LEGEND MINING LIMITED — Interim / Quarterly Report 2016

Jul 27, 2016

==> picture [478 x 75] intentionally omitted <==

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

27 July 2016

LEGEND MINING LIMITED

ASX Symbol: LEG ABN 22 060 966 145

Level 1, 8 Kings Park Road West Perth Western Australia 6005

PO Box 626 West Perth

Western Australia 6872

Phone: +61 8 9212 0600 Facsimile: +61 8 9212 0611 Email:

legend@legendmining.com.au Website: www.legendmining.com.au

CONTACT

Mr Mark Wilson Managing Director

Mr Derek Waterfield Executive Director Technical

PROJECTS

Rockford - Fraser Range: Nickel-Copper, Gold

HIGHLIGHTS

• First two diamond drillholes at Rockford Project completed

• Pyrrhotite with minor pentlandite and chalcopyrite observed in cumulate textured gabbro

• Initial observations reveal several similarities to Nova-Bollinger style/setting

OVERVIEW

Field activities at the Rockford Project this quarter included fixed loop electromagnetic (“FLTEM”) and downhole electromagnetics (“DHTEM”) surveys and the completion of two diamond drillholes at Area D.

The most pleasing aspect of this work programme were similarities to a Nova-Bollinger style system which were observed in the drill core. The lithologies encountered in drillhole RKDD002 including the presence of pentlandite and chalcopyrite in cumulate textured gabbro, the stringer/disseminated pyrrhotite in RKDD001 and Area D’s location with respect to the main gravity ridge are all features of the Nova-Bollinger system.

Once the samples selected for assay and petrology have been analysed and the core thoroughly logged and structurally reviewed, Legend will have a much better understanding of the geology of Area D. Planning of future work programmes will benefit greatly from the integration of the new data with existing datasets.

Further regional EM surveys and aircore drilling over selected targets is planned for the next two quarters.

==> picture [279 x 121] intentionally omitted <==

RKDD002-626.5m: Pyrrhotite, trace pentlandite/chalcopyrite in cumulate textured gabbro (NQ2 core)

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 1

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

1. ROCKFORD PROJECT – (Fraser Range District) Nickel-Copper, Gold

The Rockford Project, covering 2,530km[2] , comprises seven contiguous granted exploration licences located in the highly prospective Fraser Range district of Western Australia (Figure 1). The Project is the subject of a joint venture between Legend (70%) and Creasy Group (30%), with Legend operator and manager of the joint venture, (see LEG:ASX announcement 2 July 2015).

The project covers a strike length of 100km over a regional gravity high “ridge” associated with dense mafic/ultramafic intrusive rocks of the Fraser Zone, within the larger Albany-Fraser Orogen. The Nova-Bollinger deposit, which lies within the Fraser Zone, is situated on a similar tenor gravity ridge to that of the Rockford Project, see Figure 1.

Exploration completed during the quarter included; fixed loop electromagnetic (“FLTEM”) and downhole electromagnetic (“DHTEM”) surveying and a two hole diamond drilling programme at Area D, see Figure 1. Assay results from the five hole RC drilling programme completed in the March quarter were also received.

==> picture [462 x 391] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Rockford Project Target Areas on Regional Gravity

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 2

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

Area D

Area D was originally selected for follow up exploration due to the presence of a discrete 1.5km x 1km gravity high (4mgal) with an associated magnetic signature suggestive of a structural fold closure or intrusive feature. Moving loop electromagnetic (“MLTEM”) surveying over the gravity high in December 2015 identified five strong to moderate bedrock conductors D1-D5. Subsequent exploration has included; RC drilling, FLTEM and DHTEM surveying and diamond drilling, which are discussed below.

RC Drilling Programme

As reported previously (ASX 29 March 2016), three conductors were RC drill tested (D1, D2 and D4) with D1 explained by 22m of graphite schist, and D2 and D4 both requiring further geophysical evaluation to determine whether the targeted conductors had been adequately tested.

Full analytical results from the five hole RC drilling programme (RKRC001-005) were received during the quarter and integrated with the geological logging and geophysical data. As expected from the logging, no significant nickel intervals were returned, however several elevated intervals of copper and zinc were returned associated with a range of rock types including mafic granulite, felsic schist and graphite schist. Drillhole details and a summary of assay results are provided below in Tables 1 & 2.

