ELEMENTOS LIMITED — Regulatory Filings 2017

Nov 6, 2017

==> picture [596 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [596 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [596 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [596 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

7th November 2017

ENCOURAGING FIRST ASSAY RESULTS FROM DIAMOND DRILLING AT CLEVELAND

Elementos Limited (ASX: ELT) (“Elementos” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce the results of the first five holes drilled at the Cleveland project in northwest Tasmania.

Two significant intersections from the programme, include:

• Drill hole C2102 (Henry’s Lode) - 3.9 metres @ 0.49% Sn* and 0.15% Cu from 32.1 – 36.0 metres; and

• Drill hole C2104 (Khaki Lode) - 3.9m @ 0.78% Sn and 0.25% Cu from 67.1 to 71.0m.

The Company is very encouraged by the results of holes C2102 and C2104 which have the potential to extend the open–cut mineral resource at two of the main tin-copper lode systems defined at Cleveland. The intersections and transition zones have a strong presence of disseminated to semi-massive sulphide mineralisation including pyrrhotite, pyrite, marmatite and chalcopyrite (primary copper mineralisation).

The objectives of the diamond drilling programme, which commenced in August is two-fold:

• Assess the potential for infill and along strike mineralisation to increase the existing opencut mineral resources at Cleveland of 800,000t @ 0.81% Sn and 0.27% Cu; and

• Test the potential for new mineralisation and resources at the three new anomalies identified through the recently completed ground magnetic survey.

The recent exploration activities which include mapping, sampling, geophysics and drilling are the first modern exploration activities undertaken at Cleveland since 1986. The Company is now establishing a more comprehensive understanding of the geology and mineralisation at Cleveland which it believes will assist with better target generation for the on-going drilling programme.

Elementos Chief Executive Officer, Chris Creagh, commented, “The initial drill results received are an encouraging start to the programme, highlighting the potential for an incremental increase in the existing open-cut resources at Cleveland. A total of 16 drill holes are planned targeting infill and extension mineralisation around the existing open-cut resources. An additional 12 drill holes have been planned to test the magnetic anomalies that were detected earlier this year, with drill site access and pad preparations underway”.

*(all tin assays are being reported as total tin content in %)

==> picture [596 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [97 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Drilling Programme Overview

The drilling programme is being carried out by Low Impact Diamond Drilling Specialists (LIDDS), a company based in Burnie, Tasmania. LIDDS have been able to supply a very manoeuvrable Onram 1000 track mounted drilling rig with a very small footprint which allows the company to minimise site preparation works and drill at angles between +90 degrees and -90 degrees. The drill core was analysed at ALS laboratories in Burnie, Tasmania.

Planned_HoleID	Drilled_HoleID	MGAE	MGAN	Azi_Mag	Dip	RL(MSL + 1000)	Lode	Total Depth(m)
P1701	C2100	365290	5407110	300	‐35	1488	Henry's	68.9
P1705	C2101	365270	5407097	300	‐30	1485	Henry's	89.7
P1708	C2102	365045	5406944	300	‐15	1435	Khaki's	67.9
P1710	C2103	365002	5406901	300	‐15	1415	Khaki's	47.8
P1712	C2104	364974	5406855	300	‐40	1400	Khaki's	107.7

Table 1. First five diamond drill holes completed from the Cleveland Initial Infill drilling programme Note:- drill holes have been surveyed with a hand held GPS

==> picture [322 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [322 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [322 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [322 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [322 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [322 x 75] intentionally omitted <==

Page 2

==> picture [97 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

The first two drill holes (C2100 & C2101) were targeting potential near surface mineralisation on the Henry’s Lode and did not intersect any significant mineralisation.

Drill hole C2102 intersected two zones of tin-copper mineralisation. The first zone, interpreted to be the Henry’s Lode, was intersected from 32.1 – 36.0m containing approximately 15% sulphides as disseminated to and semi-massive aggregates of visually determined pyrrhotite, pyrite, marmatite and chalcopyrite. This first mineralised zone was assayed to contain 3.9m @ 0.49% Sn* and 0.15% Cu from 32.1m.

