FIRST AU LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2019

May 6, 2019

==> picture [105 x 109] intentionally omitted <==

First Au Limited

(ASX: FAU)

7 May 2019

Maiden JORC Resource at Gimlet

Inferred Resource of 68,731 ounces

First Au Limited (ASX: FAU) is pleased to announce a maiden JORC Inferred Resource from the Company’s two reverse circulation (RC) drilling programs at its Gimlet Gold Project near Kalgoorlie in WA.

The April 2019 Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) contains 642,359 tonnes at 3.33 g/t Au for 68,731 ounces at a 1.3 g/t cut-off.

Commenting on this new resource, Chairman Bryan Frost said:

“From listing on the ASX in June last year, to soon after making a gold discovery at Gimlet with its’ first drill program, we now have a Maiden JORC Resource, which is a significant achievement for the Company in such a short timeframe. And with the work currently underway in preparation for our next drilling campaign, there is a good feeling in the Company that Gimlet will produce even more excellent results. “

Overview

The FAU 100% owned Gimlet Project occurs 15 km NW of Kalgoorlie, Western Australia and tenements (E26/174 and MA 26/849) occupies 9.6 km[2] in area. It is close to existing infrastructure and within trucking distance of five gold mills within the Kalgoorlie area, with several offering the toll treatment of ore to third parties (Figure 1).

==> picture [371 x 286] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Location map of the Gimlet Gold Project, near Kalgoorlie

First Au Limited ACN 000 332 918 Registered Office: Level 1 / 123 Whitehorse Road, Balwyn Vic. 3103 Australia. Telephone 03 9817 0700 Facsimile 03 9817 0799 Website: www.firstau.com Email: info@firstau.com 1

Project Geology

The geology in the tenement is prospective for gold, dominated by metamorphosed felsic and intermediate volcanic rocks of the Black Flag Group of the Kalgoorlie Terrane, Yilgarn Craton. This Archean geology is overlain by Cainozoic sediments, including some areas covered with salt lakes, which has previously inhibited the effectiveness of some of the historic exploration. First Au recently completed its maiden aircore and RC programs, which returned strong intersections, including 3m at 462 g/t Au from 52m (refer ASX release dated 8 November 2018 and 1 December 2018 ).

Mineralisation is interpreted to be related to an NNW-SSE near vertical structure observed in the geophysics and the geological logging of the drilling. This structure appears to persist south of the Gimlet tenement, into the Intermin Resources tenements (ASX: IRC), following a trend containing the Teal Deposits. Combining FAU’s Gimlet Mineralised Zone and the Intermin Resources gold deposits to the south (Teal, Jacques Find and Peyes Farm which total 288,000 oz Au), it would appear mineralisation occurs in a series of structures along ~2.7km of strike and would suggest a significant mineralising system is evident. Mineralisation is interpreted to be associated with the Abattoir Shear, a regional structure and gold carrying conduit.

Mineralisation at Gimlet occurs as: 1) a supergene blanket within the saprolite clays; 2) a supergene-enriched shear zone, at the fresh rock / oxide interface in the transition zone; and 3) sheared felsic to intermediate fresh rock, containing lenses, disseminated and stringer sulphides, with quartz vein material (Figure 5). Pyrite appears to be the dominant sulphide phase, while arsenopyrite and galena have also been identified in the logging. In several cases, the mineralised structures are bifurcated and can appear as several lodes. The fresh mineralised zone often shows a broader halo of disseminated pyrite (with associated sericite-carbonatesquartz), containing lower grade mineralisation (~ 10 - 500 ppb Au).

Resource

First Au’s recent ~ 2800m RC and 320m diamond program in March 2019 followed up the outstanding results from its 2018 RC and aircore programs at Gimlet, which returned strong intersections, including 3m at 462 g/t Au from 52m (refer ASX release dated 8 November 2018 and 14 December 2018 ). The RC drilling was spaced to provide ~ 20m by 40m grid pattern along the already identified ~ NNW-SSE mineralising trend and covered mineralisation from ~ 30m to 170 m vertical depth, and ~ 450m in length. Combining both RC programs, there was a total of 44 drill holes and ~5,800 drill metres. Majority of the drilling was angled and drilled in an easterly direction. Earlier aircore drilling by FAU was also used when coverage by RC was not available.

