r

r

r

r

rtr

r

r

42D14NW0005 2.15806 PAYS PLAT LAKE 010METALL MINING CORPORATION

WINSTON LAKE DIVISION

DRILL-HOLE LOCATION SURVEYS

PICK LAKE DEPOSIT

SCHREIBER

#0-09352

FINAL REPORT

By

SIAL GEOSCIENCES INC.

July 1994

RECEIVED

JAN 2 O 1995

RAINING LANDS BRAur*H

2.1580 6

ro

ODE m ™

O -c

SIAL

r 42D14NW0005 2.15806 PAYS PLAT LAKE 01OC

r

r

r

r

r

Table of Contents

Page

1.O INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.0 PROJECT DETAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.1 Property Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.2 Survey outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.3 Personnel .................... 2

2.4 Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.0 SURVEY PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.1 Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.2 Surveying .................... 4

3.2.1 Standard Surveying . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.2.2 GPS Surveying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.3 Seismic Refraction Survey ............ 5

3.3.1 Operations on site . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3.3.2 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.3.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3.4 Location of Drill Hole shots ........... 11

3.4.1 On site Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.4.2 Data Processing .............. 15

r

SIAL

r

r

ri.

r

r

r

Table of Contents (cont'd)

Page

4.0 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.1 GPS coordinates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.2 Shothole locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

5.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

SIAL

r

rList of Figures

Page

Figure 1 : SEISMIC PROFILE LAYOUT (12 GEOPHONES) . . . . . . 6

Figure 2: MAIN FEATURES OF RECIPROCAL METHOD . . . . . . . 8

Figure 3: PRINCIPAL OF HAWKINS METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 4: RAY GEOMETRY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

rList of Tables

rrl Table 1 : BOREHOLE LOCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

p( Table 2: GEOPHONE PARAMETERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

! Table 3: DEPTH OF SHOT HOLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

T Table 4: SURFACE BLAST TEST RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

f Table 5: EXAMPLE OF INVERSION PROGRAM CALCULATION RESULTS . 20i

f- Table 6: CALCULATED GPS COORDINATES . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

^ Table 7: CALCULATED AND ESTIMATED COORDINATES OF BOREHOLES . 24

SIAL

r

1 . O INTRODUCTIONr

In May 1994, Metall Mining Corporation, commissioned SIAL

r~ Geosciences Inc. to conduct a seismic survey to determine the

spatial position of certain sections of drill-holes related to the

r- base sulphide deposit located at Pick lake, North of Schreiber,

i Ontario.

r-

' Based on the assumption that the seismic velocities could besaid to be homogeneous throughout the same lithological units

l surrounding the survey perimeter, a seismic survey was done along

the specifications supplied by Metall Mining Corporation.

L This report describes the technical aspects of the survey as

r~ well as the results obtained. The final results are displayed in

table 7.

r2.0 PROJECT DETAILSr

i\

2 . 1 Property Location

The survey was carried out on Metall Mining Pick lake deposit

located nearby the Wins ton Lake mine complex, north of Schreiber,

Ontario.

2 . 2 Survey outline

The seismic survey was divided into two stages:

1 . Determination of overburden and bedrock characteristics

2. Location of borehole shot points.

To determine overburden and bedrock characteristics (thickness

and seismic velocities), the seismic refraction method was used

SIAL

rr

along four (4) contiguous lines that make up the survey perimeter and encompass the surveyed drill holes. In all, 24 profiles

consisting each of a 12 geophones spread were completed along the

survey lines. With a geophone spacing of 7.5 m and a certain percentage of overlapping the total coverage consisted of approximately 1800 m.

A 24 geophone array spread over the survey perimeter was used for the second stage of the survey. This involved locating

seventeen (17) down-hole shots located in 8 drill-holes: #32, 58,

67, 69, 71, 72, 75, 77. The drillhole locations, as supplied by Metall Mining in their own grid system, are the following:

Table 1 BOREHOLE LOCATION

BORE HOLE # Northing(m) Easting(m) ELEVATION (m)

WL-032

WL-058

WL-067

WL-069

WL-071

WL-072

WL-075

WL-077

1811.33

1836.10

2050.59

1975.32

2198.74

2140.19

1944.90

1960.23

4588.38

4362.10

4614.11

4752.51

4563.42

4426.18

4288.53

4601 .18

10420.09

10423.44

10410.20

10411.36

10407.47

10424.39

10422.17

10419.07

2.3 Personnel

Mr. Abbas Moussaoui, P. Eng, and President of SIAL Geosciences Inc. was the project manager. He was on site for the second stage of the survey. Mr. Mouhamed Moussaoui, P. Eng., was the seismograph operator. He was assisted by Dennis Palos, geophysicist. They were in charge of profile levelling, GPS

positioning of the 24 geophone array and completing the seismic

profiles around the perimeter.

SIAL

r

H Jimmy Stewart, general labourer and Romeo Roy, certified

' blaster made up the rest of the crew.

r~

' Interpretation of the seismic refraction data and the

processing of drill-hole results were carried out by Mr. A. Moussaoui P. Eng, and Mr. Mouhamed Moussaoui, P. Eng.

T 2.4 Schedule

!"~ The crew mobilized from Montreal, leaving on Sunday May 22nd,

and arriving at Winston Lake Mine on Tuesday May 24, 1994. They

r- met the same day with Metall Mining Corporation representative,

i mine geologist Girard Doiron, and from then proceeded to start work

^ the same day.

The surveying and seismic data acquisition of the twenty fourr**

' 1 2-geophone seismic profiles were done over the period of May 24 to

May 29, 1994.r

The borehole surveying was then completed during the remaining

r- week, i.e., from May 30 to June 5, 1994.i

The crew demobilized on June 6, 1994.

3.0 SURVEY PROCEDURES

3.1 Instrumentation

The different equipments used for the survey are as follows:

1 OYO McSeis 160 MX 24 channel seismograph, with

digital/analog recording capability

SIAL

r

p *1 OYO Mini-starter shotbox

^ *1 ABEM Nitro-Nobel shotbox, 600 Volts

n FORCITE 75!* dynamite (in 1" x 8" sticks), with SEISMOCAP

( electric detonators (zero delay at 1OA of current)

3 reels of 1500 m multiple conductor cables, each r- 1 *3 Cable spools adaptable to an electrical winch equipped

with a variable speed motor

r ' 1 Yamaha EF 2800 generator

4 Seismic cables with 12 takeouts each

P *30 Mark Product geophones

1 * A SOKKISHA SM-3 surveying total station

r- * A TRIMBLE 4000 SE OPS receiver

l * electronic equipment, electro-sensitive paper, connectors

^ and other spare parts!

