ASX Announcement 17 May 2021 CARDINIA GOLD PROJECT RESOURCE INCREASES TO 1.23MOZ

Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource rises by 15%, or 102,000oz, to 762,000oz

Highlights

Updated Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) completed for the Cardinia Gold Project:
- o 30.0Mt at 1.28 g/t Au for 1.23Moz of contained gold.
Measured and Indicated components increased by 15% to 17.0Mt at 1.39g/t Au for 762,000oz.

Bruno-Lewis

20% increase to the Mineral Resource Estimate for the cornerstone Bruno-Lewis deposit to:
- o 11.5Mt at 1.01 g/t Au for 374,000oz of contained gold.
Updated Mineral Resource Estimate based on a gold price of A$2,600/oz, utilising cost guidance from the 2019 Pre-Feasibility Study, with mining cost assumptions increased from previous optimisations and with a lower cut-off grade of 0.4g/t Au.
69% increase in the Measured and Indicated Resource to 283,000oz.

Hobby

Updated Mineral Resource Estimate for the Hobby Prospect of 0.5Mt @ 1.31g/t Au for 22,000oz of contained gold.
Further updates to the Mineral Resource Estimate at the CGP expected in September Quarter of this year with the inclusion of additional drilling at Cardinia Hill, which has returned some outstanding highgrade results.

Kin Mining NL (ASX: KIN or "the Company") is pleased to announce an updated Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for its 100%-owned Cardinia Gold Project (CGP) near Leonora in WA of 30Mt at 1.28g/t for 1.23Moz of contained gold, including recently updated estimates for the Bruno-Lewis and Hobby deposits.

Importantly, the updated MRE includes a 15% increase in the higher-confidence Measured and Indicated portion of the resource to 17Mt at 1.39g/t for 762,000oz, reflecting successful in-fill drilling programs conducted in recent months and demonstrating the scale and quality of the CGP resource inventory.

Recent drilling of Inferred Mineral Resource positions and new, higher grade intersections have added an additional 1.4Mt at 1.40g/t for 63,000oz of Mineral Resource at Bruno-Lewis and an additional 13,000oz at Hobby, increasing the previous Mineral Resource estimate announced on 23 December 2020 "CGP Mineral Resource Estimate Upgrade to 1.15Moz".

This updated MRE for Bruno Lewis and Hobby is based on the same optimisation parameters used for all other existing mineralisation models at the CGP, which were last estimated in December 2020.

All Mineral Resource Estimates reported fall within optimised shells using the same stringent criteria for costs, recoveries and geotechnical parameters as established in the 2019 Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) for the CGP, and the application of a gold price assumption of A$2,600/oz. The A$2600 gold price adopted for this estimate is considered reasonable given the recent gold price performance and the requirement under the JORC code to include only material in an MRE that will result in "eventual economic extraction".

Kin Mining Managing Director Andrew Munckton said the Mineral Resource Estimate marked another step towards unlocking the value of the Cardinia Gold Project through ongoing programs of focused exploration and conversion of Inferred Mineral Resources to the higher confidence and quality classifications.

"This is a very pleasing update to the CGP gold resource inventory, which reflects the success of our drilling programs in recent months. Importantly, in addition to delivering a 7% increase in overall contained ounces, we have been able to deliver a significant 15% increase in the higher-confidence Measured and Indicated ounces," he said.

"The addition of 102,000 higher-quality ounces, together with improvements in average grade for the recentlydiscovered south-western lodes at Bruno Lewis, is a real positive for the project – particularly as we see great potential for further growth at this cornerstone deposit.

"We also have a very strong pipeline of new prospects and further deeper drilling results from the Cardinia Hill and Eastern Corridor deposits that are yet to be fully assessed in the latest Mineral Resource Estimate. These deposits are expected to be the subject of further updates in the September Quarter this year."

Figure 1: May sunrise at Cardinia

Figure 2: CGP location map. Resources located at Cardinia, Mertondale and Raeside (Table 1).

