Skip to main content

AI assistant

Sign in to chat with this filing

The assistant answers questions, extracts KPIs, and summarises risk factors directly from the filing text.

Sign up Log in

EMERALD RESOURCES NL Capital/Financing Update 2023

Jan 30, 2023

64849_rns_2023-01-30_c3529047-1319-466a-b5c8-d451eb353350.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

ASX Announcement & Media Release

31 January 2023

Fast Facts

ASX Code: EMR Shares on issue: 593,800,983 Market Cap: ~A$825 million Cash: A$51.8 million (at 31 Dec 2022) Bullion: A$21.8 million (at 31 Dec 2022)

Board & Management

Simon Lee AO, Non-Executive Chairman Morgan Hart, Managing Director Mick Evans, Executive Director Ross Stanley, Non-Executive Director Billie Slott, Non-Executive Director Michael Bowen, Non-Executive Director Jay Hughes, Non-Executive Director Mark Clements, Non-Executive Director and Company Secretary Bernie Cleary, Operations Manager

Company Highlights

Team

  • Highly credentialed gold project operational and in-house development team;

  • A proven history of building projects on time and on budget.

Gold Production

  • Okvau Gold Mine commissioned on time on budget in 2021;

  • Forecast +100,000oz gold production for 2023 at AISC <US$810/oz;

  • Okvau Deposit: Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate of 1.06Moz at 1.91g/t Au;

  • Ore Reserve of 13.5Mt & 1.9g/t Au for 0.82Mozs in a single open pit with waste:ore ratio of 5.01:1.

Growth

  • Significant exploration and resource growth potential in Cambodia:

  • Okvau Gold Mine reserve expansion;

  • o Memot Project maiden resource expected 2023

  • 1,639km[2] of prospective tenure

  • Significant exploration and resource growth potential in Australia (Bullseye Mining Limited (~60%):

  • Underexplored Dingo Range project

  • o Resource and reserve expected 2023 o 1,200km[2] of prospective tenure

ESG

  • Focussed on a net positive impact on near-mine environmental and social values by targeting strict compliance with corporate governance, international guidelines (IFC PS’s) and local laws by engaging and collaborating with all stakeholders.

==> picture [195 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Significant Gold Exploration Results Continue at Bullseye and Memot Prospects

Highlights

Emerald continues to drill at its ~60% owned (Bullseye Mining Limited)(Bullseye) North Laverton Gold Project located in Western Australia

Recent results from Boundary and Neptune Prospects Significant gold mineralisation from Bullseye’s RC resource exploration programme on the Boundary and Neptune Prospects continue to demonstrate upside potential:

  • 9m @ 7.35g/t Au from 59m including 1m @ 58.27g/t Au from 61m and 1m @ 16.02g/t Au from 73m (RC22NPT027);

  • 38m @ 1.65g/t Au from 56m including 1m @ 16.60g/t Au from 92m (RC22BDY009);

  • 14m @ 2.37g/t Au from 115m including 4m @ 4.63g/t Au from 117m (RC22NPT020);

  • 5m @ 6.33g/t Au from 100m including 2m @ 14.7g/t Au from 100m (RC22BDY016);

  • 28m @ 1.11g/t Au from 96m including 2m @ 6.89g/t Au from 98m (RC22NPT018);

  • 4m @ 7.31g/t Au from 38m including 3m @ 9.13g/t Au from 39m (RC22NPT022);

  • 17m @ 1.41g/t Au from 117m including 3m @ 5.39g/t Au from 127m (RC22NPT017)

Resource update expected by end of FY23 with a reserve calculation shortly thereafter. Previously completed high-grade intersections to be integrated in the resource update include:

  • 5m @ 60.25g/t Au from 171m (WDDH8) – Boundary Prospect;

  • 45m @ 6.07g/t Au from 73m (BDRC058) – Boundary Prospect;

  • 27m @ 9.34g/t Au from 153m (BDRC035) – Boundary Prospect;

  • 53m @ 3.44g/t Au from 66m (WRC17) (EOH) – Boundary Prospect;

  • 22m @ 4.87g/t Au from 17m (NPRD0056) – Neptune Prospect;

  • 26m @ 6.95g/t Au from 40 (NPRD0039) – Neptune Prospect;

  • 16m @ 10.10g/t Au from 63m (NPRD0026) – Neptune Prospect;

  • 9m @ 9.44g/t Au from 82m (NPRD0078) – Neptune Prospect

Emerald continues to drill at its 100% owned Memot Gold Project in Cambodia. Recent significant drill results from the RC infill resource drill programme include:

  • 1m @ 31.40g/t Au from 132m, 0.52% Cu and 0.52% Zn (RC22MMT073);

  • 3m @ 7.11g/t Au from 132m (RC22MMT074);

  • 1m @ 21.30g/t Au from 69m and 1.06% Cu (RC22MMT039);

Registered Office 1110 Hay Street West Perth WA 6005

  • 7m @ 2.18g/t Au from 69m including 1m @ 11.15g/t Au from 70m and 1.49% Cu (RC22MMT047)

T: +61 8 9286 6300

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

North Laverton Gold Project Resource Drill Programme (Bullseye Mining Limited - EMR: 59.44%)

The North Laverton Gold Project consists of 34 exploration licences (including 4 applications) and 4 mining licences covering the majority of the Dingo Range greenstone belt with more than 800km² of tenure (refer Figure 1) and has the potential to host multiple standalone deposits or satellite deposits to supply additional ore to a central mill. It includes the gold mineralised prospects of Boundary, Neptune, Stirling, Hurleys and Bungarra extending over a 6.4km strike length.

The planned ~98km resource definition drilling programme spans across the Boundary, Neptune, Stirling, Hurleys and Bungarra prospects. Once completed there will be circa 150,000m of new drilling available to estimate an updated North Laverton resource by the end of FY23 and a maiden reserve estimate to follow shortly thereafter.

Drilling during the initial stages of the programme has been limited to a single RC drill rig. This month a diamond rig has mobilised to site and commenced drilling. A third drill rig (RC) is expected to mobilise to site in Q3FY23 to escalate drilling capacity.

To date 255 collars (25,277m) of the 98,000m resource definition programme have been completed of which 59 collars (10,936m) has been completed since Emerald acquired a controlling interest in Bullseye. The initial drilling has been limited to the Boundary and Neptune prospects of the Boundary-Bungarra mineralised trend (Figure 2) with highlighted significant results including:

  • 12m @ 4.94g/t from 62m including 1m @ 9.07g/t from 69m and 1m @ 42.90g/t from 72m (RC22NPT003)[(1)] ;

  • 15m @ 2.48g/t from 108m including 1m @ 7.39g/t from 116m and 2m @ 7.79g/t from 118m (RC22NPT004)[(1)] ;

  • 13m @ 2.54g/t from 76m including 1m @ 19.30g/t from 81m (RC22BDY001)[(1)] ;

  • 9m @ 7.35g/t from 59m including 1m @ 58.27g/t from 61m and 1m @ 16.02g/t from 73m (RC22NPT027)[(2)] ;

  • 38m @ 1.65g/t from 56m including 1m @ 16.60g/t from 92m (RC22BDY009)[(2)] ;

  • 14m @ 2.37g/t from 115m including 4m @ 4.63g/t from 117m (RC22NPT020)[(2)] ;

  • 5m @ 6.33g/t from 100m including 2m @ 14.70g/t from 100m (RC22BDY016)[(2)] .

Note: (1) Refer ASX announcement 7 October 2022; (2) Refer Appendix One

Figure 1 | North Laverton Tenement Map with the prospect locations

==> picture [460 x 332] intentionally omitted <==

Results from drilling to date, continue to delineate mineralised high-grade structures. Historically, drilling has only tested to ~120m vertical depth (average). Mineralisation remains open at depth and along strike across all prospects (refer Figures 3, 4 and 5).

Page 2 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 | Boundary and Neptune Drill collars with recent (in black - refer to Appendix One) and historic (in green - refer to Appendix Three) significant results (Plan view)

==> picture [502 x 337] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 | Cross section of Neptune with new results from holes RC22NPT017, RC22NPT022 and RC22NPT023

==> picture [233 x 319] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 | Cross section of Neptune with new results from holes RC22NPT019 and RC22NPT020

==> picture [224 x 308] intentionally omitted <==

Page 3 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 | Long section of Neptune with new results (black) and previously announced results (blue)

==> picture [486 x 274] intentionally omitted <==

North Laverton Project Historic Significant Intersections

Bullseye’s current resource drill programme is designed to test the strike and down dip extension of historic significant intersections. These previous drill programmes include 84,028m (80,684m RC and 3,344m diamond) completed by Bullseye since 2014 and 45,583m of drilling completed by various previous tenement holders (34,695m RC, 4,587m diamond, 432m AC and 5,869m RAB), (refer Figures 6 and 7). Drill results highlights from both programmes include:

Boundary[(1)] :-

  • 5m @ 60.25g/t from 171m (WDDH8);

  • 45m @ 6.07g/t from 73m (BDRC058);

  • 27m @ 9.34g/t from 153m (BDRC035);

  • 53m @ 3.44g/t from 66m (WRC17) (EOH);

  • 47m @ 3.42g/t from 93m (BDRD0025);

  • 30m @ 5.16g/t from 151m (WDDH10);

  • 19m @ 7.89g/t from 58m (BRC1002);

  • 8m @ 17.14g/t from 38m (BDRC060);

  • 40m @ 3.17g/t from 55m (BDRD0022);

  • 27m @ 4.53g/t from 62m (BDRC014);

  • 9m @13.55g/t from 42m (WDDH1);

  • 30m @ 3.82g/t from 179m (BDRD0043);

  • 9m @ 12.55g/t from 42m (WRC23);

  • 27m @ 4.07g/t from 62m (BDRD0094).

