with five of the anomalous samples (approximately 33%) commonly elevated in both analyses, and the majority of remaining samples showing strong spatial association. The majority of anomalous samples are distributed between 50 and 150 m west of the deposit, along trend with the mineralization. Additionally, the small pod of mineralization east of the primary deposit is associated with anomalous samples in both the methanol (2 samples) and butanol (1 sample) populations. Local point anomalies are also observed east and north of the deposit near structural trends, potentially indicating local areas of enhanced gaseous migration.
Figure 22. Anomalous MET Results - Methanol Growth Formula
Figure 23. Anomalous MET Results - Butanol Growth Formula
3.7 In-Situ Gas Analyses
The in-situ gas sampling was focused on the presence and distribution of helium and methane gases in to evaluate their potential application to uranium exploration and assess the mechanism proposed for the transport of elements from a deposit to the surface environment. The Helium-4 isotope is the product of radiogenic alpha decay from uranium and thorium in the subsurface. Accordingly, concentrations of 4He above natural crustal abundances are interpreted to be directly related to alpha decay from mineralization. Additionally, the MET analysis is predicated on the migration of primarily methane gas produced via the radiolysis effect in the redox zone of a deposit, which subsequently migrate to the surface and support microbial populations that use the methane as a metabolic energy source. Passive, head-space diffusion samplers were deployed in 16 drill-holes at 10 meters below the water table in all drill-holes, and also at 100 meters in 7 of the drill-holes. Shallower samples were collected at 5m, 3m, and 1 m in VR-018 to evaluate the gradient of dissolved gases approaching the water table surface. Two samplers were also placed in on lake bottoms approximately 200-400 m east and west of the deposit to measure natural surface and background concentrations. Unfortunately, due to the significant water pressure, 4 of the 7 samples deployed at 100 meters depth developed holes in the silicon tubing, compromising the samples. Additionally, the 10 meter sample in VR-027 also had a hole in the silicon tubing, thus precluding analysis. Helium-4 concentrations ranged from 3.84x10-6 to 4.58x10-3 ccSTP/cc in samples collected from the drill-holes, while the concentrations in the two lake bottom samples were 3.99x10-6 and 5.38x10-11 ccSTP/cc. The highest concentrations of 4He (>1.5x10-3 ccSTP/cc) were measured in drill-holes that intersected significant mineralization, including VR-027, VR-029, VR-030, VR-036, and VR-042, with the exception VR-004, approximately 200 m east of the deposit, which also had a concentration >1.5x10-3 ccSTP/cc but did not intersect significant mineralization (Figure 24). Samples collected from drill-holes north and south of the primary mineralized zones generally had the lowest 4He. Additionally, 4He concentrations progressively decreased in shallower samples in VR-018 from 1.14x10-3 at 10 m to 2.01x10-4 ccSTP/cc at 1 m below the water table. Concentrations in the two lake bottom samples were 5.38x10-11 and 3.99x10-6 ccSTP/cc in Wide Lake, ~250 m west of the deposit, and the unnamed lake ~200 m east of the deposit, respectively. Notably, the significantly higher concentration observed in the unnamed lake east of the deposit is <20 m distance from VR-004, which was the only non-mineralized drillhole to show a 4He value >1.5x10-3 ccSTP/cc. This suggests enhanced gas migration in this area, and possibly indicative of open structural conduits allowing for easier subsurface gas migration.
Figure 24. Anomalous 4He in In-Situ Gas Samples
Methane (CH4) concentrations ranged from 24.51 to 717.9 ppm in samples collected from the drill- holes, and 7.46 ppm in the unnamed lake east of the deposit. The concentration of methane could not be measured in the lake bottom sample from Wide Lake. Similar to the 4He values, many of the elevated CH4 values (>200 ppm) were measured in mineralized drill-holes, with the exception of VR-025 and VR-047 (Figure 25). When compared to the distribution of anomalous MET samples, drill-holes showing elevated methane are generally proximal. Of particular note is the elevated methane measured in VR-042, which intersected a mineralized pod approximately 200 m east of the deposit, which is associated with anomalous MET samples from both the methanol and butanol growth formulas.
Collectively, these results suggest that radiogenic helium and methane gas related to mineralization are migrating vertically through the water column to the surface. This lends support to the inferred mechanism of the migration of elements and gaseous complexes from a deposit to the surface environment, which is the foundation of the model upon which the surface geochemical sampling is predicated.
