ARUMA RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2024

Sep 10, 2024

ASX Announcement 11 September 2024

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

The Manager

ASX Limited (“ASX”)

Market Announcement Office

Replacement - Multiple high-grade copper results and antimony at Fiery Creek Project

On 10 September 2024, Aruma Resources Limited (Aruma or the Company) (ASX: AAJ) released an announcement regarding recent surface sampling at the Fiery Creek Project.

Aruma now releases a replacement version of that announcement which contains additional information in the JORC Table 1 with regard to the recent surface sampling program. There are no changes to the main body of the announcement.

Authorised by

Phillip MacLeod

Company Secretary

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 projects in high-demand commodities – copper and uranium - in world-class mineral belts, in South Australia and Queensland. It also holds gold, lithium and REE prospective projects in Western Australia.

Aruma Resources Ltd ACN 141 335 364 ASX: AAJ

Business Office 1[st] Floor, 2 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005

Issued Capital 222,058,172 Shares 54,930,003 Listed options 68,500,000 Unlisted options

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

T: + 61 8 9321 0177 E: info@arumaresources.com

www.arumaresources.com

ASX Announcement 11 September 2024

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

Multiple high-grade copper results and antimony at Fiery Creek Project – JORC Table 1 Update

Highlights

• Initial Surface Sampling Program returns multiple very high-grade copper assay results at Fiery Creek Copper Project in the Mt Isa copper belt, Queensland

• Results from the Piper prospect covering over 600m of strike include; 11.83% Cu, 11.53% Cu, 9.95% Cu and 9.53% Cu

• Highly encouraging antimony results also returned including; 10,883ppm Sb, 2,305ppm Sb and 2,035ppm Sb – along with high-grade silver assays up to 31.3g/t Ag

• Historical exploration at Fiery Creek also returned very high-grade copper rock chip samples including; 36% Cu, 25.4% Cu and 15.2% Cu (ASX announcement 30 July 2024)

• Data generated from soil sampling to date indicates strong copper anomalism across the Fiery Creek Project, beyond the initial Piper and Fiery Creek targets

• The under-explored Fiery Creek Project displays geological features favourable for copper deposits and is an exploration priority for Aruma

• Next steps: detailed ground gravity surveys to better define drill targets to commence this month followed by an IP survey at the Piper prospect planned for October

Aruma Resources Limited ( ASX: AAJ ) ( Aruma or the Company ) is pleased to announce high-grade copper assay results from its initial surface sampling program at the Fiery Creek Copper Project in the Mt Isa copper belt, in northern Queensland.

The first-phase sampling program provides initial confirmation of the Project’s exploration potential. Results come from the priority Piper prospect in the north-west of the Project area, and include multiple very high-grade copper samples along with high-grade silver results (Figure 1). Highlight results include;

• 11.83% Cu, 17.7g/t Ag: AR28585

• 11.53% Cu, 18.8 g/t Ag and 0.3% Zn: AR28586

• 9.95% Cu, 31.3g/t Ag; AR28582

• 9.53% Cu: AR28580

• 4.02% Cu, 20.8g/t Ag: AR28584

• 2.10% Cu, 31.3g/t Ag: AR28581

The sampling program also returned encouraging antimony (Sb) results including; 10,883ppm Sb in AR28586, 2,305ppm Sb in AR28583 and 2,035ppm Sb in AR28585.

Aruma Resources Ltd Issued Capital ACN 141 335 364 222,058,172 Shares ASX: AAJ 54,930,003 Listed options 68,500,000 Unlisted options

Business Office Board and Management 1[st] Floor, 2 Richardson Street JAMES MOSES – Non-Executive Chairman West Perth WA 6005 GLENN GRAYSON – Managing Director T: + 61 8 9321 0177 BRETT SMITH – Non-Executive Director E: info@arumaresources.com

www.arumaresources.com

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

Aruma Resources managing director Glenn Grayson said:

“The multiple high-grade copper results, along with the silver and antimony mineralisation returned at the Piper target from our initial surface sampling program provide early confirmation of the Fiery Creek Project’s exploration potential. These results, in conjunction with historic exploration results, help provide key base-line data for our next phase of field work. Ground-based geophysical surveys are planned in the coming weeks, with the aim of defining targets for a maiden drilling program. Also of significant, wider importance is that the data generated from soil sampling to date indicates strong copper anomalism across the Fiery Creek Project, beyond the initial Piper and Fiery Creek targets.”

