ECOGRAF LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2015

May 5, 2015

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT

6 May 2015

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate for Merelani East

• Mineral Resource estimate of 17.2Mt at 6.5% TGC for 1,120,000 tonnes of contained graphite

• Located within the world class Merelani Graphite Province with a recognised sales history

• Exceptional metallurgical results which are directly comparable to neighbouring Block C deposit

• Mineral Resource estimate covers only 15% of Kibaran’s 100% owned tenement position and mineralisation remains open in all directions

• Strong results highlight stand-alone project potential and support Kibaran’s strategy of establishing a second production centre

• Exclusivity for neighbouring Block C deposit renewed

Kibaran Resources Limited (ASX: KNL), (‘Kibaran’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce its maiden JORCcompliant Mineral Resource for the Merelani East deposit in Tanzania. The Mineral Resource estimate totals 17.2 million tonnes (Mt) grading 6.5% total graphitic carbon (TGC) for 1,120,000 tonnes of contained graphite in the Inferred category.

The resource estimate was carried out by CSA Global Pty Ltd (‘CSA Global’), an independent and internationally recognised mineral industry consultancy group and was based on data sets compiled from drilling, trenching and other geological activity undertaken in late 2014 (refer announcement dated 4 February 2015). The Mineral Resource estimate has been classified in accordance with the JORC (2012) Code (Table 1).

Table 1 Mineral Resource Estimate for Merelani East deposit, > 5% TGC

JORC Classification	Tonnage (Mt)	Grade (%TGC)	Contained Graphite (t)
Inferred	17.2	6.5	1,120,000
Total	17.2	6.5	1,120,000

Notes for Table 1:

Tonnage figures contained within Table 1 have been rounded to nearest 10,000. % TGC grades are rounded to 1 decimal figure. Abbreviations used: Mt = 1,000,000 tonnes.

The Merelani East deposit is comparable in terms of grade, flake size and concentrate purity to the neighbouring Merelani Block C deposit (Table 2). The Company is continuing to work with the new owners of Tanzanite One Mining Limited and has extended an exclusive dealing period on this ground for a further 3 months.

The metallurgical characteristics of Kibaran’s Merelani East and Block C deposits are very attractive but importantly directly comparable. The Merelani East deposit, however, has the potential to host a significantly larger Mineral Resource than Block C and without the complications of gemstone associated mineralisation. This is supported by recent exploration trench results doubling the strike length of the graphite mineralisation at Merelani East to a total strike length in excess of 4 km while the mineralization remains open in all directions.

As the Company continues to fast track its flagship Epanko Graphite Project to production, the results emerging from Merelani East demonstrate that it is now a significant asset within Kibaran’s portfolio of graphite properties in Tanzania.

A key advantage of the Merelani East deposit is that occurs within a brownfields graphite province that has past production, proven processing flow sheet design and a recognised graphite sales history. This is generating considerable interest from traders and end users in the graphite industry and provides confidence that the Company’s Merelani Arusha Graphite project will support a second graphite operation after the development of Epanko.

1

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

The historical Merelani Block C Mineral Resource estimate for the main source of graphite mined, known as the Kyanite zone was 6.2Mt at 6.5% carbon. This historical estimate was reported by SAMAX Limited in 1993 and published in Explor. Mining Geology. Vol 3, No 4, pp. 371-382, 1994.

Table 2 Graphite flake distribution comparison based flotation results (refer announcement 23/2/2015)

	Flake Size		Portion of size fraction retained (%)	Portion of size fraction retained (%)
Name	Microns	Mesh	Merelani East Deposit	Block C Deposit*
Jumbo	> 300	>48	32.7	44.1
Larger	>180	>80	26.9	31.3
Medium	>150	>100	19.7	6.9
	> 106	>150		17.7
Small	> 75	>200	7.1
Fine	< 75	<200	13.6	-

Micron (µm) and Millimetre (mm). 1mm = 1000µm and fixed carbon content determined by loss on ignition method (LOI)

*Based on Bench Scale Flotation results and metallurgical technical data referenced from the Africa 1995 IMM Conference in Windhoek titled Merelani Graphite Project – Tanzania co-authored by Mr J.G. Park, Mr A.C. Northfield and Mr D.S. Dodd, Minerals Engineering, Vol. 7, No’s 2/3, pp 371-387, 1994 Printed in Great Britain.

