JORC chair Steve Hunt told ILN sister publication MiningNews.net he didn’t expect a spike in non-compliance reprimands from the Australian Securities Exchange, noting an expected delay in implementation among miners.

“A bit of a lag is understood but the challenge to the industry is that you can’t maintain your JORC 2004 reporting once you have new information,” he said.

“Once new information comes out of ongoing studies or field programs then the next version of the public reporting now has to be 2012 JORC-compliant.

“That close-out process [for JORC 2004 estimates] is already ticking and as people carry on their work, reports under the new code will pull through.”

After an extensive educative campaign of seminars and workshops, resource industry players probably have all the information they need on the new code.

However, making sure a company is ready to apply that information is another story.

“The main issue is to get prepared ahead of time,” Hunt said.

“If you want to rush out a press release on Friday afternoon and you’re not ready yet, that can cause some stress.”

The higher degree of disclosure required by the 2012 rules will be most pertinent when materially changed or brand new resource information is being published.

Hunt also flagged a significant change regarding exploration target reporting as a point companies should highlight in their compliance process.

While it’s still allowable to report exploration targets, there has been a tightening up of the declaration requirements.

“We’ve had to clarify how they’re used so there’s not a blurring of the lines between what’s an exploration target and what’s actually a mineral resource,” Hunt said.

“It had started to become a problem where a company would talk about an exploration target and perhaps allude or suggest it was ready for development.

“And quite clearly at that point, if it didn’t have formal mineral resources or hadn’t gone through a studies process, that would be a premature promise.”

In legal circles, much emphasis has been put on the new JORC code’s “if not, why not” policy, which is intended to improve the demonstration of competence.

If not, why not has been regarded by some as a new approach and a possible stumbling block for companies just getting used to the new rules.

Hunt, however, considers it simply as a re-emphasis of previously established JORC standards – a reminder that companies are obliged to back up competence claims with the appropriate supporting data.

“It’s a rebalance between the key three principals of transparency, materiality and competence,” he explained.

“There had been a drift in recent years towards only minimal supporting data being presented with resource and reserve numbers and the industry felt that that was underemphasising the requirements for the code for transparency and materiality.

“We’re not asking for all of the minute technical detail because that is overcooking the materiality area.

“Likewise, full transparency down to minute detail is not being asked for either.

“It’s about the key assumption sets and providing a more balanced exposure of what’s involved in that and a discussion around the technical areas supporting the resource or reserve.”

Boom periods in the resources industry tend to incentivise rushing headline numbers to market as quickly as possible but it would be a mistake to presume the new JORC rules are an attempt to slow things down.

Indeed, some changes are expected to streamline the process, including a measure allowing companies to refer back to reports previously signed off by a competent person when the expert is unavailable.

The information gathering and diffusion process carried out by JORC, the ASX and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission has been some two years in the making.

And although the industry’s transition to complete compliance with the new rules could take just as long, companies may do well to consider the public relations pitfalls associated with quoting outdated reporting standards.

Hunt calls for companies to focus on internal communication in order to make sure that the various parties responsible for resource reporting are well aligned.

“It’s about engagement with their technical staff and competent people and getting the drafts of the statements prepared appropriately and ready to go,” he said.

“And we don’t see that there’s months or weeks involved in that – that’s just a matter of being organised.”