IGO LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2022

Sep 6, 2022

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [107 x 49] intentionally omitted <==

7 September 2022

SIGNIFICANT LITHIUM POTENTIAL IDENTIFIED AT MT ALEXANDER PROJECT

HIGHLIGHTS

• Initial field mapping and rock chip sampling at Mt Alexander confirms numerous outcropping pegmatite dykes occurring in swarms which extend over 15km within St George’s tenements

• The pegmatite dykes strike approximately east-west within a regional corridor interpreted to host the major lithium discovery announced by Red Dirt Metals (ASX: RDT) at its Mt Ida Project to the south-east (see ASX Release by Red Dirt dated 28 September 2021 Mt Ida – A New Lithium Province )

• Assays from initial pegmatite rock chip sampling (45 samples) at Mt Alexander have returned anomalous values for lithium, caesium, tantalum and rubidium supporting the potential for lithium mineralisation to occur at depth

• Values for rubidium – a key indicator element for potential lithium mineralisation in weathered environments – are as high as 0.6% rubidium (Rb) with anomalous Rb seen in initial sampling across the 15km project area

• Mt Ida is emerging as a new lithium province with significant developments in close proximity to St George’s ground including:

• Ongoing discoveries by Red Dirt – see ASX Release by Red Dirt dated 27 July 2022 Sparrow North Pegmatite Discovery

• Exploration drilling by Zenith Minerals (ASX: ZNC) – see ASX Release by Zenith dated 23 May 2022 New Lithium Exploration Project Secured

• Hancock entering into a lithium joint venture – see ASX Release by Hawthorn Resources (ASX: HAW) dated 29 August 2022 Hancock executes agreement for nickel, lithium and copper at Mt Bevan Project

• Systematic rock chip sampling and field mapping of pegmatites is underway at Mt Alexander to finalise targets for drilling in Q4 2022

St George Mining Limited (ASX: SGQ ) (“ St George ” or “ the Company ”) is pleased to announce the significant exploration potential for lithium pegmatite mineralisation extending south from its highgrade Mt Alexander Ni-Cu-PGE Project located in the north-eastern Goldfields of Western Australia.

John Prineas, St George Mining’s Executive Chairman, said:

“The results from our initial field work to scope the lithium potential at Mt Alexander are very encouraging and support a compelling case to accelerate exploration for lithium pegmatite mineralisation. We will advance the lithium exploration in tandem with drill testing several very promising, recently identified nickel targets announced on 1 September 2022.

“We are particularly excited by the strong rubidium values in sample assays received to date – this is an excellent indicator of pegmatites favourable for lithium mineralisation.

ST GEORGE MINING LIMITED ACN 139 308 973 Suite 2, Level 2, 28 Ord Street West Perth WA 6005 |PO Box 100 West Perth WA 6872 www.stgeorgemining.com.au | Phone +61 8 6118 2118

1

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

“The initial results highlight the lithium potential from the extensive pegmatite outcrop at our Project. Mt Alexander has never been explored for lithium, providing St George with an outstanding opportunity to make a greenfields discovery in what has become a lithium exploration hotspot.

“The pegmatites at Mt Alexander may be part of the same system that hosts the major lithium discovery announced by Red Dirt Metals at its Mt Ida Project to the south-east of our ground, which further underpins the lithium prospectivity at our Project.

“The lithium opportunity at Mt Alexander is a perfect complement to our nickel sulphide discoveries at the project, and expands our focus on EV and clean energy metals.”

==> picture [428 x 323] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [215 x 162] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [216 x 162] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 – photos of pegmatite outcrop at Mt Alexander. Rock chip sampling has confirmed a geochemistry favourable for the presence of lithium pegmatite mineralisation.

2

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

Reconnaissance field work at Mt Alexander confirms fertile pegmatites:

Assays for the initial rock chip sampling of pegmatite outcrop at Mt Alexander have confirmed a geochemistry indicative of lithium, caesium, tantalum (LCT) fertile pegmatites.

45 rock chip samples were collected during preliminary mapping in selective areas across the 15km strike of the prospective pegmatite outcrops.

Anomalous values for lithium, caesium and tantalum were noted in numerous samples with up to 157ppm Li, 44ppm Cs and 125ppm Ta. See Table 1 below for a summary of all assays for the rock chip samples collected in Phase 1 of the lithium sampling programme at Mt Alexander.

