Are you Ready for
JORC 2012?
Outline
Time
Presentation
13:00
Welcome (Graham Jeffress, AIG WA)
13:05
Overview and Background to JORC 2012 (Jill Terry JORC)
13:20
What’s changed in JORC 2012 (Chris Cairns JORC)
13:45
Competent Persons (Jacqui Coombes Coombes Capability)
14:15
JORC 2012 – ET & ER (Graham Jeffress AIG WA)
14:30
JORC 2012 – MRE & R (Matt Greentree AIG WA)
14:40
JORC 2012 – Ann Rpts, Etc. (Chris Cairns JORC)
15:00
Tea Break
15:30
ASX listing Rules and JORC 2012 (James Rowe ASX)
16:00
Moderated Panel Session and Question time (Rick Rogerson)
17:15
Sundowner & Informal discussions
Contents














Introduction
New terms
Changes to Figure 1
Table 1 Reporting – ‘if not, why not?’ reporting
Competent Persons requirements
Are you a Competent Person?
Exploration Targets
Exploration Results – Table 1 Changes and Drill hole information
Mineral Resources – Table 1 changes
Ore Reserves – Table 1 changes and minimum level of studies
Studies definitions
Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves annual review
Metal equivalents
In ground valuations
Overview
Jillian Terry
Why were the JORC Code and ASX
Listing Rules updated?

Allowed for the inclusion of several Companies Updates since the
adoption of the 2004 version of the JORC Code including
 Metal Equivalents, sampling and Inferred Resource classification
 In-situ values
 Historical or foreign estimates

ASIC wanted a rule to govern Production Target announcements

ASIC wanted annual review of Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves

Brought most terms into alignment with the international
CRIRSCO reporting guidelines (Committee for Mineral Reserves
International Reporting Standards)

Wanted to reinforce equal importance of JORC principles of
Materiality, Transparency and Competence
Why were the JORC Code and ASX
Listing Rules updated?

Wanted to improve transparency for reporting of Exploration
Targets

Included a rule on extrapolation clarification for Inferred
Resources

Wanted to introduce requirements for minimum level of technical
studies to support Ore Reserve statements

Wanted to change the emphasis of Table reporting from just
‘material’ Table 1 criteria to all Table 1 criteria on an ‘if not, why
not?’ basis so investors cannot be mislead by a Public Report
remaining silent on a material issue

Additional Definitions i.e. studies, material or significant projects,
material change
Consultation Process

Early 2012 review process commenced with request for feedback
on ASX Listing Rules and JORC Code exposure documents

Public meetings by ASX, JORC, AIG, AusIMM

Meetings with industry and MCA

114 written JORC submissions received, 138 ASX written
submissions received (two rounds)

Co-operative liaison between JORC, ASX and ASIC to produce draft
JORC Code and draft ASX Listing Rules – released September 2012
for comment

81 written submission received for JORC Code, written
submissions received for ASX Listing Rules
Publishing and Transition Period

Submissions considered in final drafting of ASX Listing Rules and
JORC Code

ASX Listing Rules released November 8th 2012

JORC Code released December 20th 2012

Mandatory from Dec 1st 2013

Requirement for a Pre-Feasibility Study to support an Ore Reserve
mandatory from Dec 1st 2014
Benefits of High Quality Reporting
Accepted and compatible national (and international) public reporting
standards will:

Provide greater confidence to investors and thereby facilitate
capital raising

encourage siphoning of scarce risk capital from non-mining sources

facilitate investment comparisons between different mineral
deposits, and reduce unnecessary effort and cost for debt/equity
funding from different sources

assist free flow of direct and portfolio investment and therefore
reduce cost of capital
17/3/2013
Introduction to JORC
10
What has Changed?
What has changed in JORC 2012?

Table 1 reporting on an ‘if not, why not?’ basis – Clauses 2, 5, 19,
27, 35 and the introduction of Table 1.

