ARUMA RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2023

Nov 27, 2023

ASX Announcement 28[th] November 2023

==> picture [232 x 79] intentionally omitted <==

Soil Sampling Uncovers Gold Target at Saltwater Project

Highlights

• Latest phase of soil sampling completed over recent rock-chip anomalies delivers strong gold and polymetallic anomalism across three prospects:

• Soil sampling identifies strong gold anomalism at the Terceira prospect:

  • SWS0180 containing 0.38g/t Au and 356ppm As

  • SWS0179 containing 0.14g/t Au and 371ppm As

  • SWS0181 containing 0.14g/t Au and 204ppm As

  • SWS0178 containing 0.12g/t Au and 443ppm As

• In addition to previously reported cobalt-copper, further manganese-cobalt polymetallic anomalism detected at Orichalcum:

  • SWS0102 containing 1.1% Mn, 612ppm Co, 387ppm Cu, 0.37g/t Ag and 0.19% Ba

  • ▪ SWS0104 containing 0.7% Mn, 136ppm Co, 135ppm Cu, 0.05g/t Ag and 0.11% Ba

• SWS0106 containing 0.5% Mn, 151ppm Co, 159ppm Cu, 0.12g/t Ag and 0.08% Ba

• o Soil Sampling also detected REE and telluride enrichment at the Oracle prospect:

   - **SWS0094 containing 295ppm Ce, 160ppm La and 535ppm Ba**
  
   - **SWS0095 containing 0.28g/t Te, 200ppm Cu and 205ppm Ni**
  

• Heli-mapping and rock-chips of Saltwater outcrop features expands the prospectivity of Inkwell Ridge and the greater Saltwater Basin Complex

• First pass drilling of priority targets planned for calendar year 2024

Aruma Resources Limited ( ASX: AAJ ) ( Aruma or the Company ) is pleased to announce that results from the latest phase of its ongoing sampling program at its 100%-owned Saltwater Project in the Pilbara region of Western Australia has reaffirmed its potential as a multicommodity mineralised system.

The soil sampling program has successfully identified a very anomalous greenfield gold target at the Terceira prospect within the Saltwater project area. This residual surface gold anomaly is coincident with a large surface arsenic halo and a geophysical magnetic anomaly, and represents a highly prospective new gold target in a completely greenfields location.

Aruma Resources Ltd ACN 141 335 364 ASX: AAJ

Board and Management JAMES MOSES – Non-Executive Chairman GLENN GRAYSON – Managing Director BRETT SMITH – Non-Executive Director

Business Office 1[st] Floor, 2 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: + 61 8 9321 0177 E: info@arumaresources.com

Issued Capital 196,891,506 Shares 54,930,003 Listed options 16,000,000 Unlisted options

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

The Saltwater Project consists of four granted Exploration Licences (EL52/3818, EL52/3846, EL52/3857 and EL52/3966) over a total area of 450km[2] , situated approximately 120km southwest of the regional mining centre of Newman.

The Project sits within an emerging multi-commodity province, where Dreadnought Resources (ASX: DRE) holds a significant landholding with its Bresnahan REE-U Project, which surrounds Aruma’s Saltwater Project area (Figure 1).

Overview of latest phase of soil sampling

Aruma completed its latest phase of soil sampling, and outcrop mapping in October. Soil sampling has proved successful in providing vectors towards defining targets for a maiden drilling program, planned for calendar 2024.

The soil sampling programs have been strategically planned to collect samples from areas with previous anomalous rock chip samples, and vector in on mineralisation source locations.

In addition to the new Greenfields gold target, Aruma’s soil sampling has verified the existence of further Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide (VMS) systems with elements such as manganese, barium, copper, and cobalt. The findings also feature a series of anomalies of rare earth elements (REE) and tellurides, within the soil at the Oracle prospect. See Figures 2 to 4 for maps and Figure 5 and 6 for field photos.

