exploration report on reinfjord, …...the gabbro screen is conformable to the igneous layering of...

EXPLORATION REPORT ON REINFJORD, LOKKARFJORD, AND

TAPPELUFT INTRUSIONS OF THE SEILAND IGNEOUS PROVINCE,

NORWAY

for

NORDIC MINING ASA

Markku Iljina GeoConsulting Tmi Dec 15, 2011

Table of Contents

1. Scope ................................................................................................................................................................1

2. Background .......................................................................................................................................................1

3. Geology .............................................................................................................................................................2

3.1. Reinfjord ...................................................................................................................................................3

3.2. Lokkarfjord ................................................................................................................................................4

3.3. Tappeluft ..................................................................................................................................................6

4. Field observations.............................................................................................................................................6

5. Whole-rock chemistry ................................................................................................................................... 17

5.1. Quality assessment ................................................................................................................................ 18

5.2. Theoretical background ......................................................................................................................... 18

5.3. Småvatna and Bonjikdalen sulphide chemistry ..................................................................................... 19

5.4. Scattered observations from Reinfjord intrusion .................................................................................. 23

5.5. Genesis of Reinfjord sulphides .............................................................................................................. 23

5.6 Lokkarfjord sulphide chemistry ............................................................................................................. 24

5.7. Tappeluft sulphide chemistry ................................................................................................................ 26

6. Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................... 26

6.1. Reinfjord ................................................................................................................................................ 26

6.1.1. Geophysical survey ........................................................................................................................ 26 6.1.2. Geological interpretation and ore genesis .................................................................................... 28 6.1.3. Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 29

6.2. Lokkarfjord ............................................................................................................................................. 30

6.2.1. Geological interpretation and ore genesis .................................................................................... 30 6.2.2. Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 30

6.3. Tappeluft ............................................................................................................................................... 31

7. Evaluation of the Seiland Igneous Province to host Ni-Cu-PGE sulphide deposits ....................................... 32

7.1. Geotectonic setting, age, and character of magmas ............................................................................. 32

7.2. Sulphide saturation ............................................................................................................................... 34

7.3. Encountered deposits and mineralisation indications .......................................................................... 34

7.4. Quantitative evaluation ......................................................................................................................... 35

8. References ..................................................................................................................................................... 36

APPENDIX 1 R factor calculations ...................................................................................................................... 38

APPENDIX 2 Field observations .......................................................................................................................... 40

Appendix 3 Petrohysical properties of the samples ......................................................................................... 45

E X P L O R A T I O N R E P O R T O N R E I N F J O R D , L O K K A R F J O R D , … P a g e | 1

Markku Iljina GeoConsulting Tmi Dec 15th, 2011

1. Scope Markku Iljina GeoConsulting Tmi (MIGC) was engaged by Nordic Mining ASA to plan, execute

and report field exploration campaign on company’s pre-claims of Reinfjord, Tappeluft, and

Lokkarfjord locating in the counties of Finnmark and Troms (Fig. 1). The contract was confirmed

on May 2011 and the field operation itself was executed between 15th

and 27th

of August, 2011.

Student Outi Ahvenjärvi from the University of Oulu was employed by MIGC to assist in the

mission. In addition, a group of people from Nordic Mining and Trondheim University of Science

and Technology (NTNU) participated in the trip in Aug. 23rd

- 25th

, 2011. This Norwegian group

composed of Exploration Manager Mona Schanche (Nordic Mining), professor Rune Larsen, and

students Endre Nerhus Øen and Lars Anker-Rasch. NTNU student team stayed two weeks in

Reinfjord for geological mapping.

The contract included also arrangements for sample preparation, measurements of samples’

petrophysical properties, and haulage of samples to ALS Chemex assay laboratory in Piteå,

Sweden.

The reporting was agreed to compose of and discuss on the following subjects:

1. Field observations:

-Day-to-day sections of activities and observations

-Map illustration of observation points

-Tabled observation list with descriptions

-ArcView compatible Shape files of field observation

-ArcView compatible Shape files of petrophysical laboratory measurement results

- ArcView compatible Shape files of chemical assays

-Comments on petrophysical measurements

-Relationship of airborne EM anomalies and field observations

2. Geology section:

-Concise describtion of the geology of the Seiland Igneous Province

-Evaluation of the Seiland Igneous Province to host Ni-Cu-PGE deposits.

3. Assay results:

-Comments on analytical results.

4. Recommendations for further work

2. Background First exploration reports, including company reports and academic studies on nickel and copper

enrichments in Reinfjord and Lokkarfjord, derive from early ‘70ies. Later studies in Lokkarfjord as

ordered by Nordic Mining and made by Norwegian Geological Survey (NGU, Often and

Schiellerup, 2008) revealed the known sulphide dykes to have also high Platinum-Group Element

(PGE) contents as an sample returned with values of 0.80 % Ni, 0.72 % Cu, 608 ppb Pd, 166 ppb

Pt, and 49 ppb Au. For Reinfjord NGU reports 0.15 % Ni and 0.15 % Cu, but low PGE levels of

about few ppb. For Tappeluft base metal sulphides had been reported in an academic dissertation

(Roberts, 2007), but no attempt had been made to follow up the findings. The company had claimed

Lokkarfjord in 2010, and Reinfjord and Tappeluft in 2011.



Fig. 1. Geological map of the Seiland Igneous Province after Roberts (2007). Reinfjord, Tappeluft, and Lokkarfjord target areas indicated.

In Spring 2011 company contracted geophysical survey company, SkyTEM Surveys (SkyTEM), to

do helicopter geophysical measurements in Reinfjord and Lokkarfjord. These surveys measured

bedrock conductivity down to 500 m and total magnetic field. These surveys came back with

conductivity anomalies in Reinfjord but hardly any indications of conductors in Lokkarfjord. No

helicopter survey was done on Tappeluft.

The principal aim of the field exploration campaign reported here was to get bedrock information

from detected conductivity anomalies and re-sample known mineral enrichments. The academic

studies started by the NTNU students aim to produce further petrological information from

Reinfjord intrusion.

3. Geology Reinfjord, Tappeluft, and Lokkarfjord are ultramafic intrusions of the Seiland Igneous Province

(SIP), which in addition to ultramafic rocks is composed of various mafic and even alkaline igneous

rocks (Robins 1996, Roberts 2007, and Larsen 2011). The whole SIP is hosted by a nappe complex

of Norwegian Caledonides. SIP was emplaced and crystallized in a short time span of about 10 Ma,

560-570 Ma ago. Volumetrically largest mafic and ultramafic intrusions are aged to be formed in

LOKKARFJORD

TAPPELUFT REINFJORD



even shorter time span of only 4 Ma. The Province is interpreted to have extensional setting,

possibly in an intracontinental rift or in a back-arc setting.

Fig. 2. Bedrock (circles) and boulder (triangles) observation points and Reinfjord target areas on geological map. Day1,… refer to corresponding day descriptions in the text. Line A-B refers to cross-section depicted in Fig. 3. Map modified after Emblin 1985 to fit new field observations.

3.1. Reinfjord The following is based on descriptions made by Söyland Hansen (1971), Bennet (1971 and 1974),

Emblin (1985), and Bennett et al (1986). The Reinfjord intrusion has been intruded into layered

Langstrand gabbro found mainly on eastern and southern sides, and sedimentary garnet gneiss

found on the western side (Fig. 2). Main structural and lithological units of the intrusion are the

Layered Series (LS) and Central Series (CS) the latter been interpreted to have intrusive relationship

to the former. A Marginal Zone (MZ) has been developed between the LS and the enveloping

country rocks. In addition to these, a conspicuous Gabbro Screen is found as a giant slab inside in

the intrusion. This Gabbro Screen is also used to define Lower Layered Series and Upper Layered

Series and correspondingly the upper and lower Marginal Zones so that LS and MZ below the

screen are called ‘lower’, and those above as ‘upper’. In addition to upper and lower MZ, the

Northeast Marginal Zone has been defined; it separates CS from Langstrand gabbro in NE corner of

the intrusion.

The LS and CS are composed of olivine cumulates with various amounts of pyroxenes (wehrlite,

lherzolite, dunite). The prevailing pyroxene is clinopyroxene, which together with orthopyroxene

are commonly forming oikocrysts giving a poikilitic texture for the rock. The principal difference



between LS and CS lies in the amount of pyroxene the CS containing less pyroxene and being more

often dunite. The LS and CS are well-layered and layering is dipping to E-SE at shallow angle.

Fig. 3. Schematic cross-section over the Reinfjord intrusion approximately along the line A-B in Fig. 2. Modified after Bennett 1974. gn, garnet gneiss; gb, Langstrand Gabbro; MZ, Marginal Zone; umaf, ultramafic units.

The MZ is more heterogeneous in its lithology, structures, and textures. It is mainly ultramafic, but

more pyroxene rich (up to pyroxenite) than LS and contains also plagioclase in places making rock

gabbro and troctolite. Pyroxenitic and gabbroic pegmatites are present in MZ. It also contains

gabbro xenoliths sizing from dm to hundred meters. As an unit it represent a typical thick marginal

zone indicative of dynamic intrusion and extensive interaction of magma and partially melted

country rocks.

The gabbro Screen is an extensive sheet of Langstrand gabbro connecting the large gabbro territory

in the east to smaller gabbro body separating the Reinfjord intrusion and garnet gneiss in the west.

The Gabbro Screen is conformable to the igneous layering of the enveloping Reinfjord intrusion.

The strike length of the slab on present erosion surface is about 1.5 km while the thickness is

mapped to be 100-150 m (Fig. 2).

The relationship between various structural units of the ultramafic intrusion, garnet gneiss,

Langstrand gabbro, and gabbro screen is depicted in the Fig. 3.

As an entirety Reinfjord intrusion has vertical or steeply dipping contacts with enveloping country

rocks and is interpreted to plunge steeply to east or northeast. This also leads to imminent angular

discordance between the gently dipping layering of the intrusion and the country rock contacts. In

outcrop scale the contact zone is characterized by numerous gabbro rafts and tongues in the MZ

giving rise field relationship described as ‘interlayered’ in this field report.

3.2. Lokkarfjord

Lokkarfjord is rather small (c. 2 km2) ultramafic-mafic intrusion surrounded by younger gabbro and

the sea. Topographically Lokkarfjord has very steep walls rising from the sea level to plateau c. 600

m higher up. Lokkarfjord is not mapped in detail, but observations made in the visit, supported by

samples collected by Often and Schiellerup (2008), indicate the rock type on the sea level to be

magnetite enriched ultramafic hornblendite while the plateau level is found to be composed of

coarse grained mafic hornblende gabbro. The chemistry of the Lokkarfjord deviates substantially

1 km

1 km

gn MZ gb

MZ

umaf

umaf



from all other Seiland intrusions as having high phosphorus content throughout as described later in

the report.

Fig. 4. Bedrock (circles) and boulder (triangles) observation points and Reinfjord target areas on surface conductivity map. Lakes indicated by white. Day1,… refer to corresponding day descriptions in the text.

Day 1, area 1

Day 1, area 2

Day 1, area 3

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4

Day 5

Day 7

Day 9

Småvatna

Bonjikdalen



Fig. 5. Geological map of area 1 of day 1. Points R1001-R1011 refer to sampling points. Layering of olivine cumulate (oC) is 090/20. Xe, gabbro xenolith (R1005) 15 m in diameter.

3.3. Tappeluft Roberts (2007) describes Tappeluft Complex (Fig. 12) to comprises coeval pegmatitic gabbro,

ultramafic rock and syenite, intruded into a larger mass of clinopyroxene gabbro. The pegmatitic

gabbro is emplaced as both concordant sheets and discordant dykes and pipes. The ultramafic

portion of the complex comprises clinopyroxenites and peridotites. This deviates bit from what was

visually observed on outcrops, see Day 6 in Chapter ‘Field observations’.

