GALILEO MINING LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2025

Oct 29, 2025

30 October 2025

ASX Announcement

ASX: GAL

==> picture [178 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [141 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [165 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

High Grade Gold Assays from Drill Sampling at Norseman Project

Highlights

• Single metre fire assays of one metre samples from Norseman Project returns high grade gold up to 13.7 g/t over one metre (NAC759), accompanied by 3.2 g/t palladium over the same interval

• Assay results demonstrate prospectivity for high grade gold-palladiumplatinum veins and seams at the Norseman Project

• Anomalous drill results include;

• 7m @ 3.87 g/t 3E[1] from 28m (NAC759)

• includes peak gold assay of 1m @ 13.74 g/t Au with 3.21 g/t Pd and 0.1 g/t Pt (from 28m, NAC759)

• 1m @ 3.35 g/t 3E from end of hole with 0.94 g/t gold and 2.21 g/t Pd (from 72m, NAC756)

• 1m @ 1.62 g/t 3E with 1.26 g/t gold and 0.28 g/t Pd (from 17m, NAC801)

• 10km strike of PGE anomalism has been defined along the Eastern Contact Zone at the Mission Sill prospect

• RC drill contract signed in September, rig expected to arrive in late November to target the Mission Sill prospect

• Mission Sill prospect is approximately 8km from the 17.5Mt Callisto resource[2] and has the same prospective ultramafic host rocks

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL, “ Galileo ” or the “ Company ”) is pleased to provide new assay results from recent aircore drilling at the Company’s 100% owned Norseman project in Western Australia.

1 3E = Pd + Pt + Au expressed in g/t

2 See Table 2 and ASX Announcement dated 2 October 2023 for JORC resource

==> picture [596 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Registered Office: 945 Wellington St, West Perth, WA, 6005 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 415, West Perth WA 6872 Phone: +61 8 6285 5622 Email: info@galileomining.com.au Website: galileomining.com.au

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

Galileo Managing Director Brad Underwood commented ; “Individual assaying of samples from recent aircore drilling has returned excellent results which highlight the prospectivity of our Norseman project. In particular, a standout gold assay over 13 g/t, associated with palladium and platinum, suggests the possibility of high-grade gold-PGE mineralisation at the Mission Sill prospect. We know the area has potential to deliver new resources as shown by our 2022 discovery of the Callisto deposit and we are seeing consistent PGE anomalism in aircore drilling along 10km of strike at the Mission Sill. We are excited to be working in a new PGE mineral province and hope to deliver additional discoveries with our upcoming drilling programs at Norseman.”

Approximately 4,300m of aircore drilling in 149 drill holes was undertaken in the August aircore drill campaign. Assays released to the ASX in September[3] showed PGE anomalism along the 10km Eastern Contact Zone at the Mission Sill prospect. Further anomalism was reported from the offset Mission Sill South prospect 1.5km to the south of the Mission Sill Eastern Contact Zone (see Figures 1 and 2). Following the initial results, selected intervals were assayed on a single metre basis using fire assay techniques to help pinpoint peak anomalism and the potential sources of the anomalies at depth (original assays were aqua regia only). Results of one metre split sampling are shown in Table 1 with a maximum gold grade of 13.7 g/t being a standout highlight (NAC759).

Table 1 –1 metre aircore drill sample assays above 1 g/t 3E (further details in Appendices)

Hole ID	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	3E (Pd+ Pt+ Au; g/t)	Palladium (g/t)	Platinum (g/t)	Gold (g/t)	Nickel (%)	Copper (%)
NAC694	52	56	4	1.11	0.57	0.54	<0.01	0.56	0.18
NAC756	72	73	1	3.35	2.21	0.20	0.94	0.51	0.10
NAC759	18	20	2	1.30	0.97	0.32	0.01	0.26	0.12
and	28	35	7	3.87	1.52	0.24	2.11	0.12	0.07
including	30	31	1	17.06	3.21	0.10	13.74	0.20	0.07
NAC801	17	18	1	1.62	0.28	0.08	1.26	0.50	0.12

An RC drill contract was signed in September for a program to test bedrock mineralisation on selected sections along the 10km Mission Sill Eastern Contact target. The availability of appropriate RC drill rigs has been impacted by the high volume of drilling currently occurring in the West Australian mining and exploration sector. A scheduled start date of late November has now been supplied by the drilling company. Initial RC drilling will consist of short overlapping RC drillholes to focus on the high-grade gold-PGE results and to determine the location of the ultramafic/mafic contact in fresh bedrock.

