Quantcast

Duluth Metals Announces Increased Tonnage, Metal Content and an Upgraded Measured Classification in new updated AMEC Resource Study on the Twin Metals Project

February 26, 2014
        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, AMEC estimated a Measured
            Mineral Resource of 295 million tons, an Indicated Mineral
            Resource of 977 million tons1, and an Inferred Mineral Resource
            of 1.313 billion tons on four deposits (Maturi, Maturi
            Southwest, Birch Lake and Spruce Road) occurring on
            approximately 13% of the footprint of the prospective portion
            of the Twin Metals Minnesota (TMM) property block.
        --  The AMEC update confirms an increase in contained metal for all
            products: copper, nickel, palladium, platinum and gold.
        --  Exceptional continuity and correlation in the closely spaced
            Maturi Deposit fence drilling results enabled AMEC to upgrade a
            portion of the Maturi deposit to the Measured classification.
        --  The AMEC updated mineral resource estimate highlights a growing
            Platinum Group Metal (PGM) and gold resource of 5.0 million ozs
            Measured, 17.2 million ozs Indicated and 13.4 million ozs
            Inferred in the Maturi, Maturi Southwest and Birch Lake
            deposits. The TMM project has one of the world's largest
            palladium and platinum resources outside of South Africa.

TORONTO, Feb. 26, 2014 /PRNewswire/ – Duluth Metals Limited (“Duluth”, “Duluth Metals”) (TSX: DM) (TSX:DM.U) today announced that it has received an updated draft NI 43-101
Technical Report on the consolidated mineral resources for the Twin
Metals Minnesota Project in Northeastern Minnesota prepared by an AMEC
E&C Services Inc. (AMEC) team led by Dr. Harry Parker, RM, SME. This
updated study utilizes 916 drill holes and 312 wedge offsets, and
reports a significant portion of the Maturi deposit upgraded to the
Measured Resource category. A full report will be filed in 45 days on www.SEDAR.com.

The majority of the increase in total contained metals in the 2014
resource estimates reflects the addition of the Maturi Southwest
Deposit. The change in category for a significant portion of the
Indicated Resource to Measured Resource reflects the excellent
continuity of the resource demonstrated by the close spaced fence
drilling completed at Maturi. The new classification by category is
shown in the following table:

Table 1 – Contained Metals in the TMM Resource (effective date October
8, 2013)*

     __________________________________________________________________
    |Metal    |Measured   |Indicated   |Measured+Indicated|Inferred    |
    |         |Resource   |Resource    |Resource          |Resource    |
    |_________|___________|____________|__________________|____________|
    |Copper   |3.7 billion|11.0 billion|14.7 billion lbs. |12.3 billion|
    |         |lbs.       |lbs.        |                  |lbs.        |
    |_________|___________|____________|__________________|____________|
    |Nickel   |1.2 billion|3.5 billion |4.7 billion lbs.  |4.2 billion |
    |         |lbs.       |lbs.        |                  |lbs.        |
    |_________|___________|____________|__________________|____________|
    |Platinum |1.3 million|4.5 million |5.8 million ozs.  |3.6 million |
    |         |ozs.       |ozs.        |                  |ozs.**      |
    |_________|___________|____________|__________________|____________|
    |Palladium|3.0 million|10.2 million|13.2 million ozs. |8.0 million |
    |         |ozs.       |ozs.        |                  |ozs.**      |
    |_________|___________|____________|__________________|____________|
    |Gold     |0.7 million|2.5 million |3.2 million ozs.  |1.8 million |
    |         |ozs.       |ozs.        |                  |ozs.**      |
    |_________|___________|____________|__________________|____________|

* Note – Based on mineral resources estimated at base case 0.3% copper cut-off
grade; for tons and grade see Tables 2-5 in this press release.


** Note – Contained ounces of platinum, palladium, and gold in the Inferred
category do not include the Spruce Road deposit.

(1) All tonnages are reported as short tons.

Vern Baker, President of Duluth Metals, commented: “The ability of the
Twin Metals Project to move 295 million tons of resource into the
Measured category confirms the excellent consistency of the mineralized
material in the Maturi Deposit. It is early in the project development
cycle to have such a large Measured Resource. The potential scale of
the project resource is exceptional, considering that only 13% of the
prospective portion of the Twin Metals Property contains such a large
total resource of Measured, Indicated, and Inferred tonnage.”

