LEGEND MINING LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2020

Nov 8, 2020

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:LEG

9 November 2020 ASX Announcement

Assay Results from RKDD023 and RKRC023-027 at Mawson

• Assays received for massive and semi-massive sulphide in RKDD023

• 24.7m @ 1.35% Ni, 0.77% Cu, 0.11% Co from 219.2m

  • Incl. 3.05m @ 1.11% Ni, 0.81% Cu, 0.09% Co, 0.19g/t Pt from 219.2m

  • and 8.2m @ 1.83% Ni, 0.86% Cu, 0.15% Co from 228.7m

• 2.85m @ 1.71% Ni, 1.23% Cu, 0.14% Co from 237.75m

• Assays received from five RC holes in the Eastern Geochemical Anomaly

• Diamond drilling of DHTEM targets ongoing

Legend Mining Limited (Legend) is pleased to announce assays received from both diamond and RC drillholes at the Mawson prospect within the Rockford Project, Fraser Range, Western Australia (see Figure 3). Details are in the body of this announcement along with an update on current diamond drilling progress.

Legend Managing Director Mr Mark Wilson said: “The assays from diamond hole 023 are in line with our expectations from visual observations and structural interpretations of the core. The key objective of the ongoing work at Mawson is to look for and find the primary source of this mineralisation.

“The anomalous RC assays returned from the three holes in the Eastern Geochemical Anomaly have added to the geochemical and geology datasets for this area. Ultimately, the assimilation of all these datasets will lead to diamond drill targets over this eastern area of Mawson.

“As per the detail in the body of this announcement, the current drilling of the two offhole conductors, announced to the ASX on 21 October 2020, is a work in progress.”

==> picture [500 x 186] intentionally omitted <==

Massive Ni-Cu sulphide mineralisation from RKDD023 from 228.6m-233.0m, NQ2

P a g e 1

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

TECHNICAL DISCUSSION

RKDD023 Assay Results

Assay results have been received from diamond drillhole RKDD023 at Mawson (see Figure 1, Table 1, and Appendix 1). Diamond drillhole RKDD023 was designed to test a very strong 25,00030,000S offhole conductor identified from diamond drillhole RKDD021. As reported to the ASX on 8 September 2020, RKDD023 intersected a wide zone of Ni-Cu mineralisation over 90m downhole from 216.45m to 310.4m in an interleaved intrusive and metasedimentary assemblage, before finishing in metasedimentary package. The host intrusive is a mixture of olivine gabbronorite and gabbronorite, with massive, semi-massive, net textured, matrix, heavy disseminated, disseminated, and blebby Ni-Cu sulphides throughout. The massive Ni-Cu sulphide accumulations from 221.9223.75m, 228.7-236.9m, and 237.8-240.7m downhole occur within the interleaved metasedimentary units, with distinctive brecciated margins, indicating sulphide mobilisation. This textural observation, combined with the evidence of limited sulphide extension veining, suggests the mineralised zone intersected is remobilised and proximal to the source. Assay results received for RKDD023 confirm the field observations of remobilised sulphide, suggesting the mineralisation intersected is not the primary source.

==> picture [479 x 277] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Mawson Diamond Drillhole Locations

P a g e 2

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1: RKDD023 - Assay Results

Hole	From	To	Int.	Ni%	Cu%	Co%	Sulphide Mode
RKDD023	175.1	195.0	19.9	0.17	0.09	0.02	Disseminated,blebby
RKDD023	219.2	243.9	24.7	1.35	0.77	0.11	Massive, semi-massive, heavy disseminated, disseminated
Incl.	228.7	236.9	8.2	1.83	0.86	0.15	Massive Sulphide
RKDD023	251.85	311.0	59.15	0.32	0.19	0.03	Disseminated, heavy disseminated, net-textured, matrix, semi-massive

RKDD023: 638,580E / 6,598,655N, GDA94 Zone 51. 58.5[0] dip, 088[0] azimuth, EOH=399.8m. See Appendix 2 for Legend Field Logging Guidelines

RKRC023-RKRC027 Assay Results

Assay results have been received from drillholes RKRC023 through RKRC027 over the eastern geochemical anomaly. Three of the five holes returned anomalous Ni-Cu-Co intercepts (see Table 2 & Figure 2). Results confirm drilling visual observations that primary Ni-Cu mineralisation continues below the aircore drilling into the primary intrusive rock suite. Geological, geochemical, and geophysical datasets continue to be integrated on receival of data to design and target potential Ni-Cu sulphide accumulations with diamond drilling.