4. Field observations This Chapter describes geological observation on day-to-day basis and discusses shortly on the

implications referring also to assay results and petrophysical properties of rock samples. The field

programme emphasized abundant sampling, totally 106 samples were collected. In addition to that,

a bulk sample of c. 3 kg was taken from Småvatna mineralization for possible concentration tests.

The numbering protocol of samples was based on target area and sampler:

C1001… for samler Iljina,

C1…for sampler Ahvenjärvi, in which

C stands for Target area: R, Reinfjord; L, Lokkarfjord; T, Tappeluft

Samples with coordinates and descriptions are listed in App. 2.



Physical properties measured and calculated by the Geological Survey of Finland include (App. 3):

-density

-susceptibility

-remanence

-calculated Q-ratio

-resistivity measured by galvanic method using three different frequencies (0.1, 10, and 500 Hz)

-conductivity measured by inductive method

-calculated chargeability 1 and 2

In text it is referred to geophysical instrument called Proxan. Proxan is a portable EM device

designed to measure conductivity of bigger boulders and bedrock down to about 4 m, 8 m in max.

High susceptibility of the rock hampers Proxan measurements precluding detection of weaker

conductors though the good conductors would be detected despite of high magnetite content.

Samples collected from the Reinfjord intrusion are depicted on geological map of Fig. 2 and surface

conductivity map of Fig. 4.

The airborne geophysical results referred in this Chapter refer to interim results and interpretations

provided by SkyTEM before the field work session. Later Nordic Mining contracted Revelation

Geoscience Ltd to perform interpretations on the airborne final results.

Day 1, Aug. 16th

, miscellaneous subtarget areas

Area 1. Stratigraphic sample profile starting from garnet gneiss in the west, passing through

marginal zone (c. 20 m thick) and variable olivine cumulates (oC) and ending to Langstrand gabbro

in the east (Fig. 5). This profile was made as MIGC team had a helicopter in use and to visit this

remote area would have been impossible in the short time available for NTNU student team, which

otherwise was in charge of geological mapping. Also, according to available mapping data, the site

had most of the Reinfjord rock types exposed in a small area enabling stratigraphic sampling. 11

samples collected, R1001-R1011.

Observations and conclusions: Reinfjord ultramafic complex has the width of about 600 m on

present erosion surface. The Marginal Zone in contact with the garnet gneiss, is well

developed and has rather sharp contacts. This MZ is weathered and crumbles readily in

sampling. The mineral composition was interpreted ultramafic, plagioclase bearing

pyroxenite. MZ has rusty colour, but no visible sulphides were detected. The olivine cumulate

(oC) of the layered series is well-layered and has large pyroxene oikocrysts. Contact between

olivine cumulate and Langstrand gabbro is of ‘interlayered’ type in which oC and gabbro

‘layers’ follow each other on the surface profile.

Area 2. Field check of airborne conductivity anomaly (Fig. 4). An area of 150 m by 70 m was

checked in the centre of the anomaly. Four outcrop samples, R1-R4.

Observations and conclusions: Few sulphide grains were encountered in a gabbro looking

enclave (3m*6m) in olivine cumulate. The amount sulphides encountered do not explain

conductivity anomaly. The 3D interpretation of airborne conductivity measurement indicates

conductor to dip SE and extend to depth of c. 300 m referring that it is not related to surface

weathering phenomena. The reason for conductivity anomaly remains unconfirmed, but an

interpretation, that it is caused by sulphide precipitation triggered by assimilation of gabbro

slabs, can be put forward. Much more sulphides than encountered on surface are, however,

needed to explain conductivity anomaly.



Area 3. Field check of airborne conductivity anomaly, which plots over the Langstrand gabbro (Figs

2 and 4). Two mineralized gabbro boulders and one unmineralized outcrop sampled, R5-R7.

Observations and conclusions: The outcropped bedrock on the lake shore is unmineralized

banded gabbro. The topography rises steeply to SW from the lake and several fallen sulphide

mineralized gabbro boulders were found. Sulphide occurred in bands (layers?), which may

easily lead rock to be a galvanic conductor. Further supporting evidence comes from the

observation made in the following day (Aug. 17th

), when a thick (0.5 m) sulphide bearing

layer in gabbro gave positive reading in Proxan measurement.

Day 2, Aug. 17th

, ‘The Lake District’ Area of lowered resistivity locates in the centre of the ultramafic complex and no reason for

lowered resistivity was known. The conductive body has also depth extension. In contrary, the

known sulphide dissemination of the marginal zone in eastern edge of the conductive area did look

not to show up in the conductivity map. The Lake District is also a magnetic low. 18 samples

collected R1012-R1018, R1053, R1054, and R8-R15 (Figs 6 and 7).

Observations and conclusions: Field check gave no field indications for the lowered

resistivity. Only few sulphide grains were encountered in the oC in the centre of the anomaly.

Due to lower susceptibility of the Lake District the Proxan survey was possible. Proxan

indicated weak (up to 15 units), but undisputable conductivity anomaly in the vicinity of the

sampling points R1013 and R1053 (Fig. 6). Due to limitations of Proxan device, the

conductor should be in depth of less than 10 m.

The Langstrand gabbro has sulphide bearing layers 2-50 cm in thickness. The thickest layer

gave conductivity signal when measured by Proxan. The Contact Zone between oC and

Langstrand gabbro was interlayered and the slabs of gabbro into Reinfjord ultramafics were

rather sizeable i.e. maybe few tens of meters thick and few hundred of meters long. The

NTNU students have distinguished pyroxenite (Marginal Zone proper) and crossover zone

(i.e. that interlayered zone) in the Contact Zone (Fig. 7). Lake District marginal zone was

observed to resemble Småvatna and Bonjikdalen in terms of amount of sulphides and

continuity of mineralisation.



Fig. 6. Lake District, sampling points on the conductivity map of depth interval 10-15 m, SkyTEM interim results. Lakes and rivers outlined. Circles are outcrop and triangles are boulder observations. Sampling site R1013-R1053 shows the conductor recognised by Proxan.

Fig. 7. Lake District, sampling points on the geological map. Lakes and rivers outlined. Circles are outcrop and triangles are boulder observations.

0 250 500

Meters

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!. !.

!.

!.

!.

!.

#*

!.

!.!.!.!.

!.

!.!.

524770

524770

524970

524970

525170

525170

525370

525370

525570

525570

525770

525770

525970

525970

526170

526170

526370

526370

77

76

54

377

76

64

3 77

76

74

377

76

84

3 77

76

94

377

77

04

3 77

77

14

377

77

24

3 77

77

34

377

77

44

3 77

77

54

377

77

64

3 77

77

74

3

0 250 500

Meters

Dunite Peridotite

Olivine pyroxenite

Pyroxenite

Crossover zone Sulphide mineralised

Langstrand gabbro

R1013 R1053



Day 3, Aug. 18th

, The Valley

A 1.7 km long east-west oriented conductivity anomaly runs to east of lake Storvannet (Elljajávri).

The area is also magnetic low. The anomaly follows a rather deep valley, which has been

interpreted to follow a fault zone, along which the northern block has moved eastwards about 200

m. A sample profile was taken along the olivine cumulates of valley complemented by two

Marginal Zone samples (Figs 8 and 9). Twelve samples collected R1019-R1026 and R16-R19.

Observations and conclusion: Clear evidences of the fault zone was found as the olivine

cumulates were sheared and a vertical banding (cm wide bands) had been developed

paralleling the strike of the valley. The true magmatic layering was yet still visible and dipped

gently to SSE (135/30). One striking observation was that the rocks were distinctly magnetic

in field measurements and the laboratory measurements indicated one of the highest

susceptibility values for the ‘Valley’ samples (up to 150 mSI units) in Reinfjord intrusion

(Fig. 10). This contradicts to magnetic low in the SkyTEM results. Reason to that is most

likely that there are magnetic rock masses (valley walls) above the measuring magnetometer.

No sulphide grains were detected in the olivine cumulates, but in the eastern end of the profile

cavities after sulphide weathering (mm size) and possible silicate replacement of sulphide

grains (pyrite crystal shape) were anticipated. (Assay results revealed however, one sample to

contain some sulphides.) The porosity is also expressed by low resistivity readings in galvanic

conductivity measurements. The ‘Valley’ samples form also a group of their own in

susceptibility vs. density plot (Fig. 10) as being characterised by high susceptibility and low

density. Lowered density and resistivity may both originate from shearing.

In the western end of profile the Valley cuts the Marginal Zone. MZ outcropping on south

side was mapped to be sulphide bearing by Söyland Hansen (1971). These sulphides were

verified by local sulphide bearing pyroxenite boulders found in this field trip. Local boulders

also indicated the MZ on northern side of the fault to be sulphide bearing as well (R1025).



Fig. 8. The Valley, sampling points on the magnetic maps. Lakes and rivers outlined. Circles are outcrop and triangles are boulder observations.

Fig. 9. The Valley, sampling points on the conductivity map of depth interval 10-15 m. Lakes and rivers outlined. Circles are outcrop and triangles are boulder observations.



Fig. 10. Susceptibility [µSI] vs. density [kg/m3] of all samples. The Valley olivine cumulate samples highlighted by

blue-green. Lokkarfjord samples circled.

Day 4, Aug. 19th

, Småvatna mineralization

An about 20 m thick and 2 km long sulphide mineralization has been reported by Söyland Hansen

(1971) between Bonjikdalen and Småvatna the latter locating in the northern end of the zone.

Geologically it is located close (in few tens of m) or at the lower contact of the Reinfjord intrusion

against garnet gneiss (Fig. 2). The reported (NGU) nickel and copper values are presented in the

Table 1. PGE values were reported to be negligible (on few ppb level) by NGU. Bonjikdalen-

Småvatna zone did not show up in standard processing of SkyTEM data or in detailed work made

by contract geophysicist.

TABLE 1. REPORTED (NGU) NI, CU, AND S CONTENTS OF SMÅVATNA AND BONJIKDALEN. TABLE

ALSO PRESENTS NI AND CU CONCENTRATIONS ALLOTTED TO 100% SULPHIDES (MSF).

Valley

Density

3 4503 4003 3503 3003 2503 2003 1503 1003 0503 0002 9502 9002 8502 8002 7502 7002 6502 600

Su

sc

1 000

10 000

100 000



The stratigraphic position, thickness, and mode of sulphides make Bonjikdalen-Småvatna deposit as

a typical representative of Contact Type Ni-Cu-PGE deposit though PGE was low. A sample

traverse and some erratic samples were collected, R1027-R1041. In addition, a bulk sample of c 3

kg was taken (smaller rock chips representing the traverse).

Observations and conclusion: The chemistry of Småvatna samples is discussed in more detail

in Chapter ‘Whole-rock Chemistry’. All samples with only few exceptions were rather

weathered and the sulphide content as well as the relative metal ratios in the sulphide fraction

are possibly not initial. Visually the total amount of sulphides corresponds to those reported

by NGU.

Day 5, Aug. 20th

, Airborne conductivity anomaly

The aims of this visit were to study a weak airborne conductivity anomaly about 1 km to NW from

the Lake District and the Marginal Zone further to NW (Figs 2 and 4). Six samples taken, R1042-

R1046, and R20.

Observations and conclusions: No explanation whatsoever was found for the conductivity

anomaly. However, reasonable amount of sulphides was found in the Marginal Zone

pyroxenite (often pegmatitic) right underneath the olivine cumulate of the layered series.

These sulphides formed dm size pockets (R1042, Table 2) while rest of the MZ was less

mineralized. An interlayered type relationship between Langstrand gabbro, pyroxenite and

maybe also including some layered series, as found in the Lake District, was noted here also.

Evidences of assimilation of country rock (Langstrand gabbro in this case) into the magma

resulting in varitextured rock were documented here (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11. Varitextured gabbro in a marginal zone, close to sample sites R1042-R1046, Day 5.