				Cardinia Gold Project: Mineral Resources: May 2021
				Measured Resources			Indicated Resources			Inferred Resources			Total Resources
Project Area	Resource Gold Price (AUD)	Lower Cut off		Au	Au		Au	Au		Au	Au		Au	Au	Date Announced
		(g/t Au)	Tonnes (Mt)	(g/t Au)	(k Oz)	Tonnes (Mt)	(g/t Au)	(k Oz)	Tonnes (Mt)	(g/t Au)	(k Oz)	Tonnes (Mt)	(g/t Au)	(k Oz)

Mertondale
Mertons RewardMertondale 3-4	$2,600$2,600	0.40.4				0.91.4	2.171.85	6681	1.91.0	0.650.97	4131	2.92.3	1.151.48	106111	26-Nov-2026-Nov-20
Tonto	$2,600	0.4				1.8	1.14	67	1.1	1.24	43	2.9	1.18	111	26-Nov-20
Mertondale 5	$2,600	0.4				0.5	1.67	26	0.8	1.24	32	1.3	1.40	59	26-Nov-20
Eclipse	$2,600	0.4							0.6	1.01	19	0.6	1.01	19	26-Nov-20
QuicksilverSubtotal Mertondale	$2,600	0.4				4.6	1.61	240	1.16.5	1.100.98	39205	1.111.1	1.101.24	39445	26-Nov-20

CardiniaBruno*	$2,600	0.4	0.3	1.26	10	2.8	1.13	102	1.1	1.05	36	4.1	1.12	148	17-May-21
Lewis*	$2,600	0.4	0.6	1.24	20	4.7	1.00	151	2.1	0.80	55	7.4	0.95	226	17-May-21
Kyte	$2,600	0.4				0.3	1.53	17	0.1	0.92	3	0.4	1.38	20	26-Nov-20
Helens	$2,600	0.4				0.7	2.14	50	0.3	1.94	19	1.0	2.08	69	26-Nov-20
Fiona	$2,600	0.4				0.6	1.35	25	0.2	1.21	8	0.8	1.32	32	26-Nov-20
RangoonHobby *	$2,600$2,600	0.40.4				0.5	1.24	21	0.30.5	1.071.31	1222	0.90.5	1.171.31	3222	26-Nov-2017-May-21
Cardinia Hill *	$2,600	0.4							1.2	1.66	61	1.2	1.66	61	18-Dec-20
Subtotal Cardinia			0.8	1.16	30	9.6	1.18	364	5.8	1.15	216	16.3	1.17	611
Raeside
Michaelangelo	$2,600	0.4				1.1	2.00	73	0.4	2.19	25	1.5	2.04	98	26-Nov-20
Leonardo	$2,600	0.4				0.4	2.39	30	0.2	2.20	14	0.6	2.32	44	26-Nov-20
Forgotten FourKrang	$2,600$2,600	0.40.4				0.10.3	2.091.74	717	0.10.0	1.962.59	62	0.20.3	2.031.80	1419	26-Nov-2026-Nov-20
Subtotal Raeside						2.0	2.04	128	0.7	2.17	47	2.6	2.07	175
TOTAL			0.8	1.16	30	16.2	1.41	732	13.0	1.12	468	30.0	1.28	1231
Table 1: Mineral Resource Estimate Table May 2021. Mineral Resources estimated by Jamie Logan, and reported in
accordance with JORC 2012 using a 0.4g/t Au cut-off within AUD2,600 optimisation shells. Note * Cardinia Hill, Hobby and
Bruno-Lewis Mineral Resource Estimates completed by Mike Millard of Cube Consulting, and also reported in accordance
		with JORC 2012 using a 0.4g/t Au cut-off within AUD2,600 optimisation shells.

Figure 3: Cardinia area deposit location map.

Bruno-Lewis Mineral Resource

Bruno-Lewis is located approximately 2km west of the Cardinia office and proposed site of a future processing facility.

Mineralisation at Bruno-Lewis occurs as three distinct types. Supergene mineralisation, stratigraphically controlled structural mineralisation and cross cutting, shallow, north-east dipping mineralisation related to porphyry intrusions (Figure 5). The latest round of drilling increased the abundance of ore that is contained in the shallow, north-east dipping structures and also in the number of porphyry intrusion that exist at Bruno-Lewis. Refer Figure 5, 6 and 7.

The previous Bruno-Lewis Mineral Resource Estimate contained a large proportion of Inferred Mineral Resource and unclassified mineralisation. The significant drilling program that commenced in late 2020 and was completed earlier this year was designed to expand the MRE particularly from new lodes on the south western and north eastern side of the Bruno Lewis deposit, convert the Inferred Mineral Resource to Indicated Resource and gain a better understanding of the controls of the primary mineralisation.

Figure 4: Bruno-Lewis Plan showing all drilling, the 2019 PFS optimised pit outline (brown) and the 2021 MRE updated optimised pit outline (blue).

