Focus Graphite Announces SEDAR+ Filing of the NI 43-101 Technical Report with the Updated Mineral Resource for the Lac Tetepisca Project

Original announcement by tmx on

Company
Focus Graphite Inc.
Ticker
FMS
Exchange
TSX
Region
Quebec
Primary commodity
Graphite
Secondary commodities
None reported
Document categories
Resource update
Extracted
2026-09-17 22:44:58 UTC

Analysis by Minestarters Atlas

Minestarters Atlas analysis

Summary

Focus Graphite has filed an updated NI 43-101 technical report for the Lac Tetepisca Project in Quebec, revealing a significant graphite resource. The estimate includes 120.2 Mt of Indicated resource at 10.27% Cg and 24.1 Mt of Inferred resource at 9.88% Cg.

Reasoning: The announcement reports a substantial updated mineral resource estimate for a large-scale graphite project, providing high-grade Indicated and Inferred categories with clear technical parameters.

Positive factors

  • Significant scale with 120.2 Mt Indicated resource
  • High-grade profile at 10.27% Cg
  • NI 43-101 compliant update
  • Expansion potential noted via step-out and infill drilling

Facts used in scoring: 2

Classification and evidence

Indicated Resourcepositive

Reasonable geological confidence based on adequate drilling; continuity can be assumed. Basis for Probable Reserves.

Why it applies: The resource estimate includes 120,163 kt of Indicated graphite resource.

Evidence · text

“120.2 million tonnes ("Mt") of Indicated resource”

Inferred Resourcenegative

Speculative category — limited drilling, geological continuity assumed but not confirmed. Cannot support economic studies alone.

Why it applies: The resource estimate includes 24,143 kt of Inferred graphite resource.

Evidence · text

“24.1 Mt of Inferred resource”

NI 43-101 Compliantpositive

Resource estimate prepared in compliance with NI 43-101 (Canada) — high reporting standard.

Why it applies: The MRE was completed pursuant to the requirements of National Instrument 43-101.

Evidence · text

“completed pursuant to the requirements of National Instrument 43-101”

QP/CP Signedpositive

Qualified Person (QP) or Competent Person (CP) named and signed off — a member of a recognized professional association (e.g., AusIMM, SME, AIG, P.Geo) with relevant experience.

Why it applies: Qualified Persons Jean-Michel Dubé and Alexandre Burelle are named as responsible for the estimate.

Evidence · text

“The independent and qualified persons ("QPs") for the mineral resource estimate... are Jean-Michel Dubé, P.Geo. from IOS Geosciences and Alexandre Burelle, P.Eng., from Evomine Consulting.”

Cut-off Disclosedpositive

Cut-off grade used for resource reporting is clearly stated, enabling like-for-like comparison.

Why it applies: The resource was calculated based on a 3.5% Cg cut-off grade.

Evidence · text

“calculated based on a conservative 3.5% Cg cut-off grade”

Resource Updateneutral

Revised estimate for an existing resource — compare to prior to assess progress.

Why it applies: The source explicitly discloses a revised resource estimate

Evidence · text

“Updated Mineral Resource”

Extracted facts

Stored fact records: 2. Some facts used in scoring do not have a stored record.

Resource Estimates (2)

indicatedLac Tetepisca Project · graphiteTonnes: 120163000Grade: 10.27Grade Unit: %Contained Metal: 12345000Contained Unit: ktView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Lac Tetepisca Project
Commodity
graphite
Region
canada_qc
Reported Region
Quebec
Ticker
FMS

Resource scope

Estimate type
resource
Effective date
2026-04-30T00:00:00.000Z
Reporting standards
ni_43_101
QP Signed
Yes
Qualified person names
Jean-Michel Dubé, Alexandre Burelle
Resource group id
resource:00c81d93118f2ff8ac18
Deposit or zone
MOGC
Mining method
open_pit
Ownership percent
100 %

Resource Data

Category
indicated
Tonnes
120163000
Grade
10.27
Grade Unit
%
Contained Metal
12345000
Contained Unit
kt
Cutoff Grade
3.5
Cutoff Unit
% Cg

Prior Estimate

Resource Date
2026-04-30

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-06-22T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: Strong Indicated resource component with high grade and significant tonnage.