Figure 25. Anomalous CH4 in In-Situ Gas Samples
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
In combination, the geochemical and mineralogical data from the bulk soil samples and clay-sized fractions suggest soil samples can be collected over a wide area from different surface geological units and, by isolating the clay-sized fraction, still provide a consistent substrate suitable for the evaluation of geochemical signals. Additionally, the in-situ gas data show deposit-sourced gaseous elements and compounds do migrate vertically from a deposit to the surface. It is therefore plausible that other elements and gaseous complexes migrate from a deposit through structural conduits and permeable stratigraphy, and subsequently sorb to reactive surfaces in surface materials, to produce deposit- related anomalies. Though not directly correlated to the deposit, the surficial anomalies that are recorded by all media are associated with structures and other supportive geophysical features that could, collectively, assist in prioritizing drill targets and help vector exploration to a deposit (Figure 26). In the hypothetical case of exploring for the Centennial deposit in a ‘greenfields’ setting, if the most strongly anomalous surficial features identified by the study were prioritized as drill targets in combination with interpreted geophysical and structural data, then a drill-hole could be placed within 200m of the highest grade portion of the deposit, or perhaps closer.
Figure 26. Compilation Map
5.0 REFERENCES
Alexandre, P., Kyser, T.K., Jiricka, D., Witt, G., 2012, Formation and Evolution of the Centennial Unconformity-Related Uranium Deposit in the South-Central Athabasca Basin, Canada: Economic Geology, v. 107, p. 385-400. Drever, G., Fraser, I., Pettman, C., Dunn, C., Kyser, T.K., Alexandre, P., 2010, Geosphere-Biosphere Orientation Study over the Cigar West Unconformity Uranium Deposit in the Athabasca Basin of Northern Saskatchewan, Uravan Minerals, Unpublished Internal Report. Hoefs, J., 2009, Stable Isotope Geochemistry, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Jiricka, D., Witt, G., Wright, D., Hilchey, A., 2006, Virgin River Project 2005 Annual Exploration Report, Cameco Corporation, Unpublished Internal Report. Kelley, D.L., Kelley, K.D., Coker, W.B., Caughlin, B., Oherty, M.E., 2006, Beyond the Obvious Limits of Ore Deposits: The use of Mineralogical, Geochemical, and Biological Features for the Remote Detection of Mineralization: Economic Geology, v.101, p. 729-752. Kotzer, T., 2000, Interpretation of Tritium and Dissolved Gas Analyses on Groundwater Near UPP Area at OPG-Pickering Nuclear Generating Site, AECL – Chalk River Laboratories, COG-00-09. Kotzer, T.G., Kyser, T.K., 1995. Petrogenesis of the Proterozoic Athabasca Basin, Northern Saskatchewan, Canada, and its Relation to Diagenesis, Hydrothermal Uranium Mineralization and Paleohydrogeology: Chemical Geology, v. 120, p. 45–89. Nelson, M.A., Kyser, T.K., Clark, A.H. & Oates, C.J., 2009, Carbon isotopic evidence for microbial involvement in exotic-type copper mineralization, Huinquintipa and Mina Sur, Northern Chile: Economic Geology, v.102, p. 1311-120. Reid, K., Ansdell, K., Jiricka, D., Witt, G., Card, C., 2014, Regional Setting, Geology, and Paragenesis of the Centennial Unconformity-Related Uranium Deposit, Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, Canada: Economic Geology, v. 109, p. 539-566.
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Explanation Legend Suface Sample Data Record
Parameter Category Parameter
Record Input Description
Station ID MT001 Unique sample location identifier Dup Site X Indicates whether or not a duplicate sample was collected Bulk Soil Site X Indicates whether or not a duplicate sample was collected Picture # 1001 Picture number for image taken of soil site Easting 505496 UTM Easting coordinate copied from GPS Northing 6483077 UTM Northing coordinate copied from GPS Elevation 410 Elevation (m) copied from GPS
CPS Air 100 Maximum background CPS reading observed on scintillometer while being held in air in area around soil site
CPS Hole 200 Maximum CPS reading observed on scintillometer while being held in soil sampling pit
