ORA BANDA MINING LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2016

Sep 12, 2016

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 13 September 2016

==> picture [157 x 281] intentionally omitted <==

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Strong Initial Results from Siberia Diamond Drilling

Highlights

• Results confirm gold mineralisation at Missouri and Sand King deposits of significant width and tenor

• Results from geotechnical holes identify potential extensions to known resources

• Siberia Mining Centre expected to provide initial ore feed to Davyhurst processing plant

• Significant new drilling results:

Mr Michael Fotios Executive Chairman

Mr Craig Readhead Non‐Executive Director

Mr Alan Still Non‐Executive Director

Ms Shannon Coates Company Secretary

ISSUED CAPITAL

Shares: 489m Options: 50.2m Current Share Price: $0.37 Market Capitalisation: $181m Cash as at 30/6/2016: $15.5m

• 20.3m @ 4.97g/t Au Sand King

• 5.90m @ 7.61g/t Au Missouri  2.90m @ 6.56g/t Au Missouri  9.00m @ 2.32g/t Au Sand King

• 4.35m @ 4.17g/t Au Sand King

• 7.64m @ 2.32 g/t Au Sand King

Eastern Goldfields Limited (ASX: EGS) ( Eastern Goldfields or the Company ) is pleased to announce that initial assay results from drilling at its Siberia Mining Centre (Figure 2) have confirmed significant gold mineralisation.

A total of 41 diamond drill holes were completed for resource definition and open pit design geotechnical purposes at the Missouri and Sand King deposits (Figure 3) within the Siberia Mining Centre. Gold assay results have been received from 10 holes, including 4 geotechnical holes.

Commenting on the initial results, Executive Chairman, Michael Fotios said:

“These results clearly confirm the mineralisation at the Missouri and Sand King deposits can provide a solid basis for initial production at the Davyhurst plant, targeted in Q1 2017. Drilling is ongoing and a regular flow of results is expected over the coming weeks. Initial drilling has demonstrated the exploration potential at each of the deposits, both at depth and in adjacent mineralised structures. Future drilling will focus on further delineating this potential over the next few months.”

Geotechnical Drilling

14 diamond drill holes were drilled at Missouri and Sand King for geotechnical analysis that will provide the basis for open pit design parameters. Logging of some geotechnical holes (SKGT and MGT prefix) identified mineralisation outside of the currently modelled mineralisation and planned pit designs. Results from four holes have been received, the remainder are pending. This drilling has unexpectedly highlighted additional exploration potential, particularly to the east of Missouri.

1

Resource Definition Drilling

27 diamond drill holes were drilled at Missouri and Sand King for resource definition purposes (SKD and MDD prefix). Unlike the geotechnical drilling, these holes were specifically targeting mineralisation with the aim of increasing confidence in, and extending the current resource. 17 low angle diamond drill holes and numerous RC percussion holes remain to be drilled.

Current Results

The results presented here are from resource definition and geotechnical drilling. Mineralisation in resource definition drilling has mostly been intercepted where expected, providing additional confidence in the geology models developed for the deposits. Visible gold is often observed in the core, associated with quartz veining in biotite‐carbonate‐sulphide altered foliated basalt (Figure 1).

The significant intercept in SKD004A (20.3m @ 4.97g/t) at Sand King is significantly wider than anticipated (Figure 4). Preliminary evaluation of the structural logging at the top of this intercept suggests mineralisation is in two different orientations, the second orientation being a possible linking structure between two lodes in the first (major) direction. Geological investigation into the extent and geometric orientation of this intersection continues. With significant diamond drilling completed, interpretation of the geology and structures is ongoing and is expected to culminate in delivery of robust geology and resource models towards the end of the year.

==> picture [492 x 277] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Visible Gold (circled) in Missouri geotechnical hole MGT003 (Assays Pending)

Investor and media enquiries:

Michael Fotios Executive Chairman T: +61 8 6241 1888 E :admin@easterngoldfields.com.au

Jon Snowball FTI Consulting T: +61 477 946 068 E: jon.snowball@fticonsulting.com

2

==> picture [483 x 342] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [483 x 342] intentionally omitted <==

• Figure 2: Siberia Mining Centre- Location Map

3

==> picture [718 x 92] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [718 x 92] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [718 x 91] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [718 x 92] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [718 x 92] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Isometric view (looking North East) of Missouri and Sand King showing modelled mineralisation, drill intercepts and proposed pit cutbacks. (Note: Refer ASX release, Company Presentation dated 31 August 2016)

4

==> picture [474 x 120] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [474 x 119] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [474 x 119] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [474 x 119] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Sand King N-S Section showing significant intercept in SKD004A beneath base of possible pit design.

5

==> picture [532 x 110] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [532 x 110] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [532 x 110] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [532 x 110] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Missouri N-S section showing MDD002 and MGT009 intercepts

6

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Potential and Results and Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr Ross Whittle‐Herbert, an employee of Eastern Goldfields Limited, who is Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Herbert has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2004 and 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. The Mineral Resource was prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported. Mr Herbert consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this report that relates to historic Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Michael Thomson, an employee of Eastern Goldfields Limited, who is Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Thomson has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2004 and 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been modified from the original announcement.

