ANGLOGOLD AUSTRALIA LTD

Sunrise Dam Project

Analabs Check Assay Results

2000-2001 Exploration Drilling Program
D. Stephens Report No: 08.12023
March 2002

Keywords: Cleo, Sunrise Dam, Check Assays

Location: Laverton, Western Australia

Map: 1:250,000 Edjudina

1:100,000 Lake Carey

Distribution

1. AngloGold - SDGM
2. AngloGold - Perth
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A check assay program was carried out between January and July 2001. All
intercepts within the Western Shear Zone (WSZ) and Watu including a small barren
ore-skin around the mineralisation were re-assayed using the screen fire analysis
technique at Analabs. This work was carried out to test whether the Analabs original
fire assays are underestimating the grade due to nuggetty gold.

Results indicate that:

• The fire assays and screen fires above 0.15g/t Au show good precision (-
3.8% sRPHD), with original Fire Assays greater (on average) than the
Screen Fire Assays. At grades less than 0.15g/t Au the assays are
affected by machine precision errors within one order of magnitude of the
detection limit. This is not a serious problem, as these assays are not used
in resource calculations.

• No nugget effect is identifiable in the data, as there are no strong outliers.

Approximately 7% of the screen fire samples were then used to validate the assay
results obtained from Analabs for exploration drilling samples submitted. These
samples were split from the pulps and residues. Half were returned to Analabs and
the other half to Genalysis, both sets with different sample numbers.

This work indicates that:

• Overall the laboratories compare very favourably with all sample ranges
greater than 0.15 g/t Au returning mean sRPHD’s of between -4.3% and
3.2%. This is very acceptable.

• The Genalysis samples return more outliers than the Analabs data, but not
to any significant amount.

Data from Analabs internal quality control for January 2001 to October 2001 are
included in this report. Analabs carried out pulp re-assays and residue re-splits on
approximately 1 in 20 of all samples sent to the laboratory.

• Again the samples within one order of magnitude of the detection limit
displayed strong variability.

• Above 0.15g/t Au the samples showed extremely good precision overall

(sRPHD 0.6 to 1.1%). Some variation exists within individual grade ranges
but the number of samples in these ranges is insufficient to enable robust
conclusions to be drawn from the data

The results of standards and blanks submitted by AngloGold were highly acceptable.
Possible indications of drift (change in assayed value over time) in three standards in
the first half of the year are not supported by data from another five standards
submitted during the same period. There appears to be minor mislabelling of
standards and blanks at either AngloGold or Analabs.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1
1.1. Report Purpose ...................................................................................................................1
1.2. Project Location and Geology.............................................................................................1
2. SAMPLING AND ASSAY PROCEDURE ..............................................................................2
2.1 Scope of Resampling and Assay procedure.......................................................................2
2.1.1 Screen Fire Re-assays ................................................................................................2
2.1.2 Pulp and Residue Re-assays ......................................................................................3
2.2 Quality Control ....................................................................................................................4
2.3 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................................5
3. ANGLOGOLD SUBMITTED STANDARD AND BLANKS ....................................................7

4. ANALABS INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL .....................................................................10

4.1 Repeats and Second Splits...............................................................................................10
4.1.1 First Repeats..............................................................................................................10
4.1.2 Second Splits .............................................................................................................11
4.2 Blanks and Standards .......................................................................................................12
5. CHECK ASSAY RESULTS..................................................................................................13
5.1 Outliers in the data ............................................................................................................13
5.2 Screen Fire Re-assays .....................................................................................................13
5.2.1 Interpretation..............................................................................................................14
5.3 Laboratory Comparisons...................................................................................................15
5.3.1 Analabs Original v Genalysis Pulp.............................................................................15
5.3.2 Analabs Pulp v Genalysis Pulp..................................................................................16
5.3.3 Analabs Original v Genalysis Residue ......................................................................17
5.3.4 Analabs Residues v Genalysis Residue....................................................................18
5.3.5 Interpretation – Inter-laboratory Comparisons...........................................................19
5.4 Comparison of Different Sample Sets submitted to Analabs............................................19
5.4.1 Analabs Original v Analabs Pulp ...............................................................................19
5.4.2 Analabs Original v Analabs Residue .........................................................................20
5.4.3 Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire (restricted dataset) ..................................21
5.4.4 Interpretation..............................................................................................................22
5.5 Comparison between Splits ..............................................................................................22
5.5.1 Analabs Pulp v Analabs Residue...............................................................................22
5.5.2 Genalysis Pulp v Genalysis Residue.........................................................................23
5.5.3 Interpretation..............................................................................................................24
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................25
6.1 Conclusions.......................................................................................................................25
6.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................26
7. REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................27
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 2.1 SCREEN FIRE ASSAY PROCESS. ............................................................................3

FIGURE 2.2 RC/DD ANALYTICAL FLOWSHEET (OVERLEAF) ....................................................5

FIGURE 3.1 SRPD PLOT, ALL STANDARDS WITH GRADE > 0.15G/T AU .................................7

FIGURE 3.2 STANDARDISED PLOTS – BLANKS AND ALL STANDARDS (OVERLEAF) ...........9

FIGURE 6.1 COMPARATIVE DATA FOR S RPHD% – 2001 CHECK ASSAYS ..........................25

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 AngloGold Standards Submitted with Original Assays

Table 4.1.1 Analabs Original (Au) v Analabs First Repeat (AuR)

Table 4.1.2 Analabs Original (Au) v Second Split (AuS)

Table 5.2.1 Statistics Summary: Original Fire Assay v Scree Fire Assay

Table 5.3.1 Statistics Summary: Analabs Original v Genalysis Pulp

Table 5.3.2 Statistics Summary: Analabs Pulp v Genalysis Pulp

Table 5.3.3 Statistics Summary: Analabs Original v Genalysis Residue

Table 5.3.4 Statistics Summary: Analabs Residue v Genalysis Residue

Table 5.4.1 Statistics Summary: Analabs Original v Analabs Pulp

Table 5.4.2 Statistics Summary: Analabs Original v Analabs Residue

Table 5.4.3 Statistics Summary: Analabs Original v Analabs Screen fire

(Restricted)

Table 5.5.1 Statistics Summary: Analabs Pulp v Analysis Residue

Table 5.5.2 Statistics Summary: Genalysis Pulp v Genalysis Residue

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 All check assay data and detailed statistics on CD

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Report Purpose

The check assay program documented in this report was designed to initially test the
validity of the Fire Assay (FA) analysis technique when compared to the Screen Fire
(SFA) technique in Western Shear Zone (WSZ) and Watu ore bodies of the Cleo
deposit. The pulps and residues from these check assays were then retained.
Approximately 7% of these were used to validate the assay results obtained from
Analabs for exploration drilling samples submitted between January 2001 and July
2001 inclusive. By comparing the results of matching sets of samples submitted to
different laboratories, any systematic error present in one laboratory should become
evident.

Data from Analabs internal quality control for January 2001 to October 2001 are
presented and discussed, as are the results of standards and blanks included with
samples dispatched by AngloGold.

1.2. Project Location and Geology

The Cleo deposit is situated within the AngloGold Sunrise Dam group of tenements,
approximately 55km south of Laverton, and 20km south of the Granny Smith Gold
Mine. The group lies within the Laverton Tectonic Zone of the Yilgarn Block of
Western Australia.

A detailed description of the geology of the Cleo deposit can be found in ‘Geology of
the Cleo Deposit, Sunrise Dam Gold Mine, Laverton, W.A.’ report 08.10327
(Geology Department, 2000).

08.12023 1
2. SAMPLING AND ASSAY PROCEDURE

Exploration diamond core and Reverse Circulation Percussion (RC) samples drilled
during 2000 and 2001 were sent to Analabs in Welshpool for FA analysis. A small
portion of the samples drilled in 2000 were sent to Amdel for analysis. In all
approximately 15,000 m of RC and 50,000 m of RC were drilled between 1 January
2001 and 16 December 2001.