Outcrop sampling and mapping has generated multiple new targets across the Project. The Inkwell Ridge prospect hosts in excess of 7km of anomalous iron, copper, lithium and REE rock chips.

The Saltwater Complex continues to reveal a major VMS system with multiple base metal and barium indicative results. In addition, the helicopter supported program covered the eastern region of the Project, where rock chips from the Euros prospect highlight the potential for a mineralised mafic intrusive complex.

Aruma managing director Glenn Grayson said:

“We are delighted with the progress of our fieldwork at Saltwater. The results generated to date from our ongoing sampling program are very encouraging and highlights the Project’s potential by continuing to deliver materially positive results from this initial, targeted fieldwork. Based on results to date, we are confident we have identified a high-value manganese-cobalt target, multiple VMS targets, as well as a promising uranium prospect – and with the latest phase of sampling, have uncovered an exciting, new greenfields gold target. We will continue to pursue our systematic and targeted exploration approach at Saltwater with a view to undertaking first-pass drilling at priority targets in the new year."

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

2

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [464 x 352] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Saltwater Project Location

==> picture [465 x 267] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Saltwater Project

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

3

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Terceira Gold Project Soil Anomalies over Magnetic signature

==> picture [405 x 295] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Polymetallic anomalism at Orichalcum prospect withing the Saltwater Basin Complex

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

4

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [410 x 289] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Anomalous REE and Telluride at the Oracle prospect within the Saltwater Basin Complex

==> picture [318 x 340] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Soil Sampling team at Terceira Gold Prospect

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

5

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [457 x 324] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Rock Chip Sampling at the Saltwater Basin Complex

==> picture [453 x 323] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8: Rock Chip Sampling at the Inkwell Ridge Prospect

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

6

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [346 x 225] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9: Inkwell Ridge Prospect

Sample ID	Easting	Northing		Significant Result	Significant Result	Significant Result		Prospect
SWS0015	653490	7356751	169ppm Cu	220ppm V				Milo
SWS0016	653490	7356801	147ppm Cu	208ppm V				Milo
SWS0017	653490	7356851	0.34% Mn					Milo
SWS0019	653465	7356801	153ppm Cu					Milo
SWS0020	653465	7356851	191ppm Cu					Milo
SWS0078	669726	7350678	283ppm Sr					Oracle
SWS0087	669776	7350778	5.4ppm U	135ppm Ni	12ppm Sb	0.27g/t Te		Oracle
SWS0088	669826	7350778	120ppm Ce	63ppm La				Oracle
SWS0090	669926	7350778	0.22g/t Te					Oracle
SWS0092	669676	7350828	1.45g/t Bi					Oracle
SWS0094	669676	7350928	295ppm Ce	160ppm La	535ppm			Oracle
SWS0095	669726	7350828	200ppm Cu	205ppm Ni	0.28g/t Te			Oracle
SWS0096	669726	7350878	0.14g/t Te					Oracle
SWS0097	669726	7350928	0.14g/t Te					Oracle
SWS0098	669776	7350828	109ppm Ni					Oracle
SWS0100	669776	7350928	138ppm Ce	72ppm La	656ppm			Oracle
SWS0102	670811	7351041	1.1% Mn	612ppm	387ppm	0.37g/t Ag	0.19% Ba	Orichalcum
SWS0104	670761	7350991	0.7% Mn	136ppm	135ppm	0.05g/t Ag	0.11% Ba	Orichalcum
SWS0106	670811	7350991	0.5% Mn	151ppm	159ppm	0.12g/t Ag	0.08% Ba	Orichalcum
SWS0109	670861	7350941	290ppm Sr	208ppm V	153ppm	4.8ppm Cs	79ppm Y	Orichalcum
SWS0111	670861	7350841	0.08% Ba					Orichalcum
SWS0120	671011	7350991	113ppm Co	117ppm	222ppm V			Orichalcum
SWS0126	671061	7350841	209ppm Cu					Orichalcum
SWS0178	629559	7373611	0.12g/t Au	443ppm				Terceira
SWS0179	629576	7373628	0.14g/t Au	371ppm				Terceira
SWS0180	629594	7373646	0.38g/t Au	356ppm				Terceira
SWS0181	629612	7373664	0.14g/t Au	204ppm				Terceira
SWS0201	629986	7373342	207ppm As					Terceira
SWS0202	630004	7373359	303ppm As					Terceira
SWS0198	629922	7373417	26g/t Ga2O3					Terceira
SWS0200	629957	7373452	24g/t Ga2O3					Terceira