Competent Person Attributions – Clause 9

Exploration Targets – Clause 17

Pre-Feasibility required for Ore Reserves – Clause 29

Technical Studies definitions – Clause 37-40

Annual Reporting – Clause 15

Metal Equivalents – Clause 50

In situ values – Clause 51

Additional guidance on reporting in Table 1
ASX Listing Rules have also changed
These changes include:
 Annual reporting of Ore Reserves
 Parallel requirements with the JORC Code for the reporting of
initial or material changes to Exploration Results, Mineral
Resources or Ore Reserves
 Reporting of Production Targets
 Pre-Feasibility study required to report Ore Reserves – Clause 29
 Reporting of historical estimates and foreign estimates
 Competent Person requirements
 Reporting Terms of Joint Venture agreements
Be careful to check the related requirements of the relevant exchange
if reporting for a company listed on an exchange other than ASX!
Ignorance is not a defence……
Public Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves
must be in compliance with the JORC Code
AND
must comply with the rules of the relevant securities exchange
Listing Rules
(ASX Listing
Rules &
Guidance note
31)
or relevant securities
exchange
Public
Reporting
that meets
ALL
requirements
New Terms
New terms introduced into JORC 2012
Code
Significant project
“An exploration or mineral development project that has, or could have, a
significant influence on the market value or operations of the listed
company, and/or has specific prominence in Public Reports and
announcements.”
(Appendix 1 Generic Terms and Equivalents)
New terms introduced into JORC 2012
Code
Material change
“A material change could be a change in the estimated tonnage or grade
or in the classification of the Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves.
Whether there has been a material change in relation to a significant
project must be considered by taking into account all of the relevant
circumstances, including the style of mineralisation.
This includes considering whether the change in estimates is likely to have
a material effect on the price or value of the company’s securities.”
(Guideline to Clause 5)
Is the project Material?

What is the market capitalisation of the company?

Will the disclosure of the information affect the price of the company’s
shares?

Does the company spend a significant proportion on this project?

Does the company earn a significant amount from this project?

Will the project be an asset in the medium to long term?

Has the company made specific announcements about this project?

How prominently does the company promote this project (website,
quarterlies, annual reports, presentations, etc)?
New terms introduced into JORC 2012
Code
‘if not, why not?’
“means that each item listed in the relevant section of Table 1 must be
discussed and if it is not discussed then the Competent Person must explain
why it has been omitted from the documentation.”
(Guideline to Clause 5)
Relationship between Exploration
Results, Mineral Resources, & Ore
Reserves, Figure 1 of the JORC Code
Clause 4 2012 Code — Additional
Explanation of Principles
“Transparency and Materiality” are guiding principles of the Code,
and the Competent Person must provide explanatory comments on
material assumptions underlying the declaration of Exploration
Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves
In particular, […] the benchmark of Materiality is that which includes
all aspects relating to the Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or
Ore Reserves that an investor (or their advisers) would reasonably
expect to see explicit comment on from the Competent Person.
The Competent Person must not remain silent on any material aspect
for which the presence or absence of comment could affect the
public perception or value of the mineral occurrence”
This slide contains only extracts from Clause 4, 2012 JORC Code
Table 1 Reporting
Table 1 structure
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
Section 4 Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves
Section 5
Estimation and Reporting of Diamonds and Other
Gemstones
Table 1 2012 Code — Additional
Guidance on Reporting
Table 1 of the Code now includes
additional criteria and amended and/or
additional explanation of Table 1 reporting
to assist Competent Persons
Guidance changes are primarily for
reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves, although there are also
additional
information
requirements
related to sampling techniques and the
reporting of Exploration Results
‘if not, why not?’
reporting
‘If not, why not’ reporting

Improves the Transparency of reporting

Intent is to provide clarity to the investor

‘If not why not’ shows that all items have been considered
and where the Competent Person concludes the specific
item to be of low consequence or is yet to be addressed or
resolved.

