Post by Sapphire Capital on Jul 12, 2008 23:03:30 GMT 4
Page 1 of 7
AUSTRALASIAN
JOINT ORE RESERVES
COMMITTEE (JORC)
Chairman: Mr P R Stephenson Phone (03) 9670 8455 Fax (03) 9670 8311
A/Secretary: Mr P T Stoker Phone (07) 3376 1007 Fax (07) 3279 1565
A/Secretary’s Postal Address: 42 Canowindra Street Jindalee Qld 4074
JORC web site www.jorc.org
THE 2004 JORC CODE – COMPARISON WITH THE 1999 JORC CODE
After a three-year revision process, the ASX has incorporated the 2004 JORC Code into the
ASX Listing Rules, from 17 December 2004 (see ASX Companies Update no 16/04) replacing
the 1999 JORC Code as Appendix 5A. Appendix 5A can be accessed at
www.asx.com.au/ListingRules/appendices/App5a.doc. The 2004 JORC Code is also
available on the JORC web site www.jorc.org. This revision of the JORC Code follows a call
for submission in December 2001 and the publication of several exposure drafts from late
2002.
Whilst there are differences between the 1999 Code and the 2004 Code, most of the changes
are in the guidelines. The Code definitions, which are largely in accord with agreed
international definitions, remain substantially unchanged. The two main changes in the 2004
Code are the requirement for a Competent Person to be responsible for the documentation
supporting the reporting of Exploration Results, and the introduction of ‘Recognised Overseas
Professional Organisations’ as overseas organisations to which Competent Persons may
belong.
Other changes include:
• clarification of the reporting of exploration targets or potential;
• the rearrangement of the diamond reporting clauses;
• the introduction of guidelines for the reporting of Industrial Minerals;
• modification of the coal clauses and recognition of the new Coal Guidelines; and
• the introduction of a guideline encouraging the discussion of relative accuracy and
confidence in resource/reserve estimates.
Other lesser changes to the Code include are listed and discussed briefly.
Differences in Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve definitions
The Code definitions for Mineral Resources, Ore Reserves and the resource/reserve
categories remain unchanged with the exception of one minor modification to the definition of
a Measured Resource, the removal of ”/or” after “and”, correcting a previous typographical
error, and the addition of the word “quality” in the definition of a Mineral Resource. These
definitions are largely in accord with the “Denver Accord” international definitions.
Main Changes in the 2004 JORC Code
The two main changes in the 2004 Code are the requirement for a Competent Person to be
responsible for the documentation relating to the reporting of Exploration Results, and the
A U S T R A L I A N
I N STI T U T E O F
G E O S C I E N T I S T S
S u p p o r tin g G eo s c ie n t is t s
Page 2 of 7
incorporation into the Code of ‘Recognised Overseas Professional Organisations’ as overseas
organisations to which Competent Persons may belong.
Involvement of a Competent Person in the Public Reporting of Exploration
Results
Until now, the Code has not required the involvement of a Competent Person in the
preparation of the documentation on which a company’s Public Report of Exploration Results
is based. Other overseas codes (the Reporting Code and the SAMREC Code) require the
Competent Person, who prepared the documentation, on which the Public Report is based, to
be named. In Canada, National Instrument NI 43-101 and the CIM Standards require the
involvement and naming of a Qualified Person (effectively equivalent to a Competent Person).
In Australia it has become increasingly common for companies reporting results of exploration
to also report the name of the Competent Person who accepts responsibility for the
preparation of the documentation on which the Public Report is based, and state that the
report fairly reflects the work of the Competent Person. JORC believes it is now appropriate to
formalise this reporting responsibility in the JORC Code.
Clause 8 of the Code, which defines the role of the Competent Person, has been amended to
include Public Reports of Exploration Results, along with Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves. All these reports will be required to “be based on and fairly reflect the information
and supporting documentation prepared by the Competent Person”.
The term Exploration Results has been defined in Clause 16 as including “data and
information generated by exploration programmes that may be of use to investors”. The
clause also states that “Exploration Results may or may not be part of a formal reporting of
Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves”, and additional guidance is included on when it is
appropriate to report Exploration Results.
The definition of a Competent Person in Clause 10 has been amended slightly to cover this
extension by including the words “If the Competent Person is preparing a report on
Exploration Results, the relevant experience must be in exploration”.
