Drill Core Sampling Analysis2024113

EAST ASIA MINERALS CORPORATION
Vancouver, B.C.
Suite 900, 999 West Hastings

V6C 2W2
Drill Core Sampling and Analysis Protocols
Version 3.2 - January, 2010

Table of Contents
Page
1. Introduction ...……………………………………………………………………….…. 1
2. Terms of Reference..………………………..……………………….………………… 2
3. Glossary of Terms ...……….……………………………………………………..……. 4
4. Preparation and Analytical Procedures ...…………………….….……….……….…. 8

4.1 Laboratory Selection ...………….……………………………………………..……..…. 8
4.2 Laboratory Communication..……………….…………………………...……………..... 8
4.3 Sample Preparation..……….…………………………………………………………….. 9
4.3.1 Crushing. ……………………………………………………….…………….… 9
4.3.2 Pulverizing. …………………………………………………………..………… 9
4.4 Selecting Analytical Method - Geochemical or Assay ...………….…...…..……….…... 9
4.5 Analysis for Deleterious or Secondary Pay Elements..…………….………..………..… 10
4.6 Documentation ...…………………………………………………….………………..... 12
5. Quality Control at the Sampling Stage ………..……………….………………….… 13

5.1 Blanks..……………………………………………...………………….…………..…... 13
5.1.1 Preparation of Blanks..……...…………………………………………………. 13
5.1.2 Insertion of Blanks ...……………………………………………………..…… 14
5.2 Control Standards ...…………………………….…………………………..…….…… 14
5.2.1 Purchase or Preparation of Control Standards………..……….………..…...… 15
5.2.2 Insertion of Control Standards…………….………………………...………… 17
5.3 Sample Log. …………………………………………………………….…………..…. 17
6. Staged Exploration Procedures. …………………………………………….………. 19

6.1 Grassroots Stage Projects..………………..………………………………………..…... 19
6.2 Discovery Stage Projects. …………………………………………………….……...… 19
6.3 Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage Projects. …………………………..……. 20
7. Procedures at the Drill and Drill Core Sampling. …………………………….……. 22

7.1 Communication with the Drill Company and Drill Crew……………………………… 22
7.2 Security. ……………………………………………………………………….…….… 22
7.3 Procedures at the Drill..………………………………………………………………… 22
7.4 Transportation. ………………………………………………………………………… 23
7.5 Core Sampling………………………………………………………………………….. 23
7.6 Sampling Procedure Flow Charts. ………………………………………….…….……. 25
8. Submission of Samples to Primary Laboratory. ……………………………………. 27
9. Data Entry and Database Management……………………………………………… 28
10. Review of Preliminary Quality Control Data……………………………………….. 29
i
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page
11. Quality Control Failure: Request for Repeat Analyses…………………………….. 31
12. Additional Quality Control Procedures……………………………………………… 33

12.1 Drill Core Duplicates…………………………………………………………………… 33
12.2 Pulp Replicates ……………………………………………………………………….... 33
12.2.1 Submission of Pulp Replicates to the Secondary Laboratory ……..…………... 33
12.2.2 Comparison of Results for Cross-Checks ……………………………………... 34
12.3 Reject Replicates ………………..………………………………………………….….. 36
12.3.1 Submission of Reject Replicates for Check Analyses..………………….…….. 36
12.3.2 Comparison of Results for Reject Replicates..……………………………...….. 36
13. List of References..………………………………………….…………………………. 38
ii
1. Introduction
This document describes the protocols applied by East Asia Minerals for the collection, sampling
and analysis of diamond drill core. The senior management team and the project geologists are
accountable to ensure this protocol is applied to the company’s exploration projects.
The project geologist and manager are responsible for quality assurance and control of the
sampling procedure, shipping of samples, chemical analyses (including selection of analytical
method), verification of analyses, and security of the core and samples. Project geologists and
managers must ensure there is complete hard copy documentation of all procedures and results at
all stages of the project to provide a clear audit trail.
Standardized quality control procedures are implemented for all of East Asia Minerals’
exploration programs. Although this document is for drill core only, the approach to quality
control described in this document can be applied to rock samples, core, and soil/silt samples.
The quality control program consists of:
• The submission of blanks to monitor contamination and data accuracy.

• The submission of control samples of known metal concentration to monitor data accuracy.
• Acquisition of internal laboratory pulp replicate results to monitor analytical precision.
• Collection and review of all internal laboratory data for blanks and in-house control
standards to monitor accuracy.
• The submission of reject replicates to monitor sample homogeneity and preparation
procedures.
• The submission of pulps to a secondary laboratory (cross-checks) to verify analytical
methodology, laboratory bias and data accuracy.
• Management and review of all quality control data.
The project manager assigns responsibility for different procedures to specific individuals so that
there is accountability for each step of the quality control program. Any changes/additions that
must be made to the procedures and the date of the change must be recorded. Investment
bankers, third party engineering firms, and other individuals from outside the company may
request documentation of the sampling, sample preparation and quality control procedures used
by East Asia Minerals.
Inclusion of quality control samples such as blanks, control standards and replicates will allow
errors to be readily identified and correction measures implemented. It is envisioned that the
procedures may be modified over time, however, this document provides the minimum protocols
that will be applied by East Asia Minerals. Compliance with these protocols will be reported to
senior management on a monthly basis.
1
2. Terms of Reference
The quality control protocols described in this document are designed to maintain a high level of
confidence in analytical results for East Asia Minerals management and geologists, partners,
regulatory authorities and the public domain.
Adequate mineralogical and metallurgical testing and geotechnical measurements also need to be
introduced at specific stages to identify negative economic consequences early in the exploration
process. The additional objective of this protocol is to characterize potential ores early in the
process. The results are to be carried to the advanced metallurgical testing stage with the clear
identification of potential negative impacts of deleterious elements and complex mineralogy
early in the process.
The components of a quality control program will vary according to commodities, deposit type
and location. Quality control items will increase as a project advances and the financial risks
associated with the project increase. This protocol is governed by three stages that reflect
increasing success from grassroots through to feasibility. Each stage represents the progression
of quality controls and implementation of metallurgical, mineralogical, and rock physical
property measurements (e.g. RQD).
Grassroots Exploration Stage primarily involves drill testing geophysical, geological and/or
surface geochemical targets. These projects may not encounter mineralization. In the absence of
significant mineralization the focus then becomes identification of anomalous metal values and
alteration patterns. For this, geochemical multi-element analysis may be used a less expensive
alternative to assaying. Significant mineralization will automatically be assayed.
Quality control procedures are applied to develop a baseline confidence level with respect to
chemical analyses. Control standards, blanks and replicates are submitted and monitored. The
data is verified as each set of analyses is received. With increased success, grassroots projects
evolve into stages requiring the addition of further quality controls as well as the initiation of
metallurgical and geotechnical data collection.
Discovery Stage Projects represent a transitional stage triggered by the first discovery of
potentially economic mineralization. It is directed towards additional quality controls, as well as
the beginning of the characterization of a potential ore body.
The discovery of potential economic mineralization automatically implies that assay methods are
to be used for all samples within a mineralized interval. Geochemical multi-element analysis can
be used to characterize mineralization for elements other than precious and base metals with the
objective of identifying deleterious components. Geochemical and assay analyses are not to be
mixed in calculating the composite grade.
Replicate samples (pulp and coarse crush) are incorporated in the quality control procedure.
Drill core duplicates are optional. Quality control data are verified upon return of each sample
batch and monitored in a centralized database.
2
Characterization studies for deleterious elements, optical predictive metallurgical

characterization studies, and geotechnical data collection are initiated.
Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage applies to projects that have advanced to
resource delineation and definition. More robust quality control procedures are designed and
implemented for the specific project. Control standards (multiple control samples specific to the
style, type and grade of mineralization) and blanks are submitted with each sample batch.
Quality control data are verified upon receipt. Pulp cross-checks and coarse crush replicates are
submitted, and drill core duplicates remain optional. Crush and pulverization sizes are
optimized.
Chemical analysis must be compared with metallurgical evaluations that may be run on
individual holes, bulk samples composed of combined holes and/or large scale bulk samples.
Analysis of deleterious elements is systematic so results can be incorporated in bulk composites.
At this stage the objective is to characterize the deposit on the basis of geology, chemistry and
metallurgy.
Conclusion
This manual is designed to define a rigorous set of quality assurance and control procedures for
all of East Asia Minerals’ exploration projects. Any additions to the recommended procedures
must be documented and reasons provided for these deviations. Management approval is
required.
In addition, the adaptation of this protocol will provide the basis on which opinions are
developed during the evaluation of projects reviewed by East Asia Minerals.
3
3. Glossary of Terms
Analyses
A.A.S.: Atomic absorption spectroscopy is a single element, solution based technique.

