CORAZON MINING LIMITED — Regulatory Filings 2018

Nov 21, 2018

==> picture [594 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT – 22 NOVEMBER 2018
----- End of picture text -----

EXTENSIVE NEW COBALT-COPPER ANOMALIES DEFINED AT MT GILMORE PROJECT

• Very positive assay results returned from an extensive regional soil sampling program at the Mt Gilmore Cobalt-Copper-Gold Project in New South Wales

• The 19 kilometres of the Mt Gilmore Trend tested to date is extensively anomalous in cobalt and copper

• The sampling program has resulted in the discovery of multiple, new high-tenor cobaltcopper-gold anomalies across the wider Mt Gilmore Project area

• New anomalies discovered are substantially larger than those corresponding to the outcropping high-grade Cobalt Ridge sulphide deposit within Mt Gilmore

• A new style of cobalt mineralisation has also been identified as separate to the numerous Cobalt Ridge-style targets defined for further testing

• Work at Mt Gilmore is continuing – final results and identification and ranking of priority targets expected in early 2019

Corazon Mining Limited (ASX: CZN) ( Corazon or Company ) is pleased to announce highly successful assay results from its on-going regional geochemical soil-sampling program at the Mt Gilmore Cobalt-Copper-Gold Project ( Project ) in New South Wales.

Corazon’s extensive geochemical sampling program has collected a total of 3,533 soil samples and 206 rock-chip samples at Mt Gilmore since Project acquisition in 2016, with 3,335 assays now returned. The program is designed to systematically test favourable basement lithologies for cobalt, copper and gold mineralisation along strike from the drill-defined Cobalt Ridge Deposit, which has the been Corazon’s priority target at the Project.

The soil-sampling program has been highly successful, and has resulted in the discovery of multiple, new, high-tenor cobalt-copper-gold anomalies – with soil sampling results of up to 450 ppm cobalt and 1,060 ppm copper, supported by rock chip samples grading up to 1,795 ppm cobalt and 16.3 % copper.

The sampling program has tested approximately 19 kilometres of the Mt Gilmore Trend and has identified extensive metal-rich anomalism in soils over basement rocks (Figures 1 and 2). The metalassociation and size of these anomalies is significantly encouraging and suggests that the wider Project area hosts a substantial, long-lived hydrothermal mineralising event.

The Company’s geochemical sampling program has proven highly effective in mapping alteration and mineralisation within the outcropping basement rocks at Mt Gilmore, with results correlating positively with known mineralisation and identifying multiple new target areas.

The results to date have far exceeded the Company’s expectations, already identifying several new priority prospects, and, with most of the anomalous areas yet to be explored in detail, strong potential exists to define additional new targets. The tenor of these newly discovered cobalt

Level 1, 329 Hay St, Subiaco, W.A. 6008 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 | +61 (8) 6142 6366 | info@corazon,com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

1

==> picture [594 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT – 22 NOVEMBER 2018
----- End of picture text -----

anomalies are on par with the outcropping Cobalt Ridge Deposit and potential exists for the discovery of additional cobalt-copper-gold sulphide deposits.

The program is ongoing and this announcement is an update of previous ASX announcements dated the 26 April and 4 July 2018.

==> picture [342 x 440] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 : Mt Gilmore Trend prospect locations, interpreted geology and copper in soils geochemical image over basement rocks.

Two Styles of Cobalt Mineralisation Defined

Exploration to date has targeted the Cobalt Ridge style of mineralisation, which has a distinctive chalcophile element signature including cobalt-copper-gold-antimony metals. Analysis of the geochemical data has now identified an additional style of mineralisation, characterised by a broader metal association including cobalt-copper-antimony-silver-molybdenum - referred to as Gordonbrook Hill style mineralisation. Both styles of mineralisation are related to sulphide mineralisation, and sulphides have been identified on surface at most of the prospects.

Level 1, 329 Hay St, Subiaco, W.A. 6008 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 | +61 (8) 6142 6366 | info@corazon,com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

2

==> picture [594 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT – 22 NOVEMBER 2018
----- End of picture text -----

The tenor of the anomalism across the different areas is very similar;

• The Cobalt Ridge Deposit has been extensively drill tested over about a 300 metre strike (ASX announcement 9 November 2018) and sits within a geochemical anomaly of approximately 900 metres by 400 metres in area. Peak soil sampling results are 171 ppm cobalt and 1,060 ppm copper, with rock chips as high as 57 ppm cobalt and 709 ppm copper.

• Outside of the Cobalt Ridge Deposit area , the Mt Gilmore Trend soil sample anomalies peak at 151 ppm cobalt and 472 ppm copper, with rock chip sampling returning up to 1,795 ppm cobalt and 16.3 % copper. It should be noted that the cobalt in soils for the Lantana #2 prospect are slightly elevated (peak 450 ppm cobalt), possibly due to this prospect being proximal to outcropping cobalt-rich ultramafic rocks.

