DUKETON MINING LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2020

Aug 2, 2020

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

3rd August 2020

50% Increase to Rosie Nickel Resource

HIGHLIGHTS

Rosie Project (100% DKM)

• Updated Rosie Nickel Mineral Resource Estimate completed

• Rosie Nickel Resource increases to 2.56 Mt @ 2.9% NiEq

• Updated Mineral Resource reports 49,100 tonnes contained nickel, 10,600 tonnes contained copper and 205,000 ounces of contained PGEs

• 66% of the Rosie Mineral Resource is in the Indicated category

• An increase of 50% contained nickel metal compared to the previous mineral resource estimate

• Updated Resource now includes the Nariz mineralisation

• Mineralisation remains open in all directions

• Total combined JORC resource for Rosie & C2 is now 87,100 nickel tonnes, 12,900 copper tonnes and 205,000 ounces PGE’s

• Next steps will include a Mining Study at Rosie, planned for H2 2020

Duketon Mining Ltd (DKM) is pleased to announce an updated JORC 2012 Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for the Rosie Nickel Deposit in the Duketon Belt, 120km north of Laverton.

The Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate for Rosie of 2.56 million tonnes at 2.9% nickel equivalent is reported in accordance with the 2012 JORC Code. The resource

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

estimate is reported at >1% NiEq. Over 66% of the Resource is has been classified as Indicated and the mineralisation is open in all directions.

Table 1: Rosie Mineral Resource Statement (July 2020) >1.0% NiEq

Resource Category	Tonnes(kt)	Ni%	NiEq% (1)
Indicated	1,707	2.0	3.0
Inferred	850	1.7	2.8
Total	2,557	1.9	2.9

(1) Assumptions for the nickel equivalent are: Prices (in USD) $7.00/lb Ni, $3.20/lb Cu, $14.00/lb Co, $1,150/oz Pt, $1,250/oz Pd and $8,500/oz Rh. Recovery assumptions from metallurgical test work are: Pentlandite domain 96.9% Ni, 99.5% Cu, 95.1% Co, 78.2% Pt, 97.6% Pd and 83.4% Rh. Violarite domain 88.7% Ni, 94.5% Cu, 88.5% Co, 57.6% Pt, 87.3% Pd and 64.8% Rh.

This updated resource includes the Nariz mineralisation, discovered by DKM in 2014. This has resulted in a 50% increase in contained nickel metal in the resource compared to the 2012 resource estimate. The Mineral Resource contained metal now stands at 49,100 tonnes of nickel, 10,600 tonnes of copper, 1,400 tonnes of cobalt and over 205,000 oz of total PGEs (Table 3).

The resource also includes a reportable nickel equivalent number after metallurgical work was completed to determine recoveries (see ASX announcement 8th July 2020 & 10th July 2020). It is the opinion of DKM that all the elements included in the metal equivalents calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold.

The total JORC compliant nickel resource for the Bulge Area (Rosie & C2) now stands at 87,100 tonnes of nickel, 12,900 tonnes of copper and 205,000 ounces of PGE’s (Tables 4-6). Further work on the Bulge nickel deposits will include a mining study at Rosie, planned for the second half of 2020.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Table 2: Rosie Mineral Resource Grade

	Rosie Nickel Resource >1% NiEq	Rosie Nickel Resource >1% NiEq	Rosie Nickel Resource >1% NiEq	Rosie Nickel Resource >1% NiEq	Rosie Nickel Resource >1% NiEq
Classification	Sulphide	Tonnes	Ni (%)	Cu (%)	Co (ppm)	Total PGEs (g/t)	NiEq (%)
Indicated	Pentlandite	960,893	2.3	0.41	610	2.6	3.3
	Violarite	745,813	1.7	0.36	490	2.5	2.6
	Sub-Total	1,706,706	2.0	0.39	560	2.5	3.0
Inferred	Pentlandite	751,559	1.8	0.47	570	2.5	2.8
	Violarite	98,676	1.5	0.43	460	2.2	2.4
	Sub-Total	850,234	1.7	0.47	560	2.5	2.8
Total	All	2,556,940	1.9	0.42	560	2.5	2.9

Table 3: Rosie Mineral Resource Contained Metal

			Contained Metal	Contained Metal	Contained Metal
Classification	**Ore Type **	Ni(t)	Cu(t)	Co(t)	Total PGEs(oz)
Indicated	Pentlandite	21,973	3,987	588	79,041
	Violarite	12,336	2,679	363	59,014
	Sub-Total	34,309	6,666	951	138,056
Inferred	Pentlandite	13,354	3,537	428	60,331
	Violarite	1,452	421	45	6,937
	Sub-Total	14,806	3,958	473	67,268
	Total	49,115	10,624	1,423	205,324

