ARIKA RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2019

Mar 21, 2019

==> picture [282 x 59] intentionally omitted <==

ASX RELEASE: 22 March 2019

ADMIRAL BAY

Technical Advancements Enhance Prospectivity

t Admiral Bay

HIGHLIGHTS

• Interpretation of Canning Basin SEEBASE Data highlights shallow dome structure in the basement immediately south east along strike of Admiral Bay, potentially representing mineralisation trap.

• Geological advancements enhance prospects at Admiral Bay project and increase value to 82.5%-owned subsidiary KML.

• Historic raw seismic data has been acquired, with stratigraphic interpretations and reprocessing underway.

• Initial interpretation of two-dimensional seismic data illustrates intense structural complexity coincident with the SEEBASE high.

• Moved to acquire the entire dome structure through the application of ELA04/2621 to complement the existing Admiral Bay tenements.

Metalicity Limited (ASX: MCT) (“ MCT ” or “ Company ”) is pleased to announce significant technical developments at the Admiral Bay Project, located in the Kimberley region of Western Australia, which interprets possible shallower zinc targets adjacent to the existing deposit.

The Admiral Bay project is currently held by the Company’s 82.5% owned subsidiary Kimberley Mining Limited (KML) which is proceeding with an IPO on the TSX-V when market conditions permit (see ASX announcement dated 28 February 2019).

While the Company has significantly re-focussed its exploration strategy to develop its copper and other base metals projects in the Paterson Province and Fraser Range, Metalicity remains committed to supporting the project throughout the listing process.

Metalicity believes these technical advances significantly enhance the investment case for KML and also delivers value for the Company which will continue to hold a major interest in KML.

The 2017 Canning Basin SEEBASE model provides a new view of architecture and evolution of the basin geometry and the Company has reprocessed this data in the Admiral Bay area to interpret data for base metal structures – with the model originally developed for the oil and gas industry.

Metalicity Limited ASX Code: MCT ABN: 92 086 839 992

www.metalicity.com.au 6 Outram Street West Perth WA 6005

Recent work by the Company and their consultants (on the behalf of KML) has identified a significant basement high in the reprocessed SEEBASE data, immediately to the south east of the Admiral Bay mineral resource (see Figure 1).

Interpretation in this area was assigned a confidence interval of 85% by the Geological Survey of Western Australia and their consultants Frogtech Geoscience.

==> picture [471 x 347] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 – Canning Basin 2017 SEEBASE model with current tenure and drill holes. Colour gradient denotes depth to basement in metres.

The Company believes it is likely the mineralisation host sequence in the area of the basement high will be domed and potentially form a quality trap for mineralised fluids with enhanced mineralisation.

It is also possible the host sequence over the basement high will be at a higher RL (reduced level) than that intersected in three nearby historical oil wells, Leo-1 and Great Sandy 1 and 2. Detailed reprocessing of the seismic line through Leo-1 and Great Sandy wells is in progress and initial review supports the presence of the basement high and draping or doming of overlying geological sequences. This could mean mineralisation is at a shallower level and is considered as part of the detailed reprocessing and interpretation of the seismic data.

Reviews of historic petroleum data were completed as part of this work. A detailed top of Nita Formation structure contour map was located. The Nita Formation is the key mineralised unit in the Admiral Bay Mineral Resource. This map illustrates the depth to the top of formation in much the same way as a topographic map depicts the elevation of the earth’s surface with contours. This mapping has identified interpreted closed domes within the mineralised sequence making for enhanced traps for mineralising fluids Figure 2. One such

==> picture [133 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

2

trap corresponds with historic drilling, including the high-grade zone within the mineral resource. The Company postulates these trap sites pose valid drill targets for enhanced mineralisation.

Work completed by our geophysical consultants, Fathom Geophysics and CGG, the owners and providers of Falcon® Plus Airborne Gravity gradiometer system, suggest enhanced mineralisation may potentially be identified with a Falcon® Plus survey. Falcon® Plus surveying is an airborne exploration technology which is quick to execute and is non-ground disturbing. Such a survey is subject funding within Kimberley Mining Limited.

