Quantcast
Last updated on April 19, 2014 at 17:21 EDT

Duluth Metals Announces SEDAR filing of AMEC Technical Report on the Twin Metals Project

January 21, 2013

TORONTO, Jan. 21, 2013 /PRNewswire/ – Duluth Metals Limited (“Duluth” or “Duluth Metals”) (TSX: DM) (TSX:DM.U) today announces that the independent NI 43-101 Technical Report
completed by AMEC E&C Services Inc. (AMEC) by a team led by Dr. Harry
Parker entitled “Maturi, Birch Lake, and Spruce Road Cu-Ni-PGE
Projects, Ely, Minnesota, USA, NI 43-101 Technical Report” with an
effective date of 15 September 2012 has now been filed on SEDAR (www.sedar.com). This final study utilizes 867 drill holes and 308 wedge offsets to
confirm the Twin Metals Minnesota LLC (“TMM” or “Twin Metals”) project
to be one of the largest base and precious metal deposits of this type
in the world. The report also highlights the significance of the higher
grade S3 subunit for potential early mine sequencing.  In addition, the
PGM resource estimate confirms the project to be one of the largest
palladium and platinum resources outside of South Africa. This filing
follows the press release of December 4, 2012 which referenced the
summary highlights of the new resource estimate:

        --  Amongst the world's largest Cu-Ni-PGM polymetallic sulphide
            deposits with contained metals (using a 0.3% Cu cut-off) of
            13.6 billion lbs copper, 4.4 billion lbs nickel, and 21.4
            million ozs palladium+platinum+gold (TPM)1in the Indicated
            category and 11.9 billion lbs copper, 4.1 billion lbs nickel,
            and 12.8 million ozs TPM1 in the Inferred category,
            representing an average 19% increase from the June 2012 interim
            AMEC Report.
        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, AMEC estimated an Indicated
            Mineral Resource of 1.16 billion tons2 and an Inferred Mineral
            Resource of 1.26 billion tons on the three deposits (Birch
            Lake, Maturi and Spruce Road) occurring on approximately 11% of
            the footprint of the prospective portion of the TMM property
            block, representing a 60% increase in Indicated Tons and an 8%
            decrease in Inferred Tons from the June 2012 interim report.
        --  The S3 Subunit (which is a subset of the base case mineral
            resource estimate for the Maturi Deposit) using a higher 0.5%
            Cu cut-off contains 622 million tons in the Indicated category
            and 198 million tons in the Inferred category. This material
            may have potential to provide higher-grade mill feed for the
            early stages of any planned mining operation.
        --  Exploration Target areas include additional potential resources
            of between 1.4 and 2.2 billion tons contiguous to the
            boundaries of the three deposits. These Exploration Target
            areas occur on approximately 12% of the footprint of the
            prospective portion of the TMM property block.
        --  The AMEC updated mineral resource estimate highlights a growing
            Platinum Group Metal (PGM) and gold resource of 21.4 million
            ozs Indicated and 12.8 million ozs Inferred in the Maturi and
            Birch Lake deposits. A decline of 3.0 million ozs contained in
            the Inferred Resource from the June 2012 interim report is
            offset by a 9.1 million ozs (75%) increase in the Indicated
            Resource. The TMM project has one of the world's largest
            palladium and platinum resources outside of South Africa.

Figure 1 below shows copper values expressed in percent ranging from less than
0.2% Cu (blue) to greater than 0.8% Cu (red) in the S2+S3 subunits of
the Maturi Deposit from an oblique south view. Drill holes are
projected as the light blue strings and the green outline is the limit
of the block model. The grey surface represents the base of the Basal
Mineralized Zone.

_________________________________
(1) Values for the Pt, Pd and Au components of TPM are shown in Table 3 and
Table 4.
(2) All tonnages are reported as short tons.