==> picture [510 x 494] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Geology map of the Piper Prospect at the Fiery Creek Project (GDA20 z54) showing AAJ’s sample results plus historic drilling results.

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

2

www.arumaresources.com

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

Sample rocks from the Piper prospect (Figures 2, 3) highlight the potential for copper mineralisation with supporting antimony, sliver and arsenic (As), with an outcropping cross-cutting quartz breccia mapped for 700m. The breccia is terminated by a tertiary creek system to the east. This is an excellent example of the prospectivity of Fiery Creek, and also underlines the need for appropriate base data to help interpret other prospective structural traps for copper under cover.

==> picture [393 x 297] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Sample AR28581, Piper prospect quartz breccia. Assays of 9.5% Cu and 1.7g/t Ag. Field of view; 5cm.

==> picture [375 x 242] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Sample AR28585, Piper prospect. Assays of 11.5% Cu, 18.8 g/t Ag and 1.1% Sb. Sample is ~400m north of quartz breccia outcrop. Sample is 14cm in length.

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

3

www.arumaresources.com

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

Aruma also completed sampling at the Fiery Creek prospect in the south of the Project area. See Table 1 for all sample results in Aruma’s initial sampling program.

Next Steps

Aruma recently completed the acquisition of the Fiery Creek Copper Project (EPM 27879) (ASX announcement 7 August 2024). It has implemented a systematic exploration strategy at the Project, and initial mapping and surface sampling programs have commenced, with the first results reported in this announcement. This work is planned to continue across the project area.

Broad scale gravity and magnetic surveys have been conducted at the Fiery Creek area. This data is sparse and does not contain the resolution needed for prospect scale targeting. Aruma is planning detailed ground-based geophysical surveys that will begin in the coming weeks, to complement existing geophysical data and help better understand the structure and alteration systems present within the tenure. These surveys include;

• Ground gravity survey to target the Piper and Fiery Creek prospects, which will collect data on a 400m by 50m spacing on a north south orientation; and an

• Induced Polarisation (IP) survey to be completed over the Piper prospect, comprising three lines across the interpreted quartz breccia.

The objective of these programs is to deliver drill-ready targets for a maiden drilling program at the Fiery Creek Project (subject to results).

In parallel, access agreements with relevant pastoralists and registered native title bodies required to facilitate drilling and other ground disturbing work will be progressed as a priority.

Fiery Creek Project - Commentary

The Fiery Creek Project is strategically located within the Mt Isa Inlier in northern Queensland. The geology of the Project is known to host deposits in other parts of the Mount Isa inlier, and the structural complexity of the Fiery Creek area (Figure 5) is seen as an indicator of the Project’s exploration potential.

Beyond the Piper and Fiery Creek prospects, which have been the target of Aruma’s initial sampling program, there are very elevated copper values and strong copper anomalism across the Project area. This is shown in Figure 4, a geochemical image generated from copper soil sampling data compiled at the Fiery Creek project area to date, which highlights the under explored copper potential of the wider project area.

The southern half of the Fiery Creek Project contains outcropping Proterozoic carbonate sediments that are a common target for Mount Isa-style copper mineralisation.

The northern half of the Project is observed to have significant recent transported (Tertiary) cover, and surface sampling over this transported material (Wondoola beds) has been largely ineffective. There is also a lack of detailed geophysics to use for targeting in the northern part of the Project. As such, the copper anomalism indicated in the geochemical image (Figure 4) is significant in highlighting the copper prospectivity of the wider Project area.

Historical exploration at Fiery Creek has yielded very high-grade copper results in surface rock chip sampling, including; 36% Cu in sample FCR547 and 36% Cu (FCR534) by Sumitomo at the Fiery Creek Prospect, and 25.4% Cu (11502) at the Twilight prospect and 15.2% Cu (10733) and 7.5% Cu (10708) at the Hellfire prospect by Anglo American (AAJ: ASX announcement 30 July 2024).

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

4

www.arumaresources.com

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

==> picture [461 x 651] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Geochemical image of copper soil sampling data at Fiery Creek Project to date, showing elevated Cu values across the Fiery Creek Project area.

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

5

www.arumaresources.com

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

The Piper prospect was discovered by MIM Holdings in 1995. Five holes were drilled into the target with all holes intersecting copper mineralisation (AAJ: ASX Announcement 30 July 2024). No groundbased geophysics were undertaken by MIM, and the prospect has remained unexplored for 29 years, since MIM’s initial work.

