FOCUS MINERALS LTD — Audit Report / Information 2017

Oct 12, 2017

==> picture [514 x 86] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement 13 October 2017

PFS Completion and Ore Reserve Upgrade

Focus Minerals Limited (“FML” or “Focus”) is pleased to make the following announcement as a result of the completion of a positive Preliminary Feasibility Study (PFS) investigating several of FML’s Coolgardie deposits.

• Results from the PFS indicate the financial and technical viability of underground mining at Bonnie Vale and further open pit mining of the Greenfields deposit.

• Maiden JORC Code 2012 underground Ore Reserve for Bonnie Vale comprises 625 kt at 6.16 g/t Au for 123,700 ounces of contained gold.

• Maiden JORC Code 2012 open pit Ore Reserve for Greenfields comprises 1,016 kt at 1.45 g/t for 47,100 ounces of contained gold.

• PFS also considered the value to the operation from mining the Brilliant deposit; however, full access to this deposit is currently the subject of negotiations with the relevant parties.

• Key PFS results of the mine plan supporting the Ore Reserve estimate only.

• Just over 4 year mine life with average gold production of 32,000 ounces per annum.

• A forecast all in cash cost of AU$1,200/oz.

• A forecast pre-tax net present value (NPV) of AU$37M, assuming an AU$1,580/oz gold price and 7.5% discount rate.

• A total net cash flow of AU$53M.

• Maximum cash draw down of $35M in first year of operation.

• Forecast pre-tax internal rate of return (IRR) of 28%.

Focus intends to build on these positive results by continuing negotiations around the Brilliant deposit, considering opportunities to optimise mill throughput with the cooperation of third parties, and ongoing exploration at Bonnie Vale, Brilliant, and other Coolgardie deposits.

Cautionary Statements

No part of the Mineral Resources underpinning the production target is classified as Inferred Mineral Resources. Moreover, Focus Minerals (FML) is satisfied that it has reasonable grounds for reporting a production target that is based entirely on Ore Reserves. The PFS considered further the Brilliant Mineral Resource; however, for reasons of commercial sensitivity the results from this part of the analysis are not currently available to the public.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

OVERVIEW

Focus Minerals Limited is pleased to advise that a PFS has been completed by independent consultants Mining One Pty Ltd (“Mining One”) (Trembath, et al., 2017). The PFS considers underground mining of the Bonnie Vale deposit and further open pit mining of the Greenfields and Brilliant deposits. The results confirm a technically viable project with robust economics which has the potential to significantly improve the value of the company and deposits held by FML in the Coolgardie region.

The Bonnie Vale deposit is located 10km north of the township of Coolgardie with access via the Coolgardie North Road. It is situated on Mining Lease M15/0595 which is wholly owned by FML. The historical Bonnie Vale town site is now completely deserted. The Greenfields deposit is located 3.8km north-east of Coolgardie. The Greenfields pit is adjacent to the Three Mile Hill processing plant currently in care and maintenance. Figure 1 shows the location of the Mineral Resources under consideration relative to important infrastructure.

==> picture [471 x 293] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: General layout drawing showing location of Mineral Resources considered in the PFS.

The PFS, in combination with work completed by FML, forms the basis of the Ore Reserve estimate detailed in Trembath (2017). The PFS also identified the potential of the Brilliant deposit to add significant value to the Coolgardie operations. However, access to the Brilliant deposit is the subject of ongoing negotiations and thus details regarding this Mineral Resource have not been included in the current announcement.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

The Ore Reserve estimates are summarised in Tables 1 and 2 below. Further detail can be found in the Ore Reserve report annexed to this announcement (Trembath, 2017). In particular, the Ore Reserve report considered the compliance of the PFS to the JORC Code 2012 Edition guidelines.

Table 1: Bonnie Vale Ore Reserve estimate.

Reserve Category	Tonnage	Grade	Contained Gold
	kt	g/t Au	ounces
Proved	-	-	-
Probable	625	6.16	123,700
Total	625	6.16	123,700

Table 2: Greenfields Ore Reserve estimate.

Reserve Category	Tonnage	Grade	Contained Gold
	kt	g/t Au	ounces
Proved	-	-	-
Probable	1,016	1.45	47,100
Total	1,016	1.45	47,100

Updated Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve tables are included in Tables 4 and 5 on the final pages of this announcement. The Mineral Resources stated in this announcement, including Table 4, are inclusive of Ore Reserves.

A mine plan, based only on the Ore Reserve, is expected to generate a net life of mine cash value of AU$53M million with an NPV of AU$37M (at a 7.5% discount rate) with an internal rate of return of 28%. A maximum drawdown of AU$35M, predominantly to do with the underground development at Bonnie Vale, is required in the first year, there after the operation is scheduled to be cash positive. Importantly, AU$10M has been allocated to the recommissioning of the Three Mile Hill processing plant. Figure 2 summarises the life of mine cashflow for the mine plan supporting the Ore Reserve estimate, while Table 3 provides some key financial results.

The proposed mine plan assumes that the development of the deposits will be funded through cash reserves currently held by FML.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [445 x 305] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Life of mine cashflow for mine plan supporting Ore Reserve estimate.

The mine plan involves the excavation of 1.6 million ore tonnes over approximately 4 years using an open pit mining method for Greenfields, and longhole stoping with cemented rock fill for Bonnie Vale. A capital investment of AU$53M will be required mostly for underground development at Bonnie Vale.

Table 3: Key financial results for the mine plan supporting the Ore Reserve estimate.

	OPEX Mining ($M)	OPEX Processing ($M)	CAPEX ($M)	Total Cost per Ounce	Revenue ($M)	Cash Value ($M)
Bonnie Vale	$56	$23	$43	$1,024	$181	$60
Greenfields	$24	$38	$0	$1,455	$65	$3
Three Mile Hill Plant			$10			-$10
TOTAL	$80	$61	$53	$1,201	$247	$53

A gold price of AU$1,580 per ounce of gold was used for the financial analysis. This price is considered to be a reasonable estimate consistent with various long term projections (International Monetary Fund, 2016), (World Bank Group, 2016) (Consensus Economics Inc., 2015).

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

Key to the success of the operation will be meeting production targets. Detailed scheduling has been completed for the PFS based on equipment specifications and expert advice from specialist contract miners. Notwithstanding this guidance, a degree of conservatism has been built into the modelling of production targets. Figure 3 summarises the combined production schedule for the mining of the Greenfield and Bonnie Vale deposits.

==> picture [445 x 212] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Production profile for mining the Greenfields and Bonnie Vale deposits.

Mining method analysis and cut-off grade optimisation have been used to support preliminary engineering designs. This design work included consideration of mobile fleet equipment selection, power supply, surface and underground infrastructure, ventilation modelling and water management. More detail can be found in the JORC Code Ore Reserve report annexed to this release. Figure 4 and Figure 5 provide some indication of the mine designs developed for the mine plan supporting the Ore Reserve estimate.

A sensitivity analysis was completed to test the financial risk of the mine plan to systematic variance in key assumptions. A probabilistic (Monte Carlo) model was developed that indicated a greater than 90% chance of a positive cashflow given systematic errors in key assumptions.

Modifying factors were applied to account for mining recovery and dilution.

Ore from Greenfields has previously been treated though the Three Mile Hill processing plant. A conservative metallurgical recovery (90%) has been assumed in the PFS based on historical performance. A separate metallurgical testwork programme was completed for the Bonnie Vale deposit. This testwork indicated plus 98% recoveries. The study assumed 96% metallurgical recovery for the Bonnie Vale deposit.

The proposed mine plan envisages utilising the Three Mile Hill processing plant owned by FML for the treatment of the ore. However, there are other processing options available nearby.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [449 x 261] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Cross-sectional view of the proposed mining of Greenfields deposit.

==> picture [449 x 277] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Long-section view of the proposed mining of the Bonnie Vale deposit.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

An important part of the value of the Greenfield pit is that, once completed it will provide a tailings storage site for further mining of deposits held by FML.

The company is currently preparing a mining proposal required by the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety for both Bonnie Vale and Greenfields. Towards this end, heritage, flora and fauna surveys have been completed. These studies have not identified any areas that require special consideration. FML are in good standing with the Coolgardie Shire, and the local community are keen for the project to proceed on the understanding that it will provide much needed employment opportunities for the town.

A closure plan and associated fund has been established to ensure that the mine closure will be managed according to the relevant guidelines.

MATERIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY

The factual basis and thus reasonableness of all material assumptions and methodologies used in developing the mine plan are provided in more detail in the PFS and associated Ore Reserve report (Trembath, et al., 2017) (Trembath, 2017). A summary of the key assumptions and methodology are canvassed below.

Gold Price

A gold price of AU$1,580 per ounce was used for the financial assessment of the Ore Reserve. This is consistent with the current market price (as of the time of the assessment) and guidance from various long-term projections.

Royalty

Currently a royal payment of 2.5% of revenue is payable to the Western Australian Government. The PFS applied a royalty at a rate of 3% to account for contingency in this cost.

Cut-off Grades

Cut-off grades were developed based on optimising the mine plan. Industry best practice was used for developing the mining block selection process.

Costs

Capital and operating cost were based on budget quotes from suppliers and mining specialists. Processing costs we based on historical performance of the Three Mile Hill plant.

Mineral Resource Model

The Mineral Resource models used for the Ore Reserve estimates were developed using data from a combination of diamond drill and reverse circulation drill sample assays. The block models were estimated using Ordinary Kriging interpolation methods. The Mineral Resource estimates are classified according to the JORC Code 2012 Edition.

Mining Methods

A mining method assessment complete with geotechnical and hydrogeological analysis was completed. The analysis compared the risks and financial benefit of a range of approaches. Longhole stoping with cemented rock fill for Bonnie Vale was assessed as the lowest risk highest return option. Open pit mining of Greenfields was the only viable option assessed.