Day 6, Aug. 22nd

, Tappeluft

Tappeluft is about 3.5*1 km2 complex (Fig. 12) comprising of coeval pegmatitic gabbro, ultramafic

rock and syenite, intruded into a larger mass of clinopyroxene gabbro. Scattered observations of

pentlandite and other sulphides are made in Roberts’ thesis (2007). Observations came from the

ultramafic part as well as from the gabbropegmatite. Whole-rock analytical data indicated however

very low Ni values for all of those samples. Totally eight samples were taken, T1001-T1007, and

T1.

Observations and conclusion: Contrary to earlier descriptions on Tappeluft as a

clinopyroxenite-dunite intrusion, visual observations in the field refer to amphibole rich rock.

Field observations also confirmed Tappeluft intrusion to contain some sulphides up to weak

dissemination towards to NE contact (arrow in the Fig. 12), the sulphide bearing traverse

along the road was c. 350 m. An erratic sulphide occurrence was also found closer to SW

contact of the intrusion. Two samples were also taken from the sea shore, one better

mineralized gabbropegmatite boulder sample and one less sulphide mineralized coarse

grained gabbro outcrop sample. Field observations also referred to an younger generation of

gabbropegmatite (Fig. 13).

Fig. 12. Sampling sites on Tappelulft intrusion, map after Roberts 2007. The arrow indicates sulphide bearing traverse along the road side (samples T1001-T1005). Sample T1 represents an erratic sulphide occurrence, while T1006 (boulder) and T1007 are sulphide mineralized coarse grained pegmatitic gabbros.

T1

T1001-T1005

T1007

T1006



Fig. 13. Gabbropegmatite close to the sea shore in Tappeluft.

Day 7, Aug. 23rd

, Bonjikdalen mineralization

Reader is asked to check day 4 (Aug. 19th

) report for background information. A sample profile of

six samples was made, R1047-R1052. The collection of bulk sample for concentration tests was left

to be done by NTNU students.

Observations and conclusion: The chemistry of Bonjikdalen samples is discussed in more

detail in the Chapter ‘Whole-rock Chemistry’. Bonjikdalen traverse turned out to be much

fresher compared to Småvatna in the northern end of the zone. These samples should

represent initial sulphide content and metal ratios in the sulphide fraction.

Day 8, Aug. 24th

, The Lake District The Lake District was revisited, now together with the Norwegian team. The reader is asked to

check the description of the day 2 (Aug. 17th

).



Day 9, Aug. 25th

, weak conductors on Northeast Marginal Zone

Aim of this visit was to study the Northeast Marginal Zone, encountered weak conductivity

anomalies, and gabbro xenoliths in the NEMZ. Northeast Marginal Zone represents the least

explored part of the Reinfjord intrusion and more of it has been exposed due to withdrawal of

Langfjordjøkelen glacier. Two boulder samples, R1055-R1056.

Observations and conclusion: The contact zone between NEMZ and the Langstrand gabbro

was observed to be similar as in the Lake District i.e. interlayered and containing gabbro

slabs. The NEMZ was also found sulphide bearing; one sampled boulder was composed of

pyroxenite with patches of plagioclase bearing olivine cumulate (troctolite).

Day 10, Aug. 26th

, Lokkarfjord Lokkarfjord is rather small (c. 2 km

2) ultramafic-mafic intrusion surrounded by younger gabbro and

the sea. Two massive sulphide dykes had been documented from Lokkarfjord close to the sea shore

in steep mountain wall. Both had been verified to have high Ni and Cu (0.5-1% Ni and Cu, max

2.2% Ni and 4.5% Cu, Vrålstad 1977), while the other one was also assayed for PGE (0.8 ppm

Pt+Pd, Often and Schiellerup 2008). Norsk Hydro had made two 400 m long VLF measurement

profiles over the dykes, measurements had not revealed other dykes in the vicinity of the mapped

dykes. Detailed processing of SkyTEM conductivity data reveals also these dykes. Purpose of the

visit was to resamples the dykes and get updated conception of the dykes. In addition to that, the

aim was also to do Proxan survey on the Lokkarfjord plateau to see if more dykes are present higher

up in the topography and stratigraphy. Topographically Lokkarfjord has very steep walls to sea and

a plateau c. 600 m above the sea level. 22 samples were taken, L1001-L1014 and L1-L8.

Observations and conclusions: In order to get general distribution of the sulphides, a sample

profile was taken along the lowermost exposed bedrock outcrops (Fig. 14). Fifteen samples in

total, was taken from that traverse of about 110 m in lenght. The lowermost exposed rocks

were hornblendites. The fabric of the rock is vertical and obviously also the sulphide bodies

have vertical elongations. -In addition to sample profile, several rusty boulders on the sea

shore were sampled.

Many of the very rusty boulders actually turned out to have only little visible sulphides, but

were enriched in magnetite. The relative abundance of sulphides and magnetite varied a lot

and was unable to be judged on the weathered rock surface. The high magnetite content could

be seen in the susceptibility values, which were 100-400 mSI units. Lokkarfjord samples are

also forming a group of their own in susceptibility vs. density plot (high susceptibility and

high density, Fig. 10) due to magnetite and pyrrhotite content.

Due to steep topography, and high and variable susceptibility of the hornblendite, Proxan

study was not possible. However, on the plateau level the rock type was mafic hornblende

gabbro with lower susceptibility enabling Proxan survey, which, however, didn’t reveal any

surface conductors. The texture of that gabbro gave an impression to the author, that it

represents evolved, late stage crystallisation product.



Fig. 14. Sample profile over Lokkarfjord sulphide dykes. Lok 41- Lok 43 refer to sampling of Often and Schiellerup (2008).

5. Whole-rock chemistry All 106 samples collected during the field trip were subjected to chemical assays performed by ALS

Chemex laboratories. Precious metals Au, Pd, and Pt were assayed by ICP after lead fire-assay

preconcentration (PGM-ICP23), while rest of the 33 elements of the assay package ME-ICP61 were

assayed by ICP-AES after near total four acid leach. Over one weight percent of Ni and Cu

concentrations were assayed by Ni-OG62 and Cu-OG62 methods, respectively. Above counted

assay methods are accredited.

L1004 L1006

L1007

L1008 L1009

L2 L3

L7

L1013

L8

L1012

L1011 34 m L6 74 m L1010 90 m

L1005



In order to get better estimates for the composition of sulphide fraction 39 samples were chosen to

sulphide specific assays utilising L-ascorbic acid / hydrogen peroxide solution (ME-ICP09). Nickel,

copper, and cobalt are assayed by ICP-AES from the solution. Two samples with high sulphur

content (>10% S) were assayed by Leco (S-IR08) to get accurate whole-rock sulphur contents for

those.

5.1. Quality assessment ALS Chemex had used in-house standards, duplicates, and blanks to control the quality of the

assays. For the reason that ALS Chemex sulphide specific assay method is not accredited the

following quality test was made. Due to mineralogy of copper, all Cu is assumed to be bound to

sulphides and the total (Cut) and sulphide specific (Cusp) assay results for copper should be the

same. The calculated relative percentage difference (RPD) averaged to 3.4% with three assay pair

exceeding RPD 10% (Fig. 15). In over half of the sample pairs sulphide specific gave slightly

higher reading, but only up to 5%. The quality of the sulphide specific assays can be interpreted to

fulfil requirements for studies discussed in this report. For sample pairs with Cut>>Cusp a

mineralogical study is warranted to check the copper mineralogy.

Fig. 15. Relative percentage difference between total copper and sulphide specific copper analyses. Positive value denotes total concentration higher than sulphide specific and vice versa.

5.2. Theoretical background Definition of the terms used in the discussion:

Sulphidic metal content, Msp The amount of metal bound in sulphide minerals and therefore

amenable to recovery in sulphide flotation

Silicate metal content The amount of metal bound in silicate minerals

Total metal content, Mwr The amount of metal in the rock

Metal concentration in

sulphide fraction, Msf

The amount of metal in the 100% sulphides



Following modal sulphide mineral assemblages were assumed for the basis of Msf calculations:

Reinfjord,

modal proportion

Lokkarfjord,

modal proportion

S content of

mineral, wt%

Pyrrhotite 67 % 55 % 38.0

Chalcopyrite 15 % 15 % 35.0

Pentlandite 3 % 15 % 33.0

Brovoite 12 % 0 % 53.0

Pyrite 3 % 15 % 53.5

Weighted S content

of 100% sulphides 39.7 39.6

Despite of differing sulphide mineral composition Reinfjord and Lokkarfjord sulphide assemblages

have about the same amount of sulphur i.e. 40% S in 100% sulphides; this value was used in

calculations of sulphide fraction compositions.

Distribution coefficient (D) describes the partitioning of an element between sulphide and silicate

melt. For base metals like Cu and Ni as well precious metals, D is in favour to sulphide melt. D for

copper is inorder of 250-1,000 i.e. copper content of sulphide melt in equilibrium with the silicate

melt is 250-1,000 times higher than the associated silicate melt. D for nickel is dependent on the

MgO content of the magma and values 180-200 can be applied for magmas forming the Reinfjord,

for example. D for PGE is very high, in order of 10,000-100,000. Discussion handles also term

called R factor, which by definition is mass ratio of silicate melt to sulphide melt. The metal

contents of the very first sulphides can be calculated simply by using the partitioning coefficient but

when more sulphide melt is formed, the silicate melt gets depleted in metals and hence metal

concentrations in the sulphide melt is decreasing.

R factor can be calculated using the formula (1):

R= (XiDi-YiDi)/(Yi-XiDi), in which (1)

Xi, content of metal i in the silicate melt,

Yi, content of metal i in the sulphide melt, and

Di, distribution coefficient of metal i.

Because DPd >> DCu any withdrawal of sulphide melt would leave the residue silicate melt with

higher Cu/Pd ratio. Mantle derived melts are assumed to have Cu/Pd ratio in order of about 4,000-

20,000, the upper bound being for olivine tholeiites. Early sulphides after sulphide immiscibility

have Cu/Pd ratio closer to that of magma and any later formed sulphides have lower ratio, while the

silicate residue enriches in Cu relative to Pd.

For the reason that the formula (1) presumes knowledge of initial concentrations of metals prior to

sulphide melt separation, which is seldom adequately known, rocks Cu/Pd can be used to

approximate the R factor (App. 1). This method utilizes different D values of Cu and Pd, and

development of Cu/Pd ratio as a function of R factor.

5.3. Småvatna and Bonjikdalen sulphide chemistry Representative assay results of the Småvatna and Bonjikdalen samples are presented in the Table 2.

Samples collected in this field trip formed profiles over the mineralised section and results should

objectively present metal concentration in the section.



One striking feature is the very low precious metal values. The bit higher PGE contents of olivine

cumulate of Layered and Central Series (R8, R16, and R1053) highlight Småvatna and Bonjikdalen

low precious metals contents. Cu/Pd ratio is extremely high, often 100,000-500,000, which also

points relative depletion of Pd.

Unlike the precious metals, the base metals Cu and Ni seem to be concentrated in the amounts

typical to Contact Type magmatic sulphides. Figure 16A shows Ni concentrations in 100%

sulphides to vary generally between 3-4 wt% while that of copper shows larger scatter as varying 3-

5 wt%. Total amount of sulphides in the rock has no effect on base metal concentrations in 100%

sulphides as shown in the Fig. 16A. The amount of silicate bound nickel in the marginal zone can

be estimated to c. 180 ppm (Fig. 17).

The calculated Cu and Ni values in 100% sulphides in Reinfjord MZ are also in line with

concentration tests presented by Söyland Hansen (1971), who reported values of 5 wt% Cu and 4

wt% Ni in sulphide concentrate.

Figure 16C shows that the Langstrand gabbro has much lower tenor of base metals in sulphide

fraction than the Reinfjord marginal zone.