Figure 5: Bruno-Lewis cross section through A-A'

Figure 6: Perspective view of the Bruno-Lewis Resource optimisation looking to the north. Block model and down hole gold grade histograms are shown.

Hobby Mineral Resource

Hobby is located approximately 6.5km north of the Cardinia office and proposed site of a future processing facility.

As shown in Figure 7, 8 and 9, Hobby mineralisation consists of two steeply-dipping lodes with mineralisation open to the north and south. The Hobby mineralised contact is the same lithological contact that is mineralised up to 2.5km further south at Collymore and Rangoon. Importantly, the Hobby mineralisation contains felsic porphyry intrusions that have been shown to control high-grade mineralisation across several deposits at Cardinia.

Figure 7: Plan of the Hobby optimisation with cross section location A-A'.

Figure 8: Perspective view of the Hobby optimisation looking to the north north-west. Block model and down hole gold grade histograms showing

Figure 9: Section 6820360mN through Hobby – Cross section showing estimated grades and illustrating the optimisation shell used in the May 2021 (Blue - A$2,600 Au and 0.4g/t lower cut) to constrain the Mineral Resource Estimate.

-ENDS-

Authorised for release by the Board of Directors

For further information, please contact:

Investor enquiries Media enquiries

Andrew Munckton Nicholas Read Managing Director, Kin Mining NL Read Corporate +61 8 9242 2227 +61 419 929 046

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT

Resource Estimation

The information contained in this report relating to Mineral Resource Estimation results for the Bruno Lewis, Hobby and Cardinia Hill deposit relates to information compiled by Mr Mike Millard. Mr Millard is a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and a full time employee of Cube Consulting. Mr Millard has sufficient experience of relevance to the styles of mineralisation and the types of deposit under consideration, and to the activities undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the JORC "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves".

The information contained in this report relating to Mineral Resource estimation results for the remainder of the deposits including Kyte, Helens, Fiona, Rangoon, Mertons Reward, Mertondale 3-4, Tonto, Mertondale 5, Eclipse, Quicksilver, Michelangelo, Leonardo, Forgotten Four and Krang relates to information compiled by Mr Jamie Logan. Mr Logan is a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and was until recently a full time employee of the company. Mr Logan has sufficient experience of relevance to the styles of mineralisation and the types of deposit under consideration, and to the activities undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the JORC "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves".

Exploration Results

The information contained in this report relating to exploration results relates to information compiled or reviewed by Glenn Grayson. Mr Grayson is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and is a full time employee of the company. Mr Grayson has sufficient experience of relevance to the styles of mineralisation and the types of deposit under consideration, and to the activities undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the JORC "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves".

Mr Millard, Mr Logan and Mr. Grayson consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on information in the form and context in which it appears.