3 See ASX Announcement dated 8 September 2025 for details

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

2 | P a g e

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

Current targeting suggests that basement mineralisation of economic significance may be located at or close to this rock boundary. PGE deposits around the globe are known to occur close to a similar mafic/ultramafic rock contact and the presence of high-grade results in Galileo’s one metre samples indicates the possibility of high-grade gold-PGE seams and veins at the Mission Sill prospect.

Figure 1 – September 2025 anomalous aircore drill results from the Mission Sill prospect with updated one split sample results. Red dashed line is the Eastern Contact target zone which now covers over 10km of strike. See Appendices for assays & details of drill holes reported in this announcement. TMI background image.

==> picture [387 x 563] intentionally omitted <==

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

Section 4: NAC801
15m @ 0.42 g/t 3E PGE
(aqua regia); 1m @ 1.26 g/t
gold from 17m (fire assay)
7m @ 3.87 g/t 3E PGE from
28m including 1m @ 13.7 g/t
gold from 30m (fire assay)
Section 3: NAC759
Section 2: NAC756
1m @ 3.35 g/t 3E PGE from
72m (end of hole – fire assay)
4m @ 1.11 g/t 3E PGE
from 52m (fire assay)
Section 1: NAC694
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

3 | P a g e

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 – Drilling at the Mission Sill prospect showing over 10km of anomalous PGE results along the Eastern Contact Zone target. Location of the Jimberlana South and Mission Sill South prospects also shown. TMI magnetic background image. See ASX announcement dated 8/09/2025 for assays and details of September anomalous aircore results.

==> picture [455 x 664] intentionally omitted <==

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

Jimberlana South
Prospect
Mission Sill South
Prospect
4 | P a g e
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 – Callisto deposit and prospective geological trends at Galileo’s Norseman project.

==> picture [459 x 675] intentionally omitted <==

5 | P a g e

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 – Norseman project location map with a selection of mines, resources, and infrastructure in the region.

==> picture [487 x 657] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

6 | P a g e

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

About Galileo Mining:

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL) is focussed on the exploration and development of PGE (palladiumplatinum), nickel, copper, and cobalt resources in Western Australia. GAL’s tenements near Norseman are highly prospective for new discoveries as shown by the Callisto deposit. GAL also has Joint Ventures with the Creasy Group over tenements in the Fraser Range which are prospective for nickelcopper sulphide deposits similar to the operating Nova mine.

Norseman (100% GAL)

The wholly owned Norseman project contains the Callisto Discovery and adjacent regional prospects Jimberlana and Mission Sill with potential for palladium, platinum, nickel, copper, cobalt, and rhodium mineralisation. Galileo’s tenure at Norseman comprises mining, exploration, and prospecting licenses covering a total area of 255 km[2] .

The Callisto deposit was discovered in 2022 and is the first deposit of its type identified in Australia, analogous in mineralisation style to the Platreef deposits found in South Africa. An initial Mineral Resource Estimate was reported in 2023 with 17.5 Mt @ 1.04g/t 4E[1] , 0.20% Ni, 0.16% Cu (2.3g/t PdEq[2] or 0.52% NiEq[3] ).

Table 2 - Callisto Deposit Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate (JORC 2012) (see ASX announcement: 2 October 2023)

==> picture [549 x 210] intentionally omitted <==

Metal equivalent price assumptions of Callisto Resource released on 2[nd] October 2023

Based on metallurgical test work completed to date, the Company believes that Callisto’s mineralisation is amenable to concentration using a conventional crushing, milling and flotation process and has Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction.