The diamond holes were half core sampled on metre intervals, with the remaining
half retained for future use. RC holes including pre-collars were sent as individual
metre samples of approximately 3.5kg to 4.5kg samples, split from the complete
sample at the drill site.

A detailed description of the preparation for each different check assay sample type
is given below. Quality controls applied to all sample preparation and analysis
includes:

1. Pulverising bowls are cleaned with quartz wash prior to each batch.

2. Barren flushes between each pulp.

3. Sieve tests on 5% of random samples of LM5 product.

4. Repeats on fire assay pulps.

5. Duplicate assays for second pulp.

6. Reporting of lab standards and blanks from each batch.

All assay data was transferred to AngloGold via modem.

2.1 Scope of Resampling and Assay procedure

2.1.1 Screen Fire Re-assays

The residues for all WSZ and Watu ore intercepts including a 2 – 3m `ore skin` of
barren material from all holes drilled into the proposed underground in 2000 and
between January 2001 – June 2001 were returned to AngloGold in the initial phase
of test work. The residues were split down to a sample weight of 400 – 1,000g and
returned to Analabs with a new sample number for SFA analysis (Figure 2.1). The
remaining residue was retained. In total 603 samples were sent for screen fire
assay. The number of samples assayed was 598.

The fire assay (FA) technique uses a sample (50g) that is nominally at a -75µm
grainsize. In screen fire assaying (SFA) a large sample is screened at 75µm and the
+75µm material and the screen cloth is fire assayed. Two 50g samples of the -75µm
material are fire assayed and the weighted average gold grade is calculated for the
entire sample. Screen fire re-assays were completed to determine whether the fire

08.12023 2
 assay technique has a discernible bias when assaying coarse or nuggetty gold, such
as that found in the WSZ and Watu lodes.

The SFA process undertaken by Analabs is documented below:

Figure 2.1 Screen fire assay process.

1kg residue

LM5 and weigh

Dry screen using 75 um

nylon mesh

Oversize material must Undersize material re-

be < 50g. If not re- pulverised for 30
pulverise and re-screen seconds

Place oversize material

and mesh in bag
Duplicate 50g fire assay

Single fire assay

Head Grade = [(Wgt"+" x ppm Au"+")+((Total initial wgt - wgt"+") x (Avg

ppm Au "-"))]/Total initial weight

2.1.2 Pulp and Residue Re-assays

The check assay test work program was conducted using pulps (150-250g) and the
remaining residues after the SFA sample was removed. All of the pulps used in this
study are representative of 90% <75µm samples from the WSZ and Watu lodes of
the Cleo deposit. A detailed description of the preparation of whole and half core
samples is given in Jessop, 1995 (report no. 08.7139) and the sample preparation
flowchart is shown in Figure 2.2. The selection criteria for check assay sampling
were as follows:

a) All of the WSZ and Watu underground ore zones from one section
(99225N) were taken for check assays, with the intention of doing a
second section late in the year.

b) Approximately 20% of all ore intercept samples from the WSZ and Watu
underground lodes were re-assayed using the FA technique.

08.12023 3
Ninety one original samples were chosen as check assays based upon the above
criteria. The number of samples finally found was 83 pulp and 83 fine residue
samples. These samples were prepared as follows:

1. Two >50g samples were riffle split from each 150-250g original pulp for
Fire Assay analysis at different laboratories, one sample was sent to
Analabs (PA) and the other to Genalysis (PU). If the original sample was
<50g no check assay was made.

2. Two >50g samples were riffle split from the remaining SFA residue for Fire
Assay analysis at different laboratories, one sample was sent to Analabs
(RA) and the other to Genalysis (RU).

3. The fine pulp residue samples were dried and briefly mixed in a pulverising
bowl to homogenise the sample while trying to avoid a further reduction in
particle size.

The inclusion of fine residue samples in this report is to ascertain whether initial
splitting of the pulverised half-core to form a pulp and remaining residue sample
forms unbiased pulp samples for assaying.

A tree diagram of the relationship between the sample splits is shown in Figure 2.2
and the raw data is presented in Appendix 1.

Re-splitting the original pulp and SFA residue samples formed 332 check assay
samples, which were then submitted with new sample numbers.

Gold content of the original and check assay samples was determined by firing a 50g
pulverised sample and then analysing with an AAS finish at both Analabs and
Genalysis laboratories.

The Orig, PA and PU samples originate from the same 200g pulp sample and can be
considered as duplicate assays. Duplicating the assays checks the precision of
procedures at the laboratories. By comparing the residues (RA and RU) together
with the pulps (Orig, PA and PU) the effects of splitting a pulp from a fine residue can
be studied.

2.2 Quality Control

AngloGold also submit standards and blanks with the original samples. For both
RCP and diamond core samples, the procedure is to include two standards and a
blank for every hole (two sets for a diamond hole with a RC pre-collar). The check
assays where also submitted with a standard approximately every thirty samples.
These are discussed in Chapter 3.

Both Analabs and Genalysis laboratories have an internal quality control system
based upon the analysis of standards, blanks, repeats and re-splits assayed with
each batch of samples. These are discussed in Chapter 4.

Analabs and Genalysis supplied the results of the standards and blanks used as part
of the reporting procedures requested by AngloGold.

08.12023 4
Of the approximately 65,000 samples assayed between 1 January 2001 and 16
December 2001, Analabs completed second split re-assays of approximately 3% or
2,226 samples.

2.3 Data Analysis

Laboratory bias has been assessed using the results from the internal laboratory
quality control systems and from Blanks and Standards submitted by AngloGold.

Laboratory precision has been assessed from the Check assay data using a series
of X-Y scatter and sRPHD plots and related statistical tables. All check assay data
has been evaluated by comparing the original assay with assays of each split from
the original pulp or pulp residue.

Figure 2.2 RC/DD Analytical Flowsheet (overleaf)

08.12023 5
3. ANGLOGOLD SUBMITTED STANDARD AND BLANKS

AngloGold submits 2 standards supplied by Gannet Holdings and one blank with
every hole despatched for both diamond half core and RCP samples. Holes with
both diamond and RC portions have 2 samples and a blank sent with each drill type.

Detailed analysis of the standards and blanks submitted is given in the Excel
spreadsheet 2001 standards.xls on CD in Appendix 1 and summarised below in
Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 AngloGold Standards Submitted with Original Assays

Certified Standard No. of Calculated Values

StandardCode Value SD Samples Mean Au SD CV Mean sPD
BLANK 0.00001 0 345 0.01 0.005 0.00001 -19.65
ST70/5156 0.106 0.03 63 0.12 0.027 0.229 -9.76
ST16/7181 0.49 0.05 20 0.47 0.022 0.048 4.90
ST226 1 0.06 96 1.00 0.112 0.112 0.21
ST06/8222 1.06 0.06 16 1.01 0.034 0.033 4.66
ST227 1.2 0.06 87 1.15 0.056 0.049 4.10
ST42/9272 1.33 0.08 137 1.28 0.146 0.115 4.02
ST228 1.5 0.07 66 1.42 0.079 0.056 5.08
ST09/8170 1.99 0.13 17 1.83 0.459 0.251 8.13
ST49/8242 2.06 0.1 114 2.01 0.089 0.044 2.67
ST43/7194 3.64 0.24 22 3.65 0.115 0.032 -0.40
ST04/8193 4.72 0.2 24 4.65 0.272 0.058 1.44
ST274 6.27 0.31 5 6.42 0.217 0.034 -2.39
ST18/8239 9.7 0.52 29 9.67 0.466 0.048 0.30
ST28/8240 35.6 1.2 2 18.62 24.438 1.312 47.70
ST136/8243 49.9 1.96 1 49.30 1.20

Standardised plots for Blanks and all Standards with more than ten samples sent to
the laboratory are included in Figure 3.2. Figure 3.1 below is a standardised plot of
sRPD for all Standards with grade greater than 0.15g/t Au.