Inclusion of Recognised Overseas Professional Organisations
Since the first JORC Code in 1989, Competent Persons have had to belong to either The
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (“The AusIMM”) or the Australian Institute of
Geoscientists (“AIG”). These are the Australasian professional organisations that have
adopted the JORC Code and that have codes of ethics to allow disciplining of Competent
Persons for breaches of the JORC Code. With the globalisation of the mining industry, and the
worldwide adoption of reporting standards based on the JORC Code, this requirement has
been recognised as somewhat restrictive.
• During 2003, the ASX promulgated a list of Recognised Overseas Professional
Organisations (ROPO’s) to which Competent Persons may belong for the purpose of
preparing reports on Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves for
submission to the ASX. The ROPO process applies in respect of reports prepared under
the JORC Code. The published list, prepared on the advice of JORC and its parent
organisations, is available on the ASX website, at
www.asx.com.au/about/pdf/JORC.pdf and is updated periodically.
Each of these organisations has satisfied the following qualification criteria agreed between
JORC, its parent organisations and the ASX:
Page 3 of 7
• is a self-regulatory organisation covering professionals in the mining and/or exploration
industry;
• admits members primarily on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience;
• requires compliance with the professional standards of competence and ethics
established by the organisation; and
• has disciplinary powers, including the power to suspend or expel a member.
It will, of course, be a prerequisite that any members of ROPO’s wishing to take advantage of
this recognition must meet the requirement for relevant experience set out in the applicable
clauses of the JORC Code.
This ROPO initiative will replace the current ASX listing rules provision for a “recognised
mining professional”, which was a strict and temporary solution to the globalisation issue. The
ROPO initiative is complementary to a similar arrangement introduced in Canada in 2001. The
Canadian Securities Administrators (“CSA”) published a list of overseas professional
organisations that it recognised as fulfilling the requirements for a “Professional Association”
as defined in Canada’s National Instrument NI 43-101, included in which were The AusIMM
and the AIG.
Other Changes in the 2004 Code
Clarification of the reporting of exploration targets
In order for companies to clearly communicate the potential value of projects to investors and
their advisors, there is a need for company boards to be able to discuss their exploration
targets and possible outcomes of exploration programs. In the 1999 JORC Code there is an
apparent contradiction between Clause 17 (1999 Code) which read as follows:
“A company may choose, or be required under stock exchange listing rules, to report
exploration results. If a company reports exploration results in relation to mineralisation not
classified as a Mineral Resource or an Ore Reserve, then estimates of tonnage and average
grade must not be assigned to the mineralisation.”
and its guideline, which read:
“Where descriptions of exploration targets or exploration potential are given in Public Reports,
any tonnage/grade figures mentioned must be clearly order-of-magnitude and conceptual in
nature and expressed so as not to misrepresent them as an estimate of Mineral Resources or
Ore Reserves.”
This section of the Code has been expanded and clarified in the 2004 Exposure Draft. The
reporting of Exploration Results, which may not include estimates of tonnage and grade, is
covered in Clauses 16 and 17. The reporting of exploration targets is covered in Clause 18
which permits the reporting of exploration target size and type with strict conditions, these
being:
“Any such information relating to exploration targets must be expressed so that it cannot be
misrepresented or misconstrued as an estimate of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves. The
terms Resource(s) or Reserve(s) must not be used in this context. Any statement referring to
potential quantity and grade of the target must be expressed as ranges and must include (1) a
detailed explanation of the basis for the statement, and (2) a proximate statement that the
potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature, that there has been insufficient
exploration to define a Mineral Resource on the property and that it is uncertain if further
exploration will result in discovery of a Mineral Resource on the property.”
Page 4 of 7
The cautionary statement, (2) above, is similar to one contained in the Canadian National
Instrument NI 43-101, and emphasises to investors and their advisors that such statements
should not be confused with Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves.
Consolidation of information on reporting of Exploration Results
To report exploration results under the 1999 reporting conditions, it has been necessary to
consult both the Code, including the guideline Table 1, and the ASX listing rules. Under the
heading “Content of reports”, the ASX listing rules 5.7 and 5.8, contain specific requirements
for reporting of the results of mineral exploration, including the method of reporting assay
results.
The 2004 JORC Code contains all this information instead of it being distributed between the
Code and the ASX listing rules, as is currently the case.