Forward Looking Statements

Eastern Goldfields Limited has prepared this announcement based on information available to it. No representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to the fairness, accuracy, completeness or correctness of the information, opinions and conclusions contained in this announcement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, none of Eastern Goldfields Limited, its directors, employees or agents, advisers, nor any other person accepts any liability, including, without limitation, any liability arising from fault or negligence on the part of any of them or any other person, for any loss arising from the use of this announcement or its contents or otherwise arising in connection with it. This announcement is not an offer, invitation, solicitation or other recommendation with respect to the subscription for, purchase or sale of any security, and neither this announcement nor anything in it shall form the basis of any contract or commitment whatsoever. This announcement may contain forward looking statements that are subject to risk factors associated with gold exploration, mining and production businesses. It is believed that the expectations reflected in these statements are reasonable but they may be affected by a variety of variables and changes in underlying assumptions which could cause actual results or trends to differ materially, including but not limited to price fluctuations, actual demand, currency fluctuations, drilling and production results, reserve estimations, loss of market, industry competition, environmental risks, physical risks, legislative, fiscal and regulatory changes, economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions, political risks, project delay or advancement, approvals and cost estimates.

7

Appendix 1: Significant Intersections Table

Hole	MGA Northing	MGA Easting	MGA RL	MGA Azimuth	Dip	Max Depth	From	To	Interval (m)	Grade (g/t)	Company
MDD002	6655254	303074	380	177	‐63	132.4	8.00	9.00	1.00	1.40	EGL
						and	11.7	12.00	0.30	2.41
						and	80.25	81.20	0.95	5.74
						and	90.0	90.9	0.90	12.40
						and	93.0	94.0	1.00	1.34
						and	97.1	103	5.90	7.61
MGT009	6655050	303097	370	212	‐55	79.8	13.0	14.0	1.00	2.60	EGL
						and	29.5	30.3	0.80	1.57
						and	40.2	41.2	1.00	9.80
						and	49.0	51.9	2.90	6.56
SKD001	6656198	303844	402	180	‐60	338.1	34.65	35.0	0.35	42.55	EGL
						and	54.4	55.4	1.00	1.46
						and	263.0	264.0	1.00	1.04
SKD002	6656303	304075	425	181	‐56	197.5	55.0	56.0	1.00	1.63	EGL
						and	81.0	82.0	1.00	1.12
						and	133.36	141	7.64	2.32
						and	144.0	145.0	1.00	2.40
						and	162.0	164.0	2.00	7.34
SKD003	6655816	303826	417	340	‐42	104.9	0	1.00	1.00	1.57	EGL
SKD004A	6656220	303900	419	174	‐46	203.9	151.75	155.0	3.25	2.67	EGL
						and	160.7	181.0	20.3	4.97
						incl.	160.7	163.0	2.30	8.20
						incl.	164.8	181.0	16.2	5.06
SKD005	6656310	304055	425	172	60	242.2	127.4	136.4	9.00	2.32	EGL
						and	143.65	148.0	4.35	4.17
						and	152.7	154.2	1.50	7.59
						and	172	175.9	3.90	2.39
						and	193.2	195.0	1.80	4.01
SKGT002	6655763	303718	416	264	‐44	164.14	125.3	126.5	1.20	5.73	EGL
						and	132.5	136.3	3.80	1.46
						and	158.57	160.1	1.53	2.70
SKGT004	6656365	304056	425	180	‐50	209	165.5	169.0	3.50	4.14	EGL
						and	174	177.0	3.00	2.61
						and	191.6	193.5	1.90	5.85
SKGT005	6655945	303922	418	330	‐45	161.2	145.8	150.7	4.9	1.48	EGL
S419	6656125	303918	407	180	‐60	47	33	47	14	3.38	WMC
SAD09	6656247	304137	423	180	‐60	250	42	48.5	6.5	2.81	WMC
SAD19	6656130	303917	407	180	‐60	75	68.8	71	2.2	1.02	WMC
SAD44	6656257	303902	420	180	‐60	301	240.5	249.1	8.6	3.16	WMC
						and	215.28	217.15	1.87	4.51	WMC
						and	199.4	202.29	2.89	7.45	WMC
MID09	6655137	303076	420	180	‐60	151	132	133.13	1.13	10.10	WMC
						and	138.35	140.47	2.12	5.56
MID24	6655221	303076	420	180	‐60	249	201.1	204.1	3	2.56	WMC

8

Hole	MGA Northing	MGA Easting	MGA RL	MGA Azimuth	Dip	Max Depth	From	To	Interval (m)	Grade (g/t)	Company
						and	237.8	239.8		4.35
SMCSKD_04	6656223	303917	419	180	‐60	273.7	229	239	10	1.88	SMC
						and	179	181	2	5.48	SMC
PSRC038	6655260	303075	420	180	‐60	130	84	90	6	4.85	GOLDFIELDS
						and	122	125	3	17.26
MIRC019	6655242	303076	420	180	‐60	129	103	105	2	10.69	GILT EDGED MINING
MIRC110	6655058	303076	411	180	‐60	90	83	87	4	9.45	GILT EDGED MINING
MIRC111	6655060	303076	410	180	‐85	110	93	95	2	12.40	GILT EDGED MINING
MUGC370_084	6655092	303074	370	180	‐60	18	0	8	8	2.97	MONARCH
MUGC370_085	6655097	303074	370	180	‐60	26	3	7	4	6.92	MONARCH

No upper cut applied significant intersections greater than 1g/t with 2m maximum internal waste. EGS drilling ‐ 50g Fire assay with AAS finish on half diamond core, Coordinates in MGA94 zone 51

9

JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION – TABLE 1 REPORT TEMPLATE

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Information for historical (Pre Eastern Goldfields Limited) drilling and sampling has been extensively viewed and validated where possible. Information pertaining to historical QAQC procedures and data is incomplete but of a sufficient quality and detail to allow drilling and assay data to be used for resource estimations. Further, Eastern Goldfields Limited has undertaken extensive infill and confirmation drilling which confirm historical drill results. Sections 1 and 2 describe the work undertaken by Eastern Goldfields Limited and only refer to historical information where appropriate and/or available.

