CORAZON MINING LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2021

Jul 25, 2021

==> picture [582 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 26 JULY 2021
----- End of picture text -----

CORAZON TO ACQUIRE NICKEL-SULPHIDE PROJECT IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA

• Corazon has an exclusive option to acquire the Miriam Nickel Project in the Goldfields of Western Australia.

• The Miriam Project complements Corazon’s core asset, the Lynn Lake NickelSulphide Project in Canada, and provides the opportunity to further expand its nickel inventory.

• The Miriam Nickel Deposit was discovered in 1969[(1)] – historical drilling has identified a ‘high nickel tenor’ within massive and disseminated sulphide[ (2)] .

• The nickel sulphide prospectivity of the Miriam Project is defined by broad zones of “cloud sulphide” within multiple ultramafic channel sequences, over a 2.5 kilometre strike that includes the Miriam Deposit and the Miriam North and Bouchers North nickel prospects.

• The Miriam Project hosts excellent potential along strike and at depth from known prospects – it has undergone minimal nickel exploration over the past 20 years and there is extensive untested opportunity to target nickel sulphide mineralisation

• Corazon is currently undertaking due diligence on the Miriam Project and will update the market upon its completion.

Corazon Mining Limited (ASX: CZN) (Corazon or Company) is pleased to announce it has entered into an option agreement pursuant to which it has been granted an exclusive option to acquire 100% of the Miriam Nickel Sulphide Project (Miriam or Miriam Project) near Coolgardie in Western Australia’s Goldfields minerals district.

The acquisition of the Miriam Project would complement Corazon’s core asset, the more advanced Lynn Lake Nickel-Copper-Cobalt Sulphide Project in Canada.

Miriam is a highly prospective nickel exploration project hosting the Miriam Nickel Deposit, where drilling since the late 1960’s[(1) ] has intersected ‘high nickel tenor’ massive and disseminated sulphides[(2)] . The initial defining drill intercepts for the Miriam Deposit included:

 9.6m @ 5.60% Ni  12.5m @ 0.56% Ni  3.2m @ 2.59% Ni  0.9m @ 5.57% Ni  6.1m @ 0.90% Ni

The Miriam Project represents a strategic opportunity to expand Corazon’s portfolio of nickel sulphide assets and add to its nickel inventory, in a rapidly increasing global market appetite for quality Class-1 Nickel, driven by the rising demand from the rechargeable battery sector.

Notes

(1) Anaconda Australia Limited – 1969 to 1977 – WAMEX Reports A004513, A007001, A007002, A052299

(2) Nickel Mineralisation in Western Australia – GSWA Bulletin 14 – Marston 1984

Level 3, 33 Ord St, West Perth, W.A. 6005 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 1 Ph: +61 (08) 6166 6361| info@corazon.com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

==> picture [582 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 26 JULY 2021
----- End of picture text -----

Corazon’s Chairman, Mr. Terry Streeter stated; “ The Miriam Project presents an opportunity to strategically add to our nickel project portfolio, and provide a new exploration asset to complement our quality nickel sulphide project at Lynn Lake in Canada.

What attracted us to Miriam is the amount of sulphide that has been identified on that trend from the historical, widely spaced exploration drilling. There is a lot of smoke and we believe, that with modern high-powered geophysics, there is a good opportunity to better define nickel sulphide concentrations along strike or down-dip from the defined prospects.

The Miriam Project exhibits a high-nickel content in the nickel sulphides intersected in previous drilling. There are multiple channel sequences that have potential to host nickel sulphide, along with broad zones of cloud sulphide within the ultramafics drilled along strike to the north and south. We are currently undertaking project due diligence and once its completed, we will advise of the outcome .”

==> picture [385 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [385 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [385 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [385 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 – The Miriam Project location map

About the Miriam Project

The Miriam Project is located approximately 10 kilometres south-southwest of Coolgardie on a trend of ultramafics best identified by the Miriam and Nepean (Auroch Minerals : AOU) nickel deposits (Figure 1).

Level 3, 33 Ord St, West Perth, W.A. 6005 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 2 Ph: +61 (08) 6166 6361| info@corazon.com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

==> picture [582 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 26 JULY 2021
----- End of picture text -----

The Miriam Project covers an area of about 6 kilometres by 1.5 kilometers and comprises five Prospecting Licence applications (refer to Table 1 – Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria).

Anaconda Australia Limited discovered the Miriam Deposit, located within the Project, in 1969, and conducted most of the known nickel exploration in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This work defined the core of the Miriam Deposit over a strike of about 150 meters and to a depth of at least 150 metres below surface. Subsequent drilling extended the drilled depth in places up to about 300 metres below surface.