Vern Baker, President of Duluth Metals, commenting on the report stated:
“The AMEC Technical Report confirms the TMM resource to be one of the
largest deposits of its kind in the world. While the resource is very
large, the S3 Subunit within the Maturi Deposit hosts a higher-grade
area that is a subset of the base case mineral resource estimate. Mine
planning will focus on utilizing this higher grade areas for initial
mine sequencing, potentially improving the business/ economic model
significantly.”

The Technical Report includes three deposits for which mineral resources
have been estimated.  These deposits are in close proximity to one
another within the Twin Metals Minnesota Project, and are referred to
as the Maturi, Birch Lake and Spruce Road Deposits:

        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, the Maturi Deposit**
            contains 1065 million tons of Indicated Mineral Resources
            grading 0.59% copper, 0.19% nickel, 0.60 parts per million TPM
            (TPM = Pt + Pd + Au), plus an additional 542 million tons of
            Inferred Mineral Resources grading 0.51% copper, 0.17% nickel,
            0.53 parts per million TPM.(Maturi Deposit tonnages do not
            include 139 million tons of mineralized material excluded from
            the underground resource in a safety pillar)
        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, the Birch Lake Deposit**
            contains 99.7 million tons of Indicated Mineral Resources
            grading 0.52% copper, 0.16% nickel, 0.86 parts per million TPM,
            plus an additional 239.2 million tons of Inferred Mineral
            Resources grading 0.46% copper, 0.15% nickel, 0.64 parts per
            million TPM
        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, the Spruce Road Deposit**
            contains 480 million tons of Inferred Mineral Resources grading
            0.43% copper, 0.16% nickel.*

* Note – The Spruce Road resource was estimated using Inco legacy assay data.
Platinum, palladium, and gold were not assayed by Inco, and the core is
not available for re-assay.

** Note – These mineral resource estimates include 100% of the estimated
resource in each deposit, and include mineral resources acquired as a
part of TMM’s acquisition of Franconia Minerals Corporation in 2011.
Franconia’s principal assets are a 70% interest in the Birch Lake,
‘old’ Maturi and Spruce Road deposits in northeastern Minnesota through
the Birch Lake Joint Venture. Franconia announced in November, 2010 its
intention to increase its ownership at the Birch Lake Joint Venture to
82%; see Franconia’s company profile at www.SEDAR.com for Technical Reports. TMM’s ownership of the resource will be factored
by these percentages where applicable.

The S3 Subunit Provides Potential Earlier Economic Mining Opportunities

The current Maturi Deposit resource estimate is based on a refined
geological model. One geological subunit within the Maturi Deposit,
known as the S3, hosts a higher-grade area that is a subset of the base
case mineral resource estimate that may have potential as an early
start-up area. AMEC estimated that the S3 Subunit in the Maturi Deposit, using a 0.5% Cu cut-off, contains 622 million tons grading 0.69% Cu, 0.22% Ni and 0.76 ppm TPM of
Indicated Mineral Resources and 198 million tons
grading 0.65% Cu, 0.21% Ni and 0.82 ppm TPM in the Inferred category. This material is a higher grade sub-set of the global resources
estimated for Maturi. Within the Maturi Deposit, the bulk of
mineralization is hosted by two subunits of the Basal Mineralized Zone
(BMZ). The S2 and S3 subunits are stratiform, with the S3 subunit
overlying the S2 subunit. Both subunits are laterally extensive, and
are present over the vast majority of the deposit footprint. Within the
Indicated Mineral Resource areal footprint, the S3 subunit ranges in
vertical thickness from 0 to 355 feet, averaging 108 feet thick (0 to
276 feet, average 91 feet true thickness) and within the Indicated
Mineral Resource areal footprint, the S2 subunit ranges in vertical
thickness from 0 to 423 feet, averaging 72 feet thick (0 to 329 feet,
averaging 59 feet true thickness). Table 1 shows tabulation range of
sensitivity cases at different copper cut-off grades for the S3 Subunit
of the Maturi Deposit. The base case subset estimate at a 0.3% Cu
cut-off grade for the unit is shown in bold, and the 0.5% Cu cut-off
grade sensitivity case subset is indicated in italics.