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling		Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels,		Goldfields Group; Auger holes were drilled to a maximum depth of 1.5m. RC samples were routinely collected at 1m intervals. Diamond drill
techniques		random chips, or specific specialised industry		core samples were taken at geological boundaries and sawn in half. Samples pulverised at laboratory.
		standard measurement tools appropriate to the		Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 2m and 4m composites via a scoop method at 1m intervals. RC samples
		minerals under investigation, such as down hole		were collected at 1m, 2m to 5m intervals. 1m samples were riffle split.
		gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).		WMC; In early drilling by WMC, samples were “panned’ for visible gold. Percussion samples were collected at 1m intervals, split in the field.
		These examples should not be taken as limiting the		Diamond core samples were cut in half or quartered.
		broad meaning of sampling.		Gilt Edged Mining NL (GEM); All RAB and RC holes were collected through a cyclone and sampled at 1m intervals, pipe or spear sampled,
		Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample		composited over 5m intervals. The composite samples weighing about 3kg were despatched for analysis. 5m composites with assays greater
		representivity and the appropriate calibration of any		than 0.2 g/t Au were resampled by riffle‐splitting the whole of each 1m sample down to about 3kg prior to being despatched for analysis.
		measurement tools or systems used.		Siberia Mining Corporation Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 1m intervals from the drill hole collar using a plastic bucket and laid on the
		Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that		ground. A scoop sample was taken from each sample to form a 5m composite. RC samples were collected at 1m intervals, and passed
		are Material to the Public Report.		through a cyclone and split using a two tiered, 75:25 riffle splitter. The split sample (approximately 2‐3kg) was stored in a drawn calico bag,
		In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been		which was then placed next to the split sample reject (approximately 10‐15kg), which was contained in UV resistant PVC bags. A
		done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse		representative scoop sample was then taken from each split sample reject bags to form a 4m composite sample. Diamond half core sampled
		circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples		at 1m intervals.
		from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g		Maitland Mining NL: RC samples were collected at 2m intervals and split into about 2kgs on‐site. Aqua regia assay by Comlabs, Kalgoorlie.
		charge for fire assay’). In other cases more		Newcrest Mining Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 4m intervals and RC samples were collected in 2m intervals and speared to produce 6m
		explanation may be required, such as where there is		composites.
		coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.		Julia Mines NL; RC samples were collected at 1m intervals in a large plastic bag from a cyclone, split numerous times until a 2kg portion was
		Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg		obtained. Samples were bagged and taken to RDL and later KAL assay in Kalgoorlie for assay. NQ diamond drill core was split at Kalgoorlie.
		submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of		Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd; Auger samples were taken a maximum depth of 1.5m. RAB 4m composite spear samples were collected. RC
		detailed information.		samples were collected at 1m and passed through a riffle splitter. Samples pulverised at laboratory. 50g charge take for Fire assay or aqua
				regia assay.
				Goongarrie Gold Pty Ltd; RC samples were collected at 1m intervals, sample and assay method unknown.
				Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 2m intervals, sample and assay method unknown.
				Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 4m intervals, RC sampled at 1m intervals. Samples weighed between 1kg
				and 2kg. Sample oven dried, pulverised, to nominal ‐75 microns, 400‐500g split. 40g charge taken for aqua regia assay, selected repeats by
				fire assay. RC samples were collected from 1m to 2m intervals.
				Eastern Goldfields Ltd; RC samples were routinely collected at 1m intervals and cone split. Half sawn core samples crushed, pulverised and
				40g or 50g sample taken for fire assay at Analabs, Kalgoorile.
				Britannia Gold NL; Samples from RAB holes which were drilled to blade refusal or base of transported cover whichever was encountered first.
				RC samples from each metre were laid out in piles in rows of ten. Samples were taken to form 2m composites with a PVC sample spike.
				Within the shear zone, 1m samples were taken using a sample splitter.
				Glengarry Resources NL; Aircore samples were collected at 1m intervals were collected at 1m, 2m, 3m and 4m intervals.
				Sundowner Minerals NL; Percussion samples were collected over 1m intervals and split down by riffle splitter to approximately 1kg on site.
				Theywere then composited into 2m intervals.

