BOREHOLE TDEM SURVEY LOGISTICS AND INTERPRETATION REPORT 15N081 JANUARY 2016 THUNDER BAY DISTRICT, ONTARIO, CANADA

Transcription

1 LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. BOREHOLE TDEM SURVEY JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT THUNDER BAY DISTRICT, ONTARIO, CANADA LOGISTICS AND INTERPRETATION REPORT 15N081 JANUARY 2016 Abitibi Geophysics Inc chemin Sullivan, Suite 1400, Val-d Or, Québec J9P 7H1 T.: F.:

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract Mandate Junior Lake Project Borehole TDEM survey Data processing and deliverables Interpretation & recommendations LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. General location of the Junior Lake Project... 2 Figure 2. Index of claims and DDH location Junior Lake Project... 4 Figure 3. Current (I) waveform transmitted in the loop... 6 Figure 4. Electromotive force waveform generated in the ground... 6 Figure 5. View from Az 230 of BHEM model for hole Figure 6. View from Az 330 of BHEM model for hole Figure 7. Plan view of BHEM model for hole Figure 8. View from the north of BHEM model for hole Figure 9. View from the west of BHEM model for hole Figure 10. Plan view of BHEM model for hole Figure 11. View from Az 90 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 12. View from north of the BHEM model for hole Figure 13. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole Figure 14. View from Az 260 of BHEM model for hole Figure 15. View from north of BHEM model for hole Figure 16. Plan view of BHEM model for hole Figure 17. View from Az 260 of BHEM model for hole Figure 18. View from north of BHEM model for hole Figure 19. Plan view of BHEM model for hole Figure 20. View from Az 85 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 21. View from north of the BHEM model for hole Figure 22. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole Figure 23. View from Az 70 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 24. View from north of the BHEM model for hole Figure 25. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole Figure 26. View from Az 105 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 27. View from Az 175 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 28. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE I

3 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. DDH and loop specifications... 5 Table 2. SMARTem24 time gate locations (5.0 Hz)... 7 Table 3. Maps produced... 9 Table 4. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 5. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 6. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 7. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 8. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 9. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 10. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 11. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Table 12. Proposed drill-holes to test significant BHEM anomalies LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE II

4 ABSTRACT On behalf of Landore Resources Canada Inc., a borehole geophysical TDEM survey was carried out over Junior Lake Project, located in the Thunder Bay District at about 80 km East of Armstrong, Ontario, Canada. The objectives of the survey were to detect, locate and define the geometry of buried conductive zones, as well as to propose a follow-up program over the most promising anomalies. The TDEM survey was carried out in December, Eight drill holes were covered. Survey specifications, instrumentation control, data acquisition, processing and interpretation were all successfully performed within our Quality System framework. This borehole TDEM survey allowed the identification of several off-hole / in-hole anomalies. The interpretation and modelling of these anomalies, along with all logistical, processing and QC records are presented in this report. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 1

5 1. MANDATE PROJECT ID Junior Lake Project (Our reference: 15N081) GENERAL LOCATION Thunder Bay District, Ontario, Canada CUSTOMER Landore Resources Canada Inc. 555 Central Avenue, Suite 1 Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5R5 Phone: Fax: REPRESENTATIVE Michele Tuomi, P. Geo. Director / VP Exploration mtuomi@landore.com SURVEY TYPE Borehole TDEM Survey GEOPHYSICAL OBJECTIVES To detect, locate and define the geometry of a possible buried extension of the B4-7 Nickel-Copper and the VW Nickel deposit, To propose a follow-up program over the most promising anomalies. Junior Lake Project Figure 1. General location of the Junior Lake Project LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 2