The rearrangement of the diamond reporting clauses
A diamonds (and other gemstones) section was included in the 1996 JORC Code having been
derived from a diamond appendix issued after the release of the 1992 JORC Code. During the
preparation of the 1999 JORC Code, matters dealing with diamonds (and other gemstones)
were integrated into the relevant clauses and guidelines of the Code. As a result there was an
inconsistency in the treatment of diamonds and coal, which logically remained a separate
section. Following a number of submissions from diamond specialists, and with recognition
that a separate section on the reporting of Industrial Minerals was to be introduced into the
2004 JORC Code, the material relating specifically to diamonds has been aggregated into a
group of clauses, Clauses 40 to 43. A complete review of the guideline material relating to
diamonds in Table 1 has been undertaken, again with assistance from diamond specialists
and with reference to the Canadian Guidelines for the Reporting of Diamond Exploration
Results.
As with other commodities covered by specific sections of the Code, all the general sections of
the Code are applicable.
Naming of the diamond valuer no longer required
In line with common practice and the position adopted by other overseas codes and the
Canadian guidelines, the requirement for the valuer of diamonds to be named has been
deleted from the Code and replaced with a requirement that “any reported valuation of a
parcel of diamonds or gemstones be accompanied by a statement verifying the independence
of the valuation. The valuation must be based on a report from a demonstrably reputable and
qualified expert”.
The introduction of guidelines for the reporting of Industrial Minerals
The JORC Code has always implicitly been applicable to the reporting of Industrial Minerals
although it has not previously supplied specific guidance. JORC has conducted a process of
industry consultation over several years, including approaches to The Institute of Quarrying
Australia, and the presentation of a paper (Stephenson and Lee, 2003) at the AIG Industrial
Minerals Conference in Brisbane during March 2003. At this conference a new section
containing a single draft Industrial Minerals clause (Clause 44) and guideline was circulated,
which has subsequently been included in the draft 2004 Code. The guidelines refer to the
importance of matters not normally considered quite so material for other commodities, such
as deleterious minerals or physical properties, likely product specifications, proximity to
markets and general product marketability. Note that this clause and guideline does not
Page 5 of 7
specifically refer to the extractive industries, however a dialogue on the appropriate manner to
handle this industry sector has been established with Cement, Concrete & Aggregates
Australia, the extractive industry association.
Modification of the coal clauses and recognition of the new Coal Guidelines
As a result of the revision of the Australian Coal Guidelines to coincide with the release of the
2004 JORC Code, a revised reference to these new guidelines, the “Australian Guidelines for
Estimating and Reporting of Inventory Coal, Coal Resources and Coal Reserves, 2003
Edition” is included in the coal section of the Code. With the agreement of the Coal Guidelines
Committee, the provision in the 1999 JORC Code permitting combined reporting of Proved
and Probable Coal Reserves as Recoverable Reserves has been removed. Otherwise the
coal specific sections of the Code remain unchanged in intent.
Guideline encouraging discussion of relative accuracy and confidence in
estimates
The classification of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves involves the Competent Person in
expressing a view on the relative confidence that investors and their advisors should place on
the resources or reserves. Increasingly it is common practice during mining project studies to
attempt to quantify the confidence levels that are applicable to the resources or reserves being
considered as the basis for the study.
During committee debate on the Code revision, there was considerable discussion on the
manner in which any confidence levels, which may supplement those inherent in the
classification, might be developed. This led to the realisation that it was inappropriate, at least
at this point in time, to specify a single method of discussing confidence levels for resources
and reserves. Instead, a guideline has been introduced which encourages, but does not
require, the discussion of relative accuracy and confidence in resource/reserve estimates. It
does not specify the manner in which that is done, leaving the selection of an appropriate
method to the judgement of the Competent Person.
Naming of the Competent Person
The requirement for the Competent Person to be named, previously in section 5.12 of the ASX
Listing Rules, has been moved to Clause 8 of the Code. The guidance previously included in
Appendix 1 of the Code, which discussed the JORC Code and stock exchanges, has been
moved to become a guideline to Clause 8.
Fair Representation
In Clause 9 of the 2004 revision a sentence has been added to the clause stating that the
documentation must provide a “fair representation” of the material being reported. So there is
now explicit recognition of the obligation for the Competent Person to provide balanced
documentation and, in Clause 8, for the Public Report to fairly reflect that documentation.