%K 15 % K value indicated following 2 minute assay U 18.1 ppm U value indicated following 2 minute assay Th 12.2 ppm Th value indicated following 2 minute assay
Relative scale indicating moisture content of soil 0 - dry no appreciable moisture 1 - slightly moist 2 - damp to wet (ex. Distal river flood plain) 3 - very wet (ex. Muskeg, proximal river bank)
Outcrop X Indicates whether or not outcrop is present at or near site Relative scale indicating boulder frequencey of soil / overburden 0 - no boulders; sand and fines 1 - small cobbles and pebbles 2 - large cobbles and boulders common 3 - large boulders common / outcrop
Indicates dominant lithology of boulders in area G - Granitoid P - Pelitic S - Sandstone G/S - Mixed granitoid/sandstone P/S - Mixed pelitic/sandstone G/P - Mixed granitoid/pelitic Predominant plant species making up forest P - Jack Pine forest S - Black Spruce forest (usually moist areas, river, lake, and muskeg borders P/S - Mixed pine and spruce forest (generally not 50/50 but should have an appreciable amount of spruce) BP - Burnt pine forest BS - Burnt spruce forest BP/BS - Mixed burnt pine and burnt spruce forest - Average tree diameter of forest in centimeters - If in burnt area, should refer to diameter of living new growth not burnt forest Relative scale indicating the density of forest 1 - low density, easily walkable 2 - moderate to high density - more difficult to navigate 3 - extremely dense, very difficult to walk through, often described as rabbit brush
Tree Core Y or N Tree core sample collected at sample site -- Yes or no Tree type core was collected from P - Pine tree S - Spruce tree BP - Burnt pine tree BS - Burnt spruce tree
A1 Y or N A1 soil horizon collected at sample site -- Yes or no B Y or N B soil horizon collected at sample site -- Yes or no C Y or N C soil horizon collected at sample site -- Yes or no MET Y or N MET sample collected at sample site -- Yes or no
Notes regarding physiographic or other notable features at sample site: - Proximity to surficial features such as eskers, drumlins, river valleys, lakes,muskeg, hummocky topography, drainage low, etc. - Forest density and characteristics such as height and maturity - Presence of outcrop and surface boulders Notes regarding important sample characteristics:
- Questionable soil sample categorization (ex. questionable C horizon) - Quality of tree core collected (ex. very dry burnt pine sample) - Quality of vegetation sample (ex. collected from both immature and mature trees) -Divergence from planned location (ex. sample collected 100 m west of planned location to get suitable tree for tree core)
G, P, S, G/S, P/S, G/PBoulder Type
Sample Details
Environm- ental
Tree Type P, S, BP, or BS
Notes
Boulder Density 0, 1, 2, or 3
Forest Type P, S, P/S, BP, BS, BP/BS
Tree Diam 10
Crew members: Weather: Property: Collection Date: General Notes:
Station ID Dup Site
Lnd Wet
Out crp
Bldr Dens
Bldr Type
Frst Type
Tree Diam
Veg Dens
Tree Core
Location Notes Sample DetailsRadiometrics
Appendix D
Analytical Certificates
9050 Shaughnessy St Vancouver BC V6P 6E5 CANADA
PHONE (604) 253-3158
Building B-8
Devon Griffiths
Test
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Colin Dunn
Kurt Kyser
Paul Stacey
Larry LahusenCC:
Invoice To:
Building B-8
www.acmelab.com
Acme does not accept responsibility for samples left at the laboratory after 90 days without prior written instructions for sample storage or return.
This report supersedes all previous preliminary and final reports with this file number dated prior to the date on this certificate. Signature indicates final approval; preliminary reports are unsigned and should be used for reference only. All results are considered the confidential property of the client. Acme assumes the liabilities for actual cost of analysis only. Results apply to samples as submitted. “*” asterisk indicates that an analytical result could not be provided due to unusually high levels of interference from other elements.
2 of 5
Wide Lake Clays
Building B-8
Project:
Page:
1Part:
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS VAN13003493.1 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS VAN13003493.1