Table 1 Contents

Section 1 Cardinia
Section 2 Cardinia
Section 3 Bruno-Lewis
Section 3 Hobby

Appendix A

JORC 2012 TABLE 1 REPORT

Cardinia Gold Project - Section 1

Cardinia

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, randomchips, or specific specialised industry standardmeasurement tools appropriate to the minerals underinvestigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or	DiamondHistoric (pre-2014) diamond core (DD) sampling utilised half core or quarter core sample intervals;typically varying from 0.3m to 1.4m in length. 1m sample intervals were favoured and sampleboundaries principally coincided with geological contacts.
	handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples shouldnot be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.Include reference to measures taken to ensure samplerepresentivity and the appropriate calibration of anymeasurement tools or systems used.Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are	Recent (2014-2018) diamond core (DD) samples, either HQ3 or NQ2 in size diameter, were eithercut in half longitudinally or further cut into quarters, using a powered diamond core drop sawcentered over a cradle holding core in place. Core sample intervals varied from 0.2 to 1.25m inlength but were predominantly aligned to 1m intervals or with sample boundaries which respectedgeological contacts.
Material to the Public Report.In cases where 'industry standard' work has been donethis would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulationdrilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kgwas pulverised to produce a 30g charge for fire assay'). Inother cases more explanation may be required, such as	2019 diamond core samples, either HQ3 or NQ2 in size diameter, were either cut in halflongitudinally or a third longitudinally, using an automated Corewise core saw Core was placed inboats, holding core in place. Core sample intervals varied from 0.3 to 1.3m in length but werepredominantly aligned to 1m intervals or with sample boundaries which respected geologicalcontacts.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	where there is coarse gold that has inherent samplingproblems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types(eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure ofdetailed information.	RCHistoric reverse circulation (RC) drill samples were collected over 1m downhole intervals beneath acyclone and typically riffle split to obtain a sub-sample (typically 3-4kg). 1m sub-samples weretypically collected in pre-numbered calico bags and 1m sample rejects were commonly stored atthe drill site. 3m or 4m composited interval samples were often collected by using a scoop (drysamples) or spear (wet samples). If composite samples returned anomalous results once assayed,the single metre sub-samples of the anomalous composite intervals were retrieved and submittedfor individual gold analysis.
		Recent reverse circulation (RC) drill samples were collected by passing through a cyclone, a samplecollection box, and riffle or cone splitter. All RC sub-samples were collected over one metredownhole intervals and averaged 3-4kg.
		2019-20 RC drilling samples were collected in 1m downhole intervals by passing through a cyclone,a collection box and then dropping through a cone splitter. All RC sub-samples were collected overone metre downhole intervals and averaged 3-4kg.
		AC/RAB
		Historic air core (AC) and rotary air blast (RAB) were typically collected at 1 metre intervals andplaced on the ground with 3-4kg sub-samples collected using a scoop or spear. Three metre or fourmetre composited interval samples were often collected by using a scoop (dry samples) or spear(wet samples). If composite samples returned anomalous results once assayed, the single metresub-samples of the anomalous composite intervals were retrieved and submitted for individualgold analysis.
		Assay Methodology
		Historic sample analysis typically included a number of commercial laboratories with preparation asper the following method, oven drying (90-110°C), crushing (<-2mm to <-6mm), pulverizing (<-75μm to <-105μm), and riffle split to obtain a 30, 40, or 50gram catchweight for gold analysis. FireAssay fusion, with AAS finish was the common method of analysis however, on occasion, initialassaying may have been carried out via Aqua Regia digest and AAS/ICP finish. Anomalous sampleswere subsequently re-assayed by Fire Assay fusion and AAS/ICP finish.
		Recent sample analysis typically included oven drying (105-110°C), crushing (<-6mm & <-2mm),pulverising (P90% <-75μm) and sample splitting to a representative 50gram catchweight sample forgold only analysis using Fire Assay fusion with AAS finish.
		Multi element analysis was also conducted on approximately 10% of samples, predominantlythrough ore zones. This was conducted via a 4-acid digest with ICP-MS/OES determination for a 48element suite.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Rock ChipsAll rock chip samples are taken using a pick. The samples are taken from outcrop where possible.Samples are also taken from in situ float material or waste rock around historic workings, whereoutcrop is not present. Care is taken to ensure all samples are representative of the medium beingsampled. For example, if a 1m sediment unit is being sampled, a channel sample will be takenacross the entire unit.
		All recent drilling, sample collection and sample handling procedures were conducted and/orsupervised by KIN geology personnel to high level industry standards. QA/QC procedures wereimplemented during each drilling program to industry standards.
Drilling techniques	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer,rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (egcore diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamondtails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core isoriented and if so, by what method, etc).	Drilling carried out since 1986 and up to the most recent drill programs completed by KIN Mining wasobtained from a combination of reverse circulation (RC), diamond core (DD), air core (AC), and rotaryair blast (RAB) drilling.
		Data prior to 1986 is limited due to lack of exploration.
		DiamondHistoric DD was carried out using industry standard 'Q' wireline techniques, with the core retrievedfrom the inner tubes and placed in core trays. Core sizes include NQ/NQ3 (Ø 45-48mm) andHQ/HQ3 (Ø 61-64mm). At the end of each core run, the driller placed core blocks in the tray,marked with hole number and depth. Core recovery was usually measured for each core run andrecorded onto the geologist's drill logs.
		2017 – 2018 DD was carried out by contractor Orbit Drilling Pty Ltd ("Orbit Drilling") with aMitsubishi truck-mounted Hydco 1200H 8x4 drill rig, using industry standard 'Q' wirelinetechniques. 2019-20 DD was carried out by Topdrill Pty Ltd. With a Sandvick DE840 mounted on aMercedes Benz 4144 Actros 8x8 Carrier. The rig is fitted with Sandvik DA555 hands free diamonddrilling rod handler and Austex hands free hydraulic breakout.
		Drill core is retrieved from the inner tubes and placed in plastic core trays and each core run depthrecorded onto core marker blocks and placed at the end of each run in the tray. Core sizes includeNQ2 (Ø 47mm) and HQ3 (Ø 64mm).
		Recent DD core recovery and orientation was obtained for each core run where possible, usingelectronic core orientation tools (e.g. Reflex EZ-ACT) and the 'bottom of core' marked accordingly.
		2017 -18 drilling was measured at regular downhole intervals, typically at 10-15m from surface andthen every 30m to bottom of hole, using electronic multi-shot downhole survey tools (i.e. ReflexEZ-TRAC or Camteq Proshot). Independent programs of downhole deviation surveying were alsocarried out to validate previous surveys. These programs utilised either electronic continuous