Figure 3.1 sRPD Plot, All Standards with grade > 0.15g/t Au

sRPD of Standards (> 0.15g/t Au)

10
8
6
Mean sPD
4 25% sPD
s R P D (% )

75% sPD
2
Median sPD
0
-2
-4
-6
ST16/7181 ST226 ST06/8222 ST227 ST42/9272 ST228 ST09/8170 ST49/8242 ST43/7194 ST04/8193 ST274 ST18/8239
-8
+ve sRPD : Certified Value >Assay value. Positive skew in white (Median > Mean). Negative skew in black (Mean > Median)

08.12023 7
The standards are not subjected to any preparation as they are submitted as pulp
packets and only indicate performance of the analytical process. The assay results
for standards are evaluated using a percent difference calculation as opposed to a
relative percent half difference. This is done as the actual gold value of the standard
is known (the Certified Value) and therefore accuracy can be measured, as opposed
to precision.

The “Certified Value” for Blanks is set at 0.005g/t, half of the detection limit. By
convention any assay recorded as “less than Detection Limit” is assigned a value of
0.005g/t. Any assay of a Blank which returns a value of 0.01g/t will give a
percentage difference of -100%. Larger assay values produce proportionally larger
negative percentage differences. There are no positive percentage differences (no
assays are reported with negative values). The mean percentage difference will
always be a large negative number. Performance of Blanks in the assay process
needs to be evaluated by inspection of the data.

The following points are evident from the data:

• There are a number of errors associated with standard numbering at SDGM and
at the laboratories. The standards were occasionally labelled incorrectly before
they are despatched to the laboratory. Six of these samples where the errors
were obvious, i.e. standards reported as blanks and vice versa in the same
laboratory batch, were corrected in the database. Other possible errors are
highlighted in the Standardised Plots (Figure 3.2) and remain in the database.

• The blank assays returned a mean sRPD of –19.6%. This result is strongly
skewed by 6 of the 345 samples. These samples returned values in the range
0.03 to 0.11g/t. With these removed the sRPD is -8.26%, essentially due to
machine imprecision near the detection limit.

• Above a grade of 0.15g/t the assays of the standards display a predominantly

positive mean sRPD indicating that on average the result is lower than the
certified value.

• All of the standards with more than 20 samples sent to the laboratory, returned
mean percentage differences in the range - 0.4% to 5.08%, with the exception of
standard ST70/5156 and ST09/8170.

• ST70/5156 (Certified Value of 0.106g/t Au) returned a mean percentage

difference of -9.76%. This result is highly skewed by two samples; one returning
an assay of 0.25g/t (a difference of -135%) and the second an assay of 0.22g/t (a
difference of -106%). The median value for this standard is
–3.77%. Of the 63 samples of ST70/5156 assayed, 15 assayed outside the
±20% tolerance level, with only one on the positive side. This shows that the
laboratory is reading higher than the certified value at grades near one order of
magnitude above the detection limit.

• The standard ST09/8170 (Certified Value 1.99g/t Au) displays a strong positive
sRPD of 8.13%. The median difference of 3.52% indicates a strong negative
skew in the data. One assay of the 17 returned a value of 0.08g/t (a difference of

08.12023 8
 96%). This sample has probably been miss-labelled. If it is left out, the corrected
percentage difference for this range is 2.63%.

• The high-grade standards (Certified Values >30g/t Au) were not assayed
regularly enough to determine a statistically significant pattern. A total of three
standards were assayed in this range.

• Three Standards with certified values in the range 3.65 to 9.67g/t and greater
than 20 assays (ST43/7194, ST04/8193 and ST18/8239) gave mean differences
of -0.4 to 1.44%.

• Of the standards assayed in the first half of the year there are eight with sufficient
data to justify further comment. Three of these Standards, ST06/8222,
ST04/8193 and ST18/8239, show a trend of decreasing grades with time
(negative slope on the linear regression lines), although none of these standards
was assayed in the second half of the year, and this trend can not be confirmed
in this period. The other five standards show no trend in the first half of the year.
Standards ST42/9272 and ST/49/8242 were also assayed throughout the second
half of the year and continued to show no bias.

• The dispersion as measured by the CV is high for four standards (ST70/5156,

ST226, ST42/9272 and ST09/8170). Of these ST70/5156 and ST09/8170 have
been discussed above. Standard ST226 contains one possible outlier of 2.0g/t
(Certified Value 1.0g/t) and ST42/9272 contains four possible outliers of 0.13,
1.57, 1.93 and 1.97g/t (Certified Value 1.33g/t).

• When the effect of possible outliers, due to sample mix-ups, is taken into account
all standard assays are highly satisfactory in the grade range above 0.15g/t Au.

Figure 3.2 Standardised Plots – Blanks and All Standards (overleaf)

08.12023 9
 Au ppm Au ppm Au ppm
2/
28

0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3

0
/0

0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07

0
2/28/01 2/28/01 1
3/
28
3/28/01 3/28/01 /0
1
4/
28
4/28/01 4/28/01 /0
1
5/
FIGURE 3.2 - Standardised Plots

5/28/01 5/28/01 28
/0
1
6/28/01 6/28/01 6/
28
/0
1
7/28/01 7/28/01
7/
28
/0
8/28/01 1
8/28/01
Blanks

8/
28
9/28/01 /0
9/28/01 1
ST70/5156 - 0.11 ppm

ST16/7181 - 0.49 ppm

9/
28
10/28/01 10/28/01 /0
1
10
11/28/01 11/28/01 /2
8/
0 1
11
/2
8/
0 1
2SD

2SD
FaAu

FaAu
Cert Au

Cert Au
Linear (FaAu)
FaAu

Linear (FaAu)
FIGURE 3.2 - Standardised Plots

ST226 - 1.0 ppm

2
1.8
1.6 FaAu
Au ppm

1.4 Cert Au
1.2 2SD
1 Linear (FaAu)
0.8
0.6
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01
ST06/8222 - 1.06 ppm

1.2
1.15
1.1 FaAu
Au ppm

Cert Au
1.05
2SD
1
Linear (FaAu)
0.95
0.9
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01

ST227 - 1.2 ppm

1.45
1.4
1.35
1.3 FaAu
Au ppm

1.25 Cert Au
1.2
1.15 2SD
1.1 Linear (FaAu)
1.05
1
0.95
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01
 Au ppm Au ppm Au ppm

1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7

2
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.2

1
2
2/28/01 2/28/01 2/28/01

3/28/01 3/28/01 3/28/01

4/28/01 4/28/01 4/28/01

5/28/01 5/28/01 5/28/01

FIGURE 3.2 - Standardised Plots

6/28/01 6/28/01 6/28/01

7/28/01 7/28/01 7/28/01

8/28/01 8/28/01 8/28/01

9/28/01 9/28/01 9/28/01

ST228 - 1.5 ppm

ST09/8170 - 1.99 ppm

ST42/9272 - 1.33 ppm

10/28/01 10/28/01 10/28/01

11/28/01 11/28/01 11/28/01

2SD

2SD
2SD

FaAu

FaAu
FaAu

Cert Au

Cert Au
Cert Au

Linear (FaAu)

Linear (FaAu)
Linear (FaAu)
FIGURE 3.2 - Standardised Plots

ST49_8242 - 2.06 ppm

2.4
2.3
2.2
2.1 FaAu
Au ppm

2 Cert Au
1.9
1.8 2SD
1.7 Linear (FaAu)
1.6
1.5
1.4
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01
ST43/7194 - 3.64 ppm