10

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
				Gutnick Resources NL; RC samples were collected at 2m intervals.
Drilling		Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open‐hole		Goldfields Group; Auger holes were using an auger rig on the back of a Toyota Landcruiser from Snap Drilling. RC holes were drilled by
techniques		hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)		Western Diamond Drillers using a Schramm Rig. Diamond holes were drilled by Mundy Drilling services using a KL1200 rig. Diamond holes
		and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube,		were oriented.
		depth of diamond tails, face‐sampling bit or other		Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; RC holes were drilled by Kennedy Drilling using a 4 inch blade.
		type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what		WMC; RC percussion holes were drilled using a Schram Rig. RC holes were drilled using blades and hammer. The RC drilling diameter is
		method, etc).		unknown. Diamond drill holes for NQ core were drilled and reduced to BQ core at depth if necessary. Some diamond holes commenced with
				a percussion pre‐collar. Diamond core generally not oriented.
				Gilt Edged Mining NL (GEM); RC holes were drilled by either Sing Drilling or McKAy Drilling. Both Kalgoorlie companies used a booster and
				auxiliary compressor. The RC drilling diameter is unknown.
				Siberia Mining Corporation Ltd; RAB holes were drilled by ProDrill Pty Ltd of Kalgoorlie using an open hole RAB drill rig. All holes were drilled
				dry. RC holes were drilled by Premium Drilling Pty Ltd of Kalgoorlie using a 350/750 Schram RC drill rig and a 5.25” face sampling hammer. An
				auxiliary booster was used on holes deeper than 75m.
				Maitland Mining NL: RC were drilled using Schram T64 Drill rig. Diameter unknown
				Newcrest Mining Ltd; RC hole were drilled by Westralian Diamond Drillers of Kalgoorlie using a Schram 450 drill rig. Diameter unknown.
				Julia Mines NL; RC holes were drilled by Davies Drilling using a Schramn 64 with percussion hammer and button bits. Diamond holes for NQ
				core (with 47.6mm diameter) were drilled by Glindemann and Kitching. There is no information about core being oriented.
				Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd; Auger holes were drilled by SNAP Geochemistry. RAB holes were drilled by Challenge Drilling. RC holes were
				drilled by Drill Torque.
				Goongarrie Gold Pty Ltd; RC drilling, details unknown
				Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd; RAB drilling, details unknown
				Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd; RC and RAB drilling, details unknown
				EGL; RC drilling using 5.25 inch and 4.5 inch diameter.
				Britannia Gold NL; RAB holes were drilled using a Toyota‐mounted Wallis Mantis 30 Rotary air blast rig. Drilling to blade refusal or base of
				transported cover whichever was encountered first. RC holes were drilled using a Universal Drilling Rig (UDR 650) with an Atlas Copco
				compressor with a capacity of 350psi delivering 950 cfm. Drill diameter unknown
				Glengarry Resources NL; Aircore holes were drilled by Westralian Diamond Driller using a Mantic 75 air core rig mounted on a Toyota
				Landcruiser trayback vehicle. Drill diameter unknown
				Sundowner Minerals NL; Percussion holes were drilled by Gerick Drilling Kalgoorlie using a Warman Investigator with a 4 1/2 inch percussion
				hammer bit.
				Gutnick Resources NL; RC drilling was completed by Anaconda. Drill diameter unknown
Drill sample		Method of recording and assessing core and chip		Quantitative auger, RAB and RC drill recoveries were not recoded by Goldfields Group, Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd, WMC, Gilt Edged
recovery		sample recoveries and results assessed.		Mining NL, Siberia Mining Corporation, Maitland Mining NL, Newcrest Mining Ltd, Julia Mines NL, Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd, Goongarrie
		Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and		Gold Pty Ltd, Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd, Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd, Eastern Goldfields Ltd, Britannia Gold NL, Glengarry
		ensure representative nature of the samples.		Resources NL, Sundowner Minerals NL and Gutnick Resources NL.
		Whether a relationship exists between sample		Diamond Core recoveries are very high due to the competent ground. Any core recovery issues are noted on core blocks and logged.
		recovery and grade and whether sample bias may		There is no known relationship between sample recovery and grade.
		have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of
		fine/coarse material.
Logging		Whether core and chip samples have been		Goldfields Group; Qualitative: colour, oxidation, hardness, shearing, texture, grain size, rock, alteration, minerals and Quantitative: alteration
		geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of		intensity, mineralisation intensity, structure intensity, vein percent.
		detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource		Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; Qualitative: colour, oxidation, hardness, shearing, texture, grain size, rock, alteration, minerals.
		estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.		Quantitative: alteration intensity, mineralisation intensity, structure intensity, vein percent.
		Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in		WMC; RC and diamond logging describes the dominant and minor rock types, mineralisation, oxidation, alteration, texture, vein type and
		_nature. Core(or costean, channel, etc) photography. _		basic structure.Quantitative values assigned to amounts of sulphides,alteration and veining.

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		The total length and percentage of the relevant		Gilt Edged Mining NL (GEM); Qualitative: rock code, alteration, sulphides, weathering.
		intersections logged.		Siberia Mining Corporation Ltd; Qualitative: alteration, colour, lithology, oxidation, mineralogy, vein style, vein assemblage, remarks.
				Quantitative: mineralisation intensity.
				Maitland Mining NL: 5 samples were petrographically described by Mintek Services. Qualitative: sample colour, sample description and
				mineralisation. Quantitative; percentage of quartz.
				Newcrest Mining Ltd; Qualitative: rock type, colour, texture, typifying minerals and comments. Quantitative; grain size.
				Julia Mines NL; Qualitative: rock type and alteration. Quantitative; percentage of pyrite.
				Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd; Same as Goldfields Group.
				Goongarrie Gold Pty Ltd; Qualitative: description.
				Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd; Qualitative: rock type and description. Quantitative: sulphides
				Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd; Qualitative: Lithology.
				Eastern Goldfields Ltd; Qualitative: alteration, colour, grain size, lithology, oxidation, mineralogy, structure, texture, vein style, vein
				assemblage, remarks. Quantitative: mineralisation intensity, vein percent.
				Britannia Gold NL; For RC samples: Qualitative: geological description, lithology. Quantitative: percent quartz, percent pyrite, percent
				pyrrhotite, percent veins.
				Glengarry Resources NL; Qualitative: description.
				Sundowner Minerals NL; Qualitative: description. Logging 1m intervals using Nikon microscope or handlens.
				Gutnick Resources NL; Qualitative: colour, comment and descriptions.
				For all Company’s, entire holes were geologically logged.
				All holes were geologically logged entirely to a level of detail to support mineral resource estimation.
				It is unknown whether core was routinely photographed by earlier operators.
Sub-		If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter,
sampling		half or all core taken.		Goldfields Group; RC samples were routinely collected at 1m intervals and riffle split. Diamond drill core samples were taken at geological
techniques 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		boundaries and sawn in half. RC and diamond samples were dried, crushed, split, pulverised and a 50 gm charge taken. All sampling of resource drilling incorporated a system of standards and blanks to keep strict control on assay reliability. Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 1m intervals and 2m and 4m composites taken via a scoop method. RC
		appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.		samples were collected at 1m, 2m and 5m intervals. 1m samples were riffle split. Samples were prepared with a single stage mix and grind
		Quality control procedures adopted for all sub‐		from which an assay charge was taken Composite samples with assays greater than 0.2 g/t Au were split at 1m intervals and re‐analysed.
		sampling stages to maximise representivity of		Field duplicate samples were taken and analysed every 20 samples. Blanks and standards were routinely submitted with assay batches to
		samples.		evaluate sample preparation and assay accuracy.
		Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is		WMC; In early drilling by WMC, samples were “panned’ for visible gold. Percussion samples were collected at 1m intervals, split in the field.
		representative of the in situ material collected,		Diamond core samples were cut in half or quartered. Samples were dried in fan forced ovens at 80oC for paper packets and 140oC for
		including for instance results for field		samples in calico bags, sieved using a nylon mesh .Oversize samples crushed in Jacques jaw crusher to produce ‐6mm sample, split employing
		duplicate/second‐half sampling.		either a rotary or riffle splitter and pulverised using Tema Swing mills prior to analysis, except for soil and stream sediment samples finer than
		Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain		80 mesh. A 25grm charge was taken for assaying.
		size of the material being sampled.		Gilt Edged Mining NL (GEM); All RAB and RC holes were collected through a cyclone and sampled at 1m intervals, pipe or spear sampled,
				composited over 5m intervals. The composite samples weighing about 3kg were despatched for analysis. 5m composites with assays greater
				than 0.2 g/t Au were resampled by riffle‐splitting the whole of each 1m sample down to about 3kg prior to being despatched for analysis.
				Samples were despatched to MinLab in Kalgoorlie where they were dried, pulverised to a nominal 90% minus 200 mesh (75 microns) and a
				25 gm aliquot taken to be analysed for gold. Comprehensive QA/QC and check sampling reports were produced. Umpire assay checks were
				completed using a second laboratory (genalysis).
				Siberia Mining Corporation Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 1m intervals from the drill hole using a plastic bucket and laid on the ground.
				A scoop sample was taken from each sample to form a 5m composite. RC samples were collected at 1m intervals, and passed through a
				cyclone and split using a two teared, 75:25 riffle splitter. The split sample (approximately 2‐3kg) was stored in a drawn calico bag, which was
				then placed next to the split sample reject (approximately 10‐15kg), which was contained in UV resistant PVC bags. A representative scoop
				sample was then taken from each split sample reject bags to form a 4m composite sample. Diamond half core was sampled at 1m intervals.
				Samples were dried,crushed,split, pulverised until 80%passed minus 75 microns and a 50gm charge taken. Field duplicates were