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		logging survey tool (AusLog A698 deviation tool) or gyroscopic survey equipment.
		2019-20 DD was surveyed at regular downhole intervals (every 30m with an additional end-of-holesurvey) using electronic gyroscopic survey equipment.
		RC
		Historic RC drilling used conventional reverse circulation drilling techniques, utilising a cross-oversub, or face-sampling hammers with bit shrouds. Drill bit sizes typically ranged between 110-140mm.
		2017-18 RC drilling was carried out by Orbit Drilling's truck-mounted Hydco 350RC 8x8 Actross drillrigs with 350psi/1250cfm air compressor, with auxiliary and booster air compressors (whenrequired). Drilling utilised mostly downhole face-sampling hammer bits (Ø 140mm), with occasionaluse of blade bits for highly oxidized and soft formations. The majority of drilling retrieved drysamples, with the occasional use of the auxiliary and booster air compressors beneath the watertable, to maintain dry sample return as much as possible. RC drillhole deviations were surveyeddownhole, typically carried out inside a non-magnetic stainless steel (s/s) rod located above thehammer, using electronic multi-shot downhole tool (e.g. Reflex EZ-TRAC). In some instances,drillholes were surveyed later in open hole. Independent programs of downhole deviationsurveying were also carried out to validate previous surveys. These programs utilised eitherelectronic continuous logging survey tool (AusLog A698 deviation tool) or gyroscopic surveyequipment.
		2019-20 RC drilling was carried out by Swick Mining Services truck-mounted Swick versionSchramm 685 RC Drill Rig (Rod Handler & Rotary Cone Splitter) with support air truck and dustsuppression equipment. Drilling utilised downhole face-sampling hammer bits (Ø 140mm). Themajority of drilling retrieved dry samples, with the occasional use of the auxiliary and booster aircompressors beneath the water table, to maintain dry sample return as much as possible.
		2019-20 RC was surveyed at regular downhole intervals (every 30m with an additional end-of-holesurvey) using electronic gyroscopic survey equipment.
		AC/RAB
		Historic AC drilling was conducted utilising suitable rigs with appropriate compressors (eg250psi/600cfm). AC holes were drilled using 'blade' or 'wing' bits, until the bit was unable topenetrate ('blade refusal'), often near the fresh rock interface. Hammer bits were used only when itwas deemed necessary to penetrate further into the fresh rock profile or through notable "hardboundaries" in the regolith profile. No downhole surveying is noted to have been undertaken on ACdrillholes.
		Historic RAB drilling was carried out using small air compressors (eg 250psi/600cfm) and drill rods