4.4
4.2
4 FaAu
Au ppm

3.8 Cert Au
3.6 2SD
3.4 Linear (FaAu)
3.2
3
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01

ST04/8193 - 4.72 ppm

5.4
5.2
5 FaAu
Au ppm

4.8 Cert Au
4.6 2SD
4.4 Linear (FaAu)
4.2
4
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01
 Au ppm Au ppm Au ppm

6
7

5.6
5.8
6.2
6.4
6.6
6.8

8.5
9.5
10.5

8
9
10
11
2/28/01

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2/28/01
2/28/01
3/28/01 3/28/01
3/28/01
4/28/01 4/28/01

4/28/01
5/28/01
FIGURE 3.2 - Standardised Plots

5/28/01
5/28/01
6/28/01 6/28/01

6/28/01
7/28/01 7/28/01

7/28/01 8/28/01
8/28/01

8/28/01 9/28/01 9/28/01

ST274 - 6.27 ppm

ST18_8239 - 9.70 ppm

ST28_8240 - 35.6 ppm

9/28/01 10/28/01 10/28/01

10/28/01 11/28/01 11/28/01

11/28/01
2SD

2SD
FaAu

FaAu
Cert Au
Cert Au

2SD
FaAu
Linear (FaAu)

Cert Au
Linear (FaAu)
FIGURE 3.2 - Standardised Plots

ST136_8243 - 49.9 ppm

56
54
52 FaAu
Au ppm

Cert Au
50
2SD
48 Linear (FaAu)
46
44
2/28/01

3/28/01

4/28/01

5/28/01

6/28/01

7/28/01

8/28/01

9/28/01

10/28/01

11/28/01
4. ANALABS INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL

Analabs conducts a series of internal checks to monitor quality of results reported.

The internal quality control results are also reported to AngloGold together with the
sample batch to which they relate.

Repeating a 50g Fire Assay on the original pulp is purely to assess the precision of
the initial fire assay. A second split assays a second 50g sample taken from the total
fine residue. This assesses whether the original pulp was split equally from the total
fine residue before the initial 50g Fire Assay was conducted.

Analabs also include standards and blanks with each batch of AngloGold samples.
Standards with preferred values are used to determine the accuracy of results from
that batch. Blanks are barren samples that are used to determine whether
contamination from previous samples is influencing the final assay results.

Detailed analysis of the Analabs internal re-assays is given in an Excel spreadsheet

(2001 Analabs internal re-assays) on CD in Appendix 1.

4.1 Repeats and Second Splits

Analabs performs repeat assays on pulps with unusual looking values at a minimum
rate of 1 in 20 samples. This rate is also applied to the duplicate assays on second
split pulps but no consideration is given to the original gold grade. Consequently, the
repeats have a higher proportion of higher grade samples than the second splits.

4.1.1 First Repeats

Statistical summaries of the 3125 first repeat samples compared with the original
gold grades are included in Table 4.1.1.
The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 4.1.1 shows the following:

• The assays display excellent repeatability for all grade ranges

• The resultant mean sRPHD of 0.58% indicates that the original results return very
slight to negligibly higher grades than the re-assays.

08.12023 10
 Table 4.1.1 - Analabs Original Vs Analabs Au(r)

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 2046 0.02 0.02 0.028 0.029 1.15 1.18 -0.56
0.15 - 0.5 240 0.27 0.27 0.098 0.114 0.36 0.42 0.63
0.5 - 1.0 128 0.71 0.74 0.150 0.220 0.21 0.30 -1.05
1.0 - 1.5 106 1.24 1.31 0.144 0.568 0.12 0.43 -1.12
1.5 - 5.0 245 2.72 2.77 0.923 1.342 0.34 0.48 0.70
5.0 - 10 120 7.27 7.31 1.517 2.019 0.21 0.28 0.55
>= 10 240 77.40 75.81 229.704 238.801 2.97 3.15 2.02
TOTAL 3125 6.54 6.43 66.760 69.036 10.20 10.73 -0.17
All samples >=0.15 1064 19.17 18.84 113.385 117.357 5.91 6.23 0.58

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Reassay Au(r) Analabs Original Vs Analabs Reassay Au(r)
(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)
40 0.6

0.55

0.5
30
Analabs reassay Au(r) g/t

Analabs reassay Au(r) g/t

0.45

0.4

20 0.35

0.3

0.25
10
0.2

0.15

0 0.1
0 10 20 30 40 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Reassay Au(r) Analabs Original Vs Analabs Reassay Au(r)
(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) ( > 5ppm Au)
6 40

5
Analabs reassay Au(r) g/t

30
Analabs reassay Au(r) g/t

3 20

10
1

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 10 20 30 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Analabs Au(r)

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit Au(r)

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit (Au1 Vs Aur) sRPHD

5 Mean sRPHD
4 25% sRPHD
3 75% sRPHD
2 Median sRPHD
1 +ve sRPHD :
sRPHD

Au1>Au2
0
-1 Positive skew in
-2 white
-3 (Median > Mean)

-4 Negative skew in
-5 black
2046 240 128 106 245 120 240 3125 1079
(Mean > Median)
0.0 - 0.15 0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 5.0 - 10 gt 10 gt 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

4.1.2 Second Splits

Statistical summaries of the 2,226 second Splits compared to the original gold fire
assay results are included in Table 4.1.2.

The data range 0 - 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 4.1.2 shows the following:

• The assays display excellent repeatability for all grade ranges

• The resultant mean sRPHD of 1.12% indicates that the original results return very
slightly higher grades than the re-assays.

• Inspection of the 25th and 75th percentiles of sRPHD shows that there is a slightly
greater spread for Au v AuS than for Au v AuR. This is the expected result since
the Au and AuR samples are more closely related than the AuS samples.

08.12023 11
 Table 4.1.2 - Analabs Original Vs Analabs Au(s)

range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 1842 0.02 0.03 0.028 0.031 1.17 1.23 -2.52
0.15 - 0.5 179 0.27 0.27 0.092 0.101 0.34 0.37 1.67
0.5 - 1.0 66 0.70 0.74 0.146 0.286 0.21 0.39 -1.66
1.0 - 1.5 24 1.20 1.26 0.156 0.363 0.13 0.29 -1.26
1.5 - 5.0 49 2.56 2.59 0.967 1.492 0.38 0.58 2.57
5.0 - 10 23 7.05 7.12 1.664 2.083 0.24 0.29 0.38
>= 10 43 67.72 68.53 114.954 119.408 1.70 1.74 3.15
TOTAL 2226 1.51 1.53 18.345 18.931 12.12 12.35 -1.89
All samples >= 0.15 384 8.65 8.76 43.511 44.928 5.03 5.13 1.12

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit Au(s) Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit Au(s)
(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15-0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Analabs resplit Au(s) g/t

Analabs resplit Au(s) g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10
0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit Au(s) Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit Au(s)
(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (> 5 ppm Au)

6 40

35
5
Analabs resplit Au(s) g/t
Analabs resplit Au(s) g/t

30
4
25

3 20

15
2
10
1
5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Analabs Au(s)

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit Au(s)

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Resplit (Au1 Vs Aus) sRPHD

10 Mean sRPHD
8 25% sRPHD
6 75% sRPHD
4 Median sRPHD
2 +ve sRPHD :
sRPHD

Au1>Au2
0
-2 Positive skew in
-4 white
(Median > Mean)
-6
-8 Negative skew in
-10 black
1842 179 66 24 49 23 43 2226 384 (Mean > Median)
0.0 - 0.15 0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 5.0 - 10 gt 10 gt 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

4.2 Blanks and Standards

Analabs includes one standard and one blank per 30 fire assay samples. These
quality control samples are introduced when the samples are being weighed for fire
assay. They are used to indicate problems with the fire assay, and not the sample
preparation. Analabs supplied the data for these standards and blanks as part of the
reporting procedures.