Approximation of R factor is presented in App. 1. Low PGE and relatively high base metals in the

sulphide fraction refer to R factor (formula 1) of about 1,000, which together with very high initial

Cu/Pd ratio may have resulted in metal ratios present in marginal zones (see also cautionary

statement in App. 1). The study also suggests prior enrichment of Cu in the silicate melt up to level

of about 200-250 ppm. External Cu may have been brought to the system by assimilation of

Langsrtrand gabbro (see Table 2).



TABLE 2. REINFJORD. TOTAL AND SULPHIDE SPECIFIC ASSAY RESULTS, AND CALCULATED

CONCENTRATIONS IN 100% SULPHIDES OF SELECTED ELEMENTS. PEAK VALUES IN BOLD.

Cu Cu Ni Ni Ni Co Co S Au Pt Pd PGE+Au

Assay type SP SF WR SP SF SP SF WR WR WR WR SF

Sample site ppm wt% ppm ppm wt% ppm ppm wt% ppb ppb ppb ppm

Marginal Zone

R1029 Små 880 4.19 727 590 2.81 70 3333 0.84 6 7 5 0.86

R1030 Små 400 3.64 578 370 3.36 30 2727 0.44 3 <5 2 -

R1031 Små 1120 5.89 839 740 3.89 60 3158 0.76 6 12 12 1.58

R1035 Små 350 4.67 250 120 1.60 20 2667 0.30 3 <5 3 -

R1039 Små 710 4.44 756 500 3.13 40 2500 0.64 3 10 <1 -

R1048 Bon 1240 5.06 1130 970 3.96 60 2449 0.98 2 <5 3 -

R1049 Bon 340 3.58 573 400 4.21 30 3158 0.38 1 14 <1 -

R1050 Bon 590 3.06 860 650 3.38 50 2597 0.77 1 8 2 0.57

R13 LD 450 2.47 692 580 3.18 40 2192 0.73 3 31 1 1.92

R14 LD 770 2.08 1335 1280 3.46 90 2432 1.48 2 6 3 0.30

R15 LD 620 2.61 974 890 3.75 60 2526 0.95 3 <5 1 -

R1015 LD 510 2.10 1070 920 3.79 50 2062 0.97 2 22 <1 -

R1016 LD 800 2.27 1470 1370 3.89 100 2837 1.41 4 8 5 0.48

R1054 LD 840 3.54 807 650 2.74 70 2947 0.95 11 5 5 0.88

R1025 Stor 320 3.46 660 480 5.19 40 4324 0.37 <1 9 <1 -

R1042 Day 5 260 3.47 542 330 4.40 40 5333 0.30 1 <5 1 -

R1056 NEMZ 1630 4.08 3640 2970 7.43 170 4250 1.60 12 26 33 1.78

R3 Nwing 1870 19.18 1620 1140 11.69 70 7179 0.39 47 14 1 6.36

Langstrand gabbro

R1017 LD 200 0.71 220 220 0.78 40 1416 1.13 2 <5 2 -

R7 Tverfj 140 0.26 68 70 0.13 60 1116 2.15 1 <5 2 -

R1055 Tverfj 60 0.60 65 60 0.60 50 5000 0.40 1 <5 1 -

Miscellaneous

R8 LD 279* - 1805 - - 146* - 0.17 7 30 26 -

R1053 LD 103* - 2340 - - 156* - 0.07 2 98 37 -

R16 Valley 533* 3690 - - 144* 0.18 219 93 122 -

* total whole-rock concentration Site: Assay type: Små; Småvatna WR; total, whole-rock Bon; Bonjikdalen SP; sulphide specific LD; Lake District SF; calculated concentration in 100% sulphides Stor; Storvannet (Elljajávri) NEMZ; Northeast Marginal Zone Nwing; North wing of Reinfjord intrusion Tverfj; Tverfjordalenvann (Jiehkkejávri) Valley; valley to east of Storvannet (Elljajávri)



Fig. 16. Copper and nickel in 100% sulphides (Msf) versus whole-rock sulphur. Some strongly deviating samples excluded.

Småvatna and Bonjikdalen

Rest of Reinfjord MZ

Langstrand gabbro

S, wt%

Msf, wt%

S, wt%

Msf, wt%

S, wt%

Msf, wt%

A

B

C



Fig. 17. Total whole-rock Ni (Niwr) versus sulphidic Ni of Småvatna and Bonjikdalen samples.

5.4. Scattered observations from Reinfjord intrusion The marginal zone in the Lake District (Table 2, Fig. 16B) gave similar base and precious metal

readings as the Småvatna and Bonjikdalen. Observations outside of these three areas are scarce but

areally small sulphide enriched pockets were found. Two samples (R1056 and R3) representing

pyroxenitic Northeast Marginal Zone and the conductive area studied in Day 1/Area 2, stand out

with metal contents higher than Småvatna-Bonjikdalen-Lake District MZ.

It is worth of note that one sulphide mineralised sample of olivine cumulate of the Central Series

from the eastern end the Valley profile (Day 3, R16) had the highest gold reading from all 106

samples assayed i.e. exceeding the contents of Lokkarfjord massive sulphides. This Valley sample

(R16) had 219 ppb Au (1,800 ppm S). Gold enrichment can be related to shearing.

5.5. Genesis of Reinfjord sulphides The position of Reinfjord marginal zone hosted sulphides is typical for many layered intrusions.

Features of wallrock assimilation and mixing of melts on intrusion margins refer to dynamic

intrusion event. These characteristics and especially the sulphide content of contaminant,

Langstrand gabbro, may well have resulted in sulphide saturation and precipitation of marginal zone

sulphides. The Cu and Ni concentrations in 100% sulphides are on typical level for many Contact

Type deposits. The precious metal concentrations are, however, very low. The precious metal data

of the olivine cumulates of the layered series is limited, but some samples taken have PGE

concentrations higher than the sulphide enriched marginal zone samples. While the structural

position and base metal chemistry points strongly to orthomagmatic sulphides, the low precious

metal concentrations call for additional explanations. Following models can be proposed:

Magma was depleted in PGE due earlier withdrawal of sulphides

Magma was depleted in PGE initially due to processes in the mantle

Additional Cu and Ni, but no PGE, was introduced to magma by local contamination. This

together with low R factor (possibly lower than approximated in App. 1) gave rise ‘normal’

base metal concentrations but negligible PGE.

In summary, the MZ sulphide chemistry is not in ‘balance’ to what would be expected to have

formed from Reinfjord type silicate melt. Metal ratios may also have been affected by pervasive



fluid activity, which reworked metal ratios of the sulphide melt rendering R factor calculations

inadequate, for example.

5.6 Lokkarfjord sulphide chemistry The samples profile of fifteen samples (Fig. 14) failed to locate massive sulphides. However, the

whole profile is rather constantly sulphide bearing up to 2.7 wt% S (Table 3). The composition of

Lokkarfjord sulphide fraction is highly variable (Fig. 18). Some samples having whole-rock sulphur

content between 0.5-1.0 % S have less than one weight percent of Ni and Cu in 100% sulphides. On

the other hand some massive sulphide samples have decent Ni and Cu contents between 2-5 % of

both metals. Ni/Cu ratio is variable most samples being however copper dominated (Table 3).



TABLE 3. LOKKARFJORD. TOTAL AND SULPHIDE SPECIFIC ASSAYS, AND CALCULATED

CONCENTRATIONS IN 100% SULPHIDES OF SELECTED ELEMENTS. PEAK VALUES IN BOLD. O, OUTCROP

SAMPLE AND B, BOULDER SAMPLE.

Cu Cu Ni Ni Ni Co Co S Au Pt Pd PGE+Au

Assay type SP SF WR SP SF SP SF WR WR WR WR SF

Sample O/B ppm wt% ppm ppm wt% ppm ppm Wt% ppb ppb ppb ppm

Profile

L1004 O 120 0.94 78 50 0.39 30 2353 0.51 <1 <5 1 -

L1005 O 120 1.04 66 40 0.35 30 2609 0.46 1 <5 2 -

L1006 O 360 3.27 100 80 0.73 50 4545 0.44 2 <5 3 -

L1007 O - - 116 - - - 0.14 <1 <5 <1 -

L1008 O - - 7 - - - 0.09 1 <5 <1 -

L1009 O 70 0.85 16 <10 - 10 1212 0.33 1 <5 1 -

L2 O - - 44 - - - 0.25 1 <5 2 -

L3 O - - 31 - - - 0.28 2 <5 1 -

L8 O 750 5.56 715 460 3.41 40 2963 0.54 7 12 47 4.89

L1013 O - - 299 - - - - 0.15 1 <5 3 -

L7 O 1160 3.22 1240 1020 2.83 80 2222 1.44 12 27 100 3.86

L1012 O 4330 6.46 2010 1680 2.51 150 2239 2.68 16 34 149 2.97

L1011 O 80 1.07 <1 <10 - 10 1333 0.30 1 <5 <1 -

L6 O 150 0.79 6 10 0.05 50 2632 0.76 3 5 <1 -

L1010 O - - <1 - - - - 0.08 1 <5 <1 -

Miscellaneous L1 B 15850 5.33 5520 5440 1.83 470 1580 11.9 159 142 1005 4.39

L4 B 1330 3.83 1205 970 2.79 80 2302 1.39 16 29 107 4.37

L5 O 140 0.86 20 20 0.12 40 2462 0.65 3 <5 4 -

L1001 B 1340 3.06 1325 1160 2.65 90 2057 1.75 18 26 123 3.82

L1002 B 1440 4.24 1135 960 2.82 80 2353 1.36 14 24 92 3.82

L1003 B 10000 3.20 12000 11900 3.81 1120 3584 12.5 105 183 637 2.96

L1014 B 220 2.26 26 20 0.21 40 4103 0.39 <1 <5 <1 -

Assay type: WR; total, whole-rock SP; sulphide specific SF; calculated concentration in 100% sulphides

The base metal concentrations in Lokkarfjord sulphide fraction (Fig. 18) are generally slightly

lower than in the Reinfjord (Figs 16A-B). There is also no correlation between whole-rock sulphur

content and copper and nickel concentration in 100% sulphides as the two almost massive sulphide

samples (L1 and L1003) have similar Cusf and Nisf than the disseminated samples. Lokkarfjord

precious metal concentrations are about double to those of Reinfjord (in 100% sulphides). The R

factor study presented in App. 1 refers to about one decade higher R factor (R ~5,000-10,000) for

Lokkarfjord than for Reinfjord.

It is noteworthy that nine of 22 collected samples had phosphorus content over one weight percent.

These results are parallel with the results received by NGU (Often and Schiellerup 2008), who



reported P2O5 contents of 1-3 wt%, and not only for the hornblendites of the shore line but also to

hornblende gabbros of Lokkarfjord plateau. No mineralogical study to explain these chemical

characteristics is available.

Fig. 18. Copper and nickel in 100% sulphides (Msf) versus whole-rock sulphur.

5.7. Tappeluft sulphide chemistry In line with the field observations, Tappeluft samples are sulphide bearing S varying 400-3,700

ppm. Copper contents were 21-149 ppm and nickel 210-487 ppm. Precious metal concentrations are

below or at the detection limits.

6. Conclusions

6.1. Reinfjord

6.1.1. Geophysical survey

The interpretation of the helicopter survey on the Lake District was performed by Revelation

Geoscience Ltd (Johnson 2011). Two conductors were modelled, one shallow and one deeper the

latter locating little bit to the east from the shollower one (Fig. 19, and Tables 4 and 5). The upper

contact of the shallower conductor is modelled to depth of only 50 m while the deeper has the upper

contact at the depth of 205 m. The modelled conductance of 50 Siemens is low and is not referred to

massive sulphides.

TABLE 4. MODEL PARAMETERS OF THE WESTERN CONDUCTOR AFTER JOHNSON 2011.

Easting (centre of top edge) 525405 mE

Northing (centre of top edge) 7777165 mN

Elevation (centre of top edge) 550 m

Dip 13°

Dip Direction 126°

Plunge 0°

Strike length 600 m

Down‐dip extent 125 m

Conductance 48.4 S

S, wt%

Msf, wt% Lokkarfjord



TABLE 5. MODEL PARAMETERS OF THE EASTERN CONDUCTOR AFTER JOHNSON 2011.