Figure 2 below shows the TPM (platinum+palladium+gold) values expressed in ppm
ranging from less from less 0.3 ppm TPM (blue) to greater than 1.2 ppm
TPM (red)  in the S3 subunit within the Maturi Deposit looking from an
oblique view from the south.   Drill holes are projected as the light
blue strings and the green outline is the limit of the block model. The
grey surface represents the base of the Basal Mineralized Zone.

Table 1 – MATURI DEPOSIT S3 SUBUNIT SENSITIVITY CASE INDICATED AND
INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES


                    Maturi Deposit- S3 Subunit

            Indicated Mineral Resource

    Cu%     Million Cu   Ni   Pt   Pd   Au   TPM

    cut-off Tons    %    %    ppm  ppm  ppm  ppm

    0.2     643     0.68 0.22 0.20 0.45 0.11 0.75

    0.3     643     0.68 0.22 0.20 0.45 0.11 0.75

    0.4     641     0.68 0.22 0.20 0.45 0.11 0.75

    0.5     622     0.69 0.22 0.20 0.45 0.11 0.76

    0.6     500     0.72 0.23 0.21 0.47 0.11 0.78

    0.7     265     0.78 0.25 0.22 0.51 0.12 0.85

            Inferred Mineral Resource

    Cu%     Million Cu   Ni   Pt   Pd   Au   TPM

    cut-off Tons    %    %    ppm  ppm  ppm  ppm

    0.2     234     0.62 0.20 0.21 0.46 0.10 0.77

    0.3     232     0.62 0.20 0.21 0.47 0.10 0.78

    0.4     225     0.63 0.20 0.21 0.47 0.10 0.78

    0.5     198     0.65 0.21 0.22 0.50 0.11 0.82

    0.6     129     0.70 0.22 0.25 0.55 0.12 0.92

    0.7     53      0.78 0.24 0.28 0.64 0.14 1.06

Contained metals in the new resources are shown in Table 2 below.  The
updated AMEC resource statement highlights a growing platinum group
metals (PGM) and gold resource of 21.4 million ozs. Indicated TPM and 12.8 million ozs. Inferred TPM, which is one of the world’s largest palladium and platinum resources
outside of South Africa.

Table 2 – CONTAINED METALS IN THE TMM RESOURCE*

     ________________________________________________
    |METAL    |INDICATED RESOURCE|INFERRED RESOURCE|
    |_________|__________________|_________________|
    |Copper   |13.6 Billion lbs. |11.9 Billion lbs.  |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|
    |Nickel   |4.4 Billion lbs.  |4.1 Billion lbs.   |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|
    |         |                  |                   |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|
    |Platinum |5.6 Million ozs.  |3.5 Million ozs.** |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|
    |Palladium|12.7 Million ozs. |7.6 Million ozs.** |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|
    |Gold     |3.1 Million ozs.  |1.7 Million ozs.** |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|
    |         |                  |                   |
    |_________|__________________|___________________|

* Note – Based on mineral resources estimated at base case 0.3% copper cut-off
grade
.
** Note – Contained ounces of platinum, palladium, and gold in the Inferred
category do not include the Spruce Road deposit
.

Updated Mineral Resources

Twin Metals Minnesota LLC (sometimes herein referred to as “TMM” or
“Twin Metals”) is the joint venture company between Duluth Metals
Limited (60% ownership interest) and Antofagasta plc (40% ownership
interest). In 2011, Twin Metals Minnesota LLC acquired Franconia
Minerals Corporation. Franconia`s principal assets are a 70% interest
in the Birch Lake, “old Maturi” (not including former Nokomis property)
and Spruce Road deposits through the Birch Lake Joint Venture, with
Beaver Bay Resources owning the remaining 30%. Franconia announced in
November, 2010 its intention to increase its ownership at the Birch
Lake Joint Venture to 82% upon commencement of production. All of the
forgoing Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources, and Exploration
Target tonnages are expressed as a 100% ownership position.