Table 1: Assay results for all samples taken in recently completed surface sampling program at Mt Isa Projects. Datum: DGA94 z54.

==> picture [504 x 200] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Sample Id Project Prospect East North Ag ppm As ppm Cu % Pb ppm Zn ppm
AR28580 Fiery Creek Piper 303530 7908164 1.7 191 9.5 4 125
AR28581 Fiery Creek Piper 303590 7908147 31.3 579 2.1 22 320
AR28582 Fiery Creek Piper 303645 7908123 7.0 87 9.9 27 87
AR28583 Fiery Creek Piper 303700 7908098 7.8 251 1.6 6 138
AR28584 Fiery Creek Piper 303819 7907971 20.8 307 4.0 54 474
AR28585 Fiery Creek Piper 304062 7908410 17.7 516 11.8 30 229
AR28586 Fiery Creek Piper 303697 7908104 18.8 15874 11.5 40 3027
AR28587 Fiery Creek Hellfire 309668 7891847 0.2 52 0.1 13 28
AR28597 Fiery Creek Fiery Creek 307571 7888091 7.1 3011 2.2 613 31
AR28598 Fiery Creek Fiery Creek 307592 7888108 5.8 424 0.4 189 23
AR28599 Fiery Creek Fiery Creek 307585 7888108 1.5 6691 2.6 1106 33
AR28600 Fiery Creek Falcon 303612 7913098 0.4 158 0.0 21 268
AR28601 Fiery Creek Falcon 303534 7913308 0.4 236 0.0 10 434
----- End of picture text -----

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 projects in high-demand commodities – copper and uranium - in world-class mineral belts, in South Australia and Queensland. It also holds gold, lithium and REE prospective projects in Western Australia.

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

6

www.arumaresources.com

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

==> picture [461 x 662] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Geology map of Fiery Creek Project showing recent rock chip copper results outside those reported from the Piper prospect (which are shown in Figure 1).

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

7

www.arumaresources.com

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

==> picture [455 x 377] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Aruma Resources project portfolio including Wilan IOCG-Uranium Project, South Australia and Fiery Creek and Bortala Copper Projects, Queensland.

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.

Forward 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

==> picture [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

8

www.arumaresources.com

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

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 [49 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

9

www.arumaresources.com

Fiery Creek JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Results reported here are not being used towards Mineral Resource Estimate or Reserve calculations.

Criteria JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (eg 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 (eg ‘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 (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

Drilling Drilling at Piper has been undertaken by MIM in 1992 (5 RC holes, 668m) and 1994 (2 RC holes, 300m; 2 RC pre-collared DD holes, 461m). MIM Exploration 1992/1994 Reverse Circulation/Diamond Drilling Sample Representivity • Where targeting known mineralisation, most holes are oriented appropriately to give optimal sample representivity, drilled mostly perpendicular to the interpreted strike and dip of the mineralised body and oriented towards the target mineralised horizon/structure; however downhole widths will in most instances not represent true widths. • 2m composite samples were obtained for RC (complete holes and precollars) and 1m for diamond core samples by unknown methods. • All holes were sampled in their entirety except AD027PD where the diamond tail was sampled approximately every 3m by 1m sample intervals. • Sampling procedures have not been found. • Laboratory preparation methods are unknown. • No field duplicates data has been found. Assaying • 1992 samples were submitted to Analabs, Townsville and assayed for Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Co, Cd, Mn, Ni, Fe by perchloric acid digest, AAS finish (Lab Code: 140). 1994 samples were assayed for Cu, Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, Co, and As by Aqua Regia/perchloric acid digest, ICP-OES finish (Lab Code: GA142). The assay techniques are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation being reported.

