EV RESOURCES LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2024

May 19, 2024

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 20[th] May 2024

EVR to unlock district-scale potential of its high-grade Parag copper-molybdenum project following drill success.

Highlights:

• Hole APG-006 at Parag extends the known mineralization and dimensions of the Trinchera Este breccia and confirms growing width and length of the structure.

• Intercepted mineralized porphyry shown to be in contact with breccia, resulting in a significant reappraisal of the Parag breccia-porphyry model.

• Trinchera Este is the smallest of the 6 previously drilled breccia outcrops and represents a fraction of the overall mineralisation over a strike of up to 1200 metres and width of up to 500 metres.

• Current drill results are consistent with historical exploration work at Parag that recorded mineralization across all breccias.

• Hole APG-DDH-006 assayed 218m (metres) at 0.30% Cu and 0.10% Mo from 0m.

• This includes intersections of:

  • 186m grading 0.30% Cu and 0.20% Mo from 0m to 186m.

  • 122m grading 0.40% Cu and 0.20% Mo from 0m to 122m.

  • 56m grading 0.50% Cu and 0.20% Mo from 0m to 56m.

  • 30m grading 0.60% Cu and 0.30% Mo from 0m to 30m.

• Moly and copper prices have risen to:

• US$48,061/tonne for Mo (Molybdenum) (US$21.80/lb)

• US$10,114/tonne for Cu (Copper) (US$4.59/lb)

• Molybdenum trades at a price 4.75x the price of copper demonstrating the high value Molybdenum by product.[1]

EV Resources Limited (ASX: EVR or “EVR”) is pleased to confirm the extension to the northwest of the Trinchera Este breccia with a new hole ( APG-DDH-006 ) at the high grade Parag copper-molybdenum project (70% EVR) in Peru. Significantly, the hole is the third angled hole drilled at Trinchera Este to record lengthy high grade CopperMolybdenum results in the breccia, and then intercept mineralized porphyrtic intrusive.

(1) London Metals Exchange (LME) Prices as at 15[th] May 2024

evresources.com.au 311-313 Hay St Subiaco, Western Australia 6008 info@evresources.com.au

The results of this hole, the fourth from this current seven hole (1980 metre) campaign, extends the footprint of the Trinchera Este breccia to the northwest. The hole intersects the mineralized breccia from the surface to 125 meters depth where it makes contact with a porphyritic andesite body.

Additionally, laboratory assay values confirm mineralization in both lithological units.

Mr. Callaghan said “ Mineralization in both the breccia and adjacent porphyritic intrusions at Parag requires us to rethink our approach after similar intercepts in holes APG 002, and APG 003 – and then nearly 1000 metres to the West at drilling in the Paylacocha 1 breccia”.

This is a major development for EVR and we are now focused on reevaluating the prospectivity of a project with an expansive breccia system much closer to porphyry hosted mineralization than we previously envisaged . Following the successful drill campaign, we have committed to a reappraisal of the geological model, taking into account the potential increase in scale of Parag. This work also includes targeting delivery of a Q3 Exploration Target for the project .”

Hole APG-DDH-006 stopped in mineralization, and is the third angled hole drilled at Trinchera Este to record lengthy high grade Copper-Molybdenum results in the breccia, and then intercept mineralized porphyrtic intrusive. Each previous angled hole (APG – DDH – 002/3) has extended the dimensions of the Trinchera Este breccia which, notably, is the smallest of the six previously drilled structures. ( See Figure 1 )

Trinchera Este: The Smallest of six previously drilled breccia outcrops

Drilling, mapping, and sampling to date have established mineralization at Parag in breccia and porphyry, over a 1200 metre strike and a typical width of up to 500 metres – although the distance from the Parag Oeste breccia outcrop to Paylacocha II is 1500metres.

The confirmation of mineralization, in both breccia and adjacent porphyritic intrusions is a significant development for the Parag project, indicating that breccia hosted mineralization extends into adjacent porphyritic intrusions.

This requires a significant reappraisal of the geological model and the potential scale of the Parag project. EVR has previously explained that 18,470 metres of diamond drilling (76 holes) has been conducted at Parag prior to EVR’s investment. Six breccia outcrops have previously been drilled and named – and Trinchera Este is by far the smallest of these outcrops. ( See Figure 1)

The mineralized zone at Parag extends over a considerable strike within which Trinchera Este represents one of the smallest outcrops – albeit one we considered geologically important in the search for a mineralized porphyry system of significant scale.