Neptune[(2)] :-

  • 22m @ 4.87g/t from 17m (NPRD0056);

  • 9m @ 9.44g/t from 82m (NPRD0078);

  • 33m @ 3.82g/t from 37m (NPMD1019);

  • 15m @ 6.60g/t from 67m (NPMD1007);

  • 3m @ 29.85g/t from 45m (NPMD1026);

  • 25m @ 5.24g/t from 0m (NPGC0053);

  • 40m @ 2.98g/t from 14m (NPGC0025);

  • 6m @ 14.24g/t from 37m (NPGC0018);

  • 9m @ 9.36g/t from 7m (NPGC0045).

Neptune[(3)] :-

  • 16m @ 10.10g/t from 63m (NPRD0026);

  • 17m @ 7.44g/t from 29m (NPRD0007);

Stirling[(1)] :-

  • 26m @ 5.83g/t from 33m (STRD0016);

  • 38m @ 2.62 g/t from 16m (SRC7);

  • 31m @ 2.75g/t from 35m (STRD0008);27m @ 2.30g/t from 59m (STRD0007);27m @ 2.25g/t from 31m (STRD0019).

Hurleys[(1)] :-

  • 12m @3.30g/t from 13m (HRRD0020);

  • 12m @ 2.77g/t from 47m (HRRD0050);3m @ 9.00g/t from 62m (HRRD0062);9m @2.27g/t from 64m (HRRD0032).

Bungarra[(1)] :-

  • 14m @ 31.46g/t from 33m (LAVRD0126);

  • 19m @ 13.41g/t from 32m (DRP495);17m @ 13.28g/t from 49m (LAVRD0132);3m @ 67.37g/t from 30m (BFRC15);5m @ 39.41g/t from 31m (LAVRD0133);9m @ 17.02g/t from 33m (BFRC13);6m @ 23.26g/t from 89m (LAVRD0054);9m @ 15.45g/t from 39m (LAVRD0142);14m @ 9.74g/t from 30m (LAVGW0003);9m @ 14.58g/t from 75m (LAVRD0054);6m @ 19.28g/t from 53m (LAVRD0135).

  • 26m @ 6.95g/t from 40 (NPRD0039);

(1) Refer ASX announcement dated 7 October 2022; (2) Refer ASX announcement dated 5 July 2022; (3) Refer Appendix Three

Page 4 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6 | Plan view of Bullseye prospects targeted by the recently commenced resource drill programme

==> picture [525 x 361] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7 | Long section of North Laverton project with Au gram metre intercepts (with new drill results in black)

==> picture [526 x 296] intentionally omitted <==

Page 5 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Memot Exploration Licence – Cambodia (EMR:100%)

Emerald’s exploration tenements, which comprise of a combination of 100% owned granted licences and joint venture agreements cover a combined area of 1,639 km² in Cambodia, including the 100% owned Memot Project.

Figure 8 | Cambodian Gold Project | Exploration Licence Areas

==> picture [539 x 278] intentionally omitted <==

Memot Prospect infill RC Resource Programme

Emerald continues to progress an exploration drill programme at the Memot Project, focusing on infilling and extending the mineralisation proximally within and beyond the known mineralisation. The drilling to date includes 82 drill holes for 10,298m (5,948m RC and 4,350m diamond) with no assays pending (refer to Figure 9). Highlighted significant recent results (refer Appendix Five) received include:

  • 1m @ 31.4g/t Au from 132m, 0.52% Cu and 0.52 % Zn (RC22MMT073);

  • 3m @ 7.11g/t Au from 132m (RC22MMT074);

  • 1m @ 21.30g/t Au from 69m and 1.06% Cu (RC22MMT039);

  • 7m @ 2.18g/t Au from 69m including 1m @ 11.15g/t Au from 70m and 1.49% Cu (RC22MMT047);

  • 4m @ 3.87g/t from 3m including 1m @ 12.95g/t Au from 4m (RC22MMT057);

  • 7m @ 1.80g/t from 123m including 1m @ 10.00g/t Au from 127m (RC22MMT038);

  • 1m @ 12.20g/t from 107m (RC22MMT065);

  • 5m @ 1.81g/t from 17m including 1m @ 7.53g/t from 21m (RC22MMT077);

  • 1m @ 8.03g/t from 144m (RC22MMT078).

Several of the collars completed also tested the edges of the known mineralisation and results indicate the mineralisation is open and untested in all directions. In particular, mineralisation is open along strike to the north-west and south-east and down dip to the north-east (refer Figure 9). This coincides with the previously announced significant Au and Cu in-soil anomaly indicating the known gold results are part of a potentially larger mineralised system (refer ASX announcement dated 28 July 2022).

The mineralisation is associated with at least three high-grade, narrow, stacked quartz vein sets, dipping shallowly to the north-east (refer Figure 9) with current interpreted strike length of 650m (refer ASX announcement dated 28 July 2022). The programme is investigating both down dip and along strike continuity of the structures.

Page 6 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

A maiden resource calculation is planned for the end of FY23 utilising both the recent results and previously announced significant intersections, such as,

  • 1m @ 37.20 g/t Au from 33m (DD21MMT005);

  • 1m @ 31.70g/t Au from 49m (DD21MMT010); and 0.45m @ 37.10g/t Au from 74.55m,

  • 0.4m @ 17.70 g/t Au from 190m (DD22MMT013),

  • 3.54m @ 10.3g/t Au from 0m (ZK8-1);

  • 0.3m @ 145g/t Au from 14.2m (ML3);

  • 0.3m @ 96g/t Au from 12.7m (ML7); and

  • 0.3m @ 76.5g/t Au from 10.7m (ML6).

Figure 9 | Memot artisanal workings with current and historic drill collars and significant intersections

==> picture [535 x 369] intentionally omitted <==

A contractor has been engaged to complete ground magnetics/radiometrics and IP geophysical surveys over the prospective areas with anomalous Au and Cu geochemical signatures located within a ~6km radius of the Memot artisanal workings (refer ASX announcement dated 28 July 2022). Whilst both surveys have been completed, the data processing and interpretations are ongoing. The geophysical surveys will assist with the regional structural interpretation, as well as potentially identifying prospective exploration targets similar to intrusive centered, sediment hosted Au-Cu (Sepon) style mineralisation.

This ASX release was authorised on behalf of the Emerald Board by: Morgan Hart, Managing Director.

For further information please contact Emerald Resources NL

Morgan Hart

Managing Director

Page 7 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

About Emerald Resources NL

Overview

Emerald is a developer and explorer of gold projects. In particular, Emerald has been focused on the development and commissioning of its most advanced project, the Okvau Gold Mine in Cambodia which saw first production in June 2021. Since commercial production commenced in September 2021, Emerald has now poured over 5,000kgs of gold doré from its operations.

Emerald also holds a number of other projects in Cambodia which are made up of a combination of granted mining licences (100% owned by Emerald) and interests joint venture agreements. Together, Emerald’s interest in its Cambodian Projects covers a combined area of 1,639km².

Emerald has a controlling interest in Bullseye Mining Limited (59.44%), an unlisted Australian public company with three Western Australian gold projects totalling in excess of 1,200km² of highly prospective gold tenure including the North Laverton Gold Project which covers in excess of 800km² of the entire Dingo Range greenstone belt.

Okvau Gold Mine

The Okvau Gold Mine Operation is the most advanced of Emerald’s projects. The Okvau Gold Mine is located approximately 275km north-east of Cambodia’s capital city of Phnom Penh in the province of Mondulkiri (refer Figures 10 and 11). The town of Kratie is located on the Mekong River approximately 90km to the west and the capital of Mondulkiri, Saen Monourom is located approximately 60km to the south-east.

The principal activity of the consolidated entity during the 2021 financial year was the development of Emerald’s 100% owned Okvau Gold Mine. On 26 June 2021 Emerald announced its maiden gold pour after successfully commissioning the processing plant and gold room. Subsequently, commissioning activities continued on the sulphide float regrind circuit which was successfully completed in July 2021. This marked the practical completion of the Okvau Gold Mine commissioning process and commencement of normal run of mine operations.