Metallurgical recovery assumptions used for metal equivalent value calculations were: Pd – 82%, Pt – 78%, Au – 79%, Rh – 63%, Ni – 77%, Cu – 94%

Metal price assumptions, based on 12 month calculated averages to 11[th] September 2023, were used for metal equivalent values: Pd – US$1,600/oz, Pt – US$975/oz, Au – US$1,870/oz, Rh – US$9,420/oz, Ni - US23,800/t, Cu – US$8,420/t

Fraser Range (67% GAL / 33% Creasy Group JV)

Galileo is actively exploring for magmatic massive sulphide- nickel-copper deposits across its Fraser Range tenements covering over 600km[2] of highly prospective ground in the Albany-Fraser Orogen. The project is well positioned within the nickel-copper bearing Fraser Range Zone, with the Nova-Bollinger mine located between 30km and 90km from Galileo tenure.

14E = Palladium (Pd) + Platinum (Pt) + Gold (Au) + Rhodium (Rh) expressed in g/t

2 PdEq (Palladium Equivalent) = Pd (g/t) + 0.580 x Pt (g/t) + 1.13 x Au (g/t) + 4.52 x Rh (g/t) + 4.34 x Ni (%) + 1.88 x Cu (%)

3 NiEq (Nickel equivalent) = Ni % + 0.230 x Pd (g/t) + 0.133 x Pt (g/t) + 0.259 x Au (g/t) + 1.04 x Rh (g/t) + 0.432 x Cu (%)

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

7 | P a g e

==> picture [46 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Person Statement

==> picture [172 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

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.

The information in this report that relates to Galileo’s Mineral Resource for the Callisto Deposit is from a previous report released to the ASX by Galileo Mining (2[nd] October 2023) based on information complied by Paul Hetherington, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Hetherington 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 Hetherington consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Mr Hetherington has advised that this consent remains in place for subsequent releases by Galileo of the same information in the same form and context, until the consent is withdrawn or replaced by a subsequent report and accompanying consent.

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 6285 5622 or email info@galmining.com.au

Media:

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

==> picture [596 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

8 | P a g e

==> picture [79 x 122] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [119 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1: 1 Metre Split Sampling Anomalous AC Drill Hole Intersections

>1.0g/t 3E cut-off; no internal dilution. See Appendix 2 for drill hole details and Appendix 3 for sections. Reported as downhole width, true width unknown. 3E = Palladium (Pd) + Platinum (Pt) + Gold (Au); expressed in g/t.

Hole ID	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	3E (Pd+ Pt+ Au; g/t)	Palladium (g/t)	Platinum (g/t)	Gold (g/t)	Nickel (%)	Copper (%)
NAC694	52	56	4	1.11	0.57	0.54	<0.01	0.56	0.18
NAC756	72	73	1	3.35	2.21	0.20	0.94	0.51	0.10
NAC759	18	20	2	1.30	0.97	0.32	0.01	0.26	0.12
and	28	35	7	3.87	1.52	0.24	2.11	0.12	0.07
including	30	31	1	17.06	3.21	0.10	13.74	0.20	0.07
NAC801	17	18	1	1.62	0.28	0.08	1.26	0.50	0.12

Appendix 2: Anomalous Drill Hole Collar Details for 1 Metre Samples

Hole ID	East	North	RL	Azimuth	Dip	Total Depth (m)
NAC694	373905	6433428	303	90	-60	59
NAC756	373754	6435256	306	90	-60	73
NAC759	374046	6435447	324	90	-60	59
NAC801	375697	6438148	332	90	-60	19

Note: Easting and Northing coordinates are GDA94 Zone 51.