The Mineral Resource estimate for the Maturi deposit incorporates assay
data from 444 drill holes and 154 wedge off-set holes totalling
1,328,000 feet drilled on the Maturi deposit between 2006 and 2012, in
addition to information from 99 legacy holes also in the geologic data
base. The Birch Lake deposit resource estimate incorporates assay data
from 97 drill holes and 146 wedge off-set holes totalling 297,000 feet
drilled between 2000 and 2012, and information from an additional 17
legacy drill holes and 8 wedge off-set holes. The Spruce Road deposit
resource estimate incorporates assay data from 210 legacy holes. The
effective date of the mineral resource estimate is 15 September 2012.

Figure 3 below is a map showing the Indicated and Inferred boundaries and the
Exploration Target Areas which can be found as part of this press
release on the Company website at www.duluthmetals.com.

The December 2012 Resource Estimates for the Maturi, Birch Lake and
Spruce Road deposits are based on a 0.3% copper cut-off grade to define
the resource model. Based on AMEC`s review of metal prices, process
recoveries, refining costs and underground mine operating costs likely
to apply at the Twin Metals site, the 0.3% copper cut-off grade
(highlighted) is considered the base case for the statement of
Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources at this time. The estimates at
the cut-off grades higher and lower than the base case are provided to
show sensitivity of the estimates to cut-off grade.

Detailed Resource Tabulations

Tables of the updated resource tons and grades for various cut-offs are
shown below for each deposit. The base case (0.3% Cu cut-off) is
highlighted. The remaining cases are included to show the sensitivity
of the estimates to changes in cut-off grades:

Table 3 – MATURI DEPOSIT INDICATED AND INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES
(effective date 15 September 2012)


                            Maturi Deposit3

            Indicated Mineral Resource4

    Cu %    Million Cu   Ni   Pt   Pd   Au   TPM5

    cut-off Tons    %    %    ppm  ppm  ppm  ppm

    0.2     1137    0.57 0.18 0.15 0.34 0.08 0.58

    0.3     1065    0.59 0.19 0.16 0.36 0.09 0.60

    0.4     936     0.63 0.20 0.17 0.38 0.09 0.64

    0.5     739     0.67 0.21 0.19 0.42 0.10 0.70

    0.6     538     0.72 0.23 0.20 0.45 0.11 0.76

            Inferred Mineral Resource

    Cu %    Million Cu   Ni   Pt   Pd   Au   TPM

    cut-off Tons    %    %    ppm  ppm  ppm  ppm

    0.2     782     0.43 0.14 0.12 0.27 0.06 0.44

    0.3     542     0.51 0.17 0.14 0.32 0.07 0.53

    0.4     383     0.57 0.19 0.16 0.38 0.08 0.62

    0.5     256     0.63 0.20 0.20 0.44 0.10 0.74

    0.6     141     0.70 0.22 0.24 0.53 0.12 0.88

Table 4 – BIRCH LAKE DEPOSIT INDICATED AND INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCES
(effective date 15 September 2012)


                          Birch Lake Deposit

            Indicated Mineral Resource

    Cu %    Million Cu   Ni   Pt   Pd   Au   TPM

    cut-off Tons    %    %    ppm  ppm  ppm  ppm

    0.2     111.9   0.49 0.15 0.22 0.48 0.11 0.80

    0.3     99.7    0.52 0.16 0.23 0.51 0.11 0.86

    0.4     85.4    0.55 0.17 0.25 0.54 0.12 0.91

    0.5     54.9    0.60 0.18 0.27 0.59 0.13 0.99

    0.6     22.8    0.67 0.21 0.29 0.63 0.14 1.06

            Inferred Mineral Resource

    Cu %    Million Cu   Ni   Pt   Pd   Au   TPM

    cut-off Tons    %    %    ppm  ppm  ppm  ppm

    0.2     313.1   0.41 0.13 0.16 0.32 0.08 0.55

    0.3     239.2   0.46 0.15 0.18 0.37 0.09 0.64

    0.4     158.4   0.51 0.16 0.20 0.42 0.10 0.72

    0.5     76.8    0.58 0.18 0.23 0.48 0.11 0.82

    0.6     23.5    0.66 0.20 0.27 0.57 0.13 0.97

Table 5 – SPRUCE ROAD DEPOSIT INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCE (effective date
15 September 2012)