Easting (centre of top edge) 525690 mE

Northing (centre of top edge) 7777160 mN

Elevation (centre of top edge) 450 m

Dip 8°

Dip Direction 126°

Plunge 0°

Strike length 600 m

Down‐dip extent 300 m

Conductance 50 S

Fig. 19. Surface projection of the conductors modelled in Lake District (Johnson 2011). Stippled line indicates the gabbro screen, which noted to be sulphide bearing in the eastern end (Söyland Hansen 1971). Circle indicates the recognised Proxan conductor.

The other conductors worth of mentioning are those of so-called Valley conductor (Day 3, Fig. 4)

and one in the north wing of the Reinfjord intrusion (Day 1, Area 2). The layer inversions produced

by SkyTEM Surveys indicates the latter conductor to dip to SE to depth of c. 300 m at the angle of

40-45 degrees. Both conductors are however too small or their resistivity still too high for



modelling. The same features may be applicable to explain why Småvatna-Bonjikdalen and other

marginal zone mineralization show up so poorly.

The Fig. 20 depicts susceptibility versus Q-ratio with discrimination fields for various

ferromagnetic mineral compositions. In that diagram Reinfjord samples plot to fine-grained

magnetite field and differ from those of Lokkarfjord.

Fig. 20. Susceptibility [µSI units] versus Q-ratio of Reinfjord () and Lokkarfjord () data. Discrimination fields are based on GTK database (Airo 2005).

6.1.2. Geological interpretation and ore genesis

Our field observations confirmed the high quality of old mappings of Söyland Hansen (1971) and

Emblin (1985) in terms of lithology and accuracy of geological maps.

The MZ was found sulphide mineralized practically every places where visited. Excluding

Småvatna, Bonjikdalen, and Lake District, the amount of sulphides varied from few erratic grains to

weak dissemination and small sulphide pockets. Visually better than average sulphide contents were

detected in the MZ at the eastern Lake District, on the top of the mountain between the Lake

District and Lake Storvannet (Day 5) and in a pyroxenite of Northeast MZ (Day 9). The Layered

Series and Central Series were found unmineralized except few erratic sulphide grains.

The garnet gneiss and Langstrand gabbro surrounding the ultramafic intrusion were found sulphide

bearing, an observation was also made that certain thicker sulphide bands contained enough

sulphides to be conductors (Day 2) and some airborne conductivity anomalies can be caused by

these sulphide bands (Day 1, Area 3).

The following suggestion for geological interpretation of the conductivity anomalies of the Lake

District is based on intimate spatial relationship of gabbro slabs and sulphides. The Småvatna-

Bonjikdalen zone locates under the giant gabbro slab, though not immediately, but separated by a

slice olivine cumulate of LS layer (Fig. 2). Småvatna and Bonjikdalen are typical representatives of

Contact Type sulphide deposits found in contact zones of many layered intrusions. The genesis of

Contact Type deposits is often attributed to country rock contamination. To form immiscible



sulphide melt, the incorporation of external sulphur into magma is especially required in Reinfjord

due to high initial Mg content of the magma; high Mg magmas have high capability to dissolve

sulphur. The sulphide content of garnet gneiss underneath the deposits, though not well studied,

looks negligible, but Langstrand gabbro carries reasonable amounts of sulphides in many places

thus providing the only documented source for external sulphur. Field evidences refer to model, in

which the Lake District conductors are sulphides originated due contamination caused by the

Langstrand gabbro. Proposed cross-section showing the field relationship of ultramafic intrusion,

marginal zone and gabbro is depicted in Fig. 21.

Fig. 21. Geological model for the conductors (cross-hatched) modelled in the Lake District. gn, garnet gneiss; gb, Langstrand Gabbro; MZ, Marginal Zone; umaf, ultramafic units.

A more far going model can also be postulated. The Lake District locates close the southern tail of

the Central Series, which may have acted as a feeder for the main mass of CS. One can put forward

a model in which CS magma intruded through the mineralized Contact Type deposit and reworked

and enhanced the mineralization. However, the high nickel content (1,800-2,500 ppm) of the

olivine cumulates locating right above the conductors indicate that these rock have not experienced

any voluminous sulphide withdrawal in their history. Also, the olivine cumulate (R8 and R1053)

over the modelled conductors show higher PGE contents than any marginal zone samples.

6.1.3. Recommendations

Modelling gave low conductivity values (about 50 Siemens, Tables 4 and 5) for the conductors in

the Lake District. The two extreme models to result in such conductivity values are (i) cm-dm thick

bands of interconnected sulphides and (ii) thicker heavily disseminated layer or body of sulphides.

Both models are supported by the field findings. By reference to observations made on Day 2,

thicker sulphide bands in the Langstrand gabbro give conductivity signal. On the other hand, the

marginal zone with its gabbro slabs and xenoliths host tens of meters thick disseminated sulphides.

In economic point of view the latter model with heavily disseminated sulphides is more positive due

to reason that the sulphides encountered in the MZ are of acceptable quality in terms of their Ni and

Cu content in the sulphide fraction and the metal concentrations stay the same with increasing total

amount of sulphides (Figs 16A-B). More massive concentrations of these sulphides would be

potential for economic deposit.

Due to reason, that the conductors do not outcrop, drilling is the only mean to get hard evidence

from the conductors. In order to get more precise 3D concept of the conductors and to direct the

drilling, ground geophysical survey is necessary to be undertaken. A TEM method is recommended.



6.2. Lokkarfjord Lokkarfjord is unconventional type massive Ni-Cu-PGE deposit. Lokkarfjord sulphides carry

higher PGE concentrations than those found in Reinfjord. The closest analogy is the N-K-T

discordant sulphide veins in the 2.5 Ga old Monchegorsk layered intrusion in Kola Peninsula (see

more Mitrofanov et al. 1997 and Iljina 2011). N-K-T was a remarkable nickel mine and it exploited

(closed in 1970’ies) a swarm of vertical sulphide veins, which had considerable continuity in terms

of strike length and depth extension. These veins were narrow, the thickest being only 50 cm. A

viable genetic model for Monchegosk veins is that they represent dilatational cracks formed during

magma cooling and consolidation. These cracks localized low viscosity interstitial immiscible

sulphide liquid present in the consolidating cumulus pile.

6.2.1. Geological interpretation and ore genesis

Lithologically Lokkarfjord intrusion is composed of ultramafic hornblendite at the sea level, but the

Lokkarfjord plateau 600 m higher up is coarse grained mafic hornblende gabbro. A modified

Monchegorsk model can be suggested to Lokkarfjord. Instead of extensive veins, sulphide pods

were formed in Lokkarfjord. Individual pods may have vertical long axis, but are less developed

horizontally.

6.2.2. Recommendations

Metal characteristics of the Lokkarfjord sulphides is presented in the Fig. 18. Nickel and copper

contents in 100% sulphides are variable, but attaining the level of several weight percent. In the

case of massive sulphides, the threshold of tonnages for mining is distinctly lower than for much

lower grade Reinfjord Contact Type deposits though both have similar Ni and Cu concentrations in

100% sulphides. Careful examination of airborne geophysical data revealed four weak conductors

(Fig. 22) distributed on the shore line, one of these (conductor A, Fig. 22) coincides to sulphide

dykes studied in this field trip. The steep topography and flight line orientation prohibit further

utilization of SkyTEM measurements. Suitable conditions for the formation of the pods may only

have been in the ultramafic lower part of the magma chamber. If so, a swarm of sulphide pods may

well have formed. For this reason and also because Lokkarfjord is the only known locality for more

PGE enriched sulphides in SIP, further exploration is recommended. More work may also produce

key observations, which can be used for exploration in other Lokkarfjord type intrusions in SIP.

Due to hundreds meters high steep wall of the intrusion, the exploration and verification of the

possible pod swarm is a great challenge. Though the known sulphide bodies were visible in

SkyTEM survey, the survey is incapable to detect sulphide bodies inside the mountain. One way to

approach is to do suitable geophysical ground survey, like Max-Min (Slingram) along the sea shore.

Possibilities to make a loop for TEM measurements on the steep wall should also be examined.



Fig. 22. Weak conductor indications (A-D) in Lokkarfjord. Red triangle indicates the site of known sulphide

dykes.

6.3. Tappeluft Large portion of profile along the road across the intrusion (Fig. 12) was noted to be sulphide

bearing up to weak disseminations. Sulphides are, however, low in base metals and especially low

in precious metals. Gabbropegmatites on the shore line were similarly low in metals concerned.

Wide distribution and lack of any obvious controlling feature for the sulphide distribution refer that

the minor precipitation of iron sulphides occurred along with the silicate crystallisation i.e. magma

was at sulphide saturation. No accumulation of sulphides to form more massive bodies or sulphides

with higher base metal contents can be forecasted and further exploration cannot be recommended

at the moment.



7. Evaluation of the Seiland Igneous Province to host Ni-Cu-PGE

sulphide deposits This Chapter evaluates the Seiland Igneous Province (SIP) to host Ni-Cu-PGE sulphide deposits

making special reference to Reinfjord intrusion. The evaluation is done by making an attempt to

quantify factors critical in ore formation processes. The following factors are surveyed:

-Geotectonic setting, age and character of magmas,

-Sulphide saturation,

-Encountered deposits and mineralisation indications

Evaluation is done by comparing typical features of igneous complexes hosting Ni-Cu-PGE

deposits to those documented from SIP. Seiland data is collected from Emblin (1985), Robins 1996,

Roberts (2007), and Larsen (2011) and combined with observations made in the fieldwork

described in this report.

7.1. Geotectonic setting, age, and character of magmas

SIP consists mafic and ultramafic plutons emplaced into a sedimentary succession indicative for a

continental setting. The plutons are relatively small in area, but are numerous, with more than ten

discrete mafic plutons and five large ultramafic bodies having been identified. Significant volumes

of intermediate monzonitic and dioritic rocks, as well as nepheline syenite and carbonatitic intrusive

material do accompany mafic and ultramafic magmatism. Alkaline rocks are present in both

discrete complexes and dykes, and are generally crosscutting mafic plutons. Of the total 5,500 km2

areal extent 50% comprises mafic gabbros and 25% ultramafic intrusions, which are composed of

peridotites (lherzolites, wehrlites), dunites, pyroxenites, and hornblendites.

Reinfjord ultramafic intrusion has been interpreted to have formed by two subsequent intrusion of

ultramafic magma the former producing olivine and pyroxene bearing cumulates and the latter

mainly olivine cumulates, dunites.

SIP was emplaced and crystallized in a short time span of about 10 Ma 560-570 Ma ago.

Volumetrically largest mafic and ultramafic intrusions are aged to be formed in even shorter time

span of only 4 Ma. The Province is interpreted to have extensional setting, possibly in an

intracontinental rift or in a back-arc setting.

Geotectonic setting

Most of world’s major PGE occurrences are hosted by intracontinental rift related layered

intrusions. These intrusions are also known for their Cr and Fe-Ti-V oxide deposits, but lesser

extent for their Ni-Cu deposits.

Geotectonic setting of SIP is strongly favouring PGE mineralization.

Magma compositions

The large variety of magmas present in the Province points to heterogeneity in the source area and

to differentiation processes during the ascent of magmas with possible auxiliary magma chambers

at lower levels. Emblin (1985) did estimate the Ni content of the magma in response of the

Reinfjord intrusion to have been between 240 and 490 ppm. Values over 400 ppm are characteristic

for komatiitic magmas, which are typical hosts for many nickel deposits. However, the Ni assays of

SIP rocks, as presented by Roberts (2007), show low Ni content of the olivine cumulates (<<1,000

ppm). Compared to these low values, the Reinfjord intrusion stands out for its higher Ni content

(order of 1,000-3,000 ppm), which resemble olivine cumulates of many komatiites.