The second zone of mineralisation in C2012, interpreted to be the Khaki Lode, was intersected from 51.0 - 55.5m and contained approximately 7% sulphides that were visually determined to consist of pyrite, marmatite, pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite and arsenopyrite. This zone of mineralisation returned lower values with 4.5m @ 0.05% Sn and 0.05% Cu from 51m.

Drill hole C2103 had to be terminated without encountering any mineralisation after intersecting shallow historical underground workings from the period of mining that occurred between 1908 and 1917. An unknown number of these historical workings are not recorded in the database. The current open cut resource was calculated based on drilling carried out by Aberfoyle Resources from the early 1960’s to 1986, when the mine was last operated. Any pre-existing voids would have been recorded in the drill hole database and would have been taken into account when calculating the existing resource.

Drill hole C2104 intersected what is interpreted to be the Khaki Lode from 67.1 to 71.0m. Visual estimates are of approximately 25% disseminated and semi massive sulphide aggregates comprising pyrrhotite, pyrite and chalcopyrite. Assays from this zone of mineralisation reported 3.9m @ 0.78% Sn and 0.25% Cu from 67.1m.

==> picture [455 x 152] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [455 x 152] intentionally omitted <==

Drill hole C2104 mineralised zone from 67.1m to 71.0m

Page 3

==> picture [97 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 54] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 54] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 54] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 54] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 54] intentionally omitted <==

Cross Section of Drill Hole C2102

==> picture [423 x 159] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 160] intentionally omitted <==

Cross Section of Drill Hole C2102

Page 4

==> picture [97 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [425 x 319] intentionally omitted <==

LIDDS Onram 1000 drilling rig on site at Cleveland

For more information, please contact:

Duncan Cornish Company Secretary Phone: +61 7 3212 6299

Email: admin@elementos.com Please visit us at: www.elementos.com.au

Page 5

==> picture [97 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

C A U T I O N A R Y S T A T E M E N T S F o r w a r d - l o o k i n g s t a t e m e n t s

This document may contain certain forward-looking statements. Such statements are only predictions, based on certain assumptions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond the company’s control. Actual events or results may differ materially from the events or results expected or implied in any forward-looking statement.

The inclusion of such statements should not be regarded as a representation, warranty or prediction with respect to the accuracy of the underlying assumptions or that any forward-looking statements will be or are likely to be fulfilled. Elementos undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document (subject to securities exchange disclosure requirements).

The information in this document does not take into account the objectives, financial situation or particular needs of any person or organisation. Nothing contained in this document constitutes investment, legal, tax or other advice.

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Chris Creagh, who is the Chief Executive Officer for Elementos Limited and a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, a full time employee of Elementos and who consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Chris Creagh has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code 2012).

The Australian Securities Exchange has not reviewed and does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or adequacy of this release.

M i n e r a l R e s o u r c e s a n d O r e R e s e r v e s

Elementos confirms that Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimates used in this document were estimated, reported and reviewed in accordance with the guidelines of the Australian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (The JORC Code) 2012 edition.

Elementos confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve information included in the following announcements:

• “Cleveland Tailings Ore Reserve” released on the 3 August 2015;

• “Cleveland JORC Resource Significantly Expanded” announced to the ASX on 5 March 2014; and

• “Cleveland Open Pit - High-Grade Mineral Resource Defined” announced on 3 March 2015.

The Company also confirms that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the Cleveland Mineral Resources and Reserves continue to apply and have not materially changed. Elementos also confirms the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the date of announcement.