==> picture [344 x 440] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 : Mt Gilmore Trend prospect locations, interpreted geology and cobalt in soils geochemical image over basement rocks.

Level 1, 329 Hay St, Subiaco, W.A. 6008 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 | +61 (8) 6142 6366 | info@corazon,com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

3

==> picture [594 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT – 22 NOVEMBER 2018
----- End of picture text -----

The Cobalt Ridge style prospects include the Cobalt Ridge, Kerry Glen, Hassan’s and Lantana #2 anomalies (Figures 1 and 2). These are priority targets for on-going exploration and infill (detailed) soil sampling is underway. The size of these anomalies is very similar to the Cobalt Ridge Deposit and it is interpreted there will be a strong structural control to the mineralisation.

The Gordonbrook Hill style prospects include the Gordonbrook Hill, Lantana #1, May Queen and Morgan’s anomalies (Figures 1 and 2). In general, these areas are much larger anomalies than the Cobalt Ridge style targets, with anomalism associated with disseminated sulphides (pyritechalcopyrite-pyrrhotite) and magnetite. It is expected that more detailed sampling will identify multiple individual targets of both styles of mineralisation, within the larger anomalous areas. Infill sampling of these areas, for the better definition of priority targets, has yet to be undertaken.

Corazon Activities and News Flow

Mt Gilmore Cobalt Copper Gold Sulphide Project - NSW

Corazon’s current activities at Mt Gilmore are focused on three main strategies;

1. Assessment of the resource potential of the Cobalt Ridge Main Lode subsequent to the recently completed drilling (ASX announcement 9 November 2018);

2. Definition of priority drilling targets proximal to the Cobalt Ridge Deposit; and

3. Definition and ranking of geochemical anomalies in the greater Mt Gilmore Project area.

Work in all three areas is ongoing.

The modelling of the drilling results is underway. While drilling to date has not exhaustively tested the Cobalt Ridge Main Lode, it is expected that the Company will still now be able to more accurately express the tonnage potential of the Cobalt Ridge area.

The soil sampling program has been highly successful, with multiple high-tenor cobalt-copper-gold anomalies discovered to date. Predominantly, this sampling has been completed on a 200 metre by 200 metre pattern, with exploration continuing to move north covering the basement rocks of the Mt Gilmore Trend. This work remains in progress.

Detailed infill of the priority soil anomalies is also underway. This work will help define the higher grade mineralised trends for targeted exploration and possibly drilling.

It is expected the final results from the current phase of soil sampling and the identification of priority areas will be completed in early 2019.

The areas north of the Hassan’s prospect (Figures 1 and 2) lack detailed geophysics such as magnetics and radiometrics, which have been useful in assessing potential exploration targets. This work is currently being considered and budgeted for early 2019.

Lynn Lake Nickel Copper Cobalt Sulphide Project – Canada

Corazon’s Lynn Lake Project in Canada is a historical mining centre with large JORC compliant resources and infrastructure that, with an improved nickel price, would be beneficial for redevelopment

Level 1, 329 Hay St, Subiaco, W.A. 6008 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 | +61 (8) 6142 6366 | info@corazon,com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

4

==> picture [594 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT – 22 NOVEMBER 2018
----- End of picture text -----

Current activities are focused on improving the quality of resource and metallurgical data, to be utilised in detailed mining studies that will define the value of the asset. A new resource was announced last month (ASX announcement 11 October 2018) and detailed metallurgical testwork is underway.

The metallurgical testwork will focus on ore characterisation, flotation and product definition for down-stream processing, and is designed to provide key data for future mining and development studies for the possible re-commencement of mining at Lynn Lake. The historical processing technology used at Lynn Lake for the extraction of nickel, copper and cobalt metals was developed in the 1950’s and 1960’s, and detailed testwork has not been completed on Lynn Lake mineralisation since mine closure.

It is expected modern advances in processing technologies, will deliver substantial improvements in metal recoveries and product quality, which may in turn deliver significant reductions in both operating and capital costs associated with any future development of Lynn Lake.

This work is expected to be completed over the next three to four months. Milestone results will be released to the market as they become available.

Ends.