Table 1: Significant Soil Sample results (GDA94 MGAz50)

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

7

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

Sample ID	Easting	Northing		Significant Result	Significant Result
AR14079	633009	7368066	982ppm Co	340ppm Ce	226ppm La	4.3% Mn	341ppm Li
AR14114	633967	7367645	1018ppm Cu
AR14088	633752.6	7367604	2.13g/t Ag
AR14197	635969.3	7366773	1258ppm As	3198ppm Ba
AR14280	680758	7346955	4577ppm Ba
AR14096	634747.7	7367195	553ppm Ce	58% Fe	22ppm U
AR14145	669341	7351641	991ppm Cu
AR14151	671928.3	7355734	891ppm Cu	1% Mn	106ppm Y
AR14251	671578.1	7352117	1006ppm Cu	556ppm As	1030ppm Pb
AR14269	671161	7350490	910ppm Cu	412ppm As	24.2ppm Mo	175ppm Sb
AR14283	682219	7347597	1324ppm Ni	660ppm Cu	102ppm Y
AR14282	681927	7347905	3850ppm V	1697ppm Cr
AR14281	681979	7347922	3403ppm Cr	1376ppm V	695ppm Sc
AR14085	633469.5	7367742	56.86% Fe
AR14093	634503.8	7367339	57.28% Fe
AR14106	631739.6	7372444	59.3% Fe
AR14107	631798	7372442	59.46% Fe
AR14123	635017.3	7367148	55.28% Fe
AR14156	669942.5	7355671	55.53% Fe
AR14164	653545.8	7356865	62.23% Fe
AR14176	637092.2	7366391	59.62% Fe
AR14177	636912.2	7366626	55.16% Fe
AR14178	636939.2	7366670	56.2% Fe
AR14179	636869.6	7366724	59.7% Fe
AR14180	636835	7366725	59.38% Fe
AR14181	636722.6	7366733	60.05% Fe
AR14182	636606.2	7366750	58.02% Fe
AR14183	636588.5	7366758	57.11% Fe
AR14184	636573.2	7366761	57.66% Fe
AR14186	636520.1	7366767	55.92% Fe
AR14187	636346.8	7366810	56.44% Fe
AR14188	636397.8	7366784	55.36% Fe
AR14189	636368.7	7366795	57.76% Fe
AR14199	635898.3	7366902	55.46% Fe
AR14200	635942.7	7366889	55.11% Fe
AR14286	688970.2	7351926	56.86% Fe

Table 2: Significant Rock Chip results (GDA94 MGAz50)

Background to soil sampling program

Aruma’s ongoing soil sampling campaign was undertaken as a strategic follow-up to initial results from anomalous samples, and results to date have effectively demonstrated its value in a complex geological setting.

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

8

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

Samples have been collected based on prior targeting achieved through the integration of geophysical, radiometric, geological, and structural data. The efficacy of the soil sampling methods in refining potential drilling locations has been notably apparent.

Moving forward, the soil sampling strategy will be deployed to scrutinize the anomalous rock chip results. This methodical approach will be deployed to thoroughly evaluate the remaining 70% of the project area, which remains largely underexplored.

The continuation of this systematic exploration approach is designed to ensure more targeted and efficient drill planning for Aruma’s planned first pass drilling at priority targets at the Saltwater Project.

Next Steps

Based on the key areas of interest defined to date, the Company plans to define and model geochemical and geophysical targets. This preparatory work is crucial for the commencement of our first phase of drilling, currently being planned for 2024.