Page 6

==> picture [97 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

MINERAL RESOURCES AND ORE RESERVES

Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource (at 0.35% Sn cut‐off) NOTE: this Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource is a sub‐set of the Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource noted below	Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource (at 0.35% Sn cut‐off) NOTE: this Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource is a sub‐set of the Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource noted below	Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource (at 0.35% Sn cut‐off) NOTE: this Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource is a sub‐set of the Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource noted below	Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource (at 0.35% Sn cut‐off) NOTE: this Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource is a sub‐set of the Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource noted below	Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource (at 0.35% Sn cut‐off) NOTE: this Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource is a sub‐set of the Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource noted below	Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource (at 0.35% Sn cut‐off) NOTE: this Open Pit Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource is a sub‐set of the Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource noted below
Category	Tonnage	Sn Grade	Contained Sn	Cu Grade	Contained Cu
Indicated	0.80 Mt	0.81%	6,500t	0.27	2,300t
Inferred	0.01 Mt	0.99%	140t	0.34	50t

Table subject to rounding errors; Sn = tin, Cu = copper

Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource(at 0.35% Sn cut‐off)	Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource(at 0.35% Sn cut‐off)	Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource(at 0.35% Sn cut‐off)	Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource(at 0.35% Sn cut‐off)	Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource(at 0.35% Sn cut‐off)	Total Tin‐Copper Mineral Resource(at 0.35% Sn cut‐off)
Category	Tonnage	Sn Grade	Contained Sn	Cu Grade	Contained Cu
Indicated	5.00 Mt	0.69%	34,500t	0.28%	14,000t
Inferred	2.44 Mt	0.56%	13,700t	0.19%	4,600t

Table subject to rounding errors; Sn = tin, Cu = copper

Tailings Ore Reserve(at 0% Sn cut‐off)	Tailings Ore Reserve(at 0% Sn cut‐off)	Tailings Ore Reserve(at 0% Sn cut‐off)	Tailings Ore Reserve(at 0% Sn cut‐off)	Tailings Ore Reserve(at 0% Sn cut‐off)	Tailings Ore Reserve(at 0% Sn cut‐off)
Category	Tonnage	Sn Grade	Contained Sn	Cu Grade	Contained Cu
Probable	3.7 Mt	0.29%	11,000t	0.13%	5,000t

Table subject to rounding errors; Sn=tin, Cu=copper

Underground Tungsten Mineral Resource(at 0.20% WO3 cut‐off)	Underground Tungsten Mineral Resource(at 0.20% WO3 cut‐off)	Underground Tungsten Mineral Resource(at 0.20% WO3 cut‐off)
Category	Tonnage	WO3 Grade
Inferred	4 Mt	0.30%

Table subject to rounding errors; WO3 = tungsten oxide

This information was prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported.

Page 7

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Diamond Drilling Programme – Cleveland Project, Tasmania

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	 Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or	NQ diameter drill core, sampled based on intervals determined by the
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate	project geologist and cut using a diamond saw to split the core in half.
	to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma	The tin mineralisation at Cleveland occurs predominantly as
	sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should	cassiterite. The cassiterite is associated with pyrrhotite, pyrite,
	not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	chalcopyrite, marmatite/sphalerite, chalcopyrite and minor
	 Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity	arsenopyrite. The pyrrhotite is magnetic.
	and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems	Mineralised zones were determined visually
	used.
	 Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the
	Public Report.
	 In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be
	relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1
	m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge
	for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required,
	such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling
	problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg
	submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
Drilling	 Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	An Onram 1000 self propelled track mounted drilling rig was used,
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple	drilling NQ standard core. Coring from surface. The Onram 1000 is
	or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other	capable of drilling between +90 degrees to -90 degrees in dip.
	_type, whether core is oriented and ifso, by what method, etc). _
Drill sample	 Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	Each individual drill core run was marked on a core block with metres
recovery	and results assessed.	drilled and metres recovered. Drill core recoveries checked by the
	 Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure	project geologist
	representative nature of the samples.	Overall drill core recovery is 92%
	 Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade	 Drill core recovery for C2102 – 32.1m to 36.0m was 100%
	and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential	 Drill core recovery for C2102 ‐ 51.0 ‐ 55.5m was 75%
	loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	 Drill core recovery for C2104 – 67.1 – 71.0m was 100%
Logging	 Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	The total length of each drill hole has been photographed (wet and
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate	dry), and geologically and geotechnically logged prior to being
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	sampled.

