GALILEO MINING LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2019

Dec 18, 2019

==> picture [119 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

19 December 2019

ASX: GAL

FRASER RANGE AND NORSEMAN EXPLORATION UPDATE

Corporate Directory

Directors

Non-Executive Chairman Simon Jenkins

Managing Director Brad Underwood

Technical Director Noel O’Brien

Highlights

• Interpretation of detailed magnetic data at Galileo’s Lantern Prospect in the Fraser Range shows additional untested targets prospective for Nova style nickel deposits

• Aircore drilling at Lantern in 2019 successfully targeted intrusive rocks under cover improving confidence in the new interpretation

• Galileo’s exploration activity in the first half of 2020 will be focussed on drilling in the Fraser Range targeting high value nickel-copper deposits

Projects

Norseman Project Cobalt-Nickel-Copper

Fraser Range Project Nickel-Copper

• RC drilling at Subzero Prospect and at the new Roadside Prospect near Norseman demonstrates mineralised copper and zinc trends over 800 metres in strike length

• Zones of copper and zinc mineralisation in six drill holes including o 15m @ 0.13% copper & 0.45% zinc from 51m (NRC253)

• 9m @ 0.14% copper & 0.67% zinc from 84m (NRC257)

==> picture [121 x 122] intentionally omitted <==

Contact Details

T: +61 8 9463 0063 E: info@galmining.com.au W: www.galileomining.com.au 13 Colin St, West Perth, WA

• 6m @ 0.16% copper & 0.75% zinc from 102m (NRC259)

• High potential for discoveries at the Norseman Project with outstanding infrastructure including road and rail within five kilometres of major targets

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL, “Galileo” or the “Company”) is pleased to provide an exploration update for activities completed at the Company’s highly prospective Fraser Range and Norseman tenements.

In the Fraser Range an updated interpretation of the detailed airborne magnetic data surrounding the Lantern Prospect has shown multiple untested targets prospective for Nova style nickel-copper deposits. The interpretation is supported by aircore drilling undertaken earlier this year which showed prospective intrusions at the Lantern and Delta Blues Prospects.

Company activities in the first half of 2020 will be focussed on the drilling of Fraser Range prospects in the search for high value new discoveries.

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 1 | 15

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

At the Norseman Project recent drilling has also identified anomalous copper and zinc mineralisation over 800 metres of strike length at two prospect locations with new targets being developed for additional work in the future.

Figure 1 – Galileo Prospect Locations in the Fraser Range Nickel Belt with Simplified Geology, Current

Deposits and Key Prospects

==> picture [448 x 579] intentionally omitted <==

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

New Targets
Page 2 | 15
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Commenting on the recent activities Galileo Managing Director Brad Underwood said: “ The Fraser Range is an exciting new mineral province with two known nickel-copper discoveries at Nova and Silver Knight. Galileo has early stage prospects at Lantern and Delta Blues where we have completed just two aircore drilling programs.

From this initial drilling we successfully defined prospective rocks under cover giving us a high level of confidence in the updated interpretation which has yielded more targets for drill testing. We intend on making the Fraser Range a priority work area for the first half of 2020 as we seek to make discoveries in this highly prospective region of Western Australia.”

Figure 1 shows the location of the known nickel-copper deposits in the Fraser Range along with Galileo’s prospects and the newly developed target zones. Detailed airborne magnetic data flown at a 50-metre line spacing has been utilised to undertake the interpretation. Prospective mafic-ultramafic intrusions in the Fraser Range often display unique magnetic signatures due to remanent magnetisation of the intrusions and the deflection of volcano-sedimentary host rocks as the intrusions were emplaced.

Figure 2 – Lantern Prospect Confirmed Intrusions with Aircore Drill hole Locations and Untested New Target Zones over TMI Magnetic Image (aircore drilling planned).