3.2 Surveyingr~

h .

3.2.1 Standard Surveyingr—

:" The coordinate location and terrain profile of each ofH the twenty four 12-geophones seismic profiles were done, using a

i surveyor total field station and a levelling rod.

ri The surveying crew under the responsibility of Mouhamed

Moussaoui completed the 1,5 km levelling traverse by closing on a

- point of known elevation and coordinates. The closure error was

found to be of the order of 2m.r*

3.2.2 GPS Surveyingf*

Three sites, located North (site PL-3) and South (sites

p PL-5 and Pl-6) of Cleaverlake were surveyed using a TRIMBLE 4000 SE

v GPS receiver. The X-Y coordinates were determined within an

accuracy of the order of .50 m.

SIAL

r

rr The distance separating the two sites determined by GPS at the

( , South end of Cleaver lake (sites PL-5 and PL-6) was chained; the

^ measured distance compared well with the calculated value deduced

by GPS coordinates, within a margin of error of 30 cm.

j The elevation values of the three GPS sites were

referenced to the known elevation value at geophone site #22.

r1 3 .3 Seismic Refraction Surveyr~

Four (4) lines were used for the geophone layout: SL-1, SL-2,

r- SL-3 and SL-4. SL-1 and SL-3 are oriented roughly East-West while

SL-2 and SL-4 are oriented more North-South. SL-1 and SL-3 are

perpendicular to SL-2 and SL-4 (see the location map in Appendix).

Because of the presence of major lakes around the survey area,

S it was not possibled to extend furether the survey perimeter, thus

limiting the different combinations of geophones with a favourable

f geometry in regards to the shot holes.

r- 3.3.1 Operations on siteiL

^ In general, each seismic profile consisted of 12

geophones (see figure 1). Each geophone was planted firmly in the

ground about 10 to 25 cm below the surface at a 7,5 m interval. On

average 5 separate shothole locations were set up for each profile.

Two (2) far shots were set about 30 m from the ends of the profile

^~ to obtain estimates of bedrock velocities. Two (2) other shots

were set about 5 m from the profiles ends as well as one (1)

r~ remaining shot set at the center of the array between geophones #6 and #7. The first 4 shots represent the near, direct and inverse

r- shots which provide data for calculating velocities of the various layers from both directions and for interpreting the geometry of

the contacts between different layers. The remaining center shot

allows for monitoring of changes in the velocity of the overburden.

SIAL

r

r

- 6 -

( midpoint shot )

10

FAR SHOT T T T T T T T T T T T12 * -. *

r

r

rrt- -

r

GEOPHONE CABLE

Shot box

A ) Reid layout

1*

5*

*1

B ) Schematic layout of adjacent profiles

T

C ) Profile layout of time-distance curves

FAR SHOT

* GEOPHONE

* SHOT LOCATION

* 5

T

SEISMIC PROFILE LAYOUT ( 12 GEOPHONES )

Figure lSIAL

l 7

rl 3.3.2 Interpretation

r—

{ Each seismic shot produces a series of wave arrival times at each of the geophones. The arrival times are measured with a

precision of 0.5 to 1 millisecond and the intercepts are calculated

with a precision of 1 millisecond.r

The times corresponding to the first refracted arrivals

f~ were recorded as a function of distance on ordinary graph paper

; (time-distance curves).

pl A preliminary interpretation of the time distance curves

allows for the identification of refractors, the verification of

i the arrivals from the reverse shots, the determination of thel

velocities of the refraction from the inverse of the slopes, andr~| the intercept times for each shot point.

r~ The bedrock velocities were determined from time-distance' curves for both the direct and the reverse far shots. For thisr— project, two methods of interpretation have been used to calculate. both the depth to bedrock as well as the thickness of the surficial

^ deposit under each geohone. These methods are outlined below.

b .

1) Critical Distance Method (see figure 1)\

i

The observed quantity is the time T that it takes the first

wave (longitudinal) to travel from the source to one of the

detection stations located at a distance X measured along a

~~ surface line. On the figure 2 graph the x-axis represents the

distance between the geophones and the point of impact

r (considered as the origin) and the y-axis the subsequent arrival times. This diagram is called a time-distance curve (travel time curve).

SIAL

r - 8 -

r

r

r

r

r

p:

T, 3 -

TIME-DISTANCE CURVES

M

Q.

Q

GEOPHONE (G) SET-UP G- 12

SEISMIC PROFILE

THICKNESS CALCULATION OF OVERBURDEN LAYERS

a ) one layer b ) multi layer (i)

Layer thi • l-KK.I

= Z 1A V 2 ,Relation between '

Blast(s) k thickness(z) D, s IE DI-K * 2\ V |

correction factor as determined by chart diagram

MAIN FEATURES OF RECIPROCAL METHOD

FIGURE 2SIAL

rAccording to theory, the depth of contacts can be

determined by the formula:

Z. xc . / V2 - vi

Where: Z 1 : Thickness of the first layer

Xc : Critical Distance

V1 : Seismic Velocity of the first layer

V2 : Seismic Velocity of the second layer

2) Hawkins Method

This method was developed by the geophysicist Laric V. Hawkins

of the University of New South Wales, Australia. It allows

the calculation of the depth to bedrock as well as thicknesses

of the different overburden layers for each geophone.

The HAWKINS method is a quick method which is used on each

time-distance curve.

3.3.3 Results

The results of the 24 seismic profile sections located on

lines SL-1 , SL-2, SL-3 and SL-4 are presented on the map which

accompanies this report.

Upon examination of the map shown in appendix A, one cannot

stop noticing that the bedrock velocities, deduced from the surface

seismic survey along the survey perimeter, between geophones #16

and # 1, have a mean value of 4900 m/s 900 m/s while the seismic

velocity values between geophones # 8 and #15 have a mean value of 5700 m/s 7 50 m/s.