Modifying factors were applied to account for dilution and mining recovery.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

Processing Assumptions

It is assumed that ore will be treated through the Three Mile Hill processing plant, where it is estimated that $10M will be required to recommission the plant. Metallurgical recoveries were based on historical performance in the case of Greenfields and metallurgical sampling for Bonnie Vale.

Ore Reserve Classification

In the case of Greenfields and Bonny Vale, only material in the Mineral Resource models classified as Indicated were converted into Probable Ore Reserves and assessed in the mine plan. There was no Measured material classified in the Mineral Resource models.

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT

Resources

The information that relates to exploration and geological interpretations is based on information compiled by Michael Guo (P Geo) who is a member of the Association of Professional Geoscientists of Ontario, Canada, which is a Recognised Professional Organisation (RPO). Mr Guo is employed by Focus Minerals Limited and has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves.

The Mineral Resource estimates were undertaken by Ms. Hannah Kosovich, an employee of Focus Minerals. Ms. Hannah Kosovich is a member of Australian Institute of Geoscientists and has sufficient experience to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”.

QG Australia worked with and reviewed Focus’ work on the geological interpretation, assay QAQC information, estimation methodology and parameters, and estimate validation. Mr. Mike Job from QG is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (FAusIMM) and has sufficient experience to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”.

Mr. Michael Guo, Ms. Hannah Kosovich and Mr. Mike Job consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which it appears.

Ore Reserves

The information in this report that relates to the Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Dr David Trembath, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy with a chartered professional status in mining.

Dr Trembath is employed by Mining One Consultants who were engage by FML to complete the Preliminary Feasibility Study investigating the technical and financial viability of mining FML’s Coolgardie deposits.

Dr Trembath 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,

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Dr Trembath consents to the inclusion in any report or public announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears

==> picture [103 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

David Trembath Mining One Pty Ltd

==> picture [104 x 60] intentionally omitted <==

JORC 2012 COMPLIANCE

The PFS study has found that on the current assumptions there is a technical and economic case for mining the both the Greenfields and Bonnie Vale deposits. Compliance with reporting according to the JORC Code, 2012 Edition is detailed in the relevant Table 1 below.

==> picture [593 x 47] intentionally omitted <==

Greenfields

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria

Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 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.	• This report relates to results from Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling and diamond core drilling. The information of sampling techniques below applies to the drill holes drilled by Focus Minerals (FML) only. • RC percussion drill chips were collected through a cyclone and cone splitter. Samples were collected on a 1m basis. Diamond core was sampled across identified zones of mineralisation by site geologists, the sample widths varied between a minimum of 0.2m and a maximum of 1m. • RC chips were passed through a cone splitter to achieve a sample weight of approximately 3kg. The splitter was levelled at the beginning of each hole using a bullseye level. The spoils were collected in green bags at 1m intervals. • At the assay laboratory all samples were oven dried, crushed to a nominal 10mm using a jaw crusher (core samples only) and weighed. Samples in excess of 3kg in weight were riffle split to achieve a maximum 3kg sample weight before being pulverised to 90% passing 75μm. • The diamond core was marked up for sampling by the supervising geologist during the core logging process, with sample intervals determined by the presence of mineralisation and/or alteration. The core was cut in half using an Almonte automatic core saw and the same half of the core was routinely sent to the laboratory for analysis. Some of the diamond core has been ¼ core sampled, although this is only in a minority of cases. • Historic RC holes have been sampled on 1m or as 2m composite. It is unsure how the composite sampling for pre-Focus drilling would have been undertaken.
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).	•All FML drilling was completed using an RC face sampling hammer or NQ2/HQ3 size diamond core. Where achievable, all drill core was oriented by the drilling contractor using an Ezy-mark system. Most holes were surveyed upon completion of drilling initially using an electronic multi-shot (EMS) camera and since Sept 2013 a north-seeking gyroscope; holes were surveyed open-hole prior to 2017. Since late 2016, all holes were surveyed using various gyroscopes (non-north-seeking paired with an azimuth aligner and north-seeking) by the drill contractors whilst drilling.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	•FML sample recovery was recorded by a visual estimate during the logging process. •All FML RC samples were drilled dry whenever possible to maximise recovery, with water injection on the outside return to minimise dust. •Historic drill recovery has been sporadically recorded.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	•The information of logging techniques below applies to the drill holes drilled by FML only. •All core samples were oriented where possible, marked into metre intervals and compared to the depth measurements on the core blocks. Any loss of core was noted and recorded in the drilling database. •All RC samples were geologically logged to record weathering, regolith, rock type, colour, alteration, mineralisation, structure and texture and any other notable features that are present. •All diamond core was logged for structure and geologically logged using the same system as that for RC. •The logging information was transferred into the company’s drilling database once the log was complete. •Logging was qualitative, however the geologists often recorded quantitative mineral percentage ranges for the sulphide minerals present. •Diamond core was photographed one core tray at a time using a standardised photography jig. •More recently, samples from RC holes were archived in standard 20m plastic chip trays. •The entire length of all holes were logged. •Historic RC holes have been logged at 1m intervals to record weathering, regolith, rock type, colour, alteration, mineralisation, structure and texture and any other notable features that are present. •Original drill logs have been viewed and used to validate data stored in acQuire for a majority of the pre-FML drilling.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and	•The information of sub-sampling and sample preparation below applies to the drill holes drilled by FML only. •Core samples were taken from half core, cut using an Almonte automatic core saw. The remainder of the core was retained in core trays tagged with a hole number and metre mark.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	•RC samples were cone split to a nominal 2.5kg to 3kg sample weight. The drilling method was designed to maximise sample recovery and delivery of a clean, representative sample into the calico bag. •Where possible, all RC samples were drilled dry to maximise recovery. The use of a booster and auxiliary compressor provide dry sample for depths below the water table. Sample condition was recorded (wet, dry or damp) at the time of sampling and recorded in the database. •The samples were collected in a pre-numbered calico bag bearing a unique sample ID. Samples were crushed to 75μm at the laboratory and riffle split (if required) to a maximum 3kg sample weight. Gold analysis was initially by 40g aqua regia for the composite samples then 40g Fire Assay for individual samples with an ICP-OES or AAS Finish. •The assay laboratories’ sample preparation procedures follow industry best practice, with techniques and practices that are appropriate for this style of mineralisation. Pulp duplicates were taken at the pulverising stage and selective repeats conducted at the laboratories’ discretion. •Earlier FML QAQC checks involved inserting a standard or blank every 10 samples in RC and taking a field duplicate every 20 samples in RC. Field duplicates were collected from the cone splitter on the rig. Diamond core field duplicates were not taken, a minimum of one standard was inserted for every sample batch submitted. In more recent drilling no blanks were submitted, only standards every 25 samples with a duplicate taken off the rig every 20th sample. •Regular reviews of the sampling were carried out by the supervising geologist and senior field staff, to ensure all procedures were followed and best industry practice carried out. •The sample sizes were considered to be appropriate for the type, style and consistency of mineralisation encountered during this phase of exploration.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.	•The assay method and laboratory procedures were appropriate for this style of mineralisation. The fire assay technique was designed to measure total gold in the sample. •No geophysical tools, spectrometers or handheld XRF instruments were used. •The QA/QC process described above was sufficient to establish acceptable levels of accuracy and precision. All results from assay standards and duplicates were scrutinised to ensure they fell within acceptable tolerances.