6 2. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT LOCATION Thunder Bay District, Ontario, Canada Centered on : me, mn, NAD83 / UTM Zone 16N NTS sheet : 42L/05 NEAREST SETTLEMENT Armstrong: 80 km to the West ACCESS From Armstrong, Jackfish road and different non paved roads gave access to the survey area. ATV s must be used to reach each hole. GEOMORPHOLOGY The survey areas are located on relatively flat terrains covered by a boreal forest. Several lakes and creeks cross the survey zones. MINING LAND TENURE The survey area and claims encompassed in the present survey are owned by Landore Resources Canada Inc. The claims are illustrated on the following page. SECURITY AND ENVIRONMENT As for all of our projects, our health, safety and environmental program encompass all of our field operations. In addition, the crew was provided with a satellite phone, giving them communication access at all times. No incident was reported during the project. COORDINATE SYSTEM Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Zone 16N Datum: NAD83 LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 3

7 Figure 2. Index of claims and DDH location Junior Lake Project LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 4

8 3. BOREHOLE TDEM SURVEY TYPE OF SURVEY BH-TDEM (Borehole Time Domain ElectroMagnetics) Reading interval: 10 m (detail: 5 m) MEASUREMENTS Axial A and orthogonal U and V partial derivatives ( B/ t) of the secondary EM field (inductive coils) PERSONNEL Kevin Vaillancourt, Operator & Crew chief Fabrice Fortier, Field assistant Pierre Luc Darveau, Field assistant Carole Picard, Tech., Plotting Daniel Card, RPGeo, Field work supervision, QC, data processing & report Martin Dubois, P. Geo., Project supervisor and final validation of product conformity SURVEY DDH S : from 0 to 635 m : from 0 to 315 m : from 0 to 415 m : from 0 to 475 m : from 0 to 650 m : from 0 to 640 m : from 0 to 435 m : from 0 to 135 m TRANSMITTING LOOP SPECIFICATIONS Specifications: see table 1 Localisation: see map 10.0 Table 1. DDH and loop specifications Loop # Dimensions DDH Acquisition Current (A) Ramp (µs) me x 400 mn December 2 and 3, me x 400 mn December 3 and 4, me x 400 mn December 4, me x 750 mn December 5 and 6, December 7, me x 500 mn December 8 and 9, me x 400 mn December 12 and 13, me x 400 mn December 14, LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 5

9 TDEM TRANSMITTER (TX) TerraScope Instruments PRO5U-2N Power supplies: Voltmaster long run Maximum output: 12 kw or 25 A or 600 V Transmitted signal: Bipolar wave, 50% duty cycle Repetition rate: 5 Hz (T/4 = 50.0 ms) I T Turn-off time Δt Time Time Figure 3. Current (I) waveform transmitted in the loop emf T Pulse I / Δ t 20 gates Time Figure 4. Electromotive force waveform generated in the ground TDEM RECEIVER (RX) EMIT SMARTem24, s/n 1157 Tx synchronization: GPS (Tx Ctlr 1204) Start of integration: ms from end of trailing edge Number of gates: 29, geometrically spaced Additional delay: 0 µs LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 6

10 Table 2. SMARTem24 time gate locations (5.0 Hz) Gate # Center (ms) Width (ms) Gate # Center (ms) Width (ms) BOREHOLE COIL Geonics BH43-3D, s/n 630 (with 950 m cable) Sequential measurements of the A, U and V components and of the α and β tiltmeter values. Effective area: 100 m 2 POLARITY CONVENTION A component: along DDH axis, positive upward U component: orthogonal to A, thus to the borehole axis, positive upward V component: orthogonal to A and U, positive counter clockwise to U. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 7

11 SOFTWARE EMIT SMARTem24: Rx data transfer to PC via USB port. EMIT SMARTem24: Quality control. EMIT Maxwell: Data processing, plotting and interpretation QUALITY CONTROL (RECORDS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST) Before the survey: Transmitter & motor generator were checked for maximum output using calibrated loads. GSC geomagnetic forecasts were consulted. Daily and prior to data acquisition: The battery voltage of each receiver was checked. The polarity of the primary field was verified on each receiver. Receiver was calibrated and accurately synchronized to the transmitter prior to and during data acquisition. The crystal drifts of each receiver-transmitter combo have been thoroughly monitored and recorded throughout the entire survey period. The averaged daily drifts were calculated and are well within quality control specifications. At the Base of Operations: Field QCs were inspected & validated. A, U & V - Primary field components polarity was checked & corrected if required. Survey noise evaluation: No geomagnetic activity was observed throughout the survey period. No abnormal instrumental noise was detected during the survey. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 8