Figure 10 | Cambodian Gold Project | Location

==> picture [360 x 362] intentionally omitted <==

Page 8 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [511 x 270] intentionally omitted <==

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

Figure 11 | Cambodian Gold Project | Exploration Licence Areas
----- End of picture text -----

Table 1 | Okvau Mineral Resource Estimate

Okvau March 2022 Mineral Resource Estimate Okvau March 2022 Mineral Resource Estimate Okvau March 2022 Mineral Resource Estimate
Measured Resources Indicated Resources Inferred Resources Total Resources
Tonnage Grade Contained Tonnage
Grade		 Contained Tonnage
Grade
Contained		 Tonnage Grade Contained
(Mt) (g/t Au) Au (Koz) (Mt)
(g/t Au)		 Au (Koz) (Mt)
(g/t Au)
Au (Koz)		 (Mt) (g/t Au) Au (Koz)
1.67 0.94 51 12.93
2.10		 872 2.55
1.62
133		 17.15 1.91 1,056

Table 2 | Okvau Ore Reserve Estimate

Okvau March 2022 Ore Reserve Estimate Okvau March 2022 Ore Reserve Estimate
Tonnage Grade Contained
(Mt) (g/t Au) Au (Koz)
Proven Ore Reserve 1.67Mt 0.94g/t Au 51koz
Probable Ore Reserve 11.80Mt 2.02g/t Au 765koz
Total Ore Reserve 13.48Mt 1.88g/t Au 816koz

Forward Looking Statement

This document contains certain forward looking statements. These forward-looking statements are not historical facts but rather are based on the Company’s current expectations, estimates and projections about the industry in which Emerald Resources operates, and beliefs and assumptions regarding the Company’s future performance. Words such as “anticipates”, “expects”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “seeks”’ “estimates”, “potential” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to known or unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond the control of the Company, are difficult to predict and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or forecasted in the forward looking statements, which reflect the view of Emerald Resources only as of the date of this announcement. The forward looking statements made in this release relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made. Emerald Resources will not undertake any obligation to release publicly any revisions or updates to these forward-looking statements to reflect events, circumstances or unanticipated events occurring after the date of this announcement except as required by law or by any appropriate regulatory authority. This document has been prepared in compliance with the current JORC Code 2012 Edition and the ASX listing Rules.

The Company believes that is has a reasonable basis for making the forward-looking statements in this announcement, including with respect to any production targets and financial estimates, based on the information contained in this announcement. Reference is made to ASX Announcements dated 1 May 2017 and 26 November 2019. All material assumptions underpinning the production target, or the forecast financial information continue to apply and have not materially changed. 100% of the production target referred to in this announcement is based on Probable Ore Reserves.

Page 9 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Emerald has a highly experienced management team, undoubtedly one of the best credentialed gold development teams in Australia with a proven history of developing projects successfully, quickly and cost effectively. They are a team of highly competent mining engineers and geologists who have overseen the successful development of gold projects in developing countries such as the Bonikro Gold Project in Cote d’Ivoire for Equigold NL and more recently, Regis Resources Ltd.

Competent Persons Statements

The information in this report that relates to Exploration and Drill Results from Memot (Appendix Five) and from Bullseye Recent and Historic Drilling (Appendix One and Three) is based on information compiled by Mr Keith King, who is an employee to the Company and who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining & Metallurgy. Mr Keith King has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Keith King has reviewed the contents of this release and consents to the inclusion in this announcement of all technical statements based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources for the Okvau Gold Deposit was prepared by EGRM Consulting Pty Ltd, Mr Brett Gossage, who is a consultant to the Company, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining & Metallurgy (AIG), and has sufficient experience 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 by the 2012 edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves".

Mr Gossage has reviewed the contents of this news release and consents to the inclusion in this announcement of all technical statements based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Information in this announcement that relates to Ore Reserves for the Okvau Gold Deposit is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Glenn Williamson, an independent specialist mining consultant. Mr Williamson is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining & Metallurgy. Mr Williamson 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 (or ‘CP’) as defined in the 2012 edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves". Mr Williamson has reviewed the contents of this news release and consents to the inclusion in this announcement of all technical statements based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

No New Information

To the extent that announcement contains references to prior exploration results and Mineral Resource estimates, which have been cross referenced to previous market announcements made by the Company, unless explicitly stated, no new material information is contained. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the relevant market announcements and, in the case of estimates of Mineral Resources that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Page 10 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix One | New Drill Results from Neptune and Boundary Resource Drill Program (Bullseye) (>2 gram metre)

Prospect Hole Name Easting Northing RL Azi Dip End Depth
(m)		 From(m) To (m) Interval
(m)		 Gold
g/t
Neptune RC22NPT027 345,235 6,971,294 500 -60 223 120 59 68 9 7.35
including 61 62 1 58.27
including 73 74 1 16.02
Boundary RC22BDY009 345,253 6,971,462 500 -60 263 162 56 94 38 1.65
including 92 93 1 16.60
Neptune RC22NPT020 345,327 6,971,285 500 -61 225 174 115 129 14 2.37
including 117 121 4 4.63
Boundary RC22BDY016 345,328 6,971,752 500 -60 265 143 100 105 5 6.33
including 100 102 2 14.70
Neptune RC22NPT018 345,413 6,971,230 500 -60 223 160 96 124 28 1.11
including 98 100 2 6.89
Neptune RC22NPT022 345,354 6,971,210 500 -60 227 100 38 42 4 7.31
including 39 42 3 9.13
Neptune RC22NPT017 345,408 6,971,259 500 -61 225 234 117 134 17 1.41
including 127 130 3 5.39
Boundary RC22BDY021 345,360 6,971,955 495 -60 265 300 170 171 1 22.87
Neptune RC22NPT017 345,408 6,971,259 500 -61 225 234 145 160 15 1.39
Neptune RC22NPT027 345,235 6,971,294 500 -60 223 120 73 74 1 16.02
Boundary RC22BDY018 345,309 6,972,093 500 -60 265 300 159 168 9 1.64
Boundary RC22BDY015 345,334 6,971,773 500 -60 265 167 119 121 2 6.59
Neptune RC22NPT019 345,314 6,971,274 500 -61 225 144 77 91 14 0.84
Neptune RC22NPT024 345,581 6,971,151 508 -61 234 150 57 71 14 0.74
Neptune RC22NPT023 345,378 6,971,232 500 -60 225 132 73 81 8 1.13
Neptune RC22NPT023 345,378 6,971,232 500 -60 225 132 88 99 11 0.78
Boundary RC22BDY019 345,304 6,972,040 500 -60 265 255 88 99 11 0.75
Boundary RC22BDY021 345,360 6,971,955 495 -60 265 300 122 124 2 3.55
Neptune RC22NPT026 345,285 6,971,303 500 -60 224 120 95 104 9 0.78
Neptune RC22NPT029 345,166 6,971,294 500 -60 221 138 38 39 1 6.75
Neptune RC22NPT030 345,194 6,971,186 500 -60 222 80 39 50 11 0.60
Boundary RC22BDY014 345,184 6,971,585 500 -60 265 198 57 58 1 5.36
Boundary RC22BDY018 345,309 6,972,093 500 -60 265 300 208 214 6 0.89
Neptune RC22NPT018 345,413 6,971,230 500 -60 223 160 134 138 4 1.27
Neptune RC22NPT019 345,314 6,971,274 500 -61 225 144 96 99 3 1.56
Neptune RC22NPT030 345,194 6,971,186 500 -60 222 80 15 21 6 0.77
Boundary RC22BDY009 345,253 6,971,462 500 -60 263 162 124 125 1 3.50
Boundary RC22BDY012 345,289 6,971,320 500 -59 266 200 131 136 5 0.88
Boundary RC22BDY019 345,304 6,972,040 500 -60 265 255 180 182 2 2.18
Boundary RC22BDY020 345,272 6,972,022 501 -60 265 204 168 169 1 4.20
Boundary RC22BDY021 345,360 6,971,955 495 -60 265 300 131 132 1 3.56
Neptune RC22NPT025 345,567 6,971,140 508 -60 232 132 56 63 7 0.55
Neptune RC22NPT026 345,285 6,971,303 500 -60 224 120 83 87 4 1.04
Boundary RC22BDY007 345,225 6,971,350 500 -66 267 234 103 106 3 1.13
Boundary RC22BDY007 345,225 6,971,350 500 -66 267 234 124 128 4 0.66
Boundary RC22BDY014 345,184 6,971,585 500 -60 265 198 27 32 5 0.58
Boundary RC22BDY019 345,304 6,972,040 500 -60 265 255 215 216 1 3.47
Neptune RC22NPT016 345,288 6,971,351 500 -61 228 180 137 142 5 0.59
Neptune RC22NPT021 345,201 6,971,233 500 -61 224 174 47 48 1 3.06

Page 11 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix Two | JORC Code, 2012 Edition | ‘Table 1’ Report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data from Recent Drilling at Neptune and Boundary Prospects (Bullseye)