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.	•Very little in the way of quality control data is available from sampling of the historic drilling that currently defines the Greenfields Resource. Drilling by FML aimed to confirm the geometry of the ore envelope and grade tenor encountered in historic drilling at Greenfields.
Verification of sampling and assaying	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	•Significant intervals were visually inspected by company geologists to correlate assay results to logged mineralisation. Consultants were not used for this process. •Normally, if old historic drilling was present, twinned holes are occasionally drilled to test the veracity of historic assay data; however, no twinned holes were drilled during this program. •Primary data is sent in digital format to the company’s Database Administrator (DBA) as often as was practicable. The DBA imports the data into an acQuire database, with assay results merged into the database upon receipt from the laboratory. Once loaded, data was extracted for verification by the geologist in charge of the project. •Historic holes were validated against paper copies and WAMEX reports where possible. •No adjustments were made to any current or historic data. If data could not be validated to a reasonable level of certainty it was not used in any resource estimations.
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	•FML drill collars were surveyed after completion, using a DGPS instrument. All drill core was oriented by the drilling contractor using an Ezy-mark system. Most holes were surveyed upon completion of drilling. Initially an electronic multi-shot camera was used until Sept 2013 when a north-seeking gyroscope tool was used. Holes were surveyed open-hole prior to 2016. Since late 2016, most drillholes were surveyed using various gyroscope systems (non- north-seeking gyroscopes paired with azimuth aligners and north-seeking gyroscopes) by the drillers whilst drilling, otherwise surveyed open hole using a north-seeking gyroscope. Since the start of 2017, gyroscopes were used for “single shot” surveys whilst drilling, otherwise a single shot Eastman camera downhole survey was used. •All coordinates and bearings use the MGA94 Zone 51 grid system. •FML utilises Landgate sourced regional topographic maps and contours as well as internally produced survey pick-ups produced by the mining survey teams utilising DGPS base station instruments.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•Historic hole collar survey methods are unknown although Gold Mines Coolgardie JV indicates collars were surveyed by company survey.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	•At Greenfields, drilling has been conducted on 20m spaced grid lines on sections oriented across strike of the ore zone at an azimuth of either 20oor 200oand at various dips, with 10-20m collar intervals on section. Wider- spaced drilling exists at depth up to as wide as 40x80m.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	•Drilling was designed based on known geological models, field mapping, verified historical data and cross-sectional interpretation. •Where achievable, drill holes were oriented at right angles to the strike of the deposit, with dip optimised for drill capabilities and the dip of the mineralisation. Where drill holes were at a low angle to the known mineralisation trend, true widths were re-calculated based on the geology interpretation.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•All samples were reconciled against the sample submission with any omissions or variations reported to FML. •All samples were bagged in a tied numbered calico bag, grouped into green plastic bags. The bags were placed into cages with a sample submission sheet and delivered directly from site to the Kalgoorlie laboratories by FML personnel on a daily basis. •Historic sample security is not recorded.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•A review of sampling techniques was carried out by rOREdata Pty Ltd in late 2013 as part of a database amalgamation project. Their only recommendation was to change the QA/QC intervals to bring them into line with the FML Laverton system, which uses the same frequency of standards and duplicates but has them inserted at different points within the numbering sequence. •At Greenfields, significant data validation was completed by consultants Hellmann and Schofield in 2005 as part of a resource estimate.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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.	•All exploration was conducted on tenements 100% owned by Focus Minerals Limited or its subsidiary companies Focus Operations Pty Ltd. All tenements are in good standing. •There are currently no registered Native Title claims over the Coolgardie project areas.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•Greenfields is a site of numerous historic workings including small pits and shafts, however no production figures are available for these workings. Modern exploration by Coolgardie Gold NL include trenching and multiple drill campaigns including RAB, RC and Diamond drilling. Gold Mines of Coolgardie Pty Ltd (GMC), MPI Gold Pty Ltd and FML have also run drilling campaigns of RC and Diamond at Greenfields
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Greenfields deposit is located within the Greenfield Dolerite Sill within the Coolgardie Greenstone Belt. There are three rock types present in the pit: dolerite, felsic volcaniclastics (sediments) and ultramafics. The dolerite is sub-divided into four separate units known as the unit 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the pit area. These are separated on mineralisation, alteration, veining and grain size variations. These units all have a WNW strike and steep dip with the gold mineralisation best developed within the unit 4 dolerite, with minor occurrences located in units 3 and 5. Within the dolerite sill are shallow to moderately, NE-NW dipping quartz veins which often display higher grade gold mineralisation with visible gold identified in some drill core samples. Sulphides evident in logging include arsenopyrite and pyrrhotite. The dolerite sill and felsic volcaniclastics of the Kurrawang Formation are separated by the Greenfields Fault which runs through the pit at 280-290oazimuth.
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole	A JORC Code, 2012 Edition compliant reporting summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results has been provided in previous ASX Mineral Resource reporting (24th May 2017).

	o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.
Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	• New exploration results mineralised intersections are reported at a 0.9g/t Au cut-off with a minimum reporting width of 1m for RC holes and 0.2m for diamond holes, reported as length-weighted average grades. • For Greenfields, mineralised intersections are reported at 1.0g/t Au cut-off with a minimum reporting width of 1m for RC holes and 0.2m for diamond holes, reported as length-weighted averages.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• Holes were drilled orthogonal to mineralisation as much as possible, however the exact relationship between intercept width and true width cannot be estimated exactly in all cases.
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 original ASX Announcement (24th of May 2017)
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting	•Recent FML drill assay results used in this estimation are published in previous news releases. Historic drill hole results available on WAMEX.

	of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	•There is no other material exploration data to report at this time.
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 being planned at Bonnie Vale to test for additional extensions.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources - Greenfields

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.	•Data was geologically logged electronically, collar and downhole surveys were also received electronically as was the laboratory analysis results. These electronic files were loaded into an acQuire database by either consultants rOREdata or the company in-house Database Administrator. Data was routinely extracted to Microsoft Access during the drilling program for validation by the geologist in charge of the project. •FML’s database is a Microsoft SQL Server database (acQuire), which is case sensitive, relational and normalised to the Third Normal Form. As a result of normalisation, the following data integrity categories exist: • Entity Integrity: No duplicate rows in a table, eliminated redundancy and chance of error. • Domain Integrity: Enforces valid entries for a given column by restricting the type, the format or a range of values. • Referential Integrity: Rows cannot be deleted which are used by other

		records. • User-Defined Integrity: Business rules enforced by acQuire and validation codes set up by FML. •Additionally, in-house validation scripts are routinely run in acQuire on FML’s database and they include the following checks: • Missing collar information • Missing logging, sampling, downhole survey data and hole diameter • Overlapping intervals in geological logging, sampling, down hole surveys • Checks for character data in numeric fields •The historical Greenfields drill data was validated by the Focus data management team and the Project Geologist. This involved collaborating all collar, downhole survey, geology and assay data with existing hardcopy material as well as displaying the holes in three dimensions in Surpac to determine any unusual or unlikely trends in the data so that it could be rectified before loading into the Focus site database. This process was thorough and took a couple of months for the team to complete.
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.	•Hannah Kosovich, the Competent Person for the Greenfields Resource estimate is FML’s Resource Geologist, and conducts periodic site visits. •Wesley Groome, the Competent Person for the Exploration Results, is Senior Geologist at FML and conducts regular site visits
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.	•All available drill hole and historic mining data was used to guide the geological interpretation of the mineralisation. •The majority of the Mineral Resource occurs in what has been labelled the Unit 4 Dolerite. The remaining minor lodes occur within the less well mineralised (and altered) Unit 3 and Unit 5 Dolerites. •The mineralised geological interpretation was digitised in GEOVIA Surpac software on a section by section basis. The contact of the Dolerite 4 was used to guide the interpretation or an approximate 0.5g/t cut-off was used where the contact was obscure. Significant internal dilution included for continuity of modelling the Dolerite contact. •Minor deviation only of the lode geometry was noticed between drill holes along strike and down-dip. Minor lodes with less continuityand sample numbers were also interpreted.
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	•The Mineral Resource extends over a strike length of over 300m (from 30030mE to 30350mE) and includes the ~200m interval from the mined surface down to the 120mRL. The thickness of the main lode varies from

	and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	average thickness of 20m near surface pinching to an average thickness of 10m at depth.
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 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.	•158 holes were used in the estimate including 96 RC, 8 diamond core holes and 54 RC pre-collared diamond core holes for a total of 16,908.82. •Samples within the wireframes were composited to even 2m intervals, the dominant sample interval from historic drilling. Residual samples that did not meet the minimum length criteria of the compositing process were appended to the adjacent sample so that all material within the wireframe was included •The statistics of the 2m composites were analysed to determine if any top cutting was required. Top-capping of higher Au values within each domain was carried out with Au values above the cut-off grade reset to the cut-off grade. •Skree plots and Cumulative Frequency plots were used to determine top cut grade which was 25 g/t Au and affected five samples. •Variography was modelled for the Major, Semi Major and Minor axes on the main Unit 3 Dolerite. •GEOVIA Surpac Software was used for the estimation. An Ordinary Kriging (OK) technique was selected using the variograms modelled in Surpac. Each domain was estimated separately using only its own sample values. No samples were shared between domains (hard boundaries). •Minimum (8) and maximum (32) sample numbers were selected based on a Quantitative Kriging Neighbourhood analysis. •An elliptical search was used orientated on the lode geometry and based on range of the Variograms. •Three search passes were run in order to fill the block model with estimated Au values, with reduced minimum sample numbers and increased search distances. •Block sizes for the model were 5m in Y, 20m in X and 5m in Z direction. Sub celling of the parent blocks was permitted to 1.25m in the Y direction, 5m in the X direction and 2.5m in the Z direction. Sub-blocking was used to best fill the wireframes and inherit the grade of the parent block. A 20° rotation in the Z axis (bearing rotation) was applied to the orientation of the blocks. This aligned the blocks with the WNW strike of the lodes. •The estimate was validated by a number of methods. An initial visual review was done by comparing estimated blocks and raw drill holes. •Tonnage weighted mean grades were compared for all lodes with the raw and top-capped drill hole values. There were no major differences. •Swath plots of drill hole values and estimated Au grades by northing and RL were completed toreviewthe trends oftherawdatavs estimates andiftoo

		much smoothing of the grades had occurred. •Comparisons between previous Greenfields block model estimates was also plotted as trend lines by elevation.
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	•Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
Cut-off parameters	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	•The Mineral Resource have been reported above a 1g/t cut-off for open pit above 265mRL, this is based on a preliminary whittle shell optimisation.
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 an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	•An existing open pit exists at Greenfields, mining would continue by cut-back and open cut extraction.
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.	•In house metallurgical test work had been conducted on Greenfields samples and recoveries were in the plus 90% range. •GMC who mined Greenfields from Dec 2003 to Jan 2005 had an overall reconciliation of ~96.9% of tonnes, 100.7% of grade and 101% of ounces milled compared to mined.
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.	•Greenfields deposit occurs in an area of previous disturbance with an open cut pit and associated waste dump. •The Three Mile Hill Processing Plant is currently on care and maintenance, but has all necessary tailing facilities etc. that would allow for a rapid restart of the plant.

	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 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 densities of 1.8, 2.4 and 2.8 t/m³ were applied to Oxide, Transitional and Fresh resources respectively. The oxide and transitional values are based on values used in similar gold deposits. The fresh rock value is based on 32 measurements taken from recent Focus drill core using a water immersion method and is the average value of those samples.
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 have been classified as either Indicated or Inferred based mainly on geological confidence in the geometry and continuity of the lodes. In addition, various estimation output parameters such as number of samples, search pass, kriging variance, and slope of regression have been used to assist in classification. •Recent Focus drilling has confirmed the geological interpretation is sound and provided some quality assurance in the pre-Focus drilling.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	•No external audits or reviews were formally carried out on the Greenfields deposit.
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	•The Mineral Resource relates to global tonnage and grade estimates. •The Greenfields pit has been mined in four campaigns in the modern era commencing in 1986 and finishing in 2005 producing some 0.98Mt @ 1.81g/t

		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.	for 56,776 ounces (reconciled). •The current model reports higher tonnages at a lower grade due to the internal dilution included in modelling the main dolerite unit, 1.38Mt @ 1.69g/t for 75,214 ounces.