==> picture [534 x 368] intentionally omitted <==

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

New Targets
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [40 x 8] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 3 | 15
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

A similar style of interpretation was previously successful at both the Lantern and Delta Blues Prospects where subsequent aircore drilling and petrography confirmed nickel-copper prospective rock units.[(1)]

Figure 2 displays the new interpreted intrusions (green ellipses) which will be targeted with aircore drilling programs to assess the bedrock geology for mineral potential beneath cover rocks. Cover rocks in the area are estimated at between 40 and 100 metres with the aircore drilling technique providing a cost-effective method of first pass assessment. Follow up programs at target areas deemed prospective will include ground electro-magnetic surveying and more advanced drilling methods such as RC and diamond drilling. The same exploration methodology has been used at the Lantern Prospect which is now at the stage of RC and diamond drilling[(1)] .

Galileo plans to target its Fraser Range exploration portfolio with the following work programs;

• RC drilling at the Lantern Prospect

• Down hole electro-magnetic surveying at the Lantern Prospect followed by diamond drilling

• Aircore drilling at the Delta Blues Prospect to delineate the near surface boundaries of the prospective intrusive rock units

• Aircore drilling of newly developed target zones north of the Lantern Prospect

• Results of aircore drilling will be used in the design of electro-magnetic (EM) geophysical surveys to target conductive responses that may be related to nickel-copper mineralisation

At the Norseman Project 1,279 metres of RC drilling was completed at three prospects (Subzero, Roadside and Goblin – see Figure 3). Wide zones of sulphide alteration were intercepted at the Subzero and Roadside Prospects with up to 20% semi-massive sulphides recorded. Copper and zinc contents of the sulphide rich horizons reached maximum values of 0.19% and 0.96% respectively in 3 metre composite samples.

Drilling has established that significant hydrothermal alteration has occurred at both prospects with the prospective zones being at least 800m in strike length. The potential for an economic VMS style deposit remains high and the Company is establishing a track record of defining and drill testing prospective zones within the Norseman Project area. An untested volcanic package of rocks exists at the Woodcutters Prospect and will be targeted with soil sampling programs and electro-magnetic surveying prior to drill testing (see Figure 3 for Woodcutter Prospect location).

Scout drilling at Norseman has also confirmed a nickel prospective komatiite target under shallow cover at the Goblin Prospect. Magnetic inversion modelling was successfully used to target the basalt/komatiite contact under shallow cover rocks. The same technique will now be applied to the komatiite unit where it occurs along strike to the north at the Gremlin Prospect. The Gremlin Prospect is masked by shallow cover and has never been tested for nickel sulphide mineralisation associated with volcanic komatiite flows.

(1) Refer to the Company’s ASX announcements dated 4th November and 4th December 2019, accessible at

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

https://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/announcements.do?by=asxCode&asxCode=gal&timeframe=Y&year=2019

Page 4 | 15

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

This style of mineralisation is the dominant deposit type within the prolific Kambalda nickel district. Galileo’s Norseman Project is located at the southern end of the Norseman-Wiluna greenstone belt which also contains the Kambalda nickel mines.

Figure 3 – Galileo’s Norseman Project Area with Prospect Locations and JORC Cobalt Resources

==> picture [444 x 596] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 5 | 15
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Brad Underwood, a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and a full time employee of Galileo Mining Ltd. Mr Underwood has sufficient experience that is relevant to the styles of mineralisation and types of deposit under consideration, and to the activity being undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (JORC Code). Mr Underwood consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

With regard to the Company’s ASX Announcements referenced in the above Announcement, the Company is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the Announcements.

Authorised for release by the Galileo Board of Directors.

Investor information: phone Galileo Mining on + 61 8 9463 0063 or email info@galmining.com.au

Media: David Tasker Managing Director Chapter One Advisors E: dtasker@chapteroneadvisors.com.au T: +61 433 112 936

About Galileo Mining:

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL) is focussed on the exploration and development of cobalt and nickel resources in Western Australia. GAL holds tenements near Norseman with over 26,000 tonnes of contained cobalt, and 122,000 tonnes of contained nickel, in JORC compliant resources (see Figure 4 below). GAL also has Joint Ventures with the Creasy Group over tenements in the Fraser Range which are highly prospective for nickelcopper-cobalt sulphide deposits.

