GALILEO MINING LTD — Investor Presentation 2024

Jan 22, 2024

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

23 January 2024

ASX: GAL

2024 EXPLORATION PROGRAMS LAUNCHED

Corporate Directory

Directors

Chairman & MD Brad Underwood

Non-Executive Director Noel O’Brien

Non-Executive Director Cecilia Camarri

Non-Executive Director Mathew Whyte

Projects

Fraser Range Project Nickel-Copper-Cobalt

Norseman Project Palladium-Nickel-CopperRhodium-Platinum-Gold

Highlights

• Geophysical induced polarisation (IP) survey field preparation has commenced with survey crew scheduled to arrive in early February

• Immediate priority is to target the North Callisto sulphide trend just three kilometres along strike from the Callisto deposit

• Results of December RC drilling of the West Callisto and North Callisto prospects confirm sulphides with mineralised assays;

• 32 metres @ 0.19 g/t 3E[1] , 0.02% Cu, and 0.10% Ni from 92m (NRC489 at West Callisto)

• 16 metres @ 0.22 g/t 3E, 0.05% Cu, and 0.10% Ni from 148m (NRC490 at North Callisto)

• December RC drilling at the Jimberlana South prospect highlights widespread sulphide zones including;

• 24 metres @ 0.21 g/t 3E, 0.15% Cu, and 0.15% Ni from 36m (NRC486)

• 16 metres @ 0.38 g/t 3E, 0.18% Cu, and 0.05% Ni from 152m (NRC488)

==> 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

• Field mapping, environmental surveys, and heritage surveys are also planned for February/March in preparation for extensive 2024 drilling programs

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL, “Galileo” or the “Company”) is pleased to provide an exploration update for the Company’s 100% owned Norseman project in Western Australia.

Galileo’s Managing Director Brad Underwood commented;

“Exploration at our Norseman project is continuing with a strong focus on making fresh discoveries within a newly recognised mineral district. Following the breakthrough discovery of the Callisto deposit in 2022 we are excited to be exploring such a promising region with amazing opportunities for further successes.

Galileo is well funded to undertake its planned exploration activities and we look forward to delivering more results from this highly prospective tenement package.”

(1) 3E = Palladium (Pd) + Platinum (Pt) + Gold (Au); expressed in g/t. See Appendices for JORC details

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

Page 1 | 18

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

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

Preparations for IP surveying at the Norseman project have commenced with geophysical surveyors contracted to begin work in early February. IP geophysical surveying is used to assist in the detection of buried disseminated sulphide mineralisation similar to the Callisto palladium-nickel-copper deposit. The Callisto deposit is contained in a large mafic-ultramafic intrusion with potential for further mineralised intrusions along strike to the north and south as well as at the adjacent Mission Sill prospect.

Initial IP surveying results over the Callisto deposit showed a broad chargeable feature west of the known mineralisation[2] . This target was subsequently drilled in December 2023 and while the drill hole (NRC489) successfully intersected sulphides these did not have the same metal tenor as those at Callisto. Drilling at North Callisto in the same program continued to identify anomalous sulphides (NRC490) in an ultramafic rock analogous to the host rock at Callisto. Initial IP results from Callisto North reveal a pronounced chargeable high within the interpreted sulphide zone that is concentrated in a smaller area than the IP response from the target recently drilled west of Callisto (see Figures 1 through 3). This difference in chargeable response may be related to a greater intensity of sulphide accumulation and an accompanying higher potential for economic mineralisation.

IP surveying at North Callisto has been prioritised to develop drill targets along the identified prospective zone. Further IP surveying has also been planned over the remainder of the 20km of strike around the Callisto deposit and the 12km of prospective strike length at the Mission Sill prospect.

Figure 1 – Chargeability model of IP survey line 6,452,000N showing the location of the sulphide target zone at North Callisto (see Figure 4 for line location)

==> picture [49 x 272] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [487 x 288] intentionally omitted <==

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

Priority
target zone
----- End of picture text -----

(2) See ASX announcement dated 22 November 2023 for details.

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

Page 2 | 18

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

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

Geological mapping is organised to begin in February with the intention of providing a detailed overview of an area that has been subject to very limited modern exploration. Geological and geophysical data will then be integrated to support target generation and drill testing.

Follow up IP results from North Callisto, and initial geological mapping results from the broader project area, are expected to be received in late February/March.

Environmental and heritage surveys are planned for February over exploration areas of primary importance. These surveys are designed to expedite drilling programs once the target generation phase has been completed.