Section 4: Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves - Greenfields

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves	• Description of the mineral resource estimate used as a basis for the conversion to an Ore Reserve. • Clear statement as to whether the mineral resources are reported additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore Reserves.	•A Mineral Resource estimate has been produced by FML and reported in compliance with the JORC Code 2012 Edition in the ASX Announcement (24th of May 2017) and summarise above in current table (sections 1 to 3). A central conclusion of the report is that the Mineral Resource estimate provided does comply with the criteria set out in JORC Code 2012 Edition. The block model used as the basis for the Mineral Resource estimate was used in the development of an Ore Reserve estimate. Some adjustments were made to the Mineral Resource model to ensure that only Measured and Indicated material were considered in the development of an Ore Reserve estimate. In particular material classified as Inferred in the model was given a zero grade. •The Measured and Indicated parts of the Mineral Resource model are inclusive of the Mineral Resource used in the determination of the Ore Reserve estimate. This is to say the Ore Reserve estimate shouldnotbe added to the Mineral Resource estimate for the purpose of estimating the

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		total Mineral Resource.
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.	•A site visit was conducted by the Competent Person in 2016 for the purpose of assessing JORC Code 2012 Edition reporting compliance. A key recommendation from that visit was to produce an updated PFS consistent with the conditions set out in the JORC Code 2012 Edition.
Study status	• The type and level of study undertaken to enable mineral resources to be converted to Ore Reserves. • The Code requires that a study to at least Pre- Feasibility Study level has been undertaken to convert mineral resources to Ore Reserves. Such studies will have been carried out and will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.	•A PFS has been completed that considers a range Mineral Resources held by Focus that includes the Greenfields Mineral Resource (Trembath, et al., 2017). •The PFS proposes a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.
Cut-off parameters	• The basis of the cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	•Pit optimisation was completed using Whittle software and cost estimates from specialist mining contractors. An optimal pit was chosen that maximised the value of the resource. A cut-off grade was then chosen to determine if the ore would generate cash if transported and processed through the mill (rather than contained in a waste dump). A cut-off grade of 0.78g/t was chosen for this purpose.
Mining factors or assumptions	• The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study to convert the mineral resource to an Ore 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 PFS considered a range of mining methods and concluded that open pit mining was the most appropriate method for mining the Greenfields Mineral Resource. Further studies may assess the viability of the resource beneath the proposed pit however the current Ore Reserve does not consider this possibility. The current understanding of the distribution of grades that makes up the Greenfields Mineral Resource is unlikely to support underground mining. •A Whittle assessment was completed initially (Lerchs & Grossmann, 1965) and used as the basis of a detailed pit design. •The practicality of the pit and dump design was assessed, including geotechnical stability. •Grade control drilling was taken into account in the PFS. •A block model was provided with appropriate Mineral Resource categories’ and grade distribution. It was assumed that the model was a fair and reasonablerepresentationoftheMineral Resource. Itwas also assumed that

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• 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.	the productivities estimated by specialist mining contractors were fair and reasonable. •5% dilution at a zero gold grade and 95% mining recovery was applied to each selective mining unit. The PFS recommended further work to validate these estimates; however, the proposed dilution and recovery rates are consistent with industry standards for similar mines. Previous mining of the Greenfields pit showed good reconciliation with production estimates. •Blocks classified as inferred in the resource model were given a zero grade to ensure that the inferred material was not a determinant in the Ore Reserve estimate. •Minimal infrastructure will be required given that the resource has been previously mined and is adjacent to the Three Mile Hill processing plant, administration buildings and the town of Coolgardie itself.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that process to the style of mineralisation. • 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?	•FML currently has a mill on care and maintenance that has previously successfully processed the Greenfields Resource. •Some expenditure will be required to recommission the mill but this is not expected to be an impediment to the development of the Coolgardie Mineral Resources held by FML. •Given that the deposit has a history of successful treatment, historical metallurgical recovery has been used. In order to account for the risk the historical metallurgical recovery was reduced by 5%. •No assumptions or allowances were made for deleterious elements beyond what is already understood of the metallurgical characteristics of the ore.
Environmental	• The status of studies of potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. Details of waste rock characterisation and the	•FML have a current mining lease that covers the Greenfields deposit . Waste rock characterisation is reasonably well understood and dump designs have taken this into account. FML is currently preparing a mining proposal to deal

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	with all relevant environmental conditions. The plan is to use the completed pit as a tailing storage facility •A closure plan a fund exists for the mine.
Infrastructure	• The existence of appropriate infrastructure: availability of land for plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk commodities), labour, accommodation; or the ease with which the infrastructure can be provided, or accessed.	•Minimal new infrastructure will be required for mining of the Greenfields deposit. •The current Three Mile Processing plant is on care and maintenance. Some recommissioning work will be required to return it to a functioning mill. The cost of this work has been included in the Ore Reserve mine plan.
Costs	• The derivation of, or assumptions made, regarding projected capital costs in the study. • The methodology used to estimate operating costs. • Allowances made for the content of deleterious elements. • The source of exchange rates used in the study. • Derivation of transportation charges. • The basis for forecasting or source of treatment and refining charges, penalties for failure to meet specification, etc. • The allowances made for royalties payable, both Government and private.	•Capital costs have been estimated on the basis of budget quotes from suppliers and detailed design and scheduling. •Operating costs have been estimated on the basis of budget quotes from suppliers and detailed design and scheduling. Quotes from specialist mining contractors have been used to validate the estimates. •No inflation or escalation in costs was assumed in the modelling. •No allowances were made for the content of deleterious elements beyond what is currently understood. •The study was costed in AU dollars making it somewhat insensitive to exchange rate fluctuations. For those costs depending of exchange rates published rates at the time of the study were used. • Transportation charges for the gold, and further refining charges have been included but are considered significant. • A 2.5% royalty is applicable; however, a rate of 3% has been used to account for further administrative costs.
Revenue factors	• The derivation of, or assumptions made regarding revenue 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.	•The head grade is derived from interrogating the resource model with the proposed mine design. Modifying factors were applied to account for recovery and dilution. Costs and charges were based on what has historically been achieved on site or from budget estimates from suppliers. Production was derived from scheduling, based on productivity estimates from the relevant contractor. •A gold price of $1,580 per ounce has used for gold. This pricing is consistent with guidance from range of independent sources (Hubbard, 2015) (International Monetary Fund, 2016) (World Bank Group, 2016).
Market assessment	• The demand, supply and stock situation for the particular commodity, consumption trends and factors likely to affect supply and demand into the	•Gold is readily saleable and requires no specific marketing or sales contract. •There are no direct competitors in the production of gold. •Recent analysis shows increasing demand for gold with modest increases in

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	supply (Street, et al., 2016). •The price forecast assumes a fixed value over the life of the mine. The long term trend indicates that gold and silver price will increase. The current forecasts are within IMF guidance confidence intervals (International Monetary Fund, 2016).
Economic	• The inputs to the economic analysis to produce the net present value (NPV) in the study, the source and confidence of these economic inputs including estimated inflation, discount rate, etc. • NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations in the significant assumptions and inputs.	•To some extent the economics of mining the Greenfield deposit is dependent on the Bonnie Vale deposit as some of the capital and operating costs are shared between the two resources. In any case the proposed mining of the Greenfield deposit adds value to the viability of mining the Coolgardie deposits held by FML. •A discount rate of 7.5% was used in the analysis of the Ore Reserve estimate NPV. The Greenfields resource has a surplus NPV when using this rate. •The intention is to use the completed Greenfields pit as a tailings storage facility. The value attributable to the resource for the purpose of tailing storage has not been included in the economic evaluation. •A Monte Carlo simulation of the cash value of the Ore Reserves was completed. The results indicate that there is a 94% chance that the project would be cash positive given systematic errors in major determinants of the value of the project.
Social	• The status of agreements with key stakeholders and matters leading to social licence to operate.	•FML are in good standing with the Coolgardie Shire and the local community are keen for the project to proceed on the understanding that it will provide much needed employment opportunities for the town.
Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project and/or on the estimation and classification of the Ore Reserves: • Any identified material naturally occurring risks. • The status of material legal agreements and marketing arrangements. • The status of governmental agreements and approvals critical to the viability of the project, such as mineral tenement status, and government and statutory approvals. There must be reasonable grounds to expect that all necessary	•There are some geotechnical risks that will need to be dealt with at the next level of analysis. The material impact of these risks is not considered to be significant with an appropriate management plan. •A mining is in place with all conditions including the submission of an amended mining proposal likely to be satisfied. There is a long history of mining in the area and no reason to believe that a licence to operate will not be granted.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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 Ore Reserve is contingent.
Classification	• The basis for the classification of the Ore Reserves into varying confidence categories. • Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit. • The proportion of probable Ore Reserves that have been derived from measured mineral resources (if any).	•A detailed mine design was completed targeting the parts of the Mineral Resource classified as Indicated (there was no material classified as Measured) and above the specified cut-off grade. Material with the relevant grades of valuable metal contained within these designs was considered for conversion to an Ore Reserve estimate. Only material classified as Indicated and contained within the mine design above the cut-off grade was converted into an Ore Reserve. Modifying factors were applied and the resulting estimate was classified as Probable. There is no Proved Ore Reserve. •It is the Competent Person’s view that the methods used for the purpose of the Ore Reserve estimate provide a fair and reasonable estimate of the minable parts of the resource as it is currently understood.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Ore Reserve estimates.	•No external audit has been completed to date on the current Ore Reserve estimate.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Ore Reserve 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 Ore 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	•The Ore Reserve is based on a PFS completed to a level of detail that is typically expected for the scale of the Mineral Resource currently understood. A key factor in the assessment of the Ore Reserve is the accuracy of the cost estimates and key determinants such as the mine production profile. Confidence intervals around such estimates are almost impossible to quantify (McCarthy 2009, p.63). Maybe all that can be said here is that sufficient detail has been considered to show that the mine plan has a reasonable chance of success. •The use of geostatistical analysis to estimate the relevant confidence intervals for the Ore Reserve estimate would be complex. Simulation methods that may help in this regard have been recommended in the PFS. However, further work is considered unnecessary for the purpose of a Ore Reserve declaration primarily because previous resource modelling currently reconciles well with production data. •Key risks to the Ore Reserve value are: gold price, resource grade tonnage distribution, production rate, metallurgical recovery and mining costs. The competent person believes that the required attention to detail has been given to the project such that assumptions and estimates are based on

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	reasonable grounds. However, the combined effect of errors in assumptions has been tested in a Monte Carlo simulation. The results of this analysis indicate that the 94% chance that the combined Ore Reserves (Bonnie Vale and Greenfields) will be profitable.