Figure 1: Plan view of the location of complete system of breccia bodies at Parag. All these structures have JORC reported HQ Diamond drilling.

==> picture [535 x 502] intentionally omitted <==

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

Trinchera Este is the
smallest of the 6 previously
drilled breccias.
Mineralization in the breccia
and adjacent porphyritic
intrusions requires a rethink of
our approach after intercepts in
holes APG 002, and APG 003
– and then similar occurrences
nearly 1000 metres to the West
at drilling in the Paylacocha 1
breccia.
----- End of picture text -----

The mineralized breccia of Trinchera Este

The maiden EVR drill campaign has focused only on drilling from 2 separate platforms at the Trinchera Este breccia, situated at the eastern end of the area – it is located 1070 meters from the largest of the outcropping breccia (Pailacocha I) at the westsouthwest end. Figure 1 above demonstrates the extent of this mineralized zone which offers potential for significant scale.

Figure 2: Trinchera Este Breccia – The Smallest of 6 Previously drilled Breccias at Parag

==> picture [511 x 389] intentionally omitted <==

The mineralized breccia that is exposed on the surface covers an area of approximately 90 to 100 hectares. Minor breccias occur towards the north and east of this area, but they are not included in the current phase of exploration. The mineralized breccia of Trinchera Este is characterized by quartz-sericite-chlorite- and later carbonate alteration. It contains mineralization of chalcopyrite, molybdenite, and pyrite, with sporadic zinc and lead towards the surface.

Laboratory results show the presence of silver Copper, and molybdenum mineralization is associated with porphyry type A and B veins, sulfide veins, dissemination, breccia matrix, and filling open spaces.

The breccia in Trinchera East is mostly clast-supported, matrix-supported towards the central part and in-depth, and generally polymictic. Clasts consist of fragments of hornfels, porphyritic andesitic, and felsic intrusive, the latter sometime displaying vein stockwork. Most of the clasts are affected by strong silicification and quartz-sericite alteration. Quartz-sericite-chlorite generally affects the matrix.

The mineralization in the intrusive body is characterized by the presence of dissemination of chalcopyrite and molybdenite, tourmaline millimetre veinlets with copper sulfides, and traces of molybdenum sulfides; pyrite is present in most of the andesite porphyry intrusive body until the end of the hole as traces and eventually reaching 1%. Quartz-sericite-chlorite alteration and patches of retrograde chlorite alteration occur after secondary biotite.

Table 1. Drill intercepts and results from APG-DDH-006 hole.

COPPER EQUIVALENT VALUES WILL BE AVAILABLE AT A TIME WHEN THE COMPANY HAS UNDERTAKEN A LEVEL OF METALURGICAL TESTING THAT ALLOWS FOR AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT.

IN THE INTERIM, SHAREHOLDERS ARE ADVISED THAT MOLYBDENUM IS CURRENTLY TRADING APPROXIMATELY 4.75x THE VALUE OF COPPER.

Hole Id	Azimut h	Dip (o)	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	Cu %	Mo %
APG-DDH- 006	270	-70	0	218	218	0.30	0.10
Including			0	186	186	0.30	0.20
			0	122	122	0.4	0.20
			0	56	56	0.50	0.20
			0	30	30	0.60	0.30

Notes

1. Drill Hole Coordinates

  - **APG-DDH-006: 278756E / 8812863N at an elevation of 4676 meters above sea level. Azimuth: 270[o] , Inclination: -70[o] , Meters Drilled: 291, Diameter: HQ.**

2. Mineralization starts from the surface and extends in a breccia up to 125 meters from the surface and 125 meters to the end of the hole in a porphyritic intrusive of andesitic composition.

3. London Metals Exchange (LME) as at 15[th] May 2024:

• One tonne of copper is priced at US$10,114 or US$4.59/lb

• One tonne of Molybdenum is priced at US$48,061 or US$21.80/lb

Geological Description of Diamond Drill Hole APG-DDH-006 (cont.):

Brief geology description of Diamond Drill Hole APG-DDH-006:

From 00.00 to 7.5 meters:

Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in intrusive (porphyritic andesites), Qz-PyCpy-Mo, filling voids, some hornfels clasts, moderate to strong quartz-sericite alteration.

From 7.5 to 14.90 meters:

Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in hornfels, Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling open spaces.

From 14.90 to 49.90 meters:

Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in intrusive (porphyritic andesites), Qz-PyCpy-Mo filling open spaces, moderate quartz-sericite-chlorite alteration, local presence of some fingers of intrusive and intrusive breccia.

From 49.40 to 57.90 meters:

Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in hornfels, Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling open spaces, fault zone.

From 57.90 to 104.30 meters:

Qz hydrothermal breccia cemented in intrusive (porphyritic andesites), Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling open spaces, locally with some fingers of dacite and andesite intrusive fault zone at the end of the described interval.

From 104.30 – 107.65 meters:

Fault with gouge development, intense fracturing.

From 107.65 to 125 meters:

Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in intrusive (porphyritic andesites), Qz-PyCpy-Mo filling open spaces, locally with some fingers of intrusive.

From 125 to 291 meters:

Porphyritic andesites, locally quartz-tourmaline veinlets, and quartz-sericite (chlorite) predominate, acquiring a whitish color in areas with moderate to intense pervasive albite.

Fine quartz veinlets with a halo of sericite albite, scarce sulfides, and from 236.50 m, develop a preferential orientation of biotite-chlorite crystals, local and partially brecciated (intrusive breccia).

Figure 3 below shows Cross Section A-A´ as per the plan view with copper assays and geology, and Figure 4 below shows the same Cross section with Molybdenum assays and geology.

Figure 3: Cross Section along A-A´ looking North, Hole APG-DDH-006, downhole copper assay values, 2 m interval.

==> picture [441 x 539] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Cross Section along A-A´ looking North, Hole AAPG-DDH-006, downhole molybdenum assays values, 2 m interval.

==> picture [425 x 555] intentionally omitted <==

Hole APG-006 is significant, for the lengthy intercept of mineralized material in the Porphyritic Intrusive – refer to the results of Holes APG-002 and 003.

Next Steps

EVR is committing resources to a significant reappraisal of the geological model and the potential scale of the Parag project following the success of its current drill programme. This includes:

• EVR’s geologists continue to carefully log the core and modeling the geology.

• Re-logging program for the holes drilled by Orion in 2011 will begin in the following weeks.

• The program aims to update and confirm the geological model, particularly to examine the contacts between breccia and intrusive mineralization.

• Surface recognition of mineralized breccia and detailed mapping based on Orion mapping work.

• Structural mapping.

• Geophysical survey planning and design.

• Furter Drilling after a Geophysics programme.

For further information, please contact:

Luke Martino Hugh Callaghan Non-Executive Chairman Managing Director Tel: +61 8 6489 0600 Tel: +61 8 6489 0600 E: luke@evresources.com.au E: hugh@evresources.com.au

This ASX announcement was authorised for release by the Board of EV Resources Limited (EVR).

Competent Person Statement

The information in this release that relates to exploration results is based on, and fairly represents, technical information and supporting documentation prepared by geologists employed by EV Resources Limited that has been reviewed and approved for publication by Dr Richard Jemielita, a certified professional geologist and Member of the. Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining.

Dr. Jemielita has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a CP as defined in the 2012 Edition of the JORC Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources, and Ore Reserves. Dr Jemielita consents to the inclusion in the release of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears. Dr Jemielita is a consultant to the Company and holds no shares in EV Resources Limited.

==> picture [360 x 145] intentionally omitted <==

Compliance Statement

This announcement contains information on the Parag Project extracted from ASX market announcements dated 25 March 2024, “ 332 Metres Drilled from Near Surface at 1.36% Copper Equivalent at Parag in Peru ”, 22[nd] April 2024 “ Latest High Grade Parag Project Assays Continue to Impress ” and 29[th] April 2024 “ EVR drills through the Trinchera Este Breccia at Parag, Peru” and reported in accordance with the 2012 edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” ("2012 JORC Code"). EVR confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original ASX market announcement.

Forward Looking Statement

Forward-Looking Statements regarding EVR´s plans concerning mineral properties and programs are forward-looking. There can be no assurance that EVR’s plans to develop its mineral properties will proceed as expected. There can also be no assurance that EVR can confirm the presence of additional mineral resources, that any mineralization will prove economical, or that a mine will successfully be developed on any of EVR’s mineral properties. The performance of EVR may be influenced by several factors outside the control of the Company and its Directors, staff, and contractors. These statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding future production, resources or reserves, and exploration results. All of such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the company's control, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forwardlooking information and statements.

These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: (i) those relating to the interpretation of drill results, the geology, grade and continuity of mineral deposits and conclusions of economic evaluations, (ii) risks relating to possible variations in reserves, grade, planned mining dilution and ore loss, or recovery rates and changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, (iii) the potential for delays in exploration or development activities or the completion of feasibility studies, (iv) risks related to commodity price and foreign exchange rate fluctuations, (v) risks related to failure to obtain adequate financing on a timely basis and on acceptable terms or delays in obtaining governmental approvals or in the completion of development or construction activities, and (vi) other risks and uncertainties related to the company’s prospects, properties and business strategy. Our audience is cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements that speak only as of the date hereof, and we do not undertake any obligation to revise and disseminate forwardlooking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof, or to reflect the occurrence of or non-occurrence of any events.

JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION – TABLE 1 REPORT TEMPLATE

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or	•	Industry standard diamond core drilling
techniques	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	• •	Drill core cut in half lengthwise using a diamond saw On site and core shack logging completed by company geologists to identify and classify mineralization and other relevant geological characteristics
	and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems	•	Half core sampled, bagged and tagged and forwarded to assay
	used.		laboratory for analysis
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the	•	Assay data received, collated and analysed
	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	•Diamond core drill hole using standard tube
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple	•HQ diameter for the entire hole
	or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other
	_type, whether core is oriented and ifso, by what method, etc). _
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	•	Core runs every 1.5 meters removed from the tube
recovery	and results assessed.	•	Core extracted on a metal rail, expelled with water pressure
	• 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	• •	Runs, recovery and footage marked on plastic markers. Core placed in 4 compartment hard plastic boxes with plastic lids Quick core log carried out on site by company geologists
	loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	•	boxes with plastic straps tensioned with special equipment.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	•Core was logged by company geologists to record alteration,
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate	mineralization lithology, RQD, and structures in sufficient detail for the
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	purposes of future Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and
	_studies. _	metallurgicalstudies

10

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or	•Boxes containing drill core were photographed in pairs with their
	costean, channel, etc) photography.	proper information including drill hole name, interval, # of boxes.
	• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	•Logging was qualitative and semi-quantitative (visual estimate of
		mineral percentages)
		•100% of drill hole APG-DDH-006 was logged (291.00 metres)
Sub-sampling	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core	•	Sampling was always supervised by a company geologist.
techniques and sample preparation	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	• •	Sampling interval was every two meters unless a mineralized structure was encountered, e.g. quartz vein or sulfides, where this exceeds 50 cm this is sub-sampled and sampling resumed every two meters. Sample weight approximately 7 kg.
	maximise representivity of samples.	•	Sample bags previously marked with an indelible marker on near
	• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in		the mouth and at the base
	situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	• •	The sample inserted and a label included and sealed in the upper part without coming into contact with the sample material. The bag was then sealed with a plastic clamp 4 samples inserted into polypropylene bags and sealed with
			plastic clamps. The bag labeled with the samples included in
			addition to listing the bags to be transported.
		•	The samples periodically moved from the town of Huacho to the
			city of Lima to assay laboratory facilities
		•	Company staff supervise delivery of samples to the laboratory
			staff and provide an inventory together with analysis instructions.
		•	Each time the person in charge changes, a document is signed
			and both of their details are recorded.
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	•	16% of samples comprise standards (OREAS) of high, low and
assay data and laboratory tests	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.	• •	intermediate grades together with blank samples (Minex Products) and sample duplicates of coarse and fine rejects. CERTIFIED REFERENCE MATERIALS OREAS:- 501d PORPHYRY COPPER-GOLD ORE (Ridgeway/Northparkes Mines, New South Wales, Australia)
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,	•	503e PORPHYRY COPPER-GOLD-MOLYBDENUM (Cadia
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	Valley Operations, New South Wales, Australia)
		• 504d PORPHYRY COPPER-GOLD-MOLYBDENUM (Cadia
		Valley Operations, New South Wales, Australia)
		• Blank:Pure SiO2 quartz with 46.7% Si and 53.3% O, size 1/2
		inch, from quarries in northern Peru. Milky white in color
Verification of	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	•No independent verification undertaken
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	•No twinned holes
assaying	• The use of twinned holes.	•Data supplied by assay laboratory as Excel spreadsheets with
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	accompanying analytical certificates
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	•No adjustments of assay data
	• _Discuss any adjustment to assay data. _
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	Drill hole collars were located using a hand held GPS Garmin 64 s
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	Grid system WGS84 Zone 18 S
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.	Drill hole deviation was measured for APG-DDH-001 with Gyromaster
	• Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	equipment. Subsequent holes were measured using Reflex Ez Trac. Measurements were taken every 50 meters and the data supplied given
		to us in digital format.
		Adequate topographical control was supplied from a digital elevation
		model (DEM) constructed from ASF DAAC 2011, ALPSRP272496970-
		RTC_HI_RES; Includes Material © JAXA/METI 2007. Accessed
		through ASF DAAC 23 March 2024. DOI: 10.5067/Z97HFCNKR6VA
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	•Assay data interval two metres in drill core
and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the	•Mineral Resource/ore reserve estimation not applicable
distribution	degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	•No sample compositing
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
	classifications applied.
	• _Whether sample compositing has been applied. _
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	•Structures not known at this stage to be a significant influence on
data in	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	variability of metals grades so no sampling bias is suspected from
relation to	the deposit type.	mineralized structures
geological	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation
structure	of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a
	sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•	A company geologist or trained assistant accepted the core
security			boxes duly marked. After completing quick core logging the
			boxes were secured and deposited in the bed of a 4x4 truck, and
			transported to the core shack (house) and stored in the town of
			Huacho 176 km approx. from the project
		•	Detailed core logging was undertaken at the core shack.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•None
reviews

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listedin the preceding section alsoapplytothis section.)
Criteria JORC Code 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 obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	• Parag consists of	4 licences
	Name	Code INGEMMET	Area– Has.
	VIENTO	010196004	998.85
	PARAG 192	650003719	200.00
	VIENTO 193	650003819	100.00
	PARAG 191	650003619	100.00
	The licences are held in a Company Anta Parag S.A.C which holds 100% of all 4 licences The shareholding of Anta Parag S.A.C is 70% held by EV Resources Limited from Australia, and 30% by GeoAndina Minerales S.A.C under a Joint Venture Agreement. There are no overriding royalties or other interests which detract from the ownership and control of the licences.
Exploration done by other parties • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• Between 2010 and 2013, Pembrook (formerly Orion) carried out an exploration program including rock geochemistry, geophysics, geological mapping and diamond drilling • Pembrook applied for an EIS(Environmental Impact

13

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Declaration) but suffered numerous bureaucratic difficulties, and
		ultimately had to abandon the project due to financial difficulties.
		The EIA was finally approved in 2014 and permitted drilling from
		up to 100 pads.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•Porphyry-related polymetallic (Cu-Mo) intrusive breccias
Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the	• Drill hole number APG-DDH-006
Information	exploration results including a tabulation of the following information	• Coordinates 278756E/8812863N
	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	• Elevation 4676 meters above sea level •Drilling Company: AK Drilling, Sandvik DE710 Drilling Rig •Diamond core drill hole: •HQ diameter for the entire hole
	o down hole length and interception depth	•Azimuth 0
	o hole length.	•Inclination -70
	• If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the	•Drilled Meters 291.00
	information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the
	understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly
	_explain why this is the case. _
Data	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,	•No weighted averages or top or bottom cut-off values were employed
aggregation	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high	•London Metals Exchange (LME) as at 15thMay 2024:
methods	grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for	One tonne of copper is priced at US$10,114 or US$4.59/lb One tonne of Molybdenum is priced at US$48,061 or US$21.80/lb
	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 drill hole intersected relatively homogeneous 3D mineralized
between	Exploration Results.	intrusive breccia bodies interspersed with mineralized hornfels and
mineralisation	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle	volcanic country rocks.
widths and	is known, its nature should be reported.	•True widths of mineralization cannot be established at this stage
intercept	• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there
lengths	should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true
	_width not known’). _
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	Cross Section along A-A´ looking North, Hole APG-DDH-006, downhole
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being	copper assay values, 2 m interval.
	reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill

14

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.
		Cross Section along A-A´ looking North, Hole AAPG-DDH-006, downhole
		molybdenum assays values,2 m interval.