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling
techniques
•
Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels,
random chips, or specific specialised industry
standard measurement tools appropriate to the
minerals under investigation, such as down hole
gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).
These examples should not be taken as limiting the
broad meaning of sampling.
•
Include reference to measures taken to ensure
sample
representivity
and
the
appropriate
calibration of any measurement tools or systems
used.
•
Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that
are Material to the Public Report.
•
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 30g
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.
•
Standards are inserted in sample batches to test
laboratory performance.
•
All Bullseye RC samples were put through a fixed
cone splitter at 1m intervals with the sample
reduced to between a 2kg to 4kg sample.
•
Bullseye drill programme used SGS Laboratories,
Kalgoorlie for RC samples:
•
SGS – samples crushed and milled to <75µm and
assayed using fire assay (50g) with additional AAS.
Drilling
techniques		 •
Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)
and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by
what method, etc).		 •
A Schramm 685 drill rig is used to drill 5.5-inch RC
holes.
•
All Bullseye RC holes were downhole surveyed
using a gyroscopic survey tool (a REFLEX GYRO
SPRINT-IQ™). A typical downhole survey was
taken at 10m depth to the end of hole. All
readings showed that down hole deviation was
negligible.
Drill sample
recovery		 •
Method of recording and assessing core and chip
sample recoveries and results assessed.
•
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and
ensure representative nature of the samples.
•
Whether a relationship exists between sample
recovery and grade and whether sample bias may
have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of
fine/coarse material.		 •
RC drill sample recovery averaged better than
99%.
Logging •
Whether core and chip samples have been
geologically and geotechnically logged to a level
of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource
estimation, mining studies and metallurgical
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.		 •
All RC chips and diamond core is routinely logged
(qualitatively) by a geologist, to record details of
regolith
(oxidation),
lithology,
structure,
mineralization and/or veining, and alteration. All
logging and sampling data are captured into a
database, with appropriate validation and security
features.
Sub-sampling
techniques and
sample
preparation		 •
If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter,
half or all core taken.
•
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary
split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.
•
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness
of
the
sample
preparation
technique.
•
Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-
sampling stages to maximise representivity of
samples.		 •
Most samples are dry and there is no likelihood of
compromised results due to moisture.
•
This sample technique is industry norm and is
deemed appropriate for the material.
•
All RC samples were put through a fixed cone
splitter at 1m intervals with the sample reduced to
between a 2kg to 4kg sample.
•
The drilling used SGS Laboratories, Kalgoorlie for
RC samples: SGS– samples dried at 105° Celsius,

Page 12 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

•
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in-situ material collected,
including
for
instance
results
for
field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
•
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain
size of the material beingsampled.
crushed and milled to 85% passing -75µm. Assay
was 50g fire assay with AAS finish for gold.
Quality of assay
data and
laboratory tests		 •
The nature, quality and appropriateness of the
assaying and laboratory procedures used and
whether the technique is considered partial or
total.
•
For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld
XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in
determining the analysis including instrument
make and model, reading times, calibrations
factors applied and their derivation, etc.
•
Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy
(ie lack of bias) and precision have been
established.		 •
All samples are sent to the accredited SGS
Laboratories, Kalgoorlie 50g fire assay with AAS
finish for gold. This method has a lower detection
limit of 0.01ppm gold.
•
Industry-standard QAQC protocols are routinely
followed for all sample batches sent for assay,
which includes the insertion of commercially
available pulp CRMs at rate of 1 for every 20 field
samples and pulp blanks at a rate of 1 for every 50
field samples. Field duplicates were collected at
the rig, directly from the cyclone at a rate of one
in every 50 samples for the entire programme.
•
QAQC data are routinely checked before any
associated
assay
results
are
reviewed
for
interpretation.
•
All assay data, including internal and external
QA/QC data and control charts of standard,
replicate
and
duplicate
assay
results,
are
communicated electronically.
Verification of
sampling and
assaying		 •
The verification of significant intersections by
either
independent
or
alternative
company
personnel.
•
The use of twinned holes.
•
Documentation of primary data, data entry
procedures,
data
verification,
data
storage
(physical and electronic) protocols.
•
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		 •
All field data associated with sampling, and all
associated assay and analytical results, are
archived in a relational database, with industry-
standard verification protocols in place.
•
The calculations of all significant intercepts (for
drill holes) are routinely checked by senior
management.
•
Data verification and validation procedures
undertaken included checks on collar position
against design and site survey collar pick-ups by
Licensed on site surveyors. Hole depths were
cross-checked in the geology logs, down hole
surveys, sample sheets and assay reports to
ensure consistency. All down hole surveys were
exposed to rigorous QAQC and drill traces were
plotted in 3D for validation and assessment of
global deviation trends.
Location of data
points		 •
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill
holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches,
mine workings and other locations used in Mineral
Resource estimation.
•
Specification of the grid system used.
•
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.		 •
The grid system used is MGA_94. The creation of
the topographic surface is based on a site survey
pick-up in March 2014 by GEMS (Glockner
Engineering
and
Mining
Services,
licensed
Australian surveyors) and again in July 2014,
August 2015 and August 2017 of all drill holes and
surface contour points in GDA_94.
•
To date the collars of holes drilled have been
picked up by a hand GPS. Although it is the
intention to use a licenced surveyor with DGPS
equipment to pick up the collars before any
resource calculation.
•
All Bullseye RC holes at Neptune were downhole
surveyed using a gyroscopic survey tool (a REFLEX
GYRO SPRINT-IQ™) and are routinely undertaken
at ~5m intervals for the drilling
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 compositinghas been applied.		 •
This drill spacing is considered to be sufficient to
establish
geological
and
grade
continuity
appropriate for the declaration of estimates of
resources.
•
The drill programme adopted a standard sample
length of 1.0m.

Page 13 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.
•
Drill holes are usually designed to intersect target
structures with a “close-to-orthogonal” intercept.
•
Most of the drill holes intersect the mineralised
zones at sufficient angle for the risk of significant
sampling orientation bias to be low.
Sample security •
The measures taken to ensure sample security.		 •
All RC samples were sampled as single 1m calico
samples, each with a unique sample number.
These calicos were collected from the drill sites in
allotments of 1 tonne bulka bags. These bulka
bags were loaded by Bullseye field staff and
delivered to SGS Kalgoorlie by road transport
supplied by SGS. Zones of waste a sampled as a
composite sample using the spear sampling
technique. If the composite returns an anomalous
value, the individual 1m samples (collected and
stored at the time of drilling) are submitted for
analysis.
Audits or reviews •
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data.		 •
All QAQC data are reviewed routinely, batch by
batch, and on a quarterly basis to conduct trend
analyses, etc. Any issues arising are dealt with
immediately and problems resolved before
results are interpreted and/or reported.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results from Recent Drilling at Neptune and Boundary Prospects (Bullseye)

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

Criteria Explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement
and land tenure
status
•
Type, reference name/number, location and
ownership including agreements or material issues
with third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title
interests, historical sites, wilderness or national
park and environmental settings.
•
The security of the tenure held at the time of
reporting along with any known impediments to
obtaininga licence to operate in the area.
•
The Neptune and Boundary Gold Prospects are
100% held by Bullseye Mining Limited (EMR
59.44%). The tenure is considered to be secure.
Exploration done
by other parties		 •
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by
other parties.		 •
Historical drilling was conducted between 1989 –
2005 by companies Julia Mines NL, Eagle Mining
NL,DeepYellow NL and Korab Resources Ltd.
Geology •
Deposit type, geological setting and style of
mineralisation.		 •
Geology comprises a basalt country rock and BIF.
The Neptune deposit is associated with an
approximately 45 degree plunging mineralised
lode (or sheets) that have formed in association
with the basalt/BIF contact, a large antiform
structure and a large cross cutting structure. Gold
Mineralisation is as shallow as a few metres below
surface, extends to some 100m below surface and
is open at depth.
•
The weathering profile displays a surface laterite,
followed
by
clay/saprolite
weathering
predominately in association with the weathered
basalt.
Saprock
is
encountered
earlier
in
association with weathered BIF. Global fresh rock is
encountered from 70m down hole, but weathering
is not well advanced at Neptune and hard saprock
and fresh rock are encountered in more shallow
horizons.
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:		 •
Details of significant drilling results are shown in
Appendix One.

Page 14 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria Explanation Commentary

-
easting and northing of the drill hole collar;
-
elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation
above sea level in metres) of the drill hole
collar;
-
dip and azimuth of the hole;
-
down hole length and interception depth;
-
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 aggregation
methods		 •
In
reporting
Exploration
Results,
weighting
averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum
grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and
cut-off grades are usually Material and should be
stated.
•
Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short
lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of
low grade results, the procedure used for such
aggregation should be stated and some typical
examples of such aggregations should be shown
in detail.
•
The assumptions used for any reporting of metal
equivalent values should be clearlystated.		 •
No high grade top cuts have been applied.
•
The reported significant intersections in Appendix
One are above 2 gram metre intersections and
allow for up to 4m of internal dilution with a lower
cut trigger values of greater than 0.5g/t.
Relationship
between
mineralisation
widths and
intercept lengths		 •
These relationships are particularly important in
the reporting of Exploration Results.
•
If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect
to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should
be reported.
•
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’).		 •
All reported intersections are down hole lengths.
True widths are unknown and vary depending on
the orientation of target structures.
Diagrams •
Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and
tabulations of intercepts should be included for
any significant discovery being reported These
should include, but not be limited to a plan view of
drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional
views.		 •
Appropriate maps and sections are included in the
body of this release.
Balanced reporting •
Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration
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.		 •
All significant drilling results being intersections
with a minimum 2 gram metre values are reported
in Appendix One.
Other substantive
exploration data		 •
Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,
should be reported including (but not limited to):
geological
observations;
geophysical
survey
results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples –
size and method of treatment; metallurgical test
results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical
and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or
contaminatingsubstances.		 •
Surface geological mapping and detailed structural
interpretation have helped inform the geological
models.
Further work •
The nature and scale of planned further work (eg
tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or
large-scale step-out drilling).
•
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible
extensions,
including
the
main
geological
interpretations and future drilling areas, provided
this information is not commerciallysensitive.		 •
Additional drilling programmes are being planned
across all exploration licences.