Significant Tonnage in the Measured Category

The study includes four mineral resources in close proximity to one
another within the Twin Metals Minnesota Project, referred to as the
Maturi, Maturi Southwest, Birch Lake, and Spruce Road Deposits. The
updated mineral resources estimate has 295 million tons in the Measured
category at a 0.3% copper cut-off in the Maturi Deposit, which may
potentially provide an early start-up area for future mining. The
Maturi Deposit resource estimate does not incorporate new assay or
geological data from drilling results received after September 15,
2012. The Maturi Southwest Deposit is a newly classified resource
which was defined by drilling in 2013:

        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, the Maturi Deposit**
            contains 295 million tons of Measured Mineral Resources grading
            0.63% copper, 0.20% nickel, 0.58 parts per million TPM (TPM =
            Pt + Pd + Au) and 774 million tons of Indicated Mineral
            Resources grading 0.58% copper, 0.19% nickel, 0.61 parts per
            million TPM, plus an additional 562 million tons of Inferred
            Mineral Resources grading 0.51% copper, 0.17% nickel, 0.53
            parts per million TPM.  (Note:Full grade and tonnage tabulation
            is shown in the Detailed Resource Tabulations section later in
            this press release)
        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, the Maturi Southwest
            Deposit** contains 103 million tons of Indicated Mineral
            Resources grading 0.48% copper, 0.17% nickel, 0.31 parts per
            million TPM, plus an additional 32 million tons of Inferred
            Mineral Resources grading 0.43% copper, 0.15% nickel, 0.26
            parts per million TPM.
        --  Using a base case 0.3% Cu cut-off, the Birch Lake Deposit**
            contains 100 million tons of Indicated Mineral Resources
            grading 0.52% copper, 0.16% nickel, 0.86 parts per million TPM,
            plus an additional 239 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 interests in mineral resources
held by Franconia Minerals (US) LLC (f.k.a. Franconia Minerals
Corporation), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Twin Metals. Twin Metals
acquired 100% of the ownership units of Franconia in 2011.
Franconia’s principal assets are a 70% interest in the Birch Lake,
‘old’ Maturi, Maturi Southwest, 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.

Updated Mineral Resources

Twin Metals Minnesota LLC, 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), Maturi Southwest, and Spruce Road deposits through the Birch
Lake Joint Venture, with Beaver Bay, Inc., 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 effective date of the Maturi mineral resource estimate is
October 8, 2013. The Maturi Southwest deposit resource estimate
incorporates assay data from 49 drill holes and four wedge off-set
holes totalling 46,000 feet drilled in 2013, and information from an
additional six legacy holes. The effective date of the Maturi Southwest
mineral resource estimate is June 15, 2013.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 Birch Lake and Spruce Road mineral resource estimates is September
15, 2012. The mineral resources have been estimated using CIM
Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Reserves dated November
2010.

Detailed Resource Tabulations

Tables of the updated mineral 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 2 – Maturi Deposit Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Mineral
Resources (effective date October 8, 2013)