SIAL

r - 10 -

rr

r

r

0 E

TIME-DISTANCE CURVE

i i i i i i i i i

SEISMICJPROFILE z,

G.12

THICKNESS CALCUUTION OF OVERBURDEN LAYER

o )*sin

V 2 -

AT -

one layer

AT, V,cos e

v, 9 ~ vT

2yu v 2BV 2A *V 2B

(T A *T B )-TT2

b ) multi layer (i)

AT, V, Layer Thickness ~L\ — ——————cos 9,

Sine of Critical . a — '— , Sin t? | — "TT ———— TRefraction Angle V t -t- 1

2V KA V KBReal Velocity (V) V, * 1 s V K - — ——— - —

VKA * VKB

T (T|A H-TiB)-Trr ^.. A TTime Difference AM — ^. A l j

2 1=0

MAIN FEATURES OF HAWKINS' METHOD

FIGURE 3SIAL

11

3.4 Location of Drill-Hole shots

3.4.1 On site Operations

A total of 24 geophones were deployed for this stage of

the survey (see the map shown in Appendix for their location).

Seven (7) geophones were deployed on each of lines SL-1 and SL-3

and five (5) on each of lines SL-2 and SL-4. Where the lines meet,

a common geophone to both lines is deployed at the intersection.

The geophone spacing was 115 m on lines SL-1 and SL-3 and 140 m on

lines SL-2 and SL-4.

Table 2 shown on next page describes the set-up of each

of the 24 geophones. For each geophone we have the following

information: channel number, line number, bedrock and overburden

mean seismic velocity, overburden thickness, and delay time for the

seismic waves to travel in the overburden. The last two parameters

represent the effect of the overburden (thickness and delay). This

was determined in the first stage of the survey.

The seismograph was located at mid-point of the geophone

set-up and it was linked to the shot-box via alOOO m long cable.

Because many of the holes were obstructed, it wasn't

possible to set charges at all the depths requested. This was the

case for holes WL-077, at 630 m of depth, WL-075, at 510 m of

depth, WL-058, at 259 m of dedpth and WL-069, at 157 m of depth.

In fact more time was spent on those three last holes than on

setting up the charges for all the remaining holes.

In each drillhole the first shot was set up at the deeper

chainage point. Initially, the blasting cable was lowered into the

hole to the desired depth with a "dummy charge". This was done to

SIAL

r12

Table 2 GEOPHONE PARAMETERS

# Line

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

g

10

11

12

13

14

SL-4

SL-4

SL-4/-3

SL-3

SL-3

SL-3

SL-3

SL-3

SL-3

SL-3/-2

SL-2

SL-2

SL-2

SL-2

Seismic Velocity (m t s)

Rock Overburden

4600

4700

6000

5300

4500

5200

6000

5300

5600

4600

5800

5500

6000

6000

-

750

800

-

-

~

-

-

800

700

-

600

-

-

Overburden

Thickness (m) Delay (mis)

0

1.7

1.4

0

0

0

0

0

1.6

1.0

0

0.5

0

0

0

4

3.5

0

0

0

0

0

4

3

0

2

0

0

SIAL

rr

r

r

13

Table 2 GEOPHONE PARAMETERS (Confd)

# Line

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

SL-2/-1

SL-1

SL-1

SL-1

SL-1

SL-1

SL-1

SL-1/-4

SL-4

SL-4

Seismic Velocity (mis)

Rock Overburden

7100

5100

5000

5600

5000

5500

5500

5500

4900

4600

-

—

—

2100/650

—

750

—

800

—

750

Overburden

Thickness (m) Delay (ms)

0

0

0

5.0

0

2.3

0

0.5

0

1.5

0

0

0

7

0

3

0

1

0

4

rrrrr

SIAL

rr ensure clearance of the hole as well as to test the blasting i circuitry at depth. The cable was then brought back up to surface

for installation of the live charge.i

The depths of the shotholes were the following:r

Table 3 DEPTH OF SHOT HOLES

rHOLE # Depth(s) of Shothole (in metres) along the borehole

l WL-077 597 and 630

n WL-072 598, 808 and 1018

j WL-071 568, 840 and 1108

WL-032 617, 846 and 1083

P WL-067 600, 800 and 1123

WL-075 510,

T WL-058 259

WL-069 157

i

1 Each charge consisted of 4 sticks of Forcite 1" x 8" 75% f— and a Seismocap electric detonator. The charge was placed inside- a metal tube sealed with epoxy glue. A 10 kg weight was placed

below the charge to allow for its easy descent. The charge was attached to the main steel cable by a small steel wiring which is destroyed by the shot. The seismograph operator first checks on

the instrument screen that all geophones are responding properly

and then motipns to the blaster to proceed with the shot. Once ther" first arrivals are recorded on all 24 geophones, the crew proceeds

to the bext borehole shot, always moving from the deeper to ther- shallower shot.

^ iOther tests were conducted on-site. It involved the

testing of the time delay of the Seismocap detonators. This test was done by placing detonators very close to a geophone. The

SIAL

rvr

15

p- results suggest that the delay is negligible. The second test

l involved detonating a near surface charge located approximately in

^ the center of the survey perimeter and recording it on the 24

' geophones spread along the perimeter. The results are given in

Table 4. They show a 2 to 4% increase in seismic velocity between

i geophones #8 and #15, as compared to values between geophones #16

and #7.

r1 3.4.2 Data processing

i1 The processing of drillhole data was conducted at SIAL's

P head office located in Montreal.