Figure 2 – Chargeability model of IP survey line 6,453,200N showing the location of the sulphide target

zone at North Callisto (see Figure 4 for line location)

==> picture [512 x 212] intentionally omitted <==

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

Priority
target zone
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 3 – Chargeability model of IP survey line 6,448,300N showing the location of the Callisto deposit and the western target zone (see Figure 4 for line location). Note the difference in the pattern and intensity of chargeable responses between North Callisto in Figures 1 and 2 and West Callisto below.

==> picture [324 x 57] intentionally omitted <==

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

Callisto deposit
Drill target tested
location
with NRC489 at
West Callisto
----- End of picture text -----

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

Page 3 | 18

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

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

Figure 4 –– North Callisto prospect anomalous drill results and interpreted sulphide target zone. IP survey lines shown as east-west red hatched lines including the location of the IP lines in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Background is TMI-1VD magnetic image showing geological trends.

==> picture [413 x 604] intentionally omitted <==

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

Figure 2 – IP line
Figure 1 – IP line
Figure 3 – IP line
----- End of picture text -----

Page 4 | 18

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

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

Jimberlana Prospect

The Jimberlana Prospect is an east-west trending ultramafic-mafic dyke with sulphides developed on the northern and southern margins. Drilling by Galileo has intersected wide zones of anomalous PGE-nickel-copper sulphide at the Jimberlana South prospect at the juncture between mafic and ultramafic rock units in contact with the host country rock. Follow up drilling completed in December 2023 has extended the known area of sulphide mineralisation which is open in all directions (refer to Appendices 1 and 2 for anomalous results from recent drilling). The prospective sulphide target zone will be further drill tested to determine whether there are higher grade sulphide zones along strike or at depth. See ASX announcements dated 10[th] August 2023 and 18[th] October 2023 for further details on the Jimberlana prospect.

Figure 5 – Jimberlana South plan map with recent drilling and interpreted sulphide target zone.

==> picture [538 x 369] intentionally omitted <==

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

NRC488: 16m @ 0.2 g/t NRC487: 20m @ 0.19
g/t 3E from 68m
3E from 76m & 16m @
0.38g/t 3E from 152m
Sulphide Target Zone
NRC486: 24m @ 0.21
g/t 3E from 36m and
8m @ 0.14 g/t 3E
from 92m
----- End of picture text -----

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

Page 5 | 18

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

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

Figure 6 –– Prospective ultramafic-mafic sill complexes at Galileo’s Norseman Project. 20km of strike around the Callisto Deposit and 12km of strike around the Mission Sill prospect. IP surveying in 2024 is planned to cover the full extent of the prospective stratigraphy.

==> picture [411 x 603] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 6 | 18

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

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

Figure 7 – Norseman project location map with a selection of regional mines and infrastructure

==> picture [460 x 622] intentionally omitted <==

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

Callisto Discovery
Jimberlana Prospect
Mission Sill Prospect
----- End of picture text -----

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

Page 7 | 18

==> 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 palladium, nickel, copper, and cobalt resources in Western Australia. GAL’s tenements near Norseman are highly prospective for palladium-copper-nickel sulphide deposits as shown by the Callisto discovery. GAL also has Joint Ventures with the Creasy Group over tenements in the Fraser Range which are prospective for nickel-copper 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 278 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] ) -. (see GAL ASX announcement: 2 October 2023)

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 and Silver Knight deposits located between 30 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 [594 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 8 | 18

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

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

Appendix 1: Anomalous RC Drill Hole Intersections

>0.1g/t 3E cut-off over 8 metres (2 x 4m composite samples), maximum one interval internal dilution (4m sample composite). 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)	Copper (%)	Nickel (%)	Prospect
NRC486	36	60	24	0.21	0.16	0.03	0.01	0.15	0.15	Jimberlana South
and	92	100	8	0.14	0.10	0.03	0.01	0.07	0.04	Jimberlana South
NRC487	68	88	20	0.19	0.15	0.03	0.01	0.11	0.10	Jimberlana South
NRC488	76	92	16	0.20	0.15	0.03	0.02	0.15	0.15	Jimberlana South
and	152	168	16	0.38	0.30	0.05	0.03	0.18	0.05	Jimberlana South
NRC489	92	124	32	0.19	0.14	0.04	<0.01	0.02	0.10	Callisto
NRC490	148	164	16	0.22	0.17	0.04	<0.01	0.05	0.10	North Callisto

Appendix 2: Anomalous Drill Hole Collar Details

Hole ID	East	North	RL	Azimuth	Dip	Total Depth (m)	Prospect
NRC486	376056	6441321	328	105	-60	180	Jimberlana South
NRC487	376142	6441369	323	180	-70	180	Jimberlana South
NRC488	376080	6441361	325	180	-70	180	Jimberlana South
NRC489	372201	6448305	364	270	-85	576	Callisto
NRC490	372994	6450752	350	270	-60	228	North Callisto

Note: Easting and Northing coordinates are GDA94 Zone 51.

