METEORIC RESOURCES NL — Investor Presentation 2016

Dec 11, 2016

ASX Release Revised to Include JORC Appendix 12 December 2016

==> picture [221 x 57] intentionally omitted <==

t 08 9485 2836 10 Outram Street f 08 9321 6571 WEST PERTH WA 6005 PO Box 963 WEST PERTH WA 6872 www. meteoric.com.au METEORIC RESOURCES[NL] abn 64 107 985 651

Webb Diamond Project Update

The Directors of Meteoric Resources NL ( Meteoric or t he Company ) ( ASX:MEI ) are pleased to report on the Lozar radar surveys undertaken at the Webb Diamond Joint Venture by operator and manager GeoCrystal Ltd ( GeoCrystal ).

HIGHLIGHTS

• Ground based Lozar Radar Surveys conducted over two programs were trialed over 15 selected kimberlite magnetic targets that occur within the Webb kimberlite field.

• In the 1st survey program, the radar data interpreted pipe like bodies occurring over 6 previously drilled magnetic target sites which had confirmed kimberlite.

• The most significant response from the 1st survey was associated with drilled magnetic target KJ244, which based on the radar and drilling data, is now interpreted as a 2ha kimberlite pipe.

• The most significant responses from the 2nd survey were associated with undrilled kimberlite magnetic targets KJ52 and KJ62 which are now interpreted as pipe like structures with surface areas of 4ha and 7ha respectively.

• To date, the JV has identified 51 kimberlites by the drilling of 64 kimberlite magnetic targets from the field of 280 magnetic targets. This represents 23% of the targets tested to date.

During September 2016, ground penetrating radar geophysical surveys were undertaken on selected kimberlite magnetic targets within the project area by Lozar Radar Australia.

These ground based trial surveys were focussed on both drill tested and untested kimberlite magnetic targets within and in close proximity to a broad microdiamond anomaly (Figure 1).

Lozar Radar is a ground scanning radar technology with a depth penetration of up to 200m and with the capability of mapping geological features such as faults and lithology boundaries. This work was aimed at testing the effectiveness of this relatively new geophysical technique in remodelling the size, shape and depth extent of the Webb kimberlite magnetic targets.

The field program was in 2 parts with ground radar surveys completed on 15 kimberlite magnetic targets. At least 2 survey lines were completed over each target.

Page 1

==> picture [449 x 289] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1. Webb Kimberlite Field with Lozar Radar tested targets

First Radar Survey

The first radar survey was a trial to validate the radar technique against known kimberlite bodies at Webb that were previously drilled. A total of 6 drilled magnetic targets which had identified kimberlite were surveyed for a total 6.17 line km. Profile survey sections for the drilled targets KI244, KJ191 and KJ199 and are shown in Figures 2, 3, 4 & 5.

Based on the interpreted radar image, drilled magnetic target KJ244 presents a stark contrast between the kimberlite body and the host sediments and indicates a pipe-like body approximately 2ha in area. Also based on the radar images, both drilled magnetic targets KJ191 and KJ199 are interpreted as small pipes with diameters of approximately 100m. In all cases the overlying sediments are also clearly identified.

==> picture [250 x 188] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [198 x 165] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2. Radar profile - Target KJ244 Figure 3. Radar profile, alternate image –

Target KJ244

Page 2

==> picture [211 x 159] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [211 x 158] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4. Radar profile - Target KJ191 Figure 5. Radar profile - Target KJ199

Second Radar Survey

The second radar survey was to use the radar technique against undrilled kimberlite magnetic targets at Webb which resulted in 9 targets being surveyed for 5.56 line km. These surveyed targets are all contained within the broad microdiamond anomaly situated in the northern portion of the kimberlite field where a total of 42 undrilled kimberlite targets remain untested.

Profile radar survey sections for the undrilled magnetic targets KJ52 and KJ62 are shown below. Both these targets have been interpreted as kimberlite pipe bodies based on similarities in the signatures with the kimberlite bodies tested in the first survey. Targets KJ52 and KJ62 are now interpreted to have surface areas of 4ha and 7ha respectively.

==> picture [194 x 140] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [223 x 136] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6. Radar profile - Target KJ52 Figure 7. Radar profile, alternate image - KJ52

==> picture [452 x 147] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8. Radar profile - Target KJ62

Page 3

==> picture [456 x 148] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9. Radar profile, alternate image - Target KJ62

Discussion

The Lozar radar technique has the capability to clearly identify larger near surface potential kimberlite bodies in conjunction with the magnetics and hence is a valuable technique for targeting drill holes and defining the geometry of a pipe.

Lozar radar combined with detailed ground magnetic surveys will be used to prioritize targets for drill testing. The focus will be on the interpreted larger near surface bodies associated with the large microdiamond anomaly in the northern portion of the Webb kimberlite field. Selected kimberlite targets in other parts of the kimberlite field, based on the size and intensity of their magnetic signatures, will also be targeted.

It is anticipated that this work will be undertaken in the 2017 field season.

-END-

For more information on the company visit www.meteoric.com.au

Please direct enquiries to:

Graeme Clatworthy Executive Director Phone +61 8 9485 2836 Mob 0418 902 341

George Sakalidis Executive Technical Director Phone +61 8 9485 2836 Mob 0411 640 337

GeoCrystal Limited

Suite 4 6 Richardson Street West Perth, Western Australia, 6005

Zlad Sas Director Mob 0412 198 878 http://www.geocrystal.com.au/

Page 4

Competent Person’s Statement

The information in this report that relates to exploration results is based on information compiled or reviewed by Tom Reddicliffe BSc(Hons), MSc, FAusIMM. Tom Reddicliffe is a self-employed consultant to the Meteoric Resources NL - GeoCrystal Limited joint venture and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2004 edition of the ‘Australasian Code of Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Tom Reddicliffe consents to the inclusion of this information in the form and context in which it appears in this report.

About Diamonds and Kimberlite

Diamonds occur naturally at depths greater than 150 kilometres beneath the earth’s crust and are carried to the surface of the earth by volcanic activity. As this molten mixture of magma (molten rock), minerals, rock fragments and diamonds approaches the earth’s surface it begins to form a pipe-like structure shaped like a champagne flute. These pipes of igneous rocks are called kimberlites or kimberlite pipes and are composed of certain minerals called kimberlite indicator minerals, upper mantle rock fragments and other trace minerals. Shallow lakes may form in the resulting inactive volcanic crater associated with an underlying kimberlite pipe. Kimberlite pipes are the most significant source of diamonds yet only 1 in about every 200 kimberlite pipes contains gem quality diamonds. Some kimberlite pipes contain very few diamonds or no diamonds and these are referred to as non-diamondiferous or sterile.

About the Diamond Market

According to a report commissioned by the Antwerp World Diamond Centre published in 2012, the demand for diamonds is forecast to double by 2020, far outpacing supply, because of a lack of new mines. Industry commentators consider that the consumer appetite for diamonds is set to grow annually with the growth in demand over the next decade driven by increasing prosperity in China and India. This anticipated increase in world demand for diamonds is likely to outpace the growth in diamond production due to the impact of relatively flat growth in diamond supply towards the end of the decade, as no major new diamond deposits have been discovered since 1997. The expected consequence of this imbalance between supply and demand is that diamond prices are likely to continue to rise. The average price for global rough diamond in 2011 was US$121.60 per carat.

Typically, gem and near-gem diamonds are used in jewellery whereas industrial diamonds are used principally for cutting and grinding purposes. Gem-quality diamonds account for over 80% of the value of the world diamond market. Antwerp is the largest diamond trading centre with other key centres including Mumbai, Johannesburg and Tel Aviv. It is estimated that approximately 80% of the world’s annual production of rough diamonds is under the control of the De Beers Group and other major diamond producers including Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton and Alrosa Group.

Page 5

APPENDIX 1

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	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.	 N/A
Drilling techniques  Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, 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.  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 topreferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	 N/A

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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 andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged.	 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
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.	 N/A
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.	 N/A
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.	 As this is a trial exploration geophysical survey the survey line locations and data points were recorded by using hand held GPS equipment.  All sites were clearly identified for subsequent survey work to ensure accurate survey control for any project areas.  Datum GDA 94 andprojection MGAZ52 was used
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.	 Data was recorded every linear 1.0m on each survey line.  The survey line spacing is not sufficient for Resource Estimation work.

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure  Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.  If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	 Geophysical survey lines were completed in N-S and E-W directions and centered on the kimberlite magnetic target. This is considered appropriate due to the typical pipe like geometry of kimberlite pipes.
Sample security  The measures taken to ensure sample security.	 No samples were collected.
Audits or reviews  The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	 N/A

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	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.	 Exploration took place on granted tenements E80/4815, E80/4235, E80/4407 and E80/4506 which are subject to Exploration and Land Access.  Agreements with the Tjamu Tjamu Aboriginal Corporation. E80/4235 and E80/4407 are held by Meteoric Resources. E80/4506 is held by J&J McIntyre on which Meteoric has rights to earn or acquire up to a 90% interest. GeoCrystal has earned a 75% interest in Meteoric's tenements and a 75% interest in Meteoric's rights on E80/4506. Heritage clearance surveys have been completed.  Exploration took place on granted tenements with no known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
Exploration done by other parties  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	 There has been no prior on ground exploration for diamond bearing kimberlite pipes in the tenement area.
Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	 The exploration project area is located in the Lake McKay region of the Gibson Desert which is within the southern portion of the Webb 1:250,000 geological map.  The stratigraphy of the project area is not well constrained due to paucity of data (drill hole and outcrop) but is thought to comprise recent fluvial, alluvial and aeolian deposits and a poorly developed surficial soil. These sediments are composed of sand, silt and clay. Areas to the east, west and south of the project tenements are mapped as being underlain by up to 1000m of the Proterozoic aged Heavitree Quartzite which in turn is overlain by limestone and dolomite of the Bitter Springs Formation and then by post Permian aged fluvial and deltaic sandstones, siltstones and mudstones known as the Angas Beds. These sequences are interpreted to overlay Archean aged basement rocks of the Arunta Complex  The kimberlite pipes intrude the Proterozoic aged sediments and are overlain by the Angas Beds. The kimberlite bodies are discrete volcanic intrusions which occur within a cluster over an area of some 1000km2.

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drill hole Information  A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length.  If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	 A list of the drill holes completed in the 2013 and 2014 exploration programs along with associated data has been reported previously.
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.  The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	 N/A
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths  These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.  If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.  If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	 N/A
Diagrams  Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	 Refer to the text.
Balanced reporting  Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	 N/A
Other substantive exploration data  Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	 A regional 400m line spaced aeromagnetic survey flown by the Geological Survey of WA is available in the public domain. It was this data that highlighted the presence of 'bulls- eye' magnetic anomalies which were interpreted to be intrusive bodies, possibly kimberlites.  A detailed 150m line spaced aeromagnetic survey over a 65km2area was flown for Meteoric Resources in 2010. The data was interpreted by Southern Geoscience Consultants. This smaller survey provided more detailed magnetic data and allowed modelling of many of the 'bulls-eye' magnetic targets.  A follow-up 100m spaced aeromagnetic survey of 11,800 line- km was flown for GeoCrystal in 2014. The data was interpreted byRK Jones(consultant)and identified

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

more than 280 kimberlite targets.  Loza Radar Australia ("LRA") visited the Webb Diamond Project to carry out ground penetrating radar ("GPR") trials designed to apply new radar technology to assist in assessing the geophysical nature of the cluster of more than 280 circular features  Loza Radar has processed the data using their own software (Krot), to apply filters that best pick out the features of interest.  The Loza Radar system is a 4th generation enhanced Ground Penetrating Radar. Loza Radar uses GPRplus, a ground scanning device designed for studying subsurface structure at depths from a few metres to hundreds of metres. Data collection is based on radiation of ultra-wideband electromagnetic pulses penetrating into the subsurface medium and registration of the reflected signals born at the medium interfaces or buried objects. Reflections are the primary result of a change in density and/or a change in electromagnetic permeability.  The transmitter uses a high-pressure hydrogen discharge, which operates in stand- alone mode without synchronization. Traditional ground penetration radar's mechanics have been completely revised: pulse transmitter power has been increased by a minimum of 100,000 times, and the stroboscopic transformation replaced to direct detection of signal. The antennas use RC-Loaded dipoles. This ensures the exclusion of interference in the received signal that suppresses weak signals, whilst also permitting the reception of strong signals and avoids the requirement for connecting lines (which also introduce strong interference from the transmitter). Only the Low Frequency Systems were applied at the Webb Project where the 6 metre antenna was used with the low frequency.  The horizontal resolution, i.e. the spacing of the 'radar-shots' taken along a profile is chosen according to the required scale of the target objects and in discussion with the client. In this case, the shot spacing was 1.0m with varied lengths of survey lines due to the uncertainty of the dimensions of the targets on the first passes. The system identifies structures at all angles, including the vertical structure as well as voids , changes in rock density caused by fracturing, geological changes or water. This system shows any structure as the signal array returns from both the vertical and horizontal structures. Additionally, the Radar operator can either manually operate the 'firing switch' or it can be set to automatic. The 'shot' spacing is determined by the client's objective;and also bythe speed of the traverse.

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	 At each measurement point, the arrival time of the signal is recorded from the geological boundaries or structure/feature of interest. The profile 'Radargram' is formed in real time on the operator's console LCD screen in the form of a binary plot depicting radar return time of the subsurface reflections. Travel time of the EM wave depends on the reflector depth and propagation velocity, this varies along the profile giving a picture of subsurface layered structures. Results of the survey are stored in the console memory which can be instantly downloaded into a normal laptop computer for immediate review of data quality and points of interest whilst still in the field. This real-time capability means that the operator can mark features of interest as the profile is taken. The downloaded data is analysed on the laptop using proprietary software.  The profile lines are georeferenced and displayed as Radargrams with filters applied in the Loza Radar software(Krot).
Further work  The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	 Drill testing of untested magnetic anomalies largely associated with the microdiamond anomaly in the northern part of the kimberlite field is planned for the 2017 field season. This drill program will be aimed at confirming the presence of kimberlite and providing material to test for thepresence of diamonds.

Section 5 Estimation and Reporting of Diamonds and Other Gemstones

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Indicator minerals  Reports of indicator minerals, such as chemically/physically distinctive garnet, ilmenite, chrome spinel and chrome diopside, should be prepared by a suitably qualified laboratory.	 Indicator minerals including microdiamonds have previously been identified from samples and described byGlobal Diamond Exploration Services PtyLtd.
Source of diamonds  Details of the form, shape, size and colour of the diamonds and the nature of the source of diamonds (primary or secondary) including the rock type and geological environment.	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered from any of the exploration samples collected to date.
Sample collection  Type of sample, whether outcrop, boulders, drill core, reverse circulation drill cuttings, gravel, stream sediment or soil, and purpose (e.g. large diameter drilling to establish stones per unit of volume or bulk samples to establish stone size distribution).  _Sample size, distribution and representivity. _	 To date no samples have been collected to specifically test for commercial diamond grade.
Sample treatment  Type of facility, treatment rate, and accreditation.  Sample size reduction. Bottom screen size, top screen size and re-crush.  Processes (dense media separation, grease, X-ray, hand-sorting, etc).  Process efficiency, tailings auditing and granulometry.  Laboratory used, type ofprocess for micro diamonds and accreditation.	 To date no samples have been processed specifically for the recovery of commercially sized diamonds.
Carat  One fifth (0.2) of a gram (often defined as a metric carat or MC).	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered from any of the exploration samples collected to date.

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sample grade  Sample grade in this section of Table 1 is used in the context of carats per units of mass, area or volume.  The sample grade above the specified lower cut-off sieve size should be reported as carats per dry metric tonne and/or carats per 100 dry metric tonnes. For alluvial deposits, sample grades quoted in carats per square metre or carats per cubic metre are acceptable if accompanied by a volume to weight basis for calculation.  In addition to general requirements to assess volume and density there is a need to relate stone frequency (stones per cubic metre or tonne) to stone size (carats per stone) to derive sample grade (carats per tonne).	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered from any of the exploration samples collected to date.  To date no samples have been collected to specifically test for commercial diamond grade.
Reporting of Exploration Results  Complete set of sieve data using a standard progression of sieve sizes per facies. Bulk sampling results, global sample grade per facies. Spatial structure analysis and grade distribution. Stone size and number distribution. Sample head feed and tailings particle granulometry.  Sample density determination.  Per cent concentrate and undersize per sample.  Sample grade with change in bottom cut-off screen size.  Adjustments made to size distribution for sample plant performance and performance on a commercial scale.  If appropriate or employed, geostatistical techniques applied to model stone size, distribution or frequency from size distribution of exploration diamond samples.  The weight of diamonds may only be omitted from the report when the diamonds are considered too small to be of commercial significance. This lower cut-off size should be stated.	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered from any of the exploration samples collected to date.  To date no samples have been collected to specifically test for commercial diamond grade.
Grade estimation for reporting Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves  Description of the sample type and the spatial arrangement of drilling or sampling designed for grade estimation.  The sample crush size and its relationship to that achievable in a commercial treatment plant.  Total number of diamonds greater than the specified and reported lower cut-off sieve size.  Total weight of diamonds greater than the specified and reported lower cut-off sieve size.  The sample grade above the specified lower cut-off sieve size.	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered from any of the exploration samples collected to date.  To date no samples have been collected to specifically test for commercial diamond grade.
Value estimation  Valuations should not be reported for samples of diamonds processed using total liberation method, which is commonly used for processing exploration samples.  To the extent that such information is not deemed commercially sensitive, Public Reports should include: o diamonds quantities by appropriate screen size per facies or depth. o details of parcel valued. o number of stones, carats, lower size cut-off per facies or depth.  The average $/carat and $/tonne value at the selected bottom cut-off should be reported in US Dollars. The value per carat is of critical importance in demonstrating project value.  The basis for the price (e.g. dealer buying price, dealer selling price, etc).  An assessment of diamond breakage.	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered from any of the exploration samples collected to date.

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Security and integrity  Accredited process audit.  Whether samples were sealed after excavation.  Valuer location, escort, delivery, cleaning losses, reconciliation with recorded sample carats and number of stones.  Core samples washed prior to treatment for micro diamonds.  Audit samples treated at alternative facility.  Results of tailings checks.  Recovery of tracer monitors used in sampling and treatment.  Geophysical (logged) density and particle density.  Cross validation of sample weights, wet and dry, with hole volume and density, moisture factor.	 There was no requirement for sample security.
Classification  In addition to general requirements to assess volume and density there is a need to relate stone frequency (stones per cubic metre or tonne) to stone size (carats per stone) to derive grade (carats per tonne). The elements of uncertainty in these estimates should be _considered, and classification developed accordingly. _	 No commercially sized diamonds have been recovered to date.