The first step involved the determination of the first

seismic arrival times at the 24 geophones spread for each of the

borehole shots. Within the range of required time arrivals, it is

' considered that the accuracy of this measurement is 0.5 msec. This

is equivalent to a distance of 3 m in a rock layer.f— i1 The second step involves the referencing of arrival times to the

r- top of the bedrock by subtracting the time required to travel

k through the overburden at each of the geophones. It was assumed

^ that in the case of the first arrivals, the trajectory between the

[ top of bedrock and the geophone is vertical. This simplifies the

calculation of overburden delay, using the thickness and velocity

i data interpreted from seismic refraction profiles (see table 2).l

P Calculation methods that require inputing a value for the

bedrock seismic velocity, were not used because they assume a

r~ homogeneous and isotropic medium. This assumption, however, cannoti

1 be correct. Bedrock velocity values obtained from the seismic

P refraction survey vary generally from 4600 to 7100 m/s.

l .

r

SIAL

rrrh

r

r-

16

Table 4 SURFACE BLAST TEST RESULTS

Geophone*

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

ARRIVAL TIME

(millisec)

49

735

96

109.5

1205

1365

155

167

189

207

201

196

190

1875

1965

RADIUS FROM SHOT

(metres)

261

378

503

584

632

716

812

888

1008

1115

1079

1054

1032

1038

1082

SEISMIC VELOCfTY

(metres/sec)

5329

5138

5234

5333

5244

5249

5237

5315

5331

5387

5369

5379

5433

5539

5504

r

SIAL

ri .

ri

r

17

Table 4 SURFACE BLAST TEST RESULTS (confd)

Geophone*

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

ARRIVAL TIME

(millisec)

181

151

137

114

96

875

64.5

43

37.5

RADIUS FROM SHOT

(metres)

934

821

718

615

523

435

338

214

192

SEISMIC VELOCITY

(metres/sec)

5161

5435

5242

5394

5446

4977

5238

4967

5126

The method used for calculating shot hole location consists in a classical interactive inversion and is probably the most rigorous in terms of mathematical computations. We consider the X, Y, Z positions of the shotpoint as well as the bedrock velocity as 4 unkown parameters to be determined from the 24

measured arrival times and the following mathematical model:

t2- (XG - Xt ) 2 * ( YG - Yt ) 2 H- (ZG - Zt ) 2

where t = arrival times

v = seismic velocityXG , YG , ZG = coordinates X, Y, Z of the geophone

= coordinates X, Y, Z of the shotpoint

SIAL

i 18

p The program operates on the hypothesis that a mean

' velocity can be assumed for the whole bedrock. It then takes into

r account all the seismic wave first arrival times from the shotpoint

i to all the different combinations of three (3) corresponding

geophones that are within a favourable geometry (:angle of more

! than 30 degrees and less than 150 degrees between the shotpoint and

two geophones). This favourable geometry concept is illustrated on

j the next page, on figure 4. In the case of a favourable geometry,

the "area" of minimal uncertainty is less important than in the

P other case.l

p Once all the calculated distances from the shotpoint to the

i three different geophone combinations are completed, the

^ interpreter ends up with a cloud of points corresponding to the

[ spatial location of the shotpoint within the borehole.

r i The program then calculates the gravity centre of this

cloud of points and its dispersion. The next stage is to vary the

P mean bedrock seismic velocity so to minimize the dispersion. The

final results depend largely on the accuracy of the measurements

p and the accuracy of the selected model.

, In this case a typical computer printout of the software

[ results ( see table 5) shows the geophone number, the measured

first arrival time (required for the seismic wave to travel from

the shot point to the geophone), the calculated first arrival time,

the seismic velocity used in the calculation, the value difference

in percentage between the two arrival times and the number of

different combinations of 3 geophones used for the calculations.

r

SIAL

- 19 -

r RAY GEOMETRY

r

r

r

r

FAVOURABLE GEOMETRY

GEOPHONE (1)GtOPHONE (l+n)

AREA OF INTERSECTING RAYS ( MINIMAL UNCERTAINTY )

( RANGE OF ERROR )

r

UNFAVOURABLE GEOMETRY

GEOPHONE (l) GEOPHONE (Hj)

AREA OF INTERSECTING RAYS ( MINIMAL UNCERTAINTY )

( RANGE OF ERROR )

FIGURE 4SIAL

TABLE 520

EXAMPLE OF INVERSION PROGRAM CALCULATION RESULTS

r

F pro-f 1 77 630b2 77 630b3 77 630b4 77 630b5 77 630b6 77 63Sb7 77 630bB 77 630b9 77 630b

10 77 630b11 77 630b12 77 630b13 77 630bthsta mi nn ombre d ' i

position du.pro j ec t i on

V

4900.4925.4950.4975.5000.5025.5050.5075 .5100.5125.5150.5175.5200.

, max =ter at i on 5t r ou x ,

horis .el e vs. t i on du fa 1 ast

geo*4336353231262524OT"

2?11121516464544

t-arr1 07 . 80115.301 1 4 . 3013S.S0144.00152.60150.80150.20149.80150.80150.80146.80133.501 36 . 30132.30119.30110.00

x4213.4215.4216.4218.4219.4221.4222.ii-"7-"?4

4225.4227.^. T1 T' Q

4230.4231.

1y ? z

donned on ne

y6 1906.0 1905.5 19B5.0 1904.6 1903.1 1903.6 1902.1 1901.7 1901.2 190B.8 1899.3 1899.9 1893.30.

T

5 9965.S 9961.2 9957.5 9952.9 994B.2 9944.6 9940.9 9935.3 9931.6 9927.9 9923.3 9919.6 9915.150.

4601.2^ J-.

98t-cal

110114112126141157150148149156152141123132134119112

.07

.78

. 16

. 12

.96

. 11

. 79

.51

.85

.85

.68

.66

.93

. 33

.51

.65

. IS

:55.0;69. 1

y.2. 11-.45

-2.30-3.58-1.412.95-.01

-1.12.03

4.011.25

-3.50-3.42-3.271.67

TiTlm - :^J

1 . 99

74185•~)

0

3654-j

2

ec 23.323.323.423.523.623.823. 924. 124 . 724.424.624.325.0

1960.2

d h 136.135.133.132.130.129.123.126.125.123.122.120.119.

10419.

3062340

5173B4

1

dz 96.92.88.83.79.75.70.66.

- 62.58.54.50.46.

6307419754.^^1

npt 280280230280280230280230230280280283280

speed5050.--

5050.5050 .5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.5050.