10

Criteria JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Surface Sampling Rock chips were collected by Aruma staff and submitted for analysis. Rock chips are random and subject to bias. Rock chips have been collected by Aruma to assist in characterising different lithologies, alterations and expressions of mineralisation. In many instances, several rock chips were collected from a single location to assist with characterising and understanding the different lithologies, alterations and expressions of mineralisation present at the locality. Rock chips were submitted to Intertek Laboratories for determination of 48 elements by four acid digest and ICP-MS (Intertek Method 4A/MS48) and gold only analysis using Lead Collection Fire Assay with ICP-OES finish (Intertek Method FA50/OE04. Historical surface sampling programs at Piper have included sampling by AMAX in 1975 and Shell in 1983. More recent sampling was completed by MIM Exploration in 1992. Rock chip Sampling MIM Exploration 1992 Rock chip Sampling • MIM Exploration collected 3 rock chip samples of unknown type (e.g., whether outcrop, subcrop, float) from mineralised and altered material over 300m of strike on a single trend. Samples were mainly of silicified and brecciated siltstone with qtz/dolomite veining and CuOx staining. Samples were submitted to Analabs, Townsville and assayed for Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Co, Cd, Mn, Ni by Aqua Regia/Perchloric acid digest with AAS finish (Lab Code:140). Sample preparation methods are unknown. The assay techniques are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation being reported.

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole	Drilling
techniques	hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or	•	No drilling undertaken in the most recent exploration undertaken			by Aruma.
	standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-	•	MIM are the only company to have completed drilling at Piper Prospect.
	sampling bit or other type, whether core is	•	Drilling details are summarised in the table below.
	oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	•	RC drilling was by face sampling bit and drill core by HQ, which are considered industry
			standard techniques.
		•	Core drilling by MIM was oriented by unknown method.
			Company Hole Year No. of	Drill Comp/Rig		Hole Size/Core
			Type Drillholes			Size
			MIM RC 1992 5	Pontill/Warman			NR
				1000
			MIM RC 1994 2	Pontill/Warman			NR
				1000
			MIM DD 1994 2	Pontill/Warman			HQ
				1000
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip	Drilling
recovery	sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery	MIM Exploration 1992/1994
	and ensure representative nature of the samples.	•	Drilling RC sample recovery and sample moisture is unknown and as such no assessment of
	• Whether a relationship exists between sample		bias can be made.
	recovery and grade and whether sample bias	•	No record of core recovery has been found and as such no assessment				of bias can be
	may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain		undertaken.
	of fine/coarse material.
		•	The lack of recovery data is not considered material given the results are being used as an
			indication of mineralisation for potential follow-up work and not		being used in mineral
			resource or reserve calculations.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been	Drilling
	geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource	MIM Exploration 1992
	estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	•	Drilling has been logged in its entirety.
	studies.	•	All drillhole logging has been handwritten onto pre-prepared paper logging templates.

12

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	Qualitative information on lithology, oxidation, veining, mineralisation, and alteration has been recorded. MIM Exploration 1994 • Drilling has been logged in its entirety. • All drillhole logging has been compiled into formatted electronic logging templates. Qualitative information on lithology, oxidation, veining, mineralisation, and alteration has been recorded. • Quantitative structural measurements have been recorded for drill core. • No core photography has been found. Surface Sampling Rock chip Sampling Rock types have been interpreted in the field by geologists with experience in the Mount Isa terrains and with industry experience to understand the alteration and mineral systems of the inlier. MIM Exploration 1992 Rock chip Sampling • All rock chip logging has been handwritten onto logging sheets. Qualitative information such as lithology, alteration, veining, and mineralisation have been recorded.
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.	Drilling MIM Exploration 1992/1994 • Site and laboratory sampling methods are unknown and no procedures have been found. RC drillholes and precollars are considered to have most likely been sampled by spear. As such no comment can be made as to the appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • All samples were sent to Analabs, Townsville for sample preparation and analysis. • No record of field or lab duplicates has been found. • Sample weights are unknown. Surface Sampling Rock chip Sampling Entire rock chips were submitted by Aruma staff to the lab for sample prep and analysis.

13

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	MIM Exploration 1992 Rock chip Sampling • Sampling techniques and weights are unknown. As such no comment can be made as to the appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Sample preparation was undertaken by Analabs, Townville using unknown methods. • It is unknown whether duplicate samples were taken.
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 (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	Drilling • Aruma Resources have not undertaken QAQC analysis of any historic drilling data. MIM Exploration 1992/1994 • 1992 samples were submitted to Analabs, Townsville and assayed for Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Co, Cd, Mn, Ni, Fe by perchloric acid digest, AAS finish (Lab Code: 140). 1994 samples were assayed for Cu, Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, Co, and As by Aqua Regia/perchloric acid digest, ICP-OES finish (Lab Code: GA142). • QAQC procedures have not been found. It is unknown what company QAQC practices were utilised. Therefore, the data should be used with caution. • Given the era of drilling and labs utilised, it is likely that internal quality control measures including the use of internal Standards, Control Blanks and duplicates/repeats was undertaken although no assay certificates have been located. • No QAQC analysis of internal lab or company CRM by MIM has been found. Therefore, the data should be used with caution. • The lack of QAQC data is not considered material given the results are being used as an indication of mineralisation for potential follow-up work and not being used in mineral resource or reserve calculations. Surface Sampling • Aruma Resources have not undertaken QAQC analysis of any historic rock chip data. Rock chip Sampling Samples have been analysed by Intertek Genalysis. Sample preparation included oven drying (105°C), (<-2mm to <-6mm), pulverising (<-75µm to <-105µm) and split to obtain a representative sample. Samples are then digested using4-Acid,offeringa near total dissolution