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
				submitted. Composites with assays greater than 0.2 g/t Au were re‐assayed using individual 1m re‐split samples.
				Maitland Mining NL: RC samples were collected at 2m intervals and split into about 2kgs on‐site.
				Newcrest Mining Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 4m intervals and RC samples were collected in 2m intervals and speared to produce 6m
				composites. RC samples returning assays greater than 0.2 g/t Au were resampled at 2m intervals and assayed.
				Julia Mines NL; RC samples were collected at 1m intervals in a large plastic bag from a cyclone, split numerous times until a 2kg portion was
				obtained. NQ diamond drill core was split at Kalgoorlie. Samples were loaded into a hammer mill, crushed to 1.5mm, passed through a
				rotary splitter to extract 200gms which was pulverised by a ring grinder to 200 mesh. A 50gm charge was extracted for assaying.
				Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd; Auger samples were taken a maximum depth of 1.5m. RAB 4m composites collected using a spear. RC samples
				were collected at 1m and passed through a riffle splitter. Anomalous RAB composites were resplit into 1m intervals and re‐analysed using
				the same assay method.
				Goongarrie Gold Pty Ltd; RC samples were collected at 1m intervals, details unknown
				Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd; RAB samples method unknown.
				Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd; RAB samples were collected at 4m intervals. RC samples were collected from 1m to 2m intervals.
				Samples weighted between 1kg and 2kg. Samples were oven dried, pulverised to nominal ‐75 microns and split to 400 to 500 gm and a 40
				gm charge taken for assaying.
				EGL; RC samples were routinely collected at 1m intervals from a cone splitter and submitted for analysis. Samples were crushed, pulverised
				and a 50gm charge taken for analysis. Field duplicates, blanks and standards were submitted for QAQC analysis.
				Britannia Gold NL; Samples from RAB holes which were drilled to blade refusal or base of transported cover whichever was encountered first.
				RC samples from each metre were laid out in piles in rows of ten. Samples were taken to form 2m composites with a PVC sample spike.
				Within the shear zone, 1m samples were taken using a sample splitter.
				Glengarry Resources NL; Aircore samples were collected at 1m intervals and sampled at 1m, 4m composite samples sent for assay. Sample
				methods unknown.
				Sundowner Minerals NL; ; Percussion samples were collected over 1m intervals and split down by riffle splitter to approximately 1kg on site.
				They were then composited into 2m intervals, method unknown.
				Gutnick Resources NL; RC samples were collected at 2m intervals, method unknown.
				Unless specified above, samples were dried, crushed, split, pulverised and a charge taken for assaying.
				Repeat assays were undertaken on pulp samples at the discretion of the laboratory.
Quality of		The nature, quality and appropriateness of the		Goldfields Group; Auger samples were set to Analabs (Welshpool) to be assayed for gold to 1ppb by graphite furnace P605 and arsenic to
assay data		assaying and laboratory procedures used and		1ppm by aqua regia hydride H605. RC samples were submitted to Australian Laboratory Services (ALS) in Kalgoorlie for gold and arsenic
and		whether the technique is considered partial or total.		analysis. Fire assay methods were used for gold analysis with 50gm charge, detection limit of 0.01ppm Au, while Aqua Regia methods, with
laboratory tests		For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining		detection limits of 5ppm As, were used for arsenic analysis. Diamond drill core samples were despatched to Genalysis in Kalgoorlie and analysed for gold using 50gm fire assay to 0.01ppm. A system of standards and blanks were incorporated in all sample despatches to keep a
		the analysis including instrument make and model,		strict control on assay reliability. QA/QC re‐assaying of mineralised RC intersections and interpreted structures was undertaken later in the
		reading times, calibrations factors applied and their		reporting period.
		derivation, etc.		Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; Samples submitted to ALS for 50g Fire Assay with AAS finish. Samples were also analysed at Ultratrace
		Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg		for gold, palladium and platinum.Submitted field duplicates, blanks and standards for QAQC analysis.
		standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory		WMC; All samples were sent to WMC Exploration Division Kalgoorlie Laboratory to be analysed for gold using wet method, aqua regia leach,
		checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie		reading by A.A.S; a 25gm sample was digested with aqua regia, the gold extracted using aliquot DIBK and the solvent backwashed. The gold
		lack of bias) and precision have been established.		concentration was determined by Atomic Absorption.
				Gilt Edged Mining NL (GEM); All samples were submitted to Minlab of Kalgoorlie to be assayed for gold; 5m composites were analysed by
				aqua regia/AAS with a detection limit of 0.01ppm and 1m samples assayed by Fire/AAS with a detection limit of 0.01ppm. Certified reference
				material standards was employed. Duplicate samples, analytical standards, and check analyses at a second laboratory were used to monitor
				analytical quality.
				Siberia Mining Corporation Ltd; All samples were submitted to SGS Analabs in Kalgoorlie to be assayed for gold using 50grm Fire Assay with
				detection limit at 0.01ppm Au and for sulphur. Samples were also analysed at Ultratrace. Standards and repeats (1 in 20) were used during
				the firstphase drillingcampaign toprovide a reference to the internal lab standards. There was a strongcorrelation between standard