The Ordovician stratigraphy, including the Nita and lower Carribuddy Formations hosting Admiral Bay mineralisation, are exceptionally consistent above the Proterozoic basement. The Company is of the view that the observed zinc and lead mineralisation in Leo-1 and Great Sandy (1 & 2) wells may be present at a shallower depth above the SEEBASE high. Seismic interpretation is ongoing to test this theory.

Commenting on the additional interpretation at Admiral Bay, Metalicity CEO Mat Longworth said:

“ We are very pleased with the technical developments at Admiral Bay, which suggest the project may also host additional quality zinc targets.

“The work completed to date has provided robust geological interpretation which we believe has the potential to significantly improve attractiveness of our zinc assets – which already represents one of the world’s major undeveloped zinc deposits.

“It may even be possible, with the completion of a Falcon ® Plus Airborne survey, to screen and rank traps sites based on the gravity signature and thus target any future drilling more effectively,” he said.

==> picture [133 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

3

==> picture [472 x 346] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 – Depth to Nita Formation structural interpretation with tenure and drill holes.

Explanatory Notes:

SEEBASE:

The Current SEEBASE (Structurally Enhanced view of Economic BASEment) was released in Late 2017 and is the latest enhancement the Canning Basin study which includes significant additional information. This provides a substantial improvement in resolution and structure interpretation. The initial data was developed for the Oil and Gas industry and its application to exploration for metalliferous deposits is growing in acceptance.

The full interpretation is presented in (Figure 3) which shows the extents of the study. Admiral ay is located on the northern margin of the Willara Sub Basin on the edge of the Broome platform. Importantly the study covers the Paterson Province and has been used extensively by the company and our consultants in targeting mineralisation.

==> picture [133 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

4

==> picture [331 x 374] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 – 2017 Canning Basin SEEBASE Area of Interest (Source: Geological Survey of Western Australia, Report 182 – 2017 Canning Basin SEEBASE Study and GIS Package)

The methodology of the 2017 SEEBASE Project used field data to interpret basement, basement terranes, depth to basement, regional structural geology and the basement composition. To achieve the aims, the project required extensive basement and potential field processing and interpretations to be integrated with seismic and well analysis. This integration has proven powerful and has illustrated the strong basement control on the distribution and location of basin elements. This also delivered relative confidence percentages to areas modelled, where several forms of data were used to derive the model results. Admiral Bay is situated, in an area noted at an 85% confidence due to “Moderate basement depth - widespread 2D seismic data and a few wells”.

Therefore, the Company believes the basement high modelled in the SEEBASE processing has a relatively high confidence. It is likely the sediments overlying the high are domed potentially forming trap sites for mineralisation. Furthermore, given the Canning Basin stratigraphy is well defined not only through previous petroleum exploration, but more locally within the Admiral Bay Mineral Resource model, extrapolations that basement dome structures reflect upward through the stratigraphy giving a stratigraphically higher (or shallower depth wise) location to known formations is a possible and reasonable assumption.

Falcon® Plus Gradiometer Survey:

==> picture [133 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

5

The Falcon® Plus airborne gravity gradiometer (AGG) surveys provide the ability to provide superior mapping of basement topography to depths exceeding 6,000 metres. A recent case study published on CGG’s website (https://www.cgg.com/en/What-We-Do/Multi-Physics/Case-Studies/Success-in-the-Canning-Basin) details recent work within the Fitzroy Trough and Gregory Sub-basin within the greater Canning Basin. A noteworthy statement made by CGG:

“ A sequence of Ordovician carbonate and shale bearing formations of relatively constant thickness overlying the metamorphic basement is clearly defined as gD and GDD highs in the AGG data. The fault structure of the platforms and terraces is well-defined by, with low GDD values in the fault heave areas of these formations. In the northern part of the survey, thickness variations in the Ordovician-Silurian Carribuddy Group are linked to large listric growth faults, defining the WNW Fitzroy Trough trend.”