14

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		of almost all mineral species. The 4-Acid Digest utilises an ICP-OES finish for 48 elements from
		Ag-Zr.
		No standards, duplicates or blanks submitted with rock chips.
		Aruma Resources have not undertaken QAQC analysis of any historic rock chip data.
		MIM Exploration 1992 Rock chip Sampling
		• Samples were submitted to Analabs, Townsville and assayed for Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Co, Cd, Mn,
		Ni by Aqua Regia/Perchloric acid digest with AAS finish (Lab Code:140). Sample preparation
		methods are unknown.
		• QAQC procedures have not been found. It is unknown what company QAQC practices were
		utilised. Therefore, the data should be used with caution.
		• Given the era of drilling and labs utilised, it is likely that internal quality control measures
		including the use of internal Standards, Control Blanks and duplicates/repeats was
		undertaken although no assay certificates have been located.
		• No MIM QAQC analysis on internal or company CRM’s have been identified. Therefore, the
		data should be used with caution.
		• The lack of QAQC data is not considered material given the results are being used as an
		indication of mineralisation for potential follow-up work.
Verification	• The verification of significant intersections by	Drilling
of sampling and assaying	either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes.	• Intersections have been checked against available source data where possible noting that large amounts of source data such as assay certificates are not available. As a result, Aruma
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry	Resources are only using available data as indications of potential mineralisation for
	procedures, data verification, data storage	potential future targeting.
	(physical and electronic) protocols.	• No adjustments have been applied to the results.
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	• No twin holes have been completed.
		Surface Sampling
		Rock chip and geological information is captured in GPS with co-ordinates and track data saved
		in handheld units. Aruma geologists have captured and inspected all the chips.
		Field data is entered into excel spreadsheets to be loaded into a database

15

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	MIM Exploration 1992 • No verification of the assay results has been undertaken. • No adjustments have been made to the assay data.
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.	Drilling MIM Exploration 1992/1994 • Drill collar survey method is unknown. • Drill collars (X,Y) have been draped to open source ALOS DEM (+/-5m) which is considered adequate topographic control for first pass exploration data. • AGD84 datum/AMG66 Zone 54 projection was used in coordinates provided with data. • RC drillholes were not downhole surveyed. Diamond holes were surveyed at irregular intervals using an Eastman single shot camera. No record of magnetic susceptibilities have been found that would allow assessment of the quality of the azimuth readings. Surface Sampling Rock chip Sampling All sample locations were recorded with a Garmin handheld GPS which has an accuracy of +/- 5m. GDA20 MGAz54 MIM Exploration 1992 Rock chip Sampling MIM Exploration 1999 Rock chip Sampling • Rock chip sample location method is unknown. • Sample locations (X,Y) have been draped to open source ALOS DEM (+/-5m) which is considered adequate topographic control for first pass exploration data. • Sample locations were recorded in AGD84 datum/AMG84 projection was used in coordinates provided with data.
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.	Drilling • Data spacing is sufficient for the reporting of results. Drillhole spacing is variable reflecting the early exploration nature of the drilling completed. • No Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve estimations are being reported.

16

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• No sample compositing has been applied. Surface Sampling Rock chip Sampling Sample spacing and distribution is not sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for a mineral Resource. AMAX 1975, Shell 1983, MIM Exploration 1992 Rock chip Sampling • Data spacing is variable due to the inherent irregular nature of outcrops and has been determined by the supervising geologist. • No sample compositing has been applied.
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.	Drilling • Most holes are oriented appropriately to give optimal sample representivity, drilled mostly perpendicular to the interpreted strike and dip of the mineralised body and oriented towards the target mineralised horizon/structure; however downhole widths will in most instances not represent true widths. Surface Sampling Rock chip Sampling At this early stage of exploration, mineralisation thickness’s, orientation and dips are not known. • Historic Rock chip sampling is conducted along targeted structures or outcrops determined by the supervising geologist and assisted by pre-made field maps and surveyed grids.
Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Drilling • Sample security practices are unknown for all programs. Surface Sampling All geochemical samples in the most recent program were collected, bagged and sealed by Aruma Staff and delivered directly to Intertek • Sample security procedures are unknown for historic programs.