Specific requirements are in Clauses 5, 19, 27, 35, and the
introduction to Table 1
The introductory section of Table 1 is significantly expanded to reinforce
the 2012 Code’s requirements for how and when Table 1 and ‘if not,
why not’ reporting are required.
“In the context of complying with the Principles of the Code,
comment on the relevant sections of Table 1 should be provided on
an ‘if not, why not’ basis within the Competent Person’s
documentation and must be provided where required according to
the specific requirements of Clauses 19, 27 and 35 for significant
projects in the Public Report.
This is to ensure that it is clear to the investor whether items have
been considered and deemed of low consequence or have yet to be
addressed or resolved.”
This slide contains only extracts from the Introduction to Table 1, 2012 JORC Code
“2. In this edition of the JORC Code, important terms and their
definitions are highlighted in bold text. The guidelines are placed
after the respective Code clauses using indented italics. They are
intended to provide assistance and guidance to readers. They do
not form part of the Code, but should be considered persuasive
when interpreting the Code. Indented italics are also used for
Appendix 1 – ‘Generic Terms and Equivalents’ and Table 1 – ‘Check
List of Assessment and Reporting Criteria’ to make it clear that
they are also part of the guidelines, and that the latter is not
mandatory for reporting purposes.”
This statement (in green above), together with all of the examples
being negative, was taken by many Competent Persons as an
opportunity not to report all material information.
“2. In this edition of the JORC Code, important terms and their
definitions are highlighted in bold text. The guidelines are placed
after the respective Code Clauses using indented italics.
Guidelines are not part of the Code, but are intended to provide
assistance and guidance to readers and should be considered
persuasive when interpreting the Code.” Indented italics are also
used for Appendix 1 –
‘Generic Terms and Equivalents’ and
Table 1 – ‘Check List of Assessment and Reporting Criteria’ to
make it clear that they are also part of the guidelines, and that
the latter is not mandatory for reporting purposes.
Further guidance on the importance of material information is now
included in Clauses 5, 19, 27, 35, and the introduction to Table 1.
“Table 1 provides a [reminder] of criteria to be considered by the
Competent Person in developing their documentation and in preparing a
Public Report.
In the context of complying with the principles of the Code, comments
relating to the items in the relevant sections of Table 1 should be
provided on an ‘if not, why not’ basis within the Competent Person’s
documentation.”
This slide contains extracts only of Clause 5, 2012 JORC Code.
“Additionally, comments related to the relevant sections of Table 1 must
be complied with on an ‘if not, why not’ basis within Public Reporting for
significant projects […] when reporting Exploration Results, Mineral
Resources or Ore Reserves for the first time [or][…] where these items
have materially changed from when they were last Publicly Reported.
Reporting on an ‘if not, why not’ basis is to ensure that it is clear to an
investor whether items have been considered and deemed of low
consequence or are not yet addressed or resolved.”
This slide contains only extracts from Clause 5, 2012 JORC Code. Emphasis added.
Are You Competent?
2004 JORC Code Principles —
Competence Bias?
A common distortion of
Principles from Clause 4,
2004 JORC Code
had resulted in:
Transparency
unclear un ambiguous
presentation
JORC
Materiality
selected reasonable
information
expected
Compliant
Reports?
Competence
Based on work by
Competent Person
Competent Person’s Consent
[For] Public reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves for significant projects for the first time or when there is a
material change, the company must include the following:
 Competent Person’s name and the name of their employer
 Any possible conflicts of interest for the Competent Persons?
 Public report is based on documentation compiled by the Competent
Person. The Competent Person(s) must have given prior written
consent in regards to the “form and context” in which the public
report appears; and
Competent Person’s Consent
Public reports also need …
 A statement of written consent from the Competent Person
 A Competent Person Consent Form is available from the JORC
website.
 The onus is on the company to obtain approval, but the Competent
Person should encourage observation of this requirement
There are recent examples where this has not happened! Written
consent may be requested by ASX and placed on the Company
Announcements Platform.
JORC 2012 - Additional Provisions for
Competent Persons
Conflicts of interest
• Identify and disclose potential conflicts of interest by the Competent
Person or a related party, such as:
• shares or options held in the Company, or
• performance-related bonus payments linked to the reporting of
Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves
Previously Reported Results
Where the Competent Person(s) has previously given consent [a]
report can refer back to the original report.
However, the company must confirm that:
 “It is not aware of any new information or data that materially
affects the information included in the relevant market
announcement.”
and
 “In the case of estimates of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves,
the company confirms that all material assumptions and
technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant
market announcement continue to apply and have not
materially changed.”
Clause 9 of the JORC Code, 2012 Edition
What is a Competent Person? (Clause 11)
“A ‘Competent Person’ is a minerals industry professional who is a
Member or Fellow of AusIMM, or of AIG, or of a ‘Recognised
Professional Organisation’ (RPO)
A Competent Person must have a minimum of 5 years relevant
experience in the style of mineralisation or type of deposit under
consideration and in the activity which that person is undertaking.
If the Competent Person is preparing documentation on Exploration
Results, the relevant experience must be in exploration. If the
Competent Person is estimating, or supervising the estimation of
Mineral Resources, the relevant experience must be in the estimation,
assessment and evaluation of Mineral Resources. If the Competent
Person is estimating, or supervising the estimation of Ore Reserves, the
relevant experience must be in the estimation, assessment, evaluation
and economic extraction of Ore Reserves.”
Competent Person Self Test :
1.
Do I belong to an appropriate professional organisation?
 AusIMM, AIG, or a Recognised Professional Organisation (RPO)
2.
Do I have the minimum relevant experience?
  5 years experience relevant to the commodity & style of
mineralisation & the activity
 The key qualifier in the definition of a Competent Person is the
word ‘relevant’. It is not always necessary for a person to have
five years experience in every type of deposit in order to act as a
Competent Person.
Am I satisfied that I could face my peers and demonstrate
competence in the commodity, type of deposit, and situation
under consideration?
If doubt exists, either seek an opinion from appropriately
experienced colleagues or decline to act as a Competent Person
3.
Jacqui Coombes
Reporting of
Exploration Targets
Exploration Target – now defined (Clause 17)
“An Exploration Target is a statement […] of the […] potential of a
mineral deposit in a defined geological setting where the statement or
estimate […] relates to mineralisation for which there has been
insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource.”
Clause 17 of the JORC Code, 2012 Edition
Exploration Target – now defined (Clause 17)
Exploration Target is defined in Clause 17 of the 2012 JORC Code which
also explains how that terminology may be used within a Public Report.
The clause emphasises the importance of ensuring that a reported
Exploration Target cannot be misconstrued or misrepresented as a
Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve, and that all disclosures of an
Exploration Target must clarify whether the target is based on actual
results or a proposed exploration programme.
Exploration Target – now defined (Clause 17)
Clause 17 of the 2012 JORC Code is a significant expansion and further
development of Clause 18 of the 2004 JORC Code.
The 2012 Clause 17 definition of Exploration Target is identical to the
CRIRSCO definition.
Clause 17 also includes additional further explanation of how
Exploration Targets should be reported in Public Reports.
Exploration Target – now defined (Clause 17)
Key points to remember:

Must only report target tonnes and grade (quality) as RANGES

Must report whether the target is based on actual results or on
proposed [work]

Report all exploration conducted to date

Must include the warning statement within the same paragraph as the
first reference to the Exploration Target
Exploration Target – now defined (Clause 17)
Key points to remember (con’t):

Exploration Targets cannot be used in a ‘headline’ or highlights section

Must include details of [work] designed to test the validity of the
Exploration Target and a timeframe within which those activities are
expected to be completed

Maps, cross-sections or graphs must be accompanied with explanatory
text

The Public Report including an Exploration Target must be
accompanied by a Competent Person’s statement taking responsibility
for the form and context in which the Exploration Target appears.
Reporting of
Exploration Results
Exploration Results
(Clause 19)
“Clear diagrams and maps designed to represent the geological
context must be included in the report. These must include, but not be
limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate
sectional views.”
This slide contains only extracts from Clause 19, 2012 JORC Code
Exploration Results (Clause 19)
“As required under Clause 4 and 5, the Competent Person must not
‘remain silent on any issue for which the presence or absence of
comment could impact the public perception or value of the mineral
occurrence’.
For significant projects the reporting of all criteria in sections 1 and 2 of
Table 1 on an ‘if not, why not basis’ is required, preferably as an
appendix to the Public Report.
Additional disclosure is particularly important where inadequate or
uncertain data affect the reliability of, or confidence in, a statement of
Exploration Results; for example, poor sample recovery, poor
repeatability of assay or laboratory results, etc.”
This slide contains only extracts from Clause 19, 2012 JORC Code
Exploration Results
(ASX Listing Rule 5 and Guidance Note 31)
ASX Listing Rule 5.7
An entity publicly reporting in relation to a material mining project,
either:
(a) exploration results for the first time; or
(b) any new exploration results,
must include all of the following information in a market
announcement and give it to ASX for release to the market.
This slide contains extracts only of the ASX Listing Rules and Guidance Note 31
Exploration Results
(ASX Listing Rule 5 and Guidance Note 31 – cont’d)
5.7.1 As an appendix to the market announcement, a separate
report providing all information that is material to
understanding the exploration results, in relation to each of
the criteria in section 1 (sampling techniques and data) and
section 2 (reporting of exploration results) of Table 1 in
Appendix 5A (JORC Code).
An entity that determines that one or more of those criteria
is not material for this purpose must identify each such
criterion and explain why it has determined that it is not
material to understanding the exploration results.
This slide contains extracts only of the ASX Listing Rules and Guidance Note 31
Exploration Results (ASX Listing Rule 5 and
Guidance Note 31 – con’t)
5.7.2 As an appendix to the market announcement, a separate
table setting out the following information for material drillholes unless the entity determines that the information is not
material:
• easting and northing of the drill-hole collar
• elevation or RL of the drill-hole collar
• dip and azimuth of the hole
• down hole width and depth
• end of hole
This slide contains extracts only of Rule 5.5 of the ASX Listing Rules Guidance Note 31
Reporting of
Minerals Resources
Additional Requirements for Reporting
Mineral Resources (Clause 27)
When reporting a Mineral Resource for a significant project for
the first time, or when those estimates have materially changed
from when they were last reported, the following must be
included:

A brief summary of the information in relevant sections of
Table 1 must be provided, or,

if a particular criterion is not relevant or material, a
disclosure that it is not relevant or material and a brief
explanation of why this is the case must be provided.
Additional Requirements for Reporting
Mineral Resources (Clause 27 – cont’d)
“For a significant project, when Mineral Resource estimates are first
Publicly Reported or when a material change occurs (including
classification changes), there is an increased need for transparent
discussion of the basis for the new Mineral Resource estimate in order
that investors are appropriately informed of the basis for the changes.
As noted in Clauses 4 and 5 the benchmark of Materiality is that which
an investor or their advisors would reasonably expect to see explicit
comment on from the Competent Person, thus the reporting of all
relevant criteria in Table 1 on an ‘if not, why not’ basis is required.”
“The Technical summary based against Table 1 criteria should be
presented as an appendix to the Public Report.”
Note: This guidance relates directly to ASX Listing Rule requirements.
Reporting of Ore
Reserves
Minimum of Pre-Feasibility Study for
Reporting Ore Reserves (Clause 29 & 37)
“An ‘Ore Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of a Measured and /
or Indicated Mineral Resource. It includes diluting materials and
allowances for losses, which may occur when the material is mined or
extracted and is defined by studies at Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility level
as appropriate that include application of Modifying Factors” Clause 29
“However attention is drawn to the requirement for a Pre-Feasibility
Study or a Feasibility Study to have been completed for the Public
Reporting of an Ore Reserve in Clause 29. An Ore Reserve must not be
reported based on the completion of a Scoping Study.” Clause 37
This slide contains extracts only of Clauses 29 and 37, 2012 JORC Code
Additional Requirements for Reporting
Ore Reserves (Clause 35)
“In a Public Report of an Ore Reserve estimate for a significant project
for the first time, or when those estimates have materially changed
from when they were last reported, a brief summary of the information
in relevant sections of Table 1 must be provided or, if a particular
criterion is not relevant or material, a disclosure that it is not relevant or
material and a brief explanation of why this is the case must be
provided.
For a significant project, when Ore Reserve estimates are first Publicly
Reported or when a material change occurs (including classification
changes), there is an increased need for transparent discussion of the
basis for the new Ore Reserve estimate in order that investors are
appropriately informed of the basis for the changes.”
This slide contains extracts only of Clause 35, 2012 JORC Code
Additional Requirements for Reporting
Ore Reserves (Clause 35 – cont’d)
“As noted in Clauses 4 and 5 the benchmark of Materiality is that which
an investor or their advisers would reasonably expect to see explicit
comment on from the Competent Person, thus the reporting of all
criteria in Table 1 on an ‘if not, why not’ basis is required.”
“The Technical summary based against Table 1 criteria should be
presented as an appendix to the Public Report.
Where there are as yet unresolved issues potentially impacting the
reliability of, or confidence in, a statement of Ore Reserves (for example,
limited geotechnical information, complex orebody metallurgy,
uncertainty in the permitting process, etc.) those unresolved issues
should also be reported.”
This slide contains extracts only of Clause 35, 2012 JORC Code
Additional Requirements for Reporting
Ore Reserves (Clause 35 – cont’d)
“If there is doubt about what should be reported, it is better to err on the
side of providing too much information rather than too little.
Uncertainties in any of the criteria listed in Table 1 that could lead to
under-or over- statement of Ore Reserves should be disclosed.”
This slide contains extracts only of Clause 35, 2012 JORC Code
Technical Studies Definitions in
2012 Code (Clauses 37 to 40)
Clause 37 describes what technical and economic studies are, and their
application under the JORC Code.