The results of that survey delivered better 3D definition of the sub-basin architecture and a detailed structural interpretation allowing for more succinct exploration to be planned and executed on that case study Project. Hence, with Falcon® Plus’s depth penetration ability and low-noise characteristics contributing to improved imaging of deeper layers - paramount for Admiral Bay base metal mineralisation, initial modelling of Admiral Bay mineralisation at various depths and sizes indicates that detectability of higher tenure mineralised zones is possible using this gravity survey method:

==> picture [455 x 129] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1 – Admiral Bay Base Metal modelling results.

Therefore, given the success of Falcon® Plus elsewhere within the Canning Basin in mapping a similar stratigraphic unit, and that the survey methodology has the noise cancelling with depth penetration capabilities, coupled with the recently acquired top of Nita Formation structure map, the likelihood that a survey that defines zones of higher contrasting units, within the base metal mineralised host units may provide a high priority, high confidence target for significantly more endowed base metal mineralisation.

Leo-1 & Great Sandy 1 & 2 Wells

Leo-1 well was drilled by the Sydney Oil Company (164) Pty Ltd in July 1988 and finished at a total depth of 2,411.3 metres in August 1988. The initial loggers noted from the logging of the “Upper Nita Unit”, “The limestone is white, off-white to light grey, cryptocrystalline to microcrystalline, with sulphides concentrated in the upper 10 metres and rare white barite” The unit described corresponds to a drill hole depth of 1,540 to 1,550 metres.

Subsequent logging of core cut within the well Leo-1 by Command Petroleum NL noted the development of sulphide mineralisation (Sphalerite, Galena and Chalcopyrite) within the interval of 1,575.6 to 1,588.6 metres. Sulphide occurrences were noted throughout this interval and the extents are unknown due to the limit of the core cut.

==> picture [133 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

6

Great Sandy 2 essentially twinned the Great Sandy 1 Well. Both were targeting the prospectivity of the Nita Formation for oil and gas, Great Sandy 2 was drilled to a total depth of 1,600 metres, and Great Sandy 1 drilled to a depth of 1,771 metres. Both wells were drilled in 1981 by Meridian Oil NL.

In 1982, Meridian Oil NL commissioned a petrographic report on Great Sandy 1 Nita Formation intersections. The core was from an interval of 1,508 to 1,525 metres down hole. Notes from the report state; “Sulphide mineralisation with Galena and pyrite seems to be related to late stage dolomitization because these mineral phases form void-fillings and coatings on crystal faces that project into voids.”

The comments noted within the well reports confirm the widespread nature of the Admiral Bay base metal mineralisation, these notes further confirm the periphery of this dome structure discussed above is indeed mineralised. The mineralised basin brines that were the fluid that deposited the mineralisation observed in Leo-1 and the Great Sandy Wells, we are interpreting to be trapped at or near this domal structure observed in the SEEBASE imagery and will hopefully confirm through the 2D seismic reprocessing.

Further details around the Leo-1 and Great Sandy Wells are provided in Table 1, Sections 1 and 2.

2D Seismic Interpretation

Our geophysical partner has been contracted to re-process the Capricorn C84-05 2D seismic line that was captured in November 1984. This seismic line is coincident with the Leo-1 and Great Sandy wells. Whilst the raw data is time constrained, the re-processing coupled with the publicly available well data on offer will generate an original depth constrained stack, coupled with a PTSM and PSDM stack allowing for an accurate interpretation of the stratigraphy and structural controls coincident with the SEEBASE modelled basement high.