Aruma has also commenced a hyperspectral and machine learning study, aimed at fast tracking our modelling and drill targeting in preparation for the planned first phase of drilling. It also plans to undertake ground gravity surveys over coming months to delineate targets at depth.

Background to Saltwater Project

The Saltwater Project was originally pegged by Aruma in 2020 for its gold prospectivity, and exploration at the Project was initially gold-focused and included two phases of reverse circulation (RC) drilling within a targeted area of the Project.

The Company subsequently undertook an assessment of historic exploration within the Project area, which revealed REE, base metals, gold and uranium results from previous explorers in the Saltwater region. This included the high REE assays results previously reported by U308.

U308’s exploration also delivered grades of up to 3.1% Cu (copper), 1.4% Pb (lead), 1.5% V (vanadium) and 2 g/t Au (gold) in samples from costeans at the Nobbys prospect. Aruma is pursuing the multi-commodity potential of the Project area in its fieldwork programs.

More recently, Dreadnought has accumulated a significant landholding at its Bresnahan Project, immediately adjacent to Aruma’s Saltwater Project area. Dreadnaught has delivered highly encouraging initial REE exploration results, with significant light and heavy REE results returned from reconnaissance surface samples along major basement structures (DRE: ASX announcement, 8 February 2023).

The exploration model for the U is the Unconformity model (Figure 8). The prospective stratigraphy sits below the Bresnahan-Wyloo Unconformity of which the Saltwater Project has approximately 80km of strike.

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

9

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [482 x 190] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8: Unconformity model being utilised at Saltwater in the exploration for REE

This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Aruma Resources Ltd.

ENDS

For further information, please contact:

Glenn Grayson James Moses Managing Director Investor Relations Aruma Resources Limited Mandate Corporate Telephone: +61 8 9321 0177 Mobile: +61 420 991 574 E: info@arumaresources.com E: james@mandatecorporate.com.au

About Aruma Resources

Aruma Resources Limited (ASX: AAJ) is an ASX-listed minerals exploration company focused on the exploration and development of a portfolio of prospective gold and lithium projects, strategically located in major, active mineralised belts in Western Australia. Its core assets include the Mt Deans Lithium Project in the lithium corridor of south-eastern WA, the Salmon Gums Gold Project in the Eastern Goldfields and the multi-commodity Saltwater Project in the Pilbara region.

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

10

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

Competent person statement

The information in this release that relates to Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Glenn Grayson who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscience (AIG). Mr Grayson is Managing Director and a full-time employee of the Company. Mr Grayson has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserve’. Mr Grayson consents to the inclusion in the release of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. All exploration results reported have previously been released to ASX and are available to be viewed on the Company website www.arumaresurces.com. The Company confirms it is not aware of any new information that materially affects the information included in the original announcement. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original announcements.

Forwood Looking Statement

Certain statements contained in this document constitute forward looking statements. Such forwardlooking statements are based on a number of estimates and assumptions made by the Company and its consultants in light of experience, current conditions and expectations of future developments which the Company believes are appropriate in the current circumstances. These estimates and assumptions while considered reasonable by the Company are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, achievements and performance of the Company to be materially different from the future results and achievements expressed or implied by such forwardlooking statements. Forward looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements preceded by words such as “planned”, “expected”, “projected”, “estimated”, “may”, “scheduled”, “intends”, “anticipates”, “believes”, “potential”, “could”, “nominal”, “conceptual” and similar expressions. There can be no assurance that Aruma plans to develop exploration projects that will proceed with the current expectations. There can be no assurance that Aruma will be able to conform the presence of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves, that any mineralisation will prove to be economic and will be successfully developed on any of Aruma’s mineral properties. Investors are cautioned that forward looking information is no guarantee of future performance and accordingly, investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

11

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [346 x 502] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9: Aruma’s project portfolio

==> picture [38 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

12

www.arumaresources.com

Saltwater JORC 2012 Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

The following data is in relation to Soil Sampling Techniques used in the announcement