Geological samples must be dissolved prior to A.A.S. analysis. Sample solutions are compared
against the quantity of light adsorbed for calibration solutions at a specific wavelength to
determine elemental concentrations.
Accuracy: The degree to which an analysis, or the mean of a set of analyses, approaches the
true concentration.
Assays: Assays are distinguished from geochemical analysis by being more precise and
designed for higher-grade material. In general, assays are assumed to represent total metal.
Assays are used to quantify metal contents for ore reserve definition. The precision of the
method is dependent on the amount of sample used, the digestion (or fusion) technique used to
dissolve the sample, dilution procedures, spectral interference and optimization of the
instrumentation for specific grade ranges.
Deleterious Elements: Smelters will reduce payments for concentrates if there are elements
present that negatively impact metal recovery or create environmental concern.
Fire Assay: Fire assay is a traditional assay method for precious metals, specifically gold,
silver, platinum and palladium. There are four steps consisting of fusion, cupellation, parting
and weighing of the precious metal bead. A gravimetric finish includes weighing of the precious
metal bead. To achieve lower detection limits and to determine platinum and palladium, the
bead is dissolved and the solution analyzed by A.A.S. The traditional fire assay method
includes collection of the precious metals by lead during the fusion. A nickel sulphide fusion
can be used for collection and determination of the entire suite of platinum group elements but
the procedure generally costs many times more than the standard lead collection procedure.
Geochemical Analyses: Geochemical analyses generally cost less than assays. The laboratory
uses partial digestions and lower sample weights for geochemical analyses than for assays. In
general, geochemical analyses are less precise than assays and have a lower upper detection
limit. Geochemical analyses often provide multi-element data and compromises are made in
order to report a wide range of elements.
I.C.P.-O.E.S.: Inductively coupled plasma - optical emission spectroscopy is most often used as
a multi-element, solution based technique. Quantification is achieved with reference to multi-
element aqueous solutions. Matrix effects can be more significant than for A.A.S.
determinations but mathematical corrections can be applied to correct for interference and
spectral overlap. I.C.P. has a greater dynamic range than A.A.S. meaning that a broader range of
concentrations can be determined without requiring dilutions or calibration changes for higher
concentration samples.
4
I.C.P.-M.S.: Inductively coupled plasma - mass spectrometry is a multi-element, solution based

technique. Mass spectra are measured, as opposed to emission spectra I.C.P.-O.E.S., which are
less complicated so that there is less potential interference. I.C.P.-M.S. is primarily used for the
determination of rare earth elements, low-level elemental concentrations (in the ppb-range) and
some isotopes.
MIBK (or DIBK)-A.A.S.: An analytical procedure used in some regions to determine gold. A
10 to 20 gram sample is digested in aqua regia and the digest solution is extracted. The digest
solution is then shaken with an organic solvent (methyl isobutyl ketone or an alternative) and the
gold is extracted into the organic solvent. The organic solvent is then analyzed for gold using an
instrumental method such as A.A.S. The method is usually restricted to use with geochemical
surface samples and may underestimate gold content.
Precision: Precision is the difference or range of differences between similar estimates or

measurements.
Quality Control
Blanks: A material with negligible metal values that is used to monitor contamination during
sample preparation or analysis.
Certified Reference Materials (CRM): Certified reference materials (CRM) are a special
classification of control samples that are high quality materials. CRMs have been subjected to
rigorous international testing and are seeing wider use in exploration and development programs.
However, they are typically used in routine testing to develop analytical methods and calibrate
equipment.
Coarse Crush Reject: In most circumstances, an entire drill core interval or rock sample is
crushed. The crushed material is referred to as the coarse crush. A sub-sample is usually
removed for pulverizing. Any coarse crush material remaining is referred to as the coarse crush
reject.
Control Samples: Control samples are materials of a known metal concentration, which are
usually fine-grained and homogeneous. Control samples, controls or standard reference
materials (SRM) are used to monitor the accuracy of laboratory results. Control samples can be
prepared from project materials and recommended values are determined from a process of
submitting sub-samples to various laboratories to measure the homogeneity and metal content. (a
round robin). Alternatively, these materials can be purchased. Certified reference materials
(CRM) are a special classification of control samples that are high quality materials that have
been subjected to rigorous international testing (see CRMs).
Drill Core Duplicate: The second half of the drill core may be submitted for preparation and
analysis, and is referred to as a drill core duplicate.
Field Duplicates: A second sample collected at the same time, using the same sampling
protocol as the primary sample, to measure sample representivity. Field duplicates are collected
5
for rock samples, stream sediments, soils and other sample media. A comparable procedure for
drill core programs is submission of the second half of the drill core for analysis.
Primary Laboratory: The primary or principal laboratory where samples are originally
submitted for analysis.
Primary Samples: The first sample collected at any stage of sample collection or sample
preparation is arbitrarily referred to as the primary sample.
Pulp: A finely ground rock sample or fine fraction of a soil or stream sediment that is usually
only a portion of the original sample collected. In most cases analysis is done on the pulp.
Pulp Replicate: A sample pulp may be analyzed a second time to measure analytical precision.
A sub-sample is removed from the original pulp for analysis. Most commercial laboratories
routinely perform pulp replicate determinations and these are also referred to as laboratory
duplicates. Alternatively, the pulp may be submitted to a secondary laboratory for analysis,
which is referred to as a cross-check analysis.
QA (Quality Assurance): Quality assurance has a broad definition outside the mining industry
and has been defined as “All those planned or systematic actions necessary to provide adequate
confidence that a product or service will satisfy given needs”.
QC (Quality Control): Quality control is one aspect of quality assurance. The difference
between the two concepts is described as; “Assurance in the quality context is the relief of
concern about the quality of a product. Sampling plans and audits, the quality control devices,
are designed to supply part of this assurance”.
Reject Replicate: A second split of the reject may be submitted for pulverization and analysis,
which is referred to as a reject replicate. The same preparation and analytical procedures are
performed on the reject replicate as the primary sample.
Secondary Laboratory: A laboratory selected for analysis of a selection of sample pulps in

order to check the accuracy or bias of the primary laboratory’s results.
Other Terms
Geotechnical Data: Rock property data and physical property measurements such as rock
quality description (RQD), fracture frequency, hardness (mineralization, gangue and host rock), and
alteration on fracture surfaces. As well these data may include analyses of the acid generating
capability of waste rock, self-heating analyses (oxidation rates) of any sulphides present, magnetic
susceptibility and radioactivity among others.
Predictive Metallurgical Analyses: Predictive metallurgical analyses allow for an early stage
characterization of the metallurgy of significant mineralization with the objective of an early
stage characterization of a potential ore body. Predictive metallurgy evolves into more advanced
bulk and bench scale testing. Both stages rely on good sampling techniques, abundant sample
6
availability and importantly a uniform drill density and spacing that is representative of the
variable nature of most deposits. Samples are subjected to optical, chemical, microprobe and,
with increased sample availability, bench testing. Optical analyses investigate the mineralogical
features (minerals present, oxides vs. sulphides, etc.) and textures (grain size, grain to grain
relationships, intergrowths, etc.) including the nature of the gangue (hardness, etc.) and host rock
(dilution). Chemical analyses determine the presence of potentially deleterious elements. In
combination with the optical investigations, the microprobe analyses determine the distribution
of these elements in the minerals present and will give a good indication of where, if at all, the
deleterious elements will report. Bench testing subjects a larger quantity of material to the
milling and recovery process.
7
4. Preparation and Analytical Procedures
Commercial laboratories offer a wide range of preparation and analytical methods. Cost and
availability of services, and characteristics of the sample will determine the optimum methods
for a project. Each sample submission must be accompanied by a request for analysis that
specifies the specific analytical procedure, preparation, handling of pulp and crush rejects, and a
request for all lab control standards and replicates associated with the sample batch.
4.1 Laboratory Selection
A laboratory is selected based on logistics, price, quality, and availability of services. A