Converting the time constrained stacks to depth constrained will allow for the succinct interpretation of the known stratigraphic units and associated controls. Extrapolation of the observed mineralisation with Leo-1 and the Great Sandy wells will allow for a reasonably accurate depth constraint to possible trap sites within this interpreted dome structure illustrated in the SEEBASE modelling. Overall, the combination of this 2D seismic interpretation utilizing known well data, coupled with the depth to top of Nita Structural map with preliminary modelling of Falcon® Plus gradiometer surveying illustrating that higher tenure base metal mineralisation may be defined at the average depth of the Admiral Bay mineral resource, and the high confidence domal structure observed within the SEEBASE modelling lends to a significant step change in the definition of further resource delineation work capable of potentially delivering higher grading base metal mineralisation.

ENQUIRIES

Investors Investor Relations Mat Longworth David Tasker/ Colin Jacoby CEO Chapter One Advisors +61 8 9324 1053 +61 433 112 936/ +61 439 980 359 mlongworth@metalicity.com.au david.tasker@chapteroneavisors.com.au

Competent Person Statement

Information in this report that relates to Exploration results is based on, and fairly reflects, information compiled by Jason Livingstone, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr. Livingstone is an employee of Metalicity Limited. Mr. Livingstone has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined by the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr. Livingstone consents to the inclusion of the data in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [133 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

7

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or	•The Competent Person has relied on publicly available data to
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate	support the statements made within the announcement. The data
	to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma	presented has been taken on face value and will require as much
	sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should	field verification as possible to validate the veracity of the data.
	not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	However, the drilling data used and discussed in this announcement
	• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity	is used to lend weight to our statements, of which, the Competent
	and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems	person deems to be a valid basis to apply for the ground in question.
	used.	•Note – photographs of the core recovered from the wells drilled
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the	illustrates that base metal mineralisation exists through the deposition
	Public Report.	of Sphalerite and Galena, with minor Barite within the host
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be	stratigraphy. Veracity of down hole positions though will require
	relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1	confirmation. Also, the intervals refered to in Leo-1 and the Great
	m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge	Sandy Well’s do not form part of any mineral resource estimate and
	for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required,	are well outside the current mineral resource or exploration target
	such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling	stated for Admiral Bay.
	problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg	•As such, the nature of the sampling, the QAQC protocols taken and
	submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	aspects of the determination of mineralisation etc. require further
		work, upon gaining appropriate approvals, to determine if the work
		publicly stated is a true reflection of the mineralisation.
		•All drilling has been completed with vertical drillholes which has
		intersected the mineralised stratigraphy at relatively high angles 60-
		90°to the drillhole orientations.
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	•For the Leo-1 and Great Sandy Wells, mud rotary drilling was
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple	employed, with core runs at specific intervals.
	or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other
	_type, whether core is oriented and ifso, by what method, etc). _
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	•Within the core runs for Leo-1, it was noted that core run 1 from
recovery	and results assessed.	1566.5 to 1576.1 had a recovery of 81%, core run 2 from 1575.9 to
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure	1590.1 had a recovery of 91%. For Great Sandy 1, the single core run
	representative nature of the samples.	from 1508 to 1525.37 stated a 100% core recovery, and for Great
	• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade	Sandy 2 core run 1 from 1471 t o1485 recorded a 36% recovery, core
	and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential	run 2 from 1485 to 1503.3 recorded a 100% recovery, and finally core
	loss/gainof fine/coarse material.	run 3 from 1503 to 1514 recorded a 98% recovery.

==> picture [132 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

8

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•Regarding the recording and assessing recoveries, what measures
		were taken the author is unable to comment, however, regarding a
		relationship between grade and recovery is not possible as specific
		analytical grades are not discussed, just the presence of
		mineralisation or not. Therefore, it could allow some bias regarding
		observedmineralisationandrecovery.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	•All drill cuttings have been geologically logged.
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate	•It is of the opinion of the Competent Person that the quality of the
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	geological logging and subsequent stratigraphy data would allow for
	studies.	its inclusion into a mineral resource estimate. However, there is an
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or	absence of analytical data over these intervals.
	costean, channel, etc) photography.	•All lengths of drill cuttings and cores cut were logged.
	• _The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. _
Sub-	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core	•No sampling or analytical results were available for the intervals
sampling	taken.	discussed. The logging descriptions used imply base metal
techniques	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and	mineralisation.
and sample	whether sampled wet or dry.
preparation	• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the
	sample preparation technique.
	• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
	maximise representivity of samples.
	• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in
	situ material collected, including for instance results for field
	duplicate/second-half sampling.
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material
	_being sampled. _
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	•No Assay data is discussed.
assay data	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered
and	partial or total.
laboratory	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,
tests	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument
	make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their
	derivation, etc.
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels

==> picture [132 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

9

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	_of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. _
Verification	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	•No assay data is discussed.
of sampling	alternative company personnel.
and	• The use of twinned holes.
assaying	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
	• _Discuss any adjustment to assay data. _
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	•It has been noted that drill hole collar locations were recorded from
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	the CRAE exploration reports and checked by Survey North. Although
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.	only one collar could be located, the rehabilitated drill hole pads were
	• Specification of the grid system used.	easily located. This survey confirmed the approximate locations of the
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	drill holes(±10m)and also the surface RL values(±1m).
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	•The two well sites are some 4 kilometres apart and appear to be on
and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the	the same dome structure, the spacing would not be sufficient to
distribution	degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	determine appropriate grade continuity, if available, to support a
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and	mineral resource estimate. However, coupled with a 2D seismic
	classifications applied.	interpretation, the geological continuity could be established.
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.	•Sample compositing – not applicable as no sampling/assays are
		discussed.
Orientation	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	•All drilling has been completed with vertical drill holes which has
of data in	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	intersected the mineralised stratigraphy at relatively high angles 60-
relation to	the deposit type.	90° to the drill hole orientations.
geological	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation
structure	of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a
	sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•The Competent Person is unable to comment on the sample security
security		protocols taken by the companies being referred to, an assumption
		that industry standard measures were taken given that the
		information was made publicly available. Note – these two well sites
		were not incorporated into the Admiral Bay Mineral Resource
		Estimate.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•Beyond reading and verifying that WAMEX and WAPIMS report
reviews		appendices that correlate with publicly stated data, no other audits or
		reviews were taken.

==> picture [132 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

10

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including	•The Admiral Bay Project is located in the central Canning Basin, on
tenement	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint	the southern edge of the Kimberley region some 140km south of
and land	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,	Broome, Western Australia.
tenure status	historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental	•The Admiral Bay deposit is located within two granted Mining Leases
	settings.	(ML04/244 and ML04/249), which are valid until 20/3/2033 and one
	• The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any	granted Exploration Licence (EL04/1610), which is valid until
	known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	3/9/2019. These tenements are held by Kimberley Mining Australia
		Pty Ltd, a subsidiary of Metalicity Limited (82.5% owned)
		•A recent exploration licence application was made, EL04/2621 on the
		14/3/2019 – 100% owned by Metalicity Limited.
		•The tenement is located wholly within Vacant Crown Land and is
		covered by the Native Title Determined Area of the Karajarri People
		(AreaA)
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•The Admiral Bay deposit was discovered in 1981 by Meridian Oil NL
done by		during petroleum exploration and was subsequently acquired by CRA
other parties		Exploration (the exploration arm of CRA Limited, now Rio Tinto Ltd),
		who undertook substantial exploration from 1986 to 1992. Kagara Ltd
		acquired the deposit from CRA Exploration in 2004 and completed an
		exploration programme that lead to an initial Inferred Resource, as
		well as a pre-feasibility study to test the viability of the project. Kagara
		Ltd entered into Administration in 2012 and subsequently Liquidation
		in 2013.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•Admiral Bay lies within the Admiral Bay Fault Zone, which separates
		the Broome Platform and Willara Sub-basin and forms part of the
		greater Canning Basin.
		•Admiral Bay is a carbonate-hosted zinc-lead-silver-barium deposit,
		with mineralisation hosted mainly in the Nita Formation and, to a
		lesser degree, in the Carribuddy and Goldwyer Formations, over a
		mineralised strike extent of at least 18km.
		•Admiral Bay does not appear to be a typical mid-continental MVT.
		Rather it appears to be a large and strongly focused MVT more like
		Reocin or Polaris, rather than the more ‘poddy’ Goongewa or mid-
		continental US or Polish-style MVTs. The ratio of mineralised hits in
		the drillingis actuallyveryhigh forthis style of mineralisation.