     _______________________________________________________________
    |                                    Maturi Deposit             |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Measured Mineral Resource                                      |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Cu% cut-off|Million tons|Cu %|Ni %|Pt ppm|Pd ppm|Au ppm|TPM ppm|
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.2        |313         |0.61|0.20|0.14  |0.33  |0.08  |0.56   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.3        |295         |0.63|0.20|0.15  |0.35  |0.08  |0.58   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.4        |262         |0.66|0.21|0.16  |0.37  |0.09  |0.61   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.5        |225         |0.70|0.22|0.17  |0.39  |0.09  |0.65   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.6        |174         |0.74|0.24|0.18  |0.42  |0.10  |0.70   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |Indicated Mineral Resource                                     |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Cu% cut-off|Million tons|Cu %|Ni %|Pt ppm|Pd ppm|Au ppm|TPM ppm|
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.2        |829         |0.56|0.18|0.15  |0.35  |0.08  |0.58   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.3        |774         |0.58|0.19|0.16  |0.36  |0.09  |0.61   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.4        |678         |0.61|0.20|0.17  |0.38  |0.09  |0.65   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.5        |518         |0.66|0.21|0.19  |0.43  |0.10  |0.72   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.6        |367         |0.71|0.22|0.21  |0.47  |0.11  |0.79   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |Measured+Indicated Mineral Resource                            |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Cu% cut-off|Million tons|Cu %|Ni %|Pt ppm|Pd ppm|Au ppm|TPM ppm|
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.2        |1142        |0.57|0.18|0.15  |0.34  |0.08  |0.57   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.3        |1069        |0.59|0.19|0.16  |0.36  |0.08  |0.60   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.4        |940         |0.63|0.20|0.17  |0.38  |0.09  |0.64   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.5        |743         |0.67|0.21|0.18  |0.42  |0.10  |0.70   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.6        |541         |0.72|0.23|0.20  |0.45  |0.11  |0.76   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |Inferred Mineral Resource                                      |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Cu% cut-off|Million tons|Cu %|Ni %|Pt ppm|Pd ppm|Au ppm|TPM ppm|
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.2        |804         |0.43|0.14|0.12  |0.27  |0.06  |0.44   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.3        |562         |0.51|0.17|0.14  |0.32  |0.07  |0.53   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.4        |399         |0.57|0.19|0.16  |0.37  |0.08  |0.62   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.5        |266         |0.63|0.20|0.19  |0.44  |0.10  |0.73   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.6        |147         |0.70|0.22|0.23  |0.52  |0.11  |0.87   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
        --  Maturi Deposit tonnages do not include 114 million tons of
            mineralized material excluded from the underground resource in
            a crown pillar.
        --  CIM Definition Standards (2010) were followed for Mineral
            Resource estimation and classification.
        --  TPM is defined as Au + Pt + Pd.

Table 3 – Maturi Southwest Deposit Indicated and Inferred Mineral
Resources (effective date June 15, 2013)

     _______________________________________________________________
    |                             Maturi Southwest Deposit          |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Indicated Mineral Resource                                     |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Cu% cut-off|Million tons|Cu %|Ni %|Pt ppm|Pd ppm|Au ppm|TPM ppm|
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.2        |131         |0.43|0.15|0.07  |0.16  |0.04  |0.28   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.3        |103         |0.48|0.17|0.08  |0.19  |0.05  |0.31   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.4        |71          |0.53|0.18|0.09  |0.22  |0.06  |0.37   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.5        |40          |0.59|0.20|0.11  |0.26  |0.06  |0.43   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.6        |16          |0.67|0.22|0.12  |0.29  |0.07  |0.49   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |Inferred Mineral Resource                                      |
    |_______________________________________________________________|
    |Cu% cut-off|Million tons|Cu %|Ni %|Pt ppm|Pd ppm|Au ppm|TPM ppm|
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.2        |57          |0.35|0.13|0.05  |0.13  |0.03  |0.21   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.3        |32          |0.43|0.15|0.07  |0.16  |0.04  |0.26   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.4        |16          |0.51|0.17|0.08  |0.20  |0.05  |0.33   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.5        |7           |0.60|0.20|0.10  |0.25  |0.06  |0.42   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|
    |0.6        |3           |0.66|0.22|0.12  |0.28  |0.07  |0.46   |
    |___________|____________|____|____|______|______|______|_______|

Table 4 – Birch Lake Deposit Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources
(effective date September 15, 2012)

     _____________________________________________
    |       |              Birch Lake Deposit     |
    |_______|_____________________________________|
    |       |Indicated Mineral Resource           |
    |_______|_____________________________________|
    |Cu %   |Million|Cu  |Ni  |Pt  |Pd  |Au  |TPM |
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |cut-off|Tons   |%   |%   |ppm |ppm |ppm |ppm |
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.2    |112    |0.49|0.15|0.22|0.48|0.11|0.81|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.3    |100    |0.52|0.16|0.23|0.51|0.11|0.85|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.4    |85     |0.55|0.17|0.25|0.54|0.12|0.91|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.5    |55     |0.60|0.18|0.27|0.59|0.13|0.99|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.6    |23     |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    |0.41|0.13|0.16|0.32|0.08|0.56|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.3    |239    |0.46|0.15|0.18|0.37|0.09|0.64|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.4    |158    |0.51|0.16|0.20|0.42|0.10|0.72|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.5    |77     |0.58|0.18|0.23|0.48|0.11|0.82|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|
    |0.6    |24     |0.66|0.20|0.27|0.57|0.13|0.97|
    |_______|_______|____|____|____|____|____|____|

Table 5 – Spruce Road Deposit Inferred Mineral Resources (effective
date September 15, 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        |
    |_______|_______|____|____________|

Exploration Target Area Tonnage and Grade Ranges

Additional exploration potential highlighted by AMEC outside of the four
mineral resources (Maturi, Maturi Southwest, Birch Lake and Spruce Road
deposits) and in addition to the TMM defined mineral resource are
considered targets for further exploration.