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		fitted with a percussion hammer or blade bit, with the sample return collected at the drillholecollar using a stuffing box and cyclone collection techniques. Drillhole sizes generally rangebetween 75-110mm. No downhole surveying is noted to have been undertaken on RAB drillholes.
Drill sample recovery	Method of recording and assessing core and chip samplerecoveries and results assessed.Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensurerepresentative nature of the samples.Whether a relationship exists between sample recoveryand grade and whether sample bias may have occurreddue to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	DiamondHistoric core recovery was recorded in drill logs for most of the diamond drilling programs since1985. A review of historical reports indicates that core recovery was generally good (>80%) withlesser recoveries recorded in zones of broken ground and/or areas of mineralisation. Overallrecoveries are considered acceptable for resource estimation.
		Recent core recovery data was recorded for each run by measuring total length of core retrievedagainst the downhole interval actually drilled and stored in the database. KIN representativescontinuously monitor core recovery and core presentation quality as drilling is conducted andissues or discrepancies are rectified promptly to maintain industry best standards. Core recoveriesaveraged >95%, even when difficult ground conditions were being encountered. When poor groundconditions were anticipated, a triple tube drilling configuration was utilised to maximize corerecovery
		RC/AC/RAB
		Historic sample recovery information for RC, AC, and RAB drilling is limited.
		Recent RC drilling samples are preserved as best as possible during the drilling process. At the endof each 1 metre downhole interval, the driller stops advancing, retracts from the bottom of hole,and waits for the sample to clear from the bottom of the hole through to the sample collector boxfitted beneath the cyclone. The sample is then released from the sample collector box and passedthrough either a 3-tiered riffle splitter or cone splitter fitted beneath the sample box.
		Drilling prior to 2018 utilised riffle split collection whereas sample collection via a cone splitter wasconducted for drilling undertaken since March 2018; cyclone cleaning processes remained thesame.
		Sample reject is collected in plastic bags, and a 3-4kg sub-sample is collected in pre-marked calicobags for analysis. Once the samples have been collected, the cyclone, sample collector box andriffle splitter are flushed with compressed air, and the splitter cleaned by the off-sider using acompressed air hose at both the end of each 6 metre drill rod and then extensively cleaned at thecompletion of each hole. This process is maintained throughout the entire drilling program tomaximise drill sample recovery and to maintain a high level of representivity of the material beingdrilled. From 2020 sample rejects are placed on the ground.
		RC drill sample recoveries are not recorded in the database however a review by Carras Mining PtyLtd (CM) in 2017, of RC drill samples stored in the field, and ongoing observations of RC drill rigs in