Positive factors

  • High grade (10.27%)
  • Large tonnage (120 Mt)

Evidence · table

“10.27”

Context: 120,163

Tags used in scoring

Indicated Resourcepositive

Reasonable geological confidence based on adequate drilling; continuity can be assumed. Basis for Probable Reserves.

Why it applies: category is "indicated"

Cut-off Disclosedpositive

Cut-off grade used for resource reporting is clearly stated, enabling like-for-like comparison.

Why it applies: cutoff_grade is stated

QP/CP Signedpositive

Qualified Person (QP) or Competent Person (CP) named and signed off — a member of a recognized professional association (e.g., AusIMM, SME, AIG, P.Geo) with relevant experience.

Why it applies: qp_signed is true

NI 43-101 Compliantpositive

Resource estimate prepared in compliance with NI 43-101 (Canada) — high reporting standard.

Why it applies: reporting_standards includes ni_43_101

Resource Updateneutral

Revised estimate for an existing resource — compare to prior to assess progress.

Why it applies: the release compares against a previous estimate

PEA-Supportingneutral

Resource estimate prepared to support a Preliminary Economic Assessment — early-stage study.

Why it applies: the release names the study this estimate supports

DFS-Supportingneutral

Resource estimate prepared to support a Definitive Feasibility Study — requires high M&I confidence.

Why it applies: the release names the study this estimate supports

inferredLac Tetepisca Project · graphiteTonnes: 24143000Grade: 9.88Grade Unit: %Contained Metal: 2386000Contained Unit: ktView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Lac Tetepisca Project
Commodity
graphite
Region
canada_qc
Reported Region
Quebec
Ticker
FMS

Resource scope

Estimate type
resource
Effective date
2026-04-30T00:00:00.000Z
Reporting standards
ni_43_101
QP Signed
Yes
Qualified person names
Jean-Michel Dubé, Alexandre Burelle
Resource group id
resource:e0a2b6b129380706c33f
Deposit or zone
MOGC
Mining method
open_pit
Ownership percent
100 %

Resource Data

Category
inferred
Tonnes
24143000
Grade
9.88
Grade Unit
%
Contained Metal
2386000
Contained Unit
kt
Cutoff Grade
3.5
Cutoff Unit
% Cg

Prior Estimate

Resource Date
2026-04-30

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-06-22T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: Substantial Inferred resource supporting the overall project scale.

Positive factors

  • Good grade (9.88%)

Negative factors

  • Inferred category limits confidence

Evidence · table

“9.88”

Context: 24,143

Tags used in scoring

Inferred Resourcenegative

Speculative category — limited drilling, geological continuity assumed but not confirmed. Cannot support economic studies alone.

Why it applies: category is "inferred"

Cut-off Disclosedpositive

Cut-off grade used for resource reporting is clearly stated, enabling like-for-like comparison.

Why it applies: cutoff_grade is stated

QP/CP Signedpositive

Qualified Person (QP) or Competent Person (CP) named and signed off — a member of a recognized professional association (e.g., AusIMM, SME, AIG, P.Geo) with relevant experience.

Why it applies: qp_signed is true

NI 43-101 Compliantpositive

Resource estimate prepared in compliance with NI 43-101 (Canada) — high reporting standard.

Why it applies: reporting_standards includes ni_43_101

Resource Updateneutral

Revised estimate for an existing resource — compare to prior to assess progress.

Why it applies: the release compares against a previous estimate

PEA-Supportingneutral

Resource estimate prepared to support a Preliminary Economic Assessment — early-stage study.

Why it applies: the release names the study this estimate supports

DFS-Supportingneutral

Resource estimate prepared to support a Definitive Feasibility Study — requires high M&I confidence.

Why it applies: the release names the study this estimate supports

How Atlas produces this analysis

Minestarters Atlas uses automated extraction to summarize mining announcements, identify reported measurements, and classify supporting evidence. Sentiment reflects the extracted narrative and classification rules; it is an interpretation, not a reported measurement. Evidence quotes and context are provided where available. Missing data, low-confidence results, and review flags indicate limitations. Check the original publisher announcement before relying on an interpretation.