Scoping Study – Clause 38

Pre-Feasibility Study – Clause 39

Feasibility Study – Clause 40
This was in response to the requirement for a Pre-Feasibility Study to
be conducted as part of estimating an Ore Reserve for inclusion in a
Public Report.
These definitions are identical to those in the CRIRSCO standard
definitions, and will eventually be included in all the CRIRSCO
standards and codes.
Annual Reporting
of Mineral
Resources and Ore
Reserves
Annual Reporting of Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves (Clause 15)
“Companies must review and publically report their Mineral Resources
and Ore Reserves at least annually.” Clause 14 - 2004 JORC Code
“Companies must review and publically report their Mineral Resources
and Ore Reserves annually. The annual review date must be nominated
by the Company in its Public Reports of Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves and the effective date of each Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves statement must be shown. The Company must discuss any
material changes to previously reported Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves at the time of publishing updated Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves.” Clause 15 – JORC Code 2012
Annual Reporting of Mineral Resources
and Ore Reserves (Clause 15 – cont’d)
What does it all mean for reporting Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves?

Companies must nominate their date of review

Does not need to be June 30 or January 1 but must be an annual
review date – don’t even think about February 29th!!

Each reference in a Public Report must state the ‘effective date’

The annual review must discuss any material changes from the
previously reported Mineral Resources and / or Ore Reserves
Other Code
changes —
Metal Equivalents
& In Situ Values
Reporting Metal Equivalents (Clause 50)
New requirements for Public Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral
Resources or Ore Reserves in terms of metal equivalents.
If a single equivalent grade for one major metal is reported, the details
for all material factors contributing to the net value [are needed]
Reporting Metal Equivalents (Clause 50)
All material factors include:

Individual grades for all metals

Assumed commodity prices for all metals (where the actual prices
used are commercially sensitive, the company must disclose
sufficient information, [though] perhaps in narrative rather than
numerical form)

Assumed metallurgical recoveries for all metals and discussion of
the basis on which the assumed recoveries are derived
(metallurgical test work, detailed mineralogy, similar deposits, etc.)

A clear statement that all the elements included in the metal
equivalents calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered
and sold

Calculation formula used
Reporting of In Situ or ‘In Ground’
Values (Clause 51)

Prohibition on the publication of in situ or ‘in ground’ financial
values in a Public Report.

Such values are inconsistent with the requirements of the Code,
as they do not take account of the Modifying Factors and are
incompatible with the Code’s reporting terminology (as set out in
Figure 1, and throughout the Code).

The use of such financial values has little or no relationship to
economic viability, value or potential returns to investors.

This new clause is based on information previously included in
ASX Companies Update 03/08, previously prepared jointly by ASX
and JORC.
Tea Break
Are you Ready for
JORC 2012?
ASX Listing Rules
and
Guidance Note 31
ASX Listing Rules linkage
17/3/2013
Introduction to JORC
72
ASX Presentation
James Rowe
State Manager
ASX Listings Compliance (Perth)
Panel discussion
Rick Rogerson – Moderator
Panel
 Deborah Lord, SRK Consulting
 Jason Harris, Cube
 Jeff Elliott, CSA Global
 Richard Sulway, Snowden
 John Hearne , Coffey
 Dean Carville , AMC
Some Questions ?

Where can CPs find examples and advice about best practice and
who can CPs call for advice?

How do we deal with 2004 MRE in a 2012 world?

What is the difference between an aspiration & an Exploration
Target? Does at ET have an implication of being eventually
economic? Must there be on ground work done to define an ET?

How do people deal with reporting preliminary economic
information on ET or Inferred Res? Isn’t there a catch-22 between
the Continuous Disclosure provisions and the prohibition on
reporting economic modelling based on Inferred Resources or
Exploration Targets?

How does VALMIN and JORC coexist?

How can we improve the ‘policing’ of the JORC code, will 2012
help?
Thank You
Remember to visit the JORC website
www.jorc.org for:
 Copies of the 2012 JORC Code
 Downloadable Table 1 template
 Links to ASX Listing Rules, FAQs, &
Guidance Note 31
 Other guidance material