08.12023 12
5. CHECK ASSAY RESULTS

5.1 Outliers in the data

A preliminary analysis of the raw data indicated several outliers:

• Some sample mislabelling was identified. Where these mix-ups were positively
identified, they were corrected in the database.

• One sample, whose original assay came back below detection, returned values
between 1.34g/t Au and 1.55g/t for the pulp, residue and screen fire re-assays.
After checking the original assays on either side, as well as the re-assays on
either side, it is difficult to explain the result as anything but laboratory error on
the original assay. This sample, which remains in the database, will strongly
skew the 0-0.15 g/t Au range for all re-assays.

• Another sample returned original assays and pulps in the range 0.2-0.3g/t Au.
The screen fire returned 0.93, and the residues returned 3.2g/t and 1.7g/t Au.
This sample, which remains in the database, will strongly skew the 0.15 to 0.5g/t
Au range for all Analabs Original to Analabs Residue and Analabs Pulp to
Analabs Residue re-assays.

This instance was originally considered to be a sample handling error, interpreted to

be incorrect crushing/splitting procedure at Analabs with the original sample. On
closer inspection, it was noted that the questionable result occurred directly after the
highest assay returned from the entire re-assay program (~240 g/t Au). The strong
variance in results for the sample directly after such a high grade is interpreted as a
‘tail’ on the results. The tail continues into the second sample after the peak grade
for the Analabs residue re-assay. Had the second result after the high grade been
anomalous and not the first, then the tail could be attributed to incorrect clean out of
sample bowls at the laboratories. They use a two-bowl system so the contamination
would only occur in every second sample. This is not the case, the tail only occurs
on results where the residue has been resplit by AngloGold. This indicates that the
splitter may not have been correctly cleaned after each sample. AngloGold staff also
split the pulps, but a smaller, easier to clean, splitter was used.

5.2 Screen Fire Re-assays

The screen fire re-assay data is summarised in Table 5.2.1. The complete statistical
dataset, analysis and box and whisker plots is given in the attached Excel
spreadsheet 2001screenfires.xls on CD as Appendix 1.

The data range 0 - 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation.

The mean sRPHD is -3.84%, indicating a small overall tendency for the screen fire
assays to test higher than the fire assays.

The sRPHD increases from -7.66% at the low-grade end and becomes positive
above 10g/t Au, i.e. fire assays tend to assay higher than the screen fire assays

08.12023 13
above 10g/t Au. The sRPHD flattens out to about -3 to -6% between 0.5 and 10g/t
Au, and then becomes positive above 10g/t. This trend is subtle but identifiable on
the scatter plot of FAs v SFAs, and can be easily identified on the sRPHD box plot
(see Table 5.2.1).

5.2.1 Interpretation

The Fire assays and screen fires show reasonably good correlation for assays above
0.15g/t Au.

On average the screen fire assays are reporting slightly higher grades than fire
assays for grades up to 10g/t. At higher grades the screen fire assays report slightly
lower values than the fire assays. None of the variation is considered to be
significant and there does not appear to be any problem with the fire assays
indicating the appropriate grades.

08.12023 14
 Table 5.2.1 - Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 233 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.18 0.86 2.01 -28.67
0.15 - 0.5 100 0.29 0.40 0.10 0.44 0.33 1.11 -7.66
0.5 - 1.0 55 0.70 0.80 0.15 0.38 0.22 0.48 -3.57
1.0 - 1.5 34 1.24 1.44 0.14 0.41 0.11 0.28 -6.03
1.5 - 5.0 64 2.82 3.00 0.98 1.20 0.35 0.40 -2.73
5.0 - 10 51 7.20 8.09 1.47 2.65 0.20 0.33 -3.88
>= 10 61 57.60 53.33 100.82 89.17 1.75 1.67 2.24
TOTAL 598 6.99 6.71 36.29 32.44 5.19 4.83 -13.52
All samples >=0.15 365 11.43 10.93 45.93 40.98 4.02 3.75 -3.84

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire
(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
Analabs Screen Fire Au g/t

30
Analabs Screen FIre Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire
(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
Analabs Screen Fire Au g/t

5 30
Analabs Screen Fire Au g/t

4
25

20
3
15

2 10

5
1
0
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Analabs Original Au g/t
Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire

40.000

35.000

30.000
Analabs Screen Fire Au g/t

25.000

20.000

15.000

10.000

5.000

0.000
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000 40.000
Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire sRPHD

5 Mean sRPHD
0 25% sRPHD
75% sRPHD
-5 Median sRPHD
sRPHD

-10 +ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2

Positive skew in white

-15 (Median > Mean)

-20 Negative skew in black

( Median< Mean)
-25
100 55 34 64 51 61 598 365
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 5.0 - 10 >=10 Total >= 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

5.3 Laboratory Comparisons

5.3.1 Analabs Original v Genalysis Pulp

The Genalysis samples were splits from the original assay pulp. Therefore there
should be no bias introduced through sample preparation and ideally the scatter will
be minimal.

The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.3.1 shows the following:

• A total mean sRPHD of 1.0% for the data above 0.15g/t indicates that on average
there is no significant difference between the Analabs Originals and the
Genalysis Pulps.

• The number of data in each grade range is too low for meaningful conclusions to
be drawn on each grade range.

08.12023 15
 Table 5.3.1 - Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 37 0.04 0.11 0.04 0.25 0.86 2.28 -24.63
0.15 - 0.5 13 0.27 0.26 0.12 0.16 0.44 0.63 8.69
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.66 0.76 0.12 0.22 0.19 0.29 -6.01
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.12 1.15 0.06 0.10 0.05 0.08 -1.33
1.5 - 5.0 4 2.62 3.44 1.36 2.73 0.52 0.79 -8.23
5.0 - 10 9 6.95 7.02 1.47 2.08 0.21 0.30 0.40
gt 10 8 38.89 39.62 62.32 66.01 1.60 1.67 0.83
TOTAL 81 4.90 5.06 21.75 22.79 4.43 4.50 -10.71
All samples >0.15 44 8.99 9.23 29.02 30.45 3.23 3.30 1.00

Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp

(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5
30
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

4 25

20
3
15
2
10
1 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp

40

35

30
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Pulp sRPHD

15
Mean sRPHD
10 25% sRPHD
75% sRPHD
5
Median sRPHD
sRPHD

0
+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
-5
Positive skew in white
(Median > Mean)
-10
Negative skew in black
-15 ( Median< Mean)

-20
13 7 3 4 9 8 81 44
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 5.0 - 10 >=10 Total >= 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

5.3.2 Analabs Pulp v Genalysis Pulp

These two sample sets, being 50/50 splits of the same pulp, will allow the assay
procedure at each laboratory to be assessed without being masked by variability
introduced in the sample preparation procedure.

The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.3.2 shows the following:

• The mean sRPHD for all samples greater than 0.15g/t Au is 3.19%, indicating
good agreement, on average, between the two assay sets, with Analabs assays
slightly greater than Genalysis.

• The number of data in each grade range is too low for meaningful conclusions to
be drawn on each grade range.