The pegmatite outcrops at Mt Alexander are generally highly weathered. In this kind of terrain, key indicator elements such as rubidium are considered reliable pathfinders as lithium may have weathered out at surface.

Assays for rock chip samples at Mt Alexander returned highly anomalous values for rubidium of up to 0.6% Rb in a strongly weathered pegmatite.

Anomalous rubidium signifies the presence of a differentiated pegmatite, which is a key feature for indicating the potential of the pegmatite to be lithium bearing.

Field mapping at Mt Alexander has identified numerous east-west striking pegmatite dykes outcropping across an area extending over 15km north-south, along the greenstone belt west of the Copperfield Granite (Figure 2).

This geological setting, including the east-west strike of the pegmatite dykes, is very similar to the lithium discovery by Red Dirt at its Mt Ida Project, along strike south-east from St George’s tenements.

Further sampling and field mapping underway:

St George has commenced a detailed field exploration campaign at Mt Alexander to define targets for drill testing. The field work includes mapping and systematic sampling of the numerous outcropping pegmatite dykes along the belt.

The width at surface of the pegmatites mapped to date is up to 15m though the true thickness is not yet known because of the uncertainty of the dip angle. This will be further clarified by the current field mapping.

Importantly, the prospective pegmatite outcrops have the width and strike that could provide scale to any potential discovery.

Targets for drill testing will be finalised once results of the field campaign are assessed. The maiden drill programme for the lithium targets is scheduled to commence in Q4 2022.

3

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [452 x 536] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 – map of St George’s tenements showing the location of pegmatite outcrop and selected rock chip assays (against magnetic RTP 1VD). Yellow stars denote the Mt Alexander high grade Ni-Cu-PGE deposits discovered to date.

New lithium province:

Since the significant lithium discovery by Red Dirt at its Mt Ida Project in September 2021, the province around Mt Ida has attracted increased investor interest for its lithium potential.

The prospectivity of the province is interpreted to be associated with the large Copperfield Granite which may be a source of the LCT pegmatites at Mt Ida. A prospective LCT corridor is interpreted between the contact with the Copperfield Granite in the east and the Ida Fault in the west. More than 15km of this north-south trending corridor is located on St George’s tenure.

4

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

In addition to St George, Zenith Minerals and Hawthorn Resources – in joint venture with Legacy Iron (ASX: LCY) and Hancock Prospecting – have ground on the western margin of the Copperfield Granite; see Figure 3. Active exploration for lithium is underway at these projects, supporting the credentials of the area as a new lithium province.

The province is located approximately 95km west of Leonora in an established mining region of the north-eastern Goldfields which hosts substantial infrastructure.

==> picture [452 x 538] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 – map showing the location of lithium projects along strike to St George’s Mt Alexander Project (against magnetic RTP 1VD).

5

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1 – Assay results for rock chip samples from pegmatites and granites collected in Phase 1 of the lithium sampling programme at Mt Alexander Project.