The prevailing pyroxene in SIP mafic and ultramafic intrusions is clinopyroxene. This is in contrast

to majority of other intracontinental intrusions, where the prevailing pyroxene is orthopyroxene.

This orthopyroxene dominance has been attributed to siliceous high-Mg basalt nature of the

magmas, which are thought to have high initial PGE content.

Diversity of magmas and high Ni content of some of them are strongly favouring Ni mineralization,

especially in Reinfjord.

Domination of clinopyroxene over orthopyroxene is suggesting deviating magma compositions

between SIP and most of world’s PGE mineralized intracontinental layered complexes.

Age

Globally Paleoproterozoic and Archean deposits are dominating hosts for PGE deposits while

nickel deposits are more evenly distributed over the geological time (Fig. 23).

Young age of SIP is not supportive for PGE mineralization.

Fig. 23. Quantitative distribution of PGE (above) and Ni (below) resources over the geological time after Maier and Groves, 2010. Age scale in Ga.



7.2. Sulphide saturation Mafic magmas are more capable to dissolve sulphur than more siliceous magmas due to lower

polymerisation and vacant positions available for sulphur atoms in the structure of magma; the

ultramafic magmas have of course the highest sulphur carrying capability. In general, the sulphur

content of mafic magmas is well below the capability of magma to dissolve it. In order to form

sulphidic Ni-Cu-PGE ore, the sulphur dissolving capacity of magma should be exceeded. Factors

driving magma towards to sulphur saturation are decreasing temperature, increasing oxidation

degree, and increasing polymerisation. In natural systems the most common factor for increasing

polymerisation is the addition of silica, aluminium, and ferric iron into the magma. On the other

hand, decreasing pressure increases sulphur solubility. Finally, the fastest way to reach the sulphur

saturation is the addition of external sulphur into the magma. In practise all Contact Type Ni-Cu-

PGE deposits hosted by mafic-ultramafic complexes have been attributed to wallrock

contamination. Most common contaminants are sulphur bearing siliceous and aluminous rocks like

black shales and other sulphurous sediments. In the case of ultramafic magma, a gabbroic

contaminant lowers magma’s sulphur solubility due its higher aluminium and silica contents. In

addition to in-situ wallrock contamination, some processes related to evolvement of magma during

the ascent and interaction between magma pulses may have resulted in high grade Ni-Cu-PGE

deposits in rare cases (Iljina and Lee, 2005). No indications of such processes in Reinfjord or

elsewhere were observed in this study.

Reinfjord intrusion is the only one in SIP being in contact with sedimentary country rocks (garnet

gneiss). Småvatna-Bonjikdalen zone is in contact to these rocks. Contact zones of Reinfjord

intrusion to sulphide bearing Langstrand gabbro are also sulphide mineralised.

Well-developed layering and fractionation in terms modal and cryptic layering and replenishment

structures are characteristic to all igneous complexes hosting Reef Type deposits though many

intrusions having such features are avoid of PGE mineralisation.

Hasvik Gabbro of SIP has been interpreted to have crystallized under the pressure of 6-8 kbar

meaning the depth of c 25-30 km in the middle crust, which is an applicable crystallisation depth

range for the entire SIP. This is in contrast to most of the intracontinental intrusions, which have

much shallower crystallisation depths.

Availability of external sulphur from Langstrand gabbro and garnet gneiss and evidences of

wallrock assimilation favour Ni-Cu-PGE sulphide formation in Reinfjord.

Well-developed layering and multiple magma injections are in favour of Reef Type PGE deposit in

Reinfjord.

Deep crystallisation depths of SIP intrusions favour formation of immiscible sulphide melt.

7.3. Encountered deposits and mineralisation indications Lokkarfjord massive sulphide bodies and Reinfjord Contact Type deposits are the only documented

deposits in SIP. Other observations of sulphides are limited from microscope observations of

sulphides to preliminary notes of some sulphides hosted in the contact zone of Kjerringfjord

peridotite, Stjernøy Island (Norsk Hydro 1971). Most of the Reinfjord Contact Zone was observed

to be sulphide bearing, but in much lesser extent outside of the Småvatna, Bonjikdalen and Lake

District sections. Though the exploration has been insignificant since 1970´ies, as judged from the

amount of exploration reports available, the number of showings is small making Reinfjord

exceptional within SIP.



Low number of documented deposits is not supporting SIP to be highly potential for Ni-Cu-PGE

deposits.

Reinfjord and Lokkarfjord intrusions stand out from rest of the SIP as hosting relatively more

sulphide deposits and indications.

7.4. Quantitative evaluation Table 6 quantifies factors favouring and disfavouring Ni-Cu-PGE ore formation potential.

TABLE 6. QUANTITATIVE EVALUATION OF FACTORS FAVOURING AND DISFAVOURING NI-CU-PGE ORE

FORMATION IN SIP IN GENERAL AND REINFJORD IN PARTICULARLY.

Factor SIP Reinfjord Notes

Geotectonic setting ++ ++ + for Ni-Cu / ++ for PGE

Diversity of magmas +++ +++

Pyroxene mineralogy for PGE - -

Age - - Neutral for Ni, -- for PGE

Contamination unknown +++

Igneous textures/structures for PGE +++ +++

Crystallisation depth + +

Number of known deposits -- +

balance

- counts 4 2

+ counts 9 13



8. References

Airo, M-L. 2005. Regional interpretation of aerogeophysical data: extracting compositional and

structural features. In Airo, M.-L. (ed.): Aerogeophysics in Finland 1972–2004: Methods, System

Characteristics and Applications. Geological Survey of Finland, Special Paper 39, 176–197.

Bennett, M., 1971. The Reinfjord ultramafic complex. NGU Bulletin 269, 165-171.

Bennett M., 1974. The emplacement of high temperature peridotite in the Seiland Province of the

Norwegian Caledonides. The Journal of the Geological Society, v. 130/3, 205-228.

Bennett, M., Emblin, S., Robins, B. and Yeo, W.J.A., 1986. High-temperature ultramafic

complex in the North Norwegian Caledonites: I – Regional setting and field relationships. NGU

Bulletin 405, 1-39.

Emblin, S., 1985. The Reinfjord ultramafic complex, Seiland Province: Emplacement history and

magma chamber model. University of Bristol, England, doctoral thesis.

Iljina, M., 2011. Nickel, copper, Platinum-Group Element, and gold potential of Seiland Igneous

Province, Norway. Report for Nordic Mining.

Iljina, M. and Lee, C., 2005. PGE deposits in the marginal series of layered intrusions. in Mungall,

J. (ed.). Exploration for Platinum-Group Element deposits. Mineralogical Association of Canada,

Short Course Series, vol. 34, pp 75-96.

Johnson, D., 2011. Quality assessment and interpretation report on the Reinfjord and Lokkarfjord

SkyTEM surveys. Report for Nordic Mining by Revelation Geoscience Ltd.

Larsen, R., 2011. Ore-forming potential of the Seiland Igneous Province (SIP). Report for Nordic

Mining.

Maier, W. and Groves, D., 2010. Personal communication.

Maier, W. D., Barnes, S-J, DeKlerk, W. J., Teigler, B., and A. A. Mitchell, 1996. Cu/Pd and

Cu/Pt of Silicate Rocks in the Bushveld Complex: Implications for Platinum Group

Element Exploration, Economic Geology Vol 91, pp 1151-1158.

Mitrofanov, F., Torokhov, M. and Iljina, M., 1997. Ore deposits in the Kola Peninsula,

Northwestern Russia. 4th

Biennial SGA Meeting, August 11-13, 1997, Excursion guidebook, B4.

Geological Survey of Finland, guide 45.

Norsk Hydro, 1971. Feltarbeid i Alta-området 1971. Norsk Hydro in-house report.

Often, M. and Schiellerup, H., 2008. Oppfølging av PGE-anomale prøver i Seilandprovinsen,

Finnmark. Report for Nordic Mining, NGU Report 2008.035.

Vrålstad, T., 1977. Svovelberget, Stjernsund, Alta. In-house exploration report of Norsk Hydro.



Roberts, R., 2007. The Seiland Igneous Province, Northern Norway: Age, Provenance, and

Tectonic Significance. University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, doctoral thesis.

Robins, B. 1996. The Seiland Igneous Province, North Norway. IGCP Project 336, Field

conference and Symposium, Field trip guidebook Part II.

Söyland Hansen, T., 1971. En undersøkelse av nickel-kopper mineraliseringer i Reinfjord-

Jøkkelfjord området, Troms. NTNU Trondheim, M.Sc. Thesis.

List of Appendices:

1 R factor calculations

2 Field observations

3 Petrophysical rock properties.

Rovaniemi December 15th

, 2011.

Markku Iljina

Consulting economic geologist

A P P E N D I X 1 P a g e | 38


APPENDIX 1 R factor calculations

R= (XiDi-YiDi)/(Yi-XiDi), in which

Xi, content of metal i in the silicate melt,

Yi, content of metal i in the sulphide melt, and

Di, distribution coefficient of metal i.

Reinfjord

palladium

XPd 1.0 ppb

DPd 10,000

YPd 1.0 ppm

Calculated R factor 1,100

Using this R factor value (1,100) and 4.5 wt% of Cu in 100% sulphides

Reinfjord initial Cu content of the magma XCu =220 ppm.

Lokkarfjord

Lokkarfjord has larger range in palladium values enabling study depicted in Fig. 1. Deduced from that

Lokkarfjord may have had slightly higher R factor compared to Reinfjord. Lower base metals in

Lokkarfjord may be due lower concentration in magma prior sulphide separation.

Fig. 1. Plot of Cu/Pd ratio versus whole-rock Pd in Lokkarfjord. R factor tie lines after Maier et al. 1996.

R=1,000

R=10,000

Cu

/Pd

Pd, ppb

R=100,000

R=100



CAUTIONARY STATEMENT

Above calculations are done by fitting results to account the assay values presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Assay results show large range hampering approximation. Also, R factor calculations are most

effective in the range of 0.1-10*Di and uncertainties are increased close the range limits. The method

also presumes that the formation of immiscible sulphide melt was the only mineralizing process

involved for both base metals and PGE.

The Reinfjord MZ sulphide chemistry is not in ‘balance’ with that what would be expected to have

formed from Reinfjord type silicate melt. Metal ratios may also have been affected by pervasive fluid

activity, which reworked metal ratios of the sulphide melt rendering R factor calculations inadequate.



APPENDIX 2 Field observations Content of Appendix 2

-Table 1, samples with notes

-Table 2, layering observations

-Table 3, susceptibility readings

-Table 4, miscellaneous

TABLE 1. SAMPLES WITH NOTES.

Sample type Easting Northing Notes

Lokkarfjord

L1 BOULDER 559723 7792129 Rusty, bit rounded, sulphides

L2 OUTCROP 559728 7792101 Profile L1004-L1009-L2-L3

L3 OUTCROP 559724 7792102 NW end of Profile L1004-L1009-L2-L3

L4 BOULDER 559721 7792130 Sharp edged, lots of sulph, 1.0*1.0*1.0 cubic m

L5 OUTCROP 559641 7792148 Rusty, but no sulphides

L6 OUTCROP 559641 7792102 Profile L1010-L6-L1011-L1012-L7-L8

L7 OUTCROP 559706 7792067 Some sulphides, Profile L1010-L6-L1011-L1012-L7-L8

L8 OUTCROP 559719 7792066 No sulphides SE end of Profile L1010-L6-L1011-L1012-L7-L8

L1001 BOULDER 559731 7792130 Sharp edged, very rusty, sulphide mineralized 1.5*1.2*0.8 cubic m. Originally formed one big boulder with L1002. Susc. 150 milliSI

L1002 BOULDER 559730 7792129 Very rusty, sulphide mineralized, 1.2*0.6*0.35 cubic m. Originally formed one big boulder with L1001. Susc. 320 milliSI

L1003 BOULDER 559740 7792121 Very rusty, sulphide mineralized, 1.0*1.0*0.6 cubic m.