12 4. DATA PROCESSING AND DELIVERABLES NORMALIZATION OF THE TDEM MEASUREMENTS The SMARTem24 field B/ t measurements were converted from µv to nt/s/a units, according to current intensity inside the loop and effective surface area of the Rx antenna. STACKED PROFILES The borehole axes (A) and perpendicular (U, V) components were plotted along with the vertical primary field using Maxwell software. Refer to Appendix A for the borehole stacked EM profiles. SUPPLIED MAP The map (10.0) is inserted in a pouch at the end of this report. Our quality system requires that every final map be inspected by at least two qualified persons before being approved and included within a final report. Table 3. Maps produced Map # Description Scale 8 plates Borehole TDEM Survey - B/ t EM Response Profiles 1:1000, 1:2000, 1: Transmitting Areas Outline & DDH Localisation 1:5000 DIGITAL DATA The above-described maps are delivered in the Oasis Montaj map file format on DVD-Rom. A copy of all survey acquisition data is delivered on DVD-Rom. This includes TEM ascii files (.TEM) of each surveyed line. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 9

13 5. INTERPRETATION & RECOMMENDATIONS The BHEM survey at Junior Lake has successfully identified and characterized conductors in all holes surveyed. Significant conductors have been modelled for all holes and model plates are delivered with this report as 3D.dxf files. Six of the eight holes surveyed had conductive responses which indicated potential for significant extension of the conductor away from the hole, and proposed drill-hole parameters to test the extension of these conductors have been planned and are presented in Table 12 below. Plan, long section and cross-section views for all models produced are presented in Appendix B. Prior to drilling, the anomalies targeted should be cross-referenced by Landore geologists with the geology logs and sections to determine whether the anomaly sits near a horizon of economic interest. Final drilling parameters should be defined by Landore s geologists making use of their expertise and local knowledge. If the collar position proposed in this report is not feasible, it is recommended that the pierce point where the proposed hole intersects the model plates remain the target of drill-testing. BHEM survey interpretations are described below, and tabulated in Tables 4 to 11. Hole The BHEM survey suggests that this hole intersected conductive material around 500 m down the hole. The conductor may be part of a broader package, as off-hole responses above and below are present. The off-hole response at 340 m is likely to be detecting the same mineralization as that which is intersected by hole , even though its model sits slightly stratigraphically higher than the intersection. Unusual anomaly shapes suggest that the conductors may be oriented somewhat sub-parallel to the hole. As a result model attitudes are somewhat poorly constrained. It appears that a conductor with its response centred at around 340 m sits above the hole and to the east and a conductor with its response centred at about m sits below the hole and to the east. Although attitude is not clearly defined, the response suggests that conductors may have a plunge down toward the north. There is a buildup at the end of the hole which looks like another off-hole conductor may exist beyond the end of hole. Further drilling may be warranted here to test the deeper strata. Longer wavelength responses appear to exist but are obscured by the conductors closer to the hole. If this zone shows significant potential, then surface EM coverage is recommended to better locate the sources of the longer wavelength responses. Hole The BHEM survey suggests that a conductor was well intersected at 240 m. There is a subtle response in the V component only, which may suggest a larger body extends to the west. This is described below in Table 5 and targeted by proposed drill hole AG478_A-Prop in Table 12. Hole The BHEM survey suggests that conductive material was intersected through the upper portion of the hole, and centred on 70 m down-hole. The modelled response is not large, nor does it indicate significant extension beyond the hole. It is possible that the strong in-hole response is dominating any off-hole information. No follow-up drill hole has been recommended based on the BHEM survey for this hole. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 10