Sample ID	Point East	Point North	**Li2O **	**Cs_ppm **	**Ta_ppm **	**Rb_ppm **	Prospect
MARK047	242913	6796431	228	6.7	20.5	1,260	Jailbreak
MARK049	243014	6796377	46	4.2	32	363	Jailbreak
MARK050	242921	6796433	206	5.9	13.3	1,140	Jailbreak
MARK061	242537	6796498	31	0.3	-0.1	2.2	Jailbreak
MARK062	242808	6796446	26	1.4	42.7	101	Jailbreak
MARK063	242923	6796431	87	7.5	4.8	1,580	Jailbreak
MARK064	242942	6796438	24	1.2	125	111	Jailbreak
MARK065	242960	6796493	15	9.5	51.4	1,290	Jailbreak
MARK066	242958	6796610	3	4.8	8.8	909	Jailbreak
MARK067	242857	6796448	4	43.7	4.4	6,030	Jailbreak
MARK074	232402	6806406	11	3.3	0.7	212	Stricklands
MARK075	232481	6806381	6	3.3	4.5	353	Stricklands
MARK076	232539	6806367	4	3.1	5.7	298	Stricklands
MARK077	232574	6806373	15	1.6	1.5	175	Stricklands
MARK079	232528	6806432	18	4.2	1.4	344	Stricklands
MARK081	232599	6806361	4	2	6.8	211	Stricklands
MARK082	232601	6806311	3	4.7	2.4	479	Stricklands
MARK084	232593	6806207	72	5.3	1.6	368	Stricklands
MARK089	232590	6806504	5	1.5	5	409	Stricklands
MARK090	232629	6806337	6	3.3	1.1	535	Stricklands
MARK091	232660	6806250	12	9.5	3.1	916	Stricklands
MARK092	232676	6806202	10	5.4	2.3	517	Stricklands
MARK093	232674	6806184	17	8.3	4.4	713	Stricklands
MARK094	232695	6806122	4	4.5	9.7	479	Stricklands
MARK095	232744	6806489	9	0.5	12.6	54	Stricklands
MARK096	232745	6806477	5	4.5	8.5	545	Stricklands
MARK096	232745	6806477	10	4.5	8.3	537	Stricklands
MARK097	232693	6806448	3	6.7	5.7	753	Stricklands
MARK098	232640	6806410	3	6.5	3.9	793	Stricklands
MARK099	232751	6806145	6	10.8	1	1,100	Stricklands
MARK100	243167	6795927	19	0.3	30.4	11.8	Jailbreak
MARK101	242953	6796272	45	4.5	93.8	638	Jailbreak
MARK102	243099	6796344	95	3.9	62.3	455	Jailbreak
MARK103	243095	6796277	338	1.3	86.9	42.8	Jailbreak
MARK104	242957	6796241	31	0.7	46.4	48.4	Jailbreak
MARK105	240900	6796125	3	0.9	72.6	61.6	Jailbreak
MARK121	234688	6804038	2	4.5	6.3	651	MapArea 1
MARK122	234705	6803989	1	0.7	8.2	103	MapArea 1
MARK123	234740	6804063	4	4.4	0.3	609	MapArea 1
MARK124	234761	6804038	15	3.4	4.1	361	MapArea 1
MARK125	234760	6803975	4	3.3	2.1	554	MapArea 1
MARK126	234688	6803906	2	5.6	4.4	556	MapArea 1
MARK128	233873	6803778	13	7	0.7	1420	MapArea 1
MARK129	234112	6803475	6	3.6	9.7	645	MapArea 1
MARK130	236895	6802051	8	4.5	8.4	547	MapArea 1

6

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

About the Mt Alexander Project:

The Mt Alexander Project is located 120km south south-west of the Agnew-Wiluna Belt, which hosts numerous world-class nickel deposits. The Project comprises six granted exploration licences – E29/638, E29/548, E29/962, E29/954, E29/972 and E29/1041 – which are a contiguous package. A seventh granted exploration licence – E29/1093 – is located to the south-east of the core tenement package.

The Cathedrals, Stricklands, Investigators and Radar nickel-copper-cobalt-PGE discoveries are located on E29/638, which is held in joint venture by St George (75%) and Western Areas Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of IGO Limited (25%). St George is the Manager of the Project, with Western Areas retaining a 25% non-contributing interest (in E29/638 only) until there is a decision to mine. All other Project tenements are owned 100% by St George.

Authorised for release by the Board of St George Mining Limited.

For further information, please contact:
John Prineas	Peter Klinger
Executive Chairman	Media and Investor Relations
St George Mining Limited	Cannings Purple
+61 411 421 253	+61 411 251 540
john.prineas@stgm.com.au	pklinger@canningspurple.com.au

Competent Person Statement:

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Targets, Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves for the Mt Alexander Project is based on information compiled by Mr Dave Mahon, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Mahon is employed by St George Mining Limited to provide technical advice on mineral projects, and he holds performance rights issued by the Company.

Mr Mahon has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Mahon consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Forward Looking Statements:

This announcement includes forward-looking statements that are only predictions and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other important factors, many of which are beyond the control of St George, the directors and the Company’s management. Such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance.

Examples of forward-looking statements used in this announcement include use of the words ‘may’, ‘could’, ‘believes’, ‘estimates’, ‘targets’, ‘expects’, or ‘intends’ and other similar words that involve risks and uncertainties. These statements are based on an assessment of present economic and operating conditions, and on a number of assumptions regarding future events and actions that, as at the date of announcement, are expected to take place.

Actual values, results, interpretations or events may be materially different to those expressed or implied in this announcement. Given these uncertainties, recipients are cautioned not to place reliance on forward-looking statements in the announcement as they speak only at the date of issue of this announcement. Subject to any continuing obligations under applicable law and the ASX Listing Rules, St George does not undertake any

7

ASX / MEDIA RELEASE

==> picture [119 x 55] intentionally omitted <==

obligation to update or revise any information or any of the forward-looking statements in this announcement or any changes in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such forward-looking statement is based.