L1004 OUTCROP 559734 7792082 SE end of Profile L1004-L1009-L2-L3






L1010 OUTCROP 559624 7792103 Rusty, weathered, NW end of Profile L1010-L6-L1011-L1012-L7-L8

L1011 OUTCROP 559673 7792078 Few sulphide grains, Profile L1010-L6-L1011-L1012-L7-L8

L1012 OUTCROP 559708 7792069 Reasonable sulphide dissemination, Profile L1010-L6-L1011-L1012-L7-L8

L1013 OUTCROP 559714 7792078 No sulphides

L1014 BOULDER 559619 7792165 Very rusty, few sulphide grains visible, oxidized?

Reinfjord



R1 OUTCROP 525721 7780212 Fine-grained umaf

R2 OUTCROP 525662 7780242 Rusty umaf

R3 OUTCROP 525678 7780221 Gabbro enclave, sulphides

R4 OUTCROP 525672 7780219 Gabbro enclave, sulphides

R5 OUTCROP 527717 7778051 Langstrand gabbro

R6 BOULDER 527649 7778005 Sulphide banded Langstrand gabbro

R7 BOULDER 527663 7778016 Sulphide banded Langstrand gabbro

R8 OUTCROP 525368 7777155 oC

R9 OUTCROP 525477 7777123 oC

R10 OUTCROP 525681 7777340 Schistose umaf

R11 OUTCROP 525761 7777172 oC

R12 OUTCROP 526022 7777025 MZ, sulphides




R16 OUTCROP 526051 7778806 oC

R17 OUTCROP 526096 7778802 oC

R18 OUTCROP 526130 7778725 oc

R19 OUTCROP 525586 7778778 oC, schistose, parallel to fault zone

R20 OUTCROP 524754 7777639 oC

R1001 BOULDER 525634 7781543 Fine grained GB, represent bedrock

R1002 OUTCROP 525505 7781616 Poikilitic oC



R1005 OUTCROP 525197 7781535 Gabbro xenolith 15m diam.

R1006 OUTCROP 525194 7781534 Poikilitic oC, coarser

R1007 OUTCROP 525160 7781519 Poikilitic oC, finer grained


R1009 OUTCROP 525021 7781439

R1010 OUTCROP 525025 7781393 Marginal zone, weathered rock

R1011 OUTCROP 525007 7781367 Granulite gneiss



R1014 OUTCROP 525470 7777064 Poikilitic oC, schistose, sulphides

R1015 OUTCROP 526090 7776992 MZ, umaf, weak-moderate sulph. dissem.

R1016 OUTCROP 526101 7776984 MZ, umaf, rusty, oxidized sulphides?

R1017 OUTCROP 526192 7776971 Banded gabbro, rusty band 2-50cm, thickest bands show up by Proxan


R1019 OUTCROP 526127 7778804 Umaf, fine-grained

R1020 OUTCROP 526129 7778820 Umaf

R1021 OUTCROP 526184 7778786 Umaf, possibly few grains of weathered sulphides



R1022 OUTCROP 526183 7778785 Umaf, possibly few grains of weathered sulphides

R1023 OUTCROP 525721 7778769 oC

R1024 OUTCROP 525364 7778863 Well layered oC

R1025 BOULDER 525131 7778974 MZ, pyroxenite pegm 0.5*0.4*0.4 cubic meters, sulphides

R1026 OUTCROP 524917 7778873 MZ, pyroxenite pegm, rusty. Nearby PyPegm boulders sulphide bearing

R1027 OUTCROP 523601 7778377 Småvatna MZ gabbro, moderately sulphides, weathered


R1029 OUTCROP 523629 7778377 Småvatna MZ gabbro, mederately sulphides, weathered, coarser grained

R1030 OUTCROP 523621 7778381 Småvatna MZ, moderately sulphides




R1034 OUTCROP 523643 7778440 Småvatna MZ gabbro, sulphides, less than lower in the prof, weathered

R1035 OUTCROP 523646 7778452 Småvatna MZ gabbro, little sulphides, weathered

R1036 OUTCROP 523695 7778437 Småvatna MZ gabbro, sulphides, but not necessarily in sample, weathered

R1037 OUTCROP 523671 7778412 Småvatna MZ gabbro, weathered

R1038 OUTCROP 523643 7778375 Småvatna MZ gabbro, little sulphides, fresh

R1039 OUTCROP 523649 7778342 Småvatna MZ gabbro, little to moderately sulphides, weathered

R1040 OUTCROP 523734 7778332 Småvatna MZ

R1041 OUTCROP 523761 7778258 Småvatna MZ gabbro, weathered

R1042 OUTCROP 524670 7778053 MZ, Pyroxenite-Gabbro pegmatite, some sulphides

R1043 OUTCROP 524671 7778048 MZ, Pyroxenite-Gabbro pegmatite right underneath the ULS oC, some sulphides

R1044 OUTCROP 524677 7778097 MZ, not pegmatitic, some sulphides

R1045 OUTCROP 524677 7778054 MZ, rusty PyPegm

R1046 OUTCROP 524795 7777999 MZ, rusty PyPegm, sulphides

R1047 OUTCROP 523813 7777254 Bonjikdalen MZ, lowermost mineralized MZ, fresh

R1048 OUTCROP 523817 7777270 Bonjikdalen MZ, almost net textured sulphides, fresh

R1049 OUTCROP 523829 7777263 Bonjikdalen MZ, almost net textured sulphides, fresh

R1050 OUTCROP 523857 7777260 Bonjikdalen MZ, good sulphide dissem., fresh

R1051 OUTCROP 523865 7777260 Bonjikdalen MZ, less sulphides than lower in the profile

R1052 OUTCROP 523869 7777282 Bonjikdalen MZ, less sulphides than lower in the profile

R1053 OUTCROP 525268 7777158 oC, few sulphide grains

R1054 BOULDER 525950 7777361 MZ, good sulphide dissemination

R1055 BOULDER 527433 7778778 Langstrand gabbro, rusty but no sulphides

R1056 BOULDER 528029 7778823 Pyroxenite with troctolitic patches, some sulphides, 0.6*0.6*0.4 cubic m

Tappeluft



T1 OUTCROP 556923 7777095 Hornblendite, weak-moderately sulphides

T1001 OUTCROP 557303 7777577 Hornblendite, few granis to weak dissemm sulphides, susc. 10-25 milliSI

T1002 OUTCROP 557306 7777593 Hornblendite, few granis to weak dissemm sulphides, susc. 10-25 milliSI

T1003 OUTCROP 557319 7777595 Hornblendite, few sulphide grains, susc. 10-25 milliSI

T1004 OUTCROP 557308 7777643 Hornblendite, weak but even dissem. sulphides, susc. 10-25 milliSI

T1005 OUTCROP 557296 7777636 Hornblendite, increased amount of sulphides, susc. 10-25 milliSI

T1006 BOULDER 555954 7775268 Gabbropegmatite, 0.3*0.15*0.25 cubic m. some sulphide grains. May not be very local boulder

T1007 OUTCROP 555886 7775348 Coarse grained, but not pegm, some oxidized sulphide grains, rusty

TABLE 2. LAYERING OBSERVATIONS.

Reading Easting Northing

1 060/17 525863 7777431

2 060/18 526114 7777001

3 085/20 524699 7777684

4 135/30 525597 7778781

TABLE 3. SUSCEPTIBILITY READINGS.

Reading Easting Northing

30-50 milliSI 525874 7778786

50 milliSI 525943 7778799

50 milliSI 526114 7778783

50 milliSI 526140 7778791

TABLE 4. MISCELLANEOUS OBSERVATIONS.

type code easting northing notes

contact contact between MZ-GB 524633 7778049

contact contact between PyPegm-layered series

524670 7778048

contact contact between R1001-1002 525604 7781567 interlayered contact

contact contact between R1006-1007 525162 7781529



other gb slab 527433 7778965 Interlayered NEMZ



other gb slab2 527203 7778901 Interlayered NEMZ

other profile 524600 7781450 mapped from this point to R1001

other profile 557115 7777439 sulphides from this point to NE contact of the intrusion along the road



Appendix 3 Petrohysical properties of the samples TABLE 1. CONDUCTIVITY (INDUCTIVE METHOD), SUSCEPTIBILITY, AND DENSITY MEASUREMENTS FOR

SAMPLES DEPICTED IN THE REPORT TABLES 2 AND 3. GTK ESPOO LABORATORY.

Sample Location or type Conductivity [Siemens/meter]

Susceptibility [10-6 SI] Density [kg/m3]

R1029 Små 48.8 6050 3247

R1030 Små 129.4 7180 3302

R1031 Små 98.0 9100 3198

R1035 Små 198.8 3480 3253

R1039 Små 162.9 2253 3279

R1048 Bon 71.4 11150 3257

R1049 Bon 237.5 14670 3296

R1050 Bon 17.3 9520 3319

R13 LD 237.0 8510 3304

R14 LD 172.7 9910 3326

R15 LD 96.2 4210 3309

R1015 LD 42.2 17150 3377

R1016 LD 42.6 6880 3289

R1054 LD 177.0 8230 3351

R1025 Sto 57.1 25080 3230

R1042 Sto 259.7 35300 3308

R1056 NEMZ 99.0 81500 3044

R3 Nwing 218.3 92700 3046

R1017 LD 33.6 1328 2777

R7 Tverfj 714.3 8520 2936

R1055 Tverfj 515.5 41100 3164

R8 LD 621.1 10620 2970

R1053 Ld 247.5 5570 3364

R16 Valley 100.3 44200 2737

L1004 OUTCROP 806.5 197500 3359

L1005 OUTCROP 840.3 243300 3420

L1006 OUTCROP 2475.2 254000 3378

L1007 OUTCROP 1562.5 225000 3338

L1008 OUTCROP 684.9 286300 3365

L1009 OUTCROP 909.1 211400 3369

L2 OUTCROP 877.2 52100 3253

L3 OUTCROP 813.0 144800 3303

L8 OUTCROP 1253.1 120400 3330

L1013 OUTCROP 259.1 27610 3130

L7 OUTCROP 1150.7 233000 3387



L1012 OUTCROP 211.0 96400 3310

L1011 OUTCROP 3225.8 320000 3480

L6 OUTCROP 4329.0 494000 3471

L1010 OUTCROP 220.3 250500 3359

L1 BOULDER 3610.1 231500 3501

L4 BOULDER 359.7 7060 3336

L5 OUTCROP 684.9 178800 3357

L1001 BOULDER 934.6 161600 3319

L1002 BOULDER 649.4 101500 3279

L1003 BOULDER 237.0 107100 3014

L1014 BOULDER 478.5 148800 3285

TABLE 2. RESISTIVITY (R, CONDUCTIVE METHOD) MEASUREMENTS USING 0.1, 10 AND 500 HZ AC, AND

CALCULATED CHARGEABILITIES. CHARGEABILITY 2 OVER 60% CAN CAUSE AN IP ANOMALY, AND STRONG

ANOMALY IF OVER 70%. GTK ROVANIEMI LABORATORY.