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		operation by KIN representatives, suggests that RC sample recoveries were mostly consistent andtypically very good (>90%).
		Collected samples are deemed reliable and representative of drilled material and no materialdiscrepancy, that would impede a mineral resource estimate, exists between collected RC primaryand sub-samples.
Logging	Whether core and chip samples have been geologicallyand geotechnically logged to a level of detail to supportappropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studiesand metallurgical studies.	Logging data coded in the database, prior to 2014, illustrates at least four different lithological codesystems, a legacy of numerous past operators (Hunter, MPI, Metana, CIM, MEGM, Pacmin, SOG, andNavigator). Correlation between codes is difficult to establish however, based on historical reports,drill hole logging procedures appear consistent with normal industry practices of the time.
	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature.Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.	KIN has attempted to validate historical logging data and to standardize the logging code system byincorporating the SOG and Navigator logging codes into one.
	The total length and percentage of the relevantintersections logged.	Diamond
		Historical diamond core logging was recorded into drill logs for most of the diamond drillingprograms since 1985. A review of historical reports indicates that logging noted core recovery,fractures per metre and RQD, lithology, alteration, texture, mineralisation, weathering, and otherfeatures. Core was then marked up for cutting and sampling.
		Navigator's procedure for logging of diamond core included firstly marking of the bottom of thecore (for successful core orientations), then recording of core recovery, fractures per metre andRQD, lithology, alteration, texture, mineralisation, weathering, and other features. Core was thenmarked up for cutting and sampling. Navigator DD logging is predominantly to geological contacts.
		Navigator logging information was entered directly into hand held digital data loggers andtransferred directly to the database, after validation, to minimize data entry errors.
		Drill core photographs, for drilling prior to 2014, are available only for diamond drillholescompleted by Navigator.
		KIN DD logging is carried out on site once geology personnel retrieve core trays from the drill rigsite. Core is collected from the rig daily. The entire length of every hole is logged. Recorded dataincludes lithology, alteration, structure, texture, mineralisation, sulphide content, weathering andother features. Drillhole collar coordinates, azimuth, dip, depth and sampling intervals are alsorecorded. KIN DD logging is to geological contacts.
		Qualitative logging includes classification and description of lithology, weathering, oxidation,colour, texture and grain size. Quantitative logging includes percentages of identified minerals,veining, and structural measurements (using a kenometer tool). In addition, logging of diamonddrilling includes geotechnical data, RQD and core recoveries.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Drill core is photographed at the Cardinia site, prior to any cutting and/or sampling, and thenstored at Cardinia. Photographs are available for every diamond drillhole completed by KIN and aselection of various RC chip trays. SG data is also collect
		All information collected is entered directly into laptop computers or tablets, validated in the field,and then transferred to the database.
		The level of logging detail is considered appropriate for exploration and to support appropriatemineral resource estimation, mining studies, and metallurgical studies.
		Diamond drillholes completed for geotechnical purposes were independently logged for structuraldata by geotechnical consultants.
		RC/AC/RAB
		Historical RC, AC, and RAB logging (including Navigator) was entered on a metre by metre basis.Logging consisted of lithology, alteration, texture, mineralisation, weathering, and other features
		For the majority of historical drilling (pre-2004) the entire length of each drillhole have been loggedfrom surface to 'end of hole'.
		KIN RC logging of was carried out in the field and logging has predominantly been undertaken on ametre by metre basis. KIN logging is inclusive of the entire length of each RC drillhole from surfaceto 'end of hole'.
		Recorded data includes lithology, alteration, structure, texture, mineralisation, sulphide content,weathering and other features. Drillhole collar coordinates, azimuth, dip, depth and samplingintervals are also recorded.
		Qualitative logging includes classification and description of lithology, weathering, oxidation,colour, texture and grain size. Quantitative logging includes identification and percentages ofmineralogy, sulphides, mineralisation, and veining.
		Photographs are available for a selection of recent KIN RC drillholes.
		All information collected is entered directly into laptop computers or tablets, validated in the field,and then transferred to the database.
		The level of logging detail is considered appropriate for exploration and to support appropriatemineral resource estimation, mining studies, and metallurgical studies.
		Rock Chips
		All rock chip samples are inspected by the sampling geologist and logged for lithology, alteration,mineralisation, veining, and structural fabric. This is a combination of qualitative and quantitativedata.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sub-sampling techniques andsample preparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half orall core taken.If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etcand whether sampled wet or dry.For all sample types, the nature, quality andappropriateness of the sample preparation technique.Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-samplingstages to maximise representivity of samples.Measures taken to ensure that the sampling isrepresentative of the in situ material collected, includingfor instance results for field duplicate/second-half	DiamondHistoric diamond drill core (NQ/NQ3 or HQ/HQ3) samples collected for analysis were longitudinallycut in half, and occasionally in quarters for the larger (HQ/HQ3) diameter holes, using a powereddiamond core drop saw centered over a cradle holding the core in place. Half core or quarter coresample intervals typically varied from 0.3m to 1.4m in length. 1m sample intervals were favouredand are the most common method of sampling, however sample boundaries do principally coincidewith geological contacts. The remaining core was retained in core trays.2017-18 diamond drill core samples collected for analysis were longitudinally cut in half, with somesamples cut into quarters, using a powered diamond core drop saw blade centered over a cradleholding the core in place. Core sample intervals varied from 0.2 to 1.25m in length but werepredominantly aligned to 1m intervals or with sample boundaries which respected geological
	sampling.Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size ofthe material being sampled.	contacts. The remaining core was retained in their respective core trays and stored in KIN's yardfor future reference. All KIN diamond drill core is securely stored at the KIN Leonora Yard.
		2019-20 diamond drill core samples collected for analysis were longitudinally cut in half, with somesamples cut into thirds, using an automated Corewise powered diamond core saw with the bladecentered over a boat holding the core in place. Core sample intervals varied from 0.2 to 1.25m inlength but were predominantly aligned to 1m intervals or with sample boundaries which respectedgeological contacts. The remaining core was retained in their respective core trays and stored inKIN's yard for future reference. All KIN diamond drill core is securely stored at the Cardiniacoreyard.
		All sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation procedures conducted and/or supervised byKIN geology personnel are to standard industry practice. Sub-sampling and sample preparationtechniques used are considered to maximise representivity of drilled material. QA/QC proceduresimplemented during each drilling program are to industry standard practice.
		Samples sizes are considered appropriate for this style of gold mineralisation and as an industryaccepted method for evaluation of gold deposits in the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia.
		RC/AC/RAB
		Historic sampling was predominantly conducted by collecting 1m samples from beneath a cycloneand either retaining these primary samples or passing through a riffle splitter to obtain a 3-4kg subsample for analysis. First pass sampling often involved collecting composite samples by using ascoop (dry samples) or spear/tube (wet samples) to obtain 3m or 4m composited intervals, withthe single metre split samples being retained at the drill site as spoil or in sample bags. Ifcomposite sample assays returned anomalous results, the single metre samples for this compositewere retrieved and submitted for analysis. RC/AC/RAB sampling procedures are believed to be