1

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	studies.
	 Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
	costean, channel, etc) photography.
	 _The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. _
Sub-sampling	 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core	Half core split using a diamond saw on a 0.5m basis within the
techniques	taken.	mineralised zones, up to 1.0m outside the mineralized zones,
and sample	 If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and	between and <1.0m if a geological boundary occurred in the
preparation	whether sampled wet or dry.	designated sample zone.
	 For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the	Sample selection and marking is carried out by the project geologist
	sample preparation technique.	Cutting and sampling is carried out by the project geologist or a
	 Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to	suitably qualified and experienced contractor
	maximise representivity of samples.	Half core dried, crushed, pulverized and split by ALS Laboratories,
	 Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in	Burnie, Tasmania
	situ material collected, including for instance results for field	No duplicates are taken from the core
	duplicate/second-half sampling.	Sample weights are between 0.5kg and 3.0kg
	 Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material
	_being sampled. _
Quality of	 The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	 Total Sn, WO3 and Cu are analysed at ALS Laboratories Burnie,
assay data and laboratory	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.  For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,	Tasmania using the ME‐XRF15d technique. Pb, Zn, Ag, As and soluble Sn are analysed at ALS Laboratories Burnie, Tasmania
tests	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument	using the ME‐ICP41a technique
	make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their	Certified reference standards and blanks are submitted with the core
	derivation, etc.  Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,	samples
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels
	_of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. _
Verification of	 The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	The data is collected and entered into a database by a qualified
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	geologist
assaying	 The use of twinned holes.	Significant intervals are reviewed by a senior employee prior to
	 Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	sampling
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	Data is entered into an excel spreadsheet. All data is stored on a
	 Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	local data storage system with a copy on a remote data storage
		system
Location of	 Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	Drill collars are surveyed by hand held GPS
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	Grid system is GDA 94 Zone 55.
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.	RL’s are MSL plus 1000m
	 Specification of thegrid system used.	Downhole surveys are collected every30m usingan Ausmine

2

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
 Quality and adequacy of topographic control. Downhole Camera Drill orientation during set-up is established using a compass and back sight and foresight markers. Dip is determined using a clinometer on the mast
Data spacing and distribution  Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.  Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.  Whether sample compositing has been applied. Drill	intercepts have been reported on a weighted average basis
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure  Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.  If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. 	**Drilled_HoleID **	Azi_Mag	Dip
	C2100	300	‐35
	C2101	300	‐30
	C2102	300	‐15
	C2103	300	‐15
	C2104	300	‐40
Sample security  The measures taken to ensure sample security. Samples are collected and transported by road by company employees to ALS Burnie
Audits or reviews  The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. n/a

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Ground Magnetic Survey at Cleveland

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	 Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including	Exploration Licence EL7/2005 centred on the historical Cleveland tin
tenement and	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint	mine in Tasmania. EL7/2005 is held by Rockwell Minerals Pty Ltd, a
land tenure	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,	100% subsidiary company of Elementos Limited.
status	historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental	The project lies within Forest Tasmania Managed Land
	settings.

3

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
 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 done by other parties  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. The current drilling programme is the first drilling campaign to be carried out on the tenement since underground mining activities by Aberfoyle Resources ceased in 1986.
Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. The Cleveland mineralisation is hydrothermal mineralisation associated with Devonian-Carboniferous granite intrusives, which outcrop within 5 kilometres of the historical workings. Gravity survey data suggests the granite occurs approximately 4km below the historical workings The host sedimentary rocks were intruded by the Devonian- Carboniferous Meredith Granite. A quartz-porphyry dyke occurs approximately 350m below the land surface. The tin/copper mineralisation occurs as semi-massive sulphide lenses consisting of pyrrhotite and pyrite with cassiterite with lesser stannite, chalcopyrite, arsenopyrite, quartz, fluorite and carbonates. Sulphide minerals make up approximately 20-30% of the mineralisation. The semi-massive sulphide lenses have formed by the replacement of carbonate rich sediments and are geologically similar to tin bearing massive to semi-massive sulphide mineralisation at Renison and Mt Bischoff.
Drill hole Information  A summary of all information material to the understanding of the 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. 	HoleID	GDA94 MGAE	GDA94 MGAN	**Azi_Mag **	Dip	RL (MSL + 1000)	Total Depth(m)
	C2100	365290	5407110	300	‐35	1488	68.9
	C2101	365270	5407097	300	‐30	1485	89.7
	C2102	365045	5406944	300	‐15	1435	67.9
	C2103	365002	5406901	300	‐15	1415	47.8
	C2104	364974	5406855	300	‐40	1400	107.7