Referenced open-file documents (Table 1 – Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria) detailing historical work defines a nickel-copper endowment for the Miriam Deposit. This work is not compliant with today’s JORC standards, and further drilling would be required for the definition of a JORC resource estimate at Miriam.

Much of the historical drilling, which tested the ultramafic sequence north and south of the Miriam Deposit, was shallow percussion drilling that did not substantially penetrate the overlying oxidized zone. Many of the holes have not reached the ultramafic footwall target. There is extensive untested opportunity to target nickel sulphide mineralisation at depth and also along strike from previous drilling.

More recent nickel exploration campaigns were undertaken during the mid-1990’s (Crest Resources NL) and early-mid 2000’s (Berkeley Resources Limited JV’s with MPI and Sipa Exploration NL). This work continued to identify massive and disseminated nickel sulphides, located within or close to a well-defined channel sequences.

The existence of this defined target trend will allow Corazon to undertake focused and detailed exploration programs, utilising modern higher-powered electromagnetic (EM) geophysics. The most recent geophysical testwork for nickel sulphide exploration was completed in the early 2000’s, where EM proved successful in identifying drill defined mineralisation at the Miriam Deposit.

Option Agreement Details

Corazon has entered into an option agreement with Limelight Industries Pty Ltd (Vendor), pursuant to which it has been granted an option to acquire up to 100% of the Miriam Project (comprising Prospecting Licence applications P15/6135 to P15/6139) on the following terms:

• Corazon has been granted an exclusive option to conduct due diligence on the Miriam Project for a period of three (3) months in consideration for an option fee of $75,000 (plus GST) (Option).

• If Corazon elects to exercise the Option, Corazon will be required to:

• pay a non-refundable amount of $125,000 to the Vendor with five (5) business days of exercise of the Option;

• pay an amount of $400,000 to the Vendor on the earlier to occur of the date that is six (6) months after the date of exercise of the Option and the date of grant of tenure; and

• grant the Vendor a net smelter return royalty of 2%.

• The Vendor will retain the right to mine mullock dumps (for gold mineralisation) and to metal detect for a period of three (3) years subsequent to the grant of tenure.

Level 3, 33 Ord St, West Perth, W.A. 6005 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 3 Ph: +61 (08) 6166 6361| info@corazon.com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

==> picture [582 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 26 JULY 2021
----- End of picture text -----

Corazon is currently undertaking due diligence on the Miriam Project and will advise of the outcome in due course.

==> picture [442 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 - Nickel Prospects at the Miriam Project

This announcement has been authorised on behalf of Corazon Mining Limited by Managing Director, Mr. Brett Smith.

For further information visit www.corazon.com.au or contact:

Brett Smith James Moses Managing Director Media & Investor Relations Corazon Mining Limited Mandate Corporate P: +61 (08) 6166 6361 M: +61 (0) 420 991 574 E: info@corazonmining.com.au E: james@mandatecorporate.com.au

Level 3, 33 Ord St, West Perth, W.A. 6005 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 4

Ph: +61 (08) 6166 6361| info@corazon.com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

==> picture [582 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 26 JULY 2021
----- End of picture text -----

About Corazon

Corazon Mining Limited (ASX: CZN) is an Australian resource company with projects in Australia and Canada.

In Canada, Corazon has consolidated the entire historical Lynn Lake Nickel Copper Cobalt Mining Centre (Lynn Lake) in the province of Manitoba. It is the first time Lynn Lake has been under the control of one company since mine closure in 1976. Lynn Lake presents Corazon with a major development opportunity that is becoming increasingly prospective due to recent increases in the value of both nickel and cobalt metals, and their expected strong demand outlooks associated with their core use in the emerging global electric vehicle industry.

In Australia, Corazon is developing the Mt Gilmore Cobalt Copper Gold Sulphide Project (Mt Gilmore) located in New South Wales, which hosts the Cobalt Ridge Deposit - a unique high-grade cobalt-dominant sulphide deposit. Mt Gilmore is a regionally substantive hydrothermal system with extensive cobalt, copper and gold anomalism. The Company has completed definition drilling at the Cobalt Ridge Deposit and is currently identifying new areas prospective for additional Cobalt Ridge lookalike deposits.

Both Lynn Lake and Mt Gilmore place Corazon in a strong position to take advantage of the growing demand for commodities critically required for the booming rechargeable battery sector.