00000000000000

00000000000000000000

- - -

f: Borehole numberprof: depth of shothole (in metres)v: selected velocity (in m/sec)x,y,z: calculated spatial coord. of

shothole (in metres) ec: standard deviation npt: number of different combination of

geophones

geo#: geophone numbert-arr: first arrival time - measured (in millisec t-cal: first arrival time - calculated (" " ) ?;: percentage difference between T measured and

T calculatedspeed: selected velocity (in m/sec) theta min , max: rangeof values (in degrees) for favourable geometry between shothole and geophone

SIAL

ri .

r r r r

21

4.O RESULTS

4.1 GPS Coordinates

Table 6 CALCULATED GPS COORDINATES

The measured values for the three following sites are:

Site

PL-5

PL- 6

PL-3

LATITUDE

(degrees)

48.9660537

48.9661748

48.9730958

LONGITUDE

(degrees)

87.37855862

87.3784186

87.3812140

UTMnorth

(metres)

5423532

5423546

5424316

UTM East

(metres )

472290.0

472302.0

472101 .0

Z Elev.

(metres

402.0

403.5

410.7

4.2 Shothole locations

As was indicated in section 3.3.3, the results of the initial

seismic tests carried on surface around the survey perimeter showed

that the presence of two different types of lithologies, each

having a distinct seismic velocity: 4900 900 m/s, East of the

line that meets geophones # 1 b # 16 and 5700 750 m/s, West of the

line that meets geophones #8 S #15. The latter velocity would seem

to indicate a more dense lithology to the West of the survey area;

this rock unit would dip eastward, from the information supplied by

Metall Mining staff. This would mean that over the survey perimeter

there would exist a significant bedrock velocity anisotropy. This

was also confirmed by the surface blast test results that were

showing a slight increase (4-5%) in values to the West of geophones

#8 and #15. The anisotropy could affect the deeper shotholes which

are probably located in the more dense lithology.

SIAL

r

r

22

For these reasons the model based on an isotropic bedrock was

set aside. Instead it was decided as a first step to discard

results coming from geophones located West of line joining

geophones #7 and #16. Attempts were made to find a model that

could be verified and that would take into account the bedrock anisotropy. Attention was given to borehole WL-58; this is a borehole located close to the centre of the survey perimeter. Its

shothole is located close to the surface in what is probably the

less dense lithology. One of the aims is to minimize any

deviation from the gravity centre that surrounds the cloud of

calculated location points defining the shothole location. Because of near surface location of shothole WL-58, the errors associated

with its coordinate estimation are less important. For these

reasons, the shothole was taken as a reference for determining the

mean bedrock velocity on the remaining 16 geophones.

In this way it was possible to determine a mean velocity of

5600 m/s. However this velocity value could not be carried through

for shotholes which are located deeper, as the calculated results

for the shothole positions at those depths showed an abrupt chance, relative to the estimated values. A mean velocity of 6100 m/s was

adopted for depths ranging in the order of 600, 800 and 1000 metres.

Because of this , an approach including the percentage of

deviation between the calculated first arrival time and the

measured one was set up, combined with a change to those calculated

values that would account for the geophone geometry in regards to the shothole blast. The formula was designed to take into account the refracted trajectory and refraction angles of first arrival

rays into a two-layer medium, the top layer one being less dense than the bottom one.

The calculated locations of each shothole based on this approach are shown on page 24, in Table 7. Estimated values are

SIAL

23

shown for comparison purposes only. The less noticeable differences are those associated with elevation values (differences of up to 6 metres at the most) while the most significant

differences between the estimated and calculated values are

associated to X,Y coordinates.

5.O CONCLUSION

A seismic survey around a serie of boreholes was completed during the period of May 24 to June 6, 1994 on the Pick lake deposit property belonging to Metall Mining Incorporated. The aim

was to determine the spatial location of seven boreholes (WL-32A, 58, 67, 71, 72, 75A, 77A), using an array of 24 geophones spread over a 700 by 800 metre perimeter and explosive charges set in the

boreholes to be surveyed at different depths.

The initial calculations based on an isotropic bedrock were rejected because the measured surface seismic velocities around the survey perimeter showed two distinct bedrock velocities of 4900 m/s

and 5700 m/s. The inversion program was modified to take into account the seismic anisotropy and new calculations showed a better correlation from one shothole to another.

When compared, the estimated values and the calculated results show some differences of the order of 6 metres and less for elevation values and differences generally of the order of 8 to 12

metres for the X and Y coordinates. However differences can reach

up to 22 to 34 metres in the case of the X and Y values, as witnessed on borehole WL-72A and WL-32, for shotholes located 1000

metres deep.

/J yci^^a^Xb^^^- j^/Mouhamed Mouf-/ Moussaooi, P. Eng. Fernand Descb-artnps, P. Eng.

SIAL

24

Table 7 CALCULATED AND ESTIMATED COORDINATES OF BOREHOLES

CALCULATED VALUES

(in metres)

ESTIMATED VALUES

(in metres)

D. D. H

WL32A

WL32A

WL32A

WL58

WL67

WL67

WL67

WL71

WL71

WL71

WL72

WL72

WL72

WL75A

WL77A

WL77A

Depth

618

845

1090

259

600

800

1123

568

840

1110

598

808

1018

510

597

628

Y-LAT

1796

1815

1871

1835

1965

1945

1940

2133

2104

2133

2046

2017

1995

1953

1909

1901

X-LONG

4369

4252

4127

4345

4459

4401

4235

4475

4402

4265

4287

4220

4155

4216

4451

4445

Z-ELEV

9850

9674

9482

10166

9839

9668

9422

9853

9602

9376

9852

9660

9465

9923

9852

9823

Y-LAT

1805

1839

1893

1830

1975

1942

1967

2129

2095

2132

2054

2030

2018

1937

1901

1898

X-LONG

4384

4244

4093

4347

4480

4404

4188

4482

4393

4243

4288

4212

4121

4207

4451

4436

Z-ELEV

9849

9674

9488

10165

9835

9652

9420

9852

9598

9377

9852

9658

9469

9920

9852

9825

SIAL

Ministry ofNorthern Developmentand Mines

Ontario

Report of Work Conducted After Recording Claim

Mining Act

Transaction Number

Personal information collected on this form is obtained under the authority of the Minii this collection should be directed to the Provincial Manager, Mining Lands, Ministr Sudbury. Ontario. P3E 6A5, telephone (705) 670-7264.

instructions: - Please type or print and submit in duplicate. 42D14NWOoo5 2 158o6 PAYS PLAT LAKE- Refer to the Mining Act and Regulations for requirtmionto ui mmy

Recorder.- A separate copy of this form must be completed for each Work Group.- Technical reports and maps must accompany this form in duplicate.- A sketch, showing the claims the work is assigned to, must accompany this form

Recorded HofcJer(s) . ^ - 7 le~TV,J| S I'll fa* (Let- p.