13

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
				(client) and laboratory results. Repeats of composite samples showed no problems with technique or dependability with the laboratory.
				Maitland Mining NL: Samples were sent to Comlabs in Kalgoorlie to be assayed for analysed for gold, lead, tungsten and silver.
				Newcrest Mining Ltd; RAB samples were sent to Australian Laboratory Services Perth and analysed for low level analysis by dissolution in
				aqua regia followed by fire assay. RC samples were despatched to Australian Assay Laboratories in Boulder to be assayed for gold by fire.
				Julia Mines NL; Samples were sent to SGS Kalgoorlie Laboratory to be assayed for gold using 50 gm Fire Assay. 95% of all assays results
				greater than 1 g/t Au were check from 1 to 4 times by taking a split from the original sample residue.
				Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd; Auger samples were submitted to ALS to be assayed for gold and arsenic. Gold assays were performed using
				aqua‐regia digest and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy to 0.001ppm. Inductively coupled mass (emission) spectrometry was
				used to analyse for arsenic to 1ppm. RAB samples were submitted to Analab to be analysed for gold assay using aqua‐regia digestion and a
				flame atomic absorption spectroscopy finish to a 1 ppb detection limit. RC samples were submitted to Analab to be assayed for gold by fire
				and flame AAS finish to 0.01ppm. Arsenic was also analysed using triple acid digest and flame AAS to a 50ppm detection limit.
				Goongarrie Gold Pty Ltd; Samples were assayed for gold, unknown method.
				Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd; Samples were analysed for gold using a detection limit of 0.01 g/t Au. The assaying and laboratory
				procedures are unknown. About 1 assay in 20 was repeated.
				Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd; RAB samples were sent to Minlabs to be analysed for gold via aqua regia digest with a detection limit of
				0.01ppm. Samples were also assayed for nickel, cobalt, copper, magnesium and zinc. RC samples were despatched to Analabs in Kalgoorlie
				to be assayed for gold using aqua regia digest with a detection limit of 0.01ppm. Samples were also analysed for aluminium, cobalt, iron,
				magnesium and nickel. Selected repeat assays were by fire assay.
				Eastern Goldfields Ltd; Samples were sent to Kalgoorlie Assay Laboratories to be analysed for gold by 40gm fire assay. Samples were also
				analysed at Genalysis. Certified reference material standards were employed for a gold range of 0.32 to 48.55ppm. Blanks were also
				employed. Satisfactory results were obtained for both.
				Britannia Gold NL; Samples were submitted to Ultratrace in Perth to be analysed for gold sing aqua regia digest and AAS finish to ppb level.
				Samples were also assayed for copper, nickel, cobalt, chromium and manganese. RC samples were sent to Genalysis Laboratories in
				Maddington to be analysed for gold by fire assay followed by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry (AAS) with a detection limit of 0.01ppm.
				RC duplicates were taken on average 1 in 15 samples.
				Glengarry Resources NL; Samples were sent to Genalysis Laboratory Services to be assayed for gold, ppb detection limit, unknown method.
				Sundowner Minerals NL; Samples were submitted to SGD (Aust.) to be analysed for gold using AAS and arsenic using x‐ray fluorescence.
				Significant results were confirmed by fire assay. Final samples were prepared after the crusher was cleaned with quartz blanks between
				every sample. Significant results were confirmed by fire assay and resampled over 1m intervals.
				Gutnick Resources NL; Samples were sent to Leonora Laverton Assay Lab in Kalgoorlie to be analysed for copper, cobalt, aluminium, arsenic,
				calcium, chromium, iron, magnesium, manganese, nickel and zinc using total acid digest (TAD) or OES (ICP).
				Fire Assayis considered a total technique. Aqua regia apartial technique.
Verification		The verification of significant intersections by either		Selected drill intersections from WMC, Goldfields and Siberia Mining Corporation diamond core have been inspected by EGL geologists Some
of sampling		independent or alternative company personnel.		WMC holes have been re‐logged by EGL geologists and mineralisation identified at the reported intervals.
and assaying		The use of twinned holes.		Drill intersections from WMC and Goldfields diamond core were inspected by Siberia Mining Corporation geologists in 2005 and
		Documentation of primary data, data entry		mineralization was visible in core at the expected intervals. Mineralisation widths and styles are very comparable with NQ2 drilling by SMC in
		procedures, data verification, data storage (physical		2004
		and electronic) protocols.		Holes are not deliberately twinned.
		Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		WMC; Hand written geology logs and assays were digitally captured.
				EGL; Data has been verified by reviewing original drill and assay logs. Print outs of computerized sample intervals and assays generated by
				WMC were used to verify the intercepts reported. Geological and sample data logged directly into field computer at the core yard. Data is
				transferred to Perth via email and imported into GBIS SQL database by the database administrator (DBA). Assay files are received in .csv
				format and loaded directly into the database by the DBA. Hardcopy and/or digital copies of data are kept for reference if necessary.
				Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; Geological and sample data was logged digitally and .csv or .xls files imported into Datashed SQL
				database with in‐built validation.
				Data entry, verification and storage protocols for remaining operators is unknown.
				No adjustments have been made to assaydata.