MDL
Unit
Analyte
Method WGHT 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F
Wgt Mo Cu Zn Ag Ni Co Mn Fe As U Au Th Sr Cd Sb Bi V Ca P
kg ppm ppm ppm ppb ppm ppm ppm % ppm ppm ppb ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm % %
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.1 2 0.1 0.1 1 0.01 0.1 0.001 0.2 0.002 0.5 0.01 0.02 0.001 2 0.01 0.001
Dup20 Clay 0.11 1.05 7.75 465.2 199 4.6 0.5 19 0.27 1.8 1.216 17.7 0.625 51.5 0.47 0.08 0.779 172 0.05 0.106
WL007 B Clay 0.21 0.88 15.46 211.1 787 4.1 1.1 80 0.76 2.6 0.601 5.7 1.567 37.0 0.42 0.24 0.580 205 0.10 0.125
WL534 B Clay 0.28 1.58 13.30 100.5 162 19.5 7.3 155 3.14 9.2 3.860 2.6 15.85 33.4 0.37 0.14 0.507 190 0.12 0.361
WL495 A2 Clay 0.35 0.81 12.83 162.3 256 5.7 1.1 124 2.72 5.0 1.069 3.8 1.846 55.2 0.27 0.13 0.712 125 0.07 0.286
WL496 B Clay 0.19 1.10 9.70 129.0 168 14.3 7.4 125 4.01 8.3 2.544 7.3 14.23 29.1 0.32 0.15 0.570 153 0.07 0.321
WL497 B Clay 0.25 1.84 12.85 151.5 269 16.1 6.4 244 3.61 7.8 3.262 1.8 10.12 26.2 0.32 0.13 0.549 152 0.09 0.412
WL499 B Clay 0.39 0.82 11.15 224.8 119 12.2 5.5 85 3.66 5.8 2.130 1.5 11.26 29.0 0.24 0.09 0.753 116 0.11 0.391
WL503 B Clay 0.24 1.42 20.30 118.3 238 13.2 4.3 68 4.34 6.5 1.295 2.5 4.954 20.4 0.42 0.13 0.518 111 0.06 0.155
WL504 B Clay 0.13 1.73 12.96 104.3 204 21.9 9.3 123 5.24 9.3 2.155 5.0 14.33 34.3 0.46 0.26 0.531 148 0.12 0.150
WL 913 B Clay 0.20 0.41 28.60 42.7 80 8.5 13.8 412 4.72 2.2 0.644 6.7 2.406 35.4 0.08 0.04 0.073 156 0.34 0.046
Dup23 Clay 0.10 0.80 6.65 461.8 69 3.4 1.2 51 2.83 6.7 0.890 2.3 4.901 72.4 0.22 0.19 0.569 114 0.06 0.139
WL516 B Clay 0.29 1.10 12.59 70.9 114 24.6 12.2 213 4.74 8.3 2.204 2.4 17.78 38.8 0.49 0.12 0.561 103 0.09 0.345
WL517 B Clay 0.09 1.70 11.36 156.5 127 21.5 10.7 181 4.14 10.3 3.359 6.2 19.21 43.5 0.33 0.23 0.528 108 0.12 0.202
WL518 B Clay 0.12 1.51 12.59 137.1 83 22.3 10.9 138 3.95 9.6 3.132 1.5 17.04 51.8 0.29 0.18 0.526 135 0.11 0.295
WL519 B Clay 0.20 1.47 18.72 220.2 140 21.1 9.5 96 5.64 8.3 2.394 2.2 16.55 38.6 0.36 0.10 0.534 131 0.08 0.331
WL523 B Clay 0.29 1.15 19.59 136.8 330 7.5 2.7 190 3.17 5.7 1.681 2.1 9.711 36.8 0.52 0.08 0.373 86 0.06 0.502
WL524 B Clay 0.20 0.76 16.76 287.9 147 15.5 7.0 242 3.26 3.2 1.681 2.8 9.246 35.2 0.37 0.08 0.488 87 0.09 0.293
WL525 B Clay 0.13 0.99 10.57 262.9 64 13.8 6.7 128 3.76 7.7 2.875 <0.2 10.96 30.0 0.25 0.14 0.506 116 0.13 0.376
WL526 A2 Clay 0.19 0.41 4.81 198.1 102 2.4 0.8 26 0.32 0.3 0.421 1.3 0.070 30.3 0.16 <0.02 0.379 40 0.04 0.056
WL530 A2 Clay 0.13 0.90 6.51 239.9 85 3.1 1.0 45 1.67 4.8 0.940 4.6 5.416 98.3 0.10 0.18 0.323 118 0.05 0.060
WL531 B Clay 0.40 1.74 33.99 135.5 213 14.2 4.7 65 5.09 7.4 1.773 2.0 10.15 28.1 0.27 0.10 0.545 103 0.06 0.406
WL532 B Clay 0.13 1.06 16.81 191.5 88 20.3 8.4 484 3.93 7.9 3.251 8.8 16.30 62.4 0.24 0.12 0.553 144 0.12 0.369
WL533 B Clay 0.91 1.54 13.91 122.9 178 21.1 7.9 159 7.18 7.0 1.976 2.3 10.91 24.5 0.26 0.09 0.449 112 0.07 0.350
Dup25 Clay 0.42 1.41 28.43 205.1 175 9.0 6.1 2058 3.94 8.7 1.127 1.3 6.812 30.6 0.33 0.10 0.529 96 0.07 0.524
Dup26 Clay 0.20 1.00 14.02 208.7 58 26.1 14.1 129 3.58 8.6 1.783 1.8 13.53 51.5 0.23 0.10 0.439 97 0.07 0.206
WL087 B Clay 1.07 0.94 7.10 107.1 38 6.7 2.4 116 5.13 7.4 0.838 2.1 7.975 48.9 0.08 0.08 0.796 121 0.04 0.425
WL088 B Clay 0.11 1.83 14.55 109.5 103 17.1 7.4 113 4.11 6.8 2.131 0.2 12.51 24.8 0.25 0.18 0.347 76 0.07 0.168
WL089 B Clay 0.20 1.42 34.98 121.7 265 16.5 6.9 98 4.92 8.9 2.351 4.1 13.45 24.4 0.21 0.16 0.473 97 0.07 0.496
WL090 B Clay 0.34 1.29 23.71 218.0 213 8.2 5.2 2345 4.02 9.4 0.903 0.5 5.342 27.0 0.29 0.09 0.488 111 0.06 0.583
WL091 B Clay 0.45 1.08 13.18 55.5 76 17.3 6.1 68 3.22 7.7 1.891 2.2 9.700 45.9 0.12 <0.02 0.289 103 0.05 0.164
This report supersedes all previous preliminary and final reports with this file number dated prior to the date on this certificate. Signature indicates final approval; preliminary reports are unsigned and should be used for reference only. This report supersedes all previous preliminary and final reports with this file number dated prior to the date on this certificate. Signature indicates final approval; preliminary reports are unsigned and should be used for reference only.