Table 2: Mawson RC - Assay Results

Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results	Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results	Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results	Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results	Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results	Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results	Table 2: Mawson RC- Assay Results
Hole	From	To	Interval	Ni%	Cu%	Co%
RKRC023	63	87	24	0.20	0.03	0.02
RKRC025	53	67	14	0.15	0.11	0.02
RKRC027	64	105	41	0.30	0.10	0.02

==> picture [479 x 274] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: DD and RC Drilling Locations over Mawson Aircore Geology Interpretation

P a g e 3

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Diamond Drilling Update

Diamond drilling of the offhole DHTEM conductors from RKDD025 and RKDD026 as announced to the ASX on 21 October 2020 has been disrupted by unforeseen weather and associated logistical issues.

The first proposed hole was to test the 6,000-15,000S conductor (see Figure 1). The hole did not intersect the conductor at the modelled depth. Subsequent DHTEM in the hole has suggested the feature is below the bottom of the hole and geophysical advice is the hole be extended. This is scheduled once the current hole (testing the 25,000-70,000S conductor off hole from RKDD025 – see Figure 1) is completed.

Mawson Future Programmes

• Diamond drill testing of DHTEM targets generated from RKDD023, RKDD025, and RKDD026.

• Ongoing DD drilling programme targeting known sulphide mineralisation, geochemical anomalies, DHTEM targets, and structural targets.

• Ongoing integration of DD, RC, aircore and geophysical datasets to evolve 3D emplacement model of Mawson and assist future diamond drillhole planning/design.

==> picture [422 x 367] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Rockford Project – Mawson Location

Authorised by Mark Wilson, Managing Director.

P a g e 4

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1 – RKDD023 Summary Drill Log of Ni-Cu Mineralisation

==> picture [517 x 534] intentionally omitted <==

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

Summary drill log from 216.45m to 310.4m of Ni-Cu mineralisation
Sulphide %
Hole Interval Sulphide Mode Sulphide Type
(Visual Estimate)
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- 1-5%
RKDD023 216.45 – 219.2m [Heavy disseminated, ]
Massive pentlandite >80%
Vein, Stringer, Semi- Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- 1-5%
RKDD023 219.2 – 221.9m
massive pentlandite >40% to <80%
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 221.9 – 223.75m Massive Sulphide >80%
pentlandite
Semi-massive, >40% to <80%
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 223.75 – 228.7m Matrix, Heavy 20-40%
Disseminated pentlandite 5-20%
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 228.7 – 236.9m Massive Sulphide >80%
pentlandite
236.9 – 237.8m Heavy disseminated, Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- 5-20%
RKDD023
Semi-massive pentlandite >40% to <80%
237.8 – 240.7m Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 Massive Sulphide >80%
pentlandite
Heavy disseminated, 5-20%
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 240.7 – 243.95m Semi-massive, >40% to <80%
Disseminated pentlandite 1-5%
Heavy
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- 5-20%
RKDD023 243.95 – 247.3m Disseminated, Net-
pentlandite 20-40%
textured
Heavy 5-20%
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 251.8 – 257.05m Disseminated, Net- 20-40%
textured, Massive pentlandite >80%
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- 1-5%
RKDD023 257.05 – 263.1m [Disseminated, ]
Blebby, Matrix pentlandite 20-40%
>40% to <80%
Semi-massive,
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- >80%
RKDD023 263.1 – 267.2m Massive, Matrix,
pentlandite 20-40%
Heavy Disseminated 5-20%
Disseminated, Net- Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- 1-5%
RKDD023 271.2 – 275.1m
textured pentlandite 20-40%
281.4 – 284.0m Semi-massive, Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite- >40% to <80%
RKDD023
Massive pentlandite >80%
Disseminated, Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 284.0 – 305.7m 1-5%
Blebby pentlandite
Pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-
RKDD023 305.7 – 310.4m Disseminated 1-5%
pentlandite
----- End of picture text -----

Cautionary Statement: The sulphide percentage is a visual estimate of total sulphide.

