QA/QC Insertion Rate: Is There an QA/QC Insertion Rate: Is There an
Industry Standard? Industry Standard? Dr. Armando Simn ANEC !nternational !ngenieria y Construccin Ltda. Before Bre-X Usually lacking, or with insufficient coverage , even when run by major companies After Bre-X Strict policies implemented by regulatory bodies !ncreasing interest from exploration and mining companies General Trends in QAJQC Programs Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 22 From Management Shock, or even anger, for proportional increase in handling, preparation and analytical costs From Geologists Reluctance in implementation due to increased organizational requirements Reaction of Companies to Actual Implementation Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 33 All written information of scientific or technical nature, related to mining projects, should: Specify whether a Qualified Person verified the data on which this information is based, including sampling, analysis and tests Describe the QAfQC program Describe the nature and limitation of the verification Explain any problem encountered during data verification NI 43-101 Quality Requirements Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC ++ A Competent Person report should: Describe the nature, quality and appropriate selection of sampling and analytical procedures Describe the quality control procedures, including the insertion of standards, blanks, duplicates and external checks Assess the accuracy and precision levels attained during the project JORC Code Quality Requirements Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 55 Control Sample Insertion Rate Control Sample Insertion Rate Not clearly defined by regulatory bodies Best Practice left to the latitude of Qualified or Competent Persons Hence: frequent source of argument between QAfQC specialists and project managementfgeologists Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 66 2 "So-called 'widely accepted' or 'industry standards' practices most neither be confused with 'best practices' nor with standards. There are many procedures widely accepted by the mining industry that are adequate in some situations but inadequate in others. Moreover, such acceptance is not universal." Rogers {199S) What an Industry Standard is? What an Industry Standard is? Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 77 AMEC inquired four sources: !nternational QAfQC consultants SEDAR-filed technical reports !nformation published by exploration and mining companies Documents from regulatory organizations Is There an Industry Standard for Control Is There an Industry Standard for Control Sample Insertion? Sample Insertion? Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 88 International QAJQC Consultants International QAJQC Consultants {1) {1) Source Details Suggested Proportion of Control Samples Rogers (1998) Duplicates, standards, blanks: one in twenty; external checks: 5 Approx. 20 valle (1998) 10 duplicate plus standards, a `somewhat lower figure' for rock sampling (?) Approx. 15 (?) Neuss (1998) 2-5 field duplicates, 2-5 coarse duplicates, 5-10 internal pulp duplicates, 5-10 external pulp duplicates, plus one standard and one blank in every submission Approx. 19 to 25 Long (1998, 2000) 5 coarse reject duplicates, 5 pulp duplicates, 5 standards, one blank per batch (approx. 3), check assays, a portion of the pulp duplicates (3) Approx. 21 Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 99 International QAJQC Consultants {2) International QAJQC Consultants {2) Source Details Suggested Proportion of Control Samples Sketchley (1999) !n a twenty-sample batch: one blank, one standard, one duplicate; in addition, all pulp duplicates should be re-assayed at check lab Approx. 20 Bloom (1999) !n a twenty-sample batch: one blank, one standard; in addition, sending one in ten sample pulps to an umpire lab Approx. 20 Lomas (200+) !n a twenty-sample batch: one blank, one standard, one coarse duplicate and one pulp duplicate; in addition, 5 of the pulps should be re-assayed at check lab (including SRN) Approx. 25 Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 10 10 SEDAR SEDAR- -Filed Technical Reports {1) Filed Technical Reports {1) Porcupine Project, Canada (GoldCorp): Coarse rejects: 5; coarse blanks: 5: pulp duplicates: 5; standards, 5; check samples: 5 (Total: 25) Nodder East Load Project, South Africa (sxr Uranium One !nc. and Aflease Gold Ltd.): Coarse blanks: 2; standards, 9; pulp duplicates: 11; check samples: 2 (Total: 23) Perama Hill Project, Greece (Frontier Pacific Nining Corporation): Duplicates, 10; other control samples: 9 (Total, approx. 