JORC Review- the show has started.

The JORC review is underway wherein the AusIMM & AIG are conducting a number of discussion sessions – both face to face and on line. See JORC : Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves This site also provides links to consultation events between the 19th August to 18th September. It is understood some of these events are recorded and will appear on the AusIMM / AIG websites.

A live chat via LinkedIn and You Tube was undertaken by Rene Sterk of the JORC committee (chief JORC jerk). He was joined with Matt Briggs and Alex Sutton (now law firm, but previously geologist attached to ASX). This was a casual fire-side chat with about 200 attending on line for 1.5 hours. Viewers were encouraged to type-in their questions and comments as a driver for much of the session. The recording can be found on: JORC 2024 - An Open Discussion and Debate Session - All Welcome (youtube.com) . Some personally noted key points included;

·??????? “Compliance verses Competence” – The JORC code seeks 5 years minimum experience in a specific field. A geologist doing core logging for 5+ years, without much else, may not be competent, though a geologist may be competent with 3 years field experience in a certain commodity, but with 20 years’ experience in a variety of commodities and having written many feasibility studies.

·??????? There are many issues related to the general enforcement of the JORC code. Perhaps it is time to consider a stand alone JORC company to take on the monitoring & enforcement aspects. A complaint filed in the present system can take weeks / months to resolve, wherein the target company may have raised money and moved on.

·??????? “To swim outside your lane” and how will companies / competent persons work around the new rules? These topical terms refer to the discussion on how best to manage the Competent Person (CP) issue and how to manage the new “specialist” input. Specialists do not need to be members of an institute with discipline capabilities, and it is up to the CP to determine / vouch for the specialist.

·??????? “Speeding tickets” are a JORC slang term for complaints mainly of a compliance nature that typically that do not have an obvious material impact on the investors risk analysis. EG, A Table 1 box was missed. Sometimes it appears there may be a good report, but the author is not familiar with filling out Table 1

·??????? The formal registration of geoscientist as Competent Persons is headed in the same direction as is existing for CP for accounting, lawyers etc.

·??????? Some geologists would like to see “Resources” defined more narrowly in terms of mathematics and geology, [this is what some government agencies apply] and is time independent; whereas others would like “Resources” to include some modifying factors [this is what commercial companies seek] and is more related to the immediate future.

·??????? Reconciliation and risk determination are growing areas, wherein a closer look at “material” is to be discussed. ?

Matt’s Linked In page refers to a short article by “Exploration Review” (5) Exploration Review: Posts | LinkedIn This includes; Once this (JORC Report) is completed, the investor relations/executive director and then the company secretary/lawyers get their hands on it and try and make it comprehensible for investors. The CP and specialists must ensure the final media release includes everything that needs to the consent to the release. Interested to hear how this is communicated in the workshops and if my read is right. Potentially multiple table 1's for internal and investor purposes?

Mark Murphy has some long and entertaining posts on LinkedIn, wherein he discusses the character of; - standard definitions, mandatory elements, exploration concept, exploration results, exploration target?? competent person, public reports, mineral assets. See;

(4) JORC Code Exposure Draft - Feedback #2 | LinkedIn , (18) JORC Code Exposure Draft - Feedback #3 | LinkedIn ?and (4) JORC CODE Mark VII - the feedback begins! | LinkedIn

Roland Gotthard also has discussion points around the title “Is JORC now a flawed project?; see (18) Is JORC now a flawed project? | LinkedIn Ronald starts out with a particular view;-

Is the Joint Ore Reserves Committee Code (JORC Code) a compromised mission? Has it overgrown its original purpose and become an edifice for concentration of power? Is it fit for purpose? The JORC Code exists to protect resource investors from the actions of bad companies, by regulating the conduct of professionals who are engaged in a specific scientific/commercial endeavour, which is to explore for and develop into commercial production, mineral assets. ?The Code specifically focuses on disclosure of mineral exploration and resource development information on the ASX (and, as we all know, also on other bourses). It proscribes ways of doing so that are misleading and is prescriptive about form, intent and even formatting (of maps, for example). ?It then assigns the blame to any misleading of investors to the chumps on the coal face, who are the Competent Persons.

Ronald goes on the look at aspects related to; competent person, CV of record, cost creep, competence in the real world, materiality, company responsibilities, risk & reward, ESG, exploration results and concludes with a number of takeaways.