Bonnie Vale

Table 1: Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria Section 2: Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 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.	•This report relates to results from Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling and diamond core drilling. The information of sampling techniques below applies to the drill holes drilled by Focus Minerals Ltd (Focus) only. •RC percussion drill chips were collected through a cyclone and cone splitter. Samples were collected on a 1m basis. Diamond core was sampled across identified zones of mineralisation by site geologists, the sample widths varied between a minimum of 0.2m and a maximum of 1m. For the 2004 drill program at Bonnie Vale 4m composite samples were collected manually using spear sampling of green bags and submitted for assay. Where the RC composite samples returned an assay value of 0.2g/t Au or greater, the 1m cone-split samples were then submitted for analysis. • RC chips were passed through a cone splitter to achieve a sample weight of approximately 3kg. The splitter was levelled at the beginning of each hole using a bullseye level. At the assay laboratory all samples were oven dried, crushed to a nominal 10mm using a jaw crusher (core samples only) and weighed. Samples in excess of 3kg in weight were riffle split to achieve a maximum 3kg sample weight before being pulverized to 90% passing 75μm. The samples were then prepared for fire assay. • When visible gold was observed in RC chips, this sample was then flagged by the supervising geologist for the benefit of the laboratory. The diamond core was marked up for sampling by the supervising geologist during the core logging process, with sample intervals determined by the presence of mineralisation and/or alteration. The core was cut in half using an Almonte automatic core saw, with half-core samples submitted to Kalgoorlie assay laboratories for fire assay analysis by a 50g fire assay with an ICP-OES or AAS Finish. • Matador Exploration Pty Ltd (Matador) collected drill cuttings at 1m intervals and passed through a trailer-mounted cyclone and stand-along riffle splitter to provide a 4-6kg split sample and bulk residue for logging. 4m composites were taken by spearing the residue and submitted for assay and where results were returned above 0.2g/t, the 1m riffle split samples were submitted for analysis. • Coolgardie Gold NL (CGNL) does not state sampling techniques expect to say samples were 4m composites, which were resampled when assays

		returned 0.2g/t Au or greater.
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).	•All Focus drilling was completed using an RC face sampling hammer or NQ2/HQ size diamond core. All drill core was oriented by the drilling contractor using an Ezy-mark system. Most holes were surveyed upon completion of drilling using a north-seeking gyroscope and holes were surveyed open-hole. Otherwise a single shot Eastman camera downhole survey was used. •Matador used RC drilling methods and surveyed the hole using Electronic MultiShot (EMS) system. •CGNL used RC drilling methods.
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	•Focus sample recovery was recorded by a visual estimate during the logging process. •All RC samples were drilled dry whenever possible to maximize recovery, with water injection on the outside return to minimise dust. •Study of sample recovery versus gold grade does not indicate a bias in the gold grade caused by any drop in sample recovery.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	•The information of logging techniques below applies to the drill holes drilled by Focus only. All core samples were oriented, marked into metre intervals and compared to the depth measurements on the core blocks. Any loss of core was noted and recorded in the drilling database. •All RC samples were geologically logged to record weathering, regolith, rock type, colour, alteration, mineralisation, structure and texture and any other notable features that are present. •All diamond core was logged for structure, and geologically logged using the same system as that for RC. •The logging information was recorded into acQuire format using a Toughbook notepad and then transferred into the company’s drilling database once the log was complete. •Logging was qualitative, however the geologists often recorded quantitative mineral percentage ranges for the sulphide minerals present. •Diamond core was photographed wet and dry one core tray at a time using a standardised photography jig. •Samples from RC holes were archived in standard 20m plastic chip trays. •The entire length of all holes are logged. •Matador and CGNL logged RC samples at 1m intervals to record weathering, regolith, rock type, colour, alteration, mineralisation, structure and texture and

		any other notable features that are present.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	•The information of sub-sampling and sample preparation below applies to the drill holes drilled by Focus only. •Core samples were taken from half core, cut using an Almonte automatic core saw. The remainder of the core was retained in core trays tagged with a hole number and metre mark. •RC samples were cone split to a nominal 2.5kg to 3kg sample weight. The drilling method was designed to maximise sample recovery and delivery of a clean, representative sample into the calico bag. •Where possible all RC samples were drilled dry to maximise recovery. The use of a booster and auxiliary compressor provide dry sample for depths below the water table. Sample condition was recorded (wet, dry or damp) at the time of sampling and recorded in the database. •The samples were collected in a pre-numbered calico bag bearing a unique sample ID. Samples were crushed to 75μm at the laboratory and riffle split (if required) to a maximum 3kg sample weight. Gold analysis was determined by a 30g to 50g fire assay with an ICP-OES or AAS Finish. •The assay laboratories’ sample preparation procedures follow industry best practice, with techniques and practices that are appropriate for this style of mineralisation. Pulp duplicates were taken at the pulverising stage and selective repeats conducted at the laboratories’ discretion. •Prior to 2016 Focus inserted 3 standards and took 5 duplicates for every 100 samples. Field duplicates were collected from the cone splitter on the rig for RC samples at a frequency of one duplicate every 20 samples, excluding the 100th sample as this was a standard. Diamond core field duplicates were not taken during this drilling program. In 2016 Focus inserted 4 standards and selected about 20% of the mineralised samples >1g/t as laboratory duplicates. The same number of field duplicates was taken as in previous years. •Regular reviews of the sampling were carried out by the supervising geologist and senior field staff, to ensure all procedures were followed and best industry practice carried out. •The sample sizes were considered to be appropriate for the type, style and consistency of mineralisation encountered during this phase of exploration. •Matador RC samples were drilled dry and cone or riffle split to achieve a 4- 6kg sample weight. Certified standards were inserted every 20 samples. At the laboratory either a blank or a certified standard were inserted every 20 samples and a duplicate was taken every 10 samples.

		•CGNL sub-sampling and sample preparation is unknown.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	•The assay method and laboratory procedures were appropriate for this style of mineralisation. The fire assay technique was designed to measure total gold in the sample. •No geophysical tools, spectrometers or handheld XRF instruments were used. •The QA/QC process described above was sufficient to establish acceptable levels of accuracy and precision. All results from assay standards and duplicates were scrutinised to ensure they fell within acceptable tolerances. •Matador samples were submitted for analysis for gold by standard 30g fire assay with the finish by Atomic Absorption (AA) with a 0.01g/t detection limit. •CGNL analysis methods and QA/QC checks are unknown.
Verification of sampling and assaying	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	•Significant intervals were visually inspected by company geologists to correlate assay results to logged mineralisation. Consultants were not used for this process. •Normally if old historic drilling was present, twinned holes are occasionally drilled to test the veracity of historic assay data; however, no twinned holes were drilled during this program. •Primary data is sent in digital format to the company’s Database Administrator (DBA) as often as was practicable. The DBA imports the data into an acQuire database, with assay results merged into the database upon receipt from the laboratory. Once loaded, data was extracted for verification by the geologist in charge of the project. •No adjustments were made to any current or historic data. If data could not be validated to a reasonable level of certainty it was not used in any resource estimations.
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	•Focus drill collars were surveyed after completion, using a DGPS instrument. All drill core was oriented by the drilling contractor using an Ezy-mark system. Most holes were surveyed upon completion of drilling using a north-seeking gyroscope and holes were surveyed open-hole. Otherwise a single shot Eastman camera downhole survey was used. •All coordinates and bearings use the MGA94 Zone 51 grid system. •Focus utilises Landgate sourced regional topographic maps and contours as well as internally produced survey pick-ups produced by the mining survey teams utilising DGPS base station instruments.