The following equations were used to calculate nickel equivalent – Cu and Co measured in ppm and PGEs measured in ppb – all converted to percentages for NiEq calculation:

Pentlandite domain: NiEq = Ni% +(Cu% * 0.995 (3.2/7)) + (Co% * 0.951 (14/7)) + (Pt% * 0.976 * (1150 14.583/7)) + (Pd% * 0.976 * (1250 * 14.583/7)) + (Rh% * 0.834 (8500 * 14.583/7))

Violarite domain: NiEq = Ni% +(Cu% * 0.945 (3.2/7)) + (Co% * 0.885 (14/7)) + (Pt% * 0.576 * (1150 14.583/7)) + (Pd% * 0.873 * (1250 * 14.583/7)) + (Rh% * 0.648 (8500 * 14.583/7)) where 14.583 is the amount of troy ounces per pound.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Table 4: C2 Nickel Resource > 0.5% Ni (see ASX Announcement 29 January 2015)

	C2 Nickel Resource >0.5%Ni	C2 Nickel Resource >0.5%Ni
Classification	Oxidation	Tonnes	Ni (%)	Ni (t)
Inferred	Fresh	5,100,000	0.7	34,200
	Transitional	600,000	0.6	3,800
	Total	5,700,000	0.7	38,000

Table 5: C2 Resource > 0.5% Ni with Auxiliary Attributes (see ASX Announcement 29 January 2015)

		C2 Nickel Resource >0.5%Ni	C2 Nickel Resource >0.5%Ni	C2 Nickel Resource >0.5%Ni
Classification	Oxidation	Tonnes	Ni (%)	Cu (%)	Pt (ppb)	Pd (ppb)	S (%)
Inferred	Fresh	5,100,000	0.7	0.04	60	79	3.3
	Transitional	600,000	0.6	0.04	72	105	0.9
Total		5,700,000	0.7	0.04	61	82	3.1

Table 6: Combined Metal Inventory, The Bulge Area

Deposit	Ni tonnes	Cu tonnes	PGE oz
Rosie	49,115	10,624	205,324
C2	38,000	2,280	-
TOTAL	87,115	12,904	205,324

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [445 x 570] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Plan of DKM Tenements showing Ultramafic, Nickel Resources and Prospects

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [445 x 335] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Plan of The Bulge Complex

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [415 x 312] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Rosie Cross Section, looking NW

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [474 x 353] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Rosie Long section, looking NE

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Rosie Technical Summary – Mineral Resource Estimation and Data

The updated Rosie Nickel Mineral Resource was estimated by independent consultants from Cube Consulting Pty Ltd.

Geology and Geological Interpretation

The Rosie Nickel Deposit is located within the Duketon Greenstone Belt, approximately 120km north of Laverton in Western Australia. The host unit of the nickel sulphide mineralisation is locally termed the Bulge Ultramafic Complex, this can be traced over 10km of strike and is also host to the C2 disseminated Nickel Sulphide Deposit (5.7Mt @ 0.7% Ni for 38,000 Ni tonnes) (Tables 4- 5).

The Bulge Ultramafic Complex has been a focus for nickel exploration for a number of workers over the last ten years, most significantly at the Rosie Prospect by Independence Group NL. During this time, a JORC 2004 compliant resource of 1.9Mt @ 1.7% Ni (32,700 Ni t), 0.38% Cu and 1.9 g/t Pt + Pd was defined (see ASX announcement 24th July 2014).

The Rosie deposit is a komatiite-hosted nickel sulphide deposit. The mineralisation is characterised by accumulations of massive, matrix, breccia and disseminated Ni-Cu-PGE magmatic sulphides at the basal contact of a komatiite ultramafic rock, overlying a mafic pillow basalt footwall +/- fine grained siltstone sediments which also contain sulphides in varying amounts. The deposit has been drilled with a combination of Aircore, RC and Diamond drilling (NQ2) from surface to a vertical depth of approximately 600m over a strike length of ~1500m, however mineralisation has been intersected over a strike length of ~1km.

Duketon Mining Ltd discovered a second prospect within The Bulge called Nariz in 2014. The best intercept at Nariz to date is 5.65m @ 7.1% Ni, 0.5% copper and 3.8 g/t Pt + Pd within massive sulphides in hole DKMD0005 (see ASX announcement 2nd December 2014). Subsequent drilling returned a further intercept of 3.7m @ 2.04% Ni, 0.5% Cu and 1.9 g/t Pt + Pd (see ASX announcement 15th January 2015).