The Metallurgical results support Kibaran’s future expansion strategy of producing a premium quality graphite product from a separate source to the Epanko Graphite Project and meet the longer-term requirements of the broader graphite market which is seeking supplier diversity.

The company has now initiated further test work, including ash melting point and purity on Merelani East graphite samples.

CLAUSE 49, JORC CODE CONSIDERATION

In accordance with Clause 49 of the JORC Code (2012), the product specifications and general product marketability were considered to support the Mineral Resource estimate for Industrial Minerals. Independent test work programs have determined that (refer announcement 23 February 2015):

• The Merelani East project contains a large flake distribution with very high-grade carbon concentrates recovered from simple flotation. 32.7% of concentrate is Jumbo flake (+300 micron) at 98.1 % TGC. Overall recovery is 97.1% at 96.2% TGC.

• Commercial viability is assisted by having a low percentage of fine flake (< 75 micron) which has low value and is likely unsaleable and a high percentage of large flake which provides higher basket prices and increased saleability.

Recent test work has confirmed the graphite mineralisation is suitable for the 'expanded' and ‘spherical’ battery market and in fact has no limitations on its uses (refer announcement 23 February 2015). The very high-grade graphite concentrate grade provides access to even higher value niche markets, graphene production and use in 3D printing. The ability to sell the product is supported by the company’s existing sales agreement (refer announcement 23 December 2013).

MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

Mineral Resource modelling was based on information compiled by Kibaran’s geologists and included geological and drilling data derived from twenty two reverse circulation (RC) drill holes, two diamond drill holes and seven trenches cut across the strike of two zones of mineralisation, namely the Northern Zone and Southern Zone. The deposit comprises three target areas of mineralisation. All areas have been mapped at surface from natural outcrop. Trenching has demonstrated strike continuity of mineralisation outside the resource limits.

2

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

The mineralisation has a combined strike length of 4,100 m. The down-dip extent of the Northern Zone is 100 m below the deepest mineralisation intercept. The Northern Zone was extrapolated along strike beyond the last two lines of drilling by a distance of 100 m to the north and south, or as supported by observed mineralised outcrop.

The mineralisation exhibits shallowly dipping stratigraphy in the Northern Zone, with a more vertical dip in the Southern Zone. The graphitic mineralisation is open at depth in both zones. 3D modelling of the Merelani graphite mineralisation was undertaken by CSA Global and block grades were estimated using the Inverse Distance Squared method. A density value of 2.5 t/m[3] was applied to the Mineral Resource, based upon documented density measurements from the Block C deposit. Drill samples were assayed by a reputable independent assay laboratory in South Africa.

It is important to note that a substantial amount of graphite mineralisation exists within the model at lower TGC cut-off grades than was used to report the Mineral Resource estimate.

==> picture [435 x 360] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 Geological plan showing Mineral Resource estimate and interpretation

Classification of the Mineral Resource estimate considered the geological understanding of the deposit, quality of the samples, density data and drill hole spacing. In addition, Clause 49 of the JORC (2012) Code was referred to, with metallurgical characteristics (flake size and distribution, flotation results) and marketing agreements supporting an Inferred classification. A more comprehensive assessment of Mineral Resource classification criteria is provided in JORC Table 1 which is presented at the end of this announcement.

Figure 2 presents a collar plot at the Merelani deposit. A typical geological cross-section is presented in Figure 3 and an interpretation of the mineralisation is shown in Figure 4. The block model is shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6.

3

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [320 x 360] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 Location of drilling at Merelani East deposit

==> picture [486 x 288] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 Geological cross-section of Merelani East deposit

4

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [484 x 313] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 West-east cross section through the Northern Zone, showing RC drill holes (coloured by TGC as per legend), mineralisation outlines (4% TGC and internal 8% TGC) and topographic profile.

==> picture [482 x 167] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 3D View of Northern Zone block model showing drill holes (red), geological mapping strings, topographic DTM and resource blocks coloured on resource classification (yellow = Inferred, grey = unclassified). View looking up towards west-north-west. Strike length of Inferred Mineral Resource Eastern approximately 1,800 m. Zone

5

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [484 x 145] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6 3D View of Southern Zone block model showing drill holes and trenches (red), geological mapping strings, topographic DTM and resource blocks coloured on resource classification (yellow = Inferred, grey = unclassified). View looking up towards south. Strike length of modelled mineralisation is 2,300 m.

MERELANI BLOCK C – EXTENSION OF EXCLUSIVITY

The exclusivity agreement for Merelani Block C graphite rights has been extended by the Company for a period of 3 months.

As previously announced the Company and both AIM listed Richland Resources Limited wholly owned subsidiary Tanzanite One Mining Limited (“TML”) and Tanzania’s State Mining Corporation (‘STAMICO”) via their STAMICO-TML Joint Venture (“the Joint Venture”) entered a Memorandum of Understanding, with the intent of finalising an agreement to consolidate the Joint Venture’s graphite assets at Merelani with Kibaran’s 100% owned contiguous licences.

When Kibaran initially approached Richland Resources Limited regarding the concept of entering into an agreement for the graphite rights of Merelani Block C, the primary attraction was the potential for Merelani Block C to return to graphite production in a shorter timeframe than other graphite projects, including Epanko.

However, due to Richland Resources Limited recent selling of Tanzanite One Mining Limited to privately owned Sky Associates Limited, the negotiations to finalise an agreement have been delayed and consequently certain of the benefits of access to a brownfields site, including the time to production, have been eroded.

Subject to continued negotiations and further assessment of the potential of the Merelani East deposit, the company will determine the optimal development strategy to establishing a second production centre for Kibaran.

6

==> picture [222 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION – TABLE 1 Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling		Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut chan-	Samples were collected by reverse circulation (RC) holes,
techniques		nels, random chips, or specific specialised in-	diamond core drilling and trenching.
		dustry standard measurement tools appropri- ate to the minerals under investigation, such	Sampling is guided by Kibaran’s protocols and QA/QC procedures.
		as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of	RC samples are collected by a riffle splitter using a face sampling hammer with a diameter of approximately 140 mm.
		sampling.	All samples were sent SGS laboratory in Johannesburg for
		Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate cali- bration of any measurement tools or systems	preparation and LECO analyses. All samples are crushed using an LM2 mill to –4 mm and pulverised to nominal 80% passing –75 μm.
		used.	Diamond core (if competent) is cut using a core saw. Where the
			material is too soft it is left in the tray and a knife is used to quarter
		Aspects of the determination of mineralisation	the core for sampling. Trenches were sampled at 0.5m intervals,
		that are Material to the Public Report.	these intervals were speared and submitted for analyses.
		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 re-
		quired, such as where there is coarse gold that
		has inherent sampling problems. Unusual
		commodities or mineralisation types (eg sub-
		marine nodules) may warrant disclosure of de-
		tailed information.
Drilling		Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-	RC holes were drilled in a direction so as to hit the mineralisation
techniques		hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka,	orthogonally. Face sample hammers were used and all samples
		sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple	collected dry and riffle split after passing through the cyclone.
		or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is ori-	Diamond drilling was drilled as triple Tubed HQ diameter core.
		ented and if so, by what method, etc).
Drill sample		Method of recording and assessing core and	The RC rig sampling systems are routinely cleaned to minimize the
recovery		chip sample recoveries and results assessed.	opportunity for contamination; drilling methods are focused on
		Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the sam-	sample quality. Diamond drilling (triple Tubed HQ diameter core) was used to maximise sample recovery when used.
		ples.	The selection of RC drilling company, having a water drilling
			background enables far greater control on any water present in the
		Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias	system, ensuring wet samples were kept to a minimum.
		may have occurred due to preferential	No relationship exists between sample recovery and grade.
		loss/gain of fine/coarse material.
Logging		Whether core and chip samples have been	Geological logging is completed for all holes and representative
		geologically and geotechnically logged to a	across the deposit. Logged data is both qualitative and
		level of detail to support appropriate Mineral	quantitative depending on field being logged.
		Resource estimation, mining studies and met- allurgical studies.	All drill holes and all intervals were logged.
		Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in
		nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photog-
		raphy.
		The total length and percentage of the relevant
		intersections logged.
Sub-		If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quar-	All RC samples are split using a riffle splitter mounted under the
sampling		ter, half or all core taken.	cyclone, RC samples are drilled dry.
techniques and sample preparation		If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.	A small fraction of samples returned to the surface wet. All samples were submitted for assay Diamond core was cut on core saw and quarter core submitted for
		For all sample types, the nature, quality and	analyses.
		appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.	Sample preparation at the SGS laboratory involves the original sample being dried at 80° for up to 24 hours and weighed on
		Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- sampling stages to maximise representivity of	submission to laboratory. Crushing to nominal –4 mm. Sample is split to less than 2 kg through linear splitter and excess retained. Sample splits are weighed at a frequencyof 1/20 and entered into

7

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
		samples.	the job results file. Pulverising is completed using LM2 mill to 90%
		Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is	passing –75 μm.
		representative of the in situ material collected,	QA/QC protocols were followed, including the use of field duplicate
		including for instance results for field dupli-	samples to test the primary sampling step for the RC drilling.
		cate/second-half sampling.	Sample sizes are considered appropriate with regard to the grain
		Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the	size of the sampled material.
		grain size of the material being sampled.
Quality of		The nature, quality and appropriateness of the	Drill samples were sent to the SGS Laboratory at Mwanza
assay data		assaying and laboratory procedures used and	(Tanzania) for sample preparation, with the pulps sent to SGS
and		whether the technique is considered partial or	Johannesburg for assaying. The following methodology is used by
laboratory		total.	SGS for Total Graphitic Carbon (TGC) analyses.
tests		For geophysical tools, spectrometers,	Total carbon is measured using LECO technique. The sample is
		handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parame-	combusted in the oxygen atmosphere and the IR used to measure
		ters used in determining the analysis including	the amount of CO2 produced. The calibration of the LECO
		instrument make and model, reading times,	instrument is done by using certified reference materials.
		calibrations factors applied and their deriva- tion, etc.	For the analysis of Graphitic Carbon, a 0.3g sample is weighed and roasted at 550oC to remove any organic carbon. The sample
		Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external la- boratory checks) and whether acceptable lev- els of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	is then heated with diluted hydrochloric acid to remove carbonates. After cooling the sample is filtered and the residue rinsed and dried at 75oC prior to analysis by the LECO instrument. The analyses by LECO are done by total combustion of sample in the oxygen atmosphere and using IR absorption from the resulting CO2
			produced.
			Laboratory certificates were sent via email from the assay
			laboratory to Kibaran. The assay data was provided to CSA in the
			form of Microsoft XL files and assay laboratory certificates. The
			files were imported into Datamine.
			Standards are inserted at approximately a 10% frequency rate. In
			addition, field duplicates, laboratory duplicates are collectively
			inserted at a rate of 10% QAQC data analysis has been completed
			to industry standards.
Verification		The verification of significant intersections by	Senior Kibaran geological personnel supervised the sampling, and
of sampling		either independent or alternative company	alternative personnel verified the sampling locations. Two RC
and		personnel.	holes were twinned with diamond drill holes.
assaying		The use of twinned holes.	Primary data are captured on paper in the field and then re-
			entered into spreadsheet format by the supervising geologist, to
		Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage	then be loaded into the company’s database.
		(physical and electronic) protocols.	No adjustments are made to any assay data.
		Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
Location of		Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate	Sample locations picked up by hand held GPS.
data points		drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	UTM Zone 37 South was the grid system used.
		used in Mineral Resource estimation.	No coordinate transformation was applied to the data.
		Specification of the grid system used.	Downhole surveys collected by multi-shot camera.
		Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	Topographic DTM was compiled from point data, collected from a
			series of traverses 50m spaced along strike.
Data		Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Re-	Spacing’s are sufficient for estimation and reporting of a Mineral
spacing		sults.	Resource.
and distribution		Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological	Drill hole locations are at a nominal 100 m (Y) by 25 to 50 m (X) spacing.
		and grade continuity appropriate for the Miner- al Resource and Ore Reserve estimation pro- cedure(s) and classifications applied.	Data spacing and distribution are sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the classification applied.
		Whether sample compositing has been ap- plied.	No compositing has been applied to exploration data.
Orientation		Whether the orientation of sampling achieves	Most holes have been orientated towards an azimuth so as to be
of data in		unbiased sampling of possible structures and	able intersect the graphitic mineralisation in a perpendicular
relation to		the extent to which this is known, considering	manner. Drill pad accessibility has required an adjustment to drill
geological		the deposit type.	hole orientation to a few holes.
structure		If the relationship between the drilling orienta-	RC holes were drilled at variable dips to define the geology and
		tion and the orientation of key mineralised	contacts of the deposit.
		structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and	Some holes were drilled vertical to test geological contact

8

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
			reported if material.	positions.
	Sample		The measures taken to ensure sample securi-	Samples were stored at the company’s secure field camp prior to
	security		ty.	dispatch to the prep lab by contacted transport company, who
				maintained security of the samples.
	Audits or		The results of any audits or reviews of sam-	Sampling procedures were independently reviewed by CSA Global
	reviews		pling techniques and data.	as part of the preparation of the Mineral Resource estimate.
				Kibaran senior geological personnel reviewed sampling
				procedures on a regular basis.
				All drill hole results were collated and stored within a Datashed
				database. A random selection of assays from the database was
				cross referenced against the laboratory certificates.
Section 2		Reporting of Exploration Results
	Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	Mineral		Type, reference name/number, location and	The tenements are 100% owned by Kibaran wholly owned
	tenement		ownership including agreements or material	subsidiary and are within granted and live prospecting licenses.
	and land tenure status		issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or nation- al park and environmental settings.	The Merelani project consists of PL 7907/2012, PL 7913/2012, PL 7914/2012, PL 7915/2012, PL 7917/2012, PL 7906/2012, PL 7918/2012, PL 10090/2014, PL10091/2014, PL10092/2014.
			The security of the tenure held at the time of
			reporting along with any known impediments
			to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
	Exploration		Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration	Historical reports exist for the project area as the region was first
	done by		by other parties.	recognised for graphite potential in 1959.
	other parties			No recent information exists.
	Geology		Deposit type, geological setting and style of	The Merelani Project is hosted within a quartz–feldspar-carbonate
			mineralisation.	graphitic schist, part of a Neoproterozoic metasediment package,
				including marble and gneissic units.
	Drill hole		A summary of all information material to the	Sample and drill hole coordinates are provided in market
	Information		understanding of the exploration results includ-	announcements.
			ing 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 – eleva-
			tion 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	No high-grade cuts were necessary.
	aggregation methods		averaging techniques, maximum and/or mini- mum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	Aggregating was made for intervals that reported over 1% TGC (Total graphitic carbon). The purpose of this is to report intervals that may be significant to future metallurgical work.
			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	There is no implication about economic significance. Intervals reporting above 8% TGC are intended to highlight a significant higher grade component of graphite, there is no implication of economic significance.
			and some typical examples of such aggrega- tions should be shown in detail.	No equivalents were used.
			The assumptions used for any reporting of
			metal equivalent values should be clearly stat-
			ed.
	Relationshi		These relationships areparticularly important	All RC holes have been orientated towards an azimuth so as to be

9

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
p between		in the reporting of Exploration Results.	able intersect the graphitic mineralisation orthogonally.
mineralisati on widths and		If the geometry of the mineralisation with re- spect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature	Given dip variations are mapped down hole length are reported, true width not known from the exploration results.
intercept		should be reported.
lengths		If it is not known and only the down hole
		lengths are reported, there should be a clear
		statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length,
		true width not known’).
Diagrams		Appropriate maps and sections (with scales)	See main body of report.
		and tabulations of intercepts should be includ-
		ed for any significant discovery being reported
		These should include, but not be limited to a
		plan view of drill hole collar locations and ap-
		propriate sectional views.
Balanced		Where comprehensive reporting of all Explora-	Results are presented previous announcements.
reporting		tion Results is not 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 ma-	Field mapping was conducted early in the geological assessment
substantive		terial, should be reported including (but not	of the license area to define the geological boundaries of the
exploration		limited to): geological observations; geophysi-	graphitic schist with other geological formations. Geological
data		cal survey results; geochemical survey results;	mapping of trenches cut across the strike of the host geological
		bulk samples – size and method of treatment;	units provided important information used to compile the Mineral
		metallurgical test results; bulk density,	Resource estimate.
		groundwater, geotechnical and rock character- istics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	Details of metallurgical testwork are detailed in the body of this report, and in Section 3 of this Table.
Further		The nature and scale of planned further work	RC and Diamond drilling is planned to be completed for further
work		(eg tests for lateral extensions or depth exten-	metallurgical testwork.
		sions or large-scale step-out drilling).
		Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of
		possible extensions, including the main geo-
		logical interpretations and future drilling areas,
		provided this information is not commercially
		sensitive.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database integrity		Measures taken to ensure that data has not	Data used in the Mineral Resource estimate is sourced from
		been corrupted by, for example, transcription	a data base export. Relevant tables from the data base are
		or keying errors, between its initial collection	exported to MS Excel format and converted to csv format for
		and its use for Mineral Resource estimation	import into Datamine Studio 3 software for use in the Miner-
		purposes.	al Resource estimate.
		Data validation procedures used.	Validation of the data import include checks for overlapping
			intervals, missing survey data, missing assay data, missing
			lithological data, and missing collars.
Site visits		Comment on any site visits undertaken by the	The Competent Person (CP) for Mineral Resources has not
		Competent Person and the outcome of those	visited the Merelani site. It is anticipated that this will occur
		visits.	during the next planned drilling programme. The CP has
		If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	visited Kibaran’s other graphite project (Epanko) and re- viewed the drilling and sampling procedures employed there, which were replicated at Merelani. The CP has relied
			upon the opinions of the CP (exploration results) and other
			senior Kibaran staff regarding geological outcrop of mineral-
			isation, and other relevant matters.
Geological inter-		Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty	There is a low to moderate level of confidence in the geo-
pretation		of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral	logical interpretation, based upon lithological logging of
		deposit.	diamond drill core, RC chips, trench sampling and geologi-
		Nature of the data used and of any assump-	cal mapping of outcropping strata. Trenches cut orthogonal to the strike of thegeologydemonstrated thegeometryof

10

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
		tions made.	the deposit, and clearly showed graphitic mineralisation.
		The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.	Deposit scale geological mapping provide a geological framework for the interpretation.
		The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.	Drill hole intercept logging and assay results (RC hole only), structural interpretations from drill core and geological logs of trenches have formed the basis for the geological inter-
		The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.	pretation. Assumptions were made on depth and strike ex- tension of the graphitic schists, using drill hole and trench sample assays as anchor points at depth and at intervals
			along strike. Geological mapping also support the geological
			assumptions built into the Mineral Resource.
			No alternative interpretations were considered because the
			exposed geology in outcrop support the current interpreta-
			tion.
			Graphitic mineralisation is hosted within a graphitic schist,
			which is mapped along it’s strike continuity within the li-
			cense area. Grade (total graphitic carbon, TGC) is assumed
			to be likewise continuous with the host rock unit. Metallurgi-
			cal characteristics, principally flake size, has been observed
			to be of a consistent nature when observed in outcrop,
			trench exposure and diamond drill core at numerous loca-
			tions within the license area.
			The graphitic schist is open down dip.
			The interpretation of the mineralisation domains is based
			upon a pre-determined lower cut-off grade for TGC of 4%,
			supported by statistical studies of the TGC (%) population.
			A variation to the cut-off grade will affect the volume and
			average grade of the domains.
Dimensions		The extent and variability of the Mineral Re-	The Merelani Mineral Resource estimate is approximately
		source expressed as length (along strike or	4,100 m in strike, 50 m in plan width and reaches 100 m
		otherwise), plan width, and depth below sur-	depth below surface.
		face to the upper and lower limits of the Min-
		eral Resource.
Estimation and		The nature and appropriateness of the estima-	Datamine Studio 3 software was used for all geological
modelling tech-		tion technique(s) applied and key assump-	modelling, block modelling, grade interpolation, MRE classi-
niques		tions, including treatment of extreme grade	fication and reporting. GeoAccess Professional and Snow-
		values, domaining, interpolation parameters	den Supervisor were used for geostatistical analyses of
		and maximum distance of extrapolation from	data. The TGC interpretations were based upon a lower cut-
		data points. If a computer assisted estimation	off of 4% TGC and geological interpretations of mineralised
		method was chosen include a description of	outcrop and trenches, and logging of diamond drill core and
		computer software and parameters used.	RC chips. Internal high grade domains were identified and
		The availability of check estimates, previous	were modelled using a lower cut-off grade of 8% TGC. The Mineral Resource model consists of 7 zones of TGC miner-
		estimates and/or mine production records and	alisation, with 5 zones in the Western Zone and 2 zones in
		whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data.	the Eastern zone. Mineralisation domains were encapsulat- ed by means of 3D wireframed envelopes. Domains were
		The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.	extrapolated along strike or down plunge to half a section spacing or if a barren hole cut the plunge extension before this limit. Top cuts were not used to constrain extreme
		Estimation of deleterious elements or other	grade values because the TGC grade distribution did not
		non-grade variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acid mine drainage characteri- sation).	warrant their use. All drill hole data (RC only) and trench assays were utilised in the grade interpolation. A statistical study of the trench assay data demonstrated a similar popu- lation to the conventional drilling sample assay results.
		In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed.	A block model with parent cell sizes 50 m x 25 m x 10 m was constructed, compared to typical drill spacing of 100m x 50m.
		Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.	Grade estimation was by Inverse Distance Squared (IDS). A minimum of 4 and maximum of 18 samples were used in
		Any assumptions about correlation between	any one block estimate. A maximum of 5 samples per drill
		variables.	hole were used in any one block estimate. Cell Discretisa-
		Description of how the geological interpreta- tion was used to control the resource esti-	tion of 3 x 3 x 3 was used. Grade interpolation was run with- in the individual mineralisation domains, acting as hard boundaries.
		mates.
			The current Mineral Resource is the maiden Mineral Re-
		Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.	source estimate for the Merelani East prospect and there- fore cannot be compared to previous estimates.
		Theprocess of validation, the checking pro-

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
		cess used, the comparison of model data to	No depletion of the Mineral Resource due to mining activity
		drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if	was required due to no mining having occurred historically.
		available.	The Mineral Resource is constrained fully within license
			PL7907_2012.
			No by products were modelled.
			No selective mining units were assumed in this model.
			The grade model was validated by 1) creating slices of the
			model and comparing to drill holes on the same slice; 2)
			swath plots comparing average block grades with average
			sample grades on nominated easting, northing and RL slic-
			es; and 3) mean grades per domain for estimated blocks
			and flagged drill hole samples. No reconciliation data exists
			to test the model.
Moisture		Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry	Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
		basis or with natural moisture, and the method
		of determination of the moisture content.
Cut-off parame-		The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or	A reporting cut-off grade of 5% TGC was used to report the
ters		quality parameters applied.	Mineral Resource, and is in line with other reported Mineral
			Resources in East Africa.
Mining factors or		Assumptions made regarding possible mining	It is assumed the deposit, if mined, will be developed using
assumptions		methods, minimum mining dimensions and in-	open pit mining methods. No assumptions have been made
		ternal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilu-	to date regarding minimum mining widths or dilution.
		tion. It is always necessary as part of the pro- cess of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider po- tential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parame- ters when estimating Mineral Resources may	The largest mineralisation domains in plan view have an apparent width of over 50m which may result in less selec- tive mining methods, as opposed to (for example) mining equipment that would need to be used to mine narrow veins in a gold mine.
		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 fac-		The basis for assumptions or predictions re-	In accordance with Clause 49 of the JORC code (2012), the
tors or assump-		garding metallurgical amenability. It is always	product specifications and general product marketability
tions		necessary as part of the process of determin-	were considered to support the Mineral Resource estimate
		ing reasonable prospects for eventual eco-	for Industrial Minerals. Independent test work programs
		nomic extraction to consider potential metal-	were reported on 23 February 2015. Relevant findings in-
		lurgical methods, but the assumptions regard-	clude:
		ing metallurgical treatment processes and pa- rameters made when reporting Mineral Re- sources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical	 Metallurgical results confirm the Merelani East pr contains very large flake distribution with very grade carbon concentrates recovered from simple f tion.
		assumptions made.	 32.7% of concentrate is Jumbo flake (+300 micro
			98.1 % TGC.
			 Overall recovery 97.1% grading 96.2% TGC.
Environmental		Assumptions made regarding possible waste	No assumptions have been made to date regarding possible
factors or as-		and process residue disposal options. It is al-	waste and process residue disposal options.
sumptions		ways necessary as part of the process of de- termining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and pro-	Kibaran are holding ongoing discussions with local land- holders and community groups to keep them well informed of the status and future planned directions of the project.
		cessing operation. While at this stage the de- termination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental	Merelani is located in a sub-equatorial region of Tanzania and is subject to heavy seasonal rainfall, with rapid growth of vegetation in season. No major waterways are located within the project area.
		impacts should be reported. Where these as-
		pects have not been considered this should be
		reported with an explanation of the environ-
		mental assumptions made.
Bulk density		Whether assumed or determined. If assumed,	A density value of 2.5 t/m3 was applied to the Mineral Re-
		the basis for the assumptions. If determined,	source estimate, and is an assumed value. This value was
		the method used, whether wet or dry, the fre-	used in the estimation of the adjacent ‘Block C’ project and
		quency of the measurements, the nature, size	is considered appropriate for the host rock unit. The rock
		and representativeness of the samples.	units were observed in drill core to be quite competent from
		The bulk density for bulk material must have	shallow depths therefore a lower density for the oxidised weathering profile was not applied for this Mineral Re-

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
		been measured by methods that adequately	source.
		account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc),
		moisture and differences between rock and al-
		teration zones within the deposit.
		Discuss assumptions for bulk density esti-
		mates used in the evaluation process of the
		different materials.
Classification		The basis for the classification of the Mineral	Classification of the Mineral Resource estimates was car-
		Resources into varying confidence categories.	ried out taking into account the geological understanding of
		Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (ie relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and	the deposit, QAQC of the samples, density data and drill hole spacing. Metallurgical results related to flake size and sample purity, as well as marketing agreements in place supported the classification, as per Clause 49 (JORC 2012).
		metal values, quality, quantity and distribution	The Mineral Resource is classified as Inferred, with geologi-
		of the data).	cal evidence sufficient to imply but not verify geological and
			grade continuity.
		Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	All available data was assessed and the CPs relative confi-
			dence in the data was used to assist in the classification of
			the Mineral Resource.
			The current classification assignment appropriately reflects
			the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
Audits or reviews		The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral	No audits or reviews of the current Mineral Resource esti-
		Resource estimates.	mate have been undertaken.
Discussion of		Where appropriate a statement of the relative	No other estimation method or geostatistical analysis has
relative accuracy/		accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral	been performed.
confidence		Resource estimate using an approach or pro- cedure deemed appropriate by the Competent	The Mineral Resource is a global estimate.
		Person. For example, the application of statis- tical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an ap- proach is not deemed appropriate, a qualita- tive discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the es- timate.	Relevant tonnages and grade above nominated cut-off grades for TGC are provided in the introduction and body of this report. Tonnages were calculated by filtering all blocks above the cut-off grade and sub-setting the resultant data into bins by mineralisation domain. The volumes of all the collated blocks were multiplied by the dry density value to derive the tonnages. The graphite metal values (g) for each block were calculated by multiplying the TGC grades (%) by
		The statement should specify whether it re- lates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be	the block tonnage. The total sum of all metal for the deposit for the filtered blocks was divided by 100 to derive the re- portable tonnages of graphite metal.
		relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions	No production data is available to reconcile results with.
		made and the procedures used.
		These statements of relative accuracy and
		confidence of the estimate should be com-
		pared with production data, where available.

13

ABOUT KIBARAN RESOURCES LIMITED

Kibaran Resources Limited (ASX: KNL or “Kibaran”) is a graphite focused resource company with world class graphite projects located in Tanzania. Kibaran is also a 50% shareholder in 3D Graphtech Industries.

The Company’s primary focus is to develop its 100%-owned Epanko Graphite Project, located within the Mahenge Graphite Province. Epanko is currently undergoing a Bankable Feasibility Study and has a total Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate of 22.7Mt, grading 9.8% TGC, for 2.2Mt of contained graphite, defined in accordance with the JORC Code. This initial estimate only covers 20% of the project area. Metallurgical testwork has found Epanko graphite to be large flake, expandable, ultra-high purity and premium quality from a global perspective.

Kibaran also has rights to the Merelani-Arusha Graphite Project, located in the north-east of Tanzania. MerelaniArusha is also considered to be highly prospective for commercial graphite.

Graphite is regarded as a critical material for future global industrial growth, destined for industrial and technology applications including nuclear reactors, lithium-ion battery manufacturing and a raw material of graphene.

The Company is positioning itself to participate in the emerging 3D printing market using graphite inks via 3D Graphtech Industries PL, jointly owned with 333D Pty Ltd (formerly 3D Group) which is transacting as OZ Brewing (ASX:OZB).

In addition, Kibaran has the Kagera Nickel Project which remains underexplored and is located along strike of the Kabanga nickel deposit, owned by the Glencore – Barrick Gold Joint Venture, which is considered to be the largest undeveloped, high grade nickel sulphide deposit in the world. Kibaran is currently seeking a partner to progress exploration of its highly prospective nickel properties.

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Andrew Spinks, a Competent Person, who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Andrew Spinks is employed by Kibaran Resources Limited. Mr Spinks 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”. Andrew Spinks consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr David Williams, a Competent Person, who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. David Williams is employed by CSA Global Pty Ltd, an independent consulting company. Mr Williams 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”. David Williams consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

For further information, please contact:

Company Secretary Robert Hodby Kibaran Resources Limited P: + 61 8 6380 1003 E: rhodby@kibaranresources.com

Media Relations Rebecca Lawson M&C Partners P: +61 2 8916 6124 E: rebecca.lawson@mcpartners.com.au

14