99999=out-of-instrument range

Chargeability 1 = 100 * (R1-R2) / R1

Chargeability 2 = 100 * (R1-R3) / R1

Sample R0.1[Ohmm] R10[Ohmm] R500[Ohmm] Chargeability 1 [%]

Chargeability 2 [%]

R 1001 6610 5930 5120 10.3 22.5

R 1001 7300 6540 5640 10.4 22.7

R 1002 18000 16800 14200 6.7 21.1

R 1003 21000 19400 17100 7.6 18.6

R 1004 79300 71300 62200 10.1 21.6

R 1005 66400 61200 52500 7.8 20.9

R 1006 99999 99999 99999 0.0 0.0

R 1007 27100 25700 24100 5.2 11.1

R 1008 40300 39400 36800 2.2 8.7

R 1009 36800 34700 32500 5.7 11.7

R 1010 21300 20200 18800 5.2 11.7

R 1011 14000 13100 11800 6.4 15.7

R 1012 30000 28500 26500 5.0 11.7

R 1013 25700 24800 23400 3.5 8.9

R 1014 5290 5010 4650 5.3 12.1

R 1015 13300 11200 10100 15.8 24.1

R 1016 372 328 328 11.8 11.8

R 1017 932 923 889 1.0 4.6

R 1018 19000 18400 17100 3.2 10.0



R 1019 561 101 47.5 82.0 91.5

R 1020 336 122 79.3 63.7 76.4

R 1021 272 41.9 25.8 84.6 90.5

R 1022 29700 19500 13700 34.3 53.9

R 1023 597 221 149 63.0 75.0

R 1024 367 131 75.5 64.3 79.4

R 1025 4460 3160 2440 29.1 45.3

R 1026 497 122 82.1 75.5 83.5

R 1027 34800 33200 30800 4.6 11.5

R 1028 30300 27900 24900 7.9 17.8

R 1029 8480 7780 7220 8.3 14.9

R 1030 6480 6110 5640 5.7 13.0

R 1031 567 530 487 6.5 14.1

R 1032 3370 3280 3040 2.7 9.8

R 1033 9520 8690 7460 8.7 21.6

R 1034 13200 12200 11100 7.6 15.9

R 1035 4780 4390 4000 8.2 16.3

R 1036 12200 12100 11600 0.8 4.9

R 1037 17400 16600 15300 4.6 12.1

R 1038 29400 24000 19200 18.4 34.7

R 1039 19500 17700 15400 9.2 21.0

R 1040 4390 4410 4230 -0.5 3.6

R 1041 8100 7770 7290 4.1 10.0

R 1042 3990 3510 3060 12.0 23.3

R 1043 27200 25900 23700 4.8 12.9

R 1043 10400 9830 8810 5.5 15.3

R 1045 837 261 182 68.8 78.3

R 1046 10700 9300 8020 13.1 25.0

R 1047 59000 57100 52000 3.2 11.9

R 1048 5200 4410 3820 15.2 26.5

R 1049 27900 26200 23900 6.1 14.3

R 1050 13400 11800 10200 11.9 23.9

R 1051 34000 32700 29200 3.8 14.1

R 1052 64600 59200 49800 8.4 22.9

R 1053 36600 36900 35800 -0.8 2.2

R 1054 821 700 616 14.7 25.0

R 1055 1790 1150 776 35.8 56.6

R 1056 114 68.7 52 39.7 54.4

R 1 2270 1290 929 43.2 59.1

R 2 1610 730 441 54.7 72.6

R 3 69400 55700 42300 19.7 39.0



R 4 99999 99999 99999 0.0 0.0

R 5 10900 8170 5970 25.0 45.2

R 6 5460 4390 3480 19.6 36.3

R 7 4080 3240 2640 20.6 35.3

R 8 32700 31500 28600 3.7 12.5

R 9 18200 11000 7590 39.6 58.3

R 10 66900 58400 47100 12.7 29.6

R 11 37400 35200 32400 5.9 13.4

R 12 46300 45000 42200 2.8 8.9

R 13 6620 6120 5570 7.6 15.9

R 14 1730 1530 1400 11.6 19.1

R 15 3740 3180 3210 15.0 14.2

R 16 1260 989 837 21.5 33.6

R 17 285 58.2 36 79.6 87.4

R 18 1500 800 701 46.7 53.3

R 19 410 173 117 57.8 71.5

R 20 504 172 101 65.9 80.0

L 1 184 132 98.3 28.3 46.6

L 2 1490 1480 1270 0.7 14.8

L 3 8260 6580 5100 20.3 38.3

L 4 3690 2950 2540 20.1 31.2

L 5 1940 1680 1290 13.4 33.5

L 6 2050 1500 1030 26.8 49.8

L 7 372 137 82.8 63.2 77.7

L 8 4270 3490 2940 18.3 31.1

L 1001 470 292 200 37.9 57.4

L 1002 971 626 459 35.5 52.7

L 1003 240 204 159 15.0 33.8

L 1004 2600 2180 1790 16.2 31.2

L 1005 501 306 247 38.9 50.7

L 1006 1630 1310 1010 19.6 38.0

L 1007 5730 4130 3110 27.9 45.7

L 1008 6660 3910 2580 41.3 61.3

L 1009 4470 2920 2130 34.7 52.3

L 1010 1670 1470 1260 12.0 24.6

L 1011 982 856 786 12.8 20.0

L 1012 367 134 59.1 63.5 83.9

L 1013 11300 11600 11100 -2.7 1.8

L 1014 2280 2170 1770 4.8 22.4

End of Table 2



TABLE 3. CONDUCTIVITY (INDUCTIVE METHOD), SUSCEPTIBILITY AND DENSITY MEASUREMENTS, GTK

ESPOO LABORATORY.

Sample Conductivity [Siemens/meter]

Susceptibility [10-6 SI] Density [kg/m3]

L1 3610 231500 3501

L2 877 52100 3253

L3 813 144800 3303

L4 360 7060 3336

L5 685 178800 3357

L6 4329 494000 3471

L7 1151 233000 3387

L8 1253 120400 3330

L1001 935 161600 3319

L1002 649 101500 3279

L1003 237 107100 3014

L1004 806 197500 3359

L1005 840 243300 3420

L1006 2475 254000 3378

L1007 1563 225000 3338

L1008 685 286300 3365

L1009 909 211400 3369

L1010 220 250500 3359

L1011 3226 320000 3480

L1012 211 96400 3310

L1013 259 27610 3130

L1014 478 148800 3285

R1 357 49700 2902

R2 50 35700 2635

R3 218 92700 3046

R4 88 124800 3001

R5 132 86800 3011

R6 136 11020 3021

R7 714 8520 2936

R8 621 10620 2970

R9 186 29380 2716

R10 68 16240 3012

R11 <10 3770 3320

R12 119 12460 3320

R13 237 8510 3304

R14 173 9910 3326

R15 96 4210 3309



R16 100 44200 2737

R17 72 69100 2624

R18 37 68300 2607

R19 136 93000 2682

R20 89 59000 2901

R1001 108 4290 2848

R1002 149 8440 3300

R1003 46 11210 3299

R1004 98 12570 3291

R1005 155 10600 3174

R1006 29 3760 3258

R1007 30 2077 3252

R1008 95 12980 3251

R1009 254 8810 3238

R1010 65 6000 3120

R1011 27 44600 2672

R1012 79 7310 3375

R1013 248 4720 3389

R1014 150 11990 2819

R1015 42 17150 3377

R1016 43 6880 3289

R1017 34 1328 2777

R1018 79 8140 3293

R1019 345 64700 2614

R1020 <10 133200 2664

R1021 68 103200 2679

R1022 146 7370 3054

R1023 <10 49200 2556

R1024 125 34900 2767

R1025 57 25080 3230

R1026 144 86200 2955

R1027 41 2176 3233

R1028 21 1120 3309

R1029 49 6050 3247

R1030 129 7180 3302

R1031 98 9100 3198

R1032 1475 16430 3250

R1033 1126 12980 3163

R1034 280 16280 3278

R1035 199 3480 3253

R1036 388 1974 3185



R1037 18 865 3191

R1038 65 8680 3334

R1039 163 2253 3279

R1040 45 1704 3259

R1041 606 764 3251

R1042 260 35300 3308

R1043 103 10310 3252

R1044 128 18180 3326

R1045 74 36900 3047

R1046 137 16860 3315

R1047 20 3280 3259

R1048 71 11150 3257

R1049 238 14670 3296

R1050 17 9520 3319

R1051 71 5790 3240

R1052 46 7730 3288

R1053 248 5570 3364

R1054 177 8230 3351

R1055 515 41100 3164

R1056 99 81500 3044

TABLE 4. DENSITY, SUSCEPTIBILITY, AND REMANENCE MEASUREMENTS. Q-RATIO IS

(24.4*SUSCEPTIBILITY)/ REMANENCE. GTK ROVANIEMI LABORATORY.

Density [kg/m3] Susceptibility [10-6 SI]

Remanence [mA/m]

Q-ratio Sample

2860 3080 1210 62 R 1001

3291 8350 5980 34 R 1002

3319 10240 8360 30 R 1003

3300 10940 350 763 R 1004

3214 7740 310 609 R 1005

3282 7430 630 288 R 1006

3264 2030 2170 23 R 1007

3283 12650 3390 91 R 1008

3262 8540 3440 61 R 1009

3044 4090 1260 79 R 1010

2707 48770 5530 215 R 1011

3384 7040 630 273 R 1012

3386 5700 1480 94 R 1013



2814 9330 1720 132 R 1014

3389 17840 4020 108 R 1015

3344 9540 6470 36 R 1016

2768 1110 160 169 R 1017

3290 9200 870 258 R 1018

2632 62760 3330 460 R 1019

2697 156290 11770 324 R 1020

2685 102150 6110 408 R 1021

2972 29930 1580 462 R 1022

2599 53600 2560 511 R 1023

2779 42450 5240 198 R 1024

3280 16830 2690 153 R 1025

2940 77080 6520 288 R 1026

3204 3610 550 160 R 1027

3298 1150 60 468 R 1028

3238 10860 2570 103 R 1029

3311 7230 1230 143 R 1030

3271 4910 1310 91 R 1031

3273 18810 8620 53 R 1032

3201 18340 4160 108 R 1033

3318 25130 4890 125 R 1034

3202 2810 190 361 R 1035

3164 800 40 488 R 1036

3190 900 40 549 R 1037

3330 9130 1930 115 R 1038

3305 2350 260 221 R 1039

3264 1770 60 720 R 1040

3222 990 30 805 R 1041

3332 32390 17210 46 R 1042

3249 14740 5270 68 R 1043

3303 19070 6340 73 R 1044

3013 33600 3130 262 R 1045

3318 16700 8650 47 R 1046

3271 3690 360 250 R 1047

3300 15020 1370 268 R 1048

3322 7040 960 179 R 1049

3306 9210 650 346 R 1050

3257 6350 2830 55 R 1051

3299 8850 770 280 R 1052

3368 5550 1070 127 R 1053

3336 8100 4720 42 R 1054



3152 40370 3270 301 R 1055

3030 73220 4350 411 R 1056

2899 46520 3340 340 R 1

2664 36730 6710 134 R 2

3061 74710 3800 480 R 3

3036 111840 4380 623 R 4

3020 80130 600 3259 R 5

3015 9390 550 417 R 6

2954 7480 620 294 R 7

3005 9530 1180 197 R 8

2751 28620 2200 317 R 9

3010 15040 1120 328 R 10

3326 3720 940 97 R 11

3338 12080 4500 66 R 12

3330 7870 3760 51 R 13

3366 14290 3750 93 R 14

3326 4600 1330 84 R 15

2746 50270 6890 178 R 16

2633 67880 4640 357 R 17

2624 92240 4130 545 R 18

2686 88010 7050 305 R 19

2928 58920 3140 458 R 20

3188 236460 7190 802 L 1

3267 71970 4260 412 L 2

3321 144870 4130 856 L 3

3337 16980 790 524 L 4

3378 203350 10480 473 L 5

3430 392110 18890 506 L 6

3356 180320 5650 779 L 7

3350 132190 5390 598 L 8

3346 124260 3680 824 L 1001

3410 324670 14900 532 L 1002

3206 174960 6050 706 L 1003

3370 237760 5510 1053 L 1004

3458 359890 10480 838 L 1005

3319 241720 4610 1279 L 1006

3323 213980 9390 556 L 1007

3374 267950 9540 685 L 1008

3355 216930 8740 606 L 1009

3349 271980 14970 443 L 1010

3387 339280 11960 692 L 1011

exploration report on reinfjord, …...the gabbro screen is conformable to the igneous layering of...

Documents