CASTILE RESOURCES LTD — Regulatory Filings 2021

Aug 5, 2021

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

BROAD HIGH GRADE COPPER ZONE IN ASSAYS FROM ROVER 1

Castile Resources Limited ( ASX:CST ) ( “Castile” or “the Company” ) is pleased to advise that assays from the latest hole at Rover 1 have continued the excellent results from the IOCG (iron-oxide- copper gold system).

21CRD002-1 has reinforced the success of 21CRD002, intersecting two zones of material gold grades, and six individual zones of high-grade copper. These results support the evolving geological and mineralisation model at Rover 1 put forward by Castile’s geological team and add to the building metal inventory defined at Rover 1. Significant intersections included:

11m @ 2.2% Cu with 0.9g/t Au and 2.2g/t Ag from 571m downhole Incl. 1.8m @ 5.4% Cu with 2.1g/t Au, 0.1% Bi and 4g/t Ag from 573.97m downhole

==> picture [469 x 326] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

Mark Hepburn, Castile’s Managing Director said “It goes without saying that we’re extremely pleased with what is now a solid trend of Castile drilling returning results that not only confirm our revised interpretation of the form and extent of the mineralised pods at Rover 1, but continue to expand the footprint of the resource. What I’m particularly pleased with in regard to 21CRD002-1 is the 3 for 1 nature of the results from this hole. 21CRD0021 has further outlined an additional mineralised zone higher-up the system which should have a positive impact on project economics, it has also provided further support for previously unrecognised continuity between what were thought to be separate pods of high-grade mineralisation, and thirdly it has expanded the footprint of known zones of mineralisation at the base of the resource, increasing the scale of the prize. As the Rover 1 development studies approach critical mass in what remains a logistically challenging, COVID-impacted period for the greater Australian resources industry, it’s pleasing to see Castile’s technical team taking full advantage and delivering value with every hole”.

Mark Hepburn

Managing Director

Castile Resources Limited

For further information please contact: info@castile.com.au Phone: +61 89488 4480 Castile Resources Limited 7/189 St Georges Terrace Perth, WA, 6000 This announcement was approved for release by the Castile Resources Board of Directors

Competent Person Statement

The exploration results contained in this report are based on, and fairly and accurately represent the information and supporting documentation prepared by Mark Savage. Mr Savage is a full-time employee of Castile, and a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Savage has sufficient experience which 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, Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Savage consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on the exploration results in the form and context in which they appear.

The Mineral Resources contained in this announcement were first disclosed in the prospectus dated 3 December 2019 and released on the ASX market announcements platform on 12 February 2020 (“Prospectus”). Castile is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the Mineral Resources included in these announcements. All material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the Prospectus continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Forward Looking Statements

Certain statements in this report relate to the future, including forward looking statements relating to Castile’s financial position and strategy. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions, and other important factors that could cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of Castile to be materially different from future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such statements

Actual events or results may differ materially from the events or results expressed or implied in any forward-looking statement and deviations are both normal and to be expected. Other than required by law, neither Castile, their officers nor any other person gives any representation, assurance or guarantee that the occurrence of the events expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements will occur. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on those statements

6 August 2021

==> picture [138 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

Table 1: Significant Intersections from Hole 21CRD002-1

GOLD

GOLD
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	545.32	359430	7787655	295	637	-70	358	22.2m @ 1.5g/t Au with 0.5% Cu, 0.1% Bi and 3.4g/t Ag from 545.32m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	556	359430	7787655	295	637	-70	358	incl 2m @ 8.6g/t Au with 0.2% Cu, 0.7% Bi and 4g/t Ag from 556m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	571.8	359430	7787655	295	637	-70	358	19.1m @ 0.7g/t Au with 1.3% Cu, 0% Bi and 1.8g/t Ag from 571.8m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	573.97	359430	7787655	295	637	-70	358	incl 2.3m @ 1.7g/t Au with 4.7% Cu, 0.1% Bi and 3.3g/t Ag from 573.97m downhole