Further drilling at Nariz has intersected significant areas of disseminated, blebby and stringer nickel bearing sulphide but is yet to produce an interval as significant as that encountered in DKMD-0005.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Drilling Techniques

The Rosie/Nariz deposit has been drilled by a combination of diamond and RC drilling. The majority of drilling has been NQ2 diamond drilling. A total of 82 drillholes have intersected the contact mineralised surface and were used in this resource estimate.

Sampling and Subsampling Techniques

RC drillholes were sampled initially as 4m composites and subsequently 1m samples using a riffle splitter. Diamond core was sampled as half core across the mineralised intervals with a 5m buffer either side. Samples were generally 1m in length however can be less than 20cm in places based on geology and mineralisation.

Sample Analysis Method

All samples were analysed at Bureau Veritas in Canning Vale, WA. Samples were dried, split then pulverised to 90% passing 75um. A sub-sample was digested by 4-acid and analysed by ICP-OES for Ag, As, Bi, Co, Cr, Cu, Me, Mg, Ni, S, Ti and Zn. A 40g sub-sample was analysed for Au, Pt and Pd using a Fire Assay Charge with ICP-OES finish. High sulphide content diamond core samples were also analysed for the full suite of Platinum Group Elements (Pt, Pd, Rh, Ru, Os and Ir) using the Fire Assay Nickel Sulphide Collection – a 25g charge with ICP-MS finish, to 1ppb detection limit.

Estimation Methodology

Estimates for nickel (Ni), arsenic (As), gold (Au), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), palladium (Pd), platinum (Pt), sulphur (S), iridium (Ir), osmium (Os), rhodium (Rh), ruthenium (Ru) and density (‘SG’) were made using ordinary kriging (OK) via a two-dimensional (2D) estimation methodology. The 2D method utilises full-seam grade composites multiplied by horizontal thickness and density to create an additive variable known as an ‘accumulation’.

Kriging is then run in the 2D plane for the thickness, ‘tonnage’ (thickness x density) and grade accumulation variables. Grades are calculated by dividing the estimated accumulation by the estimated tonnage, and density is derived by dividing the estimated tonnage by the estimated thickness. These estimated variables were then translated back into the original 3D space.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Cut Off Grade

Cut-off grade for reporting is 1% NiEq. The cut-off grade of 1% NiEq represents a stratigraphic cutoff as all of the material within the contact sulphide domain is above this cut-off.

Prospects for Economic Extraction

The grade and geometry of the Rosie nickel deposit is amenable to small scale underground mining, like many “Kambalda-style”nickel deposits. The deposit is located on a mining lease. There is no apparent reason the Rosie nickel deposit could not be mined, but a desktop mining and processing study needs to be completed.

Mining Methods and Parameters

Grades and geometry are amenable to small-scale underground mining, like many ‘Kambaldastyle’ nickel deposits. Given the narrow width of the basal contact zone (average 2 – 3m thickness), some mining dilution would occur.

Metallurgical Methods and Parameters

Metallurgical testwork was completed on two composite samples, representing both the massive (pentlandite dominant) and upper (violarite dominant) domain. Samples were assessed by flotation to determine the possibility of recovering nickel and copper to concentrates at a saleable grade and to determine the deportment of platinum group elements prevalent in the ore. Sixteen (16) flotation tests were conducted, nine on the massive sample and seven on the upper. Separate saleable nickel concentrates and or bulk copper nickel concentrates can be generated in a conventional flotation circuit.

Resource Classification Criteria

Indicated Mineral Resource has a drill spacing of 50 mN x 50 mRL or closer, and search pass 1 in violarite and pentlandite sulphide domains.

Inferred Mineral Resource has a drill spacing greater than 50 mN x 50 mRL, less than 100 mN x 100 mRL, and search passes 1 or 2 in violarite and pentlandite sulphide domains.

Not Classified – oxide domain.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Authorised for release by:

Stuart Fogarty Duketon Mining Limited - Managing Director +61 8 6315 1490

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources for the Rosie Nickel Deposit is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Michael Job who is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. At the time that the Mineral Resources were compiled, Mr Job was a full-time employee of Cube Consulting Pty Ltd, an independent mining consultancy. Mr Job has sufficient experience which 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 Job has provided his written consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

PREVIOUSLY REPORTED INFORMATION

The information in the announcement that relates to Mineral Resources for the C2 resource is extracted from the Company’s ASX announcement dated 29th January 2015 and is available to view on the Company’s website (www.duketonmining.com.au). The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcement.

This report includes information that relates to exploration results which were prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2012. The information was extracted from the Company’s previous ASX announcements as follows:

• 11th February 2020.