4

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Data	 In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,	All diamond drill hole assay results reported are shown in Appendix 1.
aggregation	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high	The mineralized intervals reported in the body of this report are stated
methods	grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	on a weighted average basis
	 Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade	No bottom or top cut was applied to the aggregates
	results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used	No metal equivalents have been 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	The sections and plans shown in the body of the report display the
between	Exploration Results.	relationship between the drill hole intercept and the known
mineralisation	 If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole	mineralisation
widths and	angle is known, its nature should be reported.
intercept 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) and tabulations of	See main body of the report
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being
	reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of
	_drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. _
Balanced	 Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	All drill hole assay data used in this report is shown in Appendix 1
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	Drilling is continuing on the infill programme and testing recently
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	defined ground magnetic anomalies
	 Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,	The tin mineralization at Cleveland is associated with pyrrhotite,
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,	which is magnetic
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

5

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

n/a

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

6

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	 Any assumptions about correlation between variables.
	 Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control
	the resource estimates.
	 Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.
	 The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison
	of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if
	_available. _
Moisture	 Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural	
	_moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content. _
Cut-off	 The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters	
parameters	applied.
Mining factors	 Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum	
or	mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining
assumptions	dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining
	reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider
	potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding
	mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources
	may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be
	reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions
	_made. _
Metallurgical	 The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical	
factors or	amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of
assumptions	determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to
	consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions
	regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made
	when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous.
	Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of
	_the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made. _
Environmen-	 Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue	
tal factors or	disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of
assumptions	determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to
	consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and
	processing operation. While at this stage the determination of
	potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project,
	may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of
	these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where
	these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with
	_an explanation of the environmental assumptions made. _

7

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Bulk density	 Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the	
	assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the
	frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and
	representativeness of the samples.
	 The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by
	methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity,
	etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones
	within the deposit.
	 Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the
	_evaluation process of the different materials. _
Classification	 The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying	
	confidence categories.
	 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 metal values, quality,
	quantity and distribution of the data).
	 Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s
	_view of the deposit. _
Audits or	 The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	
reviews
Discussion of	 Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and	
relative	confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach
accuracy/	or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For
confidence	example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to
	quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence
	limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative
	discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and
	confidence of the estimate.
	 The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local
	estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be
	relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should
	include assumptions made and the procedures used.
	 These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate
	_should be compared with production data, where available. _

8

Section 4 Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves

n/a

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	 Description of the Mineral Resource estimate used as a basis for the	n/a
Resource	conversion to an Ore Reserve.
estimate for	 Clear statement as to whether the Mineral Resources are reported
conversion to	additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore Reserves.
Ore Reserves
Site visits	 Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and	
	the outcome of those visits.
	 _If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. _
Study status	 The type and level of study undertaken to enable Mineral Resources	
	to be converted to Ore Reserves.
	 The Code requires that a study to at least Pre-Feasibility Study level
	has been undertaken to convert Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves.
	Such studies will have been carried out and will have determined a
	mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and
	_that material Modifying Factors have been considered. _
Cut-off	 The basis of the cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	
parameters
Mining factors	 The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility	
or	or Feasibility Study to convert the Mineral Resource to an Ore
assumptions	Reserve (i.e. either by application of appropriate factors by
	optimisation or by preliminary or detailed design).
	 The choice, nature and appropriateness of the selected mining
	method(s) and other mining parameters including associated design
	issues such as pre-strip, access, etc.
	 The assumptions made regarding geotechnical parameters (eg pit
	slopes, stope sizes, etc), grade control and pre-production drilling.
	 The major assumptions made and Mineral Resource model used for
	pit and stope optimisation (if appropriate).
	 The mining dilution factors used.
	 The mining recovery factors used.
	 Any minimum mining widths used.
	 The manner in which Inferred Mineral Resources are utilised in
	mining studies and the sensitivity of the outcome to their inclusion.