17

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling	•	No review or audits have taken place of the data being reported.
reviews	techniques and data.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and	•	The Fiery Creek Project is located ~200km north of Mt Isa, and south of the small township of
tenement and	ownership including agreements or material		Gregory. EPM28271 is ~300km2
land tenure status	issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties,	•	There are no known impediments to Aruma being able to explore the Fiery Creek project.
	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.
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of	•	Aruma Resources have completed a search of historical open file reports available from GSQ
done by other	exploration by other parties.		to compile an exploration history.
parties		•	A mix of gold, copper, lead and zinc exploration has been undertaken in the region over the
			past 60 years. The historical exploration work has generated indications of copper and zinc
			from surface geochemical sampling and drilling.
		•	Other companies to have undertaken exploration at Fiery Creek include BHP, MIM,
			Sumitomo and Rio Tinto. The fine-grained carbonate rocks of the area are considered
			prospective for Isa style base metal mineralisation and for this reason the large companies
			have held the ground previously.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of	•	The Fiery Creek Project is located in the Western Fold Belt of the Mt Isa Inlier, a world-class
	mineralisation.		metallogenic province. The project area includes rocks of the McNamara Group known to
			host the Mt Isa, Esperanza, Lady Annie, Lady Loretta, and Mt Oxide mines.
		•	Deposit style being explored for are sedimentary hosted Mt Isa style mineralisation (Cu, Zn,
			Pb, Ag).

18

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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 was below.	undertaken in the recent surface sampling program. Historical drill hole i						nformation is Hole Depth (m) 118 118 112 118 120 150 212 249 150
	Hole ID	Easting MGA94 Zone 55	Northing MGA94 Zone 55	RL	Dip	Azimuth MGA94	Hole Depth (m)
	AD007PR	303400	7908242	130	-70	174	118
	AD008R	303522	7908233	130	-70	174	118
	AD009R	303649	7908163	130	-70	174	112
	AD010R	303711	7908091	130	-70	174	118
	AD011R	303839	7908010	130	-70	174	120
	AD025P	303542	7908363	125	-90	360	150
	AD026PD	303638	7908590	120	-70	179	212
	AD027PD	303649	7908727	120	-70	181	249
	AD028P	303966	7908583	116	-90	360	150
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 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. • For surface sampling results there was no data aggregations applied with all results being reported. • No metal equivalent values are used. • All intervals have been length weighted averaged.

19

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Relationship	• These relationships are particularly	• Surface samples are points of sampling and do not represent widths of mineralisation or intercept
between	important in the reporting of Exploration	lengths.
mineralisation	Results.	• The geometry of the mineralisation to the drillhole is in many cases not well established and only
widths and	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with	downhole lengths are reported within historical reports.
intercept	respect to the drill hole angle is known, its
lengths	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 (eg ‘down hole
	_length, true width not known’). _
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with	• Please refer to the accompanying document for figures and maps for locations of surface
	scales) and tabulations of intercepts should	sampling (figures 1, 4 and 5).
	be included for any significant discovery	• Maps and sections for previously reported drilling are available in the Aruma release dated 29 July
	being reported These should include, but	2024.
	not be limited to a plan view of drill hole
	collar locations and appropriate sectional
	views.
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all	• Results of all surface samples at Fiery Creek are set out in Table 1 of the release above.
reporting	Exploration Results is not practicable,	• Representative reporting of low and high grades has been delivered within this report.
	representative reporting of both low and	• Intersection lengths and grades are reported as down-hole, length weighted averages.
	high grades and/or widths should be	• Refer to the list of significant drill hole results in the accompanying report. All significant results
	practiced to avoid misleading reporting of	using the criteria described above.
	Exploration Results.
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and	• Refer to Aruma news release dated: 29 July 2024 – High-grade copper assays at Fiery Creek
substantive	material, should be reported including (but	Project.
exploration	not limited to): geological observations;
data	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.

20