COPPER

COPPER
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	426	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	4.1m @ 0.9% Cu with 0.1% Co and 0.9g/t Ag from 426m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	470	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	12m @ 0.9% Cu with 0.9g/t Ag from 470m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	510.2	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	3.4m @ 2.3% Cu with 0.3g/t Au, 0.2% Co and 0.8g/t Ag from 510.2m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	548.32	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	4.7m @ 0.7% Cu with 0.8g/t Au, 0.1% Co and 4.5g/t Ag from 548.32m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	560	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	8m @ 0.9% Cu with 1.1g/t Au, 0.1% Bi and 3.1g/t Ag from 560m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	571	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	11m @ 2.2% Cu with 0.9g/t Au and 2.2g/t Ag from 571m downhole
Rover_1	21CRD002-1	573.97	359430	7787655	295	637	- 70	358	incl 1.8m @ 5.4% Cu with 2.1g/t Au, 0.1% Bi and 4g/t Ag from 573.97m downhole

6 August 2021

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels,	• All data used in the following sections at Rover 1 has
techniques	random chips, or specific specialised industry	been gathered from diamond core. Multiple sizes
	standard measurement tools appropriate to the	have been used historically; HQ, NQ and BQ.
	minerals under investigation, such as down hole
	gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.).	• Samples are selected to lie on geological
	These examples should not be taken as limiting the	boundaries, with intervals selected of lengths
	broad meaning of sampling.	between 0.1 to 1.1m. Samples are halved using an
	• Include reference to measures taken to ensure	automatic core saw then individual samples
	sample representivity and the appropriate	collected in prenumbered calico sample bags.
	calibration of any measurement tools or systems
	used.	• To ensure representivity of analysis, field blanks and
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that	certified reference material is inserted in a nominal
	are Material to the Public Report.	ratio of 1:20 samples.
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been
	done this would be relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse	• Sample recovery is recorded on retrieval of the core
	circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples	tube, measuring recovered core against drill string
	from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g	advance. No apparent relationship has been
Drilling	charge for fire assay’). In other cases, more	observed between sample recovery and grade. No
techniques	explanation may be required, such as where there is	has sample bias due to preferential loss or gain of
	coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.	fine or coarse material been noted.
	Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g.
	submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of
	detailed information.
Drill sample	• Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole
recovery	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.).
	• 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.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been	• All geological data has been visually logged and
	geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of	validated by the relevant area geologists, recording
	detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource	lithology, alteration, mineralisation, structure,
	estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.	veining, magnetic susceptibility and geotechnical
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in	data.
	nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.)	• Logging is quantitative in nature.
	photography.	• All holes are logged completely.
	• The total length andpercentage of the relevant

6 August 2021

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	intersections logged.
Sub-	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter,	• Diamond Drilling - Half-core niche samples, sub-set
sampling	half or all core taken.	via geological	features as appropriate.
techniques	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary	• Core undergoes total preparation.
and sample	split, etc. and whether sampled wet or dry.	• For the 2021 field season, sample preparation
preparation	• For all sample types, the nature, quality and	process consists of;
	appropriateness of the sample preparation	o	Half ore samples of between 0.5 to
	technique.		3kg are whole crushed using a Boyd
	• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-		Crusher to achieve a maximum
	sampling stages to maximise representivity of		sample size of 2mm.
	samples.	o	A cone splitter is used to split 1kg of
	• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is		material which is pulverised in a
	representative of the in-situ material collected,		Keegor mill to a nominal 100µm
	including for instance results for field		particle size., then roll mixed to
	duplicate/second-half sampling.		homogenise the sample.
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain	o	The mill inserts a barren coarse flush
	size of the material being sampled.		after every sample.
		o	From the analysis sample, 40g is taken
			for fire assay, while a 0.2g potion is
			taken for acid digestion. These
			samples are extracted from the
			packet with a spatula and weighed
			out.
		• QA/QC is ensured during sampling via the use of
		sample ledgers, blanks, standards and repeats.
		• QA/QC is ensured during the assays process via the
		use of blanks, standards and repeats at a NATA / ISO
		accredited laboratory.
		• Repeatability	is performed by selecting 1:20 coarse
		reject material as field duplicates and re-assayed.
		• The sample sizes are considered appropriate to the
		grainsize of the material being sampled.
		• The un-sampled half of diamond core is retained for
		check samplingif required.
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the	• Analysis of drill core for Au, Ag, Bi, Co, Cu, Pb and Zn
assay data	assaying and laboratory procedures used and	is as follows;
and	whether the technique is considered partial or total.	o	Gold (Au-AAS scheme – lower
laboratory	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF		detection limit = 0.01ppm, upper
tests	instruments, etc., the parameters used in		detection limit = 100ppm). A 30-40g
	determining the analysis including instrument make		charge of prepared sample is fused
	and model, reading times, calibrations factors		with a mixture of lead oxide, sodium
	applied and their derivation, etc.		carbonate, borax, silica and other
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g.		reagents and then cupelled to yield a
	standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory		precious metal bead.
	checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy	o	The bead is then dissolved in acid and
	(i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been		analysed by atomic absorption
	established.		spectroscopy against matrix-matched
			standards.
		o	Samples returningassayvalues in