Significant intersects from the November 2018 drilling ( refer ASX release 14 December 2018 ) included:

• Drillhole 18GRC016 – 13m @ 8.2 g/t Au from

• Drillhole 18GRC017 – 31m @ 2.1 g/t Au from 48m

• Drillhole 18GRC002 – 15m @ 3.4 g/t Au from 64m

• Drillhole 18GRC007 – 21m @ 2.5 g/t Au from 138m

• Drillhole 18GRC006 – 9m @ 3.5 g/t Au from 43m

• o Drillhole 18GRC019 – 5m @ 7.8 g/t Au from 63m

Significant intersects from the more recent RC drilling in March 2019 drilling (refer ASX release dated 18 March 2019) included:

• Drillhole 19GRC013 – 15m @ 7.2 g/t Au from 93m

• Drillhole 19GRC015 – 26m @ 3.1 g/t Au from 90m ( including 1m @ 19.1 g/t Au from 94m )

• Drillhole 18GRC022 – 4m @ 18.8 g/t Au from 38m ( including 1m @ 71.2 g/t Au from 38 m )

• Drillhole 19GRC025 – 11m @ 4.0 g/t Au from 99m

• o Drillhole 19GRC030 – 15m @ 6.6 g/t Au from 157m ( including 2m @ 31.4 g/t Au from 169 m)

2

==> picture [465 x 675] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: TMI magnetic image over Gimlet Project, depicting drill collar location and Gimlet Mineralised Zone area. Note Intermin Resources’ Teal deposit south of Gimlet, along same structural trend.

3

First Au Limited (First Au) engaged BM Geological Services (BMGS) to complete a mineral resource estimate (MRE) for their Gimlet deposit north of Kalgoorlie, WA, during March of 2019.

The Resource model utilised 44 RC and 3 DH drillholes to create 3-dimensional (3D) mineralisation wireframes and weathering surfaces. The interpretation was then used to flag drilling data to be used in estimation of grades into a block model constructed using the Geovia Surpac software package (Surpac). The mineralisation interpretation was completed on 40 meter (m) spaced drilling, based on a 0.5 grams per tonne gold (g/t Au) lower cut-off to mineralisation.

The resource was classified as Inferred on the basis of drill density, geological understanding, grade continuity and the assumption that areas less than 100 metres below surface can potentially be mined in an open pit using a cutoff above 1.3 g/t and areas deeper than 100m with continuous grade above 3g/t can potentially be mined from underground. Long section of the Resource model is seen in Figure 3.

The April 2019 MRE contains 642,359 tonnes at 3.33 g/t Au for 68,731 ounces at a 1.3 g/t cut-off.

A further breakdown as follows:

Table1: April 2019 MRE using 1.3g/t cut-off

Apr-19 Inferred MRE	Tonnes	Grade(g/t Au)	Ounces
Oxide	75,034	3.32	8,007
Transitional	65,495	3.04	6,406
Fresh	501,830	3.37	54,308
Total	642,359	3.33	68,731

Additional information is provided below in the main body of the announcement, as well as the JORC Table 1 within the Appendix.

==> picture [452 x 296] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Long section (oblique view looking 025 degrees) of the Gimlet Resource model, depicting grades and cut-off for both open cut and underground mining depths. See text below for more detail.

4

Next stage at Gimlet

FAU has an ambitious exploration strategy for the next 6 months at Gimlet. The Company will investigate new structural and geochemical targets throughout the project, using aircore or RC drilling.

A priority area is the 3.5km long “Eastern Shear Zone” target that has had historic significant gold intersections within the regolith, but the lode mineralisation potentially associated with this gold in the fresh rock has eluded previous explorers from the limited deep drilling completed ( see FAU ASX release on the 6/04/18 for more details on the historic work completed on the Eastern Shear Zone ). The FAU exploration team are planning to target untested structural sites, that are offset to this regolith anomaly (Figure 2). There are numerous examples in the Yilgarn area, where geochemical anomalies evident in the regolith, offset the lode mineralisation by hundreds of metres in the fresh rock.