Address ^~ ^ l

Mining Division J ' TownshipMrea ' l

Dates ^X 7 Work From: /li O '\ a o i. To: Performed / /a** S . S/ J\ ——————————————————————— — ' — -3 ———— — j —— i— — ' — f —————————

Work Performed (Check One Work Group Only)Work Group

Geotechnical Survey

Physical Work. Including Drilling

Rehabilitation

Other Authorized Work

Assays

Assignment from Reserve

JT/O l***S) Type

ir* s

L)*jc- C.uiri'ncA

M

Client No.

/i,w?94 Telephone No.

M or G Plan No. .

~JW ^ l?9*t

JAN 2 0 1995

NING LANDS BRANCH

51Total Assessment Work Claimed on the Attached Statement of Costs S . jNote: The Minister may reject for assessment work credit all or part of the assessment work submitted 'rf the recorded

holder cannot verify expenditures claimed in the statement of costs within 30 days of a request for verification.

Persons and Survey Company Who Performed the Work (Give Name and Address of Author of Report)Name

^.J

/TewvJ

CjTCo^C i' C -TIC e*3 — M C .

J a Ti^lirr.'

Address

|Jf00 Ou^-f /3oJ

336? h-*^o,J

U"OM i"yj /*^iV7 rt

A~ -ri, Jrive Ir) t, Ait **

*l, Q^ H3/4 -3&1

ft* oJL. P 7&-WS

(attach a schedule if necessary)

Certification of Beneficial Interest * See Note No. 1 on reverse side1 certify that at the time the work was performed, the claims covered in this report were recorded in the current holder's name or held under a beneficial int

| by the current recorded holder.

Certification of Work Report

^^ Date Recorded Holder ofvAgentJ(Signahire) arest s/) U, C\

7/w Q /M 7iu^ kfa^ :——— ' ——————— 7 — " —— "-^ — ' —————— *^ ————— ' ——————— '

1 certify that 1 have a personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this Work report, having performed the work or witnessed same during and/or after its completion and annexed report is true.

Name and Address of Pereon Certifying rf e+ait /"l I'M i* Co

TeleponeNo. Date J} '

&07- 82 k - 3368 //^ /8 } 99\For Office Use Only

Total Value Cr. Recorded

"A c"/ f Q ^ft

Date Recorded Mining

L^^fA^/iMA^O^-'/fy ^*Deemed Approval Date ' Date A

jLc,'^Or OSh. P0~7~ ^ PS C*Certified By (Signature) ^-\

A ^W^-4 / /2^*M^/ 'LsAJ'urH.

\ TL TT miRecorder \ L h L L Ut/

)proved ^ ' ** ' ' ' uAV8 M3C

n^Ai-iDate Notice for Amendments Sent " ** ' ' ' -'

3NMNIW NOH1

3ONvi 03

0s- o^ ^1 GC. ON vi OD V

O)

(M tt

ft

3CO

00

m

if

cs ?

11

i8

^^Cp

^w

o1

GNoc cccc

^,

So c

QCC CC

?

tQ

SoD C

ON 'ft

C C

ii

i

o!CPccoc

JQCD0o

GNcc cc0

IllsSilo g*S

Oo^

fffg

j

ii* J\O

-

s0

cc8

U

CCCD

(j[

Cc

(/^

ccQ)

?

M

o0

CCcr

-V

C0

ccoc^

V^/"!

^\

Cc'

c

3 **

tar is*

Credits you are claiming in this report may be cut back. In order to minimize the adverse effects of such deletions, please indicate from which claims you wish to priorize the deletion of credits. Please mark (K-) one of the following:

1. D Credits are to be cut back starting with the claim listed last, working backwards.2. D Credits are to be cut back equally over all claims contained in this report of work.3. D Credits are to be cut back as priorized on the attached appendix.

In the event that you have not specified your choice of priority, option one will be implemented.

Note 1: Examples of beneficial interest are unrecorded transfers, option agreements, memorandum of agreements, etc., with respect to the mining claims.

Note 2 : If work has been performed on patented or leased land L please complete the following:

l certify that the recorded holder had a beneficial interest in the patented or leased land at the time the work was performed.

Signature/? 7 \"57,. /R /Ooi;

Ontario

Ministry ofNorthern Developmentand Mines

Ministere du Developpement du Nord et des mines

Statement of Costs for Assessment CreditEtat des couts aux fins du credit d'evaluation

Transaction No./N" de transaction

Mining Act/Loi sur les mines O 1 C!

Personal information collected on this form is obtained under the authority of the Mining Act. This information will be used to maintain a record and ongoing status of the mining claim(s). Questions about this collection should be directed to the Provincial Manager, Minings Lands, Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, 4th Floor, 159 Cedar Street, Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6A5. telephone (705) 670-7264.

Les renseignements personnels contenus dans la presente formule sent recueillis en vertu de la Lol sur les mines et sen/iron! 4 tenir A jour un registre des concessions minieres. Adresser toute quesiton sur la cotlece de ces renseignements au chef provincial des terrains miniers, ministere du Developpement du Nord et des Mines, 159, rue Cedar, 4* etage. Sudbury (Ontario) P3E 6A5. telephone (705) 670-7264.

1. Direct Costs/CoOts directs

Type

Wages Salalres

Contractor's and Consultant's Fees Drottsde ('entrepreneur et de I'expert- eonseil

Supplies Used Foumttures utilises*

Equipment Rents! Location de materiel

Description

Labour Main-d'oeuvreField Supervision Supervision sur to terrain

Type CTec . ,s,\ f

l 1

L- i f* f- eff ^ eu^A^

7Type

Type

Amount Montant

VI 561. 5.

3^3*3,^

Total Direct Coste Total des coOts directs

Totals Total global

0

3,199.5*

O

0si, w.*

2. Indirect Costs/Gouts indirects* * Note: When claiming Rehabilitation work Indirect costs are not

allowable as assessment work. Pour le remboursement des travaux de rehabilitation, les couts indirects ne sont pas admissibles en tant que travaux d'evaluation.