Figure 4: JORC Mineral Resource Estimates for the Norseman Cobalt Project (“Estimates”) (refer to ASX “Prospectus” announcement dated May 25[th] 2018 and ASX announcement dated 11[th] December 2018, accessible at http://www.galileomining.com.au/investors/asx-announcements/). Galileo confirms that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Estimates continue to apply and have not materially changed).

Cut-off Cobalt %	Class	Tonnes Mt		Co		Ni
			%	Tonnes	%	Tonnes
MT THIRSTY SILL
0.06 %	Indicated Inferred Total	10.5 2.0 12.5	0.12 0.11 0.11	12,100 2,200 14,300	0.58 0.51 0.57	60,800 10,200 71,100
MISSION SILL
0.06 %	Inferred	7.7	0.11	8,200	0.45	35,000
GOBLIN
0.06 %	Inferred	4.9	0.08	4,100	0.36	16,400
TOTAL JORC COMPLIANT RESOURCES
0.06 %	Total	25.1	0.11	26,600	0.49	122,500

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 6 | 15

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1:

Aircore Drillhole Details

Table 1: Norseman RC Drill Hole Collar Locations

Hole ID	East	North	RL	Dip	Azimuth	Depth	Prospect
NRC253	376571	6443580	329	-60	090	126	Subzero
NRC254	376525	6443575	328	-60	090	156	Subzero
NRC255	376510	6433060	319	-60	090	120	Subzero
NRC256	376410	6443060	319	-60	090	162	Subzero
NRC257	372190	6440500	357	-60	270	120	Roadside
NRC258	371750	6441000	385	-60	090	60	Roadside
NRC259	372120	6441265	339	-60	090	120	Roadside
NRC260	372055	6441275	341	-60	090	156	Roadside
NRC261	370700	6444200	370	-60	090	60	Goblin
NRC262	370610	6444200	370	-60	090	79	Goblin
NRC263	370560	6444200	370	-60	090	120	Goblin

Easting and Northing coordinates are GDA94 Zone 51.

Table 2: Anomalous Drill Results (zinc > 0.1% or copper > 0.1%)

Hole ID	From	To	Interval (m)	Cu (%)	Zn (%)	Lithology
NRC253	12	15	3	0.01%	0.18%	Basalt Saprolite
NRC253	15	18	3	0.01%	0.14%	Basalt Saprock
NRC253	24	27	3	0.03%	0.13%	Basalt Saprock
NRC253	30	33	3	0.15%	0.39%	Sediment Saprock
NRC253	39	42	3	0.04%	0.15%	Sediment, Saprock
NRC253	51	54	3	0.04%	0.12%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC253	54	57	3	0.16%	0.35%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC253	57	60	3	0.08%	0.57%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC253	60	63	3	0.16%	0.63%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC253	63	66	3	0.19%	0.58%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	108	111	3	0.05%	0.18%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	111	114	3	0.04%	0.12%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	117	120	3	0.02%	0.10%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	120	123	3	0.04%	0.24%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	123	126	3	0.04%	0.15%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	126	129	3	0.06%	0.47%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC254	129	132	3	0.07%	0.41%	Altered sediment, sulphide rich
NRC255	9	12	3	0.02%	0.12%	Mafic Intrusive. Dolerite, saprock
NRC255	21	24	3	0.01%	0.14%	Mafic Intrusive. Dolerite, saprock
NRC255	24	27	3	0.01%	0.12%	Mafic Intrusive. Dolerite, saprock
NRC255	27	30	3	0.04%	0.10%	Mafic Intrusive. Dolerite, saprock
NRC255	30	33	3	0.10%	0.12%	Mafic Intrusive. Dolerite, saprock
NRC255	33	36	3	0.06%	0.22%	Mafic Intrusive. Dolerite, saprock
NRC255	93	96	3	0.04%	0.13%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC255	96	99	3	0.06%	0.34%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC255	102	105	3	0.05%	0.25%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC255	105	108	3	0.08%	0.38%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC255	111	114	3	0.05%	0.24%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC255	114	117	3	0.10%	0.46%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC255	117	120	3	0.08%	0.50%	Silicified sediment. Sulphide rich
NRC256	54	57	3	0.01%	0.11%	Mafic volcanic
NRC256	72	75	3	0.01%	0.27%	Mafic volcanic