In the March 2019 RC program, two 40m-spaced drill lines were completed along strike, north of the previous identified mineralisation seen from the 2018 RC program, which are not included within the Inferred Resource. This drilling showed evidence of a continuation in the mineralising system, with gold evident in the supergene blanket, which includes –

• 19GRC005 – 3m @ 3.98 g/t Au from 48m (including 1m @ 9.22 g/t Au from 48m)

• 19GRC006 – 1m @ 0.52 g/t Au from 62m

• 19GRC007 – 1m@ 0.66 g/t Au from 47m and 1m @ 2.72 g/t Au from 56m

Drilling that intersects the fresh rock in the northern two lines, has shown evidence of shearing and disseminated sulphides like what has been observed as a halo around the mineralised lode in the resource area, but only uneconomic gold grades. Further drilling is to be undertaken in this area to identify the position of the primary lode gold, targeting structure already identified from the aeromagnetic image and seen in drilling.

The deeper intersections from recent March 2019 RC drilling have also demonstrated strong gram metres (up to 61 gram-metre below 120m vertical), and therefore a program is also being planned to further test the underground mining potential (> 150m depth). Much of the current JORC Resource is open with depth.

Three diamond holes to ~ 320m total were drilled during the recent RC program. The core has had geological logging, density, and geotechnical studies complete. Work planned for May, includes further mineralisation, alteration and structure studies, which will then conclude with assaying. The Company believes the critical information obtained from these studies will assist in getting a better understanding of the mineralised system and assist in further gold discoveries in the project.

5

Additional Resource Information (ASX listing Rule 5.8.1 Disclosures)

Drilling Technique

RC drilling was used, with a 4 ¾ inch face hammer used for all drilling. Samples had good recovery and were mostly dry, with wet samples recorded in the barren zones. Three HQ Diamond drill holes were also completed in the program and were mainly used to provide density and geotechnical information. Aircore drilling by FAU in 2018 was also used, primarily in assisting the wireframing.

Sampling

Generally, 4m composites from RC drilling were submitted for the first 36 metres (above the oxide mineralisation), with 1 metre re-splits submitted for the remainder of the drill hole. However, with some of the deeper holes the composited portion went to a greater depth. At the end of the program, samples with anomalous grades (above 0.1 g/t Au) were split using a portable 1/8, 3 tier riffle splitter.

Analytical Method

All samples were assayed using 50g charge lead collection Fire Assay at ALS, Kalgoorlie. Sample weights averaged at 2-3kg.

Wireframing

The Gimlet interpretation consists of 1 primary lode, 3 smaller ancillary lodes flanking the primary and 2 flat lying supergene lodes sitting at the oxidisation boundary. The interpretations were carried out by digitising wireframes onto sections and then checked in plan-view to ensure sensible continuity of geology and mineralisation. A lower cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t gold was used, in conjunction with grade continuity and a minimum downhole width of 2m when creating the wireframes.

Wireframes were combined across sections into individual three-dimensional (3DM) solids representing mineralised domains. The solids were checked for errors and inconsistent triangulations to ensure mineralisation is best represented by the shapes created.

The digitised sections were based on 40m by 20m drill spacing. Figure 4 below is a typical geological section through the Gimlet deposit and Figures 5, 6 and 7 display the final 3DM solids.

All primary mineralisation has been modelled as sub vertically dipping and striking towards 330°, except for lode 4 which strikes towards 15°. This change in strike at the north end of the deposit is not fully understood and requires further investigation. It is currently thought to be due a bounding fault that the mineralisation follows.

Wireframe validation was completed in Surpac and ensured the 3DMs were valid and could be treated as solids. The drillhole intercepts were also checked using the compositing in section, to determine if wireframes were correctly digitised to holes.