		Table 1: Area D RC Drillhole Summary	Table 1: Area D RC Drillhole Summary	Table 1: Area D RC Drillhole Summary	Table 1: Area D RC Drillhole Summary
Hole	Easting	Northing	Conductor	RL	Dip	Azimuth	Final Depth
RKRC001	639100	6598160	D1	205	-650	1500	143*
RKRC002	639800	6598340	D2	203	-650	1500	216*
RKRC003	638974	6599030	D4	200	-700	1500	268
RKRC004	639110	6598130	D1	205	-700	1500	249
RKRC005	639803	6598325	D2	203	-650	1500	284
Total							1,160

Note: Co-ordinates GDA94 MGA Zone 51

• Drillhole did not reach target depth due to poor ground conditions.

	Table 2: Area D RC Drillhole Results	Table 2: Area D RC Drillhole Results
Drillhole	Result	Lithology
RKRC002	12m @ 0.12% Cu from 140m 16m @ 0.14% Zn from 152m	Mafic Granulite Mafic Granulite
RKRC004	12m @ 0.10% Cu, 0.11% Zn from 176 20m @ 16.22% TGC from 176m (TGC-totalgraphitic carbon)	Graphite Schist
RKRC005	12m @ 0.16% Cu, 0.11% Zn from 154m	Biotite/quartz/graphite Schist

EM Surveys

DHTEM surveying was undertaken in RC drillhole RKRC003 at D4, confirming that the broad 44m zone of disseminated sulphide with pyrrhotite/pyrite up to 5% intersected from 190m was the source of the MLTEM conductor.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 3

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

FLTEM surveys were also completed during the quarter at D2 and D5 where further definition of the original MLTEM features was required. The FLTEM surveys at D2 and D5 better resolved the original MLTEM conductors revealing multiple conductive bodies and potential complex geometries at both areas. The survey identified a strong deep conductor below D2 (Conductor D6), and also resolved the D5 feature into two conductors D7 and D8.

A summary of the modelled FLTEM conductors D6, D7 and D8 is provided in Table 3, while detailed descriptions are given below, and conductor locations shown on Figure 2.

Table 3: Area D FLTEM Conductor Description

Table 3: Area D FLTEM Conductor Description	Table 3: Area D FLTEM Conductor Description	Table 3: Area D FLTEM Conductor Description	Table 3: Area D FLTEM Conductor Description	Table 3: Area D FLTEM Conductor Description
Conductor	Conductance	Dimensions	Depth to Top	Plate Orientation
D6	~5,000-8,000S+	~800m x 800m	~200-250m	35-550N dip
D7	~6,000-8,000S+	~800m x 400m	~300-350m	35-500W dip
D8	~3,000-4,000S+	~1,000m x 1,000m	~350-400m	20-400E dip

Conductor D6

FLTEM surveying comprising two 450m x 400m loops was completed over D2 aimed at trying to resolve the issue of possible multiple conductors and/or structural complexity. The surveying confirmed the presence of a second deeper strong feature (Conductor D6) with the following parameters; ~5,000-8,000S+ conductance, ~800x800m areal size, a moderate northerly dip ~3555[0] , and estimated depth to top of source of ~200-250m, see Figure 2.

Conductors D7 & D8

FLTEM surveying comprising two 600m x 575m loops was completed over Conductor D5 aimed at better constraining the complex feature originally identified by the December 2015 MLTEM survey. The survey redefined the feature as two separate bedrock conductors of significance, a strong conductor with westerly dip at D7, and a moderate conductor with easterly dip at D8, see Figure 2. Conductor D7 has a conductance of ~6,000-8,000S+, dimensions of ~800m x 400m and an estimated depth to top of source of ~300-350m. Conductor D8 has a lower conductance of ~3,0004,000S+, is larger in size ~1,000m x 1,000m with an estimated depth to top of source of ~350-400m.

Diamond Drilling Programme

A two hole (RKDD001-002) diamond drilling programme totalling 1,301.7m was completed at Area D targeting three conductors (D6, D7 and D8) identified previously by MLTEM and FLTEM surveys. A summary of drilling details is provided below in Table 4, while drillhole locations are shown on Figure 2.

