MINERAL COMMODITIES LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2020

Aug 26, 2020

==> picture [419 x 113] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX RELEASE
27 August 2020
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [160 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [595 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

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

ASX: MRC 27 August 2020
----- End of picture text -----

MASSIVE INCREASE IN MINERAL RESOURCES AT TORMIN WITH MAIDEN RESOURCE AT WESTERN STRANDLINE

• High-grade resource of 106 million tonnes at 12.4% Total Heavy Minerals (“THM”)[1] , containing 13 million tonnes in situ Heavy Mineral at Western Strandline.

• 22.8 million tonnes at 20.9% THM located within the expanded Mining Right area of the Western Strandline (22% of the total estimated resource) immediately available for mining.

• Over 85% of the Mineral Resource in the expanded Mining Right area is classified as Measured and Indicated. Mineralisation is continuous and open along strike.

• 10,000m step out and infill drilling program to continue at Western and Eastern Strandlines

Mineral Commodities Ltd (“MRC” or “the Company”) and its empowerment partner, Blue Bantry Investments 255 (Pty) Ltd, are pleased to announce a maiden JORC Resource for the Western Strandline of its Inland Strands. The Western Strandline spans the Section 102 Amended Mining Right (“S102 Mining Right”) (WC 30/5/1/2/2/10108MR) and Prospecting Right (WC 30/5/1/1/2/10262PR) owned by the Company’s 50% owned South African subsidiary, Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd (“MSR”).

The Mineral Resource was prepared in accordance with the Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (“JORC Code (2012)”) and is estimated at 106 million tonnes at 12.4% THM in the categories of Measured, Indicated and Inferred using a 2% THM cut-off grade and independently peer reviewed by Wardell Armstrong International. Pursuant to ASX Listing Rule 5.8.1, and in addition to the information contained in the body of this release, please refer to Appendix 1 JORC Table 1 for additional information, which is material to understanding the estimates of the Mineral Resources.

Table 1- Total Mineral Resources for the Western Strandline Deposit (2% THM cut-off grade)

Category	Tonnes (Mt)	THM (%)	In Situ THM (Mt)	Zircon % HM)	Garnet (% HM)	Ilmenite (% HM)	Rutile (% HM)	Anatase (% HM)	Magnetite (% HM)	Slimes (%)
Measured Indicated Inferred	10.0 33.3 62.6	19.13 16.20 9.29	1.9 5.4 5.8	2.45 1.08 1.25	14.90 12.62 15.57	15.02 4.90 5.84	1.15 0.68 0.84	0.23 0.12 0.18	0.66 13.40 0.27 10.11 0.29 10.30
Total	105.9	12.40	13.1	1.35	14.26	6.80	0.82	0.16	0.34 10.53

Mineral assemblage reported as in situ percentage of THM content

1- THM includes all minerals that report as sink during heavy liquid separation at SG of 2.96 (TBE) after desliming, within the 45 micron to 1mm size fraction as a percentage of the total material.

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

T: +61 8 6253 1100 PO Box 235 WELSHPOOL DC WA 6986

Page 1

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [93 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Executive Chairman Mark Caruso said, “ This is a transformational result for our Company. Historically, we have operated Tormin with a limited life of mine, and in the space of five months we have doubled our placer beach resources and secured this significant conventional resource that will become the pillar of our future mining operations. We have expedited development at the Western Strandline, with mining operations already commenced. It is anticipated that the Company will start processing material from the Western Strandline as early as September. This resource demonstrates the true potential of what we believe is a world class asset that our Company will be mining for decades to come”.

The Mineral Resource (Table 1) demonstrates the high-grade nature of the deposit, with over 40% of the total resource classified as Measured and Indicated.

S102 Mining Right area - 22.8 million tonnes at 20.9% THM located within expanded Mining Right area (22% of the total estimated resource) immediately available for mining.

The resource area comprises two areas totalling approximately 5.5km in total length and covering 75 hectares, is located adjacent to the existing plant and is approved for immediate mining operation as part of the recently granted S102 Mining Right. Almost 22% of the total estimated Mineral Reserve is located within the S102 Mining Right area ( 22.8 million tonnes at 20.9% THM ). The majority (85%) of the Mineral Resource that is within the S102 Mining Right is classified as Measured and Indicated (Table 2).