Base of complete oxidation (BOCO) and top of fresh rock (TOFR) surfaces were created based on the oxidisation logging in the database. These surfaces were used to flag the weathering profiles (oxide, transitional and fresh) into the model, in the “weathering” attribute.

6

==> picture [423 x 610] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4. Digitised geological interpretation through Gimlet deposit

7

==> picture [304 x 373] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5. Gimlet wireframes Plan view

==> picture [447 x 207] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6. Gimlet wireframes Long section

8

==> picture [402 x 334] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7. Gimlet wireframes Oblique View looking North East

Estimation

The block extents utilised for the model are outlined below in Table 2.

Table 2. Block model extents and block sizes.

Gimlet_1904.mdl	Y mN	X mE	Z mRL
Minimum Coordinates Maximum Coordinates User Block Size Min. Block Size Rotation	6604050	344350	100
	6604850	344800	400
	20	10	10
	1.25	0.625	0.625
	-30	0	0

The search criteria utilised for the estimate were based on the overall orientation of the individual domain geometry and the variogram model generated. Due to the thin nature of the orebody and the small number of samples most lodes required 3 passes to estimate all blocks. The search passes were adjusted in subsequent passes by either increasing search criteria or relaxing restrictions on the number of samples required for estimation. The details for each domain are provided in Table 3.

9

Table 3. Search parameters used for estimating grade

==> picture [471 x 136] intentionally omitted <==

Bulk Density

Bulk density (BD) values were collected from DH core and downhole density surveys.

A downhole density survey was completed by ABIM Solutions at the conclusion of a 2-hole diamond program at Gimlet. This involved a low-energy Caesium 137 gamma probe measuring a reading every 10cm down the drillhole. Gamma rays emitted from the source are scattered by electrons in the rock, with the reflected rays being inversely proportionate to the electron density of the rock.

The DH core was used to calculate BD using the Archimedes principal of weighing the core in air then weighing it again under water then using the difference between the weights to calculate the BD. A total of 33 BD samples were taken from the DH holes.

To ensure that the downhole survey results were comparable to the BD measurements, both densities were compared, and a line of regression was calculated and used to normalise the downhole densities. The measurements were averaged across weathering profiles to calculate representative densities for the different types of ore. The BD’s calculated are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. BD’s applied to weathering profiles

Profile	Density
Oxide	2.23
Transitional	2.51
Fresh	2.80

Cut-off Grade

The dataset for each domain was assessed individually for bias from extreme grades. Composite statistics from domains 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 displayed that each domain had a coefficient of variance (CV) of less than 2; indicating that these domains are not likely to be overly influenced by high grade outliers and therefore do not require a top-cut. Domain 5 however, had a CV of 3.23 due to a sample of 70 g/t overly affecting the population, suggesting that a top-cut would be appropriate in this case, which was 40 g/t Au.

Resource Classification

The resource has been classified as Inferred based on the density of drill data, the geological understanding of the deposit, consistency of gold assay grades received and the likelihood of mining taking place in open pit and underground settings.

10

A potential open pit portion of the resource was classified by selecting areas that were within 100 meters of surface and consistently above 1.3 g/t. An underground inferred area has been based on consistent grades above 3 g/t or lower grades that can be joined by above 3 g/t material, that could feasibly lead to underground mining.

A grade tonnage curve is presented in Figure 8.

==> picture [365 x 342] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8. April 19 Gimlet tonnes vs. grade plot

Domains 4 and 6 are not reported, as are unclassified due to the lack of geological understanding and change in continuity that occurs in the north of the deposit. This area will require further drilling. A summary of the Resource is reported in in Table 5

Table 5. Global resource classification Including unclassified material

gimlet_1904.mdl	Volume	Tonnes	Au Grade **g/t **	Ounces
Inferred	238,966	642,359	3.33	68,731

11

Table 6. Resource classification by lode.