2 of 5
Wide Lake Clays
Building B-8
Project:
Page:
2Part:
MDL
Unit
Analyte
Method 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F
La Cr Mg Ba Ti B Al Na K W Sc Tl S Hg Se Te Ga Cs Ge Hf
ppm ppm % ppm % ppm % % % ppm ppm ppm % ppb ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
0.5 0.5 0.01 0.5 0.001 20 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.001 0.02 5 0.002 0.002 0.1 0.02 0.1 0.02
Dup20 Clay 14.1 54.4 0.04 51.0 0.242 <20 1.32 0.731 0.09 0.1 1.6 0.212 0.20 183 2.014 <0.002 5.4 2.28 <0.1 0.07
WL007 B Clay 19.6 25.8 0.04 110.4 0.328 <20 0.60 1.393 0.07 0.2 1.4 0.099 0.38 422 0.606 <0.002 3.5 0.71 <0.1 0.05
WL534 B Clay 25.3 58.5 0.31 155.8 0.249 <20 8.61 1.643 0.12 0.7 7.9 0.139 0.25 296 1.560 0.016 11.9 1.79 0.1 0.67
WL495 A2 Clay 19.6 26.8 0.13 107.2 0.085 <20 2.59 1.376 0.06 <0.1 2.1 0.136 0.12 165 0.633 0.025 25.2 0.88 <0.1 0.06
WL496 B Clay 22.3 53.0 0.22 111.9 0.173 41 8.13 1.631 0.09 0.5 7.4 0.112 0.25 296 2.197 0.073 13.1 2.48 0.2 0.37
WL497 B Clay 17.3 54.6 0.20 104.2 0.157 <20 9.66 3.536 0.07 0.5 8.0 0.093 0.65 245 1.356 0.061 13.3 1.70 <0.1 0.41
WL499 B Clay 18.3 39.1 0.23 113.3 0.099 <20 5.85 2.148 0.09 0.4 4.8 0.138 0.36 181 1.182 0.023 15.3 2.13 <0.1 0.23
WL503 B Clay 14.7 51.9 0.17 99.3 0.060 <20 6.70 2.015 0.06 0.3 4.8 0.094 0.34 482 1.344 0.029 18.8 2.22 0.1 0.09
WL504 B Clay 34.7 74.1 0.36 243.2 0.266 <20 8.14 1.393 0.09 0.9 9.7 0.103 0.24 227 1.888 0.060 17.0 2.63 <0.1 0.31
WL 913 B Clay 13.3 18.9 0.43 71.0 0.494 <20 4.98 0.058 0.03 0.2 17.2 0.142 <0.02 78 0.393 0.059 12.7 1.19 0.2 0.99
Dup23 Clay 23.3 24.5 0.15 85.3 0.179 <20 1.47 1.021 0.10 0.1 2.9 0.180 0.04 78 0.279 0.077 32.3 3.18 0.1 0.07
WL516 B Clay 36.1 60.8 0.38 166.2 0.138 <20 7.22 0.688 0.11 0.9 8.4 0.133 0.04 600 1.250 0.049 13.4 2.36 0.1 0.36
WL517 B Clay 26.7 64.0 0.37 152.7 0.177 <20 9.07 0.828 0.12 1.2 10.7 0.126 0.09 232 0.189 0.089 13.5 3.81 0.1 0.49
WL518 B Clay 28.0 57.0 0.36 148.4 0.248 <20 7.86 0.551 0.12 1.0 8.9 0.134 0.03 202 0.224 0.003 13.8 2.28 <0.1 0.54
WL519 B Clay 33.4 56.7 0.41 234.0 0.110 <20 7.05 0.594 0.12 0.5 8.3 0.193 0.03 564 1.106 0.059 15.3 2.86 0.2 0.40
WL523 B Clay 18.8 47.6 0.14 76.9 0.045 <20 8.32 1.145 0.07 0.3 5.8 0.140 0.06 585 1.322 0.085 22.6 2.30 <0.1 0.23
WL524 B Clay 27.4 50.1 0.20 270.8 0.070 <20 7.38 0.925 0.09 0.6 9.3 0.152 0.05 266 1.703 <0.002 22.6 2.02 <0.1 0.31
WL525 B Clay 23.7 49.0 0.21 120.6 0.142 <20 7.14 1.826 0.09 1.1 7.8 0.105 0.34 246 1.362 0.047 12.0 1.99 0.1 0.30
WL526 A2 Clay 17.9 20.0 0.14 71.3 0.024 <20 1.72 1.593 0.12 <0.1 1.0 0.249 0.09 83 1.142 0.051 24.2 3.30 <0.1 <0.02