14 Hole The BHEM data indicate that conductive material was intersected near the bottom of the hole. It is possible that this is the down-dip extension of the response observed near the top of hole While the response in this hole is mainly dominated by a complex in-hole response from around , an off-hole response at around 460 m suggests that the conductor may have some appreciable extension below the hole. The modelling is detailed in Table 7, and the parameters for proposed hole (AG360_B-Prop) designed to test the modelled down-dip extension of the conductor, are presented in Table 12. A conductor has been intersected from It looks to have been well intersected, BHEM data suggests extension above and below the hole. A drill-hole stepping down-dip would test the below the hole extension. Hole The BHEM survey identified in-hole responses at around 280 and 400 m down the hole. It is possible that the intersection at 280 m has significant extension to the east and slightly down-dip. The modelling is detailed in Table 8 and details of a proposed drill-hole to test this target are presented in Table 12. Hole Several in-hole responses are observed in the BHEM survey. The first, at around 120 m is insignificant, the second is fairly extensive and centred around m, and appears to have appreciable extension to the east of the hole. A third horizon is intersected down around 600 m but does not show clear signs of significant extension beyond the hole. Modelling is detailed in Table 9 and drill-parameters to test the east extension of the target at 400 m are provided in Table 12. Hole The BHEM survey detected three off-hole responses, centred at 60 m, 220 m and 320 m. The response at 320 m is longer wavelength and may have significant off-hole extension above the hole and somewhat to the west. Modelling is detailed in Table 10 and parameters for drill-testing the extension of the conductor at 320 m are provided in Table 12. Hole In-hole responses from m down the hole do not define significantly extensive conductors in this hole. It is possible that greater extension of conductors exists but would be better characterized by surface EM which would not be impeded by short hole-length and interference from in-hole conductance. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 11

15 Table 4. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 2 and 3, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: 514 Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 7+00W Drilled: 639 m mn Station: 2+85S 3-62 Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly AG514_A AG514_B Downhole Location Off-hole at 340 m Off-hole at 570 m Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Distance Above Northeast m Below Northeast m Conductor Strength Good Tau~10ms Good Tau~10ms Comments This response appears to be detecting the same mineralization that was intersected at around 400 m in hole Likely to be same horizon with off-hole conductor at 570 m, and possible intersection around 500 m. Strong off-hole response. Attitude uncertain due to unusual shaped anomaly. Modelling suggests that the conductor may dip sub-parallel to the hole. A plunge down toward the northeast is also possible. Likely to be same horizon with offhole conductor at 340 m, and possible intersection around 500 m. Strong off-hole response. Attitude uncertain due to unusual shaped anomaly. Modelling suggests that the conductor may dip sub-parallel to the hole. A plunge down toward the northeast is also possible. This response seems to come from a moderate to large conductor. This is a good target for follow-up. Ideal hole parameters to test this target are provided in Table 12. Conclusion & recommendations: If these conductors sit near a horizon likely to host economic mineralization, drill-testing of model AG514_B is recommended using the parameters provided in Table 12 below. Some surface EM may be warranted in this area to help characterize the source of long wavelength responses and end of hole buildups. BHEM data tends to be dominated by the closest conductors, so the source of the subtle long wavelength responses is likely to be better located by a modern surface EM survey. End of hole buildups indicate that another anomaly was developing, but the hole did not go far enough to characterize the response. Surface EM allows easier extension of coverage areas to define these types of conductors. Surface EM planning to target these anomalous responses can be performed upon request. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 12

16 Table 5. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 3 and 4, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: 478 Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 5+50E Drilled: 324 m mn Station: 0+85N Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly AG478_A Downhole Location 240 m In-hole Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Distance Centre West 0 m Conductor Strength Moderate Tau~5 ms Comments Complex response of moderate conductance at 240 m shows that a conductor was intersected with minor extension above the hole. In addition to the clear in-hole anomaly, there is a longer wavelength feature visible only in the V component which appears to show significant extension to the west. Drilling parameters to test this possible extension are provided in the recommendations section below. Conclusion & recommendations: If the conductor intersected at 240 m is attributable to a mineralized zone of interest, drill-testing of model AG478_A is recommended using the parameters provided in Table 12 below. This will test the potential extension of this zone to the west. Surface electromagnetics may be used to further trace this and other extensive zones on this project. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 13