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 7 | 15

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

NRC257	84	87	3	0.12%	0.73%	Sandstone. Sulphide rich
NRC257	87	90	3	0.16%	0.70%	Sandstone. Sulphide rich
NRC257	90	93	3	0.13%	0.58%	Sandstone. Sulphide rich
NRC259	90	93	3	0.02%	0.23%	Ultramafic and pegmatite
NRC259	93	96	3	0.04%	0.11%	Sediment and pegmatite
NRC259	102	105	3	0.14%	0.96%	Altered sediment, Sulphide rich
NRC259	105	108	3	0.17%	0.53%	Altered sediment, Sulphide rich

Appendix 2: Galileo Mining Ltd – Fraser Range Project JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • 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.	•Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling, was used to obtain one metre individually bagged chip samples. •Each RC bag was spear sampled to provide a 3-metre representative composite sample for analyses. •A 1m sample split for each metre is collected at the time of drilling from the drill rig mounted cone splitter. •QAQC standards (blank & reference) and duplicate samples were included routinely with 1 per 20 samples being a standard or duplicate. •Samples were sent to an independent commercial assay laboratory. •All assay sample preparation comprised oven drying, jaw crushing, pulverising and splitting to a representative assay charge pulp. •A 50g Lead Collection Fire Assay with ICP-OES finish was used to determine Au results •A four acid digest was used for a multi- element analysis suite including Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Bi, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Fe, Ga, Ge, Hf, In, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb, Rb, Re, S, Sb, Sc, Se, Sn, Sr, Ta, Te, Th, Ti, Tl, U, V, W, Y, Zn, Zr by ICP-MS or ICP- OESforallsamples.
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). _	•RC drilling was undertaken using a 5.25“drill bit completed by Red Rock Drilling Pty Ltd.

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 8 | 15

	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.	•Sample recoveries are visually estimated for each metre with poor or wet samples recorded in drill and sample log sheets. •The sample cyclone was routinely cleaned at the end of each 6m rod and when deemed necessary. •No relationship has been determined between sample recoveries and grade and there is insufficient data to determineifthereis a sample bias.
	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. _	•Geological logging of drill holes was done on a visual preliminary basis with full logging in progress to include lithology, grainsize, mineralogy, colour and weathering. •Logging of drill chips is qualitative and based on the presentation of the 1m samples in the chip trays. •All drill holes were logged in their entirety.
	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.	•All initial RC drill samples were collected using a PVC spear as 3m composites (2-3kg). Other composites of 2m and individual 1m samples were collected where required ie, at the bottom of hole. •Selected 1m samples for intervals deemed of interest by the Geologist supervising the drill rig were submitted to the assay laboratory. These 1m samples were collected at the time of drilling from the drill rig mounted cone splitter. These selected 1m interval samples refer to assays reported for drill-holes NRC241, NRC242 and NRC243 only. Additional 1m cone split samples for all holes at the Subzero Prospect may be submitted for assay at a later date. •The samples were dried and pulverised before analysis. •QAQC reference samples and duplicates were routinely submitted with each batch. •The sample size is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style, application and analytical techniques used.
	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	•RC Chip samples were analysed for a multielement suite (48 elements) by ICP-MS following a four-acid digest. Assay for Au has been completed by 50gram Fire Assay with an ICP-OES finish. The assaymethods used are