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

Page 9

==> picture [119 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Sections with Anomalous Results (see Figures 1 and 2 for plan view and Appendices 1 and 2 for drill hole details)

Section 1: 6,433,425N

Section 2: 6,435,250N

==> picture [730 x 224] intentionally omitted <==

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

Section 3: 6,435,450N

==> picture [726 x 220] intentionally omitted <==

Section 4: 6,438,150N

==> picture [735 x 226] intentionally omitted <==

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

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

Appendix 4:

Galileo Mining Ltd – Norseman 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.	•Aircore drilling was completed on traverses testing geological targets based on aeromagnetic interpretation, surface geochemistry, historic drilling and/or geological interpretation. •Drill cuttings representative of each 1m down hole interval of sample return were collected direct from the drill rig sample return system (cyclone) into a 20-litre plastic bucket and ground dumped in rows. •Initially, each 1m sample pile from every drill hole was spear sampled to obtain representative nominal 4m composite samples for laboratory analysis. 1m, 2m or 3m composite samples were collected from the end of hole where the drill hole depth was not a multiple of four. A 1m bottom of hole sub-sample was also collected for laboratory analysis. •Follow up sampling of 1m samples was undertaken using spear sampling with an average sample weight of 0.6kg (range from 0.2 – 1.0kg) •Sub-sample composite weights were typically in the range 2-3kg. •Bottom of hole sample weights were approximately 1kg •Certified QAQC standards (blank & reference) and field duplicate samples were included routinely with 1 per 50 samples being a certified standard, blank or a field duplicate. •Samples have been submitted to an independent commercial assay laboratory.
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 ifso, by what method, etc). _	•The Aircore drilling method was used with an 85mm blade bit. •KTE Mining was the drilling contractor for the program utilising a KL150 model rig.
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	•Sample recoveries are visually estimated for each metre by the geologist supervising the drilling. Poor or wet samples are recorded in the drill

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

Page 10

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		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.	and sample log sheets. •The sample cyclone was routinely cleaned between holes and when deemed necessary within the hole. •No relationship has been determined between sample recovery and geology/grade and there is insufficient data to quantify any 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 basis with logging including lithology, grainsize, mineralogy, texture, deformation, mineralisation, alteration, veining, colour and weathering. •Logging of drill chips is semi- quantitative and based on the presentation of representative drill chips retained for all 1m sample intervals 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.	•Initially, composite aircore drill samples were collected using a PVC spear as 4m composites (typically 2-3kg). Other composites of 3m, 2m and 1m were collected where required ie, at the bottom of hole or through zones of interest as identified by the geologist supervising the program. A specific 1m bottom of hole sub-sample was also collected by PVC Spear or Scoop (typically 1kg). •Selected follow up 1m aircore samples were collected using a PVC spear with sample weights averaging 0.6kg (range from 0.2 – 1.0kg). •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 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	•Initial composite AC Chip samples were analysed for a multielement suite (52 elements) by ICP-MS following an aqua regia digest of a 10g sample pulp charge. The assay methods used are considered appropriate. •Follow up 1m AC chip samples were analysed using a four acid (4A/MS48) for multi-element assay, a 50 gram Fire Assay with an ICP-MS finish for Au, Pt, Pd, (FA50/MS). •QAQC standards and duplicates were

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

Page 11

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	routinely included at a rate of 1 per 50 samples •Further internal laboratory QAQC procedures included internal batch standards and blanks •Sample preparation was completed at Intertek Genalysis Laboratory, (Kalgoorlie or Perth) with digest and assay conducted by Intertek-Genalysis Laboratory Services (Perth).
	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 computer. Data is then sent to the Galileo database manager (ERM Consultants) for validation and upload into the database.
	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.	•Aircore drill hole collars are surveyed with a handheld GPS with an accuracy of +/-5m which is considered sufficient for drill hole location accuracy. •Co-ordinates are in GDA94 datum, Zone 51. •Downhole depths are in metres from surface. •Topographic control has an accuracy of 2m based on detailed satellite imagery derivedDTM.
	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.	•Aircore drill traverse spacing is not regular, the holes being placed to provide a systematic traverse pattern coverage of the geophysical/geochemical target area of interest. •Drill spacing along traverses has been at selective 50m intervals specific to the target zone and ongoing observations from the geologist during the drilling program. This spacing has been deemed adequate for first pass assessment only and is not considered sufficient to determine JORC Compliant Inferred Resources and therefore laboratory assay results and additional drilling would be required. •Drill holes were sampled from surface on a 4m composite basis or as 1m, 2m, or 3m samples as determined by the end of hole depth or under instruction from the geologist supervising the program. A 1m sub- sample from end of hole has also been collected.