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

Page 9 | 18

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

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

Appendix 3:

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.	•Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling was used to obtain one metre individually bagged chip samples from pre-collars and RC test drill holes. •Each RC bag was spear sampled to provide a 4-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. •Selected 1m split sample intervals were selected from zones of interest and sent to the laboratory for analysis with remainder of drill hole assayed using 4m composite samples. •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, pulverising and splitting to a representative assay charge pulp. •A 50g Lead Collection Fire Assay with ICP-MS finish is used to determine Au, Pt and Pd results. •A four acid digest is used for sample digest with a 48 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-OES finish. •QAQC standards (blank & reference) and duplicate samples were included routinely with 1 per 20 samples being a standard or duplicate. •Samples have been sent to an independent commercial assay laboratory

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

Page 10 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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). _	•RC drilling was undertaken by Top Drill using a 5.5“ face sampling drill bit. •All RC holes were surveyed during drilling using a GyroMaster north seeking gyro tool
	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.	•RC 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 RC drill holes was done on a visual basis with logging including lithology, grainsize, mineralogy, texture, deformation, mineralisation, alteration, veining, colour and weathering. •Logging of RC drill chips is qualitative and based on the presentation of representative drill chips retained for all 1m sample intervals in the chip trays. •All RC 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 RC assays reported are from 1m cone split samples. •1m cone split samples were collected for all metres at the time of drilling from the drill rig mounted cone splitter. •Selected 1m cone split samples for intervals deemed of interest by the geologist supervising the drill rig were submitted for priority assay. •The samples are dried and pulverised before analysis. •QAQC reference samples and duplicates are routinely submitted with each batch. •The sample size is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style, application and analytical techniques used. •QAQC standards (blank & reference) and duplicate samples were included routinely with 1 per 20 samples being a standard or duplicate. •Samples have been sent to Intertek-

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

Page 11 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			Genalysis, an independent commercial assay laboratory where the samples are weighed to the nearest gram. •The samples are dried, crushed to nominal 2mm and pulverised to nominal 85% passing 75um before analyses. •QAQC reference samples and duplicates are routinely inserted for submission witheachbatch.
	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.	•RC Chip and diamond core samples are analysed for a multielement suite (48 elements) by ICP-OES following a four-acid digest. Assays for Au, Pt, Pd are completed by 50gram Fire Assay with an ICP-MS finish. The assay methods used are considered appropriate. •QAQC standards and duplicates are 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-Genalysis Laboratory Services (Perth) using a four acid (4A/MS48) for multi-element assay and 50gram Fire Assay with an ICP-MS finish for Au, Pt, Pd, (FA50/MS). •A Niton portable handheld XRF (pXRF) has been used only to assist field logging and as a guide for sample selection. No pXRF values are reported.
	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 for validation and upload into the database. •Assays are as reported from the laboratory and stored in the Company database and have not been adjusted in any way.
	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.	•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.

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

Page 12 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			•Downhole depths are in metres measured downhole from the collar location on surface. •Topographic control has an accuracy of 2m based on detailed satellite imagery derived DTM or on laser altimeter data collected from aeromagnetic surveys
	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 was designed to target potential mineralisation as indicated by previous drilling and geological interpretation. •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. •RC 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. •1m cone split RC samples were collected through zones of geological interest.
	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 as interpretation of quantitative measurements of mineralised zones/structures has not yet been completed. •The drilling is oriented either perpendicular to the lithological strike and dip of the target rock or as holes adjacent to previous aircore drilling.
	Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Each sample was put into a tied off calico bag and then several placed in large plastic “polyweave” bags which were zip tied closed. •Samples were delivered directly to the laboratory in 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.

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

Page 13 | 18

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

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 one mining lease 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. •The tenements are in good standing and there arenoknown 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 didnot assayfor PGE.

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

Page 14 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			•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 •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.

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

Page 15 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			Galileo • Galileo commenced exploration on the Norseman Project from 30th June 2004 after sale of the tenements by AGR.
	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 sedimentary rocks, intruded by basic 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 1and 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 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.

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

Page 16 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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 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 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. •Drill hole locations have been determined with hand-held GPS drill hole collar location (Garmin GPS 78s) +/- 5m in X/Y/Z dimensions
	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.

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

Page 17 | 18

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			• 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. •Modelling and interpretation of IP survey geophysical data was undertaken by Terra Resources
	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.	•RC drill testing •IP surveying •Mapping

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

Page 18 | 18