Level 3, 33 Ord St, West Perth, W.A. 6005 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 5 Ph: +61 (08) 6166 6361| info@corazon.com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

==> picture [582 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 26 JULY 2021
----- End of picture text -----

Competent Persons Statement :

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results and Targets is based on information compiled by Mr. Brett Smith, B.Sc Hons (Geol), Member AusIMM, Member AIG and an employee of Corazon Mining Limited. Mr. Smith has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Mr. Smith consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears.

Forward Looking Statements

This announcement contains certain statements that may constitute “forward looking statement”. Such statements are only predictions and are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual values, results, performance achievements to differ materially from those expressed, implied or projected in any forward looking statements.

Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts. Words such as “expect(s)”, “feel(s)”, “believe(s)”, “will”, “may”, “anticipate(s)” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements include, but are not limited to statements regarding future production, resources or reserves and exploration results. All such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the control of the Company, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forward-looking information and statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: (i) those relating to the interpretation of drill results, the geology, grade and continuity of mineral deposits and conclusions of economic evaluations, (ii) risks relating to possible variations in reserves, grade, planned mining dilution and ore loss, or recovery rates and changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, (iii) the potential for delays in exploration or development activities or the completion of feasibility studies, (iv) risks related to commodity price and foreign exchange rate fluctuations, (v) risks related to failure to obtain adequate financing on a timely basis and on acceptable terms or delays in obtaining governmental approvals or in the completion of development or construction activities, and (vi) other risks and uncertainties related to the Company’s prospects, properties and business strategy. Our audience is cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements that speak only as of the date hereof, and we do not undertake any obligation to revise and disseminate forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof, or to reflect the occurrence of or non-occurrence of any events.

The Company believes that it has a reasonable basis for making the forward-looking statements in the announcement based on the information contained in this and previous ASX announcements.

The Company is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in this ASX release, and the Company confirms that, to the best of its knowledge, all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the exploration results in this release continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Level 3, 33 Ord St, West Perth, W.A. 6005 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 6 Ph: +61 (08) 6166 6361| info@corazon.com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random	Historical Core and Percussion Drilling
techniques	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	Drilling results are reported from the late 1960’s through to 2008. Only the most recent work recorded sampling methods in detail acceptable by today’s JORC standards.
	not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	Work completed appears to be of a good standard for the time work was
		completed. Anaconda Australia Inc in the 1960’s and 1970’s employed good
		record keeping practices and as such there is an adequate record of
		exploration drilling since the discovery of the Miriam Deposit in 1969.
		Drilling are other exploration activities undertaken were industry standard
		practices.
	Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample	There is very little information on sample/assaying standards, duplicates or
	representivity and the appropriate calibration of any	repeat testwork from the early Anaconda work, where the assaying was
	measurement tools or systems used.	undertaken by Anaconda’s in-house laboratory. Subsequent exploration by for
		example Crest Resource Australia (mid to late 1990’s) and Sipa Exploration NL
		(mid 2000’s) engaged independent commercial accredited laboratories.
	Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	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	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer,	It has been assumed that percussion drilling in the 1960’s and 1970’s was
techniques	rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg	open-hole percussion, and that later percussion drilling (1990’s on) is reverse
	core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond	circulation methods.

1

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is
	oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	Core drilling diametres are not stated.
Drill sample	Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample	Recovery from historical core drilling has not been recorded in the historical
recovery	recoveries and results assessed.	data available.
	Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	representative nature of the samples.	Core sampling intervals have been determined by geological features.
		.
	Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and	Nothing noted in the historical documentation.
	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 geologically and	The drill holes have been geologically logged in detail and are very descriptive
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support	in form. Interrogation of historical logs would be appropriate to support modern
	appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies	studies and interpretations.
	and metallurgical studies.
	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core	Core logging records both the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the
	(or costean, channel, etc) photography.	geology and mineralisation. Information recorded from logging are both
		measurable and descriptive. This includes (but is not restricted to) recording of
		lithology, alteration, mineralogy, weathering characteristics, geotechnical and
		structural features, textural and interpretive information.
	The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections	All drill holes are logged in full.
	logged.
Sub-	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all	It has been assumed that partial drill core drilling has been sampled for
sampling	core taken.	analysis, as there has been further geological analysis of drill core post
techniques		analysis.
and sample
preparation

2

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc	Not applicable for core drilling. No information is provided for exploration
	and whether sampled wet or dry.	drilling prior to the work by Sipa Exploration NL(mid 2000’s). Sipa engaged
		industry standard riffle-splitting for RC samples.
	For all sample types, the nature, quality and	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.
	Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	stages to maximise representivity of samples.
	Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	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	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	the material being sampled.
Quality of	The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	The analytical techniques used for the Miriam drilling appear appropriate and
assay data	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is	industry standard for the style of mineralisation at the time the work was
and	considered partial or total.	completed. The analytical methods are total digest methods.
laboratory tests		The range of elements historically tested for are not considered adequate for the full assessment of the resource or mining potential for the Miriam Deposit.
	For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
	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,	This information could not be determined from the historical data available
	blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether
	acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision
	have been established.