17 Table 6. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 4, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: 513 Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 2+00E Drilled: 426 m mn Station: 0+75S Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly Downhole Location Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Distance Conductor Strength Comments AG513_A In-hole 70 m Above West 0 m Very strong Tau=20+ ms A small response indicates conductive material was intersected in the upper part of the hole and is centred at around 70 m down the hole. Unusual anomaly shape suggests that the conductor may dip to the north, as does the hole. It is possible that this conductor sits in the same horizon as that which is identified in hole Conclusion & recommendations: BHEM response does not yield a clear view of significant off-hole extension. No follow-up drill hole recommended. If a larger body is expected here, it is possible that the strong in-hole response is washing out the more distant responses. In this case, surface EM surveying may help trace the extent of the conductor. Table 7. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 5 and 6, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 1+00E Drilled: 480 m mn Station: 1+85N Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly Downhole Location Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Distance Conductor Strength Comments AG360_A In-hole 400 m Above East 0 m Very strong Tau=20+ ms Conductor intersected from Looks like it has been well intersected BHEM data suggests extension above and below the hole. A drill-hole stepping down-dip would test the below the hole extension. Conclusion & recommendations: ***Recommend Drill Hole*** LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 14

18 Table 8. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 7, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 2+00W Drilled: 651 m mn Station: 2+21N Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly AG469_A AG469_B AG469_C Downhole Location In-hole 280 m In-hole 400 m In-hole 620 m Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Distance Below East 0 m Centred Centred 0 m Above Centred 0 m Conductor Strength Strong Tau~10 ms Moderate Tau~5 ms Weak Tau<1 ms Comments In-hole response at around 280 m. Conductor appears to be well intersected by the hole. BHEM data suggests the conductor may extend to the East and slightly below the hole. A step out to the east should test the extension of this conductor. Small in-hole responses appear at a few points surrounding 400 m. BHEM responses are small, and doesn t appear worthy of follow-up. Small weak in-hole anomaly near the end of the hole. BHEM data does not indicate significant size to this conductor. Conclusion & recommendations: A step out to the east may be warranted if the conductive material at AG469_A represents mineralization of interest. Recommended drill-hole parameters are presented in Table 12. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 15

19 Table 9. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 8 and 9, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: 468 Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 5+50W Drilled: 651 m mn Station: 1+65N Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly AG468_A AG468_B AG468_C Downhole Location In-hole 120 m In-hole 400 m In-hole 600 m Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Centred East 0 m Centred East 0 m Centred Centred 0 m Distance Quality Comments Moderate Tau~5 ms Moderate Tau~5 ms Moderate Tau~4 ms In-hole response of insignificant size. Not modelled. Extensive in-hole response with apparent off-hole extension to the east. Significant in-hole response, but with minimal indication of extension direction. Conclusion & recommendations: If the conductor intersected around m, referred to here as AG468_B, is of economic interest, follow-up drilling is recommended. Proposed drilling parameters to test this target are presented in Table 12. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 16

20 Table 10. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 12 and 13, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: 248 Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: 17+00E Drilled: 395 m mn Station: 4+60S Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly AG248_A AG248_B AG248_C Downhole Location Off-hole 60 m Off-hole 220 m Off-hole 320 m Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Above East < 20 m Above Centred < 20 m Above West m Distance Quality Comments Strong Tau~7ms Very Strong Tau~15 ms Strong Tau~8ms Modelling suggests small conductor was closely missed and sits to the east and slightly above the hole. Modelling suggests that a small to moderate sized conductor was closely missed and sits just above the hole. The BHEM response here suggests a larger conductor with significant extension above the hole. Follow-up is recommended. Conclusion & recommendations: If a horizon of interest exists near 320 m down-hole, follow-up drilling is recommended. Proposed drilling parameters to test this target are presented in Table 12. LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 17