14

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Location of		Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill		Goldfields Group; Collar co‐ordinates for RC and DD holes, including elevation were surveyed with DGPS. RAB holes were located with GPS.
data points		holes (collar and down‐hole surveys), trenches, mine		Downhole surveys were taken every 10m for RC and DD holes, method unknown. RAB holes not downhole surveyed. The gird system used is
		workings and other locations used in Mineral		AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51.
		Resource estimation.		Monarch Gold Mining Company Ltd; Drill hole collars were surveyed by Spectrum Surveys of Kalgoorlie using RTK GPS. Downhole surveys
		Specification of the grid system used.		were undertaken by electronic multiple shot (ems) or Eastman single shot. The gird system used is GDA1994 MGA Zone 51.
		Quality and adequacy of topographic control.		WMC; Drill hole collars were surveyed by Electronic Distance Meter (EDM) theodolite by the Kalgoorlie Gold Operations’ mine surveyor.Holes
				also surveyed using theodolite by McGay Surveys as well as by WMC mine surveyors. WMC RC holes were generally not downhole surveyed.
				Diamond holes down hole surveyed by Eastman single shot camera or multishot approximately every 30m. The gird system used is AGD
				1984 AMG Zone 51.
				Gilt Edged Mining NL (GEM); Contract surveyors were engaged for siting of drill holes prior to drilling, pick‐up of accurate drill hole co‐
				ordinates after drilling and down‐hole plunge and azimuth readings. All holes drilled after 1998 were picked up by Fugro Survey Pty Ltd of
				Kalgoorlie using differential GPS. The gird system used is AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51.
				Siberia Mining Corporation Ltd; Collar co‐ordinates for northings, eastings and elevation were recorded by Fugro Spatial Solutions Pty Ltd.
				The gird system used is AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51. Diamond holes were down hole surveyed by gyro. RC holes generally not downhole
				surveyed. If surveyed then done by Digital electronic multishot (DEMS)
				Maitland Mining NL: Collar co‐ordinates recorded on local grids and converted to MGA94 zone 51. Survey collection methods are unknown.
				Holes not downhole surveyed.
				Newcrest Mining Ltd; Collar co‐ordinates recorded on local grids and converted to MGA94 zone 51. Survey collection methods are unknown.
				Holes not downhole surveyed.
				Julia Mines NL; RC holes drilled on local grid and surveyed by unknown method. RC holes not downhole surveyed.
				Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd; Collar co‐ordinates for RC and DD holes, including elevation were surveyed with DGPS. RAB holes were located
				with GPS. Downhole surveys were taken every 10m for RC and DD holes, method unknown. RAB holes not downhole surveyed. The gird
				system used is AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51.
				Goongarrie Gold Pty Ltd; RC holes drills and surveyed on local grid. No downhole surveys. Survey collection methods are unknown.
				Australian Consolidated Equities Ltd; RC holes drills on local grid, unknown whether coordinates were surveyed. No downhole surveys.
				Centaur Mining and Exploration Ltd; Collars drilled on AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51 grid. Unclear whether surveyed on not. No downhole surveys.
				EGL; Collar locations were surveyed by DGPS and dowhole surveys were collected using electronic multishot. The gird system used is
				GDA1994 MGA Zone 51.
				Britannia Gold NL; RC holes drilled on local grid, unknown whether surveyed. RC holes not downhole surveyed.
				Glengarry Resources NL; Holes drilled on AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51 grid. Unknown whether surveyed. No downhole surveys.
				Sundowner Minerals NL; Holes drilled on AGD 1984 AMG Zone 51 grid and local grid. Unknown whether surveyed.
				Gutnick Resources NL; RC collar co‐ordinates surveyed on AMG grid, method unknown. No downhole surveys (Holes vertical).
				Topography has been surveyed by recent operators in the vicinity of operating mines. Collar elevations are consistent with surrounding holes
				and the natural surface elevation.
Data spacing		Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.		Data spacing varies from wide spaced regional drilling to close spaced resource drilling depending on the development stage of the deposit
and		Whether the data spacing and distribution is		For deposits with resources and previously mined deposits the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish geological and grade
distribution		sufficient to establish the degree of geological and		continuity.
		grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral		Samples are not composited for this report. Samples are composited for resource calculations.
		Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s)
		and classifications applied.
		Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation		Whether the orientation of sampling achieves		Missouri; Drilling predominantly to the south, optimal for the east‐west striking, north dipping mineralisation.
of data in		unbiased sampling of possible structures and the		Sand King; Drilling predominantly to the south, targeting EW to WSW striking, steep north dipping mineralisation.
relation to geological structure		extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. If the relationship between the drilling orientation	 	Palmerston & Berwick Moering; Drilling predominantly to the SW targeting mineralisation trending 090oat the south‐western portion of the deposit and changing strike to approximately 030othrough the central portion before curving to 070oat Berwick Moering. Theil Well;Dominantlyinclined drillingto the W targetingE dippingstructure.