3

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Verification	The verification of significant intersections by either	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
of sampling	independent or alternative company personnel.
and
assaying
	The use of twinned holes.	The reported drill holes have not been twinned.
	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	The work by Anaconda (discovery drilling) is summarised best in WAMEX
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	report A007002. Copies of the historical drill logs and assay submission and
		results data is also available on WAMEX.
		Work by Crest Resource Australia is best summarised by WAMEX report
		A052299. This report is significant as it is the first capture of exploration
		information in the metric measurement system, and it locates all drilling in real
		world coordinates (AMG).
		Validation of the quality of the digital capture of historical exploration data has
		yet to be undertaken.
		Modern day exploration is digitally captured by the reports on WAMEX.
	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	No adjustment to primary assaying has been undertaken.
		Assay intervals for the 1960’s and 1970’s drilling have been converted from feet
		and inches to metres.
Location of	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes	Early exploration of the Miriam Project utilized a local grid system. Work by
data points	(collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings	Crest Resource Australia in the mid-1990’s located all drilling in real world
	and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.	coordinates (AGD84 AMG Zone 51). The accuracy of this survey cannot be
		determined from the historical data.

4

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Specification of the grid system used.	The current survey data is recorded in real-world co-ordinate system AGD84
		AMG Zone 51.
	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	Drill hole survey information provides the only topographic control. The
		accuracy of this work has yet to be verified.
Data spacing	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	Detailed drilling has defined the core of the Miriam Deposit over a strike of about
and		150 meters and to a depth of at least 150 metres below surface. Subsequent
distribution		drilling extended the drilled depth in places up to about 300 metres below
		surface.
		Drilling outside of this area is widely and variably spaced.
		The Forrest Gold Prospect in the eastern of the project area has been drilled
		on an approximate grid of 50m x 50m over a strike of about 250m. This
		exploration work has yet to be reviewed.
	Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to	The exploration drilling to date will not result in the immediate definition of a
	establish the degree of geological and grade continuity	mineral resource estimation.
	appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve
	estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.
	Whether sample compositing has been applied.	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
Orientation	Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased	There is no evidence that the orientation of sampling or drilling has resulted in
of data in	sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this	a statistical bias.
relation to	is known, considering the deposit type.
geological
structure
	If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the	There is no evidence that the orientation of sampling or drilling has resulted in
	orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to	a statistical bias.
	have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed
	and reported if material.

5

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sample	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
security
Audits or	The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques	This information could not be determined from the historical data available.
reviews	and data.	At this stage, no audits or reviews have been conducted by Corazon.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

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
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 Miriam Project includes five Prospecting Licences currently status and being progressed towards granting. Tenement Application Holder Marked out Received P15/6135 Limelight Industries Pty Ltd 15/01/2017 19/01/2017 P15/6136 Limelight Industries Pty Ltd 16/01/2017 19/01/2017 P15/6137 Limelight Industries Pty Ltd 16/01/2017 19/01/2017 P15/6138 Limelight Industries Pty Ltd 16/01/2017 19/01/2017 P15/6139 Limelight Industries Pty Ltd 16/01/2017 19/01/2017					in application Current Area 193.24 HA 183.17HA 155.43HA 176.46HA 154.56HA
	Tenement Application	Holder	Marked out	Received	Current Area
	P15/6135	Limelight Industries Pty Ltd	15/01/2017	19/01/2017	193.24 HA
	P15/6136	Limelight Industries Pty Ltd	16/01/2017	19/01/2017	183.17HA
	P15/6137	Limelight Industries Pty Ltd	16/01/2017	19/01/2017	155.43HA
	P15/6138	Limelight Industries Pty Ltd	16/01/2017	19/01/2017	176.46HA
	P15/6139	Limelight Industries Pty Ltd	16/01/2017	19/01/2017	154.56HA