21 Table 11. Description of borehole anomalies within DDH Client: Landore Resources Canada Inc. Project: Junior Lake (Ref: 15N081) Survey Type: Borehole TDEM Date of Survey: December 14, 2015 DDH: Tx Loop: 517 Collar Location NAD 83 / UTM Zone 16N Grid DDH Azimuth (collar) DDH Dip (collar) DDH Length me Line: Drilled: 141 m mn Station: Surveyed: m Survey results: Anomaly AG517_A Downhole Location In-hole m Vertical Direction Lateral Direction Above Centred 0 m Distance Quality Comments Strong Tau~6ms The BHEM survey suggests that this hole intersected conductive material at around 70 and 90 m down the hole. The main conductor, which sits at around 90 m down the hole appears to extend mostly above the hole and somewhat to the west. Conductors are of moderate size and strength. Conclusion & recommendations: Significant extension beyond the hole is not clearly identified by the BHEM survey. The short hole length and inhole anomaly may be obscuring lower amplitude, longer wavelength responses. If significant extension of the conductive zone is expected here, it may be better tracked by surface EM surveying. Table 12. Proposed drill-holes to test significant BHEM anomalies Abitibi Geophysics Proposed BHEM Target Drillholes Hole ID Collar coordinates Dip Azimuth Length Estimated East (m) North (m) Elev (m) ( ) ( ) (m) Intercept (m) AG478_A-Prop 432,895 5,581, AG514_A-Prop 431,720 5,581, AG360_B-Prop 432,620 5,581, AG469_A-Prop 432,345 5,581, AG468_B-Prop 432,100 5,581, AG248_C-Prop 434,150 5,580, LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 18

22 The interpretation of the geophysical data embodied in this report is a primarily geophysical appraisal of the Junior Lake Project. As such, it incorporates only as much geoscientific information as the author has on hand at the time. Geoscientists thoroughly familiar with the area are in a better position to evaluate the geological significance of the various geophysical signatures. Moreover, as time passes and information provided by follow-up programs are compiled, exploration targets recognized in this study might be downgraded or upgraded. Respectfully submitted, Abitibi Geophysics Inc. Daniel Card, RPGeo, Project Geophysicist Martin Dubois, P. Geo., OGQ#352 Senior Geophysicist LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 19

23 APPENDIX A BOREHOLE TDEM SURVEY PROFILES OF SECONDARY MAGNETIC FIELD PARTIAL DERIVATIVES: B A / t B U / t B V / t LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 20

24 APPENDIX B BOREHOLE MODEL FIGURES LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 21

25 Figure 5. View from Az 230 of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 22

26 Figure 6. View from Az 330 of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 23

27 Figure 7. Plan view of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 24

28 Figure 8. View from the north of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 25

29 Figure 9. View from the west of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 26

30 Figure 10. Plan view of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 27

31 Figure 11. View from Az 90 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 12. View from north of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 28

32 Figure 13. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 29

33 Figure 14. View from Az 260 of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 30

34 Figure 15. View from north of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 31

35 Figure 16. Plan view of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 32

36 Figure 17. View from Az 260 of BHEM model for hole Figure 18. View from north of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 33

37 Figure 19. Plan view of BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 34

38 Figure 20. View from Az 85 of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 35

39 Figure 21. View from north of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 36

40 Figure 22. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 37

41 Figure 23. View from Az 70 of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 38

42 Figure 24. View from north of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 39

43 Figure 25. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 40

44 Figure 26. View from Az 105 of the BHEM model for hole Figure 27. View from Az 175 of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 41

45 Figure 28. Plan view of the BHEM model for hole LANDORE RESOURCES CANADA INC. JUNIOR LAKE PROJECT /15N081 PAGE 42