laboratory visit is recommended, where possible, to assess the laboratory’s facilities
Some items to record when conducting a laboratory visit include (Smee, 1999):
1. Building Description.
2. Sample Receiving and Sorting: Workspace and work order entry system.
3. Sample Preparation: Workspace, cleanliness, drying facilities, equipment list and condition,
dust control, reject storage, cleaning procedures, and preparation quality control procedures.
4. Fire Assay Facilities: Workspace, equipment list and condition, flux preparation, ventilation
and safety, quality control procedures.
5. Sample Digestion/Fusion Preparation: Workspace, cleanliness, distilled water source, fume
hood extraction, range of procedures.
6. Instrument Facilities: Equipment list, calibration standards and procedures.
7. Weighing Room: Workspace, equipment list, and maintenance.
8. Warehouse and Storage: Pulp and reject storage, organization.
9. Quality Control Methods: Description of in-house controls, frequency-of-use, pulp
replicates, blanks, quality control management, quality control charts.
10. Reporting: Computer assisted data management (LIMS: laboratory information management
systems), fax or email capabilities, reporting format, billing procedures.
11. Personnel: Number of employees, educational background, number of shifts.
A laboratory visit may also include submission of a series of control standards to test the
laboratory’s performance.
4.2 Laboratory Communication
It is preferable to negotiate a contract with a commercial laboratory that clearly defines the
services required, reporting formats, quality control parameters, pricing, turnaround time and
turnaround time penalties.
Laboratories can be asked to report:
1. Analyses of the second quartz chip sample (i.e. cleaner) to be passed through the preparation
equipment prior to each batch of samples being prepared.
8
2. Results of prepared and analyzed samples from a second split of the coarse crush.
3. Laboratory or pulp replicate results.
4. Blank and control standard results.
5. Results of coarse crush particle size analysis performed by the laboratory to monitor sample
preparation quality.
6. Results of participation in round robins.
4.3 Sample Preparation
4.3.1 Crushing
Samples are generally crushed to achieve at least 95% passing a –10 mesh (less than 2 mm)
screen. A riffle splitter or rotary splitter is used to select a sub-sample for pulverizing. The
amount of sample to be pulverized must be specified. Variations of crush size made be required
on a project basis.
4.3.2 Pulverizing
Crushed material is recommended to be pulverized to achieve at least 90% passing a -200 mesh
(75 microns) screen for typical samples.
Pulverizing may have to be customized for particular types of mineralization. Optimal particle
size, for a particular style of mineralization, is determined by conducting studies of multiple
splits of the coarse crush reject. Both the size of the sub-sample and the grinding time can be
varied. The sample size and grind characteristics impact on equipment selection. The coarse
crush replicates are used to determine whether appropriate sub-sample size and particle size have
been achieved. In the event of excess variation these parameters must be changed.
The laboratory’s procedures to clean pulverizer bowls between samples must be investigated.
The use of silica sand cleaners after each sample is recommended to be specified in cases where
samples are high in sulphides or clay content, to avoid sample cross-contamination.
4.4 Selecting Analytical Method - Geochemical or Assay
The request for analysis should include the method code or quotation number that will identify a
specific analytical procedure. Analytical methods are selected to achieve acceptable precision
for the anticipated grade range. Cost savings may be achieved by using multi-element
techniques, however detection limits need to be carefully selected in order not to miss trace
concentrations that may be key to further exploration targeting.
In general, assay determinations provide more precise data than geochemical determinations for
sub-economic or economic ore grades. There is a continuum of procedures available that may
not be clearly identified as being specifically assay or geochemical determinations.
9
It is recommended that laboratories be asked to specify potentially interfering elements, elements

that are volatilized (i.e. lost) during digestion or fusion, and minerals that might not be dissolved
by the procedure.
Specialized procedures may be required to characterize ore-grade samples, such as acid soluble
techniques that preferentially dissolve copper present as oxides. The precision of these
techniques is not typically the same quality of total metal assays but is used to assess ore
resources and reserves.
Some of the technical issues to consider when selecting an analytical method are summarized in
the following table.
Selecting an Analytical Method
Analytical Procedure Geochemical Analysis Assays

Sample Weight 0.2 – 0.5 g 0.25 – 1.0 g
Sample Dissolution Selective extractions HCl+ HNO3+ HClO4± HF
Aqua regia digestion Alkaline fusion
Elements Compromises used to achieve Optimized for single elements
maximum number of reported
elements
Dilutions Usually imprecise and Precise and performed in
performed in test tubes volumetric flasks
Upper Limit of Detection Precision is poor at upper limits No upper limit of detection
of detection
Detection Limit Generally less than 1 ppm or Usually 0.01% for base metals
0.01% for major elements
Instrumentation A.A.S., I.C.P.-O.E.S., I.C.P.- A.A.S., I.C.P.-O.E.S., XRF, fire
M.S., neutron activation assay
Specialized Methods Includes analysis of water, Colorimetry and gravimetric
biogeochemical samples, gases, techniques may be used for high
MMI, Enzyme Leach, etc. grade samples or concentrates
4.5 Analysis for Deleterious or Secondary Pay Elements
Secondary elements present within a mineral deposit may present problems in the recovery of
minerals during the metallurgical process (deleterious elements). These may also impact the
treatment of the tailings. Additionally, secondary elements may be present in sufficient
quantities to positively impact the deposit economics (secondary pay elements). In both cases
the presence of these elements may have a significant impact and must be researched early in the
exploration process.
These elements may be present in the bulk rock sample in very low relative concentrations,
sometimes below the detection limits of many analytical techniques. Under certain metallurgical
conditions these elements are concentrated between six and ten times their bulk concentration.
10
For example, if selenium was solely present in the mineral sphalerite and its bulk concentration
in the core sample was 0.02%, it could be concentrated up to six times in the sphalerite
concentrate where its concentration would be 0.12%. This would represent significant added
costs through recovery problems and treatment charges.
The elements listed below are an example of the deleterious tolerance limits in a generic
sphalerite (zinc) concentrate. The concentrations indicated are simply guidelines because
different zinc plants have different tolerances for specific. Similarly, plants processing copper
concentrates may have other tolerances.
The purpose of this list is moreover to be used to identify potentially deleterious elements in
ores. Once identified, a program is formalized to determine if those elements will be present in
concentrates at levels that cause difficulty. The final assessment of a potential problem must be
made through discussions with metallurgists.
The concentrations quoted in the table below are for concentrates. It is necessary to approximate
the corresponding concentrations in rock samples.
Table of Deleterious Elements
Element Symbol Concentration in