Sub Total of Indirect Costs Total partlel des couts indirects

Amount Allowable (not greater than 20H of Direct Costs) Montant admissible (n'excedant pss 20 H des couts directs)Total Value of Assessment Credit (Total of Direct and Allowable Indirect costa)

Valeur totale du creditd'evaluation(Total dta coott dbecta

u

Note: The recorded holder will be required to verify expenditures claimed in this statement of costs within 30 days of a request for verification. II verification is not made, the Minister may reject for assessment work all or part of the assessment work submitted.

Note : Le titulaire enregistre sera tenu de verifier les expenses demandees dans le present etat des coOts dans les 30 Jours suivant une demande a eel effet. Si la verification n'est pas effectuee, le ministre peut rejeter tout ou une partie des travaux devaluation preserves.

Filing Discounts

1. Work filed within two years of completion is claimed at 10044 of the above Total Value of Assessment Credit.

2. Work filed three, four or five years after completion is claimed at SO0/*) of the above Total Value of Assessment Credit. See calculations below:

Tola! Value of Assessment Credit Total Assessment Claimed

x 0.50

Remises pour depdt

1. Les travaux deposes dans les deux ans suivant leur achevement sont rembourses a 100 "to de la valeur totale susmenttonnee du credit devaluation.

2. Les travaux deposes trois, quatre ou cinq ans apres leur achevement sont rembourses a 50 ^ de la valeur totale du credit d'evaluation susmentionne. Voir les calculs ci-dessous.

Valeur totale du credit d'evaluation

X 0,50

Evaluation totale demandee

Certification Verifying Statement of Costs

l hereby certify:that the amounts shown are as accurate as possible and these costs were incurred white conducting assessment work on the lands shown on the accompanying Report of Work form.

that as(Recorded Holder. Agent, Position in Company)

to make this certification

l am authorized

Attestation de l'etat des couts

J'atteste par la presente :que les montants indiques sont le plus exact possible et que ces depenses ont ete engagees pour effectuer les travaux d'evaluation sur les terrains indiques dans la formule de rapport de travail ci-joint.

Et qu'a titre de. je suis autoris6(titulaire enregistre, representant, poste occup6 dans la compagnie)

a faire cette attestation.

{Signature Date

•:KtW9k

l SO~ |B3O|OOI, ju^i 4 ^ l ITW __ "^

. - — -l- — — —1643* .64 35

SCALE 1 INCH = 40 CHAINSi II l IM'-'l.U *W IJ - - - ' \ --V y "a.

i"i 5±!ii4^i! 44w^V^ geje^A^'vS^ff^r"^ - :t~i2; - rrr^l I flKi "" r -woo ,/ J^N ! , ,.^

^"-Tl i4i4jO*43S4-d *--4-5-r6--

646462164^461^*464541646451 l ^ L - - - -L -j- -\;\- - - -|-T - - ~ , TB

|TB

TB

c1 yioa-w**y^

o:

PAYS PLAT LAKEMN R ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICT

TERRACE BAYMINING DIVISION

THUNDER BAYLAND TITLES/ REGISTRY DIVISION

THUNDER BAY

Ministry ofNaturalResources

OntarioAPRIL 1 4.1987

Date FEB.15/1982

Land

Management

Branch

Number

G-606

OntarioMinistry ofNorthern Developmentand Mines

Ministers duDeveloppement du Nord et des Mines

Geoscience Approvals Office 933 Ramsey Lake Road 6th Floor Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5

Telephone: (705) 670-5853 Fax: (705) 670-5863

February 22, 1995 Our File: 2.15806Transaction #: W9440.00322

Mining RecorderMinistry of Northern Development 6 Mines 435 James Street South Suite B003Thunder Bay, Ontario P7E 6E3

Dear Mr. Weirmeir:

Subject: APPROVAL OF ASSESSMENT WORK CREDITS ON MINING CLAIMS TB 519246 IN PAYS PLAT LAKE AREA

Phone conversation on Tuesday February 21, 1995, with Mr. Doiron clarified the reason for above industry standards for line-cutting for this submission. As a result, the reduction in assessment credit for this submission will not occurr. Accordingly, assessment work credits have been approved as outlined on the attached report of work form. The credits have been approved under Section 14 (Geophysical) of the Mining Act Regulations.

The approval date is February 22, 1995.

If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Steven Beneteau at (705) 670-5858.

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Ron C. GashinskiSenior Manager, Mining Lands Section Mining and Land Management Branch Mines and Minerals Division

SBB/jl Enclosure:

cc: Resident GeologistThunder Bay, Ontario

ssessment Files Library Sudbury, Ontario

REPORT OF WORK FORM

FEBRUARY 22, 1995 FILE: 2.15806 TRANSACTION # W9440.00322

VALUE OF ASSESSMENTCLAIM WORK DONE

TB 519246 $5,688.00TB 386777 $5,688.00TB 386778 $5,688.00TB 519247 ^5,688.00TB 386766 ^5,688.00TB 386768 $5,688.00TB 386770 S5,688.00TB 386767 $5,688.00TB 386769 $5,695.00

TOTAL $51 / 199.00

\

Rope Lake G-609

r.M4VK6344071 J 53440*l *M*^*_ , ,

'•~" "~'~~ ~ ' 1*4366805 b46439 |6464 34 , 646 432 . 64 6 4 28 |6464 l 4 ' 64**J ^J^^j'^ i?!6^.1 ^ IS i*U*. — LI" L" — •"TT ~~ ~"~ "^^?^^^^^ l T a T B "y R ITB T B l "TO .T a ~"~ ^~ F /r"a ~ ~" "™* t em "oV *\4676*|

SI84 r\ 33 ' 646 767 j830017

- —^T- 4- — - — T - TB i TB ITB CT\ .646716 .646713 .643785 , ID —l—L— —l. — -j- —— -l- — i— —l — —|- — l— -B^TB TTB [™ 'TB

