GALILEO MINING LTD — Regulatory Filings 2021

Jan 12, 2021

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

13 January 2021 ASX: GAL

NORSEMAN EXPLORATION UPDATE

Corporate Directory

Directors

Chairman & MD Brad Underwood

Non-Executive Director Noel O’Brien

Non-Executive Director Mathew Whyte

Projects

Fraser Range Project Nickel-Copper

Norseman Project Cobalt-Nickel-Copper

==> picture [121 x 123] 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

Highlights

• Nickel sulphide exploration at Norseman is progressing well with multielement assays received from 1,620 unique sample locations (1,726 assays in total)

• Interpretation and evaluation of results is ongoing with a 52 element, raw geochemical data set for each sample

• Integration of new hyperspectral data with existing data sets is expected to generate focus areas for nickel targeting

• Further details regarding follow-up exploration programs at the Norseman Project, including any planned drilling programs, will be released to the market when available

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL, “Galileo” or the “Company”) is pleased to provide a summary of assay data received from soil sampling undertaken at its Norseman Project in Western Australia.

Soil sampling at Norseman was primarily undertaken to identify areas with prospectivity for nickel sulphide mineralisation. Integration of soil sampling data with geophysical data, hyperspectral data, geological data, topographical data, and satellite imagery will now be undertaken to give the sample assays context and meaning.

As announced on the 15[th] of December 2020, a specialist remote sensing company has been contracted to collect hyperspectral data and to integrate the new mineral mapping information with existing data sets, including the recently received soil assays. The initial phase of this contract has been completed with the collection of the airborne data. Data interpretation utilising machine learning and Artificial Intelligence (AI) software is ongoing.

A follow up exploration program will be devised upon the completion of all data integration and analysis. This is expected to occur in late February with the results to be utilised in the planning of drill programs scheduled for Q2 2021.

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

Page 1 | 16

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

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

The Norseman Project occurs at the southern end of the prolific Norseman-Wiluna greenstone belt. Numerous nickel, gold, and lithium mines occur in the area with Figure 1 indicating the location of selected mine sites and the large amount of existing infrastructure in the region. The closest significant nickel occurrences occur 40 to 50 km along strike to the north where the Cassini, Mariners, and Wannaway deposits are located. Galileo owns 100% of two exploration licenses, 18 prospecting licenses and one mining lease, covering 278km[2] of ground prospective for nickel, cobalt, copper, lithium, and gold.

1,726 soil samples (1,620 unique sample locations) targeting areas with potential for nickel were recently collected and analysed - see Figure 2 and Appendix 1 for location/results of soil sampling programs.

Table 1 contains a summary of selected elements (nickel, platinum, palladium, copper and gold) with respect to the average crustal abundance of those elements within basalt. This provides a preliminary guide to what might be considered anomalous within the new data set. However, the data will need to be integrated with other meaningful geological and geophysical data sets to provide context to any anomalism which may be considered for follow up work.

The maximum assay for nickel was 3,945ppm (0.39% Ni), for platinum the maximum was 173 ppb (0.17 g/t), for palladium the maximum was 314 ppb (0.31 g/t), for copper the maximum was 640ppm (0.06%) and for gold the maximum was 83 ppb (0.08 g/t).

Table 1: Summary of Soil Sampling Assay Results from the Norseman Project

ELEMENT	ACA*	<2.5 x ACA*	>2.5 to 5 x ACA*	>5 X ACA*	MAXIMUM ASSAY
Nickel	160	</=400ppm	>400ppm to 800ppm	>800ppm
Number of Samples		1,250	238	132	3,945 ppm Ni
Percent of Total Samples		77%	15%	8%
Platinum	20	</=50ppb	>50ppb to 100ppb	>100ppb
Number of Samples		1,552	62	6	173 ppb Pt
Percent of Total Samples		96%	3%	<1 %
Palladium	20	</=50ppb	>50ppb to 100ppm	>100ppb
Number of Samples		1,491	102	27	314 ppb Pd
Percent of Total Samples		92%	6%	2%
Copper	100	</=250ppm	>250ppm to 500ppm	>500ppm
Number of Samples		1,601	16	3	640 ppm Cu
Percent of Total Samples		99%	<1 %	<1 %
Gold	4	</=10ppb	>10ppb to 20ppb	>20ppb
Number of Samples		1,320	199	101	83 ppb Au
Percent of Total Samples		81%	12%	7%
TOTAL SAMPLES		1,620

• Refers to element Average Crustal Abundance for Basalt. Source:Table 4.4 pp79-80 AusIMM Field Geologists Manual. 5th Edition Monograph 9

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

Page 2 | 16

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

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

Figure 1 – Norseman Project Location Map with Selection of Regional Mines and Infrastructure

==> picture [467 x 630] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 3 | 16

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

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

Figure 2 – Soil Sampling Locations at the Norseman Project. Red Ellipses Show Outline of Soil Sampling Programs.

==> picture [465 x 623] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 4 | 16

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

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

DiMap Spectral GmbH, a German founded remote sensing and data integration specialist, has been contracted to collect and interpret multispectral, hyperspectral data. The data collection phase of this contract has now been undertaken with the airborne survey completed. This data will be used for remote sensing mineral analyses and then prepared for the interface into the machine learning procedures. Further input layers include detailed 50m airborne magnetic and radiometric data, gravity, EM, drill hole geology/assays, and soil assay data. Drill hole data is used for the determination of ore bearing domains and for specification of training areas of the machine learning process.