08.12023 16
 Table 5.3.2 - Pulp Comparison

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 36 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.87 1.25 -16.24
0.15 - 0.5 13 0.29 0.26 0.12 0.14 0.43 0.54 6.43
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.69 0.77 0.14 0.21 0.21 0.28 -4.56
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.25 1.15 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 4.03
1.5 - 5.0 5 2.47 2.46 1.36 1.21 0.55 0.49 -0.38
5.0 - 10 8 7.16 7.01 1.00 1.66 0.14 0.24 1.75
gteq 10 9 43.44 36.34 74.57 62.52 1.72 1.72 7.50
TOTAL 81 5.86 5.06 27.19 22.79 4.64 4.50 -5.45
All samples >=0.15 45 10.51 9.06 35.98 30.12 3.42 3.32 3.19

Analabs Pulp Vs Genalysis Pulp Analabs Pulp Vs Genalysis Pulp

(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Pulp Au g/t Analabs Pulp Au g/t

Analabs Pulp Vs Genalysis Pulp Analabs Pulp Vs Genalysis Pulp

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5
30
Genalysis Residue
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

4 25

20
3
15
2
10
1 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Pulp Au g/t Analabs Pulp Au g/t
 Pulp Comparison

Quantile Quantile

40

35

30
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Pulp Au g/t

Analabs Pulp Vs Genalysis Pulp (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

15
srphd
25% sRPHD
10
75% sRPHD
Median sRPHD
5
+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
sRPHD

0 Positive skew in white

(Median > Mean)
-5
Negative skew in black
(Mean > Median)
-10

-15
13 7 3 5 8 9 81 45
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 5 5 - 10 >= 10 Total >= 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

5.3.3 Analabs Original v Genalysis Residue

This comparison should reflect the relationship between Analabs original and
Genalysis pulp samples although exaggerated scatter can be expected as samples
from each data set have different sample preparation histories.

The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.3.3 shows the following:

• The mean sRPHD for all samples greater than 0.15g/t Au is –4.25%, indicating
good agreement, on average, between the two assay sets, with Genalysis assays
slightly greater than Analabs.

08.12023 17
 Table 5.3.3 - Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 38 0.04 0.10 0.035 0.234 0.85 2.30 -29.24
0.15 - 0.5 12 0.29 0.45 0.119 0.427 0.42 0.96 -7.78
0.5 - 1.0 6 0.68 0.76 0.123 0.152 0.18 0.20 -5.24
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.12 1.11 0.060 0.115 0.05 0.10 0.65
1.5 - 5.0 5 3.05 3.77 1.516 2.591 0.50 0.69 -7.06
5.0 - 10 9 6.95 7.06 1.469 1.475 0.21 0.21 -0.78
gt 10 10 35.57 40.37 55.365 66.961 1.56 1.66 -2.62
TOTAL 83 5.37 6.06 21.629 25.705 4.03 4.24 -15.69
All samples >0.15 45 9.87 11.10 28.749 34.275 2.91 3.09 -4.25

Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue

(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

Genalysis Residue Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5
Genalysis Residue Au g/t
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

30

4 25

3 20

15
2
10
1
5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue

Quantile Quantile

40

35

30
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Genalysis Residue (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

5 Mean sRPHD
25% sRPHD
0 75% sRPHD
Median sRPHD
-5
+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
-10
sRPHD

Positive skew in white

-15 (Median > Mean)

Negative skew in black

-20 (Mean > Median)

-25
12 6 3 5 9 10 83 45
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 5 5 - 10 >= 10 Total >= 0.15
-30
No. of Samples & Au Ranges
5.3.4 Analabs Residues v Genalysis Residue

These samples are identical splits from the same fine residue and therefore results
will only highlight weaknesses in laboratory assaying methods. The data should
reflect the same correlation shown between Genalysis pulps and Analabs pulps.

The data range 0 - 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.3.4 shows the following:

• The mean sRPHD for all samples greater than 0.15g/t Au is 1.75%, indicating
good agreement, on average, between the two assay sets, with Analabs assays
slightly greater than Genalysis assays.

08.12023 18
 Table 5.3.4 - Residue Comparison

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 35 0.06 0.06 0.039 0.039 0.65 0.68 -2.60
0.15 - 0.5 11 0.29 0.28 0.128 0.139 0.44 0.50 3.80
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.71 0.74 0.129 0.147 0.18 0.20 -1.96
1.0 - 1.5 5 1.20 1.03 0.147 0.421 0.12 0.41 11.22
1.5 - 5.0 5 2.67 2.52 1.266 1.229 0.47 0.49 2.31
5.0 - 10 9 6.72 6.89 1.303 1.224 0.19 0.18 -1.33
gteq 10 11 38.96 37.57 69.344 64.204 1.78 1.71 0.03
TOTAL 83 6.25 6.06 27.501 25.705 4.40 4.24 -0.08
All samples >=0.15 48 10.76 10.44 35.640 33.262 3.31 3.19 1.75

Analabs Residue Vs Genalysis Residue Analabs Residue Vs Genalysis Residue

(0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)
(>0.15ppm Au)
40
0.6

0.5
30
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

Genalysis Residue Au g/t

0.4

20
0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Residue Au g/t Analabs Residue Au g/t

Analabs Residue Vs Genalysis Residue Analabs Residue Vs Genalysis Residue

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)
6
40
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

5 35
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

30
4
25
3 20

15
2
10
1
5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Residue Au g/t Analabs Residue Au g/t
 Residue Comparison

Quantile Quantile

40

35

30
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs residue Au g/t

Analabs Residue Vs Genalysis Residue (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

20 Mean sRPHD
15 25% sRPHD
75% sRPHD
10
Median sRPHD
sRPHD

5
+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
0
Positive skew in white
-5 (Median > Mean)
-10 Negative skew in black
-15 (Mean > Median)
11 7 5 5 9 11 83 48
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 5 5 - 10 >= 10 Total >= 0.15
No. of Samples & Au Ranges
5.3.5 Interpretation – Inter-laboratory Comparisons

• Overall Analabs and Genalysis compare very favourably with all sample ranges
greater than 0.15g/t Au, returning mean sRPHDs of between -4.25% and 3.19%.

• The small number of samples in the ranges means that the statistics can be
strongly biased by a small number of outliers.

5.4 Comparison of Different Sample Sets submitted to Analabs

Comparing the Original Analabs assays with the Analabs Pulp and Residue assays
will give an indication of the repeatability produced at Analabs with different batches.
However, fundamental errors caused by splitting different sized samples will mask a
true representation of repeatability. A comparison of the same Screen fire assay
dataset as used for the pulp and residue assays is included. Only the ~80 samples
used for check assays of the 583 screen fires are included. This was done to
identify any variability problems related to the small number of samples used for the
check assays.

5.4.1 Analabs Original v Analabs Pulp

The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.4.1 shows the following:

• The sample sets have a strong correlation. The sRPHD for all values greater
than 0.15g/t Au is –1.81% indicating a very weak trend for the pulp assay to be
higher than the original.

08.12023 19
 Table 5.4.1 - Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp

Range No. of mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 37 0.04 0.09 0.04 0.25 0.86 2.76 -10.54
0.15 - 0.5 13 0.27 0.28 0.12 0.16 0.44 0.55 3.44
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.66 0.68 0.12 0.16 0.19 0.23 -0.87
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.12 1.25 0.06 0.11 0.05 0.09 -5.35
1.5 - 5.0 4 2.62 3.39 1.36 2.81 0.52 0.83 -6.79
5.0 - 10 9 6.95 7.63 1.47 2.70 0.21 0.35 -3.37
gt 10 8 38.89 47.11 62.32 78.85 1.60 1.67 -5.61
TOTAL 81 4.90 5.86 21.75 27.19 4.43 4.64 -5.80
All samples >0.15 44 8.99 10.71 29.02 36.37 3.23 3.40 -1.81

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp

(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Analabs Pulp Au g/t

Analabs Pulp Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5
30
Analabs Pulp Au g/t
Analabs Pulp Au g/t

4 25

20
3
15
2
10
1 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp

40

35

30
Genalysis Resplit Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Pulp sRPHD

6
Mean sRPHD
4
25% sRPHD
2
75% sRPHD
0
Median sRPHD
sRPHD

-2
-4 +ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
-6 Positive skew in white
-8 (Median > Mean)
-10
Negative skew in black
-12 ( Median< Mean)
-14
13 7 3 4 9 8 81 44
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 5.0 - 10 >=10 Total >= 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

5.4.2 Analabs Original v Analabs Residue

The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.4.2 shows the following:

• The sample sets have a reasonably strong correlation. The sRPHD for all values
greater than 0.15g/t Au is –5.26% indicating a weak trend for the residue assay to
be higher than the original.