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 (8) 6142 6366 M: +61 (0) 420 991 574 E: info@corazonmining.com.au E: james@mandatecorporate.com.au

Level 1, 329 Hay St, Subiaco, W.A. 6008 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 | +61 (8) 6142 6366 | info@corazon,com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

5

==> picture [594 x 96] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT – 22 NOVEMBER 2018
----- 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 mineralization 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 1, 329 Hay St, Subiaco, W.A. 6008 | PO Box 8187, Subiaco East, W.A. 6008 | +61 (8) 6142 6366 | info@corazon,com.au | www.corazon.com.au | ASX: CZN

6

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

22[nd] November, 2018

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling	 Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or		A total of 3,533 soil samples were taken at the Mt Gilmore
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate		Project since acquisition in 2016. A total of 3,335 assays have
	to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma		been returned to date.
	sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should		Samples were taken on 200m x 200m nominal grids using a
	not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.		hand-held GPS with +/-5m accuracy utilising MGA zone 56
	 Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity		(GDA94) co-ordinate system. Infill sampling of some areas have
	and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems		been completed on either a 100m x 200m, 100m x 100m or 50m
	used.		x 50m pattern, dependent on the aerial extents of the anomalies
	 Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the		generated.
	Public Report.		Surface organic matter was removed from the sample site using
	 In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be		a hand pick and shovel.
	relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1		A 25cm x 25cm x 25cm deep hole is dug using a mattock, a
	m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge		sample of primarily C soil horizon is taken directly above
	for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required,		basement rock.
	such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling		The soil sample was screened using a 3mm mesh aluminium
	problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg		sieve and a 200-250 gram sub sample of -3mm fraction was
	submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.		retained in a labelled soil geochemical bag for analysis.
			Soil sample IDs and locations are stored digitally in a register
			which also notes sample content and conditions.
			External certified reference material / standards, blanks and
			duplicates are submitted every 50th, 51stand 52ndsample
			respectively for QAQC purposes. The submitted samples also
			included 6 standards and 6 blanks.
			Samples were submitted to independent certified Australian
			laboratory ALS Brisbane via courier and analysed for 35
			elements including cobalt to 1ppm using ALS method ME-ICP41
			(Aqua Regia ICP-AES). Gold analysed separately using “ALS
			method Au-ST43 to 0.1 ppb.

1

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

22[nd] November, 2018

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drilling	 Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	Not applicable
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg 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).
Drill sample	 Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	Not applicable
recovery	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 geologically and	Soil samples were logged by an experienced Field Technician.
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	IDs and locations are stored digitally in a register, which also notes
	studies.	sample content and conditions.
	 Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
	costean, channel, etc) photography.
	 The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
Sub-sampling	 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core	A 1kg to 2kg soil sample was screened using a 3mm mesh aluminium
techniques	taken.	sieve and a 200-250 gram sub sample of -3mm fraction was retained in a
and sample	 If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and	labelled soil geochemical bag for analysis.
preparation	whether sampled wet or dry.
	 For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the
	sample preparation technique.
	 Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
	maximise representivity of samples.
	 Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in
	situ material collected, including for instance results for field
	duplicate/second-half sampling.
	 Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material
	being sampled.

2

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

22[nd] November, 2018

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Quality of	 The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	All samples for analysis have been submitted to ALS Minerals, Shand
assay data	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered	Street, Brisbane, Queensland. ALS is a respected and certified
and	partial or total.	independent laboratory with extensive experience and with operations
laboratory	 For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,	throughout the world.
tests	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument
	make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their	External certified reference material / standards, blanks and duplicates
	derivation, etc.	are submitted every 50th, 51stand 52ndsample respectively for QAQC
	 Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,	purposes.
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels
	of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	Lab Standards, Repeats and Blanks have also been reported within the
		ALS Certificates, along with the standard QC Reports.
		Sample preparation included Laboratory pulverizing to 85% passing
		<75um.
		Analysis methods utilized ALS method ME-ICP41 (Aqua Regia ICP-
		AES). This method tested for 35 elements. Further details for this
		analytical method and detection limits can be obtained from ALS.
		Element Method Detection
		Limit
		Ag, Al, As, B, Ba, Be, Bi, ME-ICP41 (Aqua Variable
		Ca, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Regia ICP-AES)
		Ga, Hg, K, La, Mg, Mn,
		Mo, Na, Ni, P, Pb, S, Sb,
		Sc, Sr, Th, Ti, Tl, U, V, W,
		Zn.
		Au Au-ST43 0.1 ppb