		Table 4: Diamond Drillhole Summary	Table 4: Diamond Drillhole Summary	Table 4: Diamond Drillhole Summary	Table 4: Diamond Drillhole Summary	Table 4: Diamond Drillhole Summary
Hole	Easting	Northing	Conductor	RL	Dip	Azimuth	Final Depth
RKDD001	639852	6598275	D6	203	-600	1300	584
RKDD002	638125	6598750	D7 & D8	203	-700	0900	717.7
Total							1,301.7

Co-ordinates GDA94 MGA Zone 51

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 4

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [438 x 374] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Drillhole Location with FLTEM Conductor Plates on Residual Gravity

Diamond Drillhole RKDD001 - Conductor D6

RKDD001 was drilled to test D6, a strong FLTEM conductor with the following parameters; ~5,0008,000S+ conductance, ~800x800m areal size, a moderate northerly dip ~35-55[0] , and estimated depth to top of source of ~200-250m, see Figure 2.

The hole was drilled to 584m intersecting a sequence comprising; gabbro, ultramafic, mafic to felsic granulite and metasediment, and is summarised in Table 5 below.

A strongly foliated felsic quartz-biotite-garnet granulite with up to 3% pyrrhotite and ~5% graphite was intersected between 291.9-314.5m, coinciding fairly closely with the modelled target depth of 325m. However, this unit was not considered large enough or strong enough to explain the D6 feature and that the source of D6 was deeper in the hole.

Two further units containing approximately 3-5% pyrrhotite and +5% graphite between 448.9-464.6m and 526.6-572.6m hosted within the mafic-felsic granulite/metasediment sequence were also intersected, see Photo 1. A DHTEM survey of RKDD001 clearly defined these two pyrrhotite/ graphite rich intervals as inhole conductors and fully explains the D6 conductor.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 5

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [388 x 153] intentionally omitted <==

Photo 1: RKDD001-566.8m: Pyrrhotite in mafic granulite (NQ2 core)

Table 5 : RKDD001 – Drill Log Summary	Table 5 : RKDD001 – Drill Log Summary
Interval	Description
0 - 91.0m	Transported Cover
91.0 - 166.9m	Gabbro/(Mafic Granulite)with minor Ultramafic
166.9 - 584.0m	Mafic-Felsic Granulite with Metasediment
166.9 - 176.8m	Graphite/carbonate rich interval
291.9 - 314.5m	Pyrrhotite(1-3%) &graphite(~5%)
448.9 - 464.6m	Pyrrhotite(3-5%) &graphite(+5%)
526.6 - 572.6m	Intervals withpyrrhotite(3-5%) andgraphite(+5%)

Diamond Drillhole RKDD002 - Conductors D7 & D8

RKDD002 was drilled to a depth of 717.7m with the aim of testing Conductors D7 and D8, see Figure 2. D7 has a conductance of ~6,000-8,000S+, dimensions of ~800m x 400m and an estimated depth to top of source of ~300-350m, while D8 has a lower conductance of ~3,000-4,000S+, is larger in size ~1,000m x 1,000m with an estimated depth to top of source of ~350-400m.

The drillhole intersected a sequence including; an upper and lower gabbro, mafic to felsic granulite and metasediment with several intervals containing significant sulphides (see Photo 2). A summary of the geological log is provided below in Table 6.

==> picture [302 x 166] intentionally omitted <==

Photo 2: RKDD002-508.5m: Pentlandite (silver), pyrrhotite (brown) in mafic granulite (NQ2)

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 6

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

The occurrence of minor disseminated pyrrhotite/chalcopyrite/pentlandite (FeS, CuS, NiS) in two intervals between 626.3-626.8m and 661.0-661.35m is considered highly significant. Whilst the tenor is low, the sulphides are hosted in a cumulate textured gabbro (see Photo 3), which is a favourable host for nickel-copper mineralisation. Further evaluation of this gabbro unit is required to test for potential larger accumulations of sulphide.