Table 2- Mineral Resources for the Western Strandline Deposit inside S102 Mining Right Area (2% THM cut-off grade)

Category	Tonnes (Mt)	THM (%)	In Situ THM (Mt)	Zircon (%HM)	Garnet (%HM)	Ilmenite (%HM)	Rutile (%HM)	Anatase (%HM)	Magnetite (%HM)	Slimes (%)
Measured Indicated Inferred	6.4 13.1 3.3	21.25 23.12 11.60	1.4 3.0 0.4	2.49 1.09 3.17	15.16 12.41 17.99	15.63 5.09 16.81	1.15 0.67 1.56	0.24 0.11 0.33	0.65 12.66 0.28 12.10 0.74 22.13
Total	**22.8 **	20.92	4.8	1.66	13.65	9.04	0.88	0.17	0.42 13.71

Mineral assemblage reported as in situ percentage of THM content

Development of the Western Strandline areas within the S102 Mining Right have commenced with a phased development program initially targeting the near surface, high grade strand horizons, with grades as high as 90% THM[2] comprising 7.54% Zircon[2,3] , 1.82% Rutile[2,3] , 34% Ilmenite[2,3] , 34% Garnet[2,3] intersected in the orebody, before processing the Red Aeolian and Orange Feldspathic Sands.

The high-grade THM mineralisation and Valuable Heavy Minerals (“VHM”)[4] assemblage observed in the ‘strand horizons’ from the resource drilling are reminiscent of similar grades and mineral assemblage encountered in the first years of mining the high-grade Tormin Beach areas. The reported VHM contains high constituent zircon, rutile, ilmenite, garnet assemblage as well as anatase and magnetite.[2 ]

2- ASX Release - HIGH-GRADE RESULTS AND NEW INLAND STRANDLINE DISCOVERY AT TORMIN, 7 April 2020

3- Percentage of mineral contained in THM - ASX Release - HIGH-GRADE RESULTS AND NEW INLAND STRANDLINE DISCOVERY AT TORMIN, 7 April 2020 4- VHM includes zircon, rutile, anatase, ilmenite, garnet and magnetite

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 2

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [93 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

The Company has already commenced topsoil stripping in preparation for mining at the S102 Mining Areas of the Inland Strand.

==> picture [462 x 248] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Topsoil stripping in the southern part of the S102 Mining Right

==> picture [501 x 168] intentionally omitted <==

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

Tormin Plant
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [350 x 81] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Section 102 Mining Areas part of the S102 Mining Right.

Note Section 102 Mining areas only. Resource Boundary shown in Figure 5.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 3

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [121 x 112] intentionally omitted <==

Background

The Tormin operation is located approximately 370km north of Cape Town and approximately 30km from the township of Lutzville in the Republic of South Africa.

==> picture [452 x 309] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Geographical location of the Company’s tenements in the Western Cape province of South Africa

The Inland Strands comprise multiple discrete palaeo strandlines running semi-parallel to the coastline and within the Company owned Geelwal Karoo Farm 262. Two palaeomarine strandlines have been identified, consisting of a Western Strandline (35-40m above mean sea level) and an Eastern Strandline (86m above mean sea level). Aeromagnetic data indicates that the Inland Strands run continuously along the coastline of the Company’s tenure portfolio.

In January 2020, the Company was granted Prospecting Right 10262PR covering an area of 1,741 hectares and some 12km in length. The initial Inland Strands area, which is adjacent to our existing mining operations, was subject to extensive resource definition drilling commencing in mid-February 2020 and targeting the geophysical aeromagnetic anomaly previously identified as a buried palaeo-strandline in 2014. Initial exploration results were released to the ASX on 7 April 2020, followed by additional results on 7 July 2020.

This first phase of the resource drilling campaign was completed, with a total of 6,917 metres drilled. The drilling program has concentrated on defining resources within the newly granted S102 Mining Right area which covers 5.5km of the currently identified 12km long Western Strandline horizon, as well as extensional drilling in the prospecting permit areas to the immediate north and south of the S102 Mining Right area.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 4

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [121 x 112] intentionally omitted <==

Geology and geological interpretation

The western coastal plain of South Africa embraces a significant resource of detrital heavy minerals by world standards. The heavy mineral sand deposits occur in a current active beach environment (eg Tormin mine) as well as in older palaeo-beach raised strandlines found inland. The onshore mineral sands are marine palaeo-terraces “Inland Strands”, aeolian sands and fluvial sediments. These targets were formed during Miocene, Pliocene and Quaternary/Pleistocene coastal transgression (sea moving inland) and regression cycles.

The strandline is a concentration of high-grade VHM with overburden horizons above the strandline in the form of Aeolian facies (Orange Feldspathic Sand), erosion surface facies (dorbank, silcrete, calcrete) and Red Aeolian Sands deflation zones that have also been confirmed to be mineralised in places. The deposit hosts economic mineralisation in three main geological units of enriched high grade heavy mineral strandline deposits (1-12m thickness), bulk mineralisation in Orange Feldspathic Sand (1-44m thickness) and low grade in Red Aeolian Sand (0-11m thick-ness) as well as dorbank and gravel.

==> picture [456 x 214] intentionally omitted <==

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

Topsoil
Feldspathic Sand
Aeolian Sand
Strandline
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 4: Bulk sampling in the strandline show different lithological units - photo taken looking north-east

Drilling techniques and hole spacing

Exploration drilling included 6,733 metres of aircore drilling in 23 drill fence lines which are 250m apart on 20m spacings (247 holes), 11 infill drill fence lines on 25m spacing (64 holes) between the primary lines in the southern half of the Western Strandline, 6 drill fence lines which are 500m apart on 20m spacings (12 holes) on the north extension of the Western Strandline and two sonic holes (28m). Moreover, 16 holes (436m) from historical drilling were verified by recent drilling and included in the resource model.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 5

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [93 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [465 x 666] intentionally omitted <==

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

S102 Mining Right
Boundary
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 5: Western Strandline, showing drillhole collars and S102 Mining Right

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 6

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [121 x 112] intentionally omitted <==

Sampling and sub-sampling techniques

Each sample was riffle split into two pre-numbered calico bags of ~5kg each, one for primary assaying at the onsite mine laboratory and a duplicate for external QA/QC. The remaining sample was collected in a large plastic bag to be stored securely in a bag farm for reference. Primary samples of approximately 5kg were submitted directly to the Tormin mine laboratory to be analysed for slimes and heavy minerals.

Sample analysis method

A total of 7,369 samples were assayed. All samples were analysed by the onsite laboratory at the Tormin processing plant. The laboratory sample was dried, de-slimed (removal of - 45 micron fraction) and screened (+1mm oversize), then 200g of sample split to use for heavy liquid separation using Tetrabromoethane (“TBE”) with density range between 2.94 and 2.96g/ml to define THM content. The Tormin laboratory uses a heavy liquid separation (“HLS”) with TBE for heavy mineral analysis. It also uses Panalytical Aeris XRD machines (the Rietveld method after HLS) in an automated mode setup (THM program) and industrial laboratory XRF (Panalytical Epsilon 3 ED) as a grade verification check on the XRD zircon content. Additionally, 250 samples were sent to external laboratories in Pretoria and Johannesburg (XRD Analytical and Consulting, Mintek and UIS Analytical Services) for QA/QC purposes.

QA/QC has been undertaken by field and lab duplicates, Certified Reference Material (“CRM”) and blank samples and twin holes. In general, all QA/QC indicated good to moderately good performance.

Furthermore, quantitative mineralogical investigations by using scanning electron microscopy (“QEMSCAN”) on 18 metric and composite samples were undertaken by SGS and ALS laboratories for verification of the heavy mineral assemblage and VHM content as well as fraction size and trash minerals. In addition, optical microscopy grain counting was undertaken on 4 composite samples to study mineral assemblage composition and physical properties of valuable mineral particles.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 7

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [450 x 307] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Drilling result cross section in fence line 11

Estimation Methodology and resource classification

The Mineral Resource estimation involved the use of drillhole and geology/topography to construct three-dimensional wireframes to define mineralised domains using Micromine software.

Domains were snapped to the nearest true intersection from sampling. Data was extrapolated between data points and approximately half of the drill spacing beyond. Ordinary kriging was used as the primary estimator for THM and VHM values. A block size of 50x12.5x1m reflects the geometry of the mineralised domains and drillhole spacing. Areas with drilling spaced at 125x25m were generally classified as Measured Resources and 250x20m was generally classified as Indicated Resources. Drilling up to 500x25m has been generally classified as Inferred Resources.

Where the slope of regression of the kriged estimate is greater than 0.85, and previous categories have been met, the final resource has been classified as Measured. Where blocks have slope between 0.7 and 0.85, even if other criteria have been met for higher classification, the resource was classified as Indicated. Where the slope is less than 0.7, even if other criteria have been met for higher classification, the resource was classified as Inferred.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 8

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [443 x 249] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Example SW – NE cross-section at fence line 6, looking northwest comparing lithology and kriged block THM grades (%)

==> picture [429 x 343] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8: Oblique view showing 3D model on THM grade (%) in the northern part of Western Strandline, looking northeast, 200m spaced 50m slices

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 9

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [93 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

A summary of the Mineral Resource statement is shown in Table 1 as defined by the JORC Code (2012).

==> picture [418 x 479] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9: Resource Classifications on Western Strandline

Cut-off grades

A 2% THM cut-off grade was applied for blocks, as this is the current minimum grade where there is a reasonable expectation for eventual extraction2% cut off grade was based on grade-tonnage curves with respect to THM and VHM assemblage. Also taken into account was current and anticipated plant performance, and other similarly sized deposits in the region.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 10

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [121 x 112] intentionally omitted <==

Mining and metallurgical methods and parameters

Typical open-pit mining is practised with excavators and articulated dump trucks being utilised. The resource is considered as dry mining feed and mineralisation can be any depth or width. There is no stripping, except ~25cm topsoil, as mineralisation starts near the surface. The thickness and continuous nature of the mineralisation supports nonselective bulk mining methods. The Company believes there are no mining factors which affect the assumption that the deposit has reasonable prospects for economic mining.

The Company has undertaken initial metallurgical testwork. The metallurgical recovery is similar to other mineral sands operations and metallurgical parameters have been taken from the metallurgical tests to date. These tests support economic extraction of the deposit.

==> picture [397 x 216] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10: Western Strandline Mineral Resource Grade -Tonnage Curve

Future work

The Inland Strand deposit presents a significant mineral sands assets for the Company which offers material extension of mine life. The opportunity to develop and mine the Western Strandline is an important turning point for the Company in realising the value of the world-class Tormin Mineral Sands Operation. The Western Strandline represents the first conventional resource at Tormin and will become a cornerstone deposit, together with the Company’s existing Tormin Beaches and Northern Beaches mining areas. The recent JORC Resource of 2.5Mt @ 23.5% THM at the Northern Beaches has doubled the Company’s placer beach mining area and, by scheduling mining from the Western Strandline, the Company can optimise and manage the ongoing replenishment rate of these unique active placer beach mining deposits.

The Western Strandline Mineral Resource Estimate represents a twenty-fold increase in the Company’s Mineral Resources – Figure 11.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 11

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [121 x 112] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [440 x 303] intentionally omitted <==

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

Northern Beaches
Tormin Beaches
Western Strandline
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 11: Tormin Orebodies Comparison By Resource Size and Grade - August 2020

The Eastern Strandline of the Inland Strand deposit presents an additional exploration target, which has the potential to further expand the Company’s conventional mineral sands resources.

Bulk sampling from the Western Strandline is ongoing and development of the the first pit will commence in the coming few days. A new front end feed system will be constructed, including a crushing circuit, as well as additional classification, concentration and thickener circuits. These front end and additional upgrades will target increased total primary processing capacity from the current ~2.5Mtpa to up to 4Mtpa.[5]

Detailed testwork and engineering design work has already commenced on the planned front end upgrades, with the Company anticipating 4Mtpa[1] throughput capacity by 2022.

MRC targets delivery of Ore Reserve estimates in Q4 2020. The Company is continuing a 10,000m drilling program designed to infill the existing targeted resource areas and step out the resource along the extent of the known mineralised zones on the northern and southern extensions of the Western Strandline, as well as the Eastern Strandline, to complete fence line resource drilling as part of a strategy to unlock the full potential of the Prospecting Right by June quarter 2021.

5- These present expected capacity only and do not represent actual annual production guidance. Specific annual production guidance will be provided on a quarterly and annual basis.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

END

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 12

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [93 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Issued by Mineral Commodities Ltd ACN 008 478 653 www.mineralcommodities.com. Authorised by the Executive Chairman and Company Secretary, Mineral Commodities Ltd.

For enquiries, please contact:

INVESTORS & MEDIA Peter Fox Investor Relations and Corporate Development T: +61 8 6253 1100 investor@mncom.com.au

CORPORATE Peter Torre Company Secretary T: +61 8 6253 1100 peter@torrecorporate.com.au

About Mineral Commodities Ltd

Mineral Commodities Ltd (ASX: MRC) is a global mining and development company with a primary focus on the development of high-grade mineral deposits within the mineral sands and battery minerals sectors.

The Company is a leading producer of zircon, rutile, garnet and ilmenite concentrates through its Tormin Mineral Sands Operation, located on the Western Cape of South Africa. In October 2019, the Company completed the acquisition of Skaland Graphite AS, the owner of the world’s highest-grade operating flake graphite mine and one of the only producers in Europe. The planned development of the Munglinup Graphite Project, located in Western Australia, builds on the Skaland acquisition and is a further step toward an integrated, downstream value-adding strategy which aims to capitalise on the fastgrowing demand for sustainably manufactured lithium-ion batteries.

Cautionary Statement

This report may contain forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements reflect management’s current beliefs based on information currently available to management and are based on what management believes to be reasonable assumptions. It should be noted that several factors could cause actual results or expectations to differ materially from the results expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 13

27 August 2020

ASX: MRC ASX: MRC

==> picture [121 x 112] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Persons Statement

The information in this Announcement related to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled and approved for release by Mr Bahman Rashidi, who is a member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and the Australian Institute of Geoscientists (AIG). Mr Rashidi is the Exploration Manager and a full-time employee of the Company and has over 22 years of exploration and mining experience in a variety of mineral deposits and styles. Mr Rashidi has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person in accordance with the JORC Code (2012).

The information from Mr Bahman Rashidi was prepared under the JORC Code (2012). Mr Rashidi consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [71 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

ABN 39 008 478 653 info@mncom.com.au www.mncom.com.au

Page 14

Appendix 1 JORC TABLE 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
• Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1m samples from which 3kg was pulverised to produce a 30g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	• The current resource database consists of 328 aircore holes and 2 sonic holes , representing 7,202m of vertical drilling, and their analytical data. • Sample taken from surface to bedrock. • Mineralogical studies and grade testwork undertaken according to mine control standards within Tormin mine site laboratory. • Sampled exclusively by vertical holes. • One-metre air core drill samples from a cyclone were collected in 20-25kg plastic bags. • Each bag was riffle split into two pre-numbered calico bags of ~5kg each and the remainder of the samples collected in a large plastic bag. • 5kg samples were submitted directly to the Tormin mine laboratory to be analysed for oversize, slimes and heavy minerals. • The laboratory sample was dried, de-slimed (removal of -45 micron fraction) and screen (+1mm oversize). • 200g of sample split to use for heavy liquid separation using TBE with density range between 2.92 and 2.96g/ml to define THM content.
• Drilling techniques	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Banka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	• Air core drilling was used. Air core drilling is considered a standard industry drilling method for HMS mineralisation. • 78mm and 85mm drill bits and rods were used. • Two sonic holes by wide barrel (137mm) drilled. • All holes were drilled vertically.
• Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	• Metric samples from aircore drill were taken and riffled down to a representative sample for heavy liquid separation and XRD. • No sample loss or cavitation were experienced. Dry samples may lose some of their slimes fraction due to blowing out of sampling equipment, however HM are not affected. • Sample recovery was very good. • The twin aircore and sonic drilling provide high quality samples from the face of the drill hole.
• Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	• Each hole was logged by a geologist on pre-printed log sheets. • Geological and lithological observations per depth were recorded together with field sections and hand drawn down- the-hole logs. • Special attention was given to heavy minerals intersected as a guide to potential marine strandlines and marine diamond deposits. • Percentage HMS was recorded from visual observations as well as the magnetic content of each metre by handheld pen magnet. • Marine gravels and contact with basement bedrock recorded as maximum depth of mineralisation. • Each 1m sample was washed and seived to obtain a representative sample stored in numbered chip trays.
• 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.	• Sampling over 1m down the hole intervals as determined by 1m marks on the rig mast. • Drill samples were riffle split into approximately 3kg samples to be assayed. • All samples were dry. • Technicians undertaking the splitting were supervised by minesite geologists to ensure sampling quality. • The sample sizes were considered suitable, based on industry practices of mineral sand exploration.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
	• 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.	• Field duplicate samples were riffled for the Tormin mine laboratory and external QA/QC checks for every 25th sample • Lab duplicate samples were split for the Tormin mine laboratory and for external QA/QC checks.
• Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• All sample analyses were undertaken by the Tormin mine laboratory. • The mine owns and operates a state of the art heavy liquid separation (HLS) lab using TBE with density range between 2.92 and 2.96g/ml with Panalytical XRD machines (the Rietveld method after HLS in an automated mode setup). All grades reported are from XRD results on heavy liquid sink. • Industrial laboratory XRF machines (Panalytical Epsilon 3 ED) are used by Tormin mine as a grade verification check on the XRD zircon content. • The Tormin mine laboratory completes its own internal QA/QC using Certified Reference Material (“CRM”) at the rate of approximately 1 in 50 and sending every 25th sample to the external labs. • 100 field duplicates plus 30 blank samples, and 36 CRMs were included into the sample stream and submitted to the lab. • The CRMs, blank and duplicate sample results are within accepted limits. • External sampling checks for XRD have been done by XRD Analytical and Consulting (200 samples) and UIS Analytical Services (20 samples) and for XRF in Mintek and UIS Analytical Services (10 samples each), accredited laboratories in Pretoria and Johannesburg. Also,10 samples have been assayed in Mintek and UIS Analytical Services by ICP-MS for trace elements and REEs. • The adopted QA/QC protocols are appropriate for the Mineral Resource and public reporting and QA/QC system returning acceptable results. • QEMSCAN testwork on 18 composite samples by SGS, ALS and SJT MetMin was used for verification of the mineral assemblage and the component mineralogy as were grain size distribution and HMS particle size. • Additionally, optical microscopy grain counting was used to confirm heavy mineral assemblage on 4 composite samples. • No geophysical tools or handheld instruments were utilised in the sample analysis.
• 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.	• All sampling was undertaken by mine site personnel overseen by a qualified and experienced mine geologist and independent consultants. • All sample preparation was carried out by qualified staff, supervised by chemists and the laboratory manager. • The lab results and logging have been reviewed by external consultants to MSR as well as internally by MRC’s exploration manager. • 10 twinned holes drilled in different fence lines. • 16 holes (436m) from historical drilling were verified and included into the resource model. • The drillhole logs have been converted to electronically stored formats and stored in a database provided by Maxwell Geoservices (Webshed). This database is hosted on an offsite server supplied by Maxwell Geoservices and managed by their trained database staff. • No adjustments to assay data results were made outside the standard XRD and XRF calibration software being used.
• Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drillholes (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.	• Hole collars were surveyed by DGPS accurate to within centimetres by mine surveyors. • Down hole surveys for shallow vertical air core holes are not required. • WGS 84 datum and UTM/ zone 34S coordinate system is used.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
• Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of exploration results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution are 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.	• Systematic grade spacing used in the drilling program was 250m x 20m containing 23 fence lines. • Each drillhole is spaced 20m apart along each drill line perpendicular to the strandline inferred strike. • The abovementined drill fence line is 250m apart along the strandline strike. • 11 fence lines were drilled between the primary lines in the southern half of strandline with 25m spacing. • 6 fence lines were drilled in the northern extension of strandline with 500m x 20m grade. • 16 holes from historical drilling were verified and included into the resource model. • 10 twinned holes were drilled in different fence lines.
• 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.	• Vertical drilling to intersect sub-horizontal strata. • Orientation of the drillholes will not result in sampling bias.
• Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Sampling was carried out using pre-printed calico bags to prevent mislabelling. • All sample bag numbers were logged against the drillhole by the site geologist. • Three samples per metre drilled were produced. The reject was stored securely in a bag farm for reference, one for external QA/QC use and one were sent directly to the mine lab at the end of each day’s drilling in a secure area. • The Tormin mine laboratory inspected the submitted samples and did not report any missing, nor any error of the samples against the sample lists. • Where external laboratories were used, their chain of custody controls for shipping and sample submission were used.
• Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	• The lab results and logging have been reviewed by external consultants to MSR and internally as part of normal validation processes by MRC. • Wardell Armstrong International (“WAI”) conducted a review of the Mineral Resource Estimate and no material issues were identified.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section)

Criteria	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 area has a granted prospecting right (WC 30/5/1/1/2/10262 PR) in the name of Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd, a subsidiary of ASX listed Mineral Commodities Ltd (ASX: MRC). • This Prospecting Right (Inland Strand) incorporates an area approximately 12km in length covering 1,741 hectares of coastal area adjacent to the existing beach mining operations on the Company-owned farm Geelwal Karoo 262. • Section 102 Mining Right (WC 30/5/1/2/2/10108 MR) application encompassing the Northern Beaches and Inland Strandline expansion project was approved by the Department of Mineral Resources - South Africa on 30 June 2020.
• Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• The general area has been investigated and mined for heavy mineral deposits as far back as the 1930s (Haughton, 1931). Subsequent geological surveys and exploration programs investigated the distribution, mineralogy and economic potential of the heavy mineral sands along the coastline of Geelwal Karoo (Toerien & Groeneveld 1957, Abele 1989, Swart 1990, Barnes 1998) and Trans Hex 1989-1991). • De Beers drilled 9 fence lines across the property and bulk sampled the area in the 1960s. • During 1999, Trans Hex conducted additional onshore drilling of strandlines and identified the inland raised beach deposits containing heavy minerals. Trans Hex subsequently bulk sampled the material by digging several trenches in 1999-2000. • Geelwal Karoo Diamante conducted small diameter forum drilling to a depth of 40m between 2000 and 2002, with a total of 42 drillholes. • Extensive work, including mining of the inshore strandlines along the coast, was undertaken by Namakwa Diamond Company in 2003-2005. This work also identified the presence of the Inland Strand.
• Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The western coastal plain of South Africa contains a significant resource of detrital heavy minerals by world standards. • The heavy mineral sand deposits occur in a current active beach environment (eg Tormin mine) as well as in older palaeo-beach raised strandlines found inland (inland strandlines) eg Tronox Namakwa Sands. • Apart from the mid-Jurassic, Cretaceous and Tertiary (Paleogene) sediments along the coast, numerous small fossiliferous, marine and terrestrial deposits of Neogene age outcrop along the coastal zone. • The onshore mineral sands are marine palaeo-terraces “Inland Strands”, aeolian sands and fluvial sediments. These targets were formed during Miocene, Pliocene and Quaternary/Pleistocene coastal transgression (sea move inland) and regression cycles. • The lithological units of the Western Strandline can be described as below: a. Aeolian sand – non mineralised b.Red Aeolin sand – mineralised c. Silcrete Duricrust/ dorbank d.Orange Feldspathic Sand – non mineralised e. Orange Feldspathic Sand – mineralised f. Dorbank – mineralised g.Strandline – mineralised h. Base pebble beds – mineralised i. Schist basement • For purposes of estimation, the lithology has been grouped into the following: A: Red Aeolian sand B: Silcrete Duricrust/dorbank C: Orange Feldspathic Sand D: Main Strandline Mineralisation (including the thin mineralised dorbank) E: Secondary perched strandline mineralisation F: Gravel

Criteria	Explanation	Commentary
		G: Schist basement • The orebody hosts economic mineralisation in five geological layers of enriched extremely high grade heavy mineral strandline deposit, bulk mineralisation in Orange Feldspathic Sand and low grade in red aeloian sand, silcrete/dorbank, and patchy mineralisation in the basal gravel.
• 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.	• The minimum hole length is 6m, maximum 49m and average depth of drilling is 21.8metres. • East collar ranges – 220,486mE to 227,172mE. • North collar ranges – 6,500,894mN to 6,510,977mN. • Height collar ranges- 35.90m to 95.84m. • Azimuth ranges/dip ranges – vertical drilling.
• Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	• Not relevent. • No grade cutting of HM values were undertaken. • No metal equivalents were used for reporting of Mineral Resources.
• Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• The strandline mineralisation is sub-horizontal in nature and the air core drilling intercepts are vertical. • Thickness of intercept reported is therefore true thickness of the mineralisation.
• 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.	• Maps, sections and plan views are provided in the main body of the report.
• 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.	• Statistics of drillhole grades used during the Mineral Resource Estimate are contained in the main body of the report. • This report provides the total information available to date and is considered to represent a balanced report.
• 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.	• Historical drill data is not reported as it is classified as historical foreign estimates that are non-JORC compliant. • Aeromagnetic geophysical data has been used for drilling target delineations. • Only 16 holes (436m) from historical drilling were verified and included into the resource model.
• Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• Further drilling is planned to produce a Measured/Indicated resource over the North and South extensions of Western Strandline and an Inferred/Indicated Resource over the Eastern Strandline.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

(Criteria listed in Section 1, and where relevant in Section 2, also apply to this section)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database integrity	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. • Data validation procedures used.	• The data was plotted and plots where expected with no mis-plots or extraneous data found. Maximum and minimum values and average values were all within the norm. Duplicate values were confirmed as such. The coordinates were confirmed as being WGS84 UTM zone 34S. • Data is stored in an offsite database hosted by Maxwell Geoservices.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. • If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	• The Competent Person is currently a full time employee of Mineral Commodities Ltd. • No site visits were undertaken for this resource estimate due to COVID-19 travel ban, although the Competent Person did visit the project previously and is familiar with the site and resource conditions.
Geological interpretation	• Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. • Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. • The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation. • The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation. • The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.	• The deposit is a classic inland strandline mineral sands deposit with no doubt as to its genesis. • The grain size charactristics are interpreted to support an offshore depositional setting, closer to the shoreline position. • Samples were collected for resource estimation purposes. • The geology/topography of the deposit has been used to constrain the resource envelope. The data was partitioned into areas (subsets) based on geology/topography. The base of the deposit is defined by the underlying bedrock, the landward side by barren land and sand dunes.
Dimensions	• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	• The total deposit, inside MSR controlled Prospecting Rights, has a strike length along the coastline of approximately 11,750m and an average width from the dunes to within the surf zone of 150m. It is developed from surface to a maximum depth of 49m and the average resource thickness is approximately 21m. The deposit occurs from the surface down.
Estimation and modelling techniques	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen, include a description of computer software and parameters used. • The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data. • The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. • Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). • In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed. • Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. • Any assumptions about correlation between variables. • Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates. • Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. • The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	• Micromine software was used to domain and estimate each of the valuable heavy minerals. Domains were snapped to the nearest true intersection from sampling. • Assays were all 1.0m, so no compositing was required. • Outlier values were cut based on local analysis for each lithology and each variable. There is a nugget effect of between 60 and 70%: Top cut: - STRAND2 THM at 55%, garnet at 10%, ilmenite at 10% - Dorbank/silcrete THM at 30% - RAS THM at 15%, Garnet at 10%, Ilmenite at 5%, Zircon at 1%, Rutile at 1% • Data was extrapolated between data points and approximately half of the drill spacing beyond. Data points are nominally 125 x 25m to 250 x 25m. There are generally between 2-15 drill holes per line. • Ordinary kriging was used as the primary estimator. Each variable was estimated separately, using variograms created for each lithology. STRAND and STRAND2 lithology types. All lower grade lithology units used an LGSAND variogram, constructed with data from all lower grade lithology units. • An anisotropic search was used, with the variable ratios of direction of greatest continuity: Across the continuity: depth. (STRAND 1:0.4:0.04, STRAND2 2:0.6:0.06, LGSANDS 4:0.4:0.08) A maximum search distance of 500m was used for both STRAND units, and 750m for LGSAND units. Octant searching was used, with maximum points per sector of between 5 and 12. Minimum points to estimate a block were 5. These neighbourhood parameters were all confirmed using cross validation. • This is a resource estimate and mining parameters are not used beyond normal global parameters of grades, dimensions, and accessibility. • The THM standard deviation in the block model is as follows: - 12.1 with a coefficient of variation of 1.14 • These values are acceptable as they indicate the modelling algorithm produces realistic values within the range of the dataset. In addition, an in-depth validation process was used to test the robustness of the modelled data, including visual checks, check estimates (IDW and NN), swath plots and detailed statistical comparisons.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	• The resource tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
Cut-off parameters	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	• Final report was based on a 2% THM cut off grade for blocks as this is the current minimum grade where there is a reasonable expectation for eventual extraction. • 2% cut off grade was based on grade-tonnage curves with respect to THM and VHM assemblage. Also taken into account was current and anticipated plant performance, and other similarly sized deposits in the region.
Mining factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	• The resource is considered as dry mining feed and mineralisation can be any depth or width. Dry mining techniques are preferred in situations involving high grades. • Mining would be through conventional open pit methods. • There is no stripping except ~25cm top soil as mining starts at the surface. • The thickness and continuous nature of the mineralisation, supports a non-selective bulk mining method. • The Company believes there are no mining factors which affect the assumption that the deposit has reasonable prospects for eventual economic mining. • For evaluation of resources within the S102 Mining Right area, the Micromine block model was sub-blocked to 4x4x4m to aid selection of blocks within this perimeter.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	• The metallurgical recovery is similar to other mineral sand operations. • Metallurgical parameters have been taken from the metallurgical tests, and metallurgical testworks results support the recovery. The VHM mineral assemblage, low slimes and oversize are fit for an economic extraction. The level of garnet is slightly greater than at other deposits. • To date, any changes that MRC undertake have not been quantified or assumed to change the product specifications.
Environmental factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfield project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered, this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.	• There are no environmental factors likely to affect the assumption that the deposit has reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. • The local vegetation environment generally consists of strandveld plant communities. Topsoil stripped from the mining operations will be stockpiled for later use during rehabilitation. • Tailings generated in the processing plant will be pumped back into the open pits as part of the rehabilitation strategy. Any excess water will be recovered and recycled to the process. • There are no pollutants introduced with the tailings and the material is inert, however further studies for tailing and slime waste classification are ongoing.
Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. • The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. • Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluationprocess of the different materials.	• The bulk density is based on a calculation of the specific gravity of the silica and heavy mineral content fractions of each sample. It is therefore not fixed and fluctuates between 1.68 and 2.1 as per the formula: SG=1.68+(0.0095 x THM). • The use of a bulk density algorithm is a standard industry practice for the estimation of mineral sands resource.
Classification	• The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories. • Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (ie relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data). • Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	• The Mineral Resources have been classified as Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Categories, in accordance with the 2012 Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (“JORC Code (2012)”). • A range of criteria has been considered in determining this classification including: o Geological continuity o Drillhole spacing: - Areas with aircore drilling spaced at 125x25m have been generally classified Measured - Areas with aircore drilling spaced at 250x20m have been generally classified Indicated. o Slope of regression of the kriging estimate – this is a measure of the robustness of the estimate:

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		- Where slope is greater than 0.85, and previous categories have been met, the final resource has been classified as Measured. - Where there is a cluster of blocks with slope between 0.7 and 0.85, even if other criteria have been met for higher classification, the resource has been classified as Indicated. - Where there is a cluster of blocks where slope is less than 0.7, even if other criteria have been met for higher classification, the resource has been classified as Inferred. - For GRAVEL and DORBANK lithologies, the thin nature of the lithology has increased variability and decreased confidence in tonnes reported, leading to lowering of classification. • The results of the validation of the block model show acceptable correlation of the input data to the estimated grades. • The author is confident that all relevant factors have been considered and the results reflect his views.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	• The Mineral Resource has been reviewed internally as part of normal validation processes by MRC. • Wardell Armstrong International (“WAI”) conducted a review of the Mineral Resource Estimate and no material issues were identified. Mr Ché Osmond (CGeol) and Richard Ellis (CGeol) (WAI) undertook an audit of the Mineral Resource estimate as an independent technical review. • This is considered to be a maiden Mineral Resource Estimate under the guidelines of the JORC Code (2012) since this is the first resource estimate completed in this project.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence	• Where appropriate, a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	• An in-depth geostatistical study has been completed on this resource, which has allowed for robust estimation and high levels of confidence in the resource.