P a g e 5

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2 - Legend Field Logging Guidelines

Legend Field Logging Guidelines

==> picture [221 x 92] intentionally omitted <==

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

Sulphide Mode Percentage Range
Disseminated & blebby 1-5%
Heavy Disseminated 5-20%
Matrix 20-40%
Net-Textured 20-40%
Semi-Massive >40% to <80%
Massive >80%
----- End of picture text -----

Appendix 3 – Mawson RC & Diamond Drillhole Details

==> picture [490 x 94] intentionally omitted <==

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

Hole Type MGA94-East MGA94-North RL Azimuth Dip Total Depth
RKDD021 DD 638,605 6,598,630 202 090 -60 483.2m
RKDD023 DD 638,580 6,598,655 202 088 -58.5 399.8m
RKRC023 RC 639,430 6,598,800 204 270 -80 310.0m
RKRC025 RC 639,157 6,598,696 201 270 -80 306.0m
RKRC027 RC 639,328 6,598,701 204 270 -80 320.0m
----- End of picture text -----

P a g e 6

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Oliver Kiddie, a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and a full-time employee of Legend Mining Limited. Mr Kiddie 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 Kiddie consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this report that relates to Legend’s Exploration Results is a compilation of previously released to ASX by Legend Mining (14 August 2020, 27 August 2020, 8 September 2020, and 21 October 2020) and Mr Oliver Kiddie consents to the inclusion of these Results in this report. Mr Kiddie has advised that this consent remains in place for subsequent releases by Legend of the same information in the same form and context, until the consent is withdrawn or replaced by a subsequent report and accompanying consent. Legend confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcements and that all material assumptions and technical parameters in the market announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed. Legend confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcements.

Forward Looking Statements

This announcement contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of securities laws of applicable jurisdictions. Forward-looking statements can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “may”, “will”, “expect”, “intend”, “plan”, “estimate”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “continue”, “objectives”, “outlook”, “guidance” or other similar words, and include statements regarding certain plans, strategies and objectives of management and expected financial performance. Forward-looking statements are provided as a general guide only and should not be relied upon as an indication or guarantee of future performance. These forwardlooking statements are based upon a number of estimates, assumptions and expectations that, while considered to be reasonable by Legend Mining Limited, are inherently subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies, involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Legend Mining Limited and any of its officers, employees, agents or associates.

Actual results, performance or achievements may vary materially from any projections and forward-looking statements and the assumptions on which those statements are based. Exploration potential is conceptual in nature, to date there has been insufficient exploration to define a Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the determination of a Mineral Resource. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and Legend Mining Limited assumes no obligation to update such information made in this announcement, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of this announcement.

Visit www.legendmining.com.au for further information and announcements.

For more information contact:

Mr Mark Wilson Mr Oliver Kiddie Managing Director Executive Director Ph: +61 8 9212 0600 Ph: +61 8 9212 0600

P a g e 7

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 4:

Legend Mining Ltd – Diamond & RC Drilling Programme Mawson Prospect JORC Code Edition 2012: Table 1

Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data

==> picture [475 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Appendix 4: Legend Mining Ltd – Diamond & RC Drilling Programme Mawson Prospect JORC Code Edition 2012: Table 1 Section1:Sampling Techniques andData	Appendix 4: Legend Mining Ltd – Diamond & RC Drilling Programme Mawson Prospect JORC Code Edition 2012: Table 1 Section1:Sampling Techniques andData	Appendix 4: Legend Mining Ltd – Diamond & RC Drilling Programme Mawson Prospect JORC Code Edition 2012: Table 1 Section1:Sampling Techniques andData
Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. 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 (e.g. ‘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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	DD Drilling Diamond drilling was used to produce half HQ and NQ2 core samples (between 0.2m-1.2m) which were submitted to Intertek Genalysis Laboratory Services Perth for geochemical analysis. Sample intervals were based on geology and style of sulphide occurrence. QAQC standard samples were included. Samples were analysed for: Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Bi, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Dy, Er, Eu, Fe, Ga, Gd, Ge, Hf, Ho, In, K, La, Li, Lu, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Nd, Ni, P, Pb, Pr, Rb, Re, S, Sb, Sc, Se, Sm, Sn, Sr, Ta, Tb, Te, Th, Ti, Tl, Tm, U, V, W, Y, Yb, Zn, Zr by methods 4A/MS48R and 4AH/OE (four acid digest with ICP-MS finish). Au, Pt, Pd by method FA50/MS (fire assay with an ICP-MS finish). RC Drilling RC drilling was undertaken along E-W traverses with holes nominally spaced 100-150m apart testing geochemical, geological, and gravity targets. Each metre drilled was collected in a green plastic bag (20-30kg) with a 1m representative sample (2-3kg) also collected via a rig mounted cone splitter. The transported cover in each hole was not sampled. The residual and fresh portion of each drillhole was sampled as 4m composites to the end of hole. Where significant sulphides were observed, 1m samples were taken All samples weighed 2-3kg. QAQC standards and duplicate samples were included routinely (approximately 1 each every 50 samples). Au was analysed by fire assay with an ICP-OES finish. A four acid digest with ICP-MS finish was used for a multi-element suite including: Ag, Al, As,Ba,Be,Bi, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr,

P a g e 8

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [475 x 687] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Cs, Cu, Dy, Er, Eu, Fe, Ga, Gd, Ge,
Hf, Ho, In, K, La, Li, Lu, Mg, Mn, Mo,
Na, Nb, Nd, Ni, P, Pb, Pr, Rb, Re, S,
Sb, Sc, Se, Sm, Sn, Sr, Ta, Tb, Te,
Th, Ti, Tl, Tm, U, V, W, Y, Yb, Zn, Zr.
Drilling techniques • Drill type (e.g. core, reverse  Diamond drillhole RKDD023 was pre-
circulation, open-hole hammer, collared using the mud rotary
rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, technique. No samples were
sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. recovered from the mud rotary pre-
core diameter, triple or standard collar.
tube, depth of diamond tails,  The remainder of the hole was
face-sampling bit or other type, diamond drilled with HQ into
whether core is oriented and if solid/fresh rock, followed by NQ2
so, by what method, etc.). coring to end of the hole.
 Orlando Drilling completed the DD
drilling.
 RC drilling utilised a face sampling
5.5 inch bit and was completed by
Orlando Drilling.
Drill sample recovery • Method of recording and  Drill core sample recoveries for the
assessing core and chip sample HQ and NQ2 core were measured
recoveries and results and recorded in drill log sheets.
 Drill core orientation was recorded
assessed.
when possible at the end of each drill
• Measures taken to maximise
run (line on bottom of core).
sample recovery and ensure  No relationship has been determined
representative nature of the between sample recoveries and
samples. grade and there is insufficient data to
determine if there is a sample bias
• Whether a relationship exists
 Sample recoveries are visually
between sample recovery and
estimated for each metre by the
grade and whether sample bias
supervising rig geologist with poor or
may have occurred due to
wet samples recorded in drill and
preferential loss/gain of
fine/coarse material. sample log sheets.
 The sample cyclone is routinely
cleaned at the end of each rod and
when deemed necessary.
Logging • Whether core and chip samples  Geological logging of DD and RC
have been geologically and drillholes included; lithology,
geotechnically logged to a level grainsize, texture, structure,
of detail to support appropriate deformation, mineralisation, alteration,
Mineral Resource estimation, veining, colour, weathering.
mining studies and metallurgical  Drill core logging is qualitative and
studies. based on drill core retained in core
trays.
• Whether logging is qualitative or
 The drillholes were logged in its
quantitative in nature. Core (or
entirety.
costean, channel, etc.)
photography.
• The total length and percentage
of the relevant intersections
logged.
Sub-sampling • If core, whether cut or sawn and DD Samples
techniques and sample whether quarter, half or all core  Selected sawn half HQ and NQ2 core
preparation taken. samples based on geology and
sulphide occurrence were submitted
for geochemical analysis.
----- End of picture text -----