• 15th January 2015

• 2nd December 2014

The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcements. The Company confirms that the form and context in which any Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcements.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

JORC Table 1

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 report – Duketon Project

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data – Rosie MRE 2020

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or	• RC drillholes have been sampled initially as 4m composites, and subsequently 1m
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate	samples. RC 1m samples were split with a riffle splitter into calico bags where
	to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma	mineralisation has been encountered.
	sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.	• Diamond core (NQ2) has been sampled as half core in areas of mineralisation with a 5m buffer sampled at either side of the mineralised zone. The samples are generally 1m intervals, however can be less than 20cm in places based on geology and mineralisation styles. Geological boundaries are deemed sample boundaries, in order to gain multi-element analysis of the complete suite of rocktypes observed, and not to contaminate one rock type with another, and/or mineralisation.
	• 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, rotary air	• The Rosie/Nariz deposit has been drilled with a combination of Aircore, RC and
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple	Diamond drilling (NQ2). The primary method of drilling has been oriented diamond
	or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other	core (NQ2) using the Ace and EziMark orientation tools from surface to a vertical
	type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	depth of approximately 600m over a strike length of ~1,500m, however mineralisation
		has been intersected over a strike length of ~1km and is still open in all directions.
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	• The majority of the resource drilling to date has been diamond core and sample quality
recovery	and results assessed.	on the whole was excellent. Wet samples have been recorded for RC drilling, however
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure	the wet samples were not used in the resource estimate. At Rosie,RC sample weights

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	representative nature of the samples.	(total for 1m) were noticeably variable through each 6m rod run, tending to increase
	• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade	with penetration depth per rod. In addition, individual sample weights per 1m drilled
	and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential	also varied considerably. The cone splitter was swapped for a riffle splitter which
	loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	alleviated some of the blockage and contamination issues seen in the cone split
		samples. An area of concern was that there might be a grade/weight bias in the RC
		1m samples. Statistical analysis for the riffle splitter has shown that although there
		was a weight bias, it did not necessarily affect the grades. The cone split sample
		weights have not been able to be statistically analysed due to mixed methods of
		primary vs field duplicate sample selection in the field, an issue which was rectified
		later in the program.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	• Logging has been completed in detail for diamond core including rock type, grain size,
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate	texture, colour, foliation, mineralogy, alteration and a detailed description written for
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	every interval. In sections of oriented diamond core structural measurements of
	studies.	fractures, foliation, veins and shearing have been measured systematically using the
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or	Kenometer, with Alpha and Beta measurements taken for each feature where possible.
	costean, channel, etc) photography.	If the core is not orientated only an Alpha reading has been taken. RC chip samples
	• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	have been logged with a detailed geological description. All logging is of a level sufficient in detail to support resource estimation.
		• All diamond holes are logged on paper logs using the company geological codes library
		and a detailed written description is recorded for each interval. The logs are then data
		entered into an excel spreadsheet before being uploaded to the database.
		• RC chip samples have been logged with a detailed geological description. All logging
		is of a level sufficient in detail to support resource estimation.
		• Core photography has been completed both wet and dry for the majority of the
		diamond drilling over the entire length of the hole. The photographs are labelled and
		stored on the Perth server. Geotechnical logging has been completed for 30m either
		side of the footwall contact/mineralisation – and involved measuring fracture
		frequency, depth, hardness, fracture type, alpha, beta angle, profile of the fracture, the
		roughness of the joint surface, the infill type and characteristics. This data is recorded
		on paper logs, entered into an excel spreadsheet which is then loaded into the SQL
		database by the database administrator.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sub-sampling	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core	• RC samples split with a riffle splitter.
techniques	taken.	• Diamond core samples are half core, cut with an Almonte core saw.
and sample	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and	• Where field duplicates are taken the core is cut into two quarters. Field duplicates for
preparation	whether sampled wet or dry.	RC samples are taken as riffle splits.
	• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the	• All samples were sorted and dried in ovens for up to 24 hours (approx +/-) at 105°C.
	sample preparation technique.	Primary sample preparation has been by crushing the whole sample. For RC samples,
	• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to	the whole sample was crushed to a nominal 3mm. For diamond core the whole sample
	maximise representivity of samples.	was crushed to a nominal 10mm (primary crush) and then further crushed to a nominal
	• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in	3mm. All samples were then split with a riffle splitter to obtain a sub-fraction, a nominal
	situ material collected, including for instance results for field	2.4 kg sample where possible. All material was retained after splitting. Samples were
	duplicate/second-half sampling.	then milled using a robotic preparation system to 90% passing -75um.
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	• Laboratory standards taken at the pulverizing stage and selective repeats conducted at the laboratories discretion
		• Sample size considered appropriateforthe grainsize ofthematerialsupplied
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	• 1m split RC samples and all diamond core samples have been analysed for:
assay data	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered	• Au (1ppb), Pt (5ppb), Pd(5ppb) – the samples have been analysed by firing a 40g
and	partial or total.	portion of the sample. Lower sample weights may be employed for samples with
laboratory	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,	very high sulphide and metal contents. This is the classical fire assay process and
tests	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument	will give total separation of gold, platinum and palladium in the sample. Au (FA),
	make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their	Pt(FA), Pd(FA) have been determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical
	derivation, etc.	Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES).
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,	• As(1ppm), Co(5ppm), Cu(2ppm), Cr(10ppm), Fe(0.01%), Ti(50ppm), Ni(2ppm),
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels	Zn(2ppm), Mg(0.01%) and S(0.01%) –digested and refluxed with a mixture of acids
	of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	including Hydrofluoric, Nitric, Hydrochloric and Perchloric Acids. This extended
		digest approaches a total digest for many elements however some refractory
		minerals are not completely attacked. The mixed acid digest (0.15g sample weight)
		is modified to prevent losses of sulphur from high sulphide samples. The samples
		are peroxidised using an oxidant that converts the sulphides present to sulphates.
		• As has been determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-
		MS).
		• Co, Cu, Cr, Ti, Fe, Ni, Zn, Mg, S have been determined by Inductively Coupled
		Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES).
		• HighSulphide contentDiamond Core sampleshave also beenanalysedfor6PGEs:

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Pt(1ppb), Pd(1ppb), Rh(1ppb), Ru(1ppb), Os(1ppb), Ir(1ppb) – the samples have
		been analysed by Fire Assay using Nickel sulphide as the collecting medium. Here a
		nominal 25g sample is mixed with a Nickel Carbonate / Sulphur based flux and fused
		at 1,120°C for 1.25 hours. The resultant Nickel Sulphide button is pulverised and a
		portion is digested to remove the Nickel Sulphide base.
		• Inter-laboratory (Umpire) Checks on pulps from the Rosie deposit were completed at
		Genalysis, Maddington, WA. The pulps were analysed by a comparative method and
		for the same suite of elements as those completed at Ultra Trace (detailed above).
		• Standards were submitted with a minimum 3/100 samples, blanks minimum 2/100
		samples, duplicates minimum 2/100 samples, in Aircore and RC drilling. In 2012 the
		standard insertion rate was increased to 5/100 samples. With diamond drillholes,
		every zone of mineralisation generally had 2 or more standards,1 or more blanks and
		1 or more duplicates spread throughout the zone of mineralisation.
		• Various Geostats Pty Ltd Certified Reference Materials standards have been used
		from 0.5%, 1%, 2%, 3% Nickel, up to 11.65% Nickel for high grade massive sulphide.
		A Gold, Platinum and Palladium standard has also been used where Nickel Sulphide
		Fire Assays have been completed for the PGE suite of elements. Standards were
		submitted within mineralised intervals in a suitable location based on the expected
		grade of the zone being sampled and using a comparable grade standard, i.e.,
		disseminated mineralisation would have a ~0.5% Ni standard inserted into the sample
		run, whereas matrix sulphide mineralisation may have a 3% Ni standard inserted and
		so on.
Verification of	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	• All data has been checked internally for correctness by senior DKM geological and
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	corporate staff.
assaying	• The use of twinned holes.	• No adjustments have been made to assay data.
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	• There have been no twinned holes drilled at this point.
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	• Field Marshall was used for RC logging and the files were loaded directly into the
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	Datashed database.
		• All diamond holes were logged onto paper logs using the company geological codes
		library and a detailed written description is recorded for each interval. The logs are
		then data entered into an excel spreadsheet before being uploaded to the SQL
		database.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	• For drilling completed prior to 2012 collars were surveyed using DGPS equipment to
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	sub 0.5m accuracy. Co-ordinates were surveyed in the MGA94 grid system.
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.	• For drilling completed after 2012 collars were surveyed using a handheld GPS to an
	• Specification of the grid system used.	accuracy of +/-5m. Co-ordinates were surveyed in the MGA94 grid system.
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	• Dip and azimuth readings have been completed using DHA SEG Target INS– North
		Seeking Gyroscope for all diamond holes where possible. All gyro downhole surveys
		have to pass DHS internal audit by cross referencing the in-run and out-run which
		equates to <10m misclose between IN and OUT run over 1,000m (1%). RC drilling
		has been surveyed approximately every 50m down hole with a Reflex EZ single shot
		digital camera.
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	• For the Rosie resource the contact domain was reviewed in longitudinal projection
and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the	showing the drill intercept locations. The drill spacing was variable with some well-
distribution	degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	informed areas where drill spacing was approximately 30 x 30m and some areas where
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and	the drilling spacing was in excess of 50 x 50m, to 100 x 100m in parts. The data
	classifications applied.	spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish geological and grade continuity
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.	appropriate for the Mineral Resource estimation procedure and classification applied.
		• All sample/intercept composites have been length and density-weighted. Most
		diamond core samples have measured density values assigned to them. All RC
		assay results were assigned a density based on a regression formula calculated from
		the measured density and Ni, Cu, Co and S content of the diamond core samples.
		Where S values were not present, a modified regression formula calculated from the
		measured densityand Ni,Cu and Co was used.
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	• The contact mineralisation intersected to date is sub-vertical in orientation and forms
data in	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	a semi-continuous sheet of mineralisation approximately 1m true width with an
relation to	the deposit type.	average grade of ~2% Ni (plus Cu, Co and PGE), with thicker accumulations in
geological	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation	places. The mineralisation is syn-genetic and as such is not primarily structurally-
structure	of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a	controlled, however structural modification is apparent with the formation of breccia-
	sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	ore. The deposit could be classified as a moderately deformed magmatic sulphide
		deposit. The details of the structural modification and extent of over-printing
		relationships are a work in progress and not well understood at this stage. The
		drillholes were orientated to pierce the mineralisation approximately perpendicular to
		the strike, at an angle of approximately 60 degrees dip, this may vary from time to
		time depending on the depth and amount of deviation encountered within the
		drillhole. Drillhole intersections through the mineralisation are suitable for resource