            Spruce Road Deposit

            Inferred Mineral Resource

    Cu %    Million Cu   Ni

    cut-off Tons    %    %

    0.2     674     0.38 0.14

    0.3     480     0.43 0.16

    0.4     254     0.50 0.18

    0.5     101     0.57 0.21

    0.6     24      0.66 0.24

_________________________________
(3) Maturi Deposit tonnages do not include 139 million tons of mineralized
material excluded from the underground resource in a safety pillar.
(4) CIM Definition Standards (2010) were followed for Mineral Resource
estimation and classification.
(5) TPM is defined as Au + Pt + Pd.

Exploration Target Area Tonnage and Grade Ranges

Similar to the June 2012 interim report, AMEC has again highlighted
additional potential resources outside of the three mineral resources
which occur on an additional 12% of the footprint of the Twin Metals
Minnesota property. In addition to the TMM global resource, Exploration
Targets have been outlined for four areas surrounding and adjacent to
the Maturi and Birch Lake deposits. The grade and tonnage ranges of the
four exploration targets are based on limited drill hole results. For
the Maturi North and South targets, and the Birch Lake target, the
target grade ranges and tonnage ranges were based on estimated blocks
within the model above a 0.3% Cu cut-off grade that were not classified
as either Indicated or Inferred, and applying a ±20% variance to the
tonnages and grades to the estimates.  The Maturi West exploration
target was based on statistical analysis of limited drilling grades and
thickness of intercepts at a 0.30% Cu cut-off.

The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Targets are
conceptual in nature, and there has been insufficient exploration to
define the target as a mineral resource, and it is uncertain if further
exploration will result in the target being delineated as a mineral
resource.

Maturi

The area inside the Maturi model perimeter surrounding the boundary of
the Mineral Resource estimate was divided into two exploration targets,
Maturi North and Maturi South. An additional exploration target, Maturi
West, lies outside and to the west of the current model area. The
tonnage and grades of the Maturi North exploration target could range from 290 to 435 million tons grading
0.41 to 0.61% Cu, 0.14 to 0.21 %Ni, 0.10 to 0.14 ppm Pt, 0.24 to 0.34
ppm Pd, and 0.07 to 0.07 ppm Au. The tonnage and grades of the Maturi South exploration target could range from 330 to 500 million tons grading
0.42 to 0.62 %Cu, 0.13 to 0.19 %Ni, 0.14 to 0.21 ppm Pt, 0.31 to 0.45
ppm Pd, and 0.07 to 0.10 ppm Au. The tonnage and grades of the Maturi West exploration target could range from 600 to 980 million tons grading
0.41 to 0.52 %Cu, 0.15 to 0.18 %Ni, 0.10 to 0.14 ppm Pt, 0.27 to 0.31
ppm Pd, and 0.07 to 0.07 ppm Au. The ranges of PGE values stated for
Maturi West are based on regression formulas.

Birch Lake

The Birch Lake exploration target includes the area inside the Birch
Lake model perimeter surrounding the Indicated and Inferred Mineral
Resources. The tonnage and grades of the Birch Lake exploration target
could range from 222 to 334 million tons grading 0.33 to 0.50 %Cu, 0.11
to 0.16 %Ni, and 0.39 to 0.58 ppm TPM (comprising 0.11 to 0.16 ppm Pt,
0.22 to 0.33 ppm Pd, and 0.05 to 0.8 ppm Au).