Domain	Classification	Volume	Tonnes	Au Grade g/t	Ounces
1	Inferred	166,861	457,304	3.51	51,548
2	Inferred	27,188	74,540	2.51	6,015
3	Inferred	18,143	50,500	3.27	5,304
5	Inferred	26,774	60,016	3.03	5,850

Mining and Metallurgical Methods, and Parameters and Other Factors Considered to Date

Geotechnical and metallurgical studies are currently underway, utilising material from within the Gimlet Resource Area. This will provide data to be used for a future mining optimisation scoping study. Some parameters for this study can be taken from the nearby Teal open pit mine (ASX: IRC), which have similar geological characteristics.

12

On Behalf of the Board

==> picture [46 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Bryan Frost Executive Chairman

About First Au: First Au is an advanced gold and base metals exploration company listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX: FAU) and is pursuing a well-funded and aggressive exploration program at its 100% owned Gimlet Gold project near Kalgoorlie and its Emu Creek and Talga Projects in the Eastern Pilbara region of Western Australia.

Enquiries in relation to this announcement please contact either :

Richard Revelins: rrevelins@firstau.com +1-310-405-4475 Paul Armstrong: paul@readcorporate.com.au +61-421-619-084

Competent Persons Statement

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Dr Gavin England, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and the Australian Institute of Geosciences. Dr England is a consultant to First Au Limited. Dr England has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’.

The information in this report that relates to the Mineral Resource Estimate is based on information compiled Andrew Bewsher, who is an employee and director of BM Geological Services, acting as a consultant for FAU. Mr Bewsher is a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, and the activity undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves.

Dr England and Mr Bewsher consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears.

13

Appendix 1

– – JORC Code, 2012 Edition Table 1 report Gimlet project

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(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.	The sampling has been carried out on Reverse Circulation (RC) drill chips. In November 2018, A total of 18 RC holes were completed for 2,908 m. In March 2019, a total of 25 RC holes were completed for 2,769 m. In addition, 2 diamond drill holes have been drilled to a total 270m and a 140m RC drillhole with a 64m diamond tail (however, these are still to be processed and will be reported later).
	Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representation and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.	The drill hole collar locations were surveyed by a qualified surveyor using Leica_Captivate _RTK_GPS _Base@SSM_Kalgoorlie_107. Sampling was carried out under First Au’s protocols and QAQC procedures as per industry best practice.
	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	In the November 2018 drilling, one metre samples were collected through a cyclone and stored individually in standard retention bags. 4 metre composites were collected by spearing the sample. Selected intervals were assayed as 1 m

14

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	samples collected in calico bags, taken directly from the cone splitter attached to the rig. In the March 2019 drilling, one metre sample were collected through a cyclone and stored individually in standard retention bags. 4 metre composites were collected by spearing the sample in the first 32m depth, to be later 1m sampled if mineralisation is evident. Otherwise, intervals below 32m depth were assayed as 1 m samples collected in calico bags, taken directly from the cone splitter attached to the rig. A sample size of approximately 2-3 kg was collected for each composite and split. All samples were pulverised at the lab to -75um, to produce a 50g charge for Fire Assay with an AAS finish.
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, by what method, etc).	The RC drilling rig, owned and operated by Kalgoorlie based Challenge Drilling, was used to obtain the samples.
Drill sample recovery	Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.	Most samples were dry and had good recovery. RC recovery and meterage were assessed by visually assessing volumes of individual bags. Ground water ingress occurred in some holes and was noted, particularly at depth. Typically, drilling operators ensured water was lifted from the face of the hole at each rod change to ensure water did not interfere with drilling and to make sure samples were collected dry. Recovery of the samples was generally good, generally estimated to

15

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		be full, except for some sample loss at the collar of the hole, and when samples were wet at depth, which affected only a few samples.
	Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.	A suitable RC rig with an auxiliary air compressor was used to be sure that in most cases, groundwater interference was kept to a minimum. Cyclone and cone splitter at the rig were used and were regularly cleaned during drilling. Field geologists supervised all drilling. In the November 2018 RC drilling, a spear method was adopted to collect a representative 4 metre composite sample for initial assessment of mineralisation, followed up by second phase of assay by 1m samples from the cone splitter. In the March 2019 drilling, one metre sample were collected through a cyclone and stored individually in standard plastic bags. 4 metre composites were collected by spearing the sample in the first 32m depth, to be later 1m sampled if mineralisation is evident. Otherwise, intervals below 32m depth were assayed as 1 m samples collected in calico bags, taken directly from the cone splitter attached to the rig.
	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.	No relationship between recovery and grade has been identified.