19) Nuestra Senora, Nexico (Scorpio Nining Corporation): Coarse duplicates, 2.5; standards+blanks, 2.5; pulp duplicates, 5; pulp check samples, 5; coarse reject check samples, 2.5 (Total: 17.5) Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 11 11 SEDAR SEDAR- -Filed Technical Reports {2) Filed Technical Reports {2) Nirador Project, Ecuador (Corriente Resources): Coarse duplicates: 5; pulp duplicates: 5; standards: 5 (Total: 15) HC Property, Nevada (J-Pacific Gold): 5 twin samples, 5; coarse duplicates, 5; pulp duplicates, 5 (Total: 15) Pueblo viejo, Dominican Republic (Placer Dome): 10 of standards and blanks Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 12 12 3 SEDAR SEDAR- -Filed Technical Reports {3) Filed Technical Reports {3) General trend: + to 5 insertion rate for each type of control samples (blanks, duplicates, standards, check assays) !n most cases, particular sample subtypes are ignored !nsertion rate less than 17 only when check assays are not included An acceptable average is approximately 18, with minor differences in some particular types of samples Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 13 13 Exploration and Mining Companies {1) Exploration and Mining Companies {1) Carpathian Gold (Colnic, Romania): Coarse blanks, 5; standards, +; Check samples, 20 (before ANEC's Technical Report in 2006) (Total: 29) African Copper (Dukwe Project, Botswana): approx. 20 control samples Aurelian Resources, FDN epithermal Au-Ag: Standards, duplicates and blanks, 15; in addition, samples from significant drill intercepts are sent to two reference laboratories (Total: 18 ?) Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 1+ 1+ Exploration and Mining Companies {2) Exploration and Mining Companies {2) GlobeStar Nining. Regular practice: Duplicates: +; standards, +; blanks, +; check samples, + (Total: 16) Cambridge Nineral Resources: blanks, 5; duplicates, 5; standards; 5 (Total: 15) Scorpio Nining Corporation (Nuestra Senora, Nexico): coarse duplicates, 2.5; standards, 2.5; check assays: 5 pulps, 2.5 coarse rejects (Total: 12.5) Belvedere Resources: 12 control samples (only standards, blanks and duplicates) Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 15 15 Exploration and Mining Companies {3) Exploration and Mining Companies {3) General trend: + to 5 insertion rate for each type of control samples (blanks, duplicates, standards, check assays) With the exception of Scorpio, the insertion rate is less than 16 only when check assays are not included An acceptable average is approximately 20, with minor differences in some particular types of samples Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 16 16 Regulatory Bodies Regulatory Bodies Setting New Standards {TSE-OSC, 1999): A sample batch of 20 samples should include a duplicate sample, a coarse blank, and a standard Previously assayed pulps should be re-submitted to the same lab (rate not stated) and to another lab as check assays (rate not stated) !n conclusion: the first three control samples represent an overall 15 insertion rate; additional pulp re-assays (internal and external to the primary lab), probably add 5, to a total close to 20 Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 17 17 A Typical Example A Typical Example Sample Type Label Insertion Frequency Sample Type Twin Samples* TS 2 Duplicates {6%) Coarse Duplicates* CD 2 Pulp Duplicates* PD 2 Standards* STD 6 Standards {6%) Coarse Blanks* CB 2 Blanks {4%) Pulp Blanks* PB 2 Check Samples** CS + Check Samples {4%) *To be assayed at the primary laboratory ** To be assayed at the secondary laboratory Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 18 18 4 Conclusions {1) Conclusions {1) A general agreement appears to exist between the consulted sources (international consultants, SEDAR-filed technical reports, published company information and documents from regulatory bodies) about an average recommended insertion rate of control samples of approximately 20 Nost companies do not differentiate the duplicate subtypes (twin samples, coarse and pulp duplicates) or blank subtypes (coarse and pulp blanks), all of them with different functions in a comprehensive QAfQC program Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 19 19 Conclusions {2) Conclusions {2) !n many of the studied examples, only one standard was included in the QAfQC program; when various standards were considered, sometimes there was no correlation between the grade levels of the standards and the actual sample grades, or between their sample matrices. A common situation was using standards with below-cut-off values, or even with close-to-detection-limit levels The implementation of a comprehensive QAfQC program would represent, in average, an increase of 1 to 2 of the total exploration costs Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 20 20 Recommendations Recommendations !t is essential that QAfQC programs are comprehensive, including all types and subtypes of control samples, so that precision, accuracy and possible contamination at the various points in the sampling-preparation-assaying sequence are properly assessed. The QAfQC program should be tailored to the specific needs of the project. Whereas an overall insertion rate of 20 can be in principle recommended, the individual proportions of the various types of control samples should reflect the problems with higher probability of occurrence. With the advance of the QAfQC program and the identification and correction of those problems, the amounts and relative proportions of control samples can be adjusted accordingly. Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 21 21 The cost impact of The cost impact of obtaining high quality obtaining high quality data data is negligible when compared to the is negligible when compared to the value impact of value impact of using low quality data using low quality data Final Reflection Taller de ACC Taller de ACC - - ANEC ANEC 22 22