About the Resource Estimates

The figures for resources presented herein, including the anticipated
tonnages and grades that may be achieved or the indicated level of
recovery that may be realized, are estimates, and no assurances can be
given that they will be realized during production. Such estimates are,
in large part, based on interpretations of geological data obtained
from drill holes and other sampling techniques. Actual mineralization
or favourable host rock units may be different from those predicted. It
may also take many years from the initial phase of drilling before
production is possible, and during that time the economic feasibility
of exploiting a deposit may change.

The Company’s business of mineral exploration has a high level of
inherent risk. Although the Company is optimistic about the potential
of many of its projects, there is no guarantee that any mineral
deposits will be economically feasible and that these deposits will be
put into production. The Company’s exploration and development
activities may also be affected by a number of risks, including
environmental, metallurgical, financing, permitting, approval,
legislative and other government risks which are normal to the industry
and are referenced in greater detail in the Company’s Annual
Information Form.

For the purposes of assessing reasonable prospects of economic recovery
and appropriate cut-off grade, the following assumptions were used:

        --  Average mining costs: $16/t (all underground mining; long hole
            open stoping with backfill)
        --  Average process costs: $12/t (flotation concentrate followed
            hydrometallurgical processing using Teck Resouorces Limited
            ("Teck") CESL(TM) process6)
        --  G&A costs: $2/t

Underground potentially mineable shapes were constrained by geology, and
the mine modeling software used was Vulcan(TM). The Maturi resource was
estimated using Ordinary Kriging with a maximum block size of 25 x 25 x
15 feet. Indicated Mineral Resources generally extend 250 feet from
well-drilled areas showing continuity in NSR values and geological
geometry. Areas defined by only legacy drilling are not included within
the Indicated Mineral Resource outline. The Inferred Mineral Resource
boundary typically extends 500 feet from well-drilled areas showing
continuity in NSR values and geological geometry. A variable tonnage
factor was used, but the average tonnage factor was 10.5 ft(3)/t. The metal prices used in the NSR calculation were mutually agreed
upon by TMM, Antofagasta and AMEC on December 7, 2011 and have not
changed for this estimate. Assumed metal prices and metallurgical
recoveries are presented in Tables 6a and 6b.

Table 6a – NSR calculation parameters, Maturi Deposit

     _____________________________________________________________
    |Metal    | Price (US$) | Recovery  |Recovery|Recovery|Payable|
    |         |             |Concentrate|  CESL  | Global |       |
    |_________|_____________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Copper   |   $3.00/lb  |    94.3%  |  96.3% |  90.8% |100.0% |
    |_________|_____________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Nickel   |   $9.38/lb  |    72.0%  |  95.6% |  68.8% | 80.0% |
    |_________|_____________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Platinum |$1840/troy oz|    93.0%  |  59.4% |  55.2% | 80.0% |
    |_________|_____________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Palladium|$805/troy oz |    90.0%  |  70.7% |  63.6% | 80.0% |
    |_________|_____________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Gold     |$1050/troy oz|    85.0%  |  74.5% |  63.3% | 80.0% |
    |_________|_____________|___________|________|________|_______|

Table 6b – NSR calculation parameters, Birch Lake Deposit

     ______________________________________________________________
    |Metal    |  Price (US$) | Recovery  |Recovery|Recovery|Payable|
    |         |              |Concentrate|  CESL  | Global |       |
    |_________|______________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Copper   |    $3.00/lb  |    94.3%  |  96.3% |  90.8% |100.0% |
    |_________|______________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Nickel   |    $9.38/lb  |    60.0%  |  95.6% |  57.4% | 80.0% |
    |_________|______________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Platinum |$1,840/troy oz|    93.0%  |  59.4% |  55.2% | 80.0% |
    |_________|______________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Palladium| $805/troy oz |    90.0%  |  70.7% |  63.6% | 80.0% |
    |_________|______________|___________|________|________|_______|
    |Gold     |$1,050/troy oz|    85.0%  |  74.5% |  63.3% | 80.0% |
    |_________|______________|___________|________|________|_______|

_________________________________
(6) Teck has developed a hydrometallurgical process named CESL(tm), that
effectively recovers copper, nickel and PGM’s from bulk
copper-nickel-PGM concentrates, which Duluth and Twin Metals are
considering as a concentrate processing alternative. Concentrate from
the Maturi group of deposits has been successfully procesed at bench
and pilot scale at Teck’s hydrometallurgical facility in Richmond, BC
with average recovery of metal from concentrate into saleable product
form as reported in Table 7a and Table 7b.