16

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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.	All chips were geologically logged by BM Geological Services’ geologists using the First Au geological logging legend and protocol.
	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.	Logging of RC chips records lithology, mineralogy, mineralisation, weathering, colour and other features of the samples. All samples were wet-sieved and stored in a chip tray.
	The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged	All holes were logged in full.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.	Not applicable
	If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.	In the November 2018 RC drilling, a spear method was adopted to collect a representative 4 metre composite sample for initial assessment of mineralisation, followed up by second phase of assay by 1m samples from the cone splitter. >90% of samples were dry. In the March 2019 program, One-metre drill samples were collected below a rig- mounted cyclone and captured in standard plastic bags. First phase of assaying in the top 32m, a spear was used to collect a representative portion of sample material from each 1 metre interval to make up the 4-metre composite. >90% of samples were dry. If warranted, the second phase of assaying using 1m intervals, using samples collected in a numbered calico bag, which is derived from a cone

17

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		splitter attached to the rig, to get a representative sample. Below 32m depth, the above 1m method is applied.
	For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.	Samples were prepared at the ALS Laboratory in Kalgoorlie. Samples were dried, and the whole sample pulverised to 90% passing -75um, and a sub-sample of approx. 200g retained. A nominal 50g was used for the fire assay analysis. The procedure is industry standard for this type of sample.
	Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representation of samples.	A CRM standard and fine blank was submitted at a rate of approximately 1 in 20 samples. At the laboratory, regular Repeats and Lab Check samples are assayed.
	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.	Spearing sample material contained within standard plastic bags is an industry standard technique for collecting composite samples. The purpose is to determine intervals to subsequently attain a representative 1 metre. A 1 m calico sample is collected at the rig by a cone splitter and left with the green bulker sample to be later sent for assay. A minor number of 1m calico samples for assay were collected using the one metre bulk sample in the green bags, then via a portable riffle splitter. The riffle splitter was routinely inspected by the field geologist.
	Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	Sample sizes are considered appropriate to give an indication of mineralisation given the particle size and the preference to keep the sample weight at a targeted 2 to 3kg mass.

18

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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.	Samples were analysed at the ALS Laboratory in Kalgoorlie. The analytical method used was a 50g Fire Assay with AAS finish for gold. The techniques are appropriate for the material and style of mineralization.
	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.	Not applicable.

19

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	First Au protocol for the 2018 and 2019 RC drilling programs was for a single CRM (Certified Reference Material) and a fine blank to be inserted in every 20 samples. First Au protocol for the 2018 RC drilling programs was for a single CRM (Certified Reference Material) and a fine blank to be inserted in every 20 samples. A total of 1270 samples were submitted as part of the AC program, along with 52 CRM standards or fine blanks and 18 field duplicates. March 2019 program used a total of 2057 samples were submitted as part of the RC program, along with 68 CRM standards 66 fine blanks, 34 coarse blanks and 19 field duplicates. At the ALS Laboratory, regular assay Repeats, Lab Standards and Blanks are analysed. Results of the Lab QAQC were analysed on assay receipt. On analysis, all assays passed QAQC protocols, showing no levels of contamination. Wet samples may exhibit some sample bias with fines washed away with the returning water.
Verification of sampling and assaying	The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.	Significant results were checked by First Au executives and BMGS senior geologists.
	The use of twinned holes.	Not applicable.
	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	All field logging is carried out using a customised logging form on a Tough Book and transferred into an Access database. Assay files are received electronically