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 9 | 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		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.	considered appropriate. •QAQC standards and duplicates were routinely included at a rate of 1 per 20 samples •Further internal laboratory QAQC procedures included internal batch standards and blanks •Sample preparation was completed at Intertek Genalysis Laboratory, (Kalgoorlie) with digest and assay conducted by Intertek-Genalyis Laboratory Services (Perth) using a four acid (4A/MS48) for multi-element assay and 50gram Fire Assay with an ICP-OESfinish for Au (FA50/OE04).
	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.	•Field data is collected on site using a standard set of logging templates entered directly into a laptop. Data is then sent to the Galileo database manager (CSA Global - Perth) for validation and upload into the database. •Assays are as reported from the laboratory and stored in the Company database. •Assays for Cu and Zn as reported have been converted to percent from parts-per-million laboratory data and reported as percent to 2 decimal places.
	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.	•All co-ordinates are in MGA94 datum, Zone 51. •Topographic control has an accuracy of 2m based on detailed satellite imagery derived DTM.
	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 hole spacing for the individual drill holes was grid based. The holes being placed to intercept the interpreted mineralised position as identified by surface mapping and sampling activities and at depth by conductivity models of MLEM data. •Drilling was on 50 to 100m spacing on section and up 500m along strike. Drilling was a combination of follow up drilling and scout drilling of new prospects and the spacing and drillhole distribution is deemed insufficient to establish a JORC 2012 Compliant Resource. •Drill holes were sampled on a 3m composite basis or as 1m or 2m samples at the end of hole as required. Where anomalousvalueswere

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 10 | 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			identified by the geologist at the time of composite sampling, selected 1m samples collected from the drill rig mounted cone splitter were submitted forassay.
	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.	•It is unknown whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling. •No drilling core has been completed for the measurement of possible structures. •Given the nature of mineralisation it is thought that the geometry is best described as subvertical however no quantitative measurements exist and all drill intercepts are reported as down hole length, true width unknown. •No quantitative measurements of mineralisedzones/structures exist.
	Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Each sample was put into a tied off calico bag and then several placed in a large plastic “polyweave” bag which was zip tied closed. For transport, sampled were placed on wooden pallets inside plastic “polyweave” “Bulk Bags” ensuring no loss of material. •Samples were delivered directly to the laboratory in Kalgoorlie by Galileo’s freight contractor.
	Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•Continuous improvement reviews of sampling techniques and procedures are ongoing. No external audits have beenperformed.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

(Criteria listed in	the preceding section also apply to this section.)
Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	•The Norseman Project comprises two granted exploration licenses and eighteen granted prospecting licenses covering 278km2, and one Mining Lease Application covering 6.54 km2 •All tenements within the Norseman Project are 100% owned by Galileo Mining Ltd. •The Norseman Project is centred around a location approximately 10km north-west of Norseman on vacant crown land. •The Fraser Range Project comprises four granted exploration licenses, covering492km2and twopending

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 11 | 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			tenements covering 164 km2 •Kitchener JV tenement E28/2064 (67% NSZ Resources Pty Ltd, 33% Great Southern Nickel Pty Ltd). •Yardilla JV tenements: E63/1539, E63/1623, E63/1624 (67% FSZ Resources Pty Ltd, 33% Dunstan Holdings Pty Ltd) •NSZ Resources Pty Ltd & FSZ Resources Pty Ltd are wholly owned subsidiaries of Galileo Mining Ltd. •Great Southern Nickel Pty Ltd and Dunstan Holdings Pty Ltd are entities of Mark Creasy •The Kitchener Area is approximately 250km east of Kalgoorlie on vacant crown land and on the Boonderoo Pastoral Station. •The Yardilla Area is approximately 90km east of Norseman on vacant crown land and on the Fraser Range Pastoral Station •All tenements in the Norseman Project are 100% covered by the Ngadju Native Title Determined Claim. •The tenements are in good standing and there arenoknown impediments.
	Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•Barrier Exploration completed three diamond drill holes at the Cowan West VMS prospect in 1971. •The GSWA 250k Norseman Map Sheet Explanatory Notes records that 13 metric tonnes of ore were produced from the pits and shaft at the Subzero Prospect in 1953. Average ore grade was 8.36% copper.
	Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•The Norseman target geology and mineralisation style is volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) mineralisation occurring within the GSWA mapped Mount Kirk Formation •The Mount Kirk formation is described as “Acid and basic volcanic rocks and sedimentary rocks, intruded by basic and ultrabasic rocks” •The Fraser Range target geology is indicative of magmatic sulphide mineralisation hosted in or associated with mafic-ultramafic intrusions within the Fraser Complex of the Albany- Fraser Orogeny. •The underlying unweathered lithology is