==> picture [353 x 154] intentionally omitted <==

Photo 3: RKDD002-626.5m: Pyrrhotite (brown), trace pentlandite/chalcopyrite in cumulate

textured gabbro (NQ2 core)

A DHTEM survey of RKDD002 clearly identified strong inhole and offhole anomalism centred at 450475m and 550-600m downhole. The combination of these two conductive features is considered sufficient to explain the targeted D7 and D8 conductors.

It is also highly significant that the high power DHTEM was firstly able to detect the upper disseminated sulphide zone (626.3-626.8m) in early/mid channels and secondly to do so given the presence of strong conductors higher in the hole. The signature of this sulphide zone is consistent with a stringer-like unit with limited areal extent (<15x15m) of moderate conductance (<2,000S) and persists to ~20msec delay times.

Table 6 : RKDD002 – Drill Log Summary	Table 6 : RKDD002 – Drill Log Summary
Interval	Description
0 – 80.6m	Transported Cover
80.6 – 207.0m	Gabbro with minor Mafic Granulite and Ultramafic
207.0 – 603.5m	Mafic-Felsic Granulite with Metasediment
459.3-472.9m	Pyrrhotite(2-3%) &graphite(+5%)
503.0-514.4m	Pyrrhotite(3-5%), tracepentlandite(0.1%) &graphite(+5%)
526.4-583.9m	Pyrrhotite(3-5%), trace chalcopyrite(0.1%) &graphite(+5%)
592.9-597.7m	Graphite(5%)
603.5 – 690.6m	Gabbro
626.3-626.8m	Disseminatedpyrrhotite/chalcopyrite/pentlandite ~2%
661.0-661.35m	Disseminatedpyrrhotite/chalcopyrite/pentlandite ~2%
690.6 – 717.7m	Mafic Granulite

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 7

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

EM Conductor Status

RC and diamond drilling has now effectively tested three MLTEM (D1, D2 and D4) and three FLTEM (D6, D7 and D8) conductors. Table 7 below summarises the current status of MLTEM conductors D1-D5 and FLTEM conductors D6-D8.

	Table 7: Area D Conductor Status
MLTEM Conductor	Conductor Description
D1	 MLTEM conductor explained by 22m intersection of graphite schist in drillhole RKRC004 between 174-196m.  No further workplanned.
D2	 MLTEM conductor not fully explained by 10m intersection of graphite schist in drillhole RKRC005 between 141-151m.  FLTEM subsequently defined a second deeper strong conductor located to the immediate southeast, see D6 below.
D3	 Untested MLTEM conductor.  Possible future drill testingdependent on results of Area D review.
D4	 DHTEM has confirmed the broad 44m zone of disseminated sulphide with pyrrhotite/pyrite up to 5% in drillhole RKRC003 from 190m as the MLTEM conductor.  Low Ni-Cu assay results were returned from pyrrhotite/pyrite interval.  No further workplanned.
D5	 This MLTEM feature was poorly constrained and subsequent FLTEM surveying has redefined/separated the feature as two new conductors D7 and D8, see below.
FLTEM Conductor	Conductor Description
D6	 FLTEM over the original D2 MLTEM feature identified a separate deeper strong conductor (D6) beneath the graphite schist in RKRC005.  Diamond drillhole RKDD001 intersected several pyrrhotite/graphite rich intervals associated with mafic granulite/metasediments. Petrology and assaysampling pending.
D7 & D8	 FLTEM surveying over the original poorly constrained D5 MLTEM feature has defined two strong to moderate conductors D7 and D8, see Figure 2.  Diamond drillhole RKDD002 intersected several pyrrhotite/graphite rich intervals associated with mafic granulite/metasediments and disseminated pyrrhotite/ pentlandite/chalcopyrite in cumulate gabbro. Petrology and assay sampling pending.

Future Programmes

• Comprehensive review of all exploration results at Area D, including inversion modelling of the prospect, incorporating drilling, EM, detailed gravity (100m x 100m) and aeromagnetic data.

• Select drill core intervals for assay/geochemical and petrological analysis.

• Infill gravity survey over the eastern portion of Rockford to assist with target selection.

• MLTEM surveying over selected magnetic/gravity features.

• Aircore drilling programme over same features as MLTEM surveys.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 8

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

2. CORPORATE

Annual General Meeting

The Annual General Meeting was held on 28 April 2016 with all resolutions passed unanimously on a show of hands. The results of the meeting were released to the ASX on the same day.