Sphalerite (Zinc)
Concentrates (%)
Arsenic As <0.30
Antimony Sb <0.20
Cadmium Cd <0.60
Calcium Ca <1.0
Carbon C <0.30
Chlorine Cl <0.10
Chromium Cr <0.10
Cobalt Co <0.030
Copper Cu <2.0
Fluorine F <0.30
Indium In <0.050
Iron Fe <14.0
Germanium* Ge <0.030
Lead Pb <3.0
Magnesium Mg <2.0
Manganese Mn <1.0
Mercury Hg <0.040
Molybdenum Mo <0.060
Nickel Ni <0.0080
Selenium Se <0.04
Silicon Si <2.0
Sulphur S 28 - 36
11
Tellerium Te <0.005
Thallium Tl <0.0050
Tin Sn <0.50
Uranium U not available
Vanadium V <0.010
*Germanium is an example of a secondary pay element where additional credit may be payable
by the smelter if included when contracts are negotiated.
There is a wide variation in the possibilities for the occurrence of deleterious or potential
secondary pay elements in the minerals being processed to a final product. These elements may
in fact be present only in waste minerals and would therefore report to the tails. As such the
presence of a deleterious element in the bulk chemical analyses may have no effect on the
recovery of a desired element. It is however important to know what is reporting to the tails for
treatment and environmental reasons. Optical mineralogical and microprobe analyses will
determine in what minerals potentially deleterious or secondary pay elements occur.
4.6 Documentation
A brief description of the method used is included in a project report and a detailed description
included in appendices. Where possible, methods should be specified using the method codes.
Most laboratories will supply detailed method descriptions if requested or they may be available
from some laboratories’ web sites. Documentation will be specific to each project.
It may be necessary to change procedures during the course of a drilling program. The reasons
for these changes and which samples are affected must be documented.
12
5. Quality Control at the Sampling Stage
Quality control starts at the planning stages of a drill program. The project geologist must
acquire suitable materials to be used as blanks and control standards prior to the commencement
of drilling. A procedure must be in place for the submission of these materials with samples to
the laboratory.
This section describes the use of blanks and control standards. Additional quality control
procedures including cross-check analyses on pulps, analysis of coarse crush reject replicates,
and the use of drill core duplicates is described in Section 12. The procedures described in this
section assume that split drill core is shipped off-site for both sample preparation and analysis.
5.1 Blanks
5.1.1 Preparation of Blanks
Blank material is submitted with samples to the laboratory to monitor contamination caused when
crushing or pulverizing equipment is not cleaned properly after mineralized samples are processed,
or due to dust. It is also possible to identify sample mix-ups and other sources of contamination.
Suitable material consists of an unmineralized rock type (barren drill core). The rock type is
preferably relatively hard so that the preparation equipment is thoroughly scoured.
Laboratories are also expected to analyze barren quartz chips or silica sand that is used to clean
sample preparation equipment. Laboratories will routinely include analytical blanks in sample
batches. The blanks described in this section are submitted without the knowledge of the laboratory
and are designed to monitor contamination throughout both sample preparation and analysis.
Materials Required
Unmineralized quartzite or sandstone (for example)

20-litre pails
Procedure
1. A geologist locates a source of suitable material.
2. Determine how much material to collect by (a) dividing the total of number of samples by
the frequency of blank insertion to determine the total number of blanks for the program and
(b) multiplying by 2 kg (the approximate weight of material submitted).
3. Store the blank material in pails so that it is ready for routine core sampling.
4. Record a description of the material and its origin.
13
5. Submit five 200-500 gm sub-samples of the blank material to the primary laboratory to
confirm low metal values.
6. Blank material is not processed in advance of its insertion into sample batches. Individual
pieces of rock should be no larger than 10 centimetres by 10 centimetres so that they are
small enough to pass the hopper of the crusher.
5.1.2 Insertion of Blanks
A blank sample is inserted routinely into sample batches. When the sample is analyzed, the
reported analytical values should be near the detection limit of the method. If the reported values
are higher than expected, contamination of the samples during crushing, pulverizing or analysis
may have occurred.
Sample preparation procedures would then be reviewed to isolate the cause of contamination and
corrective action would be taken.
Materials Required
Sample bags
Sample tags
Blank material
Procedure
1. As example, samples are assigned sample numbers ending in “15", “50” and “85", or
three sample numbers are chosen at random from each series of 100 sample numbers.
The insertion of blanks randomly is a more robust test of the laboratory.
2. Prior to moving samples to a sample preparation facility, coarse blank samples are added
as follows:
a) label a plastic sample bag with the sample tag ending in the number “15", “50” or
“85", or the pre-selected random number.
b) insert the sample tag in the sample bag.
c) add an amount of coarse blank material to the bag that is similar to that submitted
for samples.
3. Sort all samples into consecutive numerical order. Submit the blank sample to the
sample preparation facility with the samples.
Note: Plastic bags can be filled with blank material in advance, then labeled and the sample tag
added when preparing samples for shipment. Where possible, barren drill core is submitted so
that the laboratory cannot recognize the blank material.
5.2 Control Standards
14
5.2.1 Purchase or Preparation of Control Standards
In different circumstances it may be appropriate to purchase control standards or prepare control

standards from materials on the property.
Purchased Control Standards
Purchased control standards fall into two main categories: a) certified reference materials
(CRM) and b) control samples. Certified reference materials are available for a wide range of
elements and different matrices. The “1994 Compilation of Working Values and Sample
Descriptions for 383 Geostandards” (Geostandards Newsletter, Vol. 18, July 1994) includes a
listing of many of the materials which are mostly available from the geological surveys of
different countries. Canadian CANMET standards are an example of available CRMs. CRMs
are meant to be used for the development of analytical methods and calibration of laboratory
equipment, and are generally too expensive to use on a routine basis for the quality control
programs of an exploration campaign, which assay thousands of samples.
A variety of reference materials are also available, with most suppliers based in Australia. One
such supplier, Geostats, has an extensive number of gold and base metals standards, which are
significant less costly than CRMs.
Control samples (reference material) have not been treated to the same rigorous international
analytical round robins as the CRMs. However, the Geostats reference materials have been
analyzed at significant number of different laboratories and recommended values are determined
using statistical procedures in accordance with ISO9000 guidelines. Other suppliers offer similar
materials thus broadening the availability of materials with appropriate metal concentrations and
matrices.
Assuming that samples are being submitted for gold assay, it is necessary to include a minimum
of 75 grams of reference material. For example, if one sample in 50 is a control standard, one
kilogram of reference material will be used with the submission of approximately 650 samples.
If samples are being submitted for only base metal analysis, it is necessary to submit only 5
grams of the reference material. Thus one kilogram of reference material could be used for the
submission of almost 10,000 samples. This translates into a cost of a few cents per sample if
reference materials are purchased.
It is important to carefully review the care and storage instructions for purchased control
standards. In some cases, control standards must be stored under nitrogen or may have a
specified shelf life.
Early stage discoveries will undoubtedly have to rely on purchased control standards, as there is
likely to be insufficient material to prepare control standards from project material.
The Advantage of Control Standards Prepared from Project Materials
15
The principal drawback for the use of purchased control standards is that the mineralogy of the
reference material may not match that of the samples. It is preferable in many circumstances to
prepare control standards from locally available materials. This is particularly important for gold
projects where the flux used for the fire assay may have to be adjusted according to
concentration of sulphides, oxides, carbon, etc. Similarly, for copper-oxide, nickel-laterite and
other projects, where a variety of specialized digestions are used to predict metal recovery, it is
important to monitor the effectiveness of the digestions based on reference materials built from
sub-economic and economic ores.
A series of control standards at different grade ranges is required and possibly materials with
different characteristics. Where necessary, control standards are recommended to be prepared
that are representative of different ore types. As example, East Asia Minerals considers both
oxide and sulphide mineralization. Ore types should not be mixed when selecting materials for
control standards. It may be possible to use control standards prepared for other projects in the
same region.
A total of 3 to 5 control standards are recommended. These control standards can usually be
developed from drill core, outcrop or other sources. They must be carefully prepared, well
homogenized, split and then submitted to 5 to 6 laboratories to determine the range of acceptable
values.
Samples rich in sulphides require special handling. The oxidation of these materials may alter
the analytical results, particularly using hydrochloric and nitric acids for the determination of
base metals. It is preferable to store these materials in vacuum-sealed bags in a nitrogen
environment to maintain the stability of the sulphides. Control standards developed for a
specific project must be strictly monitored with respect to a reasonable shelf life and/or the
effects of oxidation or degradation over time.
Limitations of Using Control Standards Prepared from Project Materials
Once the material for the control standards is received at a laboratory it is likely to take 4 to 6
weeks to complete the preparation and analytical stages. An approximate cost to prepare 5
kilograms of control standard is in the order of $2500 to $3500 depending on the number of
variables being determined. Most of the costs are related to submission of the material for
determination of acceptable values and measurement of homogeneity. This becomes a
significant expense and the time delay is not always manageable.
It can be particularly difficult to prepare a homogeneous control standard with respect to gold or
other metals that are distributed as nuggets or discrete grains. The insertion of control standards
where metal concentrations cannot be anticipated reduces the effectiveness of a quality control
program. It may be preferable to use purchased control standards in such cases.
Since it is expensive to prepare control standards, a relatively few number of different materials
are generated. Unfortunately, some laboratories will learn to anticipate the location and grade of
the control standards and perhaps submit only acceptable results. In order to monitor a
16
laboratory effectively, it is advantageous to occasionally submit commercial control standards

that are available in a wide range of concentrations.
5.2.2 Insertion of Control Standards
Summary
This procedure deals with the insertion of control standards or purchased reference materials to
monitor laboratory performance.
Materials Required
Fully prepared (crushed, pulverized, homogeneous and certified) control standards