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

Page 12

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	•All holes are inclined at 60 degrees. •It is unknown whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures as the target setting is hosted in soft regolith material with no measurable structures recorded in drill chips. •No quantitative measurements of mineralised zones/structures exist and all drill intercepts are reported as down hole length, true width unknown. Blade refusal depth of the drill rig will vary due to rock type, structure and alteration intersected as well as in-hole drilling conditions.
	Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Each sample was put into and tied off inside a calico bag. •Several of the samples were placed in a large plastic “polyweave” bag which are then zip tied closed, for transport to laboratory analysis no loss of material. •Laboratory analysis samples are delivered directly to the laboratory in Perthor Kalgoorlie by Galileo staff.
	Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•Continuous improvement internal reviews of sampling techniques and procedures are ongoing. No external auditshave 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 exploration licenses, eighteen granted prospecting licenses and two mining leases covering 255km2 •All tenements within the Norseman Project are 100% owned by Galileo Mining Ltd. •A 1% Net Smelter Royalty is payable to Australian Gold Resources Pty Ltd on mine production from within the Norseman Project (NSR does not apply to production from any laterite operations) •The Norseman Project is centred around a location approximately 10km north-west of Norseman on vacant crown land. •All tenements in the Norseman Project are 100% covered by the Ngadju Native Title Determined Claim.

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

Page 13

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			•The tenements are in good standing and there are no known impediments.
	Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	Between the mid-1960’s and 2000 exploration was conducted in the area for gold and base-metals (most notably Ni sulphides). Exploration focussed on the Mt Thirsty Sill and eastern limb of the Mission Sill. Central Norseman Gold Corporation/WMC (1966-1972) •Explored the Jimberlana Dyke for Ni-Cu- PGE-Cr. Soil sampling generated several Cu anomalies 160-320ppm Cu. Barrier Exploration and Jimberlana Minerals Between (1968 and 1974) • Explored immediately south of Mt Thirsty for Ni-Cu sulphide. IP, Ground Magnetic Surveys, Soil Sampling, Soil Auger Sampling and Diamond Drilling was completed. Resolute Limited, Great Southern Mines Ltd and Dundas Mining Pty Ltd (1993-1996) •Gold focussed exploration. Several gold anomalies were identified in soil geochemistry but were not followed up. Resolute assayed for Au, Ni, Cu, Zn but did not assay for PGE. •Resolute Limited drilled laterite regolith profiles over the ultramafic portions of the Mt Thirsty Sill and identified a small Ni-Co Resource with high Co grades. Kinross Gold Corp Australia (1999) •Completed a 50m line spaced aeromagnetic survey. 2000-2004