Cameroon Project

Legend received the quarterly interest payment of $30,000 on 21 June 2016 from Jindal Steel and Power, as per the rescheduled debt agreement announced to the ASX on 28 July 2015.

Competent Person Statement

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

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

For more information:

Mr Mark Wilson Managing Director Ph: (08) 9212 0600

Mr Derek Waterfield Executive Director - Technical Ph: (08) 9212 0600

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 9

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1: Tenement Schedule as at 30 June 2016

Mining Tenements

Tenement Reference	Location	Interest at beginning of Quarter	Acquired / Disposed	Interest at end of Quarter	Comments
E28/1718	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/1727	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/2188	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/2189	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/2190	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/2191	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/2192	Fraser Range, Western Australia	70%	N/A	70%	70:30 JV
E28/2342	Fraser Range, Western Australia	100%	Disposed	0%	Surrendered
ELA28/2408	Fraser Range, Western Australia	100%	Disposed	0%	Withdrawn

Farm-In or Farm-Out Arrangements

Tenement Reference	Location	Interest at beginning **of Quarter **	Acquired / Disposed	Interest at end of **Quarter **	Comments
None	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Appendix 2: Legend Mining Limited - Rockford Project JORC Code Edition 2012: Table 1

Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria

Commentary

Sampling techniques

RC drilling was used to obtain samples on 1m intervals. For each metre drilled, a 2-3kg rig split sample is collected from the cyclone in a calico bag with the remainder of the sample collected in a green plastic bag (20-40kg). All RC drillholes have been sampled as 4m composites and where anomalous values are returned the 1m rig split samples may be submitted for assay. QAQC standards and duplicate samples were included routinely (approximately 1 each every 50 samples). RC samples were submitted to an independent commercial assay laboratory and analysed for; Au by fire assay and a multi- element suite including Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Bi, Ca, Cd, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Fe, Ga, Ge, Hf, In, K, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb, Rb, Re, S, Sb, Sc, Se, Sn, Sr, Ta, Te, Th, Ti, Tl, U, V, W, Y, Zn, Zr by ICP-OES/MS. No diamond drill core has been sampled to date. It is envisaged that selected half core samples will be submitted for geochemical and petrological analysis, along with appropriate QAQCreference samples and duplicates.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 10

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	Commentary
Drilling techniques	RC drillholes used the standard RC drilling technique, utilising a face sampling bit. Diamond drillhole pre-collars were completed using the mud rotary technique to the top of saprock/fresh rock, followed by limited HQ diamond coring. The remainder of the hole was drilled with NQ2 diamond coring.
Drill sample recovery	RC drillhole sample recoveries were not measured, however poor or wet samples are recorded in drill and sample log sheets. No drill samples were recovered from the mud rotary pre-collar portion of the diamond drillholes. Drill core sample recoveries for the HQ and NQ2 core were recordedindrill log sheets.
Logging	Geological logging of RC drillholes included; lithology, grainsize, texture, deformation, mineralisation, alteration, veining, colour, weathering. Logging is qualitative and based on 1m intervals which are sieved and retained in chip trays. Geological logging of diamond drillholes included; lithology, grainsize, texture, deformation, mineralisation, alteration, veining, colour, weathering. Drill core orientation was recorded when possible. Logging is qualitative and based on drill core retained in core trays. Alldrillholeswereloggedintheirentirety.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	RC drill samples were collected using a PVC spear or scoop as 4m composites (2-3kg). Other composites of 2m and 3m and individual 1m samples were collected where required, i.e. bottom of hole. Both wet and dry samples were collected. The RC samples are dried and pulverised before analysis. QAQC reference samples and duplicates were routinely submitted with each sample batch. The size of the RC sample is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style sought and for the analytical technique used. Diamond drill core has been marked in preparation for possible sampling at a future date. It is envisaged that selected half core samples will be submitted for geochemical and petrological analysis, along with appropriate QAQC reference samples and duplicates. The size of the core sample is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style sought and an appropriate analytical technique will been used.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	RC samples were analysed for Au by 50g fire assay with an ICP- OES finish, and for a multi-element suite by ICP-OES/MS following a four acid digest. These assay methods are considered appropriate. QAQC standards and duplicate samples were included routinely (approximately 1 each every 50 samples). In addition reliance is placed on laboratory procedures and internal laboratory batch standards and blanks. No diamond core sampleshave beensubmitted to date.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 11