15

Criteria	JORC Code explanation Commentary
	and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.  Regional drilling in all orientations, depending on the geological understanding at the time.  It is not known whether there is any introduced sample bias due to drill orientation.
Sample security	 The measures taken to ensure sample security.  Unknown for earlier operators.  EGL – Samples are bagged, tied and in a secure yard. Once submitted to the laboratories they are stored in cages within a secure fenced compound. Samples are tracked through the laboratoryvia their LIMS.
Audits or reviews	 The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.  Digital data from the SQL database has been reviewed by EGL and is consistent with hard copy and digital WAMEX data.  Goldfields Group and WMC; Siberia Mining Corporation conducted a due diligence on the data and core in 2005 and were “comfortable with the quality and integrity of the data”. Digital data has been reviewed and is consistent with hard copy data.  Monarch Gold MiningCompanyLtd;Monthly QAQC reports wereproduced to monitor accuracyandprecision.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criterialistedinthe preceding sectionalso apply to this section.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary

(Criterialistedinthe preceding sectionalso apply to this section.)	(Criterialistedinthe preceding sectionalso apply to this section.)	(Criterialistedinthe preceding sectionalso apply to this section.)	(Criterialistedinthe preceding sectionalso apply to this section.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status  Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.  The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	 Siberia deposit is on Tenement M24/290 and M24/352, held by Siberia Mining Corporation Pty. Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eastern goldfields Limited. The tenement is in good standing.  There are no heritage issues.
	TENEMENT	HOLDER	AGREEMENTS
	M24/0290, M24/0352,	SIBERIA MINING CORPORATION PTY LTD	M24/290 ‐ SIBERIA GRANTED GARDNER THE RIGHT TO EXPLORE FOR NICKEL MINERALS ON M24/290. ROB MITCHELL AND HANK SHRERS (SURFACE ALLUVIAL RIGHTS TO 2M DEPTH)
			M24/0352 ‐ ROB MITCHELL AND HANK SHRERS(SURFACE ALLUVIAL RIGHTS TO 2M DEPTH)
	 There are no  There are no	heritage issues known impediments to operatingin the area.
Exploration done by other parties  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	 Drilling on the tenements was completed by numerous operators, but the majority of work was completed by WMC, Gilt Edged Mining, Siberia Mining Corporation & Monarch Gold. All work by these companies was to industry standards of the time
Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	 Wyche & Witt (1994) described the rock units of the Siberia area in the Davyhurst 1:100,000 Sheet, and assigned the mafic rocks of the Siberia area to the Wongi and Missouri Basalt Units of the Pole Group, and the ultramafics to their east, to the Walter Williams Formation. In its most simplistic sense the geology of the mafic rocks is a sequence of high‐Mg to tholeiitic basalts and flow dolerites interleaved with medium to coarse grained dolerite and gabbro dykes and sills. Ultramafic rocks outcrop poorly along a NE‐SW trending, central spine dominated by in situ lateritic outcrop. The contact between the Missouri Basalt in the west and the ultramafics in the east has been the focus of extensive gold mining activity from the period 1900‐1930.  Gold mineralisation at Siberia has two styles: o quartz‐biotite‐feldspar‐sulphide shear lodes within the basalt and; o quartz‐talc‐sulphide schist lodes in the ultramafic contact against the ‘top’ of the mafics (i.e. a contact lode). This style of mineralisation has been the focus of extensive gold mining activity from the period 1900‐1930.
Drill hole Information  A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of thefollowing	 See Significant Intercepts in Appendix 1

16

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		information for all Material drill holes:
		o easting and northing of the drill hole collar
		o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation
		above sea level in metres) of the drill hole
		collar
		o dip and azimuth of the hole
		o down hole length and interception depth
		o hole length.
		If the exclusion of this information is justified
		on the basis that the information is not
		Material and this exclusion does not detract
		from the understanding of the report, the
		Competent Person should clearly explain why
		this is the case.
Data		In reporting Exploration Results, weighting		Original assays are length weighted. Grades are not top cut. Lower cut off is nominally 1g/t. Maximum 2m internal dilution.
aggregation		averaging techniques, maximum and/or		No metal equivalents reported.
methods		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.
Relationship		These relationships are particularly important		All intercept widths reported are down hole lengths. The geometry of mineralisation is known for major deposits (Sand King & Missouri).
between		in the reporting of Exploration Results.		However no attempt has been made here to report true widths.
mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	 	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’). _
Diagrams		Appropriate maps and sections (with scales)		See plans and sections.
		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.
Balanced		Where comprehensive reporting of all		Results from historic drilling are shown on the diagrams. All intercepts from recent drilling are reported
reporting		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

17

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		Results.
Other		Other exploration data, if meaningful and		Metallurgical and geotechnical work has been completed for Sand King and Missouri deposits.
substantive		material, should be reported including (but not		Additional metallurgical, geotechnical, environmental and engineering work is currently underway for the Sand King and Missouri deposits
exploration data		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.
Further work		The nature and scale of planned further work		Drilling is currently underway at Missouri and Sand King to better define current resources, culminating in new JORC2012 compliant
		(eg tests for lateral extensions or depth		resources and reserves.
		extensions or large‐scale step‐out drilling).		Statutory approvals for mining at Sand King and Missouri in progress.
		Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of
		possible extensions, including the main
		geological interpretations and future drilling
		areas, provided this information is not
		commercially sensitive.

18