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 12 | 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			granulite facies metamorphosed and partially retrogressed sedimentary, mafic and ultramafic igneous rocks as determined by petrographic work.
	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. _	•Refer to drill hole collar and intercept reporting table in the body of the report
	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.	•Weighted averaging has been used, based on the sample interval, for the reporting of drilling intercept results. •Tables of the relevant assay intervals of significance are included in this release. Criteria for inclusion are based on an assay of >/= 0.1% Cu or 0.1% Zn over a minimum interval of 1m, 2m of internal dilution with intercepts of Cu or Zn reporting greater than 0.1% being reported. •Parts-per-million data reported from the assay laboratory for Cu and Zn have been converted to percent values and reported as percent values to 2 decimal places with upward roundingapplied.
	Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	•The mineralisation occurs on surface with a general strike of 010° similar to the host rock •Geometry from surface outcrop is best described as sub-vertical. Drilling intercept data of lithologies implies an apparent dip of the prospective lithologies on E-W section of between 65 and 80 degrees to the west, however no reliable quantitative measurements exist.

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 13 | 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	•Plan map of the general prospect area, detailed location plan map and representative section have been provided. Tables with drill-hole collar locations and zones of significant geochemical intercepts for target elements of interest Cu, Zn, Au, Ag are provided. Locations have been included using accurate hand-held GPS locations (Garmin GPS 78s) +/- 5m in X/Y dimensions and Z dimension from a DEM surface generated from detailed aeromagnetic survey data+/- 2m.
	Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration _Results. _	•All significant results are reported.
	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.	•At both the Norseman and Fraser Range Projects, detailed 50m line spaced aeromagnetic data has been used for interpretation of underlying geology. Data was collected by Magspec Airborne Surveys Pty Ltd using a Geometrics G-823 caesium vapor magnetometer at an average flying height of 30m. •At the Fraser Range Project, detailed gravity data has also been used for interpretation of underlying geology. Data was collected using Scintrex CG-5 Autograv gravity meters positioned using a Leica GX1230 receiver and GNSS base station. •Fraser Range petrography was undertaken by R.N. England Consulting Geologist •GEM Geophysics Pty Ltd was contracted to complete the Moving Loop Electromagnetic (MLEM) survey. •MLEM survey data was collected with 400m loops using a Smartem V system and Jesse Deeps SQUID receiver in a 400m offset Slingram configuration. Z, X and Y component data were collected at a base frequency of 1Hz. •Maxwell software was utilised to process and model the MLEM data. •Modelling and interpretation of the EM survey geophysical data was undertaken by Spinifex Gpx Pty Ltd

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 14 | 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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.	•Downhole Electromagnetic surveys (DHEM) of selected RC drillholes •Mapping, Soil and Rock Chip geochemical sampling over extended prospective geological areas at the Subzero, Roadside, Woodcutters and Gremlin Prospects •At the Fraser Range Project, aircore drilling to confirm interpretation of intrusive rocks with potential for magmatic nickel-copper deposits •RC and diamond drilling programs are planned for the more advanced Lantern Prospect

==> picture [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 15 | 15