9

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	 _The infrastructure requirements of the selected mining methods. _
Metallurgical	 The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that	
factors or	process to the style of mineralisation.
assumptions	 Whether the metallurgical process is well-tested technology or novel
	in nature.
	 The nature, amount and representativeness of metallurgical test work
	undertaken, the nature of the metallurgical domaining applied and the
	corresponding metallurgical recovery factors applied.
	 Any assumptions or allowances made for deleterious elements.
	 The existence of any bulk sample or pilot scale test work and the
	degree to which such samples are considered representative of the
	orebody as a whole.
	 For minerals that are defined by a specification, has the ore reserve
	estimation been based on the appropriate mineralogy to meet the
	_specifications? _
Environmen-	 The status of studies of potential environmental impacts of the mining	
tal	and processing operation. Details of waste rock characterisation and
	the consideration of potential sites, status of design options
	considered and, where applicable, the status of approvals for process
	_residue storage and waste dumps should be reported. _
Infrastructure	 The existence of appropriate infrastructure: availability of land for	
	plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk
	commodities), labour, accommodation; or the ease with which the
	_infrastructure can be provided, or accessed. _
Costs	 The derivation of, or assumptions made, regarding projected capital	
	costs in the study.
	 The methodology used to estimate operating costs.
	 Allowances made for the content of deleterious elements.
	 The source of exchange rates used in the study.
	 Derivation of transportation charges.
	 The basis for forecasting or source of treatment and refining charges,
	penalties for failure to meet specification, etc.
	 The allowances made for royalties payable, both Government and
	_private. _
Revenue	 The derivation of, or assumptions made regarding revenue factors	
factors	including head grade, metal or commodity price(s) exchange rates,
	transportation and treatment charges, penalties, net smelter returns,
	_etc. _

10

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	 The derivation of assumptions made of metal or commodity price(s),
	_for the principal metals, minerals and co-products. _
Market	 The demand, supply and stock situation for the particular commodity,	
assessment	consumption trends and factors likely to affect supply and demand
	into the future.
	 A customer and competitor analysis along with the identification of
	likely market windows for the product.
	 Price and volume forecasts and the basis for these forecasts.
	 For industrial minerals the customer specification, testing and
	_acceptance requirements prior to a supply contract. _
Economic	 The inputs to the economic analysis to produce the net present value	
	(NPV) in the study, the source and confidence of these economic
	inputs including estimated inflation, discount rate, etc.
	 NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations in the significant
	_assumptions and inputs. _
Social	 The status of agreements with key stakeholders and matters leading	
	_to social licence to operate. _
Other	 To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project	
	and/or on the estimation and classification of the Ore Reserves:
	 Any identified material naturally occurring risks.
	 The status of material legal agreements and marketing arrangements.
	 The status of governmental agreements and approvals critical to the
	viability of the project, such as mineral tenement status, and
	government and statutory approvals. There must be reasonable
	grounds to expect that all necessary Government approvals will be
	received within the timeframes anticipated in the Pre-Feasibility or
	Feasibility study. Highlight and discuss the materiality of any
	unresolved matter that is dependent on a third party on which
	_extraction of the reserve is contingent. _
Classification	 The basis for the classification of the Ore Reserves into varying	
	confidence categories.
	 Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s
	view of the deposit.
	 The proportion of Probable Ore Reserves that have been derived
	_from Measured Mineral Resources (ifany). _
Audits or	 The results of any audits or reviews of Ore Reserve estimates.	
reviews

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Discussion of	 Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and	
relative	confidence level in the Ore Reserve estimate using an approach or
accuracy/	procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For
confidence	example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to
	quantify the relative accuracy of the reserve within stated confidence
	limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative
	discussion of the factors which 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.
	 Accuracy and confidence discussions should extend to specific
	discussions of any applied Modifying Factors that may have a
	material impact on Ore Reserve viability, or for which there are
	remaining areas of uncertainty at the current study stage.
	 It is recognised that this may not be possible or appropriate in all
	circumstances. These statements of relative accuracy and confidence
	of the estimate should be compared with production data, where
	_available. _

Section 5 Estimation and Reporting of Diamonds and Other Gemstones

n/a

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Indicator	 Reports of indicator minerals, such as chemically/physically	
minerals	distinctive garnet, ilmenite, chrome spinel and chrome diopside,
	_should be prepared by a suitably qualified laboratory. _
Source of	 Details of the form, shape, size and colour of the diamonds and the	
diamonds	nature of the source of diamonds (primary or secondary) including the
	_rock type and geological environment. _
Sample	 Type of sample, whether outcrop, boulders, drill core, reverse	
collection	circulation drill cuttings, gravel, stream sediment or soil, and purpose
	(eg large diameter drilling to establish stones per unit of volume or
	bulk samples to establish stone size distribution).
	 _Sample size, distribution and representivity. _

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sample	 Type of facility, treatment rate, and accreditation.	
treatment	 Sample size reduction. Bottom screen size, top screen size and re-
	crush.
	 Processes (dense media separation, grease, X-ray, hand-sorting,
	etc).
	 Process efficiency, tailings auditing and granulometry.
	 Laboratory used, type of process for micro diamonds and
	accreditation.
Carat	 One fifth (0.2) of a gram (often defined as a metric carat or MC).	
Sample grade	 Sample grade in this section of Table 1 is used in the context of	
	carats per units of mass, area or volume.
	 The sample grade above the specified lower cut-off sieve size should
	be reported as carats per dry metric tonne and/or carats per 100 dry
	metric tonnes. For alluvial deposits, sample grades quoted in carats
	per square metre or carats per cubic metre are acceptable if
	accompanied by a volume to weight basis for calculation.
	 In addition to general requirements to assess volume and density
	there is a need to relate stone frequency (stones per cubic metre or
	tonne) to stone size (carats per stone) to derive sample grade (carats
	_per tonne). _
Reporting of	 Complete set of sieve data using a standard progression of sieve	
Exploration	sizes per facies. Bulk sampling results, global sample grade per
Results	facies. Spatial structure analysis and grade distribution. Stone size
	and number distribution. Sample head feed and tailings particle
	granulometry.
	 Sample density determination.
	 Per cent concentrate and undersize per sample.
	 Sample grade with change in bottom cut-off screen size.
	 Adjustments made to size distribution for sample plant performance
	and performance on a commercial scale.
	 If appropriate or employed, geostatistical techniques applied to model
	stone size, distribution or frequency from size distribution of
	exploration diamond samples.
	 The weight of diamonds may only be omitted from the report when
	the diamonds are considered too small to be of commercial
	_significance. This lower cut-offsize should be stated. _
Grade	 Description of the sample type and the spatial arrangement of drilling	
estimation for	or sampling designed for grade estimation.

13

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
reporting	 The sample crush size and its relationship to that achievable in a
Mineral	commercial treatment plant.
Resources	 Total number of diamonds greater than the specified and reported
and Ore	lower cut-off sieve size.
Reserves	 Total weight of diamonds greater than the specified and reported
	lower cut-off sieve size.
	 _The sample grade above the specified lower cut-offsieve size. _
Value	 Valuations should not be reported for samples of diamonds	
estimation	processed using total liberation method, which is commonly used for
	processing exploration samples.
	 To the extent that such information is not deemed commercially
	sensitive, Public Reports should include:
	o diamonds quantities by appropriate screen size per facies or
	depth.
	o details of parcel valued.
	o number of stones, carats, lower size cut-off per facies or depth.
	 The average $/carat and $/tonne value at the selected bottom cut-off
	should be reported in US Dollars. The value per carat is of critical
	importance in demonstrating project value.
	 The basis for the price (eg dealer buying price, dealer selling price,
	etc).
	 _Anassessment of diamond breakage. _
Security and	 Accredited process audit.	
integrity	 Whether samples were sealed after excavation.
	 Valuer location, escort, delivery, cleaning losses, reconciliation with
	recorded sample carats and number of stones.
	 Core samples washed prior to treatment for micro diamonds.
	 Audit samples treated at alternative facility.
	 Results of tailings checks.
	 Recovery of tracer monitors used in sampling and treatment.
	 Geophysical (logged) density and particle density.
	 Cross validation of sample weights, wet and dry, with hole volume
	and density, moisture factor.
Classification	 In addition to general requirements to assess volume and density	
	there is a need to relate stone frequency (stones per cubic metre or
	tonne) to stone size (carats per stone) to derive grade (carats per
	tonne). The elements of uncertainty in these estimates should be
	_considered, and classification developed accordingly. _

14

APPENDIX 1.Significant Drill Intercepts

.

Hole ID	**From (m) **	To (m)	Interval (m)	Sample Number	Sn	WO3	Cu	Sn	Pb	Zn	Ag	As
					ME‐XRF15d			ME‐ICP41a
					%	%	%	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm
C2104	67.1	67.5	0.4	130095	0.6	0.0	0.5	190	10	180	9	860
C2104	67.5	68.0	0.5	130096	0.8	0.0	0.2	630	20	110	5	40
C2104	68.0	68.5	0.5	130097	0.7	0.0	0.1	480	<10	100	3	10
C2104	68.5	69.0	0.5	130098	0.9	0.0	0.6	660	40	220	12	70
C2104	69.0	69.5	0.5	130099	0.9	0.0	0.2	930	20	130	9	<10
C2104	69.5	70.0	0.5	130100	0.6	0.0	0.1	400	20	80	4	40
C2104	70.0	70.5	0.5	130101	1.2	0.0	0.2	850	30	100	9	50
C2104	70.5	71.0	0.5	130102	0.5	0.0	0.1	300	30	180	5	1200
C2102	32.1	32.5	0.4	130036	0.09	0.01	0.34
C2102	32.5	33.0	0.5	130037	0.75	0.01	0.04	120	10	580	<1	30
C2102	33.0	33.5	0.5	130038	0.16	0.01	0.01	<50	<10	170	1	10
C2102	33.5	34.0	0.5	130039	0.58	0.01	0.02	160	<10	400	<1	10
C2102	34.0	34.5	0.5	130040	0.4	0.02	0.03	70	<10	410	1	<10
C2102	34.5	35.0	0.5	130041	0.5	0.03	0.07	70	<10	360	1	50
C2102	35.0	35.5	0.5	130042	0.85	0.01	0.07	80	20	330	<1	40
C2102	35.5	36.0	0.5	130043	0.53	0.02	0.67	200	30	890	7	<10
C2102	51.0	51.5	0.5	130061	0.05	0.01	0.03
C2102	51.5	52.0	0.5	130062	0.05	0.01	0.05
C2102	52.0	52.5	0.5	130063	0.02	0.01	0.11
C2102	52.5	53.0	0.5	130064	0.06	0.01	0.05
C2102	53.0	53.5	0.5	130065	0.02	0.02	0.04
C2102	53.5	54.0	0.5	130066	0.05	0.02	0.03
C2102	54.0	54.5	0.5	130067	0.1	0.01	0.08	60	10	1300	2	6330
C2102	54.5	55.0	0.5	130068	0.15	0.01	0.05	110	<10	1220	2	1500
C2102	55.0	55.5	0.5	130069	0.04	0.01	0.06

*Note – only samples that contained 0.1% Sn or greater were analysed for soluble Sn, Pb, Zn, Ag and As

15