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	• Soil samples were collected by Aruma staff and submitted for analysis. Soil samples were taken from a depth of approximately 20cm by spade on a predetermined line and sample spacing. The samples were sieved in the field to 2mm aiming for 300g of sample. The 300g samples were then dispatched to Perth to Intertek Genalysis Pty Ltd facilities in Perth. • Soil sampling grids were designed to provide vectors to mineralisation, with each grid location determined by existing nearby rock chip anomalies. • No mineralisation was directly observed in the soil samples and determination of anomalism is dependent on lab analysis. • Soil sample analysis was completed by Intertek Genalysis, the process of the sample analysis included oven drying (105-110 degrees Celsius), crushing (<-2mm to <-6mm), pulversing (<- 75µm to <-105µm) and split to obtain a representative 10gram catchweight sample for 33 Element (including Gold) Aqua Regia digest with ICP-MS finish.
Drilling techniques	• Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core _is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.). _	• No drilling undertaken
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	• No drilling undertaken

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography. • The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged.	• No drilling undertaken
Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • 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.	• Soil samples were collected by Aruma staff and submitted for analysis. Soil samples were taken from a depth of approximately 20cm by spade on a predetermined line and sample spacing. The samples were sieved in the field to 2mm aiming for 300g of sample. The 300g samples were then dispatched to Perth to Intertek Genalysis Pty Ltd facilities in Perth.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, 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 (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) andprecision have been established.	• Soil sample analysis was completed by Intertek Genalysis (Intertek is a certified Analytical Laboratory), the process of the sample analysis included oven drying (105-110 degrees Celsius), crushing (<-2mm to <-6mm), pulversing (<-75µm to <-105µm) and split to obtain a representative 10gram catchweight sample for 33 Element (including Gold) Aqua Regia digest with ICP-MS finish.
Verification of sampling and assaying	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	• Soil samples and geological information is captured in Avenza and coordinates and track data saved from handheld GPSs used in the field. • Field data is entered into excel spreadsheets to be loaded into a MX deposit database.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down- hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	• All sample locations were recorded with a Garmin handheld GPS which has an accuracy of +/- 5m. GDA94 MGAz50.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• Sample spacing and distribution is not sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for a Mineral Resource.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• At this early stage of exploration, mineralisation thickness’s, orientation and dips are not known
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• All geochemical samples were collected, bagged and sealed by Aruma staff and delivered by secured freight directly to Intertek Laboratory in Maddington
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	• No audits were completed on the Saltwater project. • Sampling methodologies are considered industry best practice. • The program is continuously reviewed by Senior Aruma personnel.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	• The Saltwater Project, 120km SW of Newman is managed, explored and maintained by Aruma Resources. • The project contains four exploration licenses (EL52/3818, EL52/3846, EL52/3857 and EL52/3966) and covers a total area pf 450km² • All tenements are 100% owned by Aruma Resources. • All work was done under POW’s • Aruma has agreements in place with the Native Title holders the Jidi Jidi Aboriginal Corporation.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• The reports are acknowledged in the announcement and is numbered as an A report in Minedex
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Saltwater Project is located over Wyloo Group metasediments and the Bresnahan Group in the Ashburton Basin. • The Saltwater Project is prospective for orogenic gold, volcanogenic base-metals and unconformity related REEs.
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.	• No drilling reported

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade 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.	• No drilling results reported. • All results greater than 0.1% TREO or base metals (Co, Cu, Pb, Zn) and 0.1g/t Au have been reported. • No metal equivalents reported
Relationship between mineralisati on widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• No drilling reported.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of 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.	• Refer to the figures within this report
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should bepracticed to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	• Public reporting of exploration results by Aruma and past tenement holders and explorers are considered balanced.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• Suitable commentary of the geology encountered are given within the text of this document.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• Geological mapping • Surface sampling • Geophysical re-evaluation • RC and Diamond Drilling