What is a Public Report and Summary Reports
An updated guideline has been included with Clause 5 indicating more fully the nature and
type of reports which are regarded for the purposes of the Code as Public Reports, the main
additions being postings on company web sites and briefings for shareholders, stockbrokers
and investment analysts.
The 2004 Code includes guidelines covering the issuing of concise reports or other summary
reports. The guidelines to Clause 5 include advice that, for companies issuing concise annual
reports or other summary reports, inclusion of all material information relating to Exploration
Page 6 of 7
Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves is recommended. In cases where summary
information is presented, the guideline suggests that it should be clearly stated that it is a
summary, and that a reference should be attached giving the location of the Code-compliant
Public Reports or Public Reporting on which the summary is based.
Inclusion of Generic Terms Table
The new Appendix 1 in the 2004 JORC Code is a table of generic terms, led on a similar
table in the Reporting Code. In the Code certain words are used in a general sense when
particular commodity groups within the industry might attach a more specific meaning to them.
In order to avoid unnecessary duplication, a non-exclusive list of generic terms has been
prepared, together with other terms that may be regarded as synonymous for the purposes of
the Code.
Guideline on level of study required for the reporting of an Ore Reserve
There is a variation in the level of studies required for the reporting of an Ore Reserve
between a number of the overseas Codes. The United States Securities and Exchange
Commission is also quite prescriptive on the acceptable inputs to a mandatory feasibility study
for the declaration of Ore Reserves. The JORC Code has implicitly recognised that the level
and timing of appropriate studies will vary according to circumstances. The definition of an Ore
Reserve in the Code includes the following: “Appropriate assessments, which may include
feasibility studies, have been carried out, and include consideration of and modification by
realistically assumed mining, metallurgical, economic, marketing, legal, environmental, social
and governmental factors. These assessments demonstrate at the time of reporting that
extraction could reasonably be justified.”
The 2004 Code includes a guideline that expands on the intent of these sentences by stating
that the studies will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and
economically viable and from which the Ore Reserves can be derived. It further advises that it
may not be necessary for these studies to be at the level of a final feasibility study.
In this matter, as in other areas, the JORC Code allows the decision as to what is an
appropriate study to be made by the Competent Person.
Reference to the VALMIN Code And Valuations
There has been some confusion between certain terms used in the JORC Code and certain
terms used and defined in the VALMIN Code. In order to clarify the situation, a guideline has
been added to Clause 6 to emphasise that the terms ‘technical and economic studies’ and
‘feasibility studies’ in the JORC Code are not intended as references to “Technical
Assessments” or “Valuations” as they are specifically defined in the VALMIN Code.
Definition of “Modifying Factors” added
For clarity a definition of the term modifying factors has been added in Clause 11 as follows:
“The term ‘Modifying Factors’ is defined to include mining, metallurgical, economic, marketing,
legal, environmental, social and governmental considerations”.
Additions to guideline Table 1
Several additional topics have been included in Table 1 in the 2004 Exposure draft:
• Orientation of data in relation to geological structure, in the sampling section,
• Dimensions and moisture in the Mineral Resource section,
Page 7 of 7
• Study status in the Ore Reserves section.
References:
Australian Guidelines for Estimating and Reporting of Inventory Coal, Coal Resources and Coal
Reserves, 2003 Edition. Prepared by the Coalfields Geology Council of New South Wales and the
Queensland Mining Council, 2003.
Australian Stock Exchange, Companies Update 6 December 2004, Update no 16/04.
Australian Stock Exchange, Appendix 5a Listing Rules.
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy Working Group on Resources and Reserves in conjunction with
the European Federation of Geologists and The Institute of Geologists of Ireland. Code for Reporting
of Mineral Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the Reporting Code)
October 2001.
Joint Committee of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of
Geoscientists and Minerals Council of Australia, 1999. Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves.
National Instrument NI 43 – 101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects, 02/01/2001.
South African Mineral Resource Committee (SAMREC) Under the Auspices of The South African
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. South African Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves (the SAMREC Code), March 2000.
Stephenson, P R, and Lee, G, 2003. The Application of the JORC Code to the Public Reporting of
Industrial Minerals, Proceedings of the AIG Industrial Minerals Conference, pp 61-64 (The Australian
Institute of Geoscientists, Brisbane, March 2003).
The CIM Standing Committee On Reserve Definitions Adopted by CIM Council. CIM Standards on
Mineral Resources and Reserves Definitions and Guidelines, August 2000.