For the non-legacy assay data utilized in these resource estimates, half
core samples were prepared at ALS Minerals laboratories in Thunder Bay
and then shipped to the ALS analytical facilities in Vancouver. Samples
were analyzed for Au, Pt, and Pd using a 30g standard fire assay with
an ICP-AES finish. An additional 33 elements were analyzed for using a
four acid (near total) digestion and a combination of ICP-MS and
ICP-AES. ICP over-limits for copper and nickel are re-analyzed using
dissolution by four acid (near total) digestion followed by ICP-AES or
AAS. The remaining half core samples are being stored in Minnesota. A
system of blanks, standards and quarter-core duplicates were added to
the sample stream by Twin Metals Minnesota LLC to verify accuracy and
precision of assay results, supplementing and verifying a variety of
internal QA/QC tests performed by ALS Minerals.

All data verification and quality assurance/quality control procedures
of Twin Metals Minnesota LLC were applied specifically to the results
contained in this press release, and the data herein has been verified
by Phillip Larson, P. Geo., Senior Geologist with Duluth Metals and a
Qualified Person under NI 43-101, in accordance with the procedures of
the Company. The data verification procedures and quality
assurance/control procedures adopted by the Company and applied to the
work being reported in this press release can be found in Section 11 of
the “NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Maturi, Birch Lake, and Spruce
Road Copper-Nickel-PGE Projects, Ely, Minnesota, USA”, with an
effective date of June 15, 2012, and dated July 27, 2012. The Technical
Report was filed on SEDAR under the Company’s profile on July 27, 2012
(www.sedar.com).

Dr. Harry Parker, SME, Registered Member, Technical Director of AMEC, is
the Independent Qualified Person who prepared the Resource Estimate and
is responsible for the mineral resource estimates summarized in this
press release. Dr. Parker is a licensed Professional Geologist in the
State of Minnesota. Phillip Larson, P. Geo. is the Qualified Person for
Duluth Metals and Senior Geologist for Duluth Metals, in accordance
with NI 43-101 of the Canadian Securities Administrators, and reviewed
and approved the technical content of this press release.

About Duluth Metals Limited

Duluth Metals Limited is committed to acquiring, exploring and
developing copper, nickel and platinum group metal (PGM) deposits.
Duluth Metals has a joint venture with Antofagasta plc on the Twin
Metals Project, located within the rapidly emerging Duluth Complex
mining camp in north-eastern Minnesota. The Duluth Complex hosts one of
the world’s largest undeveloped repositories of copper, nickel and
PGMs, including the world’s third largest accumulation of nickel
sulphides, and one of the world’s largest accumulations of polymetallic
copper and platinum group metals. Aside from the joint venture, Duluth
Metals retains a 100% position on approximately 40,000 acres of mineral
interests on exploration properties adjacent to and nearby the Twin
Metals Minnesota LLC joint venture.

About Twin Metals Minnesota, LLC

Twin Metals Minnesota, LLC is a joint venture company, 60 percent owned
by Duluth Metals Limited and 40 percent by Antofagasta plc. Twin Metals
was formed in 2010 to pursue the development and operation of a copper,
nickel and platinum group metals (strategic metals) underground mining
project within the Duluth Complex in northeastern Minnesota. Twin
Metals holds mineral and land assets of approximately 32,000 acres of
leased and permitted land, including mineral resources prepared in
compliance with the requirements of NI 43-101.