==> picture [132 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

11

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary
	•Within the project area, the surface geology is dominated by Quaternary Aeolian sand. Sand sheets in the northwest grade into 2– 10m high dunes towards the southeast. •The stratigraphy is comprised of a thick sequence of Cretaceous- Jurassic-Permian sandstones/siltstones (up to 1,200m thick), which overlies a variably dolomitized siltstone/shale/limestone – the Nita Formation – which is host to an upper zinc-rich zone and a lower lead-rich zone of mineralisation. •Sulphides infill dissolution, breccia and fracture porosity and overprint stylolites •Previous drilling indicates that the upper high-grade Zn-rich zone is up to 20m thick, whilst the lower high-grade Pb zone is up to 15m thick. The high-grade zones described above are hosted within a broad, moderately Zn-Pb mineralised, zone up to 110-120m thick. •In general, base metal mineralisation occurs in the lower parts of the Siluro-Devonian Cudalgarra Formation and the Ordovician-age Nita and Goldwyer Formations over depths of around 1,250m to 1,700m. Mineralisation is most typically associated with calcareous rocks, commonlywithappreciable barite
Drill hole Information • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly _explain why this is the case. _	Drill hole	Hole Type	East_MGA	North_MGA	RL	RL Ref	**Hole Depth **	**Company **	Year
	GREATSANDY-1	Mud Rotary	432144	7875484	91.5	Kelly Bush	1771	MO	1981
	LEO-1	Mud Rotary	431231.51	7871681.52	87.98	Kelly Bush	2411.3	CP	1988
Data aggregation methods • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade	•Not applicable

==> picture [132 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used
	for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of
	such aggregations should be shown in detail.
	• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values
	_should be clearly stated. _
Relationship	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of	•All drilling has been completed with vertical drill holes which has
between	Exploration Results.	intersected the mineralised stratigraphy at relatively high angles 60-
mineralisatio	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole	90° to the drill hole orientations. Therefore, reported lengths are likely
n widths and	angle is known, its nature should be reported.	to be not true widths of observed mineralisation.
intercept lengths	• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true
	_width not known’). _
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	•Please see main body of the announcement.
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being
	reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of
	_drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. _
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	•Results from all drill holes within the project tenements have
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades	previously been reported. Therefore, given the style of mineralisation
	and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of	discussed, extrapolations and relationships to previously reported
	_Exploration Results. _	dataisrelevant and therefore,notmisleading.
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported	•Previously reported and relevant to the discussed data:
substantive	including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical	•Wireline logging suites comprising gamma, caliper, density, neutron,
exploration	survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and	resistivity, self-potential, temperature, compensated sonic and
data	method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,	magnetic deviation are available for all drill holes.
	groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential	•Extensive 2D seismic data are available for the project area.
	deleterious or contaminating substances.	•Metallurgical, geotechnical, hydrogeological and mining studies have
		beencompleted onthe project.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	•Kimberley Mining Australia Pty Ltd intends to develop this Project as
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	Metalicity Limited as a major shareholder. Initially, a Falcon® Plus
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,	Gradiometer Survey is planned, coupled with the currently underway
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,	reprocessing of 2D seismic data to better define potential drilling
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	targets to delineate higher tenure base metal mineralisation. The aim
		is to deliver higher tenure mineralisation for future feasibilities to
		consider.

==> picture [132 x 28] intentionally omitted <==

13