P T Stoker
Acting Secretary - JORC
AUSTRALASIAN
JOINT ORE RESERVES
COMMITTEE (JORC)
Chairman: Mr P R Stephenson Phone (03) 9670 8455 Fax (03) 9670 8311
A/Secretary: Mr P T Stoker Phone (07) 3376 1007 Fax (07) 3279 1565
A/Secretary’s Postal Address: 42 Canowindra Street Jindalee Qld 4074
JORC web site www.jorc.org
THE 2004 JORC CODE – COMPARISON WITH THE 1999 JORC CODE
After a three-year revision process, the ASX has incorporated the 2004 JORC Code into the
ASX Listing Rules, from 17 December 2004 (see ASX Companies Update no 16/04) replacing
the 1999 JORC Code as Appendix 5A. Appendix 5A can be accessed at
www.asx.com.au/ListingRules/appendices/App5a.doc. The 2004 JORC Code is also
available on the JORC web site www.jorc.org. This revision of the JORC Code follows a call
for submission in December 2001 and the publication of several exposure drafts from late
2002.
Whilst there are differences between the 1999 Code and the 2004 Code, most of the changes
are in the guidelines. The Code definitions, which are largely in accord with agreed
international definitions, remain substantially unchanged. The two main changes in the 2004
Code are the requirement for a Competent Person to be responsible for the documentation
supporting the reporting of Exploration Results, and the introduction of ‘Recognised Overseas
Professional Organisations’ as overseas organisations to which Competent Persons may
belong.
Other changes include:
• clarification of the reporting of exploration targets or potential;
• the rearrangement of the diamond reporting clauses;
• the introduction of guidelines for the reporting of Industrial Minerals;
• modification of the coal clauses and recognition of the new Coal Guidelines; and
• the introduction of a guideline encouraging the discussion of relative accuracy and
confidence in resource/reserve estimates.
Other lesser changes to the Code include are listed and discussed briefly.
Differences in Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve definitions
The Code definitions for Mineral Resources, Ore Reserves and the resource/reserve
categories remain unchanged with the exception of one minor modification to the definition of
a Measured Resource, the removal of ”/or” after “and”, correcting a previous typographical
error, and the addition of the word “quality” in the definition of a Mineral Resource. These
definitions are largely in accord with the “Denver Accord” international definitions.
Main Changes in the 2004 JORC Code
The two main changes in the 2004 Code are the requirement for a Competent Person to be
responsible for the documentation relating to the reporting of Exploration Results, and the
A U S T R A L I A N
I N STI T U T E O F
G E O S C I E N T I S T S
S u p p o r tin g G eo s c ie n t is t s
Page 2 of 7
incorporation into the Code of ‘Recognised Overseas Professional Organisations’ as overseas
organisations to which Competent Persons may belong.
Involvement of a Competent Person in the Public Reporting of Exploration
Results
Until now, the Code has not required the involvement of a Competent Person in the
preparation of the documentation on which a company’s Public Report of Exploration Results
is based. Other overseas codes (the Reporting Code and the SAMREC Code) require the
Competent Person, who prepared the documentation, on which the Public Report is based, to
be named. In Canada, National Instrument NI 43-101 and the CIM Standards require the
involvement and naming of a Qualified Person (effectively equivalent to a Competent Person).
In Australia it has become increasingly common for companies reporting results of exploration
to also report the name of the Competent Person who accepts responsibility for the
preparation of the documentation on which the Public Report is based, and state that the
report fairly reflects the work of the Competent Person. JORC believes it is now appropriate to
formalise this reporting responsibility in the JORC Code.
Clause 8 of the Code, which defines the role of the Competent Person, has been amended to
include Public Reports of Exploration Results, along with Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves. All these reports will be required to “be based on and fairly reflect the information
and supporting documentation prepared by the Competent Person”.
The term Exploration Results has been defined in Clause 16 as including “data and
information generated by exploration programmes that may be of use to investors”. The
clause also states that “Exploration Results may or may not be part of a formal reporting of
Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves”, and additional guidance is included on when it is
appropriate to report Exploration Results.
The definition of a Competent Person in Clause 10 has been amended slightly to cover this
extension by including the words “If the Competent Person is preparing a report on
Exploration Results, the relevant experience must be in exploration”.