15

==> picture [311 x 486] intentionally omitted <==

16

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	•Reported metals grades for drill hole APG-DDH-001 range from
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades	0.102% to 1.86% copper and 0.0017% to 1.26% molybdenum to
	and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of	335.2 metres downhole
	_Exploration Results. _
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported	Brief geology description of Diamond Drill Hole APG-DDH-006:
substantive	including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical
exploration	survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and	From 00.00 to 7.5 meters:
data	method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,	Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in intrusive (porphyritic
	groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential	andesites), Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo, filling voids, some hornfels clasts, moderate
	deleterious or contaminating substances.	to strong quartz-sericite alteration.
		From 7.5 to 14.90 meters:
		Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in hornfels, Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling
		open spaces.
		From 14.90 to 49.90 meters:
		Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in intrusive (porphyritic
		andesites), Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling open spaces, moderate quartz-sericite-
		chlorite alteration, local presence of some fingers of intrusive and intrusive
		breccia.
		From 49.40 to 57.90 meters:
		Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in hornfels, Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling
		open spaces, fault zone.
		From 57.90 to 104.30 meters:
		Qz hydrothermal breccia cemented in intrusive (porphyritic andesites),
		Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling open spaces, locally with some fingers of dacite and
		andesite intrusive fault zone at the end of the described interval.
		From 104.30 – 107.65 meters:
		Fault with gouge development, intense fracturing.
		From 107.65 to 125 meters:
		Hydrothermal breccia, quartz cemented in intrusive (porphyritic
		andesites), Qz-Py-Cpy-Mo filling open spaces, locally with some fingers
		of intrusive.

17

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		From 125 to 291 meters:
		Porphyritic andesites, locally quartz-tourmaline veinlets, and quartz-
		sericite (chlorite) predominate, acquiring a whitish color in areas with
		moderate to intense pervasive albite.
		Fine quartz veinlets with a halo of sericite albite, scarce sulfides, and
		from 236.50 m, develop a preferential orientation of biotite-chlorite
		crystals, local and partially brecciated (intrusive breccia).
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	•A further drilling campaign is currently being planned by EV
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	Resources scheduled to commence in May 2024
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,
	_provided this information is not commercially sensitive. _

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section.)

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Database	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for	•Not applicable
	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	•Not applicable
		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	•Not applicable
	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	•Not applicable
		length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below
		_surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. _

18

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Estimation	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s)	•Not applicable
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.
	• 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	•Not applicable
	_moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content. _
Cut-off	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters	•Not applicable
parameters	applied.
Mining factors	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum	•Not applicable
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.

19

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Metallurgical	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical	•Not applicable
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	•Not applicable
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. _
Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the	•Not applicable
	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	•Not applicable
	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.	•Not applicable
reviews

20

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and	•Not applicable
	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 withproduction data, where available. _
Section 4 Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves
(Criteria listedin		section 1,and whererelevant insections2 and3,alsoapplytothis section.)
	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Mineral	• Description of the Mineral Resource estimate used as a basis for the	•Not applicable
	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	•Not applicable
		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	•Not applicable
		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.	•Not applicable
	parameters

21

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mining factors	• The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility	•Not applicable
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.
	• _The infrastructure requirements of the selected mining methods. _
Metallurgical	• The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that	•Not applicable
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	•Not applicable
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	•Not applicable
	plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk

22

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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	•Not applicable
	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	•Not applicable
factors	including head grade, metal or commodity price(s) exchange rates,
	transportation and treatment charges, penalties, net smelter returns,
	etc.
	• 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,	•Not applicable
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	•Not applicable
	(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	•Not applicable
	_to social licence to operate. _
Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project	•Not applicable
	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 ofgovernmental agreements and approvals critical to the

23

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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	•Not applicable
	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.	•Not applicable
reviews
Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and	•Not applicable
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.

24

Section 5 Estimation and Reporting of Diamonds and Other Gemstones

(Criteria listed in other relevant sections also apply to this section. Additional guidelines are available in the ‘Guidelines for the Reporting of Diamond Exploration Results’ issued by the Diamond Exploration Best Practices Committee established by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Indicator	• Reports of indicator minerals, such as chemically/physically	•Not applicable
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	•Not applicable
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	•Not applicable
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. _
Sample	• Type of facility, treatment rate, and accreditation.	•Not applicable
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).	•Not applicable
Sample grade	• Sample grade in this section of Table 1 is used in the context of	•Not applicable
	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	•Not applicable
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

25

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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	•Not applicable
estimation for	or sampling designed for grade estimation.
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	•Not applicable
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.	•Not applicable
integrity	• Whether samples were sealed after excavation.

26

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• 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	•Not applicable
	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. _

27