20

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		from the Laboratory. All data is stored in the Gimlet Gold Project Access database and managed by BMGS in Perth and Kalgoorlie.
	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	No assay data was adjusted.
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.	RC and diamond drill collars were determined by a qualified surveyor using Leica_Captivate _RTK_GPS _Base@SSM_Kalgoorlie_107
	Specification of the grid system used.	Grid projection is MGA94, Zone 51.
	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	Collar pick-up of historical drill holes does an adequate job of defining the topography.
Data spacing and distribution	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	The RC drill holes were spaced to attain top to tail coverage throughout most of each section. On average they were spaced on 20 by 40 metre intervals.
	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.	This is not considered material.
	Whether sample compositing has been applied.	In the November 2018 RC drilling, a spear method was adopted to collect a representative 4 metre composite sample for initial assessment of mineralisation, followed up by second phase of assay by 1m samples from the cone splitter.

21

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		In the March 2019 program, RC samples collected above 32m depth were 4 metre composites. Selected intervals were than sampled as a 1m sample after mineralisation was determined by the 4m composite sample using the 1m calico bag sample collected at the rig cone splitter. Below 32m, 1m calico bags were sampled from the rig cone splitter.
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.	It is considered the orientation of the drilling and sampling suitably captures the likely “structures” for each exploration domain.
	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.	This is not considered material.
Sample security	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Samples were transported by company transport to the ALS laboratory in Kalgoorlie.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	Sampling and assaying techniques are industry-standard. No specific audits or reviews have been undertaken at this stage in the program.

22

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this 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 RC drilling occurred within tenement E26/174, of which First Au holds a 100% controlling interest under the tenement name Drillabit Pty Ltd. The area is now under a subsequent mining lease application.
	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.	The tenement is in good standing with the WA DMIRS.
Exploration done by other parties	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	Previous workers in the area include Laconia Resources, Placer Dome Asia, De Grey Mining, Delta Gold, Yamarna Goldfields and Intermin Resources NL.
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	The host stratigraphy is the Black Flag Group. Much of the license comprises Tertiary-aged lake sediments that overlie Archaean felsic volcanic sediments, felsic porphyry, intermediate volcanics and conglomerates. The mineralisation style comprises oxide supergene and quartz and sulphide-bearing, shear-hosted gold. Remobilised placer gold is infrequently encountered.

23

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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.	Detailed information regarding the drill hole information is reported in FAU ASX announcements on the 18 March 2019 and 14 December 2018.
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.	Grades are reported as down-hole length-weighted averages of grades above approximately 0.5 ppm Au, although in some cases in the larger intersections, there is some minor internal dilution. No top cuts have been applied to the reporting of the assay results in the exploration results.
	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.	Higher grade intervals are included in the reported grade intervals.

24

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	No metal equivalent values are used.
Relationship between mineralisatio n 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 geometry or orientation of the mineralisation is consisting of a near vertical lode in the fresh zone, while a horizonal blanket is identified in the regolith. Work is underway in interpreting the geology and better defining wireframes to produce this connectivity between holes and drill lines. A range of downhole true widths have been reported.
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.	Refer to Figures 1 to 7 in the body of text.
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.	No misleading results have been presented in this announcement.
Other substantive	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

25

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
exploration data	results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
Further work	The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	Further exploration work is currently under consideration, including the drilling of RC holes north of the reported program and additional aircore drilling of geochemical and structural targets within the Gimlet tenements. The details of which will be released in due-course.

26

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 integrity	Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. Data validation procedures used.	Database inputs were logged electronically at the drill site. The collar metrics, assay, lithology and down-hole survey interval tables were checked and validated by BMGS staff. The database was checked for duplicate values, from and to depth errors and EOH collar depths. A 3D review of collars and hole surveys was completed in Surpac to ensure that there were no errors in placement or dip and azimuths of drill holes.
Site visits	Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	No sites visits were undertaken by the competent person; however, the project was organised and overseen by BMGS staff who adequately described the geological processes used for the collection of geological and assay data.