This announcement has been prepared by St George Mining Limited. The document contains background Information about St George Mining Limited current at the date of this announcement.

The announcement is in summary form and does not purport to be all inclusive or complete. Recipients should conduct their own investigations and perform their own analysis in order to satisfy themselves as to the accuracy and completeness of the information, statements and opinions contained in this announcement.

The announcement is for information purposes only. Neither this announcement nor the information contained in it constitutes an offer, invitation, solicitation or recommendation in relation to the purchase or sale of shares in any jurisdiction. The announcement may not be distributed in any jurisdiction except in accordance with the legal requirements applicable in such jurisdiction. Recipients should inform themselves of the restrictions that apply to their own jurisdiction as a failure to do so may result in a violation of securities laws in such jurisdiction.

This announcement does not constitute investment advice and has been prepared without taking into account the recipient’s investment objectives, financial circumstances or particular needs and the opinions and recommendations in this announcement are not intended to represent recommendations of particular investments to particular persons.

Recipients should seek professional advice when deciding if an investment is appropriate. All securities transactions involve risks, which include (among others) the risk of adverse or unanticipated market, financial or political developments. To the fullest extent of the law, St George Mining Limited, its officers, employees, agents and advisers do not make any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the currency, accuracy, reliability or completeness of any information, statements, opinion, estimates, forecasts or other representations contained in this announcement. No responsibility for any errors or omissions from the announcement arising out of negligence or otherwise is accepted.

8

The following section is provided for compliance with requirements for the reporting of exploration results under the JORC Code, 2012 Edition.

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.	Rock Chip: a sample is collected from in‐situ material at surface adjudged by the geologist on site. The sample between 0.5‐2kg is collected in a marked calico bag for submission for assay. Soils: Each soil sample is taken from a manually excavated pit approximately 300mm deep (depending on the nature of the sampling medium). The loose material at the bottom of the pit is placed through a series of sieves, with the fine fraction of the 180micron sieve placed into pre‐numbered paper geochemical sample envelope. The sample envelopes are then sent to a certified laboratory for assay.
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.	Rock Chips: Samples are collected by hand or dislodged by geo pick of in‐situ material at surface. Soils: Each sample is sourced from the loose material at the bottom of the sample pit which is considered to be representative of the profile being targeted.
	Rock Chips: samples are taken under the discretion of geologists with the intention of taking a representative rock chip sample for the parent rock sampled. Soils: A single sample are taken on a predetermined spacing and collected using uniquely numbered calico bags. Each sample collected for assay typically weighs 50g, and once dried, is prepared for the laboratory. Pulverisation further reduces the particle size with 90% of the material passing 75micron. The sample is then assayed using the Aqua Regia Digest method.
Drilling techniques Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open‐hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diametre, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face‐ sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	N/A
Drill sample recovery Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.	N/A

1

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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
	To date, no sample recovery issues have yet been identified that would impact on potential sample bias in the soil profile or sampling methods.
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.	Each sample is recorded for the lithology, type and nature of the soil. The surface topography and type is recorded at the sample location.
	The logging is both qualitive and quantitive in nature, with sample recovery and volume being recorded,
	N/A
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
	All samples were dry when sampled.
	Samples are dried, crushed and pulverized to produce a homogenous representative sub‐sample for analysis at the laboratory.
	No QAQC are inserted within the submitted samples and are not deemed necessary for this stage of exploration. Internal laboratory QAQC measures are considered sufficient
	The sample material is sourced from the bottom of the pits with efforts made to reduce the amount of surficial ‘float’ material entering the sample. Sieving of the sample helps to homogenise and reduce size fraction of the sample
	The sample sizes are considered to be appropriate to screen for the geochemical signatures of base metal sulphide mineralisation and associated geology.
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.	The soil samples are analysed using an Four Acid Digest. Al, Ca, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, P, S, Ti, V and Zn have been determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Optical Emission Spectrometry. Ag, As, Bi, Cd, Co, Li, Mo, Nb, Ni, Pb, Sb, Sn, Te, W, Cs, Rb, Ta have been determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Mass Spectrometry.