Page 15 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix Three | Historic (2017) Drill results on Neptune Prospect (>2 gram metre)(Bullseye)

Prospect Hole Name Easting Northing RL Azi Dip End
Depth
(m)		 From
(m)		 To (m) Interval
(m)		 Gold
g/t
Neptune NPRD0001 345,205 6,971,212 499 -60 225 185 44 47 3 0.65
Neptune NPRD0002 345,513 6,971,115 504 -60 225 200 10 24 14 3.07
Neptune NPRD0002 345,513 6,971,115 504 -60 225 200 33 36 3 5.52
Neptune NPRD0002 345,513 6,971,115 504 -60 225 200 53 71 18 0.54
Neptune NPRD0005 345,650 6,971,100 508 -60 240 200 45 48 3 1.33
Neptune NPRD0006 345,613 6,971,117 508 -60 240 200 52 53 1 1.92
Neptune NPRD0006 345,613 6,971,117 508 -60 240 200 10 12 2 0.82
Neptune NPRD0007 345,487 6,971,145 504 -60 225 199 29 46 17 7.44
Neptune NPRD0007 345,487 6,971,145 504 -60 225 199 68 83 15 1.00
Neptune NPRD0007 345,487 6,971,145 504 -60 225 199 88 89 1 4.23
Neptune NPRD0008 345,513 6,971,146 504 -60 225 220 42 58 16 1.41
Neptune NPRD0008 345,513 6,971,146 504 -60 225 220 1 3 2 2.46
Neptune NPRD0008 345,513 6,971,146 504 -60 225 220 67 69 2 1.01
Neptune NPRD0009 345,539 6,971,146 506 -60 235 220 32 60 28 1.05
Neptune NPRD0010 345,566 6,971,150 507 -60 235 119 88 90 2 1.27
Neptune NPRD0010 345,566 6,971,150 507 -60 235 119 52 54 2 1.12
Neptune NPRD0013 345,205 6,971,310 498 -60 225 100 92 100 8 0.92
Neptune NPRD0013 345,205 6,971,310 498 -60 225 100 28 36 8 0.57
Neptune NPRD0013 345,205 6,971,310 498 -60 225 100 45 47 2 0.93
Neptune NPRD0014 345,244 6,971,284 498 -60 225 100 68 69 1 3.56
Neptune NPRD0014 345,244 6,971,284 498 -60 225 100 83 85 2 0.95
Neptune NPRD0015 345,223 6,971,318 498 -60 225 100 68 75 7 15.99
Neptune NPRD0016 345,251 6,971,254 499 -60 225 100 44 55 11 5.49
Neptune NPRD0018 345,232 6,971,249 499 -60 225 100 38 39 1 1.87
Neptune NPRD0018 345,232 6,971,249 499 -60 225 100 30 31 1 1.63
Neptune NPRD0018 345,232 6,971,249 499 -60 225 100 86 87 1 1.53
Neptune NPRD0020 345,218 6,971,222 499 -60 45 100 31 46 15 1.12
Neptune NPRD0020 345,218 6,971,222 499 -60 45 100 56 62 6 1.39
Neptune NPRD0021 345,207 6,971,280 498 -60 225 100 15 23 8 1.71
Neptune NPRD0021 345,207 6,971,280 498 -60 225 100 7 8 1 2.73
Neptune NPRD0022 345,413 6,971,176 501 -60 225 100 39 40 1 3.57
Neptune NPRD0022 345,413 6,971,176 501 -60 225 100 47 49 2 1.36
Neptune NPRD0022 345,413 6,971,176 501 -60 225 100 22 24 2 0.93
Neptune NPRD0023 345,221 6,971,278 498 -60 225 100 30 31 1 1.50
Neptune NPRD0024 345,440 6,971,194 502 -60 225 100 92 95 3 24.04
Neptune NPRD0024 345,440 6,971,194 502 -60 225 100 76 84 8 1.78
Neptune NPRD0025 345,243 6,971,313 498 -60 225 100 86 91 5 2.39
Neptune NPRD0025 345,243 6,971,313 498 -60 225 100 77 81 4 1.85
Neptune NPRD0026 345,450 6,971,176 502 -60 225 100 63 79 16 10.10
Neptune NPRD0026 345,450 6,971,176 502 -60 225 100 96 100 4 0.62
Neptune NPRD0026 345,450 6,971,176 502 -60 225 100 84 85 1 1.69
Neptune NPRD0027 345,269 6,971,226 499 -60 225 100 30 41 11 1.36
Neptune NPRD0029 345,295 6,971,190 499 -60 225 100 17 23 6 4.65
Neptune NPRD0029 345,295 6,971,190 499 -60 225 100 7 11 4 1.00

Page 16 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Prospect Hole Name Easting Northing RL Azi Dip End
Depth
(m)		 From
(m)		 To (m) Interval
(m)		 Gold
g/t
Neptune NPRD0029 345,295 6,971,190 499 -60 225 100 84 86 2 1.37
Neptune NPRD0035 345,465 6,971,105 502 -60 225 100 11 18 7 0.58
Neptune NPRD0035 345,465 6,971,105 502 -60 225 100 1 3 2 0.78
Neptune NPRD0039 345,462 6,971,147 503 -60 225 100 40 66 26 6.95
Neptune NPRD0039 345,462 6,971,147 503 -60 225 100 20 30 10 0.62

Appendix Four | JORC Code, 2012 Edition | ‘Table 1’ Report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data from 2017 Historic Bullseye Drilling

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling
techniques		 •
Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut
channels, random chips, or specific specialised
industry
standard
measurement
tools
appropriate
to
the
minerals
under
investigation, such as down hole gamma
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).
These examples should not be taken as limiting
the broad meaning of sampling.
•
Include reference to measures taken to ensure
sample representivity and the appropriate
calibration of any measurement tools or
systems used.
•
Aspects of the determination of mineralisation
that are Material to the Public Report.
•
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 30g 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)
maywarrant disclosure of detailed information.		 •
The drill results reported were drilled with RC between
March 2017 and May 2017.
•
The Bullseye completed RC holes were processed
through a fixed cone splitter in 1m intervals to reduce
the RC sample to between a 2kg to 4kg sample.
•
Bullseye undertook field investigations to confirm
collar locations (with a licenced surveyor and DGPS
equipment) and evidence of work areas. The findings
of this field investigation corresponded well with the
reported works.
•
The Bullseye drill holes had standard samples inserted
in sample batches to test laboratory performance. The
historic drilling’s use of standards is unknown.
•
The Bullseye drill programmes used the following labs
and methodology:
•
Bureau Veritas, Kalgoorlie; Milled to <75um and
assayed using fire assay (40g) with additional
atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS).
Drilling
techniques		 •
Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-
hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka,
sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-
sampling bit or other type, whether core is
oriented and if so,bywhat method,etc).		 •
The drill results reported were drilled with RC using a
5.5 inch hammer.
•
All collars completed by Bullseye were picked up by a
licensed onsite surveyor.
Drill sample
recovery		 •
Method of recording and assessing core and
chip sample recoveries and results assessed.
•
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery
and ensure representative nature of the
samples.
•
Whether a relationship exists between sample
recovery and grade and whether sample bias
may have occurred due to preferential
loss/gain of fine/coarse material.		 •
All Bullseye RC 1m samples and sub-samples (pre- and
post-split) are weighed at the drill rig, to check that
there is adequate sample material for assay. Any wet
or damp samples are noted and that information is
recorded in the database; samples are usually dry. Both
the Bullseye RC and Diamond sample recovery was
+95% recovery.
•
It is not possible to confirm the relationship between
sample recoveryandgrade.
Logging •
Whether core and chip samples have been
geologically and geotechnically logged to a
level of detail to support appropriate Mineral
Resource estimation, mining studies and
metallurgical 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.		 •
All holes drilled by Bullseye Mining Limited have been
geologically logged. Logging recorded lithology,
mineralogy, alteration, weathering, texture, sulphide
content, veining and macro structure;
•
The geological legend has evolved from historic
observations and recent logging determinations and is
consistent with the regional and local geology;