WL530 A2 Clay 26.3 22.0 0.14 83.1 0.181 <20 1.11 0.922 0.13 0.1 2.3 0.145 0.04 45 <0.002 0.041 18.4 4.10 <0.1 0.12
WL531 B Clay 18.4 52.9 0.17 109.6 0.044 <20 9.13 0.716 0.06 0.2 7.1 0.115 0.04 618 1.748 0.039 23.4 1.53 <0.1 0.26
WL532 B Clay 34.3 59.8 0.44 186.5 0.162 37 6.11 0.678 0.15 0.9 6.2 0.155 0.06 268 1.249 0.063 11.5 2.32 <0.1 0.23
WL533 B Clay 21.1 51.0 0.26 187.8 0.067 <20 8.75 0.487 0.07 0.4 5.6 0.157 0.03 190 1.172 0.071 22.5 2.05 <0.1 0.22
Dup25 Clay 19.5 42.6 0.17 116.2 0.057 <20 6.84 1.220 0.07 0.2 4.6 0.230 0.06 269 1.247 0.057 22.6 2.95 <0.1 0.12
Dup26 Clay 31.5 53.7 0.31 217.1 0.069 <20 7.12 1.511 0.14 0.3 6.1 0.207 0.20 309 0.834 0.062 12.5 3.32 <0.1 0.49
WL087 B Clay 24.7 45.3 0.21 73.4 0.085 <20 3.32 1.304 0.08 0.2 2.0 0.190 0.03 36 0.214 0.010 37.0 2.68 <0.1 0.20
WL088 B Clay 20.9 55.5 0.32 191.3 0.160 33 7.24 3.053 0.08 0.6 7.3 0.136 0.66 210 0.168 0.072 13.3 3.22 <0.1 0.31
WL089 B Clay 25.5 58.7 0.26 172.9 0.140 <20 8.85 0.647 0.09 0.5 11.5 0.184 0.06 416 0.990 0.099 20.5 2.82 <0.1 0.43
WL090 B Clay 17.8 41.0 0.16 121.0 0.065 <20 6.58 1.197 0.07 0.2 3.3 0.224 0.06 225 1.399 0.047 20.6 2.87 <0.1 0.09
WL091 B Clay 25.9 39.5 0.15 181.7 0.020 <20 6.19 0.560 0.10 0.1 4.4 0.179 0.02 136 0.499 0.086 10.9 1.86 <0.1 0.33
2 of 5
Wide Lake Clays
Building B-8
Project:
Page:
3Part:
MDL
Unit
Analyte
Method 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F
Nb Rb Sn Ta Zr Y Ce In Re Be Li Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er
ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppb ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
0.02 0.1 0.1 0.005 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.02 1 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Dup20 Clay 0.39 9.5 1.0 <0.005 3.6 6.28 26.4 0.02 <1 0.2 4.7 2.97 10.29 2.01 0.38 1.52 0.25 1.37 0.25 0.62
WL007 B Clay 0.49 4.9 0.9 0.010 3.0 4.23 36.5 <0.02 <1 0.1 1.2 4.80 16.66 2.50 0.29 1.72 0.22 1.21 0.14 0.37
WL534 B Clay 3.46 24.7 1.8 0.015 23.9 21.39 71.7 0.04 <1 2.6 34.3 7.30 30.05 7.52 1.67 5.76 0.83 5.43 0.90 2.53
WL495 A2 Clay 1.48 8.2 3.1 <0.005 4.1 5.19 36.6 0.03 <1 0.3 13.5 3.72 14.56 2.51 0.38 1.73 0.24 1.18 0.18 0.47
WL496 B Clay 3.28 17.4 1.7 0.008 17.2 12.01 55.9 0.02 <1 1.6 29.9 5.94 24.30 5.27 1.15 3.21 0.58 3.25 0.47 1.46
WL497 B Clay 3.18 13.9 1.4 0.007 17.7 12.88 43.1 0.03 <1 2.0 26.4 5.39 22.42 4.80 0.96 4.04 0.63 3.78 0.60 1.71
WL499 B Clay 2.85 17.3 2.1 0.008 10.1 8.78 40.9 0.02 <1 1.6 36.4 4.98 18.69 3.26 0.68 2.63 0.37 2.07 0.33 0.91