2

Criteria	JORC Code explanation Commentary
	Au, Pt and Pd have been determined by Fire assay. The assay method and detection limits are appropriate for analysis of the elements required.
	For geophysical tools, spectrometres, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parametres used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. A handheld XRF instrument (Olympus Innov‐X Spectrum Analyser) is used to provide an initial assay of the geochemical sample onsite. One reading is taken per sample. The instruments are serviced and calibrated at least once a year. Field calibration of the XRF instrument using standards is periodically performed (usually daily). The handheld XRF results are only used for preliminary assessment and reporting of element compositions, prior to the receipt of assay results from the certified laboratory.
	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. Laboratory QAQC involves the use of internal lab standards using certified reference material (CRMs), blanks and pulp duplicates as part of in‐house procedures. The Company also submits a suite of CRMs, blanks and selects appropriate samples for duplicates. Sample preparation checks for fineness are performed by the laboratory to ensure the grind size of 90% passing 75µm is being attained.
Verification of sampling and assaying	The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. Significant intersections and assays are verified by the Company’s Technical Director and Consulting Field Geologist.
	The use of twinned holes. N/A
	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. Primary data is captured onto a laptop using acQuire software and includes geological logging, sample data and QA/QC information. This data, together with the assay data, is entered into the St George Mining central SQL database which is managed by external consultants.
	Discuss any adjustment to assay data. No adjustments or calibrations will be made to any primary assay data collected for the purpose of reporting assay grades and mineralised intervals. For the geological analysis, standards and recognised factors may be used to calculate the oxide from assayed elements, or to calculate volatile free mineral levels in rocks.
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. The sample locations are determined by using a handheld GPS system with an expected accuracy of +/‐5m for easting, northing and elevation. This is considered adequate for the type and purpose of the surveys.
	Specification of the grid system used. The grid system used is GDA94, MGA Zone 51.
	Quality and adequacy of topographic control. Elevation data has been acquired using DGPS surveying at specific location across the project, including drill collars, and entered into the central database. A topographic surface has been created using this elevation data. The local elevation data is also captured with the handheld GPS when sampling.
Data spacing and distribution	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. The soil samples were taken at 20m intervals along the geochemical survey lines.
	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. N/A

3

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Whether sample compositing has been applied.	No compositing has been applied to the exploration results.
Orientation of	Whether the orientation of sampling achieves	Rock Chips: The rock chip samples are taken at the discretion of the
data in relation	unbiased sampling of possible structures and	geologist on site. However, the orientation of key structures may be
to geological	the extent to which this is known, considering	noted whilst mapping exercises are undertaken.
structure	the deposit type.	The soil samples are taken at regular intervals, at a near
		perpendicular orientation (unless otherwise stated). However, the
		orientation of key structures may be locally variable and any
		relationship to potential mineralisation has yet to be identified.
	If the relationship between the drilling	No orientation based sampling bias has been identified in the data
	orientation and the orientation of key	to date.
	mineralised structures is considered to have
	introduced a sampling bias, this should be
	assessed and reported if material.
Sample	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Chain of Custody is managed by the Company until samples pass to a
security		duly certified assay laboratory for subsampling and assaying. The
		sample bags are stored on secure sites and delivered to the assay
		laboratory by the Company or a competent agent. When in transit,
		they are kept in locked premises. Transport logs have been set up to
		track the progress of samples. The chain of custody passes upon
		delivery of the samples to the assay laboratory.
Audits or	The results of any audits or reviews of sampling	Sampling techniques and procedures are regularly reviewed
reviews	techniques and data.	internally, as is the data. The soils programme has been reviewed by
		third parties and consultant geologists.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in section 1 will also apply to this section where relevant)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	Type, name/reference number, location and	The Mt Alexander Project is comprised of six granted Exploration
Tenement and	ownership including agreements or material	Licences (E29/638, E29/548, E29/954, E29/962, E29/972 and
Land Status	issues with third parties including joint ventures,	E29/1041). Tenement E29/638 is held in Joint Venture between St
	partnerships, overriding royalties, native title	George (75% interest) and Western Areas (25% interest). E29/638
	interests, historical sites, wilderness or national	and E29/548 are also subject to a royalty in favour of a third party
	park and environmental settings.	that is outlined in the ASX Release dated 17 December 2015 (as
		regards E29/638) and the ASX release dated 18 September 2015 (as
		regards E29/548).
	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.	No environmentally sensitive sites have been identified on the tenements. A registered Heritage site known as Willsmore 1 (DAA identification 3087) straddles tenements E29/548 and E29/638. All
		tenements are in good standing with no known impediments.
Exploration	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration	Exploration on tenements E29/638 and E29/962 has been largely for
Done by Other	by other parties.	komatiite‐hosted nickel sulphides in the Mt Alexander Greenstone
Parties		Belt. Exploration in the northern section of E29/638 (Cathedrals Belt)
		and also limited exploration on E29/548 has been for komatiite‐
		hosted Ni‐Cu sulphides in granite terrane. No historic exploration has
		been identified on E29/954 or E29/972.
		Mafic‐Ultramafic intrusion related high grade nickel‐copper‐PGE
		sulphides were discovered at the Mt Alexander Project in 2008.
		Drilling was completed to test co‐incident electromagnetic (EM) and
		magnetic anomalies associated with nickel‐PGE enriched gossans in
		the northern section of current tenement E29/638. The drilling
		identified high grade nickel‐copper mineralisation in granite‐hosted
		and East‐West orientated ultramafic units and the discovery was
		named the Cathedrals Prospect.