Page 17 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sub-sampling
techniques and
sample
preparation
•
If core, whether cut or sawn and whether
quarter, half or all core taken.
•
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled,
rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or
dry.
•
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation
technique.
•
Quality control procedures adopted for all
sub-sampling
stages
to
maximise
representivity of samples.
•
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in-situ material collected,
including
for
instance
results
for
field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
•
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the
grain size of the material beingsampled.
•
All Bullseye Mining Limited RC samples were processed
through a fixed cone splitter at 1m intervals with the
sample to reduce the RC sample to between a 2kg to
4kg sample. Any wet or damp samples are noted and
that information is recorded in the database; samples
are usually dry. Assaying was completed at Bureau
Veritas – samples dried at 85° Celsius, crushed and
milled to 90% passing -75µm. Assay was 40g fire assay
with AAS finish for gold.
Quality of assay
data and
laboratory tests		 •
The nature, quality and appropriateness of the
assaying and laboratory procedures used and
whether the technique is considered partial or
total.
•
For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld
XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in
determining the analysis including instrument
make and model, reading times, calibrations
factors applied and their derivation, etc.
•
Nature of quality control procedures adopted
(eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external
laboratory checks) and whether acceptable
levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision
have been established.		 •
The Bullseye Mining Limited drill programmes followed
Industry-standard QAQC protocols
•
QAQC protocols are routinely followed for all sample
batches sent for assay, which includes the insertion of
commercially available pulp CRMs at rate of 1 for every
20 field samples and pulp blanks at a rate of 1 for every
50 field samples. Field duplicates were collected at the
drill rig, directly from the cyclone at a rate of one in
every 50 samples for all Bullseye Mining Limited drilling
programmes.
Verification of
sampling and
assaying		 •
The verification of significant intersections by
either independent or alternative company
personnel.
•
The use of twinned holes.
•
Documentation of primary data, data entry
procedures, data verification, data storage
(physical and electronic) protocols.
•
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		 •
All field data associated with sampling, and all
associated assay and analytical results, are archived in
a
relational
database,
with
industry-standard
verification protocols in place.
•
Data verification and validation procedures undertaken
by Bullseye included checks on collar position against
design and site survey collar pick-ups by GEMS. Hole
depths were cross-checked in the geology logs, down
hole surveys, sample sheets and assay reports to
ensure consistency. All down hole surveys were
exposed to rigorous QAQC and drill traces were
plotted in 3D for validation and assessment of global
deviation trends.
•
Bullseye have conducted a comparison of historic
drilling holes against the recent Bullseye Mining
Limited drill programme results. The comparison has
showed solid correlation between the historic priority
one holes and the recent drilling for both geology and
grade.
Location of data
points		 •
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate
drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys),
trenches, mine workings and other locations
used in Mineral Resource estimation.
•
Specification of the grid system used.
•
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.		 •
The grid system used is MGA_94. The creation of the
topographic surface is based on a site survey pick-up
by GEMS;
•
Collars of holes drilled by Bullseye Mining Limited have
been picked up by GEMS or alternative licensed on-site
surveyor using a Trimble GNSS DGPS. Where
identified, historical drill holes have also been picked
using the DGPS;
•
The Bullseye RC and diamond holes were downhole
surveyed using a gyroscopic survey tool. Vertical holes
were not surveyed.
Data spacing and
distribution		 •
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration
Results.
•
Whether the data spacing and distribution is
sufficient to establish the degree ofgeological		 •
This drill spacing is considered to be sufficient to
establish geological and grade continuity appropriate
for the declaration of estimates of resources.

Page 18 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

and grade continuity appropriate for the
Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation
procedure(s) and classifications applied.
•
Whether
sample
compositing
has
been
applied.
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.		 •
Drill holes are usually designed to intersect target
structures with a “close-to-orthogonal” intercept.
•
Most of the drill holes intersect the mineralised zones
at sufficient angle for the risk of significant sampling
orientation bias to be low.
Sample security •
The measures taken to ensure sample security.		 •
All RC samples were sampled each with a unique
sample number. These calicos were collected from the
drill sites in allotments of 1 tonne bulka bags. These
bulka bags were loaded by Bullseye field staff and
delivered to respective Laboratories byroad freight.
Audits or reviews •
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data.		 •
All QAQC data are reviewed routinely, batch by batch,
and on a quarterly basis to conduct trend analyses, etc.
Any issues arising are dealt with immediately and
problems resolved before results are interpreted
and/or reported.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results from Historic (2017) Bullseye Drilling

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

Criteria Explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement
and land tenure
status
•
Type, reference name/number, location and
ownership including agreements or material
issues with third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title
interests,
historical
sites,
wilderness
or
national park and environmental settings.
•
The security of the tenure held at the time of
reporting along with any known impediments
to obtaininga licence to operate in the area.
•
The Neptune Gold Project is 100% held by Bullseye
Mining Limited (EMR:59.44%).
•
All tenure is considered to be secure.
Exploration done
by other parties		 •
Acknowledgment
and
appraisal
of
exploration by other parties.		 •
Historical drilling was conducted between 1989 – 2005
by companies Julia Mines NL, Eagle Mining NL, Deep
Yellow NL and Korab Resources Ltd.
Geology •
Deposit type, geological setting and style of
mineralisation.		 •
Neptune: geology comprises a surrounding basalt
country rock and banded iron formation (BIF). The
Boundary deposit is associated with quartz veining in
weathered saprolite and saprock predominately
overlying a steeply plunging granodiorite. Gold
Mineralisation is within the quartz veins but extends
well into the fresh granodiorite to a depth of some
160m below surface. Additional gold mineralisation is
seen in the surrounding basalt proximal to the contacts
with the granodiorite;
• The weathering profile has a partially oxidized ‘saprock’
unit overlying fresh rock at about 50m depth in the
north deepening to about 70m in the south, forming a
weathered basin overlying the granodiorite. Within the
basin, a saprolite unit occurs in association with a more
extensive clay/sand (palaeochannel) infill zone and an
extensive laterite overlies all units.
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:
-
easting and northing of the drill hole
collar;		 •
Details of significant drilling results are shown in
Appendix Three.

Page 19 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria Explanation Commentary

-
elevation or RL (Reduced Level –
elevation above sea level in metres) of
the drill hole collar;
-
dip and azimuth of the hole;
-
down hole length and interception
depth;
-
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 aggregation
methods		 •
In reporting Exploration Results, weighting
averaging
techniques,
maximum
and/or
minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of
high grades) and cut-off grades are usually
Material and should be stated.
•
Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short
lengths of high grade results and longer
lengths of low grade results, the procedure
used for such aggregation should be stated
and
some
typical
examples
of
such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
•
The assumptions used for any reporting of
metal equivalent values should be clearly
stated.		 •
No high grade top cuts have been applied.
•
The reported significant intersections in Appendix
Three are above 2 gram metre intersections and allow
for up to 4m of internal dilution with a lower cut trigger
values of greater than 0.5g/t.
Relationship
between
mineralisation
widths and
intercept lengths		 •
These relationships are particularly important
in the reporting of Exploration Results.
•
If the geometry of the mineralisation with
respect to the drill hole angle is known, its
nature should be reported.
•
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’).		 •
The majority of the drill holes intersect the mineralised
zones at sufficient angle for the risk of significant
sampling orientation bias to be low.
Diagrams •
Appropriate maps and sections (with scales)
and tabulations of intercepts should be
included for any significant discovery being
reported These should include, but not be
limited to a plan view of drill hole collar
locations and appropriate sectional views.		 •
Appropriate maps and diagrams are included in the
body of this release.
Balanced reporting •
Where
comprehensive
reporting
of
all
Exploration
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.		 •
Significant drilling results above 2 gram metre are
reported in Appendix Three.
Other substantive
exploration data		 •
Other exploration data, if meaningful and
material, should be reported including (but
not limited to): geological observations;
geophysical
survey
results;
geochemical
survey results; bulk samples – size and
method of treatment; metallurgical test
results;
bulk
density,
groundwater,
geotechnical
and
rock
characteristics;
potential
deleterious
or
contaminating
substances.		 •
Surface geological mapping and detailed structural
interpretation have helped inform the geological
models.
•
Initial metallurgical, geotechnical and hydrogeological
drilling has been carried out.
Further work •
The nature and scale of planned further work
(eg tests for lateral extensions or depth
extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).
•
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of
possible extensions, including the main
geological interpretations and future drilling
areas, provided this information is not
commerciallysensitive.		 •
Additional drilling programmes are being planned
across all exploration licences.

Page 20 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix Five | New Significant Intercepts Memot Prospect RC Drill Programme (>2 gram metre)(EMR:100%)

Hole Name Easting Northing RL Azi Dip End
Depth		 From To Interval Gold
g/t		 Silver Copper Lead Zinc
(m) (m) (m) (m) (g/t) (g/t) ppm ppm ppm
RC22MMT073 633,511 1,317,690 45 349 -90 153 132 133 1 31.40 63.00 5,150 589 5,170
RC22MMT039 633,766 1,318,061 47 225 -63 160 69 70 1 21.30 69.00 10,650 42 1,230
RC22MMT074 633,393 1,317,814 45 225 -65 153 132 135 3 7.11
assays pending
RC22MMT047 633,843 1,318,283 47 225 -60 159 70 77 7 2.18 8.35 2,965 12 244
including 70 71 1 11.15 38.60 14,850 21 820
RC22MMT057 633,491 1,318,070 45 225 -55 117 3 7 4 3.87 1.45 236 204 82
including 4 5 1 12.95 3.20 314 446 111
RC22MMT038 633,548 1,317,967 47 225 -68 160 123 130 7 1.80 1.31 241 18 430
including 127 128 1 10.00 5.20 389 75 1,700
RC22MMT065 633,893 1,317,903 48 225 -60 153 107 108 1 12.20
assays pending
RC22MMT077 633,396 1,318,480 42 225 -55 92 17 22 5 1.81 assays pending
including 21 22 1 7.53 assays pending
RC22MMT048 633,752 1,318,332 43 225 -60 159 58 60 2 4.25 4.60 1,233 45 302
RC22MMT078 633,400 1,318,488 42 45 -60 147 144 145 1 8.03
assays pending
RC22MMT053 633,658 1,317,993 47 225 -66 22 19 21 2 3.73 13.50 2,710 250 382
RC22MMT062 633,731 1,317,751 50 225 -55 153 109 116 7 1.07 2.04 437 47 1,516
RC22MMT041 633,839 1,317,988 48 225 -65 139 34 37 3 1.95 3.67 400 73 511
RC22MMT067 633,638 1,317,944 49 225 -70 88 78 82 4 1.39 assays pending
RC22MMT072 633,516 1,317,694 45 45 -60 153 34 36 2 3.09 18.90 1,583 1,584 1,992
RC22MMT049 633,739 1,318,016 47 225 -65 159 43 44 1 5.37 4.20 790 23 193
RC22MMT059 633,736 1,318,095 46 45 -70 87 0 7 7 0.69 1.01 694 73 171
RC22MMT062 633,731 1,317,751 50 225 -55 153 16 17 1 4.90 4.00 425 669 375
RC22MMT072 633,516 1,317,694 45 45 -60 153 42 43 1 5.37 1.10 565 16 66
RC22MMT072 633,516 1,317,694 45 45 -60 153 89 92 3 1.71 2.40 477 54 148
RC22MMT049 633,739 1,318,016 47 225 -65 159 93 94 1 3.72 25.10 2,250 274 2,700
RC22MMT058 633,731 1,318,089 47 225 -65 84 72 73 1 3.70 7.70 1,030 44 124
RC22MMT063A 633,695 1,317,839 49 225 -55 42 20 21 1 3.60
assays pending
RC22MMT064 633,716 1,317,857 49 225 -60 153 101 103 2 1.78 1.20 254 53 132
RC22MMT065 633,893 1,317,903 48 225 -60 153 27 28 1 3.97 43.00 12,150 71 677
RC22MMT069 633,533 1,317,920 47 225 -60 150 144 148 4 1.06 assays pending
RC22MMT074 633,393 1,317,814 45 225 -65 153 149 151 2 2.01
assays pending
RC22MMT040 633,771 1,318,060 48 45 -90 79 63 64 1 3.22 0.70 90 28 495
RC22MMT046 633,855 1,318,211 47 225 -65 160 124 125 1 2.76 0.30 63 3 27
RC22MMT059 633,736 1,318,095 46 45 -70 87 60 63 3 1.16 0.10 89 2 78
RC22MMT064 633,716 1,317,857 49 225 -60 153 50 52 2 1.55 2.15 198 46 33
RC22MMT067 633,638 1,317,944 49 225 -70 88 50 51 1 3.02 assays pending
RC22MMT069 633,533 1,317,920 47 225 -60 150 78 79 1 2.51
assays pending
RC22MMT075 633,343 1,318,292 44 225 -55 153 29 32 3 1.03
assays pending
RC22MMT043 633,833 1,317,851 49 225 -60 120 17 18 1 2.28 3.80 417 178 212
RC22MMT049 633,739 1,318,016 47 225 -65 159 108 110 2 1.23 5.05 1,659 19 320
RC22MMT049 633,739 1,318,016 47 225 -65 159 124 125 1 1.52 0.05 79 0 48
RC22MMT051 633,667 1,318,098 45 225 -55 138 47 48 1 1.61 13.40 1,995 447 650
RC22MMT051 633,667 1,318,098 45 225 -55 138 52 53 1 1.60 0.90 153 43 119

Page 21 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

RC22MMT051 633,667 1,318,098 45 225 -55 138 95 96 1 1.79 2.10 387 29 61
RC22MMT059 633,736 1,318,095 46 45 -70 87 37 38 1 1.56 0.05 110 1 20
RC22MMT062 633,731 1,317,751 50 225 -55 153 9 10 1 1.66 1.60 221 187 56
RC22MMT062 633,731 1,317,751 50 225 -55 153 71 72 1 1.82 2.00 501 146 231
RC22MMT069 633,533 1,317,920 47 225 -60 150 22 23 1 1.71 assays pending
RC22MMT069 633,533 1,317,920 47 225 -60 150 87 88 1 2.07 assays pending
RC22MMT069 633,533 1,317,920 47 225 -60 150 102 103 1 2.34 assays pending
RC22MMT072 633,516 1,317,694 45 45 -60 153 98 99 1 1.57 4.80 1,000 89 305
RC22MMT074 633,393 1,317,814 45 225 -65 153 100 101 1 2.34 assays pending

Appendix Six | JORC Code, 2012 Edition | ‘Table 1’ Report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data from New Significant Intercepts Memot Prospect RC Drill Programme

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling
techniques
•
Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut
channels, random chips, or specific specialised
industry
standard
measurement
tools
appropriate
to
the
minerals
under
investigation, such as down hole gamma
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).
These examples should not be taken as
limiting the broad meaning of sampling.
•
Include reference to measures taken to ensure
sample representivity and the appropriate
calibration of any measurement tools or
systems used.
•
Aspects of the determination of mineralisation
that are Material to the Public Report.
•
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 3kg was pulverised to
produce a 30g 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.
•
Standards are inserted in sample batches to test
laboratory performance.
•
For the recent Memot RC drill, reverse circulation (RC)
drilling is used to collect both a 4m composite and 1m
samples in the precollar. The 4m programme
composited are taken from the excess bagged
material off the cone splitter taken every 1m. A spear
sampling technique is then used to produce a 3-5kg
composite sample. The 1m samples are split with a
cone splitter at the drill rig to produce a 3-5kg sub-
sample. These 1m samples are submitted after the
results of the 4m composites are received to identify
the zones of mineralisation.
•
The Exploration drill samples preparation is carried out
at a commercial off-site laboratory (ALS Phnom Penh).
Gold assays are conducted at ALS Vientiane, Laos
utilising a 50gram subsample of 85% passing 75µm
pulped sample using Fire Assay with AAS finish on and
Aqua Regia digest of the lead collection button. Multi-
element assay is completed at ALS, Perth, Australia on
a 1g pulp subsample digested by Aqua Regia and
determined by ICP-AES or ICP-MS for lowest available
detection for the respective element.
Drilling
techniques		 •
Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-
hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka,
sonic, etc) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-
sampling bit or other type, whether core is
oriented and if so, by what method, etc).		 •
A track mounted Longyear DB350 rig is used to drill
5.5-inch RC precollar holes. Recent drilling used a
REFLEX survey tool to survey hole deviation. A typical
downhole survey was taken at 12m depth and then
every 30m to the end of hole. Surveying of RC holes
utilises 6m of stainless drill rod to negate the magnetic
interference from the rod string and hammer
assembly. All readings showed that down hole
deviation was negligible.
Drill sample
recovery		 •
Method of recording and assessing core and
chip sample recoveries and results assessed.
•
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery
and ensure representative nature of the
samples.
•
Whether a relationship exists between sample
recovery and grade and whether sample bias
may have occurred due to preferential
loss/gain of fine/coarse material.		 •
All RC 1m samples and sub-samples (pre- and post-
split) are weighed at the rig, to check that there is
adequate sample material for assay. Any wet or damp
samples are noted and that information is recorded in
the database; samples are usually dry.
Logging •
Whether core and chip samples have been
geologicallyandgeotechnicallylogged to a		 •
All RC chips and diamond core is routinely logged
(qualitatively)byageologist,to record details of