Inclusion of Recognised Overseas Professional Organisations
Since the first JORC Code in 1989, Competent Persons have had to belong to either The
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (“The AusIMM”) or the Australian Institute of
Geoscientists (“AIG”). These are the Australasian professional organisations that have
adopted the JORC Code and that have codes of ethics to allow disciplining of Competent
Persons for breaches of the JORC Code. With the globalisation of the mining industry, and the
worldwide adoption of reporting standards based on the JORC Code, this requirement has
been recognised as somewhat restrictive.
• During 2003, the ASX promulgated a list of Recognised Overseas Professional
Organisations (ROPO’s) to which Competent Persons may belong for the purpose of
preparing reports on Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves for
submission to the ASX. The ROPO process applies in respect of reports prepared under
the JORC Code. The published list, prepared on the advice of JORC and its parent
organisations, is available on the ASX website, at
www.asx.com.au/about/pdf/JORC.pdf and is updated periodically.
Each of these organisations has satisfied the following qualification criteria agreed between
JORC, its parent organisations and the ASX:
Page 3 of 7
• is a self-regulatory organisation covering professionals in the mining and/or exploration
industry;
• admits members primarily on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience;
• requires compliance with the professional standards of competence and ethics
established by the organisation; and
• has disciplinary powers, including the power to suspend or expel a member.
It will, of course, be a prerequisite that any members of ROPO’s wishing to take advantage of
this recognition must meet the requirement for relevant experience set out in the applicable
clauses of the JORC Code.
This ROPO initiative will replace the current ASX listing rules provision for a “recognised
mining professional”, which was a strict and temporary solution to the globalisation issue. The
ROPO initiative is complementary to a similar arrangement introduced in Canada in 2001. The
Canadian Securities Administrators (“CSA”) published a list of overseas professional
organisations that it recognised as fulfilling the requirements for a “Professional Association”
as defined in Canada’s National Instrument NI 43-101, included in which were The AusIMM
and the AIG.
Other Changes in the 2004 Code
Clarification of the reporting of exploration targets
In order for companies to clearly communicate the potential value of projects to investors and
their advisors, there is a need for company boards to be able to discuss their exploration
targets and possible outcomes of exploration programs. In the 1999 JORC Code there is an
apparent contradiction between Clause 17 (1999 Code) which read as follows:
“A company may choose, or be required under stock exchange listing rules, to report
exploration results. If a company reports exploration results in relation to mineralisation not
classified as a Mineral Resource or an Ore Reserve, then estimates of tonnage and average
grade must not be assigned to the mineralisation.”
and its guideline, which read:
“Where descriptions of exploration targets or exploration potential are given in Public Reports,
any tonnage/grade figures mentioned must be clearly order-of-magnitude and conceptual in
nature and expressed so as not to misrepresent them as an estimate of Mineral Resources or
Ore Reserves.”
This section of the Code has been expanded and clarified in the 2004 Exposure Draft. The
reporting of Exploration Results, which may not include estimates of tonnage and grade, is
covered in Clauses 16 and 17. The reporting of exploration targets is covered in Clause 18
which permits the reporting of exploration target size and type with strict conditions, these
being:
“Any such information relating to exploration targets must be expressed so that it cannot be
misrepresented or misconstrued as an estimate of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves. The
terms Resource(s) or Reserve(s) must not be used in this context. Any statement referring to
potential quantity and grade of the target must be expressed as ranges and must include (1) a
detailed explanation of the basis for the statement, and (2) a proximate statement that the
potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature, that there has been insufficient
exploration to define a Mineral Resource on the property and that it is uncertain if further
exploration will result in discovery of a Mineral Resource on the property.”
Page 4 of 7
The cautionary statement, (2) above, is similar to one contained in the Canadian National
Instrument NI 43-101, and emphasises to investors and their advisors that such statements
should not be confused with Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves.
Consolidation of information on reporting of Exploration Results
To report exploration results under the 1999 reporting conditions, it has been necessary to
consult both the Code, including the guideline Table 1, and the ASX listing rules. Under the
heading “Content of reports”, the ASX listing rules 5.7 and 5.8, contain specific requirements
for reporting of the results of mineral exploration, including the method of reporting assay
results.
The 2004 JORC Code contains all this information instead of it being distributed between the
Code and the ASX listing rules, as is currently the case.