• The residues have a much stronger negative sRPHD (-13.9%) in the 0.15-0.5g/t
Au range than identified in the pulp re-assays. The residues also have a higher
CV than the pulps. On average the residue assay results in this range are higher
than the original assays but it should be noted that there are only 12 samples in
the range.

08.12023 20
 Table 5.4.2 - Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 38 0.04 0.10 0.04 0.21 0.85 2.05 -26.47
0.15 - 0.5 12 0.29 0.62 0.12 0.85 0.42 1.37 -13.92
0.5 - 1.0 6 0.68 0.74 0.12 0.12 0.18 0.16 -3.94
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.12 1.19 0.06 0.16 0.05 0.14 -2.71
1.5 - 5.0 5 3.05 3.53 1.52 2.54 0.50 0.72 -2.73
5.0 - 10 9 6.95 7.02 1.47 1.75 0.21 0.25 -0.18
gt 10 10 35.57 41.84 55.36 72.40 1.56 1.73 -2.25
TOTAL 83 5.37 6.25 21.63 27.50 4.03 4.40 -14.97
All samples >0.15 45 9.87 11.44 28.75 36.73 2.91 3.21 -5.26

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue

(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Analabs Residue Au g/t

Analabs Residue Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5
Analabs Residue Au g/t

30
Analabs Residue Au g/t

4 25

20
3
15
2
10
1 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue

40

35

30
Analabs Residue Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Analabs Residue (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

10
Mean sRPHD
5 25% sRPHD
75% sRPHD
0
Median sRPHD
-5
sRPHD

-10 +ve sRPHD :

Au1>Au2
-15
Positive skew in white
-20 (Median > Mean)
-25
12 6 3 5 9 10 83 45 Negative skew in
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 5.0 - 10 >=10 Total >= 0.15 black
No. of Samples & Au Ranges (Mean > Median)
5.4.3 Analabs Original Vs Analabs Screen Fire (restricted dataset)

The data range 0 – 0.15g/t has been ignored in the following evaluation and
interpretation. Examination of Table 5.4.3 shows the following:

• The sample sets have a reasonably strong correlation. The sRPHD for all values
greater than 0.15g/t Au is –5.62% indicating a weak trend for the screen fire
assay to be higher than the original.

A consistent trend from negative to positive sRPHD identified in the unrestricted

dataset (see Section 5.2 and Table 5.2.1) can not be identified in the restricted
subset. The highest negative sRPHD values are in the middle of the grade range in
the restricted dataset. Note, however that the number of samples in each grade
range is really too low to allow any firm conclusions to be drawn on any particular
grade range.

08.12023 21
 Table 5.4.3 - Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires Restricted

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 41 0.04 0.10 0.03 0.22 0.90 2.17 -34.78
0.15 - 0.5 13 0.27 0.37 0.12 0.23 0.44 0.62 -7.01
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.66 0.76 0.12 0.22 0.19 0.29 -5.92
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.12 1.26 0.06 0.21 0.05 0.17 -5.41
1.5 - 5.0 5 3.05 3.98 1.52 2.64 0.50 0.66 -10.18
5.0 - 10 9 6.95 7.74 1.47 1.98 0.21 0.26 -4.85
gt 10 11 33.38 35.34 53.02 55.39 1.59 1.57 -2.41
TOTAL 89 5.15 5.58 20.92 21.93 4.07 3.93 -19.05
All samples >0.15 48 9.51 10.25 27.88 29.19 2.93 2.85 -5.62

Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires(Restricted) Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires(Restricted)

(>0.15ppm Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
Screen Fires (Restricted) Au g/t

Screen Fires (Restricted) Au g/t

30

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs ScreenFires(Restricted) Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires(Restricted)

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
Screen Fires (Restricted) Au g/t
Screen Fires (Restricted) Au g/t

5 30

4
25

20
3
15
2
10
1 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t Analabs Original Au g/t
 Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires Restricted

Quantile Quantile
Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires (Restricted)

40

35
Screen Fires (Restricted) Au g/t

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Original Au g/t

Analabs Original Vs Screen Fires (Restricted) (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

5
Mean sRPHD
0 25% sRPHD
75% sRPHD
-5 Median sRPHD

-10
sRPHD

+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2

-15 Positive skew in white

(Median > Mean)
-20 Negative skew in black
(Mean > Median)
-25

-30
13 7 3 5 9 11 89 48
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 5 5 - 10 >= 10 Total >= 0.15
No. of Samples & Au Ranges
5.4.4 Interpretation

• Once the non-laboratory error of the tail on the data is discounted, the sample
types all compare favourably. No strong bias is indicated.

• The precision of the pulp re-assay compared to the original is higher than the
residue re-assay. This is expected as the pulp re-assay sample is more closely
related to the original sample.

• The small datasets used for the check assays reduce the ability to pick out trends
in the data. They do give a relatively consistent if slightly more variable result
when compared to a larger dataset.

• A very similar precision to that shown by the residues can be seen in the
restricted SFA dataset. This is expected as the residues were split off of the
remaining samples left from the screen fire analysis, and therefore are equivalent
samples.

5.5 Comparison between Splits

There should be no bias related to the laboratory assaying procedures as analysis of

samples were conducted at the same facility, however these comparisons will
highlight whether any systematic error occurs as a result of splitting pulp samples
from residues.

5.5.1 Analabs Pulp v Analabs Residue

Examination of Table 5.5.1 reveals the following:

• The total mean sRPHD for values greater than 0.15g/t is –1.34%. This is
negatively skewed by the strong negative sRPHDs attributable to the tail
identified in 5.1 (Analabs original and pulp assays in the range 0.2 – 0.3g/t,
Analabs residue assays 3.2 and 1.7g/t). The skew in the 0.15 – 0.5g/t Au (pulp)
range is such that the mean is less than the 25th percentile due to this effect. As
a result the median (-0.55%) is probably a better estimate. The total median
sRPHD for all samples > 0.15g/t Au is 0.71%, indicating insignificant bias.

08.12023 22
 Table 5.5.1 - Analabs Reassay Comparison

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 33 0.04 0.07 0.038 0.062 0.85 0.90 -18.59
0.15 - 0.5 12 0.27 0.59 0.114 0.865 0.42 1.47 -10.02
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.69 0.71 0.143 0.129 0.21 0.18 -1.43
1.0 - 1.5 3 1.25 1.19 0.107 0.161 0.09 0.14 2.64
1.5 - 5.0 5 2.47 2.51 1.360 1.805 0.55 0.72 2.27
5.0 - 10 8 7.16 6.84 1.002 1.332 0.14 0.19 2.67
gteq 10 8 47.36 46.73 78.730 81.305 1.66 1.74 3.86
TOTAL 76 6.08 6.04 28.045 28.618 4.61 4.74 -8.85
All samples >=0.15 43 10.71 10.62 36.796 37.589 3.44 3.54 -1.37

Analabs Pulp Vs Analabs Residue (>0.15ppm Au) Analbs Pulp Vs Analabs Residue
(0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40
0.6

0.5
30
Analabs Residue Au g/t

Analabs Residue Au g/t

0.4

20
0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Analabs Pulp Au g/t Analabs Pulp Au g/t

Analabs Pulp Vs Analabs Residue Analabs Pulp Vs Analabs Residue

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5 30
Analabs Residue Au g/t

Analabs Residue

4 25

20
3
15
2
10
1 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Pulp Au g/t Analabs Pulp Au g/t
 Analabs Reassay Comparison

Quantile Quantile

40

35

30
Analabs residue Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Analabs Pulp Au g/t

Analabs Pulp Vs Analabs Residue (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

15
Mean sRPHD
25% sRPHD
10
75% sRPHD
Median sRPHD
5
+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
sRPHD

0 Positive skew in white

(Median > Mean)
-5
Negative skew in black
(Mean > Median)
-10

-15
12 7 3 5 8 8 76 43
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 5 5 - 10 >= 10 Total >= 0.15
No. of Samples & Au Ranges
5.5.2 Genalysis Pulp v Genalysis Residue

Examination of Table 5.5.2 reveals the following:

• The sRPHD for all samples with a grade >0.15g/t is -0.75%.