WL503 B Clay 3.81 10.0 2.0 <0.005 4.6 5.35 29.8 0.04 <1 0.9 35.0 3.83 13.64 2.34 0.45 2.07 0.24 1.36 0.19 0.63
WL504 B Clay 7.85 16.7 2.6 0.006 16.1 11.87 75.0 0.05 <1 1.8 36.4 8.20 31.37 5.12 1.11 4.79 0.51 3.07 0.48 1.36
WL 913 B Clay 1.06 3.6 1.3 <0.005 62.6 19.54 39.3 0.07 <1 1.0 6.5 4.14 18.55 4.29 0.96 3.78 0.69 3.92 0.81 2.12
Dup23 Clay 2.62 16.6 3.9 <0.005 4.3 5.87 43.7 <0.02 <1 0.2 7.5 4.34 15.62 3.23 0.49 1.52 0.28 1.27 0.18 0.70
WL516 B Clay 6.35 18.8 2.2 <0.005 15.4 13.54 97.0 0.04 <1 2.0 36.2 8.79 33.06 5.72 1.16 4.36 0.57 3.35 0.54 1.61
WL517 B Clay 5.40 24.1 2.1 0.008 22.8 10.96 63.3 0.06 <1 2.6 35.9 6.14 21.84 4.78 0.85 2.52 0.55 3.20 0.54 1.38
WL518 B Clay 5.22 25.2 2.3 0.027 25.4 12.48 59.0 0.03 <1 1.2 27.2 5.70 22.15 5.78 1.01 2.85 0.62 3.81 0.52 1.60
WL519 B Clay 5.45 25.8 2.7 0.005 15.6 14.39 75.8 0.04 <1 1.9 33.4 7.86 28.18 5.72 1.24 4.29 0.61 3.44 0.58 1.51
WL523 B Clay 2.58 13.1 2.0 <0.005 7.4 6.63 41.5 0.04 <1 1.4 34.0 4.54 16.77 3.15 0.61 2.40 0.37 2.03 0.34 0.93
WL524 B Clay 3.45 19.2 2.8 0.005 9.9 13.24 60.4 0.04 <1 2.3 30.9 5.85 20.28 5.04 1.08 2.34 0.51 2.96 0.57 1.47
WL525 B Clay 3.57 17.1 1.5 0.012 10.7 18.70 61.1 0.04 <1 2.4 27.9 8.25 32.37 6.81 1.50 6.13 0.87 4.73 0.81 2.26
WL526 A2 Clay 0.23 21.6 2.6 <0.005 <0.1 4.85 32.1 <0.02 <1 0.5 6.2 3.79 12.06 1.94 0.37 0.99 0.18 0.98 0.16 0.40
WL530 A2 Clay 1.43 17.7 3.6 0.007 5.1 7.32 51.7 <0.02 <1 0.7 5.9 5.40 18.79 3.64 0.64 2.21 0.33 2.14 0.28 0.57
WL531 B Clay 4.02 8.3 2.7 <0.005 11.6 6.23 39.7 0.05 <1 1.1 44.3 3.95 16.58 3.01 0.57 1.83 0.32 1.72 0.31 0.76
WL532 B Clay 3.29 27.5 2.0 <0.005 14.1 16.75 77.3 0.02 <1 2.6 34.6 9.08 33.82 6.93 1.46 5.36 0.89 4.06 0.73 1.98
WL533 B Clay 5.46 12.6 3.0 <0.005 8.3 6.44 44.8 0.05 <1 1.9 56.8 4.74 15.42 2.85 0.60 2.38 0.35 2.03 0.32 0.91
Dup25 Clay 3.53 14.6 2.7 0.006 4.9 4.09 36.6 0.06 <1 1.0 32.9 3.60 12.30 2.39 0.39 1.38 0.24 1.28 0.18 0.41
Dup26 Clay 2.56 34.8 1.9 <0.005 23.3 9.54 68.4 0.04 <1 1.6 29.0 6.74 22.78 4.82 1.00 3.06 0.58 2.92 0.48 1.19
WL087 B Clay 3.73 16.2 3.0 <0.005 9.8 3.89 46.9 <0.02 <1 0.4 17.4 5.14 17.04 2.40 0.34 1.62 0.19 1.05 0.14 0.36
WL088 B Clay 6.55 16.2 2.3 0.005 12.8 8.37 53.6 0.04 <1 1.6 29.6 5.34 20.14 4.12 0.75 2.79 0.47 2.36 0.38 0.86
WL089 B Clay 6.51 18.1 2.6 0.014 18.4 9.60 67.3 0.05 <1 2.3 32.8 6.51 21.78 4.71 1.17 2.59 0.51 3.03 0.48 1.14
WL090 B Clay 3.09 12.2 2.3 <0.005 4.7 3.19 35.0 0.05 <1 1.0 24.2 3.64 12.66 2.35 0.35 1.43 0.19 0.91 0.14 0.32
WL091 B Clay 1.67 23.9 1.6 <0.005 12.7 8.20 53.0 0.02 <1 1.6 38.1 5.70 19.80 3.74 0.76 2.81 0.41 2.39 0.40 1.06