Vjh ' l

'a L*lia-I6-l'S8 - 7-HJT- - J *46 40* ] 653 95* TTBTB L-—— — —-L— I—...L.J

l -- IJ TB ITB ~ -

0\ *48572| 64636* A*465701f

l tt i JO* !s\, •*000J6540pJ^*5.4dFB~ "~ TTB" ~~ —-*-~

aj|j)023 iBSOOIJ " _ I~JT""" "1l 653966)65 4 008 J6540

S.V* ; TB"La** l

T————l———— -HT.--T--

'6465.0 "65 4565 634564 [654009,6340.7 *540.8 O O, l C. l , ,

trl - -trl —— [-TIT —— Kr -^^rTB —— i WJ-W- 1-5^^- r~--^l3-7e-T--i " " TB T' TB

T lf^^i^**T^'^'**i i l\ ! * - — -l——— —J*4S*II 164380* IM9B07 M*3M

10 B S !* 88 OdTfts y**)Jf W *aW4:* l J-V-^l^T^83844.4.4**4*48* ~"" "

* * 46^48 5- .l——~ T B

.300.0 .30039 633655006823f 655^*4.4*! fp

J-r.7 —— M" WITT". ITB TT. in 1AT' i i424 1*41/6 4 22 |*4.44 *46 44. ,OW4f' JO**!

47 j***444—- —v J~ — — -4 — — 46490 16464^*2 lr"!

l*" OO33 ~

1*300*3 *88006i*68004i*B8t— l— —^ . l-. — i— — — ' —*

^^^i^^^5-26-^ H^- - -j;i--{-T B-

RECEIVE

JAN 2 0199

MINING LANDS BKILLRAINE TPDNTAN TPREFER TOTWP PLAN 0-6tt T REFER TO TWP. j P

- f5 A(STATUS REFER TOTWP PLAN

0-691

G-538COPPER ISLAND

R E F E R E

THE INFORMATION THAT APPEARS ON THIS MAP HAS BEEN COMPILED FROM VARIOUS SOURCES, AND ACCURACY IS NOT GUARANTEED. THOSE WISHING TO STAKE MIN ING CLAIMS SHOULD CON SULT WITH THE MINING RECORDER. MINISTRY OF NORTHERN DEVELOP MENT AND MINES, FOR AD DITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE STATUS OF THE LANDS SHOWN HEREON.

LEGENDHIGHWAY AND ROUTE. No

OTHER ROADS

TRAMuS

SURVEYED LINES'TOWNSHIPS, BASE LINES, ETC " LOTS, MINING CI AIMS PARCELS ETC

UNSURVEYt-0 l INESLOT LINFSPARCF l B .UNQARYMINlNij f l AIMS ETC

RAILWAY AND RIGHT OF WAY UTILITY LINES NON PERENNIAL STREAM FLOODING OR FLOODING RIGHTS SUBDIVISION OR COMPOSITE PLAN RESERVATIONS ORIGINAL SHORELINE MARSH OR MUSKEG MINES TRAVERSE MONUMENT

V*

DISPOSITION OF CROWN LAUDS

PATENT. SURFACE ft MiNIMQ " . SURFACE RIGHTS ONLY

.MINING RIGHTS ONLY

LEASE, SURFACE St M INING RIGHTS

" .SURFACE RIGHTS ONLY._....,............... . P5

" . MINING RIGHTS ONLY........^................... B

LICENCE OF OCCUPATION ...........___............... WORDER IN-COUNCIL -.--.... — ...——.................^ OC

RESERVATION ___. ... .,............................. (J)CANCELLED ___..... .........................m ..... ASAND ft GRAVEL._........ . ,. .. . , (J)

LAND USE PERMTTS FOR COMMERCIAL TOUMUHjOUTfO*T CAKTtNOTf: MINING MIGHTS IN PARCELS PATENT** VHlOft TOMMY *.

1*13. VESTED IN ORIGINAL PATKNTiE BV TH( PUBLI LANDS ACT. H S O 1070. CHAP. MO. SEC *3. tUMIC 1

SCALE: 1 INCH ~ 40 CHAINS

O 10OO 2OOO 4000 600* 8OOO

1OOO11 KM) (2 KM)

PAYS PLAT LAKEM. N. R. ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICT

TERRACE BAYMINING DIVISION

* TITUS/ MtllTftV n*t4

THUNDER BAYMinistry ofNaturalResources

Liind ManagementBraitfh

APRIL 14 1987

Oilt FEB. 15/1982 •i!

42D14NW0005 2 15806 PAYS PLAT LAKE 200

r

8 7 5 4 1

WINSTON MINE

F

)

I2D14NW0005 2 15806 PAYS PLAT LAKE

PUDDEL LAKE

CLEAVER

LAKE

TRAILER

CORE

;ONTACT

2000 NWL-77

WL-69

1900 N

(1083)LOON LAKE

WL-32r'V

1800 N

1700 N

1500 N

386765

1600 N

210

LEGEND:6

- 12 GEOPHONE SEISMIC PROFILE AND NUMBER

O OCMm

WL-75

12 GEOPHONE SEISMIC PROFILE AND INTERPRETED SURFACE BEDROCK VELOCITY ( in metres/second )

- SURFACE LOCATION OF BOREHOLE AND NUMBER

72 #

(598)SURFACE PROJECTION OF BOREHOLE BLAST AND CHAINAGE OF BLAST FROM SURFACE ( In metres )

- SURFACE PROJECTION OF BOREHOLE

TB 5867 78 CLAIM NUMBER

F

E

NO NOTES

D

—

NO DATE MODIFICATIONS REF.DESS. VERIF.

APPROUVED

NO REFERENCES NO

^^^ r^l A 1 1400 boul. Gouin Quest SJJC, SIAL Montreal, Canada, H3M 3B1

0^, Geosciences inc. Tei. : ( su ) 339-2999^^ Fax. : ( 514 ) 339-2997

CLIENT :

METALL MlNUN© DNCORFC"^O A TElf^J'lrKA U oy

SITE : WINSTON LAKE MINE PROPERTY SCHREIBER, ONTARIO

PROJECT :

TITLE : SEISMIC

WL-32,

C.A.D. : A. SAYEGH

INSPECTED : M.

SCALE : Q

1 / 2000 L^

PICK LAKE DEPOSIT

LOCATION OF BOREHOLES 58, 67, 69, 72, 75 * 77

INSPECTED M. MOUSSAOUI

L'ECUYER APPROVED : A. MOUSSAOUI

50 100m I DATE JUNE 1994

GS94 JN01