An estimate of the exploration potential is between 1.3 to 2.1 billion
tons contiguous to the boundaries of the four deposits. These
exploration target areas occur on approximately 13% of the footprint of
the prospective portion of the TMM property block. The grade and
tonnage ranges of the four exploration targets are based on limited
drill hole results and location within the favourable host rocks. The
potential quantity and grade of the exploration target areas 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

An estimate of the exploration target potential for Maturi North and
Maturi South were determined by estimating a range of the tons within
the modeled area at a range of the grades that are known to occur
within that deposit area. Tonnage and grades of the Maturi North
exploration target could range from 290 to 430 Mst (million short tons)
grading 0.41 to 0.61% Cu, 0.14 to 0.21% Ni, 0.10 to 0.15 ppm Pt, 0.23
to 0.34 ppm Pd and 0.05 to 0.08 ppm Au. Tonnage and grades of the
Maturi South exploration target could range from 330 to 500 Mst
(million short tons) grading 0.42 to 0.62% Cu, 0.13 to 0.19% Ni, 0.14
to 0.21 ppm Pt, 0.31 to 0.46 ppm Pd and 0.07 to 0.10 ppm Au.

Maturi Southwest

The estimated exploration target potential within the permit boundaries
are based in part on mineralized intercepts from 11 drill holes; of
these 7 are legacy drilling and 4 are recent Maturi Southwest (MSW)
drill holes. Internal to the MSW exploration target is a low-grade area
(below 0.30 % copper); this area was excluded from the estimated
exploration target tonnage ranges. The southern boundary of the MSW
exploration target was truncated against the exploration area defined
for the Birch Lake. The tonnage potential of the MSW exploration
target area could range from 500 to 820 Mst (million short tons) with
grades ranging from 0.43 to 0.55 %Cu, 0.14 to 0.18 %Ni, 0.08 to 0.10
ppm Pt, 0.17 to 0.22 ppm Pd and 0.03 to 0.07 ppm Au.

Birch Lake

At Birch Lake, blocks with extrapolated grades outside the area
classified as Inferred are considered to be targets for further
exploration. Exploration potential is in the range of 220 to 330 Mt
and with grades ranging from 0.33 to 0.50% Cu, 0.11 to 0.16% Ni, 0.11
to 0.16 ppm Pt, 0.22 to 0.33 ppm Pd, and 0.05 to 0.08 ppm Au. The
range of tonnage and grade is based on a 0.30% Cu cutoff of material
outside of the Inferred Classification boundary using a range of grades
that are known to occur within the favourable host rocks.

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.

Duluth’s business of mineral exploration has a high level of inherent
risk. Although Duluth 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. Duluth’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 common to the industry and are referenced in greater detail
in the Company’s Annual Information Form.

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 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.

The Maturi resources are based on a concentrate sales plan that in turn
assumes a mining cost of $12.54/t, a process cost of $5.96/t and
general and administrative charges of $3.16/t. The prices, recoveries,
and payabilities are shown in the table below. The metal prices used
in the NSR calculation were mutually agreed upon by Duluth, TMM,
Antofagasta plc and AMEC on February 4, 2014.

2013 Maturi NSR Parameters (US$)

     ____________________________________________
    |         |              | Recovery  |       |
    |   Metal |  Price (US$) |Concentrate|Payable|
    |_________|______________|___________|_______|
    |Copper   |    $3.30/lb  |    93.4%  | 75.2% |
    |_________|______________|___________|_______|
    |Nickel   |   $10.00/lb  |    63.9%  | 48.8% |
    |_________|______________|___________|_______|
    |Gold     |$1,350/troy oz|    78.2%  | 56.6% |
    |_________|______________|___________|_______|
    |Palladium| $850/troy oz |    76.2%  | 57.4% |
    |_________|______________|___________|_______|
    |Platinum |$2,000/troy oz|    61.3%  | 43.3% |
    |_________|______________|___________|_______|

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 have 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 Twin Metals Minnesota
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. 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, leased applications and permitted land.

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


Source: PR Newswire



comments powered by Disqus