The key deliverable from the process is a mineral prospectivity map highlighting zones within the project area with the greatest potential for mineralisation. The timetable for completion is three months from data collection (completed in December) with results expected in late February. Results will be utilised in the planning of drill programs scheduled for Q2 2021.

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

Page 5 | 16

==> 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 nickel, copper and cobalt resources in Western Australia. GAL has Joint Ventures with the Creasy Group over tenements in the Fraser Range which are highly prospective for nickel-copper sulphide deposits similar to the operating Nova mine. GAL also 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 3 below).

Figure 3: 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 | 16

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

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

Appendix 1: Soil Sample Thematic Maps

Nickel in soil samples at the Norseman Project (ppm)

==> picture [128 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [490 x 514] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 7 | 16

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

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

Platinum in soil samples at the Norseman Project (ppb)

==> picture [91 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [490 x 513] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 8 | 16

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

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

Palladium in soil samples at the Norseman Project (ppb)

==> picture [92 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [490 x 511] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 9 | 16

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

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

Copper in soil samples at the Norseman Project (ppm)

==> picture [98 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [490 x 513] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 10 | 16

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

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

Gold in soil samples at the Norseman Project (ppb)

==> picture [83 x 73] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [490 x 512] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 11 | 16

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

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

Appendix 2:

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.	•Soil samples were collected from holes approximately 15cm depth. •A nominal 200gram sample was collected for assay. •All samples were submitted to Intertek- Genalysis Laboratories, Kalgoorlie for preparation. Sample digest and assay was completed at Intertek-Genalysis, Perth. •QAQC standards (blank & reference) and field duplicate samples were included routinely per 50 samples for soil sampling with field duplicates to ensure sample representivity. •Each sample was dried, crushed and pulverised to nominal 85% passing 75µm. •Soil sampling – Gold and 51 other elements (52 element suite) were assayed by Aqua Regia digest with ICP-MS finish (method AR25/MS52). •The assay suite included; Au, Ag, Al, As, B, Ba, Be, Bi, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Fe, Ga, Hf, Hg, In, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb, Pd, Pt, Rb, Re, S, Sb, Sc, Se, Sn, Sr, Ta, Te, Th,Ti,Tl, U,V,W,Y,Zn,Zr.
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). _	•N/A. Soil sampling only.
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.	•N/A. Soil sampling only.
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.	•A general site log was collected and comprised a general site regolith description, visual sample colour log and a nominal scale log of intensity of sample reaction to 10%Hydrochloric

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

Page 12 | 16

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant _intersections logged. _	Acid. •Logging is qualitative and based on the presentation of the entire sample in a collection tray.
	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.	•N/A. Soil sampling only. •Soil samples were taken from approximately 15cm depth, a nominal 200-gram sample of the whole soil from 10-15cm depth was collected for assay. Sample sizes are industry standard and considered appropriate. •The samples were dried and pulverised to nominal 85% passing 75µm. This is considered to appropriately homogenise the sample to allow subsampling for analysis. •QAQC standards (blank & reference) and field duplicate samples were included routinely per 50 samples for soil sampling with field duplicates. •Intertek-Genalysis conducted internal check samples as part of batch QAQC. Field duplicates soil samples demonstrated representivity of samples.
	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.	•Soil samples were analysed for a multielement suite (52 elements) by ICP-MS following a 25gram pulp charge Aqua Regia digest. •The assay methods used are considered appropriate. •Certified QAQC standards and blanks were routinely included at a rate of 1 every 50 samples. Field duplicates were collected and submitted 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) with digest and assay conducted by Intertek-Genalyis Laboratory Services (Perth) using an Aqua Regia digest with ICP-MS finish (AR25/MS52).
	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.	•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 Exploration Manager for QAQC validation and then submitted to Galileo’s database manager (CSA Global - Perth)for further validation

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

Page 13 | 16

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	and upload into the database. •Assays are as reported from the laboratory and stored in the Company 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.	•Sample sites are located using handheld GPS. •All co-ordinates are in MGA94 datum, Zone 51. •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.	•Sample site spacing was variable, appropriate to early-stage sampling. •Typical site spacing was 200m line spacing and 100 or 50m site spacing along lines. First pass sampling areas were completed on 400m line spacing by 100m along line site spacing. •N/A. No resource estimate has been completed. •Sample compositing has not been applied.
	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.	•Sampling traverses are east/west oriented perpendicular to the general strike of regional structure and stratigraphy (dominantly north-south) as determined from regional aeromagnetic and government mapping data.
	Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Each sample was put into a tied off Kraft paper geochemical sample bag. And placed in a cardboard pulp box and taped closed for transport to the laboratory. •Samples were delivered directly to the laboratory in Kalgoorlie by Galileo’s soilsampling 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.

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

Page 14 | 16

==> 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 278km2 •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. •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.	•Historic soil samples have previously been collected adjacent to, and in some instances within, portions of the current soil sampling areas however the historic data has not yet been validated or integrated into the current soils program
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•The Norseman target geology and mineralisation style is komatiite nickel sulphide 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”
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. _	•Not applicable

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

Page 15 | 16

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	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. _	•Not applicable
	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’). _	•Not applicable
	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 soil sampling program location including local geology •Regional map of the area with regional geology and known areas of economic mineralisation .
	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. _	•Summary of results is 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.	•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.
	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.	•Integration of soil sample assays with geophysical data, hyperspectral data, geological data, topographical data, and satellite imagery to give the sample assays context and meaning

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

Page 16 | 16