		•Matador has not stated the collar survey method, down-hole surveys used the Electronic MultiShot (EMS) system. •CGNL survey methods are unknown.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	•Drill spacing across the Coolgardie prospects varied depending on the exploration stage that the drill target currently existed. •Drilling varied from wide spaced exploration RC drilling to precisely placed diamond tails designed to test mineralisation at depth and along strike. •Drill spacing at the Bonnie Vale deposit varies from a 5m x 25m to 50m x 50m.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	•Drilling was designed based on known geological models, field mapping, verified historical data and cross-sectional interpretation. •Drill holes were oriented at right angles to strike of deposit, with dip optimised for drill capabilities and the dip of the ore body.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•All samples were reconciled against the sample submission with any omissions or variations reported to Focus. •All samples were bagged in a tied numbered calico bag, grouped into green plastic bags. The bags were placed into cages with a sample submission sheet and delivered directly from site to the Kalgoorlie laboratories by Focus personnel on a daily basis. •Historic sample security is not recorded.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•A review of sampling techniques was carried out by rOREdata Pty Ltd in late 2013 as part of a database amalgamation project. Their only recommendation was to change the QA/QC intervals to bring them into line with the Focus Laverton system, which uses the same frequency of standards and duplicates but has them inserted at different points within the numbering sequence.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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.	•All exploration was conducted on tenements 100% owned by Focus Minerals Limited or its subsidiary companies Focus Operations Pty Ltd. All tenements are in good standing. •There are currently no registered Native Title claims over the Coolgardie project areas.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•Bonnie Vale is the site of a number of historic workings including the “Varischetti Mine” (Westralia). Modern exploration has been conducted by Coolgardie Gold NL, Gold Mines of Coolgardie and Focus.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•Locally the geology of the deposit is dominated by the Bonnie Vale Tonalite, with an ultramafic to the east and west of the tonalite. This ultramafic has been logged as a carbonate altered ultramafic and described as a komatiite in Hallberg’s regional mapping. Mineralisation is hosted within large (strike lengths >300m) quartz reefs which range in thickness from centimetre scale to several metres. The known reefs strike sub-parallel to the edge of the tonalite, with the main orientations being an easterly dip (e.g. Westralia) or northeast (Bonnie Vale, Quarry Reef) of 40 to 60 degrees
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	•A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results is provided in the original ASX announcement dated 27th of October 2016.

Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	•Mineralised intersections are reported at a 1.00g/t Au cut-off with a minimum reporting width of 1m for RC holes and 0.2m for diamond holes, reported as length-weighted average grades.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	•Holes were drilled orthogonal to mineralisation as much as possible, however the exact relationship between intercept width and true width cannot be estimated exactly in all cases.
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 and Tables in body of the release.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	•All drill assay results used in this estimation are published in previous news releases.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test _results; bulkdensity, groundwater, geotechnical _	•There is no other material exploration data to report at this time.

	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.	•The company is further reviewing the exploration results, follow-up drilling will be planned to test the extension down-dip of main quarry reef and other mineralisation in the region.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources - Greenfields

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.	•Data was geologically logged electronically, collar and downhole surveys were also received electronically as was the laboratory analysis results. These electronic files were loaded into an acQuire database by either consultants rOREdata or the company in-house Database Administrator. Data was routinely extracted to Microsoft Access during the drilling program for validation by the geologist in charge of the project. • Focus’ database is a Microsoft SQL Server database (acQuire), which is case sensitive, relational and normalised to the Third Normal Form. As a result of normalisation, the following data integrity categories exist: • Entity Integrity: no duplicate rows in a table, eliminated redundancy and chance of error. • Domain Integrity: Enforces valid entries for a given column by restricting the type, the format or a range of values. • Referential Integrity: Rows cannot be deleted which are used by other records. • User-Defined Integrity: business rules enforced by acQuire and validation codes set up by Focus. •Additionally, in-house validation scripts are routinely run in acQuire on Focus database and they include the following checks: • Missing collar information • Missing logging, sampling, downhole survey data and hole diameter • Overlapping intervals in geological logging, sampling, down hole surveys o Checks for character data in numeric fields •Data extracted from the database were validated visually in GEOVIA

		Surpac software and ARANZ Geo Leapfrog software. Also when loading the data any errors regarding missing values and overlaps are highlighted.
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.	•Michael Guo, the Competent Person for Sections 1 and 2 of Table 1 is Focus General Manager of Exploration and Geology, and conducts regular site visits. •Michael Job, the Competent Person for Section 3 of Table 1 is Senior Principal Consultant with QG Australia, an independent mineral industry consulting group. He visited Focus Coolgardie operations in September 2012.
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.	•All available drill hole and historic mining data was used to guide the geological interpretation of the mineralisation. •Historic underground works at Bonnie Vale have focused on extracting mineralised quartz reefs dipping at a 400-450 angle. •This current interpretation of an un-excavated quartz reef at Bonnie Vale also supports mineralised quartz veins dipping at 400-450. •The logging of quartz veining guided the interpretation particularly of the higher-grade lode, but mineralisation was not restricted to the presence of large scale quartz veining. •The mineralised geological interpretation was digitized in GEOVIA Surpac software on a section by section basis. An approximate 0.5g/t cut-off was used, infrequently sub 0.5g/t samples (logged at quartz veining) included for continuity. •Minor deviation only of the lode geometry was noticed between drill holes along strike and down-dip. •Minor lodes with less continuity and sample numbers were also interpreted.
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.	•The Main Quarry Reef lode extends ENE over a strike length of 500m and extends from about a depth of 70m below surface to almost 400m below surface. The thickness of the Main Quarry Reef lode varies from 2m to approximately 10m, with an average thickness of 4m.
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	•Within the main mineralised lode, a ‘core’ domain of higher Au values closely associated with the quartz veining was interpreted. The boundary between the high-grade core and surrounding main mineralisation envelope was considered a hard boundary and no samples were shared between the two domains. The use of these domains controlled the limit of the high gold values encountered at Bonnie Vale.

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 byproducts.

• Estimation of deleterious elements or other nongrade 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.

• Only RC and Diamond holes were used in the estimation. In total 56 RC holes, 1 Diamond and 9 RC pre-collar with diamond tail holes were used.

• • The drill hole samples were composited to 1m within each domain. This is the dominant sampling interval.

• • Composited assay values of each domain were exported to a text file (.csv) and imported into Snowden Supervisor and Geovariances Isatis software for geostatistical analysis.

• • A review of histograms, probability plots and mean/variance plots for each domain revealed some outlier sample values.

• • Top-capping of higher Au values within each domain was carried out with Au values above the cut-off grade reset to the cut-off grade.

• • For the main core lode, a top-cap of 40g/t was and 15g/t for the surrounding domain. Different caps were used for the other minor lodes.

• • Due to the small number of samples within the domains, omni-directional variograms were modelled for the core and main surrounding Quarry Reef lode. A Normal Scores transformation was applied to the data set for the surrounding to obtain variograms that could be modelled. A backtransformation was applied before exporting the variograms in a Surpac readable format. This variogram was also used for the minor lode domains, with minor orientation differences as required. For the core domain, the variogram was modelled on capped but non-transformed data.

• • GEOVIA Surpac Software was used for the estimation. An Ordinary Kriging (OK) technique was selected using the variograms modelled in Supervisor/Isatis. Each domain was estimated separately using only its own sample values. No samples were shared between domains (hard boundaries).

• • Minimum (10) and maximum (24) sample numbers were selected based on a Kriging Neighbourhood analysis in Supervisor.

• • An elliptical search was used based on range of the Variograms (see table below).

		•Three search passes were run in order to fill the block model with estimated Au values. For the core and surrounding main lode, 81% of the blocks were filled on the first pass, 17% on the second and 2% on the third. •Block sizes for the model were 10m in Y, 10m in X and 5m in Z direction. Sub celling of the parent blocks was permitted to 2.5m in the Y direction, 1.25m in the X direction and 1.25m in the Z direction. Sub-blocking was used to best fill the wireframes and inherit the grade of the parent block. No rotation was applied to the orientation of the blocks. •Block size is approximately ½ of the average drill hole spacing. •The estimate was validated by a number of methods. An initial visual review was done by comparing estimated blocks and raw drill holes. •Tonnage weighted mean grades were compared for all lodes with the raw and top-capped drill hole values. There were no major differences. •Swath plots of drill hole values and estimated Au grades by northing, easting and RL were done for the core and surrounding main and showed that the estimated grades honoured the trend of the drilling data. •Historic mine production from Bonnie Vale was recorded as an average gold grade of 16.2 g/t, which is very close to the estimated grade of the core lode for this estimate (16.6 g/t Au).
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	•Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
Cut-off parameters	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	•The Resources for Bonnie Vale have been reported above a 2.0g/t cut-off. This is based on economic factors.
Mining factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and	•The Main Quarry Reef at Bonnie Vale would be mined by small-scale underground methods, most likely by longhole stoping, or possibly similar

	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 an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	to those used previously at Focus The Mount underground mine (resue mining), where the lodes are very narrow.
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.	•One sample (BONC055, 140-141m. Grade: 9.66 g/t) was sent to ALS Metallurgy for gravity/cyanide leaching test. The results show that the gravity gold recovery was high, at ~68%., overall gold extraction was very high, at >99%, with a final leach tail grade of only 0.05 g/t Au.
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 made.	•The Main Quarry Reef occurs within the historic Bonnie Vale mining centre with previous ground disturbances including waste dumps and milling residues/tailings. •The Three Mile Hill Processing Plant is currently on care and maintenance, but has all necessary tailing facilities etc. that would allow for a rapid restart of the plant.
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	•A bulk density of 2.60 was used for the mineralised lodes based on test work carried out on ½ diamond core of the mineralised zones. This is consistent with the density of quartz and tonalite. The water immersion

	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.	technique was used for these determinations.
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.	•Mineral Resources have been classified as either Indicated or Inferred based mainly on geological confidence in the geometry and continuity of the lodes. In addition, various estimation output parameters such as number of samples, search pass, kriging variance, and slope of regression have been used to assist in classification. •Significant portions of the core and surrounding main lodes which were estimated in the first search pass were classified as Indicated. In addition, one of the minor lodes that was very close to the main lode (Domain 4) and was supported by ample drilling was classified as Indicated. •The remainder of the core and main lodes were classified Inferred, as were some of the minor lodes with good continuity and numerous drill intercepts. Smaller domains based on a single drill hole intercept data or filled on the second or third search pass were assigned a ‘not classified’ code and are not included in the reported mineral resource estimate.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	•QG Australia worked with and reviewed/critiqued Focus work on the geological interpretation, assay QAQC information, estimation methodology and parameters, and estimate validation. Very little of the Focus work needed changing, and Mike Job from QG is satisfied to act as the Competent Person for the mineral resource estimate.
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.	•This is addressed in the relevant paragraph on Classification above. •The Mineral Resource relates to global tonnage and grade estimates •Bonnie Vale has historic production from 1894 to 1911 with recorded production figures of 176,883oz at an average grade of 16.2 g/t, the grade matches well with this Mineral Resource estimate of the high-grade core (16.6 g/t Au).