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		estimation and do not introduce sampling bias.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Chain of custody was managed by company representatives and is considered
security		appropriate.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	• No external audits or reviews have been conducted apart from internal company
reviews		review.

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 tenement (M38/1252) is 100% owned by Duketon Mining Limited and is in good
tenement and	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint	standing and there are no known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the
land tenure	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,	area.
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 inthe area. _
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• Cominco explored the area for nickel in 1966 and found nickel sulphide veinlets in
done by other		ultrabasic rocks and gossanous material. INSEL explored the area between 1969
parties		and 1973 later followed by Kennecott and Shell Minerals between 1973 and 1974
		who identified high magnesium (+34%MgO) and low aluminium dunites. There was
		no further activity until Independence Group commenced exploration in the mid 2000
		culminating in the discovery of the C2 and Rosie mineralisation. South Boulder Mines
		discovered the Terminator gold deposit during 2009.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Rosie/Nariz Nickel Deposit is a komatiite-hosted nickel sulphide deposit. The
		mineralisation is characterised by accumulations of massive, matrix, breccia and
		disseminated Ni-Cu-PGE magmatic sulphides at the basal contact of a komatiite
		ultramafic rock, overlying a mafic pillow basalt footwall +/- fine grained siltstone
		sediments which may also contain sulphides in varying amounts.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the	• All significant intersections for Rosie have been previously reported.
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. _
Data	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,	• N/A
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	• Mineralization is very steep to sub-vertical and strikes approximately northeast-
between	Exploration Results.	southwest.
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	• Refer to figures in document.
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being
	_reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of _

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	_drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. _
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	• The thickness of the modelled mineralisation ranges from 0.2m to 4.5m wide.
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	• N/A
substantive	including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical
exploration	survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and
data	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 (eg tests for lateral	• Further work on the Rosie Deposit will involve Mining Studies
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