6

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along	Tenements have first in line status for granting. Part of the Project area is
	with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to	covered by the Kangaroo Timber Reserve, as such additional conditions for
	operate in the area.	exploration of the Project are expected for the granted leases.
Exploration	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other	Where exploration has been completed by other parties, those parties have
done by other	parties.	been referenced in this document. Key exploration companies include:-
parties		Anaconda Australia 1969-1977 (the discovery of the Miriam Deposit)
		Crest Resource Limited 1996-1997
		Berkeley Resources Limited joint ventures, including
		MPI early 2000’s
		Sipa Exploration NL 2005-2008
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	Archaean greenstone hosted nickel-copper-cobalt sulphide deposits
		associated with komatiitic channel facies sequences.
		Archaean greenstone hosted hydrothermal (lode) gold deposits.
Drill hole	A summary of all information material to the understanding	Survey data presented in real-world grid system ADG84 Zone 51. Down-hole
Information	of the exploration results including a tabulation of the	survey information for the discovery drilling in 1969 was recorded using Acid-
	following information for all Material drill holes:	Etch methods. In 1977 much of this drilling was resurveyed using an Eastman
	o easting and northing of the drill hole collar	Kodak Downhole Camera. Not all drilling programs have recorded the method
	o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea	of down-hole survey.
	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.	Early exploration of the Miriam Project utilized a local grid system. Work by Crest Resource Australia in the mid-1990’s located the collars of all drilling in real world coordinates (AGD84 AMG Zone 51). The accuracy of this survey cannot be determined from the historical data.
		Corazon is in the process of validating all historical drill hole
		information.

7

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		A summary of historically significant drilling results were reported by
		Crest in 1997 and are tabled below.

8

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		MPI Drilling in 2000 returned the following significant results
	If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis	Downhole survey data is not reported within and is not considered material to
	that the information is not Material and this exclusion does	this report.

9

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	not detract from the understanding of the report, the	Reported mineralised intervals may not be defined as “true widths”. Where
	Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the	possible, information regarding true widths is provided.
	case.
Data	In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging	No data aggregation has been reported in this announcement and no
aggregation	techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations	adjustment to primary assaying has been undertaken.
methods	(eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	Results have been reported as they were historically reported.
	Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of	All averaging over intervals is calculated on an individual interval weighted
	high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results,	average basis from the primary (initial) assay data. No bottom-cuts or top-cuts
	the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated	have been applied.
	and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.	Parameters and criteria for calculating intervals are defined within the notes of tables presented.
	The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent	Metal equivalent values are not reported.
	values should be clearly stated.
Relationship	These relationships are particularly important in the	Reported mineralised intervals may not be defined as “true widths”. Where
between	reporting of Exploration Results.	possible, information regarding true widths is provided.
mineralisation
widths and
intercept
lengths
	If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill	Azimuths and dips of the drill holes are variable, dependent on the targets
	hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.	being tested. Historical drilling appears to have been designed to as best as
		possible test across the mineralisation, normal to the strike of the komatiitic
		channel sequences.
	If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are	This report identifies the down hole lengths of mineralisation intersected in the
	reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg	drilling. Reference within the body of the report may define interpreted true
	‘down hole length, true width not known’).	widths of mineralised bodies.

10

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

26[th] July 2021

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations	Appropriate diagrams have been included in the announcement.
	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.
Balanced	Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is	This report tables results of the interpreted mineralised zone intersected by the
reporting	not practicable, representative reporting of both low and	drilling. Results include the broad lower-grade interval as well as narrow high-
	high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid	grade intervals.
	misleading reporting of Exploration Results.
Other	Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be	Corazon is currently reviewing and collating historical exploration data.
substantive	reported including (but not limited to): geological
exploration	observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical	In addition to the drilling, exploration has included geophysical studies such as
data	survey results; bulk samples – size and method of	magnetics, induced polarisation and electromagnetics. Not all this information
	treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,	is available. The most recent electromagnetic survey was completed in 2000
	groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics;	by MPI.
	potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
		Geological papers summarizing the Miriam Deposit include –
		Gemuts – 1975 – Report on the Miriam Nickel Prospect, Coolgardie Area –
		Economic Geology of Australia and Papua New Guinea – AUSIMM Monograph
		5 Vol 1 pp 98-99.
		Marston – 1984 – Nickel Mineralisation in Western Australia – GSWA Bulletin
		14.
Further work	The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for	Corazon is currently completing technical and legal due diligence on the
	lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-	Miriam Project and the Prospecting Licence applications.
	out drilling).	This work is expected to result in the reprocessing of the most recent
		geophysical datasets and collation of a drill hole database for the Project.

11

26[th] July 2021

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

Historical Drilling – Miriam Nickel Project – Western Australia

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		The Company will work with the current owner of the Project to advance these
		leases towards granting.
	Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible	All relevant diagrams have been presented in this report.
	extensions, including the main geological interpretations and
	future drilling areas, provided this information is not
	commercially sensitive.

12