• 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.

Section 4: Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves	• Description of the mineral resource estimate used as a basis for the conversion to an Ore Reserve. • Clear statement as to whether the mineral resources are reported additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore Reserves.	•A Mineral Resource estimate has been produced by FML, this was reported in compliance with the JORC Code 2012 Edition and was outlined in the original Mineral Resource ASX Announcement (27th of October 2016) and summarised above in the current table (sections 1 to 3). A central conclusion of the report is that the Mineral Resource estimate provided does comply with the criteria set out in JORC Code 2012 Edition. The block model used as the basis for the Mineral Resource estimate was used in the development of an Ore Reserve estimate. Some adjustments were made to the Mineral Resource model to ensure that only Indicated material was considered in the development of an Ore Reserve estimate (note: there was no Measured material in the model). In particular, material classified as Inferred in the model was given a zero grade for the purpose of selecting economic minable parts of the Mineral Resource. However, diluting materials did include some Inferred and unclassified material represented in the resource model. The grade of this material was estimated from the model using the Inferred and unclassified block grades (unclassified grades were set at 0.00g/t gold). •The stated Mineral Resource is inclusive of the Mineral Resources used in the determination of the Ore Reserve estimate. This is to say the Ore Reserve estimate shouldnot be added to the Mineral Resource estimate for the purpose of estimating the total Mineral Resource.

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.	•A site visit was conducted by the Competent Person in 2016 for the purpose of assessing JORC Code 2012Edition reporting compliance. A key recommendation from that visit was to produce an updated PFS consistent with the conditions set out in JORC Code 2012 Edition.
Study status	• The type and level of study undertaken to enable mineral resources to be converted to Ore Reserves. • The Code requires that a study to at least Pre- Feasibility Study level has been undertaken to convert mineral resources to Ore Reserves. Such studies will have been carried out and will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.	•A PFS has been completed that considers a range resources held by Focus that includes the Bonnie Vale deposit (Trembath, et al., 2017). •The PFS proposes a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.
Cut-off parameters	• The basis of the cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	•A cut-off grade assessment was completed in order to choose both the optimal method mining and the optimal grade for the relevant method. The results indicate a 2g/t cut-off grade for stope design and 0.9g/t for any other material that need to be excavated.
Mining factors or assumptions	• The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study to convert the mineral resource to an Ore 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 PFS considered a range of mining methods and concluded open stoping with cemented rock fill was likely to maximise the value of the resource with minimal technical risk. •Preliminary capital tunnel development supporting Individual stope designs was completed on the basis the economic cut-off grade, geotechnical guidance and operating parameters of the likely mining equipment. •A geotechnical assessment based on core logging was used to provide guidance on the achievable supported and unsupported hydraulic radius for tunnel and stope design. A modified tributary area method was used to develop stable pillar designs. •Grade control drilling was taken into account in the PFS. •A block model was provided with appropriate Mineral Resource categories’ and grade distribution. It was assumed that the model was a fair and reasonable representation of the resource. It was also assumed that the productivities estimated by specialist mining contractors were fair and reasonable. •Dilution estimates were based on geotechnical analysis of the proposed stope designs. The average over-break, based on the geotechnical analysis was added to the stope designs toproduce

the outcome to their inclusion.

• The infrastructure requirements of the selected mining methods.

• diluted stope shapes. Further dilution from mining adjacent to CRF was accounted for using a modifying factor of a conservative 5% dilution rate at a 0.0g/t Au grade.

• • It should be noted that the block model was orientated at about 45 degrees to the strike of the resource. This is an odd choice of orientation as it exaggerated ‘edge effect’ dilution (for an assessment of this effect see Trembath (2015)). It also made it difficult to apply a dilution skin to a stope design, as the true thickness of the Mineral Resource at a particular section is not apparent. Matters were further complicated by the presence of internal dilution in the block model. This source of internal dilution seems to be an artefact of the modelling process rather than an attempt to represent a mineralogical feature.

• • Over-break in ore and waste development was assumed to be offset somewhat by under-break. Discrepancies here are unlikely to have a significant effect on the cost of mining. In any case, a net 3% was used for development dilution at a grade of 0.0g/t Au.

• • A 95% extraction rate for open stoping is an industry standard. It accounts for bridging of stopes, wall failures that sterilise ore, drill and blast quality control and the like. The conservative stope designs are unlikely to expose the mine to further risks of this nature.

• • Blocks classified as Inferred in the Mineral Resource model were given a zero grade to ensure that the Inferred material was not a determinant in the Ore Reserve estimate. However, after the stope designs were completed they were used to interrogate the Mineral Resource block model for the purpose of developing an ore production inventory. For the purpose of estimating the dilution grade Inferred block grade were used. A proportion of the stope designs also contained blocks that had no resource classification. These blocks were given a zero grade. Thus once the designs were completed the resulting stope grades were based on block grades from unclassified, Inferred and Indicated category. It should be noted that parts of the resource model categorised as Inferred and included in the stope designs was a small proportion of the overall mining inventory. The unclassified material was more significant (30%) but given that it has been given a zero grade there is no risk of over stating the Ore Reserve value.

• • The PFS properly considers the infrastructure requirements for the mine. Importantly the Three Mile Hill processing plant, administration buildings and the town of Coolgardie itself provide considerable infrastructure to support mining at Bonnie Vale.

Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that process to the style of mineralisation. • 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?	•FML currently has a mill on care and maintenance that has previously successfully processed ore from a variety of the Coolgardie deposits. •Some expenditure will be required to recommission the mill but this is not expected to be an impediment to the development of the Coolgardie deposits held by FML. •Metallurgical testwork has been completed for the current deposit, this studwork indicated excellent recoveries, however to account for the practicalities of processing on site a laboratory recoveries were reduced. •The samples that made up the test work were taken were distributed across the entire deposit with a target grade equal to the estimated production grade. •Given the size of the Mineral Resource and geological setting no specific domaining was required. •No assumptions or allowances were made for deleterious elements beyond what is already understood of the metallurgical characteristics of the ore. •The deposit has been mined and processed previously, albeit over 100 years ago. In any case this fact does provide some confidence in the metallurgical recover of the contained gold.
Environmental	• The status of studies of potential environmental impacts of the mining 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.	•FML have current mining leases that cover the Bonnie Vale deposit. The mine plan will utilise all waste generated as mine fill. FML is currently preparing a mining proposal to deal with all relevant environmental conditions. It is expected that there will be no serious conditions or impediments to mining the Bonnie Vale deposit. •A closure plan and fund exists for the mine.
Infrastructure	• The existence of appropriate infrastructure: availability of land for plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk commodities), labour, accommodation; or the ease with which the infrastructure can be provided, or accessed.	•The PFS properly considers the infrastructure requirements for the mine. •The current Three Mile Processing plant is on care and maintenance. Some recommissioning work will be required to return it to a functioning mill. The cost of this work has been included in the Ore Reserve mine plan.
Costs	• The derivation of, or assumptions made, regarding projected capital costs in the study. • The methodology used to estimate operating	•Capital costs have been estimated on the basis of budget quotes from suppliers and detailed design and scheduling. •Operating costs have been estimated on the basis of budget quotes

	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.	from suppliers and detailed design and scheduling. Quotes from specialist mining contractors have been used to validate the estimates. •No inflation or escalation in costs was assumed in the modelling. •No allowances were made for the content of deleterious elements beyond what is currently understood. •The study was costed in AU dollars making it somewhat insensitive to exchange rate fluctuations. For those costs depending of exchange rates published rates at the time of the study were used. • Transportation charges for the gold and further refining charges have been included but are considered significant. • A 2.5% royalty is applicable; however, a rate of 3% has been used to account for further administrative costs.
Revenue factors	• The derivation of, or assumptions made regarding revenue 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.	•The head grade is derived from interrogating the Mineral Resource model with the proposed mine design. Modifying factors were applied to account for recovery and dilution. Costs and charges were based on what has historically been achieved on site or from budget estimates from suppliers. Production was derived from scheduling, based on productivity estimates from the relevant contractor. •A gold price of $1,580 per ounce has used for gold. This pricing is consistent with guidance from range of independent sources (Hubbard, 2015) (International Monetary Fund, 2016) (World Bank Group, 2016).
Market assessment	• The demand, supply and stock situation for the particular commodity, 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.	•Gold is readily saleable and requires no specific marketing or sales contract. •There are no direct competitors in the production of gold. •Recent analysis shows increasing demand for gold with modest increases in supply (Street, et al., 2016). •The price forecast assumes a fixed value over the life of the mine. The long term trend indicates that gold and silver price will increase. The current forecasts are within IMF guidance confidence intervals (International Monetary Fund, 2016).
Economic	• The inputs to the economic analysis to produce the net present value (NPV) in the study, the source and confidence of these economic inputs including estimated inflation, discount rate, etc. • NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations in the	•To some extent the economics of mining the Bonnie Vale deposit is dependent on the Greenfields deposit as some of the capital and operating costs are shared between the two deposits. In any case the proposed mining of the Bonnie Vale deposit adds value to the viability of miningthe Coolgardie deposits held byFML.