Small sample bags (approximately 10 x 16 cm)
Sample log (see Note below)
Procedure
1. Regularly spaced sample numbers are used for control standards. The number of control
standards should reflect the size of the analytical batch used by the laboratory, which may be
in the order of 20 samples for gold fire assay and 40 samples for routine geochemical
analysis. For some projects, it may be preferable to randomly insert control standards. This
requires detailed record keeping and careful organization.
2. Bags labeled with these numbers are filled with 5 grams of one of the control standards and
the sample tag is inserted in the bag. Approximately 75 grams is suitable to be submitted if
gold fire assays are requested. Care must be taken to ensure that control standards are not
contaminated when handled and, if necessary, packets of the control standards should be
prepared by suppliers or in a laboratory environment.
3. Record which control standard was put in each bag in the sample log or sample cards.
4. Control standards are inserted in numerical order with the samples prior to shipping. Ensure
that the laboratory analyses the samples in numerical order. In some situations control
standards may be inserted after samples have been pulverized but East Asia Minerals
personnel should supervise insertion of control standards and descriptions of the procedures
included quality control reports.
5. The control standards are used on a rotational basis, i.e. the same control standard is not
inserted consecutively.
5.3 Sample Log
The internal sample log records a minimum of the following information:
• the sample number,
17
• drill hole number,

• meterage/footage,
• sample shipment number or batch number,
• the date samples were shipped,
• the date results were reported and/or laboratory certificate number,
• sample numbers assigned for blanks,
• sample numbers assigned for control standards and which control standard was inserted,
• sample numbers assigned for drill core duplicates, if used.
The following is an example of a sample log.
Example of a Sample Log
Sample Hole-ID From To Shipment Shipped Date

Number Rec’d/
Cert #
1001 DH-06 100 101 33BH Oct.3 Oct.12
A990343
1002 DH-06 101 103.4
1003 DH-06 103.4 104.87
1004 DH-06 104.87 105.5
1005 DH-06 105.5 107
1006 DH-06 BLANK
1007 DH-06 107 108
1008 DH-06 108 110
1009 DH-06 110 111
1010 DH-06 113 113.5
1011 DH-06 113.5 114
1012 DH-06 114 115.23
1013 DH-06 115.23 115.9
1014 DH-06 115.9 116.8
1015 DH-06 Control STD05
BM&S
1016 DH-06 116.8 117.33
1017 DH-06 117.33 118.75
18
6. Staged Exploration Procedures
The staged exploration, discovery, and advanced exploration and evaluation process is governed
by an evolution reflecting increased success, sample availability, and capital risk. While the
Grassroots Stage encompasses accepted baseline QA/QC practices, the Discovery and Advanced
Exploration and Evaluation Stages reflect the addition of complimentary QA/QC procedures,
metallurgical testing and analysis for deleterious (and pay) elements.
6.1 Grassroots Stage Projects
Grassroots Stage projects typically involve drill testing geophysical, geological and/or surface
geochemical targets. These projects may not encounter mineralization. In the absence of
significant mineralization the focus then becomes identification of anomalous metal values and
alteration patterns.
Generally, geochemical multi-element ICP analysis is acceptable for Grassroots Stage projects to
evaluate the metal content of zones of interest. The analytical technique may vary on a project
basis. Potential economically significant intersections will automatically move the project to
more mature stages.
One control standard and one blank sample are submitted with each sample batch with a
minimum of one each per every 30 samples. Coarse reject replicates and drill core duplicates are
optional. Cross-check analysis of pulps at a secondary laboratory is recommended (and
conducted by East Asia Minerals) for 5% of mineralized samples. Quality control results are
verified upon receipt of analysis and the lab contacted immediately upon any quality failure.
Under the Grassroots Stage and specific to ICP analyses and geochemical analysis for gold, the
following guidelines are recommended.
• Samples with reported base metal results greater than 10,000 ppm and silver values greater
than 10 ppm are automatically assayed.
• Samples analyzed for gold using a geochemical analysis (MIBK-A.A.S. or fire assay with an
instrumental finish) that report gold values greater than 1000 ppb are automatically fire
assayed using a gravimetric finish.
• Intervals selected for assay, based on the above criteria, shall include lower grade samples on
each end of the interval so that the “cut-off” grade for the mineralized interval is determined
using the same analytical method.
6.2 Discovery Stage Projects
Discovery Stage projects represent a transitional phase that is initiated by the discovery of
potentially economic mineralization. It is directed towards additional quality controls, as well as
the beginning of the characterization of a potential ore body. At this stage there is usually
limited sample availability.
19
The discovery of potential economic mineralization automatically implies that assay methods are
to be used for all samples within a mineralized interval. It is very important not to combine
geochemical analyses for low grade or barren samples with assays when calculating the grade
and width of mineralized intervals.
minimum of one each per every 30 samples.
Samples are selected for coarse crush (reject) replicates to represent the range of grade and
texture. At least 5% of the mineralized interval(s) samples are re-submitted to the primary lab.
Drill core duplicates are optional.
Cross-check analyses of pulps at a secondary laboratory are recommended (and conducted by

East Asia Minerals) for 5% of mineralized samples.
Quality control results are verified immediately upon receipt of analyses and the laboratory is
contacted immediately upon failure at any point.
Geochemical multi-element analysis can be used for initial characterization of the chemistry of
the mineralization for elements other than base and precious metals with the objective of
identifying deleterious elements. Alternative analytical methods, sometimes with lower
detection limits or use of strong acid digestions may be required to determine the absolute
concentration of deleterious elements and must be employed early in the process.
Under Discovery Stage projects the following guidelines are recommended.
• Complete multi-element (deleterious) chemical characterization analyses on individual

representative samples. If practical, characterize all samples that comprise composite.
• As an indication of a potential resource develops, initiate optical predictive metallurgical
characterization and compare results with chemical analyses.
• Microprobe work can compliment this type of study by locating host minerals of deleterious
elements.
• Begin collection of geotechnical data.
6.3 Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage Projects
This stage applies to projects that have advanced to resource delineation and definition.
Chemical analyses lead to and compliment metallurgical evaluations that may be run on
individual holes, bulk samples composed of combined holes, and/or large-scale bulk samples.
The objective is to characterize the deposit chemically and metallurgically to have a confident
and comprehensive understanding of the deposit prior to capital expenditures. The approach
must reflect the fact that mineral deposits are not generally homogeneous and that advanced
economic models need to reflect variances in metallurgy.
20
minimum of one each per every 30 samples. It is required that the laboratory be consulted for
the size of the analytical batch.
Samples are selected for coarse crush (reject) replicates to represent the range of grade and
texture. At least 5% of all samples are re-submitted. Drill core duplicates are optional.
Cross-check analyses of pulps at a secondary laboratory are recommended (and conducted by

East Asia Minerals) for 5% of all samples.
Samples are analyzed for deleterious elements until the deposit is reasonably characterized.
Metallurgical analyses will provide a further check on analytical results and deleterious
elemental concentrations.
Under Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage Projects the following guidelines are
recommended.
• Assays to be used for all samples.

• The selection of deleterious elements may vary for different parts of an ore body and the
analytical requests must reflect a detailed investigation to document these variations.
• Specified sample preparation protocols must be adhered to. Samples required for
metallurgical testing may require different sample preparation procedures.
• Initiate systematic predictive metallurgy prior to advanced metallurgical analyses and
compare results with chemistry. Microprobe work may compliment this type of study by
locating host minerals of deleterious elements.
• Assays of metallurgical re-samples (either assays of reject or re-sampling of drill core) are
compared immediately with initial results. Deleterious results from the metallurgical flow
test are compared with geochemical data of the original samples.
• Initiate a statistical review of the spatial (hole to hole) variance of the assay data.
21
7. Procedures at the Drill and Drill Core Sampling
7.1 Communication with the Drill Company and Drill Crew
Success in collecting core samples requires good communication with the drill company and
crew. East Asia Minerals’ core sampling protocol is designed to collect quality core samples.
This protocol is discussed with the drill companies prior to awarding a contract.
Geologists on site must communicate with and monitor the drill crew to ensure attention to
acceptable practices is maintained at all times. This relates not only to the drilling and sampling,
but also to health, safety and environmental issues. Prior to a drill program, materials that may
interfere or contaminate the core must be identified and not used in the program.
7.2 Security
Core must be secured from outside inspection and interference, or accidental internal
interference. The chain of custody must be strictly maintained during transportation, sample
collection, shipping and preparation to avoid tampering or inappropriate release of privileged
information. Assay results must be kept confidential and only released to those on a need to
know basis. Public release of results will only be conducted through a news release approved by
East Asia Minerals’ board of directors. All project staff must be made aware of the need to
maintain the confidentiality of assay and drill results.
7.3 Procedures at the Drill
• Core boxes are labeled, and arrows drawn so that the core is systematically laid in the box.
• The core box is placed away from any source of contamination.
• A wooden or plastic marker is placed in the core box after each run. The meterage/footage is
written on the marker.
• Transfer of the core from the core barrel to the box should be done as carefully as possible.
No core is allowed to fall onto the ground. Core is directly placed in the core box and a
plastic mallet is used to loosen core in the core tube. Breakage of core will produce
inaccurate geotechnical measurements.
• Photographs of the core at the drill site will be beneficial for geotechnical analyses. Often
transportation may result in degradation of the core.
• Document intervals of ground core and immediately address inaccuracies in depth labeling in
the core boxes. A rod count must be conducted immediately to accurately measure the depth
of the hole (this is at the drill company’s cost if poor attention to labeling is apparent).
• Rod counts should be done at each bit change as a matter of course.
• As soon as a core box is full, a lid is properly secured so that no accidents occur.
• Poor quality or broken core boxes must be discarded.
22
7.4 Transportation
Sample collection and transportation procedures vary considerably between projects.

Differences are commonly related to access, climate, local infrastructure and region. Sample
collection and transportation procedures must be documented and made available to the
appropriate field staff. These procedures are recommended where applicable:
• Transportation of core from the drill site to the logging facility must be conducted in a
manner to minimize or eliminate shifting of material in the core boxes.
• Transportation and storage of cut or split core must ensure that the remaining core does not
shift excessively and that marked sample intervals remain intact.
• Appropriate measures must be taken to eliminate the possibility of sample tampering through
proper chain of custody management.
7.5 Core Sampling
The project geologist is responsible for the handling of drill core at the core logging and
sampling facility, as well as the sampling process. Accurate sample selection, collection and
documentation are the responsibility of the geologist.
The health, safety and environmental aspects of core splitting and cutting must be enforced. This
includes protection for the eyes, ears and hands, and where appropriate, additional protection
such as washable or throwaway overalls may be required. Cuttings that are high in sulphides,
and/or cutting oils must be disposed of properly.
• Upon arrival, ensure core boxes are intact. Document all problems.
• Organize and open boxes with care.
• Measure depth intervals in each box and document any lost core or depth inaccuracies.
Immediately report depth inaccuracies to the drill foreman and initiate a rod count.
• Tag boxes with metal (or other durable) tags listing hole name and the interval.
• Wash core where possible. Care should be taken with friable core or poorly bound
mineralization (fractures, etc.).
• Geotechnical analyses for Discovery and Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage
projects must be conducted before samples are selected. Photographs may be necessary.
Physical property measurements can be conducted at the same time (i.e. magnetic
susceptibility, conductivity).
• Align core to be sampled by matching broken pieces.
• The Project Geologist is responsible for selecting material and intervals to be sampled.
• Intervals are selected on the basis of mineralogy (e.g. oxide vs. hypogene, pyrite vs.
pyrrhotite) and significant grade variations, textures (grain size, banded vs. massive,
disseminated, stringer, folded intervals) and concentrations of specific minor minerals.
Sample intervals must never cross geological boundaries and significant grade variations.
• Intervals should not exceed 2 meters for porphyry deposits in mineralized zones and 1 meter
for massive sulphide deposits. Smaller intervals are often required for gold.
23
• Intervals should be marked with a grease pencil on the core, and a metal tag or other
permanent tag fixed to the core box in case the pencil mark is lost in cutting/splitting.
• The geologist marks the core within each interval with a line down the middle of the core to
guide cutting/splitting. In addition arrows pointing down core often help to ensure that the
core is replaced in the box in the correct orientation. This line must be selected to reflect the
best equal distribution of grade, mineralogy and texture in both halves of the core.
• A diamond saw should be used unless washing action, inherent in the sawing process, could
degrade friable or highly fractured samples.
• After cutting, both halves are washed and placed back in the core box and again aligned.
Care must be taken with this according to the nature of the core and mineralization.
• Dry the core to avoid oxidation of sulphides.
• Prior to collecting half core samples, the geologist reviews the sample intervals with the
sampler. It is recommended that the same half of the core be systematically taken unless the
best equal distribution of grade, mineralogy and texture cannot be made.
• Sample numbers to be used for quality control standards are not used for drill core samples.
• The sampler labels plastic bags with the appropriate sample numbers, saws the core along the
marked line and places the drill core for the appropriate intervals in the sample bags. Every
effort is made to select a representative sample of drill core having poor consistency.
• The designated geologist, sampler or quality control manager prepares the quality control
standards to be included with the sample shipment and completes the sample log.
Conclusion
Exceptions to the above recommended procedures may apply to specific projects. The
recommended procedures can be customized within the context of this document. Changes to
the recommended procedures must be documented and reasons provided for these deviations.
Senior management approval is required.
24
7.6 Sampling Procedure Flow Charts
Section 4
Selection of Preparation
&
Analytical Procedures
Section 7.5
Sample Drill Core
Section 5.1.2
Prepare Blank Insert Blanks
Section 5.1.1 Grassroot = 1:30 or batch

Discovery = 1:30 or batch
Section 5.2.2 Advanced = 1:30 or batch
Any mineralized zone = 1:20 or batch
Prepare Standard Insert Standards
Section 5.2.1
Section 12.1
Drill Core Duplicates
Section 8
Request
Submit to lab repeat
analysis
Sections 9/10
Compare results for
Failure
blanks & standards
Section 11
Accept QA
Additional Quality Control Procedures
25
Section 12
Additional Quality Control Procedures
Section 12.2.1
Retrieve pulps from lab, insert Grassroot = 5% of mineralized samples

standards and submit to secondary Discovery = 5% of mineralized samples
lab for cross-checks Advanced = 5% of all samples
Section 12.2.2
Compare results from two

laboratories to monitor accuracy
Section 12.3.1
Retrieve coarse crush rejects Grassroot = N/A

from lab, re-number and Discovery = 5% of mineralized samples
re-submit to primary lab Advanced = 5% of all samples
Section 12.3.2
Compare results to
monitor sample homogeneity
26
8. Submission of Samples to Primary Laboratory
Summary
All of the work carried out collecting and preparing the sample will be wasted if the samples are
lost in transit. Therefore, it is worthwhile taking special precautions to ensure that they reach
their destination.
Depending on project specifics, strict protocol with respect to chain of custody may be required
for transportation of samples. In some areas samples may need to be transported only in the
custody of an East Asia Minerals employee who never leaves the samples unattended. If the
sample preparation facility and analytical laboratories are at different sites, the packaging and
transportation procedures of samples must be approved. The security of storage facilities, both
on-site and at the laboratory must be critically reviewed.
It is also critical that the laboratory performs the same preparation and analytical procedures for the
entire duration of the project. Instructions for the retention or disposal of pulps and rejects must be
included with each sample batch or included in a laboratory contract.
Materials Required
Analytical Requisition Form

Sample log
Re-sealable sample pails, boxes or sacs
Procedure
1. Insert control standards and blanks per appropriate ratio, or per batch.
2. Pack samples tightly into pails, boxes or sacs in numerical order. The containers are numbered
according to the order that they were used.
3. Complete the Analytical Requisition Form to indicate which samples are included in the
shipment, when samples were shipped, the total number of samples in the shipment, and the
analytical procedures. The laboratory should be advised when samples with high sulphide
content or other special characteristics are in the shipment.
4. Enclose a copy of the Analytical Requisition Form in the first container. A second copy of the
form is retained in the files. This form may be submitted in person with the samples where high
security is an issue.
5. Fax a copy of the Analytical Requisition Form to the laboratory where possible.
27
9. Data Entry and Database Management
Sample locations and the insertion of quality control standards are recorded at the drill core
handling site but must be transferred to a digital format following these guidelines:
• Data is entered or imported (digital) in a timely fashion. All digital data is to be followed by
a hard copy that is verified and filed.
• All database records are backed-up regularly.
• Data entry is validated using software validation routines where available/practical, and also
by manual comparison with the original documentation.
• Results for quality control standards must be verified prior to accepting data in the database.
28
10. Review of Preliminary Quality Control Data
Summary
Results for control standards and blanks must be assessed as received. Data must not be
transferred to a database until the results are verified. If the results for control standards and
blanks are not deemed acceptable, immediate corrective action is required.
Discussion of the use of pulp replicates and coarse reject duplicates is continued in Section 12.
Control Charts
There are different methods to assess control data. A common method is the use of control
charts to plot the results for the blank and each control standard (as follows).
Control Sample
3500
3000
2500
N = 16
Expected Cu = 14670 ± 300 ppm
Cu as Difference from the Expected
2000
1500
1000
500
-500
2 Standard Deviations
-1000
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
Certificate Number
The results for the blank and each control standard are extracted from the laboratory data
manually or electronically. The results are sorted according to control standard.
The graph is constructed by plotting:
a) the sample number, batch number or laboratory certificate number on the x-axis.
b) the analytical value or the difference of the value from the expected value on the y-axis.
c) the expected value.
d) the acceptable range of expected values.
e) the total number of determinations of the control standard or blank.
29
The data points should fall within the acceptable range of expected values. If data points fall
outside these limits, it is first verified that the control standard or blank was recorded properly.
If a laboratory error is suspected, repeat analyses are requested (Section 11).
For multi-element analyses, it may not be necessary to monitor each element. Several elements
of particular economic or exploration significance can be selected.
Laboratories should report results for their internal control standards, analytical blanks and
laboratory replicate analyses. This information is used to assess analytical precision and
laboratory performance. However, it is preferable to base an evaluation of the laboratory’s
performance on the basis of hidden or blind quality control standards.
30
11. Quality Control Failure: Request for Repeat Analyses
If the results for blanks or control standards are outside acceptable limits it is necessary to
determine the appropriate action. The following items should be checked prior to contacting the
laboratory (this list is a guide-line only, and not exhaustive):
• If the values for blanks are unacceptably high, determine if the previous samples are high
grade as this may explain sample carry-over in preparation or analysis. Further discussion
with the laboratory is required to isolate the cause.
• If all the values for a control standard are outside the acceptable limits check that the control
standard was recorded correctly.
• To determine if a sample mix-up is likely, review the data for several samples before and
after the questionable quality control sample to see if any results are similar to the expected
values. If a sample mix-up is identified, request re-analysis of the suspect samples.
• If the value for a control standard is nominally outside the acceptable limits and all other
quality control data for the sample batch are acceptable, no further action is necessary.
• If the values for several quality control standards are similarly biased high or low, even
though close to acceptable values, repeat analyses are requested for all the samples (and
control standards) bracketed by the questionable control standard results.
If it is determined that there is no immediate explanation for unacceptable quality control results,
the following guidelines apply:
• If a sample mix-up is suspected or there is no explanation for unacceptable quality control

results, request re-analysis of sample pulps that incorporate the suspect quality control
sample(s). Repeat analyses should be requested for approximately 10 samples before and 10
samples after the suspect quality control sample(s). It is preferable to request return of the
pulps for the samples that are subsequently re-numbered and submitted with different quality
control samples.
• If sample contamination is suspected based on poor results for the blank, request that a new
pulp is prepared from the reject and re-analyzed. Sample cross-contamination is more likely
at the pulverization stage than the crushing stage of sample preparation, but is also possible
during analysis.
• When re-analyses are reported, compare these values against the original results. If results
are similar no further action is required and it is acceptable to retain the original results in the
database. The repeat analyses should be retained in a separate table.
• If repeat values are different than the original results, the laboratory must provide an
explanation and state changes to their internal procedures that will prevent another
occurrence. The original values are replaced with the corrected data.
• If quality control results are consistently unacceptable for a sample submission, the entire
sample batch must be re-analyzed.
It is preferable to discuss the quality control requirements of a program with the contracted
laboratory prior to the program. Most major laboratories will provide repeat analyses, based on a
31
quality control program, free of charge. A laboratory contract is a useful business tool, which
can define the conditions under which repeats are free of charge or when charges may apply.
Invoices for analytical services should not be paid until quality control data has been verified and
any necessary repeat analyses completed.
32
12. Additional Quality Control Procedures
12.1 Drill Core Duplicates
At the drilling stage the equivalent of field duplicates is the collection of the second half of the
drill core for analysis. Drill core duplicates are recommended for Discovery, and Advanced
Exploration and Evaluation Stage projects. Generally drill core duplicates are introduced for
fewer than one in 100 samples and they should be carefully selected to represent different ore
types, alternation styles and rock competency.
There is generally reluctance to submit the second half of the drill core for analysis. Removal of
the second half of the drill core eliminates its use as a reference or library sample, and the
intersection cannot be used for metallurgical studies.
The purpose of analyzing the second half of the drill core is to compare the result with that of the
primary sample. This comparison will provide an understanding of variability introduced by
selecting one half of the drill core versus the other. The study of drill core duplicates may lead to
the conclusion that alternative drilling or sampling techniques are required, such as larger
diameter drill core.
If drill core duplicates are not utilized, management must be provided with a clear explanation of
the reasons why the procedure was not implemented. Approval is required.
12.2 Pulp Replicates
12.2.1 Submission of Pulp Replicates to the Secondary Laboratory
Pulps prepared at the primary laboratory are regularly submitted to a secondary laboratory for
cross-checks. This procedure is generally used to verify the accuracy and analytical procedures
of the primary laboratory. It is important to request that the same analytical procedures be used
at both laboratories.
Inter-laboratory bias may account for differences between results for two laboratories, which
influences the extent to which the accuracy of the primary laboratory can be tested.
Analytical Methods
In some circumstances, it is preferable to request check assays using different procedures. For
example, there may be a logistical reason for using a local laboratory that does not offer x-ray
fluorescence analysis but has used a supposedly total digestion. To determine if the total
digestion is appropriate for the mineralogy of the samples, it may be preferable to submit
samples to a secondary laboratory that offers x-ray fluorescence analysis that determines total
metal values.
Sample Selection
33
Approximately 5 to 10% of the sample pulps should be submitted for cross-checks especially at
the beginning of an Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage project. If the accuracy of the
primary laboratory is confirmed (and other aspects of the quality control program are
acceptable), it may be possible to reduce the number of checks to 2 to 5% of the total number of
samples.
The optimum approach is to randomly select samples for cross-checks, or to select every 10th or
20th sample. It is useful to ensure that a selection of high-grade samples, typical of different
types of ore, are also submitted for cross-checks.
Cross-checks are performed less often for a Discovery Stage project and may only be randomly
performed for a Grassroots Stage project.
Sample Submission
Control standards should be included with the submission of cross-checks to ensure that the
secondary laboratory has performed properly.
12.2.2 Comparison of Results for Cross-Checks
When results from the secondary laboratory are reported it is necessary to systematically
compare these results against the original results. Standard x-y graphs or log-log x-y plots can
be used to quickly assess whether there are significant differences between the data sets.
Mean vs. the Difference Plot
It is possible to document more subtle variations in the data by using a “mean versus the
difference plot”. In this case, the mean (or average) of two values is calculated as well as the
difference between the two values. The mean is then plotted against the difference for each
sample.
34
2000
+10%
1500
+5%
1000
Difference Cu (ppm)
500
X=Y
0
-500
-1000 -5%
N=480
-1500
-10%
-2000
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Mean Cu (ppm)
In the above figure, if the copper values from both laboratories were always exactly the same, all
the points would lie along the horizontal y = 0 line. In this example it can be seen that most of
the time the difference between two values is less than ± 500 ppm. This graph is particularly
useful to graphically display data where there appears to be a bias, such that more points will
appear below the y = 0 line than above the line (or vice versa).
The “precision envelopes” can also be drawn on this graph to show how many samples fall
between ± 5% and ± 10%.
The number of points above and below the y = 0 line can be counted or determined by sorting
the data or creating a cumulative frequency graph. If a bias is suspected, the amount of the bias
(and whether it is positive or negative) can be determined from the graph.
Similar graphs can be used to compare results for any two data sets including drill core
duplicates, laboratory replicates, and reject replicates. Advanced users are recommended to use
Thompson-Howarth (Howarth and Thompson, 1976) plots to estimate precision.
Corrective Action
If it is determined that a bias exists, it is necessary to determine what the cause of the bias might
be and if the primary laboratory needs to take corrective action. Segregation of samples during
transport, oxidation of samples, and different analytical methods should be considered as
35
possible explanations. In extreme cases it may be necessary to find an alternative primary