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 corrupted by, for	• All data is managed by Maxwell Geoservices and stored in a SQL database. Data
integrity	example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection	was recorded on paper logs, Field Marshall or Ocris logging software with inbuilt
	and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.	validation and sent to Maxwell for uploading into the database. Assay files are sent
	• Data validation procedures used.	directly from the laboratory to Maxwell for merging with the database.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and	• No site visit has been conducted by the Competent Person for the MRE at this stage
	the outcome of those visits.	due to travel restrictions. All drill core has been photographed both dry and wet and
	• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	available for viewing from the company database.
		• The Competent Person for data collection and quality has visited the site and inspected
		the core on numerous occasions.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Geological	• Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological	•	There is a high confidence level in the geological interpretation and that of the
interpretation	interpretation of the mineral deposit.		mineralisation. The resource estimate has been guided by the geology as the
	• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.		mineralisation is syn-genetic and directly linked to the basal contact horizon of the base
	• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.		of the ultramafic rock unit in which it resides. The grade distribution of the mineralisation has been used as a controlling guide for the wireframes for the
	• The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.		estimation, the rock type of the mineralised envelope will vary in places but is in general restricted to ultramafic rocks and minor zones of the footwall sediments and basalts.
	• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.		The grades are highest in the ultramafic rocks and weakest within the sediments and basalts of the footwall units. The main factors affecting continuity of grade are rock
			type and amount of structural deformation within the zone of mineralisation. Some
			minor remobilisation into the footwall units has been observed.
		•	The deposit is similar in style to many komatiitic nickel-copper deposits.
		•	The basal contact mineralised zone, and the lower-grade hanging wall and footwall
			units were modelled using the vein-modelling tool in Leapfrog software.
Dimensions	• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as	•	The drilling used for the estimate of the Mineral Resource to date spans a vertical
	length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below		depth of approximately 600m over a strike length of ~1,500m, however mineralisation
	surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.		has been intersected over a strike length of ~1km and is still open in all directions.
			The main basal contact mineralised zone is approximately 0.2m-4.5m wide (true
			width) and sub-vertical in a sheet like orientation striking approximately north-west to
			south-east. The mineralisation projects to the surface, however is obscured from
			direct detection by a thin veneer of transported overburden (~10-20m thick).
Estimation	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s)	•	Estimation of nickel, cobalt, copper, arsenic, gold, platinum, palladium, iridium,
and modelling	applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade		osmium, rhodium, ruthenium, sulphur and bulk density was by two-dimensional
techniques	values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance		Ordinary Kriging within the basal contact mineralised zone, using Datamine
	of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation		software. The 2D method utilises full-seam grade composites multiplied by
	method was chosen include a description of computer software and		horizontal thickness and density to create an additive variable known as an
	parameters used.		‘accumulation’.
	• The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine	•	These accumulations are then projected to a 2D plane – as the contact mineralized
	production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes		zone is sub-vertical, the projected plane was vertical.
	appropriate account of such data.	•	Kriging is then run in the 2D plane for the thickness, ‘tonnage’ (thickness x density)
	• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.		and grade accumulation variables. Grades are calculated by dividing the estimated
	• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of		accumulation by the estimated tonnage, and density is derived by dividing the estimated tonnage bythe estimated thickness. These estimated variables were then

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	economic significance (eg sulphur for acid mine drainage		translated back into the original 3D space.
	characterisation).	•	Grade caps were not used for nickel, as there were no extreme outlier values, but
	• In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to		grade capping was used for all the other variables. These caps were applied to the
	the average sample spacing and the search employed.		raw data before the accumulation calculations.
	• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.	•	Variography was performed using Snowden Supervisor software for the twelve
	• Any assumptions about correlation between variables.		grade accumulations, plus the thickness and ‘tonnage’ variables.
	• Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control	•	The minimum number of accumulations/thickness required was two, with a
	the resource estimates.		maximum of ten. There are 95 full seam accumulations available for most variables,
	• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.		but only 58 for the less-sampled minor PGEs (Ir, OS, Rh, Ru).
	• The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	•	First pass search ellipse radii were similar to the variogram ranges, with similar anisotropy as the variogram models; 200m down plunge (40° to the south in the 2D projected plane) and 100m across plunge.
		•	If a block was not estimated with this first search pass, a second pass twice the size
			of the first was used, and a third pass five times the original search was used if
			required. Over 95% of the blocks were informed on the first or second pass.
		•	The 2D parent block size was 32 mN and 32 mRL, with the 3D parent block size 16
			mE x 16 mN x 16 mRL. The final 3D block model was not rotated, but rotation of the
			2D model and grade accumulations was required to project to the 2D plane (the
			contact mineralized zone trends towards 315°). Average drill hole spacing through
			the basal contact zone is 50m N x 50m RL, with some infill to 25 x 25.
		•	Hard boundaries were used for grade estimation, with each mineralised zone
			estimated separately (i.e. no data sharing between zones).
		•	The block model was validated for all variables by checking tonnage-weighted
			grade estimates against input sample data per shoot, semi-local comparisons of
			model and sample accumulations and estimated grades by using swath plots, and
			by extensive visual inspection of the block grades and input data on screen. All
			these methods show that the grade estimates honour the input data satisfactorily.
		•	The model was also coded for the pentlandite dominant (massive) zone and
			violarite dominant (upper) zone as used for the metallurgical studies (see below). It
			is assumed that oxidised areas above the violarite zone will have no metallurgical
			recovery, and have been excluded from the mineral resource.
		•	The low-grade hanging wall and footwall zones were estimated by conventional 3D
			ordinary kriging, but are not part of the mineral resource, and are only required for
			dilution for futuremine planning studies.