3

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

22[nd] November, 2018

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Verification of	 The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	Sampling and analytical methods are of a good standard and as such the
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	results are considered representative of the mineralisation.
assaying	 The use of twinned holes.  Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	Sample security has been controlled by the Company or ALS Minerals.
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	Auditing of these results has determined accuracies within acceptable
	 Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	industry standards.
Location of	 Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	Sample locations were surveyed by hand-held GPS utilising the GDA94
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	(Zone 56) datum (approximately + 5m accuracy).
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.
	 Specification of the grid system used.
	 Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Data spacing	 Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	Samples were taken on 200m x 200m nominal grids using a hand-held
and	 Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the	GPS with +/-5m accuracy utilising MGA zone 56 (GDA94) co-ordinate
distribution	degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	system. Infill sampling of some areas have been completed on either a
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and	100m x 200m, 100m x 100m or 50m x 50m pattern, dependent on the
	classifications applied.	aerial extents of the anomalies generated.
	 Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation of	 Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	A square grid sampling pattern was utilised. No orientation bias has
data in	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	been established.
relation to	the deposit type.
geological	 If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation
structure	of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a
	sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
Sample	 The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Sample submission for the sampling program was undertaken by an
security		experienced field technician engaged by the Company.
Audits or	 The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	No audit of results has been undertaken as yet.
reviews

4

22[nd] November, 2018

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

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 ownership including	The Mount Gilmore Project includes a single Exploration Licence
tenement and	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint	(EL8379) located in New South Wales, Australia. The lease was granted
land tenure	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,	on 23rdJune 2015 and includes 99 “Units”.
status	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.	EL8379 is owned 51% by Corazon Mining Limited subsidiary Mt Gilmore Resources Pty Ltd and 49% by Providence Gold and Minerals Pty Ltd. Corazon Mining Limited has the option to earn up to 80% equity in the Project (refer to announcement dated 16 June, 2016).
		The lease covers private farm (station) land and minor Crown Land.
Exploration	 Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	Mineralisation was discovered in the Mt Gilmore Project region more than
done by other		130 years ago with small scale mining being completed in the late 1870’s
parties		at Glamorgan, Flintoffs and Federal copper and mercury mines.
		Historical records exist for the historical production and sampling. These
		reports vary in quality and reliability.
		Modern exploration within the Project commenced in the 1980’s when
		PanContinental completed ground IP and magnetic geophysical surveys,
		gridded soil geochemistry for Cu, As, Au and Co, 25 trenches (1518.5m)
		and 17 RC drill holes (for 1,020.82m).
		At Lantana Downs, in 1981 Freeport in search for volcanogenic massive
		sulphide deposits (VMS), completed rock-chip sampling and drilling
		targeting gossanous/sulphide/siliceous lodes identified by mapping and
		historical workings. Anomalous base metals were identified. Gold and
		cobalt were not tested for.
		Between 2006 and 2008 Central West Gold NL completed 25 RC holes
		and 2 core tails for 2,880m of RC and 163m of core. 21 of these holes

5

22[nd] November, 2018

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		were targeting Cobalt Ridge and 4 were completed at Gold Hill.
		Corazon completed drilling at Cobalt Ridge in 2016, 2017 and 2018.
Geology	 Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	The Project is located on the western edge of the Mesozoic Clarence-
		Morton Basin, where it abuts the Siluro-Devonian Silverwood Group. The
		Silverwood group is intruded by the Later Permian Towgon Grange
		Granodiorite and, at the contact, tourmaline rich bodies occur ranging from
		veinlets to breccia-fill to dyke-like bodies up to 10m wide. The tourmaline
		enrichment appears to correlate with copper, cobalt and gold soil
		anomalies. Zoning of mineralisation has been identified, with cinnabar
		concentrated within the granodiorite and copper and gold concentrated
		within the hornfels.
		The Project is considered prospective for tourmaline breccia hosted Co-
		Cu-Au deposits, Cu-Au-Fe skarns and Quartz-sulphide vein systems,
		including porphyry Cu-Au deposits.
Drill hole	 A summary of all information material to the understanding of the	Not applicable.
Information	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.

6

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

22[nd] November, 2018

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Data	 In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,	Not applicable.
aggregation	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high
methods	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.
Relationship	 These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of	Not applicable.
between	Exploration Results.
mineralisation	 If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole
widths and	angle is known, its nature should be reported.
intercept	 If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there
lengths	should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true
	width not known’).
Diagrams	 Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	All diagrams include grids and scales for reference (if appropriate).
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being
	reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of
	drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.
Balanced	 Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	Noted and complied with.
reporting	practicable, representative reporting 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, should be reported	Historical exploration results have been previously reported by Corazon
substantive	including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical	Mining Limited. This work included rock-chip sampling, soil
exploration	survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and	geochemistry, geophysics and drilling. Reliance has been placed on
data	method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,	historical reports as an indicator of potential only.
	groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential
	deleterious or contaminating substances.

7

22[nd] November, 2018

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

Mt Gilmore Project, New South Wales, Australia.

Surface Soil Geochemistry – 2016 to 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Further work	 The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	Additional geological mapping and infill soil sampling targeting
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	anomalous areas will provide a better understanding of the mineralised
	 Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,	trends and mineralisation processes that will be used in defining drill
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,	targets.
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

8