laboratory if the secondary laboratory results are reliable. It is then necessary to determine if all
the project samples need to be re-analyzed.
12.3 Reject Replicates
12.3.1 Submission of Reject Replicates for Check Analyses
Objective
A second split of the reject material (the –2 mm or –10 mesh left over crushed sample) is
prepared in a similar manner to the original pulp. A second split is prepared in order to (a)
measure sampling errors introduced by the selection of a split for pulverizing , (b) check for
sample mix-ups in sample preparation, and (c) determine if sample preparation procedures
should be changed to improve representivity of the analysis.
Sample Selection
Approximately 5 to 10% of the sample rejects should be submitted for replicate analysis at the
beginning of a project for Advanced Exploration and Evaluation Stage projects. Rejects should
be returned and re-numbered. In general, 30 replicate pairs should be accumulated prior to
assessing the reproducibility of the results. If analytical reproducibility is determined to be
adequate, the number of checks can be decreased to 1 to 2% of the total number of samples. The
re-numbered rejects are returned to the primary laboratory for preparation and analysis so that
methods are duplicated as closely as possible.
For Discovery Stage projects, less than 5% of the sample rejects can be submitted for replicate
analysis. Replicate analysis is generally only carried out for a Grassroots Stage project if
significant mineralization has been intersected.
The optimum approach is to randomly select samples.
Sample Submission
In many cases a laboratory crushes and pulverizes samples. Preparation of two splits at the same
time is advantageous since the –2 mm material is probably relatively homogeneous after
crushing. The disadvantage of requesting that two splits be prepared at the same time is that the
second split is not submitted to the laboratory blind.
In some cases, particularly in remote locations, crushing but not pulverizing may be carried out
on-site. Usually a split of the crushed material is prepared for shipment to a laboratory for
pulverizing and analysis. In this case, a second split of the crushed material should be prepared
for submission to the laboratory, but numbered differently than the primary sample.
12.3.2 Comparison of Results for Reject Replicates
36
The graphs described in above Section 12.2.2 (Comparison of Results for Cross-Checks) can be
used to compare results for replicates. The reproducibility of the results for the rejects is a
reflection of:
i) whether the material was crushed finely enough to achieve a representative split,
ii) whether the size of the split to be pulverized was large enough to be representative,
iii) whether the crushed material was pulverized sufficiently,
iv) whether the sample selected from the pulp for analysis (usually 0.5-1.0 grams for base
metals) was representative of the pulp,
v) whether the analyses were accurate and precise.
The imprecision of all the steps in the preparation and analytical procedures is cumulative and
reflected in the comparison of results for crusher replicates.
The reproducibility of results based on laboratory replicates (on the same pulp), cross-checks and
control standards is expected to be better than the reproducibility of results based on rejects.
37
13. Reference List
AMOR, S., BLOOM, L., WARD, P., 1998.

Practical Application of Exploration Geochemistry. Proceedings of a short course presented by
the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, Toronto.
BLOOM. L., 1999.

Third Party Vetting of Geochemical Programs or Return on Quality. In Quality Control in
Mineral Exploration: A short course presented during the 19th International Geochemical
Exploration Symposium, April, 11, 1999.
BLOOM, L., 1998.

The Role of Economic Geologists in Evaluating Assay Data Quality. Proceedings of Short
Course Presented by the GAC and PDAC, November, 1998.
HOWARTH, R.S., THOMPSON, M., 1976.

Duplicate analysis in geochemical practice, Part II: Analyst 101 (1206), 699-709.
SMEE, B., 1999.

Laboratory Audit II – The Geochemist’s Point of View. In: Quality Control in Mineral
Exploration, A Short Course Presented During the 19th International Geochemical Exploration
Symposium, April, 1999.
THOMPSON, M., 1992,

Data quality in applied geochemistry: the requirements and how to achieve them: Jour Geochem
Expl, 44, 3-22.
THOMPSON, M., HOWARTH, R.J., 1978.

A new approach to the estimation of analytical precision: Jour Geochem. Explor., 9, 23-30.
38

Drill Core Sampling Analysis2024113

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drill Core Sampling Analysis2024113

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drill Core Sampling Analysis2024113

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EAST ASIA MINERALS CORPORATION

Suite 900, 999 West Hastings

Drill Core Sampling and Analysis Protocols

Version 3.2 - January, 2010

3. Glossary of Terms ...……….……………………………………………………..……. 4

4. Preparation and Analytical Procedures ...…………………….….……….……….…. 8

5. Quality Control at the Sampling Stage ………..……………….………………….… 13

6. Staged Exploration Procedures. …………………………………………….………. 19

7. Procedures at the Drill and Drill Core Sampling. …………………………….……. 22

8. Submission of Samples to Primary Laboratory. ……………………………………. 27

9. Data Entry and Database Management……………………………………………… 28

10. Review of Preliminary Quality Control Data……………………………………….. 29

Table of Contents (Continued)

11. Quality Control Failure: Request for Repeat Analyses…………………………….. 31

12. Additional Quality Control Procedures……………………………………………… 33

13. List of References..………………………………………….…………………………. 38

The quality control program consists of:

• The submission of blanks to monitor contamination and data accuracy.

Characterization studies for deleterious elements, optical predictive metallurgical

A.A.S.: Atomic absorption spectroscopy is a single element, solution based technique.

I.C.P.-M.S.: Inductively coupled plasma - mass spectrometry is a multi-element, solution based

Precision: Precision is the difference or range of differences between similar estimates or

Secondary Laboratory: A laboratory selected for analysis of a selection of sample pulps in

4. Preparation and Analytical Procedures

4.1 Laboratory Selection

A laboratory is selected based on logistics, price, quality, and availability of services. A

4.2 Laboratory Communication

Laboratories can be asked to report:

4.3 Sample Preparation

4.4 Selecting Analytical Method - Geochemical or Assay

It is recommended that laboratories be asked to specify potentially interfering elements, elements

Selecting an Analytical Method

Analytical Procedure Geochemical Analysis Assays

4.5 Analysis for Deleterious or Secondary Pay Elements

Table of Deleterious Elements

Element Symbol Concentration in

5. Quality Control at the Sampling Stage

5.1.1 Preparation of Blanks

Unmineralized quartzite or sandstone (for example)

1. A geologist locates a source of suitable material.

4. Record a description of the material and its origin.

5.1.2 Insertion of Blanks

5.2 Control Standards

5.2.1 Purchase or Preparation of Control Standards

In different circumstances it may be appropriate to purchase control standards or prepare control

Purchased Control Standards

The Advantage of Control Standards Prepared from Project Materials

Limitations of Using Control Standards Prepared from Project Materials

laboratory effectively, it is advantageous to occasionally submit commercial control standards

5.2.2 Insertion of Control Standards

Fully prepared (crushed, pulverized, homogeneous and certified) control standards

5.3 Sample Log

The internal sample log records a minimum of the following information:

• the sample number,

• drill hole number,

The following is an example of a sample log.

Example of a Sample Log

Sample Hole-ID From To Shipment Shipped Date

6. Staged Exploration Procedures