• The sRPHD for the grade range 0.5 to 1.0g/t is high at 8.84% but only seven
assays occur in this grade range and one of the comparisons shows a pulp assay
of 0.5 g/t against a residue assay of 0.1g/t, substantially increasing the sRPHD.

08.12023 23
 Table 5.5.2 - Genalysis Reassay Comparison

Range No. of Mean SD CV Mean

Au g/t Samples Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 Au1 Au2 sRPHD
0 - 0.15 34 0.06 0.08 0.039 0.098 0.69 1.25 -7.88
0.15 - 0.5 10 0.28 0.42 0.102 0.464 0.36 1.12 -5.88
0.5 - 1.0 7 0.68 0.63 0.150 0.268 0.22 0.43 8.84
1.0 - 1.5 4 1.15 1.05 0.078 0.143 0.07 0.14 4.77
1.5 - 5.0 5 2.46 2.51 1.209 1.330 0.49 0.53 -0.42
5.0 - 10 7 6.52 6.95 0.989 0.915 0.15 0.13 -3.28
gteq 10 9 36.05 40.71 62.653 71.439 1.74 1.75 -3.23
TOTAL 76 5.22 5.83 23.489 26.722 4.50 4.58 -3.95
All samples >=0.15 42 9.39 10.48 31.134 35.448 3.31 3.38 -0.76

Genalysis Pulp Vs Genalysis Residue (>0.15ppm Genalysis Pulp Vs Genalysis Residue

Au) (0.15 - 0.5 ppm Au)

40 0.6

0.5
30
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

Genalysis Residue Au g/t

0.4

20 0.3

0.2
10

0.1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

Genalysis Pulp Vs Genalysis Residue Genalysis Pulp Vs Genalysis Residue

(0.5 - 5 ppm Au) (>5 ppm Au)

40
6
35
5
30
Genalysis Residue Au g/t

Genalysis Residue

4 25

20
3
15
2
10
1
5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t Genalysis Pulp Au g/t
 Genalysis Reassay Comparison

Quantile Quantile

40

35

30
Genalysis residue Au g/t

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Genalysis Pulp Au g/t

Genalysis Pulp Vs Genalysis Residue (Au1 Vs Au2) sRPHD

15
Mean sRPHD
25% sRPHD
10 75% sRPHD
Median sRPHD
5 +ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2
sRPHD

Positive skew in white

0 (Median > Mean)

Negative skew in black

-5 (Mean > Median)

-10
10 7 4 5 7 9 76 42
0.15 - 0.5 0.5 - 1 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 5 5 - 10 >= 10 Total >= 0.15

No. of Samples & Au Ranges

5.5.3 Interpretation

The data show very good correlation with only small precision errors, once the bias
caused by the previously noted tail is removed. There are few discrepancies
between residue and pulp re-assays attributable to the laboratories.

08.12023 24
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusions

1. No nugget effect can be identified by a comparison between FA and SFA

results. The FA technique is entirely satisfactory.

2. There is no consistent bias pattern between laboratories. Genalysis tended to

display slightly more outliers in the data, but this is not a consistent trend.
Figure 6.1 provides a summary of sRPHD for all assays greater than 0.15g/t
Au.

Figure 6.1 Comparative Data for s RPHD% – 2001 Check Assays

Comparative Data - 2001 Check Assays

12 Mean sRPHD
Au v AuR Au v AuS Au v SFA Au v Gen AnPu v Au v Gen AnRes v Au v Au v Au v SFA An Pu v GenPu v
25% sRPHD
Pulp GenPu Res GenRes AnPu AnRes rest. AnRes GenRes
8 75% sRPHD
Median sRPHD

4
sRPHD (%)

-4

-8

-12
+ve sRPHD : Au1>Au2. Positive skew in white (Median > Mean). Negative skew in black (Mean > Median).

3. Errors in labelling of samples appear to be the main source of error with

standards submitted. It is difficult to define whether this is a laboratory
handling issue, or if it happened prior to submission to the laboratory.

4. Above a grade of 0.15g/t the assays of the standards display a predominantly

positive mean sRPD indicating that on average the result is lower than the
certified value

5. The AngloGold standards submitted to Analabs returned strong correlations,

once mislabelling of samples was removed.

6. Three of the Standards assayed in the first half of the year show a trend of
decreasing grades with time, although none of these standards was assayed
in the second half of the year, and this trend can not be confirmed in this
period. The other five standards show no trend in the first half of the year.

08.12023 25
 Two of these Standards were also assayed throughout the second half of the
year and continued to show no bias.

7. Measurements at or near the Detection Limit have poor precision. Generally

the useful working range of analytical methods should be considered to be at
levels greater than at least 5 or 10 times the quoted detection limit for the
method. No detailed statistical evaluation of data in the grade range 0 to
0.15g/t is warranted.

8. Submission of Blanks and monitoring of the Blank assays provides a check on

sample mix ups and enables performance of the laboratory at the detection
limit to be assessed – principally by inspection/plotting of results.

6.2 Recommendations

Screen fire re-assays of the original fire assay data have given confidence that the
fire assays carried out at Analabs Welshpool laboratory are reporting true grade with
acceptable precision. It is recommended that screen fire re-assaying of all ore grade
intercepts is unnecessary.

Comparison of Screen fire assays and fire assays should be carried out when new
styles of mineralisation are being tested, or when a coarse gold problem is known to
exist.

Both Analabs and Genalysis have shown good precision in their assays. Analabs
Welshpool should continue to be the laboratory of choice for high-grade samples.
Genalysis should continue in its role as check laboratory.

The submission of AngloGold Standards is an integral part of the quality control

system, provides an effective check on the laboratory and should continue.

Monitoring of very low-grade samples should continue to ensure that the machine
precision and detection limits meet the agreed levels for the assay method in use.

08.12023 26
7. REFERENCES

Report No. Date Author Description

08.7113 May 1995 J. Jessop Check Assay Results, 1994/1995 Diamond

(Acacia Drilling Program - Cleo Prospect
Resources)

08.7873 January 1997 H. Dorsett-Bain Check Assay Results, 1996 Diamond Drilling
J. Jessop Program

08.7312 October 1994 HAM,J Sunrise Dam Check Assay Report

08.10327 January 2000 SDGM Geology Geology of the Sunrise Dam Gold Mine,
Department Western Australia

08.10329 December C. Bisgood Sunrise Dam Project - Analabs Check Assay

1999 Results 1997-1999 Exploration
Drilling Program - Includes CD

SDGM.107 February C. Bisgood and Sunrise Dam Gold Mine - Amdel Laboratories
00 2000 C Spurway Ltd Check Assay Results 1999 Exploration
Drilling Program - Includes CD

08.12023 27
 APPENDIX I
(CD ATTACHED)

Contents: Report 08.12023

Data CD - 2001 Standards.xls
- 2001 Analabs Internal Re-assays.xls
- 2001 Screen Fires.xls
- 2001 Re-assays.xls
- 2001 Re-assays Comparisons.xls

NOTE:

The Excel files included in this CD contain raw data, statistics and graphic
output for comparison of sets of assays.

Some of the tables of data and plots in these spreadsheets were completed
prior to a major revision of the report and are no longer considered to be
necessary for the evaluation of the paired assay data.

These spreadsheets should not be used as a template for evaluation of

datasets in the future without substantial editing or re-configuration.