P a g e 9

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
	• 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.	The size of the sample from the diamond drilling method is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style sought and for the analytical technique used. Sample preparation includes; drying, crushing and pulverising before analysis. QAQC standard samples were included. RC Samples 4m composite samples were collected using a PVC spear (2-3kg). 1m samples comprised 1m rig splits taken directly from the rig mounted cone splitter. Both wet and dry samples were collected. The samples are dried and pulverised before analysis. QAQC reference samples and duplicates were routinely submitted with each sample batch. The size of the sample is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style sought and for the analytical technique used.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.	Core samples were analysed for: Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Bi, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Dy, Er, Eu, Fe, Ga, Gd, Ge, Hf, Ho, In, K, La, Li, Lu, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Nd, Ni, P, Pb, Pr, Rb, Re, S, Sb, Sc, Se, Sm, Sn, Sr, Ta, Tb, Te, Th, Ti, Tl, Tm, U, V, W, Y, Yb, Zn, Zr by methods 4A/MS48R and 4AH/OE (four acid digest with ICP-MS finish). Au, Pt, Pd by method FA50/MS (fire assay with an ICP-MS finish). These assay methods are considered appropriate. QAQC standard samples were included. In addition, reliance is placed on laboratory procedures and internal laboratory batch standards and blanks. All samples were analysed by Intertek Genalysis Laboratory Services Perth. All RC drill samples were analysed for Au by 50g fire assay with an ICP-OES finish, and for a multi-element suite by ICP-MS following a four acid digest. These assay methods are considered appropriate. QAQC standards and duplicate sampleswereincludedroutinely

P a g e 10

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
		(approximately 1 each every 50 samples). In addition reliance is placed on laboratory procedures and internal laboratory batch standards and blanks. All samples were analysed by Intertek Genalysis Laboratory Services Perth using methods; FA50/OE04 (Au), 4A/MS48 (multi-elements) and 4A/MS48R(REEextended suite).
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.	Significant intersections were verified by senior exploration personnel. Primary data was collected in the field using a set of standard logging templates and entered into a laptop computer. The data was forwarded to Legend’s database manager for validation and loading into the company’s drilling database. No adjustments of assay results have been undertaken.
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.	The drillhole collars were surveyed with a handheld GPS unit with an accuracy of ±5m which is considered sufficiently accurate for the purpose of the drillhole. All co-ordinates are expressed in GDA94 datum, Zone 51. Regional topographic control has an accuracy of ±2m based on detailed DTM data.
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.	DD Drilling Diamond drillhole spacing is not regular or grid based, with the location of individual drillholes governed by targeting the position of modelled EM conductor plates and anomalous geochemical results in previous drillholes. Only selected sawn HQ and NQ2 half core samples based on geology and sulphide mineralisation were submitted for geochemical analysis. Diamond drillhole RKDD023 was targeting an offhole DHTEM plate generated from RKRC021. RC Drilling RC drilling was at a nominal 100- 150m spacing along E-W traverses. Drillholes are sampled in the residual and fresh portions of the profile only as 4m composites, with detailed 1m sampling of sulphide bearing

P a g e 11

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [475 x 330] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
intervals.
Orientation of data in • Whether the orientation of  Diamond drillholes RKDD023 was
relation to geological sampling achieves unbiased planned to intersect the interpreted
structure sampling of possible structures DHTEM plate perpendicular to dip.
and the extent to which this is  The relationship between drill
known, considering the deposit orientation and mineralisation is
type. unknown.
• 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.
Sample security • The measures taken to ensure  Individual calico sample bags from the
sample security. diamond drilling and RC were placed
in polyweave bags and hand
delivered directly to the assay
laboratory in Kalgoorlie by company
personnel.
 All diamond drill core will be removed
from site and stored at an appropriate
facility.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or  Internal audits/reviews of procedures
reviews of sampling techniques are ongoing, however no external
and data. reviews have been undertaken.
----- End of picture text -----

Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results

==> picture [475 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Section2:Reporting ofExplorationResults	Section2:Reporting ofExplorationResults	Section2:Reporting ofExplorationResults
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 Rockford Project comprises nine granted exploration licences, covering 2,430km2, (Legend manager). Rockford JV tenements: E28/2188, 2189, 2192 (70% Legend, 30% Rockford Minerals Pty Ltd) E28/1716, 1717, 1718, 1727 (70% Legend, 30% Ponton Minerals Pty Ltd). Legend 100%: E28/2404, 2405. The Project is located 280km east of Kalgoorlie mostly on vacant crown land with the eastern portion on Kanandah Pastoral Station. There are no Native Title Claims over tenements E28/1716, 1717, 2192, 2405. Tenements E28/2188, and E28/2189 are covered 20% and 85% respectively by the Untiri Pulka Native Title Claim. Tenements E28/1718, E28/1727 & E28/2404 are covered 90%, 20% and 100% respectively by the Ngadju Native Title Claim. The tenements are in good standing and there arenoknown impediments.

P a g e 12

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by otherparties.	Not applicable, not referred to.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	The primary target is Nova style nickel-copper mineralisation hosted in mafic/ultramafic intrusives within the Fraser Zone of the larger Albany- Fraser Orogen. Secondary targets include VMS style zinc-copper-lead-silver mineralisation and structurally controlled Tropicana style gold.
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: • 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. • 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 table of drillhole collars in Appendix 3.
Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. 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.	Individual sample assays and weighted averages are presented.

P a g e 13

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [475 x 690] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
• The assumptions used for any
reporting of metal equivalent
values should be clearly stated.
Relationship between • These relationships are  The drill core has been oriented to
mineralisation widths particularly important in the enable structural logging and
and intercept lengths reporting of Exploration Results. evaluation of true thicknesses of the
mineralised intervals.
• If the geometry of the
mineralisation with respect to  Drillhole intercepts/intervals are
the drill hole angle is known, its measured downhole in metres.
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 (e.g.
‘down hole length, true width
not known’).
Diagrams • Appropriate maps and sections  Project and drillhole location maps
(with scales) and tabulations of and drill sections have been included
intercepts should be included in the body of the report.
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.
Balanced reporting • Where comprehensive  Assay results presented are
reporting of all Exploration balanced.
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.
Other substantive • Other exploration data, if  Detailed high quality aeromagnetic/
exploration data meaningful and material, gravity datasets, aircore drilling
should be reported including ground EM surveys and DHTEM
(but not limited to): geological surveys used to target drilling.
observations; geophysical  Downhole EM surveying was
survey results; geochemical completed by GEM Geophysics in
survey results; bulk samples – drillholeRKDD021.
size and method of treatment; DHTEM Details
metallurgical test results; bulk  Loop Size: 300m x 300m, double
density, groundwater, turn
geotechnical and rock  Station Spacing: 2-10m intervals
characteristics; potential  Sensor: B-field DigiAtlantis
deleterious or contaminating  Base/frequency: 0.125Hz
substances.  Stacking: ~32-64 stacks, 2-3
repeatable readings
Further work • The nature and scale of  Continued geological, geophysical
planned further work (e.g. tests and geochemical integration of data.
for lateral extensions or depth  Plan further diamond drillholes.
extensions or large-scale step-  RC drill testing of geochemical and
out drilling). gravity targets
• Diagrams clearly highlighting
the areas of possible
extensions, including the main
----- End of picture text -----

P a g e 14

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia

==> picture [525 x 61] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [475 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

P a g e 15

Registered Office: Level 1 / 8 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005, Australia