27

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Geological interpretation	Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological 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.	Wireframes have been created for weathering surfaces including base of complete oxidation and top of fresh rock and mineralised domains. RC and AC drilling data has been used to inform the wireframes as well as geophysical data to interpret large scale faults truncating the deposit. Mineralisation domains were created using a lower cut-off of 0.5 g/t gold.
Dimensions	The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	Gimlet is 520m long, striking 330°. Mineralisation is defined by 3 parallel subvertical lodes each ranging from 2-6m wide that host th~~e b~~ulk of mineralisation, with the rest contained in a lode that strikes at 020° (following the strike of the bounding fault) and 2 flat lying supergene lodes sitting adjacent to the main mineralised trend, starting at 35m below surface.

28

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Estimation and modelling techniques	The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade 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 thegeological interpretation	Estimations were performed using Ordinary Kriging (OK). Hard boundaries were used for all estimations. In order to prevent over-estimation and smearing of high-grade samples, top-capping was applied to some domains. Selection of top cap values were based on statistical analysis of the individual domains. Lode 6 was the only lode identified as requiring a top cap, due to a single elevated value of 70 g/t gold. A cap of 40 g/t was applied to bring this outlier in line with the rest of the dataset During the estimation, ellipsoidal searches orientated along the approximate strike and dip of the mineralisation were used. The X axis was orientated along strike, the Y axis across strike in the plane of mineralisation, and the Z axis perpendicular to the plane of mineralisation. The block model extents have been extended to allow for a minimum of 50m in all directions past the extent of known mineralisation. The block model was rotated to strike towards 330° to better represent the orientation of mineralisation. The block model was built with 20m North 10m East and 10m elevation parent block cells. Block size was determined via a kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA), using Snowden mining software. A series of checks are used to confirm the block size to be being geologically suitable. Sampling occurs at 1m intervals for the majority of holes. 1m compositing was used to ensure adequate sample support for the estimate. No estimation has been completed for other minerals or deleterious

29

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	elements. The model has been checked by comparing composite data with block model grades in swath plots (north/East/elevation) on each estimated domain. The block model visually and statistically reflects the input data.
Moisture	Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	Tonnage has been estimation on a dry basis.
Cut-off parameters	The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	The mineral resource has been quoted using a lower cut-off grade of 1.3 g/t gold to align with previously reported estimates in the area. This lower cut grade is in line with the assumption of extraction of material using Open pit mining methodology. A variety of other cut-off grades were also presented to highlight to the viability of a potential underground resource and financial analysis
Mining factors or assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining 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	The mineral resource has been reported based on utilising open pit mining methodologies. Open pit parameters of min 2m downhole mineralisation width, and a lower cut grade of 0.5g/t has been used for interpretation.

30

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of 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.	The fresh portion of the mineralisation has an abundant sulphide content which requires further metallurgical testing to define recovery. No metallurgical work has been completed for Gimlet mineralisation at this time but will be completed as future drilling programs deliver suitable material for testing.
Environmental factors or assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of 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	It is considered that there are no significant environmental factors, which would prevent the eventual extraction of gold from the Gimlet project. Environmental surveys and assessments will form a part of future pre- feasibility.

31

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	made.
Bulk density	Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.	Bulk density was calculated using Archimedes principle on drill core, representing the different weathering profiles, from 2 diamond holes. Downhole density measurements using a Geovista dual gamma density probe were also taken for comparison with the core measurements. The two types of measurements were compared, and a line of regression created to normalise the downhole densities to enable all measurements to be utilised and averaged over the different weathering profiles.
Classification	The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories. Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (ie relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data). Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	The Mineral Resource is classified as an Inferred Resource under the JORC 2012 code. This classification is considered appropriate given the confidence that can be gained from the existing data density and results from drilling. The classification was based on drill-hole and sample density and grade continuity. Data integrity has been analysed and a high level of confidence has been placed on the dataset and resultant resource estimation. The Mineral Resource classification and results appropriately reflect the Competent Person’s view of the deposits and the current level of risk associated with the project to date

32

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	No audits have been previously completed on Mineral Resource Estimates.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence	Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	There is good confidence in the data quality, drilling methods and analytical results. The available geology and assay data correlate well, and the geological continuity has been demonstrated. Further drilling will continue to improve geological and grade understanding of the deposit.

33