The rearrangement of the diamond reporting clauses
A diamonds (and other gemstones) section was included in the 1996 JORC Code having been
derived from a diamond appendix issued after the release of the 1992 JORC Code. During the
preparation of the 1999 JORC Code, matters dealing with diamonds (and other gemstones)
were integrated into the relevant clauses and guidelines of the Code. As a result there was an
inconsistency in the treatment of diamonds and coal, which logically remained a separate
section. Following a number of submissions from diamond specialists, and with recognition
that a separate section on the reporting of Industrial Minerals was to be introduced into the
2004 JORC Code, the material relating specifically to diamonds has been aggregated into a
group of clauses, Clauses 40 to 43. A complete review of the guideline material relating to
diamonds in Table 1 has been undertaken, again with assistance from diamond specialists
and with reference to the Canadian Guidelines for the Reporting of Diamond Exploration
Results.
As with other commodities covered by specific sections of the Code, all the general sections of
the Code are applicable.
Naming of the diamond valuer no longer required
In line with common practice and the position adopted by other overseas codes and the
Canadian guidelines, the requirement for the valuer of diamonds to be named has been
deleted from the Code and replaced with a requirement that “any reported valuation of a
parcel of diamonds or gemstones be accompanied by a statement verifying the independence
of the valuation. The valuation must be based on a report from a demonstrably reputable and
qualified expert”.
The introduction of guidelines for the reporting of Industrial Minerals
The JORC Code has always implicitly been applicable to the reporting of Industrial Minerals
although it has not previously supplied specific guidance. JORC has conducted a process of
industry consultation over several years, including approaches to The Institute of Quarrying
Australia, and the presentation of a paper (Stephenson and Lee, 2003) at the AIG Industrial
Minerals Conference in Brisbane during March 2003. At this conference a new section
containing a single draft Industrial Minerals clause (Clause 44) and guideline was circulated,
which has subsequently been included in the draft 2004 Code. The guidelines refer to the
importance of matters not normally considered quite so material for other commodities, such
as deleterious minerals or physical properties, likely product specifications, proximity to
markets and general product marketability. Note that this clause and guideline does not
Page 5 of 7
specifically refer to the extractive industries, however a dialogue on the appropriate manner to
handle this industry sector has been established with Cement, Concrete & Aggregates
Australia, the extractive industry association.
Modification of the coal clauses and recognition of the new Coal Guidelines
As a result of the revision of the Australian Coal Guidelines to coincide with the release of the
2004 JORC Code, a revised reference to these new guidelines, the “Australian Guidelines for
Estimating and Reporting of Inventory Coal, Coal Resources and Coal Reserves, 2003
Edition” is included in the coal section of the Code. With the agreement of the Coal Guidelines
Committee, the provision in the 1999 JORC Code permitting combined reporting of Proved
and Probable Coal Reserves as Recoverable Reserves has been removed. Otherwise the
coal specific sections of the Code remain unchanged in intent.
Guideline encouraging discussion of relative accuracy and confidence in
estimates
The classification of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves involves the Competent Person in
expressing a view on the relative confidence that investors and their advisors should place on
the resources or reserves. Increasingly it is common practice during mining project studies to
attempt to quantify the confidence levels that are applicable to the resources or reserves being
considered as the basis for the study.
During committee debate on the Code revision, there was considerable discussion on the
manner in which any confidence levels, which may supplement those inherent in the
classification, might be developed. This led to the realisation that it was inappropriate, at least
at this point in time, to specify a single method of discussing confidence levels for resources
and reserves. Instead, a guideline has been introduced which encourages, but does not
require, the discussion of relative accuracy and confidence in resource/reserve estimates. It
does not specify the manner in which that is done, leaving the selection of an appropriate
method to the judgement of the Competent Person.
Naming of the Competent Person
The requirement for the Competent Person to be named, previously in section 5.12 of the ASX
Listing Rules, has been moved to Clause 8 of the Code. The guidance previously included in
Appendix 1 of the Code, which discussed the JORC Code and stock exchanges, has been
moved to become a guideline to Clause 8.
Fair Representation
In Clause 9 of the 2004 revision a sentence has been added to the clause stating that the
documentation must provide a “fair representation” of the material being reported. So there is
now explicit recognition of the obligation for the Competent Person to provide balanced
documentation and, in Clause 8, for the Public Report to fairly reflect that documentation.
What is a Public Report and Summary Reports
An updated guideline has been included with Clause 5 indicating more fully the nature and
type of reports which are regarded for the purposes of the Code as Public Reports, the main
additions being postings on company web sites and briefings for shareholders, stockbrokers
and investment analysts.