	significant assumptions and inputs.	•A discount rate of 7.5% was used in the analysis of the Ore Reserve estimate NPV. The Bonnie Vale resource has a surplus NPV when using this rate. •A Monte Carlo simulation of the cash value of the Ore Reserves was completed. The results indicate that there is a 94% chance that the project would be cash positive given systematic errors in major determinants of the value of the project.
Social	• The status of agreements with key stakeholders and matters leading to social licence to operate.	•FML are in good standing with the Coolgardie Shire and the local community are keen for the project to proceed on the understanding that it will provide much needed employment opportunities for the town.
Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project and/or on the estimation and classification of the Ore Reserves: • Any identified material naturally occurring risks. • The status of material legal agreements and marketing arrangements. • The status of governmental agreements and approvals critical to the viability of the project, such as mineral tenement status, and government and statutory approvals. There must be reasonable grounds to expect that all necessary Government approvals will be received within the timeframes anticipated in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility study. Highlight and discuss the materiality of any unresolved matter that is dependent on a third party on which extraction of the Ore Reserve is contingent.	•There are some geotechnical risks that will need to be dealt with at the next level of analysis. The material impact of these risks is not considered to be significant with an appropriate management plan. •Hydrogeology is not properly understood. The PFS recommends further work here. •A mining is in place with all conditions including the submission of an amended mining proposal likely to be satisfied. There is a long history of mining in the area and no reason to believe that a licence to operate will not be granted.
Classification	• The basis for the classification of the Ore Reserves into varying confidence categories. • Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit. • The proportion of probable Ore Reserves that have been derived from measured mineral resources (if any).	•There is no material classified as Measured in the Mineral Resource model thus no Proved Ore Reserve. Blocks classified as Inferred in the Mineral Resource model were given a zero grade to ensure that the inferred material was not a determinant in the Ore Reserve estimate. However, after the stope designs were completed they were used to interrogate the resource block model for the purpose of developing an ore production inventory. For the purpose of estimating the dilution grade inferred block grades were used. A proportion of the stope designs also contained blocks that had no Mineral Resource classification. These blocks were given a zero grade. Thus, once the

		designs were completed the resulting stope grades were based on block grades from unclassified, Inferred and Indicated categories. It should be noted that parts of the Mineral Resource model categorised as Inferred and included in the stope designs was a small proportion of the overall mining inventory. The unclassified material was more significant (30%) but given that it has been given a zero grade there is no risk of over stating the Ore Reserve value. All material captured within the designed minable shapes (including) dilution was classified as Indicated and converted to a Probable Ore Reserve. •It is the Competent Person’s view that the methods used for the purpose of the Ore Reserve estimate provide a fair and reasonable estimate of the minable parts of the Mineral Resource as it is currently understood.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Ore Reserve estimates.	•No external audit has been completed to date on the current Ore Reserve estimate.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Ore Reserve 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 Ore 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.	•The Ore Reserve is based on a PFS completed to a level of detail that is typically expected for the scale of the Mineral Resource currently understood. A key factor in the assessment of the Ore Reserve is the accuracy of the cost estimates and key determinants such as the mine production profile. Confidence intervals around such estimates are almost impossible to quantify (McCarthy 2009, p.63). Maybe all that can be said here is that sufficient detail has been considered to show that the mine plan has a reasonable chance of success. •The use of geostatistical analysis to estimate the relevant confidence intervals for the Ore Reserve estimate would be complex. Simulation methods that may help in this regard have been recommended in the PFS. However, further work is considered unnecessary for the purpose of an Ore Reserve declaration primarily because of the conservative nature of the methodology adopted. •Key risks to the Ore Reserve value are: gold price, resource grade tonnage distribution, production rate, metallurgical recovery and mining costs. The Competent Person believes that the required attention to detail has been given to the project such that assumptions and estimates are based on reasonable grounds. However, the combined effect of errors in assumptions has been tested in a Monte Carlo simulation. The results of this analysis indicate that the 94% chance that the combined Ore Reserves (Bonnie Vale and Greenfields) will be

• 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.

profitable.

WORKS CITED

Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), 2014. Chapter 5 - Additional reporting on mining and oil and gas production and exploration activities. [Online]

Available at: http://www.asx.com.au/documents/rules/Chapter05.pdf [Accessed 1 May 2016].

Australian Securities Exchange, 2015. ASX mining reporting - frequently asked questions. [Online]

Available at: http://www.asx.com.au/regulation/compliance/asx-mining-reporting-faqs.htm#posttransition reporting

[Accessed September 2015].

Consensus Economics Inc., 2014. Energy and Metals Consensus Forecasts, London: Phillp M. Hubbard.

International Monetary Fund, 2016. Commodity Price Outlook and Risks, s.l.: International Monetary Fund.

JORC, 2012. Australasian Code for Reporting of Explorations Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, s.l.: Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Mineral Council of Australia.

Lerchs, H. & Grossmann, I. F., 1965. Optimum design of open-pit. Transactions on Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Volume LXVIII, pp. 17-24.

Trembath, D., 2017. Greenfields and Bonnie Vale Reserve Report, Perth: Mining One Consultants.

Trembath, D., Stoessiger, C., Richards, D. & Valenza, A., 2017. Preliminary Feasibility Study of Bonnie Vale, Greenfields, and Brilliant Deposits, Coolgardie, Perth: Mining One.

World Bank Group, 2016. Commodity Markets Outlook, July 2016, Washington, DC: World Bank.

Table 4. Combined Mineral Resources at 12 October 2017

Note: Mineral Resources reported are inclusive of Ore Reserves

Thursday, 12 October 2017	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Measured Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Measured Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Measured Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Indicated Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Indicated Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Indicated Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Inferred Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Inferred Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Inferred Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Total Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Total Resources	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Total Resources
COOLGARDIE GOLD PROJECT
Tindals Project - UG Tindals Project - Surface	268 4.5 39,000			1,872 3.9 234,500 8,707 2.2 616,500			942 4.0 120,000 2,191 2.2 154,500			3,082 4.0 393,500 10,898 2.2 771,000
TindalsProject	268	4.5	39,000	10,579	2.5	851,000	3,133	2.7	274,500	13,980	2.6	1,164,500
BonnieValeProject				474	9.1	139,000	347	5.0	56,000	821	7.4	195,000
Lindsays-BayleysProject				4,350	1.7	238,000	3,327	2.1	229,000	7,677	1.9	467,000
ThreeMileHill Project				2,122	1.7	113,500	156	1.7	8,500	2,278	1.7	122,000
Norris Project							2,440	2.2	169,000	2,440	2.2	169,000
Total Coolgardie	268 4.5 39,000			17,525 2.4 1,341,500			9,403 2.4 737,000			27,196 2.4 2,117,500
LAVERTON GOLD PROJECT
BarnicoatProject	390	1.7	21,000	2,486	1.7	135,000	1,803	1.3	74,000	4,679	1.5	230,000
BurtvilleProject				1,207	1.4	54,000	708	1.8	41,500	1,915	1.5	95,500
Central Laverton Project				2,749	2.0	176,500	642	1.9	39,500	3,391	2.0	216,000
Chatterbox Project	531	2.2	38,000	3,923	2.1	270,000	3,235	2.2	232,000	7,689	2.2	540,000
Jasper Hills Project - UG Jasper Hills Project - Surface	370 1.9 22,000			84 4.6 12,000 1,326 1.5 64,000			101 4.0 13,000 743 1.9 45,000			185 4.3 25,000 2,439 1.7 131,000
Jasper Hills Project	370	1.9	22,000	1,410	1.7	76,000	844	2.1	58,000	2,624	1.9	156,000
Lancefield Project - UG Lancefield Project - Surface				2,037 6.5 427,000 72 3.9 9,000			619 7.1 141,000 94 6.3 19,000			2,656 6.7 568,000 166 5.2 28,000
Lancefield Project				2,109	6.4	436,000	713	7.0	160,000	2,822	6.6	596,000
Total Laverton	1,291 2.0 81,000			13,884 2.6 1,147,500			7,945 2.4 605,000			23,120 2.5 1,833,500
TOTAL COMBINED RESOURCES	1,559 2.4 120,000			31,409 2.5 2,489,000			17,348 2.4 1,342,000			50,316 2.4 3,951,000

Competent Person’s Statement: The information in the table above relating to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Michael Guo (P Geo) who is a member of the Association of Professional Geoscientists of Ontario, Canada, which is a Recognised Professional Organisation (RPO). Mr Guo is employed by Focus Minerals Limited and has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Mr Guo consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on the information compiled by him in the form and context in which it appears. With the exception of the deposits that follow, this information was prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported. Bonnie Vale was first reported under JORC Code 2012. The Brilliant deposit, which constitutes part of the Tindals project, was updated to comply with JORC Code 2012 on 7 April 2017 and the Greenfields Deposit, which constitutes part of the Three Mile Hill project, was updated to comply with JORC Code 2012 on 24 May 2017.

Table 5. Combined Ore Reserves at 12 October 2017

Thursday, 12 October 2017	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Proven Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Proven Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Proven Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Probable Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Probable Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Probable Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Total Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Total Reserves	Tonnes '000t Grade Au g/t Ounces Total Reserves
COOLGARDIE GOLD PROJECT
BonnieValeProject				625	6.2	124,000	625	6.2	124,000
Three Mile Hill Project				1,016	1.4	47,000	1,016	1.4	47,000
TOTAL COMBINED RESERVES	0 0.0 0			1,641 3.2 171,000			1,641 3.2 171,000

The information in the table above relating to Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Dr David Trembath, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy with a chartered professional status in mining. Dr Trembath is employed by Mining One Consultants who were engage by FML to complete the Preliminary Feasibility Study investigating the technical and financial viability of mining FML’s Coolgardie deposits. Dr Trembath 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. Dr Trembath consents to the inclusion in any report or public announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears