NORDIC RESOURCES LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2022

Jul 6, 2022

NORDIC DELIVERS MAIDEN 133.6Mt MINERAL RESOURCE – 278,520t Ni and 12,560t Co

Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource for extensive shallow disseminated nickel mineralisation at Hotinvaara within the flagship Pulju Nickel Project

HIGHLIGHTS

• Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) completed for Hotinvaara Prospect:

• Total MRE of 133.6Mt @ 0.21% Ni, 0.01% Co for 278,530t of contained Ni and 12,650t Co;

• Indicated Resource of 20.9Mt @ 0.22% Ni, for 46,540t of contained Ni;

• Inferred Resource of 112.7Mt @ 0.21% Ni, for 231,990t of contained Ni.

• The Hotinvaara deposit starts at surface, with 227,000t contained Ni metal (81% of total) within 250m of the surface.

• Significantly increased Exploration Target highlights potential for further substantial resource growth.

• Previously reported test work[1] indicated 83-94% of total nickel is in sulphides, with excellent liberation characteristics.

• Maiden MRE demonstrates strong metal endowment within an extensive nickelrich system, a strong platform for upcoming exploration drilling program.

Nickel sulphide explorer Nordic Nickel Limited (ASX: NNL ; Nordic, or the Company ) announces its maiden Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for the Hotinvaara Prospect ( Hotinvaara ) at its flagship 100% owned Pulju Nickel Project ( Pulju, or the Project ) in Finland.

Pulju is located in the Central Lapland Greenstone Belt (CLGB) of Finland, 50km north of Kittilä with access to world class infrastructure, grid power, national highway, international airport and, most importantly, Europe’s only two nickel smelters. The municipality of Kittilä also hosts western Europe’s largest gold mine, Suurikuusikko, operated by Agnico Eagle.

The known nickel mineralisation in the CLGB is typically associated with ultramafic cumulate and komatiitic rocks with high-grade, massive sulphide lenses and veins enveloped by very large, lower grade disseminated nickel near surface. The disseminated nickel at Pulju is widespread, but the known massive sulphides will be the primary target for the upcoming drill campaign at Hotinvaara.

Pulju’s maiden MRE of 133.61Mt @ 0.21% Ni, in addition to its revised Exploration Target of 275415Mt @ 0.17-0.25% Ni and 76-114ppm Co for 459-1,032kt contained Ni and 21-47kt contained Co, is based only on the potential of the near-surface disseminated mineralisation.

The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature. There has been insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource for the Exploration Target.

Importantly, the Exploration Target is limited solely to the extent of the Hotinvaara exploration licence area, representing just 5km[2] of Nordic’s total prospective project area of 395km[2 ] at Pulju.

1. Nordic Nickel Ltd ASX Announcement 22 June 2022

Management Comment

Commenting on the maiden MRE, Nordic Nickel Managing Director, Todd Ross, said: “The Company is proud to be delivering our maiden Mineral Resource Estimate just one month after listing on the ASX. Gaining access to the high quality historical drill core at Hotinvaara from Outokumpu has not only confirmed the extensive disseminated nickel sulphide mineralisation and the scale of the Pulju nickel system, it has also highlighted the potential to discover bonanza grade massive sulphides at depth which is the focus of Nordic’s upcoming drilling program.

The MRE for Hotinvaara, together with the previously announced first pass mineralogical test work program, has provided us with strong encouragement that the disseminated mineralisation at Hotinvaara can potentially be economically recovered.”

Location

The location of the Pulju Project is shown in Figure 1. The Project area has few permanent inhabitants and most of the land is owned by Metsähallitus (Forestry Office, Finnish Government).

==> picture [349 x 319] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Location of Pulju Nickel Project and Europe’s entire nickel smelting and refining capacity

Pulju is located 195km from Boliden’s Kevitsa Ni, Cu, Au-PGE mine and 9.5Mtpa processing plant in Sodankyla, Finland. Kevitsa provides feed for the 19ktpa Harjavalta smelter which is approximately 950km to the south and processes concentrate from Kevitsa’s low grade disseminated nickel sulphide ore (Resource Ni grade ~0.21%). Europe’s only other smelter is Terrafame’s 37ktpa Sotkamo smelter which is located 560km from Pulju.

1

==> picture [497 x 351] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Pulju Project area showing location of Hotinvaara deposit area in green outline where JORC Mineral Resource Estimate is contained.

Exploration History and Tenure

The claim history of Pulju started with Outokumpu Mining Oy (Outokumpu), a Finnish state-owned mining company, in 1979. Outokumpu drilled ~10,000m (51 holes) at Hotinvaara between 19851998 with the majority of these drill holes shallow (<300m) as the company was focused solely on open pit nickel projects at that time. Many holes at Hotinvaara ended in ultramafic cumulates with disseminated Ni-sulphides.

Importantly, the highly prospective base of the ultramafic cumulate sequence was never reached by the historic drilling. The basal contact is where high-grade Sakatti-style Ni-Cu deposits have the potential to be located and this contact will be a primary focus of NNL’s maiden drilling program. In addition, several large, as yet untested EM conductors have been identified within and below the disseminated mineralisation and will also be tested as part of the maiden drilling program.

The Pulju Project area consists of one granted Exploration Licence (EL) and seven EL applications together covering a total area of 98.09km[2] . A granted exploration reservation area covering approximately 323km[2] surrounds and overlaps the licences. The reservation area provides Nordic with exclusive rights to submit further Exploration Licence applications. In total, the Pulju Project area covers 395 km[2] and all licences are 100% owned by NNL.

2

Mineral Resource Estimate

Nordic has undertaken an extensive analysis of the historic pulps and newly sampled core at Hotinvaara using comprehensive QAQC to check the accuracy of the historical assays, and this has formed the basis for the maiden MRE.

The Hotinvaara exploration licence contains a JORC (2012) Mineral Resource Estimate of 133.61Mt @ 0.21% Ni, 95ppm Co and 57ppm Cu for 278,530t of contained Ni, 12,650t Co and 7,620t Cu.

Resource estimation has been based on a conventional 3D block model, with estimated grades of Ni, Co and Cu. Nickel is reported as total nickel (nickel derived from both silicate and sulphide minerals). These resources are considered as potentially amenable to open-pit mining.

The mineralised zone reflects NE-SW trending mineralised cumulate lenses. A series of wireframe models were interpreted for Ni-mineralised zones, based on a cut-off of 1,500ppm Ni. A volumetric block was generated, using parent block sizes of 20m x 20m x 10m.

The overall extent of the mineralised zones covers a strike length of approximately 1,700m, an overall width of 1,900m and maximum depth of 500m.

The evaluation work was carried out and prepared in accordance with the JORC Code (2012). The in-situ mineral resource estimation (total nickel) at different cut-off grades in Table 1.

JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades	JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades	JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades	JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades	JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades	JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades	JORC(2012) Mineral Resource Estimate at different cut-off grades
0.13% Ni cut-off					Contained Metal
Resource Class	Tonnes Ni Co Cu Mt % ppm ppm				Ni Co Cu Kt Kt Kt
Indicated	21.40	0.22	99	56	47.19	2.13	1.20
Inferred	122.85	0.20	92	56	246.41	11.35	6.87
TOTAL	144.25 0.20 93 56				293.60 13.47 8.07
0.15% Ni cut-off					Contained Metal
Resource Class	Tonnes Ni Co Cu Mt % ppm ppm				Ni Co Cu Kt Kt Kt
Indicated	20.95	0.22	100	56	46.54	2.09	1.18
Inferred	112.66	0.21	94	57	231.99	10.56	6.45
TOTAL	133.61 0.21 95 57				278.53 12.65 7.62
0.17% Ni cut-off					Contained Metal
Resource Class	Tonnes Ni Co Cu Mt % ppm ppm				Ni Co Cu Kt Kt Kt
Indicated	18.71	0.23	101	55	42.91	1.88	1.02
Inferred	93.26	0.22	96	57	200.78	8.93	5.33
TOTAL	111.97 0.22 97 57				243.69 10.81 6.35

Table 2: Summary of In-Situ Resources at different cut-off grades

3

In accordance with ASX Listing Rules and the 2012 JORC reporting guidelines, a summary of the material information used to estimate the Mineral Resource is detailed below (for more detail please refer to JORC Table 1, Sections 1 to 3 included below).

Geology and Geological Interpretation

The Paleoproterozoic supracrustal rocks of the Pulju Greenstone Belt (PGB) are within the northwestern CLGB and form one of the largest known Paleoproterozoic greenstone belts in the world. The CLGB compares to other prospective greenstone belts such as Norseman-Wiluna, Abitibi, and Zimbabwe Craton and is interpreted to be equally prospective but underexplored for magmatic NiCu-(PGE) and gold orogenic deposits.

A regional geological map of the CLGB is shown in Figure 4. The belt can be traced into Norway where it joins the Karasjok Greenstone Belt.

==> picture [490 x 348] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Geological Map of CLGG (Geological Survey of Finland, GTK).

The lower part of the PGB consists of metasedimentary units and minor mafic metavolcanic rocks (Sietkuoja formation) of the Sodankylä group. The metavolcanic and metasedimentary units in the middle part (Mertavaara formation) of the sequence are associated with komatiitic rocks of the Savukoski group. MgO-rich olivine cumulates are rare in the CLGB, but in the PGB, they are common. These cumulate bodies host the Hotinvaara Ni-(Cu) deposit and some other minor nickelcopper prospects. Sulphur-rich metasedimentary rocks and felsic metavolcanic rocks are among the lithological components of the Mertavaara formation.

4

Komatiites are interbedded with sulphide-bearing metasedimentary rocks and metavolcanic rocks. The metasedimentary unit (paraschists with graphite-bearing interlayers) of the Vittaselkä formation (Savukoski group) forms the uppermost part of the stratigraphical succession in the PGB.

Non-differentiated komatiitic lava flows appear to occur as independent layers together with mafic metavolcanic rocks of the Mertavaara formation. These rocks are characterised by well-preserved primary structures including volcanic breccias, pillows, and tuffogenic layering. They have been correlated with similar komatiites in the Sattasvaara formation of the Savukoski group ( same host rocks as Sakatti and Kevitsa deposits ).

Mineralisation

Several mineralisation styles are present at Pulju from disseminated nickel sulphides to massive sulphides which generally occur at the base of komatiitic cumulate bodies in other global deposits. The wide zones of disseminated nickel sulphide at Hotinvaara are typically found near surface and have been the focus of this MRE based on historic drilling up to approximately 300m depth.

The nickel mineralisation in the CLGB is associated with ultramafic cumulate and komatiitic rocks with high-grade, massive sulphide lenses and veins enveloped by very large, lower grade disseminated nickel near surface.

The most important stratigraphic unit for the formation of magmatic Ni-Cu-PGE sulphide deposits is the 2.05 Ga Savukoski Group. The upper part of the Savukoski Group is dominated by MgO-rich volcanic rocks, komatiites and picrites, and their basaltic derivatives. The lower sedimentary part of the group, the Matarakoski Formation, is composed mainly of fine-grained pelitic rocks, including sulphide- and graphite-bearing black schists, phyllites and mafic tuffites.

The close spatial association of Savukoski Group komatiitic lavas and ultramafic intrusions with sulphidic sediments provides a prospective environment for the formation of magmatic sulphide deposits. This association also occurs at the high grade Sakatti Cu-Ni-PGE deposit, Kevitsa Ni-CuPGE deposit and Lomalampi Ni-PGE deposits.

Petrographic studies have confirmed that the most abundant sulphide minerals at Hotinvaara are pentlandite and pyrrhotite. In addition, chalcopyrite, cubanite, violarite, mackinawite and valleriite are present. Secondary pyrite, marcasite, bravoite are present in subordinate amounts. Sulphides are mainly present as uniform dissemination of anhedral, mono- or polymineralic grains and aggregates. Sulphide grain size is usually within 200-400µm.

Previous work by Outokumpu geologists has demonstrated the nickel sulphides are generally located within the main Hotinvaara ultramafic olivine cumulate (Figure 5). The interpreted - mineralised zones reflect NE-SW trending mineralised cumulate lenses, generally dipping at 30[o] 40[o] to the north-west (Figures 6 & 7).

Nickel in Sulphide

Recent preliminary mineralogy test work conducted by Metso:Outotec in Finland (see Nordic ASX announcement 22 June 2022) concluded that a high percentage of nickel was contained in sulphides (83% of total Ni in Sample 1 and 94% in Sample 2) at Hotinvaara.

The results indicated simple mineralogy with the sole Ni-bearing sulphide minerals being pentlandite (primary) and pyrrhotite (secondary) with excellent liberation characteristics for pentlandite even at relatively large particle sizes.

5

==> picture [365 x 293] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Local geology of the Hotinvaara prospect (Geological Survey of Finland, GTK), showing historical drill holes and highlighting the massive sulphides encountered. Note locations of Section A-A’ (Figure 6) and Section B-B’ (Figure 7).

==> picture [323 x 334] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Section A-A’ (7,555,320mN) Nickel composites (ppm) and block model (view looking north).

6

==> picture [425 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Section B-B’ (7,555,600mN) Nickel composites (ppm) and block model (view looking north).

Drilling

All drilling at Pulju was commissioned and managed by Outokumpu Oy and consisted entirely of diamond drilling. A total of 51 drillholes for 9,621.25m was completed between 1982 and 1998 (1982-1984: HOV001-027; 1986-1987: HOV028-035; 1997–1998: HOV036-051). Drilling contractors Maa ja Vesi Oy completed holes HOV001-HOV008 and Rautaruukki Oy completed holes HOV009-HOV027. The contractor for holes HOV028-HOV051 is unknown. The diamond drill core is mostly 32mm in diameter. Most drillholes have been drilled with an azimuth of 90° and dip of ~45°. The core was not oriented. Core loss was recorded either on the core boxes or in the geological logs, or both. The recovery calculated for the available holes was ~98%. There was no evidence of sample bias or any relationship between sample recovery and grade.

Sampling and sub-sampling

The sampling method was diamond core drilling. The majority of sample lengths were between 1 and 5m, 3m being the most common length. The sampling occurred in two stages:

1. Historical sampling done by Outokumpu Oy at the time of the drilling campaigns in the 1980s and 1990s. The selected core samples were sawn longitudinally such that ½ core was sent to the laboratory. Sample size varied from 0.09-12.07m (max number includes core loss); average sample size is 1-4m.

2. New sampling done by NNL during 2020 and 2021. Sample lengths utilised were similar to that of historical sampling. Part of the sampling was done using historical pulps and partly from core samples sawn longitudinally such that one ¼ core was sent to the laboratory. NNL also sampled prospective lithologies which were not previously assayed. For these gaps, ½ core was sawn longitudinally and sent for analysis.

Control samples were submitted 1/20 (5% each of blanks, duplicates and standards) in the form of standard samples (OREAS 13b, OREAS 14P), blanks (OREAS 22f, OREAS 22e) and coarse rejects and pulp duplicates. Eurofins Labtium also submitted their own internal control samples, in the form of standards and blanks for assay.

7

Sample analysis

Mineralisation was determined by NNL using visual observations and pXRF analysis. All core (51 drillholes) has been logged in detail and sent for assaying by Outokumpu Oy. The 41 drillholes that exist in the Finnish National drill core archive in Loppi have been relogged by NNL. NNL also made susceptibility and density measurements for each lithology. Sample analysis occurred in two stages:

1. Historical sampling done by Outokumpu Oy at the time of the drilling campaigns in the 1980s and 1990s. Holes HOV001 - HOV051 have been analysed by ICP, XRF and/or ASS-analysis methods. For the holes HOV001 - HOV027, the core was analysed in Rautaruukki Oy Raahen Rautatehdas laboratory in Raahe, Finland. In a separate Ni-program, 63 ultramafic samples from HOV001 - HOV027 were analysed in OKME/Outokumpu laboratory for the Ni and Fe content of the olivine and/or pyroxenes and amphiboles. These were analysed with XRF and ASS-analysis methods. The laboratory used for assaying of holes HOV028 - HOV051 is unknown. No quality control procedures were reported.

2. New sampling done by NNL during 2020 and 2021. All samples were analysed by Eurofins Labtium. Samples were sent to Eurofins Labtium Oy Sodankylä for sample preparation. For historical pulps, the sample preparation was done by subsampling matt rolling technique (code 36). For the core samples, the sample preparation was drying sample at 70°C (code 10), fine crushing by jaw crusher to >70% at <2mm (code 31), pulverizing in a hardened steel bowl (max. 1.5kg) (code 51). The analysis 240P (sulphide selective leach; ICP-OES finish) and 703P (fire assay fusion; ICP-OES finish) was done in Sodankylä, 304P/M (four acid digestion; ICPOES/ICP-MS finish) in Kuopio and 175Xa (pressed pellet; XRF finish) in Oulu University material centre.

A database consisting of 2,839 samples was compiled by Nordic from the historic assays and newly acquired data. Where there was an overlap in different analytical methods for a sample, final Ni, Cu and Co assays, values from the newly acquired data were preferentially selected over the historical results. This was based on the assumption that the modern analytical methods would be more accurate than historical methods. The final database consisted of 1,461 samples assayed by historical XRF, 471 samples by historical ICP, 243 samples by historical AAS and 664 samples by newly acquired 4-acid digest with ICP-OES finish (Eurofins method 304-P). Of the total database, 869 samples were also analysed following partial leach acid digestion to determine Ni-in-sulphide contents (Eurofins method 240-P).

Estimation Methodology

Resource estimation was based on a conventional 3D block model using Datamine, with estimated grades of Ni, Co and Cu. Nickel is reported as total nickel (nickel derived from both silicate and sulphide minerals). A series of wireframe models were interpreted for Ni-mineralised zones, based on a cut-off of 1,500ppm Ni. A volumetric block was generated, using parent block sizes of 20m x 20m x 10m. The primary group of samples within the mineralised zone structures were converted into approximately 5m downhole composites. During the compositing process, outlier grades were capped on the basis of capping levels determined by log probability plots, decile analysis and coefficient of variation analysis.

Grade estimation was completed using ordinary kriging (OK). Alternative grade values were also estimated using inverse-distance weighting (ID) and nearest neighbour estimation (NN), for validation purposes. Directional anisotropy was used to control the orientation of estimation search ellipses. Resource classification criteria were based on criteria which included variography results and drillhole coverage.

8

Classification Criteria

In consideration of the available sample data, and geological understanding of the deposit, the resource classification criteria were as follows:

• Indicated Resources: covered by a grid of at least three drillholes, found within an 80m x 80m x 20m search area.

• Inferred Resources: Can be interpolated from a single hole, but extrapolation distance limited to 100m.

Cut-off Grade

The main reference cut-off used for resource estimation was 0.15% (total Ni), as appropriate for potential open pit mining. This cut-off grade level corresponds to a nickel price of US$16,750/t Ni and assumed parameters applicable for a bulk mining open pit operation. Where appropriate, parameters were based on those of Boliden’s operating Kevitsa mine in Finland.

Mining and Metallurgical Methods and Parameters

No detailed mining and metallurgical studies have been undertaken. Nickel in sulphide (partial leach) assays were undertaken on selective samples submitted during 2021. These results suggest an average nickel in sulphide content of approximately 75%. Two bulk samples provided to Metso:Outotec for petrological and mineral liberation studies returned results of 83% (sample 1 – 0.238% Ni-Total) and 94% (sample 2 – 0.714% Ni-Total) nickel in sulphides. Full details of this study are provided in Nordic ASX release 22 June, 2022.

Hotinvaara Exploration Target

On the basis of the historic drilling at Hotinvaara, it is noted the mineralisation is open to the south and northeast. However, the prospective lithological units that host the mineralisation extend well beyond the drilling area. The prospective Mertavaara Formation host rocks (ultramafic cumulates, serpentinites and komatiites) have been mapped to continue to the south, northeast and northwest (Figure 8).

Approximately 35km[2] of the prospective Mertavaara Formation has been mapped across the Pulju Project exploration licences. The huge extent of the Mertavaara Formation highlights the considerable potential for other deposits within the project area, should drilling be successful. Only 2.5km[2] (7%) of the 35km[2] of Mertavaara Formation occurs within the active Hotinvaara Exploration Licence and is used in this Exploration Target estimate. Mineralisation external of the Mertavaara Formation has not been considered in this estimation. Consequently, the Exploration Target represents only a small part of the prospective geology across the full project area (Figure 9).

Exploration Target – estimation methodology

To estimate the potential of the Hotinvaara Exploration Licence area, the following methodology was applied:

1. The MRE was projected to surface to calculate its surficial expression area (0.70km[2] ). Based on the MRE tonnes, at the 0.15% cut-off, contained within the surficial expression, it is estimated the Mertavaara Formation has the potential to host ~190 million tonnes/km[2] .

2. Approximately 2.50km[2] of Mertavaara Formation has been mapped within the Hotinvaara Exploration Licence area. Excluding the 0.70km[2] that the MRE was calculated within, it is estimated 1.80km[2] of prospective Mertavaara Formation remains to be explored within the Hotinvaara Exploration Licence area.

9

1. To determine the potential tonnes, a maximum and minimum increase of approximately 20% was made to the aforementioned estimate to allow for uncertainty in the exact proportion of mineralised rock.

2. To determine the potential grade, the MRE grade was taken as representative of the average grade and then varied by a maximum and minimum increase of 20% to allow for uncertainty.

Based on the Exploration Target estimation methodology outlined above, it is estimated the Hotinvaara Exploration Licence area has the potential to contain approximately 275– 415Mt @ 0.17-0.25% Ni, 76-114ppm Co and 46–68ppm Cu for 459–1,032kt contained Ni, 21-47kt contained Co and 13-28kt contained Cu.

The potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature, there has been insufficient exploration and drilling to estimate a Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.

Exploration Target – initial test

It is estimated approximately 65 drill holes would be required as an initial test of the potential of the Exploration Target area. Initial hole spacing within the Exploration Target area is planned on a nominal 200m by 200m grid. Figure 9 shows approximate locations of the proposed drill holes with drilling planned during the 2022 and 2023 field seasons. Should this initial drilling within the Exploration Target area be successful, additional drilling would probably be required to determine if an Inferred category for a JORC (2012) Mineral Resource can be estimated outside the current MRE block model areas (refer Figure 9).

A scoping study level metallurgical testing program is also planned to be undertaken to determine the proportion of floatable nickel sulphide minerals versus non-economic nickel silicate minerals. Bench-scale float tests should provide insights into nickel mineral species, nominal processing recovery rates and concentrate grades.

==> picture [475 x 317] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8: Pulju Project local geology (Geological Survey of Finland, GTK).

10

==> picture [466 x 499] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9: Hotinvaara Exploration Licence highlighting prospective geology (Mertavaara Formation) and surficial expression of 2022 Mineral Resource Estimate (green). Proposed drill holes to test Exploration Target highlighted by red dots. Inset: Pulju Project exploration licences and granted exploration reservation area highlighting full extent of Mertavaara Formation.

Difference to previous Exploration Target

The new Exploration Target has the following parameter differences to those used in the September 2021 estimate:

• New volumetric block model based on 0.15% Ni cut-off (133.6Mt) whereas the original estimate was based on a 0.2% Ni cut-off (63.9Mt). For the 0.7km[2] area that the volumetric model occupies when projected to surface, this equates to 190Mt/km[2] in the new estimate versus 91Mt/km[2] in the previous estimate.

• To determine the likely tonnes and grade, a maximum and minimum increase of approximately 20% was made in the new estimate, versus 10% in the previous estimate.

11

Authorised for release by: Todd Ross – Managing Director

For further information please contact:

Nordic Nickel

Todd Ross – Managing Director

T: + 61 416 718 110

E: todd.ross@nordicnickel.com

W: nordicnickel.com

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources defined at Hotinvaara is based on information compiled by Mr Adam Wheeler who is a professional fellow (FIMMM), Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining. Mr Wheeler is an independent mining consultant. Mr Wheeler has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity that he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’ (the JORC Code). Mr Wheeler consents to the inclusion of this information in the form and context in which it appears in this report.

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation compiled under the supervision of Dr Lachlan Rutherford, a consultant to the Company. Dr Rutherford is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. He has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code). Dr Rutherford consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Forward Looking Statement

This announcement contains forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties, including reference to the conceptual Exploration Target area which surrounds the maiden Hotinvaara MRE described in this announcement. These forward-looking statements are expressed in good faith and believed to have a reasonable basis. These statements reflect current expectations, intentions or strategies regarding the future and assumptions based on currently available information. Should one or more of the risks or uncertainties materialise, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary from the expectations, intentions and strategies described in this announcement. No obligation is assumed to update forward looking statements if these beliefs, opinions and estimates should change or to reflect other future developments.

12

APPENDIX 1

==> picture [596 x 77] intentionally omitted <==

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria	**JORC Code explanation **	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random	•	The main sampling method has been diamond drill core. In the
techniques	chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement		Hotinvaara area, 51 drillholes (HOV001 - HOV051) were drilled
	tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such		by Outokumpu Mining Oy during three stages: 1982 - 1984
	as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments,		(HOV001 - HOV027), 1986 - 1987 (HOV028 - HOV035) and
	etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the	1997 - 1998 (HOV036 - HOV051). Altogether 9621.45m was
	broad meaning of sampling.	drilled. Most drillholes have been drilled with an azimuth of 90°
	• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample	and dip of ~45°.
	representivity and the appropriate calibration of any	•	Drill collar locations have been provided by Outokumpu Oy,
	measurement tools or systems used.		located in 1997 and 1998. Collar locations were re-checked by
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are		Nordic Nickel Ltd (“NNL”) in June 2021 and surveyed using a
	Material to the Public Report.		SatLab SLC6 RTK-ReceiverDGPS. It was noted that there was
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this		a consistent 95m NW shift in true collar locations relative to
	would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling		the Outokumpu collar table. Corrections were made to account
	was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was		for this shift.
	pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other	•	Mineralisation was determined using lithological changes. All
	cases more explanation may be required, such as where		core (51 drillholes) has been logged in detail and assayed by
	there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.		Outokumpu Oy. The 41 drillholes that exists in the Finnish
	Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine		National drill core archive in Loppi have been relogged by NNL.
	nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.		Measurements were also made with a pXRF, Susceptibility and
			density measurements taken for each lithology.
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer,	•	Diamond drilling contractors: Maa ja Vesi Oy (HOV001-
techniques	rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg		HOV008); Rautaruukki Oy (HOV009-HOV027); contractor
	core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond		unknown for remaining holes (HOV028-HOV051).
	tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is	•	The diamond drill core is mostly 32mm in diameter.
	oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	•	The core is not oriented.
		•	All drilling in Hotinvaara was commissioned and managed by
			Outokumpu Oy.
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample	•	Core loss has been marked on core boxes for holes HOV005,
recovery	recoveries and results assessed.		HOV007, HOV009 - HOV014, HOV016 - HOV021, HOV023 -
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure		HOV027,HOV029 - HOV035. Core loss was recordedinboth

==> picture [594 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [254 x 30] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	**JORC Code explanation **	Commentary
	representative nature of the samples.	the logs and on the core boxes for HOV036 - HOV051. The
	• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and	recovery calculated for these 41 holes was ~98%.
	grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to	• There was no evidence of sample bias or any relationship
	preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	between sample recovery and grade.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	• The core was logged to a level of detail to support a MRE.
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support	• The core has been logged in detail by Outokumpu Oy for all 51
	appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and	drillholes in Finnish. The Logging was completed recording
	metallurgical studies.	lithology, mineralogy, veining, textures and alteration features.
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core	The logs include most assays and susceptibility measurements.
	(or costean, channel, etc) photography.	• NNL has relogged and photographed 41 out of 51 drillholes
	• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections	which exist at the national Finnish drill core archive in Loppi
	logged.	(Geological Survey of Finland). The 41 drillholes, totalling
		7552.81m, include: HOV005, HOV007, HOV009 - HOV014,
		HOV016 - HOV021, HOV023 - HOV027, HOV029 - HOV051.
		NNL has relogged the drillholes in English, recording lithology,
		mineralogy, veining, textures, alteration features and
		estimation of sulphide content.
		• In the current drillhole database, 82% of the core from the
		drilling has been logged by NNL.
		• A petrography study from selected thin sections was done by
		Aurora Exploration (Petri Peltonen) in 2021. It includes 15 thin
		sections from holes HOV007, HOV030 and HOV032 focusing on
		structure and texture of minerals, mineralogy, grain size, as
		well as assessing the potential for sulphide liberation and other
		mineralogical observations that may affect mineral processing.
Sub-sampling	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all	The sampling can be divided into 1) historical sampling done by
techniques	core taken.	Outokumpu; and 2) New sampling done by NNL (2020-2021).
and sample preparation	• 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 sizesareappropriate to thegrain sizeof the	1) Historical sampling • The main sampling of core was done by Outokumpu Oy during the drilling campaigns in the 80s and 90s. The selected core samples were sawn longitudinally such that ½ core was sent to the laboratory. Sample size varied from 0.09 - 12.07 m (max number includes core loss); average sample size is 1 - 4m. • Holes HOV001 - HOV051 have been analysed by ICP, XRF and/or ASS-analysis methods. • For the holes HOV001 - HOV027 analysis numbers (9282-0001

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	**JORC Code explanation **	Commentary
	material being sampled.	– 9282-0275, 9283-1500 – 9283-1971 and 9284-0001 – 9284-
		0435) the core was analysed in Rautaruukki Oy Raahen
		Rautatehdas laboratory in Raahe, Finland.
		• In a separate Ni-program, 63 ultramafic samples from HOV001
		- HOV027 were analysed in OKME/Outokumpu laboratory for
		the Ni and Fe content of the olivine and/or pyroxenes and
		amphiboles. These were analysed with XRF and ASS-analysis
		methods (sample numbers 83-32902 – 83-34934, 84-29595 –
		84-29600.
		• The laboratory used for assaying of holes HOV028 - HOV051 is
		unknown.
		• No quality control procedures were reported.
		2) Resampling by NNL, 2020 – 2021
		• All sampling done by NNL was analysed by Eurofins Labtium.
		The sample preparation was done in the Sodankylä Laboratory.
		The analysis 240P (sulphide selective leach; ICP-OES finish)
		and 703P (fire assay fusion; ICP-OES finish) was done in
		Sodankylä, 304P/M (four acid digestion; ICP-OES/ICP-MS
		finish) in Kuopio and 175Xa (pressed pellet; XRF finish) in Oulu
		University material centre.
		• For the resampling done by NNL, the same sample length was
		used as the historical one. Part of the sampling was done using
		historical pulps, from the Outokumpu drillings, and partly from
		core samples sawn longitudinally such that one ¼ core was
		sent to the laboratory.
		• NNL also did sampled prospective lithologies which were not
		previously assayed in holes HOV036 - HOV051. For these gaps,
		½ core was sawn longitudinally and sent for analysis to Eurofins
		Labtium. Maximum sample length was 3m and shorter for
		lithological changes or marked core loss. The majority of the
		gap samples was 3m in length.
		• Samples were sent from Loppi (Geological Survey of Finland) to
		Eurofins Labtium Oy Sodankylä for sample preparation. For
		historical pulps, the sample preparation was done by
		subsampling matt rolling technique (code 36). For the core
		samples, the sample preparation was drying sample at 70°C
		(code10),fine crushing by jawcrusherto>70% at<2mm

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	**JORC Code explanation **	Commentary
		(code 31), pulverizing in a hardened steel bowl (max. 1.5kg)
		(code 51).
		• Control samples were submitted	1/20 (5% each; 15% total) in
		the form of standard samples (OREAS 13b, OREAS 14P), blanks
		(OREAS 22f, OREAS 22e) and coarse rejects and pulp
		duplicates. Eurofins labtium also submitted their own internal
		control samples, in the form of standards and blanks for assay.
		• It is considered that the sample	sizes used are appropriate	for
		the mineralisation at Hotinvaara.
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	• The primary historical assaying was done by Outokumpu by
assay data	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is	multielement ICP, XRF and ASS methods from longitudinally
and laboratory	considered partial or total.	sawed ½ core. With these assay	methods total Ni was
tests	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF	analysed.
	instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the	• The re-sampling and gap sampling done by NNL in 2020-2021
	analysis including instrument make and model, reading	was divided in 2 programs:
	times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.	1) The first program included re-assaying of 623 historical
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards,	pulps and resampling ¼ core of 70 samples of old
	blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether	Outokumpu intervals:
	acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision	• The main assay method for historical pulps assayed		by
	have been established.	NNL was partial leach (Ni-in-sulphide; Eurofins code
		240P), which was done for all available pulps in holes
		HOV033 - HOV051. A part of the pulps, randomly
		selected, were analysed with 4 acid digestion to
		determine total Ni (Eurofins code ICP-MS, 304M or ICP-
		OES, 304P), Au, Pd, Pt (Eurofins code 703P).
		• 70 core samples from HOV005 - HOV032 were assayed
		using partial leaching for	Ni-in-sulphide (Eurofins code
		240P) and some with 4 acid digestion for total Ni
		(Eurofins code ICP-MS, 304M or ICP-OES, 304P), Au, Pd,
		Pt (Eurofins code 703P) and XRF (175-Xa).
		2) The second program included assaying 757 samples of		core
		which included resampling of selected intervals from the
		Outokumpu sampling (¼ core) and gap sampling (½ core).
		• The resampling was analysed mostly with ICP. However,
		where Ni>1500 ppm in historical assays, it was analysed
		for Ni-in-sulphide (Eurofins code 240P).
		• Thegapsamplingwasanalysedwith multielement ICP

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		(4 acid digest, 31 elements, Eurofins code 304P).
		• Instruments and techniques used:
		• Handheld XRF measurements were done with Thermo
		Scientific Niton Xlt3 XRF analyser, Mining Cu/Zn mode, in 38
		holes; a total of 378 measurements were taken.
		Measurements were done separately for rock matrix
		(duration 60s) and	sulphides (duration 10-20s).
		• Susceptibility measurements were made with GF
		instruments SM20 from 41 holes with 1 or 2m intervals.
		• Density measurements were made for 16 holes targeting
		different lithologies. The density measurements were done
		using Archimedes’ principle, which meant measuring dry
		and wet weight (g)	of selected piece of drill core and the
		water temperature°C,and then entering it into the formula.
		Density measurements were done with both ½ core and
		whole core with intervals and depths recorded.
		• Historical gravity data measured by Outokumpu was
		purchased from GTK in 2020.
		• Ground magnetics was done by Magnus Minerals in 2019
		with GEM’s GSM-19 (Overhauser) magnetometer and data
		was processed by GRM-services Oy.
		• BHEM was completed by GRM-Services in 2021 with EMIT’s
		DigiAtlantis survey equipment (SMARTx4 transmitter, 24-28
		A transmitter current, SMARTem24 receiver, 0.25 Hz base
		frequency, DigiAtlantis probe). Data was processed by GRM-
		Services and modelled by NNL. Surveyed drillholes are:
		HOV040, HOV041 & HOV043.
		• FLEM was completed by Geovisor in December 2021 and
		January 2022 with time domain EM equipment (EMIT’s
		SMART Fluxgate, base frequency 0.25 Hz, transmitter
		current 21-28 Amp). A total of 23.4-line km was measured
		over two separate,	large sized transmitter loops. Data was
		processed by Geovisor and modelled by NNL.
		• For the standards, no two standards in any batch varied by
		more than 2σ from the analysed mean implying a good level of
		analytical precision. Certified blanks were used and analysis at
		acceptablelevels.Course and pulp duplicates showa good

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		correlation between original and duplicate samples
		• Comparisons were made between the historical and new
		sample	where sample intervals were the same. There was an
		acceptable correlation between the historic and new assays (R2
		> 90%). It is therefore considered that the historical assay
		values can be used for reporting.
		• Results of the control sample analysis are considered
		acceptable and lack of bias.
Verification of	• The verification of significant intersections by either	• No external verification done.
sampling and	independent or alternative company personnel.	• No specific twin holes were drilled.
assaying	• The use of twinned holes.	• Historical data for Outokumpu drilling campaigns was
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	purchased from the Geological Survey of Finland in Excel form.
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	Assay results from 2020-2021 were entered and maintained in
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	an Excel database. Any problems encountered during the hole
		data import, combination and de-surveying process were
		resolved with NNL geologists.
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes	• Drill hole collar locations for 44 holes were determined by
data points	(collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and	DGPS (SatLab SLC6 RTK-Receiveraccurate to +/- 2 cm (using
	other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.	correction service Leica Geosystems HxGN SmartNet).
	• Specification of the grid system used.	• Elevations were determined from GTK’s LiDAR digital terrain
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	model.
		• All collar locations are in ETRS89 Zone 35, Northern
		Hemisphere.
		• No downhole surveys were made during historic drilling.
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	• Drill traverses were completed on nominally 50m spacing.
and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to	• Individual drill holes spaced nominally 100m apart within each
distribution	establish the degree of geological and grade continuity	traverse.
	appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve	• It is considered that the spacing of samples used is sufficient
	estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.	for the	evaluation in this study. Following completion of high-
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.	level mineral processing test work to determine recovery of Ni-
		in-sulphide, a JORC (2012) Mineral Resource Estimate could be
		completed.
		• The mineralised volume was defined on a 1500ppm Ni
		wireframe and then computerised models generated at varying
		cut-offs. A computerised block modelling approach has been
		applied	for volumetric estimation,forgradesof Ni,Co andCu.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	**JORC Code explanation **	Commentary
		Consistent with the overall geological characteristics of Ni-
		sulphides within NE-SW trending mineralised cumulate lenses,
		a series of wireframe models were interpreted for Ni-
		mineralised zones, based on west-east section lines.
		• The overall extent of the mineralised zones covers a strike
		length of approximately 1,700m, an overall width of 1,900m
		and maximum depth of 500m.
		• Samples were retrieved within the interpreted zones, and
		these were used to generate 5m composites. A volumetric
		block model was set up using the topography and zone
		wireframe envelopes as control, based on a parent block size
		of 20m x 20m x 10m. Following geostatistical analysis, grades
		of Ni, Co and Cu, were estimated into the block model using
		ordinary kriging (OK).
		• All downhole intersections >0.15% Ni from the 5m composites
		are reported in the Appendix D.
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased	• Drill holes were predominantly oriented 90° (E) with dips of -
data in	sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this	45° to -60° to get as near perpendicular to the lode orientation
relation to	is known, considering the deposit type.	as possible and collect meaningful structural data.
geological	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the	• The mineralisation is generally dipping at 30o-40oto the north-
structure	orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to	west.
	have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed	• True thicknesses are an average 86% that of the downhole
	and reported if material.	thickness.
		• Drilling orientations have not introduced anysampling bias.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• The historical pulps were sent in their original containers from
security		the Finnish National drill core archive (GTK) in Loppi directly to
		the laboratory for sample preparation and analysis in
		Sodankylä and then on to Kuopio by courier. The pulp
		containers had lids and were secured in individual container
		spacings inside a Styrofoam box with a lid.
		• The sawed samples in 2020 (70 samples) were sawn at Loppi
		(GTK) and sent to Sodankylä for sample preparation and
		analysis, and onwards by courier to Kuopio and Oulu for more
		analysis.
		• The sawing for samples (757 samples) in 2021 was done by
		Palsatech in Kemi, the samples were bagged with hard plastic
		bagsandthen tied off with ziptiesandthen shippedtothe lab

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	**JORC Code explanation **	Commentary
		in containers by courier.
		• Sample security of blanks and standards was managed by the
		Company, by bagging them in zip lock bags and taking them
		directly to the laboratory in Sodankylä.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques	• None.
reviews	and data.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	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.	Name		Area Code		Tenement type	Status		Applicant		Application date		Grant date	Expiry date	Area km2
	Saalama		VA2020:0071		Reservation	Valid		PMO		02/11/2020		04/02/2021	01/11/2022	323.59
	Holtinvaara		ML2013:0090		Exploration	Application		PMO		04/11/2013				14.99
	Mertavaara1		ML2013:0091		Exploration	Application		PMO		04/11/2013				11.88
	Aihkiselki		ML2013:0092		Exploration	Application		PMO		04/11/2013				15.75
	Kiimatievat		ML2019:0102		Exploration	Application		PMO		11/11/2019				24.21
	Hotinvaara		ML2019:0101		Exploration	Valid		PMO		11/11/2019		24/01/2020	24/01/2024	4.92
	Rööni-Holtti		ML2022:0009		Exploration	Application		PMO		09/03/2022				18.65
	Saalamaselkä		ML2022:0010		Exploration	Application		PMO		09/03/2022				6.02
	Kaunismaa		ML2022:0011		Exploration	Application		PMO		09/03/2022				1.68
Exploration done by other parties • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• Outokumpu Oy did regional exploration in the area which was followed by drilling in the 1980s and 1990s (51 drillholes completed). • The Hotinvaara area was later held by Anglo American (2003 - 2007) but no exploration results have been reported. To the knowledge of NNL, no drilling was completed in Hotinvaara.
Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The main commodity of economic interest at Hotinvaara is nickel. Minor copper has also been intersected. The main economic minerals are pentlandite and chalcopyrite. The bulk of the mineralisation occurs as disseminated sulphides but there is also semi-massive to massive sulphide veins with high nickel grades. • The main mineralised rock types are komatiites, dunites, serpentinites and metaperidotites (ultramafic cumulates). Also, some mineralisation is hosted by ultramafic skarn. • The Pulju greenstone Belt is located in the western part of the Central Lapland greenstone Belt. The Pulju Belt covers an area of ~10km x 20km.
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	• Drill collar table (Datum: ETRS89/ TM35FIN Zone 35). All drill holes are diamond cored. HOLE ID EASTING NORTHING ELEV. AZI. DIP LENGTH HOV001 391,902 7,555,207 254.0 90 -44.9 88.05 HOV002 391,776 7,555,218 251.2 90 -45.0 192.85 HOV003 391,787 7,555,419 253.7 90 -45.4 186.15 HOV004 391,670 7,555,825 260.1 90 -45.0 93.40
	HOLE ID	EASTING		NORTHING			ELEV.		AZI.	DIP	LENGTH
	HOV001	391,902		7,555,207			254.0		90	-44.9	88.05
	HOV002	391,776		7,555,218			251.2		90	-45.0	192.85
	HOV003	391,787		7,555,419			253.7		90	-45.4	186.15
	HOV004	391,670		7,555,825			260.1		90	-45.0	93.40

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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.	HOLE ID	EASTING	NORTHING	ELEV.	AZI.	DIP	LENGTH
	HOV005	391,602	7,555,979	262.6	90	-44.1	157.20
	HOV006	392,047	7,555,954	262.6	90	-44.4	227.40
	HOV007	391,761	7,555,320	253.2	90	-43.8	222.60
	HOV008	392,062	7,555,099	259.9	90	-45.7	133.55
	HOV009	391,894	7,555,362	255.5	90	-47.0	155.90
	HOV010	391,838	7,555,264	253.4	90	-49.9	207.00
	HOV011	391,720	7,555,321	251.6	90	-52.3	282.70
	HOV012	391,966	7,555,358	256.5	90	-44.8	169.80
	HOV013	392,094	7,555,348	262.8	90	-45.0	71.20
	HOV014	392,073	7,555,852	260.9	90	-45.1	165.90
	HOV015	391,903	7,555,862	264.9	90	-47.0	199.40
	HOV016	392,299	7,555,438	275.4	90	-44.2	167.00
	HOV017	392,600	7,555,471	289.1	90	-46.9	216.00
	HOV018	391,997	7,555,403	257.8	90	-45.0	200.40
	HOV019	393,203	7,555,938	314.3	90	-46.8	183.50
	HOV020	392,791	7,556,163	286.8	88	-46.8	160.00
	HOV021	393,226	7,556,136	308.5	0	-43.3	150.40
	HOV022	392,392	7,556,185	277.7	90	-45.3	182.30
	HOV023	392,490	7,556,280	279.7	90	-45.0	213.90
	HOV024	391,897	7,555,413	256.0	90	-53.3	169.00
	HOV025	391,899	7,555,462	256.3	90	-45.5	200.20
	HOV026	391,738	7,555,270	251.7	90	-46.6	261.00
	HOV027	391,732	7,555,172	250.7	90	-52.0	342.70
	HOV028	392,651	7,555,519	289.4	90	-49.0	222.00
	HOV029	392,733	7,555,564	290.1	110	-50.2	154.80
	HOV030	392,728	7,555,615	289.7	90	-50.1	183.90
	HOV031	392,948	7,555,451	294.7	280	-48.6	183.85
	HOV032	392,788	7,555,611	290.9	90	-51.0	226.00
	HOV033	392,960	7,555,656	309.8	270	-62.6	135.40
	HOV034	392,932	7,555,704	308.7	235	-57.7	146.70
	HOV035	393,082	7,555,544	304.9	290	-58.0	161.10
	HOV036	392,825	7,555,559	291.9	90	-51.0	199.10
	HOV037	392,761	7,555,563	290.6	80	-53.7	238.25
	HOV038	392,803	7,555,660	292.7	70	-49.3	135.60
	HOV039	392,729	7,555,665	287.1	70	-54.5	198.40
	HOV040	392,758	7,555,612	289.7	90	-55.3	624.00
	HOV041	392,888	7,555,604	301.2	90	-53.3	174.85
	HOV042	393,163	7,555,734	314.2	90	-45.0	80.70
	HOV043	392,619	7,555,622	282.5	90	-48.4	380.00
	HOV044	392,970	7,555,800	311.7	80	-49.5	135.10
	HOV045	392,638	7,555,268	298.5	90	-50.0	16.40
	HOV046	392,473	7,555,631	276.8	90	-47.8	166.85
	HOV047	392,374	7,555,638	273.5	90	-50.9	99.25
	HOV048	392,290	7,555,643	269.7	80	-49.9	75.40
	HOV049	391,881	7,555,314	254.9	90	-55.7	320.00
	HOV050	392,271	7,555,839	269.8	90	-49.3	142.60
	HOV051	392,460	7,555,830	277.6	90	-50.3	221.70
	• No information has been excluded.
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. _	• Weighted average grade intersections are reported at a primary cut-off of 1500ppm Ni with a max. 3m internal dilution. Secondary cut-off: 5000ppm Ni, max 0.75m internal dilution. Tertiary cut-off: 10000ppm Ni, max 0.5m internal dilution. • Notopcuts havebeenappliedtothe reported grades.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• 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. • Intersection example: Hole ID From To Int. Ni Cu Co (m) (m) (m) (%) (ppm) (ppm) HOV007 101.60 199.99 97.40 0.319 55 112 incl. 165.05 171.70 6.65 0.817 170 242 incl. 166.90 169.50 2.60 1.050 208 308 • No metallurgical or recovery factors have been used. • No equivalent grades have been calculated.	Cut-off level Primary Secondary Tertiary
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’). • Holes inclined to get as near to perpendicular intersections as possible. • The mineralised drill hole intersections were modelled in 3D in Datamine to interpret the spatial nature and distribution of the mineralisation. • True thicknesses are an average 86% that of the downhole thickness.
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. • Tabulation of intersections summarised in Independent Technical Assessment Report in NNL prospectus (8thApril, 2022). • Tabulation of intersections within the block model are provided in Appendix F. • Overall plan of drillholes: •

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		• Overall Plan of Mineralised Zones’ Interpretation:
		•
		• Overall 3D View of Mineralised Zones’ Interpretation:
		•

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		• Example Section Through Volumetric Block Model – 7555,460mN
		•
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration	• All available relevant information is reported.
reporting	Results is not practicable, representative reporting
	of both low and high grades and/or widths should
	be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
	_Exploration Results. _
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,	• Historical gravity data measured by Outokumpu was purchased from GTK
substantive	should be reported including (but not limited to):	in 2020.
exploration	geological observations; geophysical survey	• Ground magnetics was done by Magnus Minerals in 2019 withGEM’s GSM-
data	results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples	19 (Overhauser) magnetometerand data was processed by GRM-services
	– size and method of treatment; metallurgical test	Oy.
	results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical	• BHEM was completed by GRM-Services in 2021 with EMIT’s DigiAtlantis
	and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or	survey equipment and data was modelled by NNL. Modelling indicates two
	contaminating substances.	target conductors in the vicinity of HOV040.
		• FLEM was completed by Geovisor in December 2021 and January 2022
		with EMIT’s SMART Fluxgate survey equipment and data was modelled by
		NNL. Modelling indicates deep-seated conductors at about 400m, 800m
		and 1500m depths. The conductor at 400m correlates with the deeper
		plate identified from BHEM.
		• A petrology, geochemical and mineral liberation study was undertaken by
		Metso:Outotec. Full details of this study are provided in NNL ASX release
		“Encouraging First Pass Test Work on Hotinvaara Nickel Mineralisation“, 22
		June, 2022.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g.	• A 21,000m infill and extensional drill program has been planned over the
	tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or	upcoming 18 months (two drill seasons) as part of proposed Initial Public
	_large-scale step-out drilling). _	Offering (IPO).

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible	• The mineralisation appears to be open along strike and at depth.
	extensions, including the main geological
	interpretations and future drilling areas, provided
	_this information is not commercially sensitive. _

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

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	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been	• The Competent Person undertook the following validation procedures:
integrity	corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying	verification of resampling assay QC data; it is considered that the
	errors, between its initial collection and its use for	historical assay values can be used for current resource estimation
	Mineral Resource estimation purposes.	purposes.
	• Data validation procedures used.	• Checks during import, combination and desurveying of data. Check
		sections and plans also produced.
		• Historic data management and data validation procedures are unknown.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the	• Adam Wheeler has not undertaken a site visit. Drilling was completed in
	Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.	the 1980; ad 1990’s so no drilling operations could be observed.
	• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why	• MMO, who is the major shareholder of NNL, completed multiple site
	this is the case.	visits to the project the most recent of which was in July 2021 to survey
		the historic drill hole collars.
Geological	• Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the	• The general overall interpretation of the mineralisation is very clear as
interpretation	geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.	the mineralised cumulates are defined through aeromagnetics and
	• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions	mapping. The historic diamond drilling campaign has shown clear
	made.	evidence of disseminated mineralisation.
	• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on	• In the estimation of indicated resources, a maximum extrapolation
	Mineral Resource estimation.	distance of 40m has been applied.
	• The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral	• In the estimation of inferred resources, a maximum extrapolation
	Resource estimation.	distance of 100m has been applied.
	• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and	• Effects of alternative geologic models were not tested.
	geology.	• The impact of geology on mineralisation has been applied through the
		use of dynamic anisotropy controlling search envelopes during grade
		estimation, such that high and low grades are projected sub-parallel to
		the edges of the defined mineralised structures. This methodology is
		the main factor in terms of grade continuity.
		• The geological continuity of the mineralised zones has been reinforced
		by successive drilling campaigns.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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.	Strike Length m	Overall Width m	Minimum Base Elevation mRL	Maximum Outcrop Elevation mRL	Maximum Depth m	True Thickness of Mineralised Zones m	Dip Range
	1,700	1,900	-300	315	500	20-300	25-55O
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 useof reconciliation data ifavailable. • • • • • • • • •	As the bulk of the near-surface disseminated material has not been evaluated at scale before, checks with previous estimates are not possible. It is considered that nickel is the principal product, with copper and cobalt a secondary product. There are no other by-products. No deleterious elements have been considered and have therefore not been estimated. The 3D block models for the near-surface modelling were based on a parent block size of 20m x 20m x 10m, with sub-blocks generated down to a resolution of 10m x10m to reflect the topography. There was no lower limit on sub-block height. In the modelling of mineralised zone, mineralised sub-blocks were generated down to a minimum of 5m x 5m 1m. There is no correlation between Ni and Cu and Co grades. The interpretation of mineralised zones subsequently controlled selected samples and zone composites, and then the resource block models. Grade capping was applied. Prior to compositing, an analysis of outlier grades was completed on the selected sample data. These analyses included log-probability plots, decile analysis and coefficient of variation (CVA) analysis. From these analyses, capping levels were chosen, and applied to outlier grades prior to compositing. Model validation steps: a comparison of global average grades was made for each zone; a local comparison of grades was also made, in the form of swath plots, which compare the average grades on each 50m thick west-east slice; separate plots were generated for each mineralised zone, comparing the average drillhole composite grades.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis	• Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
	or with natural moisture, and the method of
	determination of the moisture content.
Cut-off	• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality	• The main reference cut-offs used for resource estimation were: 0.15%
parameters	parameters applied.	and 0.2% Ni (total Ni), as appropriate for potential open pit mining.
Mining factors	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining	• Conventional open pit mining was considered for potential mining of
or	methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal	near-surface resources.
assumptions	(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. _
Metallurgical	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding	• No detailed metallurgical studies have been undertaken.
factors or	metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as	• Nickel in sulphide (partial leach) assays were undertaken on selective
assumptions	part of the process of determining reasonable	samples submitted during 2021. These results suggest an average
	prospects for eventual economic extraction to	Nickel in Sulphide contents of approximately 75%.
	consider potential metallurgical methods, but the	• Two bulk samples provided to Metso:Outotec for petrology and mineral
	assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment	liberation studies returned results of:
	processes and parameters made when reporting	a. Lower disseminated sample: Ni grade 0.238%, with 83% in
	Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous.	Sulphides
	Where this is the case, this should be reported with	b. Higher grade disseminate sample: Ni grade 0.714%, with 94% in
	an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical	Sulphides
	assumptions made.	c. A summary of this study is provided in NNL ASX release
		“Encouraging First Pass Test Work on Hotinvaara Nickel Mineralisation“,
		22 June, 2022.
Environmen-	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and	• If the project is further developed, environmental impact monitoring
tal factors or	process residue disposal options. It is always	will be required.
assumptions	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.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	While at this stage the determination of potential
	environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields
	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. _
Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the	• Density measurements have been made from core samples, using
	basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method	water immersion.
	used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the	• No voids present.
	measurements, the nature, size and	• From density values estimated from actual drillhole measurements, a
	representativeness of the samples.	global density of 2.81 t/m3was applied for near-surface modelling.
	• 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 evaluation processof thedifferent materials.
Classification	• The basis for the classification of the Mineral	• The basis for resource classification criteria is described above.
	Resources into varying confidence categories.	• The resource classification criteria have taken into account all relevant
	• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all	factors.
	relevant factors (ie relative confidence in	• The resource estimation results reflect the Competent Person’s view of
	tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data,	the deposit.
	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. _
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral	• No audit or review of the Mineral Resource estimates has been
reviews	Resource estimates.	completed by an independent external individual or company. The
		Competent Person has conducted an internal review of all available
		data.
		• MMO, who is the major shareholder of NNL, completed multiple site
		visits to the project the most recent of which was in July 2021 to survey
		the historic drill hole collars.

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative	• The relative accuracy of the Mineral Resource estimate is reflected in
relative	accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource	the reporting of the Mineral Resources as per the guidelines of the 2012
accuracy/	estimate using an approach or procedure deemed	JORC code.
confidence	appropriate by the Competent Person. For example,	• The resource statement relates to global estimates of tonnes and grade.
	the application of statistical or geostatistical	• No historical mining has taken place.
	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. _

==> picture [250 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [600 x 26] intentionally omitted <==