2 of 5
Wide Lake Clays
Building B-8
Project:
Page:
4Part:
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS VAN13003493.1
Method 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F
Tm Yb Lu Pd Pt Pb204 Pb206 Pb207 Pb208
ppm ppm ppm ppb ppb ppm ppm ppm ppm
0.02 0.02 0.02 10 2 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Dup20 Clay 0.06 0.39 0.06 <10 <2 0.10 2.30 1.52 4.35
WL007 B Clay 0.04 0.33 0.04 <10 3 0.18 3.57 2.95 7.14
WL534 B Clay 0.40 2.15 0.28 <10 4 0.10 2.77 1.49 4.04
WL495 A2 Clay 0.06 0.42 0.05 <10 <2 0.45 10.07 6.94 18.74
WL496 B Clay 0.23 1.60 0.21 <10 4 0.12 2.98 2.04 5.25
WL497 B Clay 0.26 1.78 0.18 12 <2 0.12 2.94 1.81 4.47
WL499 B Clay 0.13 0.79 0.09 <10 4 0.12 3.28 1.97 5.44
WL503 B Clay 0.08 0.53 0.07 <10 <2 0.26 5.61 4.06 11.07
WL504 B Clay 0.18 1.21 0.15 28 2 0.20 4.58 3.15 7.90
WL 913 B Clay 0.34 2.24 0.32 23 5 0.12 2.33 1.77 4.40
Dup23 Clay 0.06 0.52 <0.02 <10 <2 0.34 7.40 5.31 14.02
WL516 B Clay 0.22 1.63 0.22 22 <2 0.14 3.78 2.42 6.71
WL517 B Clay 0.18 1.42 0.17 <10 4 0.15 3.99 2.46 6.27
WL518 B Clay 0.30 1.73 0.19 <10 <2 0.15 3.89 2.21 6.18
WL519 B Clay 0.24 1.68 0.22 12 <2 0.16 4.01 2.64 7.16
WL523 B Clay 0.14 0.97 0.12 <10 <2 0.21 4.38 3.48 8.28
WL524 B Clay 0.18 1.50 0.17 <10 3 0.22 5.13 3.38 9.06
WL525 B Clay 0.36 2.09 0.25 <10 4 0.11 2.65 1.74 4.83
WL526 A2 Clay 0.06 0.29 0.03 <10 <2 0.30 6.30 5.04 12.50
WL530 A2 Clay 0.08 0.55 0.04 <10 <2 0.33 6.38 4.86 12.47
WL531 B Clay 0.12 0.73 0.08 <10 <2 0.36 7.73 5.82 16.34
WL532 B Clay 0.26 1.77 0.20 10 <2 0.20 5.47 3.44 9.50
WL533 B Clay 0.11 0.78 0.07 <10 <2 0.29 5.88 4.73 11.19
Dup25 Clay 0.08 0.39 0.05 <10 <2 0.35 7.18 5.36 14.16
Dup26 Clay 0.18 1.17 0.15 <10 <2 0.19 4.99 3.15 8.77
WL087 B Clay 0.06 0.30 0.03 <10 <2 0.53 10.27 8.64 21.62
WL088 B Clay 0.15 1.11 0.15 <10 7 0.20 4.54 3.25 7.98
WL089 B Clay 0.21 1.23 0.14 11 7 0.26 5.48 4.04 11.37
WL090 B Clay 0.05 0.28 0.03 <10 2 0.34 6.33 5.54 13.70
WL091 B Clay 0.16 0.95 0.10 <10 <2 0.16 3.75 2.55 6.40
This report supersedes all previous preliminary and final reports with this file number dated prior to the date on this certificate. Signature indicates final approval; preliminary reports are unsigned and should be used for reference only.
3 of 5
Wide Lake Clays
Building B-8
Project:
Page:
1Part:
MDL
Unit
Analyte
Method WGHT 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F 1F
Wgt Mo Cu Zn Ag Ni Co Mn Fe As U Au Th Sr

centennial deposit surface geochemical study final report

Documents