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

Page 14

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			•Australian Gold Resources (“AGR”) held “Mt Thirsty Project” from 2000 to 30th June 2004. Works identified Ni-Co resources on the Project. •Anaconda Nickel Ltd (“ANL”) explored AGR Mt Thirsty Project as part of the AGR/ANL Exploration Access Agreement 2000-2001. AGR/ANL (2000-2001) •Mapping focussed on identifying Co-Ni enriched regolith areas. •RC on 800mx100m grid at Mission Sill targeting Ni-Co Laterite (MTRC001- MTRC035). Nickel assay maximum of 0.50%, Co 0.16%, Cu to 0.23%. •Concluded the anomalous Cu-PGE association suggested affinity with Bushveldt or Stillwater style PGE mineralisation. A lack of an arsenic correlation cited as support for magmatic rather than hydrothermal PGE source. AGR (2003-2004) •Soil sampling over the Mission Sill and Jimberlana Dyke. •RC drilling (MTRC036-052) confirmed shallow PGE anomalism with best results of 1m at 2.04 combined Pt-Pd in MTRC038 from surface. •Petrography identified sulphide textures indicative of primary magmatic character. •Sixty samples were re-assayed for PGE when assays returned >0.05% Cu. A further 230 samples were re-assayed based on the initial Au-Pd-Pt results. The best combined result for Au-Pd-Pt was 5.7g/t. Galileo • Galileo commenced exploration on the Norseman Project from 30th June 2004 aftersale ofthe tenements byAGR.
	Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•The Norseman target geology and mineralisation style is PGE-nickel- copper mineralisation related to layered intrusions (sills and dykes) and komatiite nickel sulphide mineralisation occurring within the GSWA mapped Mount Kirk Formation (and intrusions into this formation) •The Mount Kirk formation is described as “Acid and basic volcanic rocks and sedimentaryrocks,intruded by basic

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

Page 15

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			and ultrabasic rocks”
	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 Appendices 1 and 2.
	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.	• Tables of relevant assay intervals of significance are included in this and previous releases. • Parts-per-billion and parts-per-million data reported from the assay laboratory have been converted to grams-per-tonne for Au, Pd, Pt. • Parts-per-million data reported from the assay laboratory for Cu and Ni have been converted to percent values and reported as percent values rounded to 2 decimal places. 3E intercepts have been calculated as the sum of Au, Pd and Pt assays in grams-per-tonne.
	Relationship between mineralisatio n widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	•The drilling is oriented perpendicular to the lithological strike and dip of the target rock unit •It is unknown whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures as no measurable structures are recorded in drill chips. •No quantitative measurements of mineralised zones/structures exist, and all drill intercepts are reported as down hole length in metres,true width

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

Page 16

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			unknown.
	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.	•Project location map and plan map of the drill hole locations with respect to each other and with respect to other available data are included in the text. •Sections included in Appendix 3 •Drill hole locations have been determined with hand-held GPS drill hole collar location (Garmin GPS 78s) +/-5m in X/Y/Zdimensions
	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 available relevant information is presented.
	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.	•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. •28 lines (for 657 stations) of 200m or 400m line x 100m station spaced Moving Loop Electromagnetic survey data was collected over the prospect using a 200m loop. Data was collected using a SMARTem receiver and Fluxgate receiver coil at base frequencies of 1.0Hz to 0.25Hz and 28- 30 Amp current. Two conductor plates were modelled. Based on the available drill logs these conductors appear to represent the position of sulphide rich sediment beneath the target mafic- ultramafic intrusion. •Consultants from Omni GeoX delineated the layered units within the sill using geochemical relationships identified by K-means cluster analysis and manual geochemical interpretive workflows. • Pole-Dipole Induced Polarisation (IP) survey data was collected using a pole- dipole array with a SMARTem 16 channel 24-bit receiver system (EMIT). A Search-Ex WB50 50KVA transmitter was utilised with a 100m receiver spacing. • Dipole-Dipole Induced Polarisation (IP) surveydata was collected usinga

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

Page 17

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			dipole-dipole array with a SMARTem 16 channel 24-bit receiver system (EMIT). A Search-Ex WB50 50KVA transmitter was utilised with a 50m receiver spacing. •Modelling and interpretation of IP survey geophysical data was undertaken by Terra Resources •Mapping of the Norseman Project Area prospective for PGE-nickel was undertaken at a 1:10,000 scale by Model Earth Pty Ltd •Consultants from Omni GeoX undertook geochemical analyses of available surface and drill hole samples from the Mission Sill prospect. Ni-Cr ratios were plotted and sued to define the western contact of the Mission Sill intrusive complex.
	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.	•Air core drill testing •RC drill testing •Rhodium assaying of selected intervals

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

Page 18