Page 22 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

level of detail to support appropriate Mineral
Resource estimation, mining studies and
metallurgical 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.
regolith
(oxidation),
lithology,
structure,
mineralisation and/or veining, and alteration. In
addition, the magnetic susceptibility of all samples is
routinely measured. All logging and sampling data
are captured into a database, with appropriate
validation and security features.
•
Standard
field
data
are
similarly
recorded
(qualitatively) routinely by a geologist for all soil
samplingsites.
Sub-sampling
techniques and
sample
preparation		 •
If core, whether cut or sawn and whether
quarter, half or all core taken.
•
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled,
rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or
dry.
•
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation
technique.
•
Quality control procedures adopted for all
sub-sampling
stages
to
maximise
representivity of samples.
•
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in-situ material collected,
including
for
instance
results
for
field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
•
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the
grain size of the material beingsampled.		 •
Most samples are dry and there is no likelihood of
compromised results due to moisture.
•
All samples were prepared for assay at the NATA
accredited ALS Cambodia sample preparation facility
in Phnom Penh; and that facility has been inspected,
at the request of the Company, numerous times and
most recently by Mr Keith King in April 2022. Samples
are dried for a minimum of 12 hours at 105˚C.
•
This sample technique is industry norm and is deemed
appropriate for the material.
Quality of assay
data and
laboratory tests		 •
The nature, quality and appropriateness of the
assaying and laboratory procedures used and
whether the technique is considered partial or
total.
•
For
geophysical
tools,
spectrometers,
handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters
used in determining the analysis including
instrument make and model, reading times,
calibrations
factors
applied
and
their
derivation, etc.
•
Nature of quality control procedures adopted
(eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external
laboratory checks) and whether acceptable
levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision
have been established.		 •
All samples are sent to the NATA accredited ALS
Laboratory in Vientiane, Laos, for single Aqua Regia
digest with a 50g charge with an ICP-MS finish.
Samples are sent to the similarly accredited ALS Lab in
Brisbane, Australia and ALS Lab Perth, Australia, for
multi-element ICP analysis, after partial extraction by
aqua regia digest then via a combination of ICP-MS
and ICP-AES. This method has a lower detection limit
of 1ppm gold.
•
Industry-standard QAQC protocols are routinely
followed for all sample batches sent for assay, which
includes the insertion of commercially available pulp
CRMs and pulp blanks into all batches - usually 1 of
each for every 20 field samples. Additional blanks
used are home-made from barren quarry basalt.
QAQC data are routinely checked before any
associated
assay
results
are
reviewed
for
interpretation, and any problems are investigated
before results are released to the market - no issues
were raised with the results reported here.
•
All assay data, including internal and external QAQC
data and control charts of standard, replicate and
duplicate
assay
results,
are
communicated
electronically.
Verification of
sampling and
assaying		 •
The verification of significant intersections by
either independent or alternative company
personnel.
•
The use of twinned holes.
•
Documentation of primary data, data entry
procedures, data verification, data storage
(physical and electronic) protocols.
•
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		 •
All field data associated with sampling, and all
associated assay and analytical results, are archived in
a
relational
database,
with
industry-standard
verification protocols and security measures in place.
•
The calculations of all significant intercepts (for drill
holes) are routinely checked by senior management.
•
All field data associated with drilling and sampling,
and all associated assay and analytical results, are
archived in a relational database, with industry-
standard verification protocols and security measures
inplace.
Location of data
points		 •
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate
drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys),
trenches, mine workings and other locations
used in Mineral Resource estimation.
•
Specification of thegrid system used.		 •
Whilst, all sample locations are first surveyed with a
hand-held GPS instrument (which generates relatively
inaccurate RL values), not all samples were insitu. All
locations are surveyed to WGS 84.

Page 23 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

•
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
•
Drill hole collar locations are first surveyed with a
hand-held GPS instrument (which generates relatively
inaccurate RL values). The locations of all holes used
in Mineral Resource estimates are verified or
amended by survey using a differential GPS by and
external contractor with excellent accuracy in all
dimensions using a local base station reference).
•
To date the newly reported collars of holes drilled
have been picked up by a hand GPS. Although it is the
intention to use a licenced surveyor with DGPS
equipment to pick up the collars before any resource
calculation.
•
Down-hole surveys are routinely undertaken at 30m
intervals for all types of drilling, using a single-shot or
multi-shot REFLEX survey tool (operated by the driller
and checked bythe supervising geologist).
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.		 •
This drill spacing is considered to be sufficient to
establish geological and grade continuity appropriate
for the declaration of estimates of resources.
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.		 •
Drill holes are usually designed to intersect target
structures with a “close-to-orthogonal” intercept.
•
Drilling has been done at various orientations.
•
Most of the drill holes intersect the mineralised zones
at sufficient angle for the risk of significant sampling
orientation bias to be low.
Sample security •
The measures taken to ensure sample security.		 •
The chain of custody for all drill samples from the drill
rig and soil/auger samples from the field to the ALS
Sample Preparation facility in Phnom Penh is
managed by Renaissance personnel. Drill samples are
transported from the drill site to the Okvau
exploration core farm, where they are logged and all
samples are batched up for shipment to Phnom Penh.
•
Sample submission forms are sent to the ALS Sample
Prep facility in paper form (with the samples
themselves) and also as an electronic copy. Delivered
samples are reconciled with the batch submission
form prior to the commencement of any sample
preparation.
•
ALS is responsible for shipping sample pulps from
Phnom Penh to the analytical laboratories in
Vientiane, Brisbane and Perth and all samples are
tracked via their Global Enterprise Management
System.
•
All bulk residues are stored permanently at the ALS
laboratoryin Vientiane.
Audits or reviews •
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data.		 •
All QAQC data are reviewed routinely, batch by batch,
and on a quarterly basis to conduct trend analyses,
etc. Any issues arising are dealt with immediately and
problems resolved before results are interpreted
and/or reported.
•
Comprehensive QAQC audits have been conducted
on this project by Duncan Hackman (August 2009,
February 2010 & November 2011), SRK (February
2013) and Nola Hackman (January 2014), Wolfe (July
2015).

Page 24 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

•
Mr Brett Gossage reviewed the data used in the Okvau
Resource up to December 2016 and concluded that
there are no concerns about data quality.
•
Keith King completed his most recent site visit and lab
audit of the ALS Phnom Penh facilities in April 2022.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results from New Significant Intercepts Memot Prospect RC Drill Programme

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

Criteria Explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement
and land tenure
status
•
Type, reference name/number, location and
ownership including agreements or material
issues with third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title
interests, historical sites, wilderness or national
park and environmental settings.
•
The security of the tenure held at the time of
reporting along with any known impediments
to obtaininga licence to operate in the area.
•
The licences are held (100%) in the name of
Renaissance Minerals (Cambodia) Limited which is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Emerald Resources NL.
•
The tenure is considered to be secure.
Exploration done
by other parties		 •
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration
by other parties.		 •
Exploration has been completed by previous
explorers; Oxiana and Oz Minerals including soil
sampling, geophysical data collection and drilling.
Geology •
Deposit type, geological setting and style of
mineralisation.		 •
Gold occurrences within the licences is interpreted as
either
a
“intrusion-related
gold
system”
or
“Porphyry”
related
mineralisation.
Gold
mineralization is hosted within quartz and/or
sulphide veins and associated within or proximal
distance to a Cretaceous age diorite.
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:
-
easting and northing of the drill hole
collar;
-
elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation
above sea level in metres) of the drill hole
collar;
-
dip and azimuth of the hole;
-
down hole length and interception depth;
-
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.		 •
Details of significant drilling in Appendix Five.
Data aggregation
methods		 •
In reporting Exploration Results, weighting
averaging
techniques,
maximum
and/or
minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high
grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material
and should be stated.
•
Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short
lengths of high grade results and longer
lengths of low grade results, the procedure
used for such aggregation should be stated
and
some
typical
examples
of
such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
•
The assumptions used for any reporting of
metal equivalent values should be clearly
stated.		 •
No high grade top cuts have been applied.
•
The reported significant intersections in Appendix
Five are above 2 gram metre intersections and allow
for up to 4m of internal dilution with a lower cut
trigger values of greater than 0.5g/t.
Relationship
between
mineralisation		 •
These relationships are particularly important
in the reporting of Exploration Results.		 •
All reported intersections are down hole lengths.
True widths are unknown and vary depending on the
orientation of target structures.

Page 25 of 26

==> picture [137 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

29 April 2022
Criteria Explanation Commentary
widths and
intercept lengths
•
If the geometry of the mineralisation with
respect to the drill hole angle is known, its
nature should be reported.
•
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 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.		 •
Appropriate maps and sections are included in the
body of this release.
Balanced reporting •
Where
comprehensive
reporting
of
all
Exploration
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.		 •
All significant drilling results being intersections with
a minimum 2 gram metre values are reported in
Appendix Five.
Other substantive
exploration data		 •
Other exploration data, if meaningful and
material, should be reported including (but not
limited
to):
geological
observations;
geophysical survey results; geochemical survey
results; bulk samples – size and method of
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk
density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock
characteristics;
potential
deleterious
or
contaminatingsubstances.		 •
All mineralisation is associated with visible amounts
of pyrrhotite or arsenopyrite.
Further work •
The nature and scale of planned further work
(eg tests for lateral extensions or depth
extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).
•
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of
possible
extensions,
including
the
main
geological interpretations and future drilling
areas, provided this information is not
commerciallysensitive.		 •
Further drilling programmes are being planned on
additional nearby targets.
•
Additional drilling programmes are being planned
across all exploration licences.

Page 26 of 26

More from EMERALD RESOURCES NL

Capital/Financing Update 2026
May 5
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 30
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 30
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
Apr 30
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 29
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 29
Interim / Quarterly Report 2026
Apr 22
Capital/Financing Update 2026
Apr 20
Interim / Quarterly Report 2026
Apr 9
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
Mar 25
View all filings →