This press release contains forward-looking statements (including
“forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian
securities legislation and “forward-looking statements” within the
meaning of the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)
relating to, among other things, the results of drilling operations of
Duluth Metals and exploration and mine development. Generally,
forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such
as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “budget”,
“scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or
“does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variations of such words and
phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”,
“could”, “would”, “might” or “will be taken”, “occur” or “be achieved”.
Duluth Metals has relied on a number of assumptions and estimates in
making such forward-looking statements, including, without limitation,
the prices of copper, nickel and platinum group metals (PGMs) and the
costs associated with continuing exploration and mining development.
Such assumptions and estimates are made in light of the trends and
conditions that are considered to be relevant and reasonable based on
information available and the circumstances existing at this time. A
number of risk factors may cause actual results, level of activity,
performance or outcomes of such exploration and/or mine development to
be materially different from those expressed or implied by such
forward-looking statements including, without limitation, whether such
discoveries will result in commercially viable quantities of such
mineralized materials, the possibility of changes to project parameters
as plans continue to be refined, the ability to execute planned
exploration and future drilling programs, possible variations of
copper, nickel and PGM grade or recovery rates, the need for additional
funding to continue exploration efforts, changes in general economic,
market and business conditions, and those other risks set forth in
Duluth Metals’ most recent annual information form under the heading
“Risk Factors” and in its other public filings. Statements related to
“reserves” and “resources” are deemed forward-looking statements as
they involve the implied assessment, based on realistically assumed and
justifiable technical and economic conditions, that an inventory of
mineralization will become economically extractable. Forward-looking
statements are not guarantees of future performance and such
information is inherently subject to known and unknown risks,
uncertainties and other factors that are difficult to predict and may
be beyond the control of Duluth Metals. Although Duluth Metals has
attempted to identify important risks and factors that could cause
actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those
described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors and
risks that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated,
estimated or intended. Consequently, undue reliance should not be
placed on such forward-looking statements. In addition, all
forward-looking statements in this press release are given as of the
date hereof. Duluth Metals disclaims any intention or obligation to
update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of
new information, future events or otherwise, save and except as may be
required by applicable securities laws. The forward-looking statements
contained herein are expressly qualified by this disclaimer.

Cautionary Note to United States Investors Concerning Estimates of
Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources

This press release uses the terms “Indicated Mineral Resources” and
“Inferred Mineral Resources” in accordance with the Canadian Institute
of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards. While
such terms are recognized under Canadian securities legislation, the
United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize
these terms. The term “Inferred Mineral Resource” refers to a mineral
resource for which quantity and grade or quality can be estimated on
the basis of geological evidence and limited sampling and reasonably
assumed, but not verified, geological and grade continuity. These
estimates are based on limited information and it cannot be assumed
that all or any part of an “Inferred Mineral Resource” will be upgraded
to a higher classification resource, such as “Indicated” or “Measured”,
as a result of continued exploration. Accordingly, an estimate relating
to an “Inferred Mineral Resource” is insufficient to allow meaningful
application of technical and economic parameters or to enable an
evaluation of economic viability. Under Canadian securities
legislation, estimates of an “Inferred Mineral Resource” may not form
the basis of feasibility or other economic studies. Investors are
cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an “Inferred Mineral
Resource” is economically or legally mineable. Investors are also
cautioned not to assume that all or any part of “Indicated” will ever
be converted into “Mineral Reserves” (being the economically mineable
part of an “Indicated” or “Measured Mineral Resource”).

 

 

 

 

SOURCE Duluth Metals Limited

Image with caption: “Figure 1 (CNW Group/Duluth Metals Limited)”. Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20130121_C6967_PHOTO_EN_22686.jpg

Image with caption: “Figure 2 (CNW Group/Duluth Metals Limited)”. Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20130121_C6967_PHOTO_EN_22687.jpg

Image with caption: “Figure 3 (CNW Group/Duluth Metals Limited)”. Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20130121_C6967_PHOTO_EN_22688.jpg


Source: PR Newswire