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	Commentary
Verification of sampling and assaying	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 or calibrations have been made to any assay results reported by Legend.
Location of data points	RC and diamond drillhole collars are 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 detailedDTMdata.
Data spacing and distribution	RC and 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. RC drillholes are sampled as 4m composites and where anomalous values are returned 1m samples may be submitted for assay. No diamond core sampleshave beensubmitted to date.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	RC and diamond drillholes were planned to intersect modelled EM conductor plates perpendicular to strike.
Sample security	RC samples were placed in polyweave and/or bulka bags and delivered directly to the assay laboratory. All diamond drill core has been removed from site and will be stored in an appropriate facility in Perth. No diamond core samples have been submitted to date.
Audits or reviews	Internal audits/reviews of procedures are ongoing, however no external reviews have been undertaken.

Section 2:Reporting of Exploration Results	Section 2:Reporting of Exploration Results
Criteria	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	The Rockford Project comprises seven granted tenements; E28/2188-2192 (70% Legend, 30% Rockford Minerals Pty Ltd JV), E28/1718 & E28/1727 (70% Legend, 30% Ponton Minerals Pty Ltd JV). 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 E28/2188-2192. Tenements E28/1718 & E28/1727 are covered 90% and 20% respectively by theNgadjuNativeTitle Claim.
Exploration done by other parties	Not applicable, not referred to.
Geology	The primary target is Nova style nickel-copper mineralisation hosted in high grade mafic granulites within the Fraser Complex. A secondary target is Tropicana style structurally controlled gold mineralisation.
Drill hole Information	Refer to table of collars in body of report.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 12

==> picture [478 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	Commentary
Data aggregation methods	Weighted averaging (based on sample interval) has been used in the reporting of the RC drilling results. No diamond core sampleshave beensubmitted to date.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	The geometry of the anomalous intervals/assays with respect to the RC drilling angle is unknown. The diamond drill core has been oriented to enable future evaluation of true thicknesses of any mineralised intervals. Alldrillholeintervals are downholelengthsmeasuredin metres.
Diagrams	Project location and drillhole location maps have been included inthe body ofthereport.
Balanced reporting	All significant results are reported.
Other substantive exploration data	Outer-Rim Exploration Services Pty Ltd completed high powered moving loop electromagnetic (MLTEM) surveying over the Rockford Project. MLTEM Details Loop Size: 200m x 200m, single turn Line/Station Spacing: 300m spaced lines with 100m stations Transmitter: ORE HPTX (190-200 amps) Receiver: EMIT SMARTem24 Sensor: EMIT Fluxgate 3 component B field sensor Time base/frequency: 0.125 – 1 Hz (250-2,000msec time base), ~0.475msec ramp.  Highpower EM Geophysical Services Pty Ltd completed high powered downhole electromagnetic (DHTEM) and fixed loop electromagnetic (FLTEM) surveying over the Rockford Project. DHTEM Details Loop Sizes: 200x200m, 350x400m and 500x500m, single turn Station Spacings: 5-20m primarily with limited 1-2m station detailing over target zones Transmitter: ORE HPTX (150-200 amps, single turn) Receiver: Crone PEM Sensor: Crone PEM Z and XY dB/dt DH probes Time base/freq.: 0.833Hz (300msec time base), ~1msec ramp FLTEM Details  Loop Sizes: 600m x575m and 450mx400m, single turn  Line/Station Spacing: 125m spaced lines with 75m stations  Transmitter: ORE HPTX (150 amps)  Receiver: EMIT SMARTem24  Sensor: EMIT Fluxgate 3 component B field sensor  Time base/frequency: 0.5Hz (500msec time base), ~1.15msec ramp
Further work	Full evaluation of the diamond drilling programme and submission of selected drill core samples for geochemical and petrological analysis is planned. Regional MLTEMand aircore programmes are also planned.

JUNE 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Page 13