Stratamodel Inc and Future Energy LLC are pleased to offer a highly prospective uranium property with a package of historical exploration data located in Grand County, Utah. This property consists of 741 lode claims and five sections of Utah State Trust Land with a total area of approximately 29 sq miles (7510 hectares).
BIG FLAT URANIUM PROPERTY, GRAND COUNTY UTAH
Property
Big Flat location in Grand County Utah.
Big Flat Property showing Utah Trust Land in yellow and lode claims in blue.
Past Exploration Activity
The Mineral Canyon/Big Flat area has been explored and mined periodically since the 1930s. Numerous small mines were developed where mineralization cropped out along the walls of Mineral Canyon. During 1940s and 50s independent miners shipped high grade uranium ore by light truck to the AEC in Grand Junction Colorado. The most recent exploration activity took place in the mid 1970s to the early 1980s consisting of large drilling programs. Exploration drilling in the district started when the AEC put in shallow holes in Mineral Canyon in the 1940s. During the 1970s and 80s, private mining companies like Morrison Nuclear, Exxon Minerals, and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) undertook more ambitious drilling programs on the surrounding mesas drilling hundreds of holes up to 1,200 feet deep.
Geology and Mineralization
Mineralization consists of uranium and vanadium bound to coalified wood fragments within conglomerate. The target conglomerate horizon lies within the Triassic Chinle formation. The depth to target is between 600 and 1100 ft below surface. Overlying formations consist of aeolian sandstones and siltstones of the Wingate and Kayenta formations. As is typical of this style of mineralization, ore fragments range in size from a few inches to several feet long. A severe nugget effect makes evaluation of chemical assays notoriously inaccurate. Downhole gamma logging is far more reliable but still subject to a nugget effect caused by the relatively coarse size of the mineralized wood fragments and their random distribution and irregular spacing within the host conglomerate.
Big Flat stratigraphy.
Mineralized woody debris spaced 2-10 inches apart (Lucky Strike Mine, not from Big Flat).
Mineralized log approximately 3 ft by 1 ft in cross-bedded sandstone (Chinle, not from Big Flat).
Historic Data
Future Energy has an extensive collection of historic data from the district including locations of over 650 drill holes and gamma logs for approximately half of them. Stratamodel assembled all drill holes, gamma logs, and property boundaries into a geographic information system covering the property and it's immediate vicinity.
Stratamodel estimated grade and thickness in a semi-quantitative evaluation of this historic data. Almost nothing is known about the state of calibration of the gamma tool, the date of logging, or in general, the k factors for the tools used for the gamma logging. In order to gain some insight into the historic drilling results, an analysis of the gamma logs was made based on some simple evaluation methods and assumptions. The results are approximate.
A background to background method was employed to get the thickness of each anomaly. Grade was estimated from the magnitude of each peak. An average gamma value was obtained by multiplying the corrected gamma by 0.7071 (half amplitude of a sine wave). Finally in the absence of a K factor, an approximation of gamma to grade of 1000 cps per 0.05% equivalent U3O8 was used for a semi-quantitative grade estimate.
A composite estimated grade was made on five foot intervals (minimum mining width) to arrive at a final grade/thickness estimate. A significant number of drill holes had multiple anomalous zones. Two maps were prepared, a grade thickness product map and a maximum grade map.
Grade thickness (grade thickness product, sum of all intervals above 1000 cps)
Maximum grade (estimated grade from richest five foot interval)
Selected Gamma Anomalies
HOLE ID |
DEPTH FROM (ft) |
DEPTH TO (ft) |
THICKNESS (ft) |
RAW PEAK GAMMA (cps) |
6921-J,27 |
875 |
877 |
2 |
10,000 |
6921-J,27 |
892 |
894 |
2 |
18,000 |
6916-G.9,3.25 |
762 |
765 |
3 |
10,000 |
6916-G.9,3.25 |
928 |
930 |
2 |
37,000 |
T26S-R19E-S19-1 |
703 |
706 |
3 |
35,000 |
T26S-R19E-S19-1 |
708 |
713 |
5 |
60,000 |
6922-R,6 |
972 |
975 |
3 |
12,000 |
6922-D,15 |
918 |
923 |
5 |
15,000 |
6921-ZZ,12 |
850 |
853 |
3 |
13,000 |
6921-B.95,21.9 |
877 |
891 |
4 |
25,000 |
6921-F,26 |
956 |
961 |
5 |
110,000 |
6921-F,22 |
927 |
932 |
5 |
12,000 |
6921-F,24 |
897 |
903 |
6 |
20,000 |
6921-F,24 |
918 |
925 |
7 |
12,000 |
6921-G,22 |
894 |
900 |
6 |
17,500 |
6921-G,23 |
902 |
910 |
8 |
10,000 |
6916-G.25,1.3 |
882 |
886 |
4 |
14,000 |
6921-5 |
913 |
920 |
7 |
135,000 |
6921-F,25 |
923 |
925 |
7 |
30,000 |
Exploration Potential
Stratamodel and Future Energy believe the Big Flat property has significant exploration potential particularly in light of historically high uranium prices. Several clusters of ore grade mineralization at minimum mining widths of five feet are indicated by the historic data. Moreover, large portions of this property have never been drilled. The well established NW-SE trend of Chinle mineralization in other districts was partially tested as seen in the pattern of drilling. However, zones of anomalous gamma activity suggest the possibility of a NE-SW trend. Neither trend has been pursued to its full extent at Big Flat. Moreover, there is still a significant potential for new zones to be discovered.
Interested parties should contact bigflat@stratamodel.com for further information, a data package, a property tour, and terms.