Hey Everyone

I've read, re-read and re-read again the Joint SGS-Noront NR regarding the Lab errors and I believe there may be a fairly simple explanation as to what happened.

From the original Noront NR, we know that there were 19 cores submitted which equated to 744 individual samples. Previous postings would seem to indicate that 6 cores were stepout holes for the DE1 43-101. The other 13 could be assumed to be E2.

When the lab received the first cores, they would have done a manual analysis to determine the choice of certified reference material to be used for calibration and QA/QC monitoring. If the core was DE1, it was was quite likely high in nickel with trace PGE's etc..

So now they would be merrily running samples and likely getting accurate results. By this time they have all of the 19 cores from Noront and would most likely assume that because all cores are from the same client and on the same project that the chemical makeup would be similar.

So now (while their equipment is dialed in for high nickel), E2 samples start running.

What happens if the E2 samples are the high chromite, low nickel, trace PGE's like the recent SPQ assays? Given the antipathic relationship between nickel and chromite, my bet is that the chromite readings would be biased low(Hopefully some of the lab techs can chime in on this).

The same scenario would apply if the lab had set up for a high chromite sample and then ran high nickel samples through.

In both scenarios, the labs internal referance samples would quite likely run correctly. If however Noronts referance samples were opposite those of the lab (ie, nickel vs. chromite) then that would explain Noronts QA/QC catching the error.

This hypothesis would apper to fit extremely well with The SGS statement

"The choice of certified reference material is now made by a senior laboratory staff member on a sample-batch basis. SGS has also issued stricter data acceptance criteria and now sample batches are rejected if the contained certified reference material is not suitable in matrix and concentration level when compared to the client samples."

Essentially, because there appear to be 2 different style deposits (thus far), choice of certified reference material (calibration standard) would have to be done on a core by core basis rather than client work order basis.

Just some food for though for the weekend.

Cheers.