4

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style of	The Mt Alexander Project is at the northern end of a western
	mineralisation	bifurcation of the Mt Ida Greenstones. The greenstones are bound to
		the west by the interpreted Ida Fault, a significant Craton‐scale
		structure that marks the boundary between the Kalgoorlie Terrane
		(and Eastern Goldfields Superterrane) to the east and the Youanmi
		Terrane to the west.
		The Mt Alexander Project is prospective for further high‐grade nickel‐
		mineralisation (both komatiite and mafic‐ultramafic intrusive hosted)
		and also precious metal mineralisation (i.e. orogenic gold) that is
		typified elsewhere in the Yilgarn Craton.
Drill hole	A summary of all information material to the
information	understanding of the exploration results	Drill hole collar locations are shown in the maps and tables included
	including tabulation of the following	in the body of the relevant ASX releases.
	information for all Material drill holes:
	• Easting and northing of the drill hole collar
	•Elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation
	above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar
	• Dip and azimuth of the hole
	• Down hole length and interception depth
	• Hole length
Data	In reporting Exploration Results, weighting	Reported assay intersections are length and density weighted.
aggregation	averaging techniques, maximum and/or	Significant intersections are determined using both qualitative (i.e.
methods	minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high	geological logging) and quantitative (i.e. lower cut‐off) methods.
	grades) and cut‐off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	For massive sulphide intersections, the nominal lower cut‐off is 2% for either nickel or copper. For disseminated, blebby and matrix
		sulphide intersections the nominal lower cut‐off for nickel is 0.3%.
	Where aggregated intercepts incorporate short	Any high‐grade sulphide intervals internal to broader zones of
	lengths of high grade results and longer lengths	sulphide mineralisation are reported as included intervals.
	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.	Any disseminated, matrix, brecciated or stringer sulphides with (usually) >1% nickel or copper on contact with massive sulphide mineralisation are grouped with the massive sulphides for calculating significant intersections and the massive sulphide
		mineralisation is reported as an including intersection.
	The assumptions used for any reporting of	No metal equivalent values are used for reporting exploration
	metal equivalent values should be clearly	results.
	stated.
Relationship	These relationships are particularly important in	Assay intersections are reported as down hole lengths. Drill holes are
between	the reporting of exploration results. If the	planned as perpendicular as possible to intersect the target EM plates
mineralisation	geometry of the mineralisation with respect to	and geological targets so downhole lengths are usually interpreted to
widths and	the drill hole angle is known, its nature should	be near true width.
intercept	be reported. If it is not known and only the down
lengths	hole lengths are reported, there should be a
	clear statement to this effect.
diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and	A prospect location map, cross section and long section are shown
	tabulations of intercepts should be included for	in the body of relevant ASX Releases.
	any significant discovery being reported. These
	should include, but not be limited to a plane
	view of drill hole collar locations and
	appropriate sectional views.
Balanced	Where comprehensive reporting of all	Reports on recent exploration can be found in ASX Releases that are
Reporting	Exploration Results is not practical,	available on our website atwww.stgm.com.au:
	representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	The exploration results reported are representative of the mineralisation style with grades and/or widths reported in a consistent manner.

5

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Other	Other exploration data, if meaningful and	All material or meaningful data collected has been reported.
substantive	material, should be reported including (but not
exploration	limited to): geological observation; geophysical
data	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.
Further Work	The nature and scale of planned further work	A discussion of further exploration work underway is contained in the
	(e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth	body of recent ASX Releases.
	extensions or large – scale step – out drilling).Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main	Further exploration will be planned based on ongoing drill results, geophysical surveys and geological assessment of prospectivity.
	geological interpretations and future drilling
	areas, provided this information is not
	commercially sensitive.

6