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		•	There has been no mining at the Rosie deposit. This mineral resource estimate
			supersedes the previous estimate from 2012. There is a significant increase in
			tonnage (+28%) and Ni grade (+15%) compared to the previous estimate due to
			additional drilling that has extended the deposit to the south and at depth.
		•	A conventional 3D ordinary kriged check estimate model was run in parallel to the
			2D estimate, with the results within 1% for tonnage and 4% for Ni grade.
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural	•	Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
	_moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content. _
Cut-off	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters	•	The mineralised shoots have been defined stratigraphically. A cut-off grade of 1%
parameters	applied.		nickel equivalent (NiEq) has been used for reporting, but this represents the entire
			basal contact mineralised zone.
		•	NiEq has been calculated with the following prices (US $) and recoveries for
			(Pentlandite (P) and Violarite (V):
			• Ni $7.00/lb., P = 96.9%, V = 88.7%
			• Cu $3.20/lb., P = 99.5%, V = 94.5%
			• Co $14.00/lb., P = 95.1%, V = 88.5%
			• Pt $1,150/oz., P = 78.2%, V = 57.6%
			• Pd $1,250/oz., P = 97.6%, V = 87.3%
			• Rh $8,500/oz., P = 83.4%, V = 64.8%
Mining factors	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum	•	Grades and geometry are amenable to small-scale underground mining (most likely
or	mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining		long-hole stoping), like many ‘Kambalda-style’ nickel deposits.
assumptions	dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining	•	Given the narrow width of the basal contact zone (average 2 – 3m thickness), some
	reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider		mining dilution would occur.
	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 metallurgical	•	Metallurgical testwork was completed on two composite samples, representing both
factors or	amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of		the massive (pentlandite dominant) and upper (violarite dominant) domain. Samples
assumptions	determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to		were assessed by flotation to determine the possibility of recovering nickel and

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions		copper to concentrates at a saleable grade and to determine the deportment of
	regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made		platinum group elements prevalent in the ore.
	when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous.	•	Sixteen (16) flotation tests were conducted, nine on the massive sample and seven
	Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of		on the upper.
	the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	•	Separate saleable nickel concentrates and or bulk copper nickel concentrates can be
			generated in a conventional flotation circuit.
Environmen-	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue	•	As any potential mine would be relatively small-scale underground mining, haulage of
tal factors or	disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of		waste rock to surface would be minimal, and any potentially acid forming material
assumptions	determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to		would be encapsulated in the waste rock dump. Surface disturbance would be
	consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and		minimal, given the scale of the project.
	processing operation. While at this stage the determination of	•	The deposit is in an area of Western Australia that has numerous mining operations,
	potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project,		both underground and open-cut, and any proposed mine would comply with the well-
	may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of		established environmental laws and protocols in the Goldfields area of WA.
	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 basis for the	•	Bulk densities were determined by Bureau Veritas and field staff for the majority of
	assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the		significant interval diamond core samples from the Rosie deposit. The water
	frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and		displacement method was used. The samples were weighed in air (DryWt) and then
	representativeness of the samples.		submerged in water and the water displacement measured (WetWT) and the formula
	• The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by		Density=DryWT/(DryWT-WetWT) was applied.
	methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity,	•	For the RC samples, there were no measured densities, hence the sample intervals
	etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones		were assigned a density based on a regression formula calculated from the
	within the deposit.		measured density and Ni, and Fe content of the diamond core samples. Note that
	• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.		RC drilling represents less than 20% of the data available within the mineralized zone. Densities were used for all downhole compositing and metal accumulation variables. Density was interpolated into the resource model as with the grade (metal
			accumulation) attributes.
Classification	• The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying	•	Indicated Mineral Resource has a nominal drill spacing of 50 mN x 50 mRL, and
	confidence categories.		used search pass 1. Inferred Mineral Resource has a nominal drill spacing of
	• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (ie		greater than Indicated but below 100 mN x 100 mRL, and using search pass 1 or 2.
	relative confidence intonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input	•	There is high confidence in thegeological interpretation,and the input data has

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490

==> picture [126 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality,		been thoroughly checked and is reliable. The geometry and consistency of the
	quantity and distribution of the data).		mineralised shoots is similar to many ‘Kambalda-style’ nickel deposits.
	• Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s	•	The results reflect the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
	_view of the deposit. _
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	•	No independent external audits have occurred, but the work has been internally peer
reviews			reviewed by Cube Consulting.
Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and	•	Confidence in the estimate is reflected in the Mineral Resource Classification.
relative	confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach		Geostatistical metrics (e.g., kriging variances) have been used to assist with
accuracy/	or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For		classification, but are not the only measure of confidence.
confidence	example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to	•	The Mineral Resource relates to global tonnage and grade estimates.
	quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence	•	No mining production has occurred at the Rosie nickel deposit.
	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. _

Duketon Mining Limited ACN 159 084 107 Level 2 45 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005 T: +61(0) 8 6315 1490