6 August 2021

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		excess of 100g/t Au were repeated
		using the screen-fire method.
		o Silver, bismuth, cobalt, copper, lead
		and zinc samples are digested using a
		4-acid digest.
		o The subsequent solution is analysed
		by inductively coupled plasma -
		atomic emission spectroscopy or by
		atomic absorption spectrometry.
		• No significant QA/QC issues have arisen in recent
		drilling results.
		• These assay methodologies are appropriate for the
		style of mineral deposit under consideration.
Verification	• The verification of significant intersections by either	• Anomalous intervals as well as random intervals are
of sampling	independent or alternative company personnel.	routinely checked assayed as part of the internal
and	• The use of twinned holes.	QA/QC process.
assaying	• Documentation of primary data, data entry	• Several twinned holes have been drilled with no
	procedures, data verification, data storage (physical	significant issues highlighted.
	and electronic) protocols.	• Primary data is collected on a ruggedised computer,
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	on predefined and self-validating worksheets. This
		data is imported into a relational database
		(DataShed) and is backed up regularly.
		• All data used in the calculation of resources is
		compiled in databases which are overseen and
		validated by senior geologists.
		• Noprimaryassays data is modified in anyway.
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill	• All data is spatially oriented by survey controls via
data points	holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine	direct pickups by the survey department. Drillholes
	workings and other locations used in Mineral	are all surveyed downhole. Modern holes are
	Resource estimation.	surveyed by Gyro tools.
	• Specification of the grid system used.	• All drilling and resource estimation is undertaken in
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	MGA grid.
		• Topographic control is generated from a
		combination of aerial photogrammetry and ground-
		based surveys. This methodology is considered
		adequate for the resource inquestion.
Data	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	• Drilling has been undertaken on a nominal 40x40m
spacing	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is	spacing, infilled to a nominal 20x20m spacing where
and	sufficient to establish the degree of geological and	significant mineralisation has been identified.
distribution	grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	• No compositing of primary samples is undertaken
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s)	prior to analysis.
	and classifications applied.
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves	• Drilling intersections are nominally designed to be
of data in	unbiased sampling of possible structures and the	normal to the orebody under consideration as far
relation to	extent to which this is known, considering the	topography and economics allows.
geological	deposit type.	• It is not considered that drilling orientation has
structure	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation	introduced an appreciable sampling bias.

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	and the orientation 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.	• Individual samples in calico samples are collected in
security		groups of 5 and placed into poly weave bags and
		secured with a zip-tie. All poly weave bags of a
		submission are then placed within a bulka bag,
		which is then sealed before delivery to a third-party
		transport service who provides a tracking number.
		The transport contractor then relays the samples to
		the independent laboratorycontractor.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling	• Site generated data is routinely reviewed by the
reviews	techniques and data.	Castile corporate technical team.

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and	• The Tennant Creek Project comprises 5 granted
tenement and	ownership including agreements or material issues	exploration leases.
land tenure	with third parties such as joint ventures,	• Native title interests are recorded against the
status	partnerships, overriding royalties, native title	Tennant Creek tenements.
	interests, historical sites, wilderness or national	• The Tennant Creek tenements are held by Castile
	park and environmental settings.	Resources exclusively.
	• The security of the tenure held at the time of	• Third party royalties exist across various
	reporting along with any known impediments to	tenements at Tennant Creek, over and above the
	obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	Northern Territory government royalty.
		• Castile operates in accordance with all
		environmental conditions set down as conditions
		for grant of the leases.
		• There are no known issues regarding security of
		tenure.
		• There are no known impediments to continued
		operation.
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by	• The Tennant Creek area has an exploration and
done by other	other parties.	production history in excess of 100 years.
parties		• The Rover area in particular has an intensive
		exploration history stretching from the 1970’s.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of	• The Rover Project is presently considered to be
	mineralisation.	associated with a southern repeat of the 1860-
		1850Ma Warramunga Province, in particular, the
		Paleoproterozoic Ooradidgee Formation, after
		recent geochronology work undertaken by NTGS .
		This is a weakly metamorphosed succession of
		partly tuffaceous sandstones and siltstones and
		turbidite shales. Locally the turbidite
		metasediments are variably altered by hematite
		and silica flooding.
		• Mineralisation is mainly of the Iron Ore Copper-
		Gold (IOCG) type, particularly the Tennant Creek
		sub-type. Massive ironstone comprised of
		magnetite or hematite +/-quartz is interpreted to
		be alteration of metasediments within a structural
		trap.
		• Copper manifests as of chalcopyrite, associated
		with breccia fill within magnetite-quartz ironstones
		and Jasper/BIF that often form an alteration
		transition to a chlorite alteration envelope.
		Pervasive sub-economic copper levels can persist
		throughout the zone. Economic levels of copper
		are dominantly contained in the lower massive
		magnetite zone of the ironstone bodies,
		particularlywhere intense chlorite alteration

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		replaces magnetite laterally and at depth, grading
		into magnetite chlorite stringer zones. Gold
		content is related to an increase in haematite
		dusted quartz veins, with bonanza grades
		associated with massive pyrite with subordinate
		bismuthite. Cobalt appears to have a direct
		relationship with pyrite.
		• Lead and zinc mineralisation at Explorer 108 is
		associated with a brecciated, dolomitised
		metasedimentary unit, consisting of irregular,
		generally narrow bands or veins of semi-massive
		sphalerite and galena. A basal “high-grade” zone is
		present at the contact of the altered
		metasediments and lower felsic volcaniclastic unit.
		• It is postulated that Explorer 108 mineralisation is
		an analogue of Mt Isa style base metal
		mineralisation.
Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to the	• Exploration results are presented in Tables 1 and 2
Information	understanding of the exploration results including	of the ASX release dated 24/05/2021 related to
	a tabulation of the following information for all	this edition of JORC Table 1.
	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.
Data	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting	• Results are reported on a length weighted average
aggregation	averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum	basis.
methods	grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and	• Results are reported above a 1gm Au / Au Eq. cut-
	cut-off grades are usually Material and should be	off / 1%m Pb + Zn and 1%m Cu.
	stated.	• Results reported may include up to three metres of
	• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short	internal dilution below a 0.5g/t Au / Au Eq. cut-off
	lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of	/ 0.5% Pb + Zn / 0.5%m Cu.
	low-grade results, the procedure used for such	• Metal equivalent values are reported based on the
	aggregation should be stated and some typical	ratio of prevailing commodity prices which are
	examples of such aggregations should be shown in	given above.
	detail.
	• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal
	equivalent values should be clearly stated.
Relationship	• These relationships are particularly important in	• Interval widths are reported as downhole width
between	the reporting of Exploration Results.	unless otherwise stated.
mineralisation	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect
widths and	to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
intercept	be reported.
lengths	• 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’). _
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and	• Diagrams are presented in the ASX release dated
	tabulations of intercepts should be included for any	24/05/2021 related to this edition of JORC Table 1.
	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	• Completed drilling where analysis is available is
reporting	Results is not practicable, representative reporting	reported.
	of both low and high grades and/or widths should
	be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
	Exploration Results.
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,	• Geological information related to the reported
substantive	should be reported including (but not limited to):	results is presented in the ASX release dated
exploration	geological observations; geophysical survey results;	24/05/2021 related to this edition of JORC Table
data	geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and	1.
	method of treatment; metallurgical test results;
	bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock
	characteristics; potential deleterious or
	contaminating substances.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g.	• Ongoing exploration and mine planning
	tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or	assessment continues to take place at the Rover
	large-scale step-out drilling).	Project.
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible
	extensions, including the main geological
	interpretations and future drilling areas, provided
	this information is not commercially sensitive.

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been	• No new Resource information is being
integrity	corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying	presented.
	errors, between its initial collection and its use for
	Mineral Resource estimation purposes.
	• Data validationprocedures used.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the	• Mr Savage has been on-site supervising the
	Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.	drilling program relating to the results under
	• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this	consideration.
	is the case.
Geological	• Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the	• No new Resource information is being
interpretation	geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.	presented.
	• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions
	made.
	• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on
	Mineral Resource estimation.
	• The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral
	Resource estimation.
	• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and
	_geology. _
Dimensions	• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource	• No new Resource information is being
	expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan	presented.
	width, and depth below surface to the upper and
	lower limits of the Mineral Resource.
Estimation	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation	• No new Resource information is being
and modelling	technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including	presented.
techniques	treatment of extreme grade values, domaining,
	interpolation parameters and maximum distance of
	extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted
	estimation method was chosen include a description
	of computer software and parameters used.
	• The availability of check estimates, previous estimates
	and/or mine production records and whether the
	Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account
	of such data.
	• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-
	products.
	• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade
	variables of economic significance (e.g. sulphur for
	acid mine drainage characterisation).
	• In the case of block model interpolation, the block size
	in relation to the average sample spacing and the
	search employed.
	• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining
	units.
	• Any assumptions about correlation between variables.

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• Description of how the geological interpretation was
	used to control the resource estimates.
	• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting
	or capping.
	• The process of validation, the checking process used,
	the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and
	use of reconciliation data if available.
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or	• No new Resource information is being
	with natural moisture, and the method of	presented.
	determination of the moisture content.
Cut-off	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality	• No new Resource information is being
parameters	parameters applied.	presented.
Mining factors	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining	• No new Resource information is being
or	methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal	presented.
assumptions	(or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always
	necessary as part of the process of determining
	reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction
	to consider potential mining methods, but the
	assumptions made regarding mining methods and
	parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may
	not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this
	should be reported with an explanation of the basis of
	the mining assumptions made.
Metallurgical	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding	• No new Resource information is being
factors or	metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as	presented.
assumptions	part of the process of determining reasonable
	prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider
	potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions
	regarding metallurgical treatment processes and
	parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources
	may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case,
	this should be reported with an explanation of the
	basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.
Environmental	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and	• No new Resource information is being
factors or	process residue disposal options. It is always necessary	presented.
assumptions	as part of the process of determining reasonable
	prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider
	the potential environmental impacts of the mining and
	processing operation. While at this stage the
	determination of potential environmental impacts,
	particularly for a greenfields project, may not always
	be well advanced, the status of early consideration of
	these potential environmental impacts should be
	reported. Where these aspects have not been
	considered this should be reported with an
	explanation of the environmental assumptions made.
Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the	• Bulk density of mineralisation at the Rover
	basisfor the assumptions. If determined, the method	Project is variable,dependant on lithology,

==> picture [139 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

6 August 2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the	alteration and mineralisation.
	measurements, the nature, size and	• Geological technicians perform routine density
	representativeness of the samples.	test-work on core samples of both host rock
	• The bulk density for bulk material must have been	and mineralisation.
	measured by methods that adequately account for	• Density measurements have been determined
	void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and	using the water immersion technique.
	differences between rock and alteration zones within	• Bulk density is assigned by lithology.
	the deposit.
	• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in
	the evaluationprocess of the different materials.
Classification	• The basis for the classification of the Mineral	• Resources are classified in line with JORC
	Resources into varying confidence categories.	guidelines utilising a combination of estimation
	• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all	quality parameters, and geological knowledge.
	relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in	• This approach considers all relevant factors and
	tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data,	reflects the Competent Person’s view of the
	confidence in continuity of geology and metal values,	deposit.
	quality, quantity and distribution of the data).
	• Whether the result appropriately reflects the
	Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral	• Resource estimates are peer reviewed by the
reviews	Resource estimates.	site technical team as well as Westgold’s
		Corporate technical team.
Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative	• All currently reported resources estimates are
relative	accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource	considered robust, and representative of
accuracy/	estimate using an approach or procedure deemed	deposits on a global scale.
confidence	appropriate by the Competent Person. For example,	• No production data exists to compare the
	the application of statistical or geostatistical	resource estimate against.
	procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the
	resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an
	approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative
	discussion of the factors that could affect the relative
	accuracy and confidence of the estimate.
	• The statement should specify whether it relates to
	global or local estimates, and, if local, state the
	relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to
	technical and economic evaluation. Documentation
	should include assumptions made and the procedures
	used.
	• These statements of relative accuracy and confidence
	of the estimate should be compared with production
	data, where available.