The 2004 Code includes guidelines covering the issuing of concise reports or other summary
reports. The guidelines to Clause 5 include advice that, for companies issuing concise annual
reports or other summary reports, inclusion of all material information relating to Exploration
Page 6 of 7
Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves is recommended. In cases where summary
information is presented, the guideline suggests that it should be clearly stated that it is a
summary, and that a reference should be attached giving the location of the Code-compliant
Public Reports or Public Reporting on which the summary is based.
Inclusion of Generic Terms Table
The new Appendix 1 in the 2004 JORC Code is a table of generic terms, led on a similar
table in the Reporting Code. In the Code certain words are used in a general sense when
particular commodity groups within the industry might attach a more specific meaning to them.
In order to avoid unnecessary duplication, a non-exclusive list of generic terms has been
prepared, together with other terms that may be regarded as synonymous for the purposes of
the Code.
Guideline on level of study required for the reporting of an Ore Reserve
There is a variation in the level of studies required for the reporting of an Ore Reserve
between a number of the overseas Codes. The United States Securities and Exchange
Commission is also quite prescriptive on the acceptable inputs to a mandatory feasibility study
for the declaration of Ore Reserves. The JORC Code has implicitly recognised that the level
and timing of appropriate studies will vary according to circumstances. The definition of an Ore
Reserve in the Code includes the following: “Appropriate assessments, which may include
feasibility studies, have been carried out, and include consideration of and modification by
realistically assumed mining, metallurgical, economic, marketing, legal, environmental, social
and governmental factors. These assessments demonstrate at the time of reporting that
extraction could reasonably be justified.”
The 2004 Code includes a guideline that expands on the intent of these sentences by stating
that the studies will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and
economically viable and from which the Ore Reserves can be derived. It further advises that it
may not be necessary for these studies to be at the level of a final feasibility study.
In this matter, as in other areas, the JORC Code allows the decision as to what is an
appropriate study to be made by the Competent Person.
Reference to the VALMIN Code And Valuations
There has been some confusion between certain terms used in the JORC Code and certain
terms used and defined in the VALMIN Code. In order to clarify the situation, a guideline has
been added to Clause 6 to emphasise that the terms ‘technical and economic studies’ and
‘feasibility studies’ in the JORC Code are not intended as references to “Technical
Assessments” or “Valuations” as they are specifically defined in the VALMIN Code.
Definition of “Modifying Factors” added
For clarity a definition of the term modifying factors has been added in Clause 11 as follows:
“The term ‘Modifying Factors’ is defined to include mining, metallurgical, economic, marketing,
legal, environmental, social and governmental considerations”.
Additions to guideline Table 1
Several additional topics have been included in Table 1 in the 2004 Exposure draft:
• Orientation of data in relation to geological structure, in the sampling section,
• Dimensions and moisture in the Mineral Resource section,
Page 7 of 7
• Study status in the Ore Reserves section.
References:
Australian Guidelines for Estimating and Reporting of Inventory Coal, Coal Resources and Coal
Reserves, 2003 Edition. Prepared by the Coalfields Geology Council of New South Wales and the
Queensland Mining Council, 2003.
Australian Stock Exchange, Companies Update 6 December 2004, Update no 16/04.
Australian Stock Exchange, Appendix 5a Listing Rules.
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy Working Group on Resources and Reserves in conjunction with
the European Federation of Geologists and The Institute of Geologists of Ireland. Code for Reporting
of Mineral Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the Reporting Code)
October 2001.
Joint Committee of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of
Geoscientists and Minerals Council of Australia, 1999. Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves.
National Instrument NI 43 – 101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects, 02/01/2001.
South African Mineral Resource Committee (SAMREC) Under the Auspices of The South African
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. South African Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves (the SAMREC Code), March 2000.
Stephenson, P R, and Lee, G, 2003. The Application of the JORC Code to the Public Reporting of
Industrial Minerals, Proceedings of the AIG Industrial Minerals Conference, pp 61-64 (The Australian
Institute of Geoscientists, Brisbane, March 2003).
The CIM Standing Committee On Reserve Definitions Adopted by CIM Council. CIM Standards on
Mineral Resources and Reserves Definitions and Guidelines, August 2000.
P T Stoker
Acting Secretary - JORC