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		consistent with the normal industry practices at the time.
		Samples obtained from conventional RC drilling techniques with cross-over subs often sufferedfrom down hole contamination, especially beneath the water table. Samples obtained from RCdrilling techniques using the face sampling hammer suffered less from down hole contaminationand were more likely to be kept dry beneath the water table, particularly if auxiliary and booster aircompressors were used. These samples are considered to be representative.
		The vast majority of Reverse Circulation (RC) drill samples were collected at 1m downhole intervalsfrom beneath a cyclone and then riffle split to obtain a sub-sample (typically 3-4kg). After splitting,1m sub-samples were typically collected in pre-numbered calico bags, and the 1m sample rejectswere commonly stored at the drill site in marked plastic bags, for future reference. First passsampling often involved collecting composite samples by using a scoop (dry samples) or spear/tube(wet samples) to obtain 3m or 4m composited intervals, with the single metre split sub-samplesbeing retained at the drill site. If the composite sample assays returned anomalous results, singlemetre sub-samples for the anomalous composite intervals were retrieved and submitted foranalysis.
		Navigator included standards, fields duplicate splits (since 2009), and blanks within each drillsample batch, at a ratio of 1 for every 20 samples, with the number of standards being inserted at aratio of 1 for every 50 samples.
		Recent RC sub-samples were collected over 1 metre downhole intervals and retained in pre-markedcalico bags, after passing through a cyclone and either a riffle splitter, prior to March 2018, or conesplitter, after March 2018. The majority of RC sub-samples consistently averaged 3-4kg. Samplereject from the riffle splitter were retained and stored in plastic bags, and located near eachdrillhole site. When drilling beneath the water table, the majority of sample returns were kept dryby the use of the auxiliary and booster air compressors. Very few wet samples were collectedthrough the splitter, and the small number of wet or damp samples is not considered material forresource estimation work.
		KIN RC drill programs utilise field duplicates, at regular intervals at a ratio of 1:25, and assay resultsindicate that there is reasonable analytical repeatability; considering the presence of nuggety gold.
		All sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation procedures conducted and/or supervised byKIN geology personnel are to standard industry practice. Sub-sampling and sample preparationtechniques used are considered to maximise representivity of drilled material. QA/QC proceduresimplemented during each drilling program are to industry standard practice.
		Samples sizes are considered appropriate for this style of gold mineralisation and as an industryaccepted method for evaluation of gold deposits in the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		No duplicates are taken for rock chip sampling. Sample sizes are approximately 3kg, this isconsidered appropriate for the material being sampled.
Quality of assay data andlaboratory tests	The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assayingand laboratory procedures used and whether thetechnique is considered partial or total.For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF	Numerous assay laboratories and various sample preparation and assay techniques have been usedsince 1981. Historical reporting and descriptions of laboratory sample preparation, assayingprocedures, and quality control protocols for the samples from the various drilling programs arevariable in their descriptions and completeness.
	instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining theanalysis including instrument make and model, reading	Assay data obtained prior to 2001 is incomplete and the nature of results could not be accuratelyquantified due to the combinations of various laboratories and analytical methodologies utilised.
	times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation,etc.Nature of quality control procedures adopted (egstandards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks)and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias)and precision have been established.	Since 1993, the majority of samples submitted to the various laboratories were typically prepared foranalysis firstly by oven drying, crushing and pulverizing to a nominal 85% passing 75µm.
		In the initial exploration stages, Aqua Regia digest with AAS/ICP finish, was generally used as a firstpass detection method, with follow up analysis by Fire Assay fusion and AAS/ICP finish. This was acommon practice at the time. Mineralised intervals were subsequently Fire Assayed (using 30, 40 or50 gram catchweights) with AAS/ICP finish.
		Approximately 15-20% of the sampled AC holes may have been subject to Aqua Regia digest methodsonly, however AC samples were predominantly within the oxide profile, where aqua regia resultswould not be significantly different to results from fire assay methods.
		Limited information is available regarding check assays for drilling programs prior to 2004.
		During 2004-2014, Navigator utilised six different commercial laboratories during their drillingprograms, however Kalgoorlie Assay Laboratories conducted the majority of assaying for diamond,RC, and AC samples using Fire Assay fusion on 40 gram catchweights with AAS/ICP finish.
		Since 2009 Navigator regularly included field duplicates and Certified Reference Material (CRM),standards and blanks, with their sample batch submissions to laboratories at average ratio of 1 in 20samples. Sample assay repeatability and blank and CRM standard assay results were typically withinacceptable limits.
		KIN sample analysis from 2014 to 2018 was conducted by SGS Australia Pty Ltd's ("SGS") Kalgoorlieand Perth laboratories. Sample preparation included oven drying (105°C), crushing (<6mm),pulverising (P90% passing 75µm) and riffle split to obtain a 50 gram catchweight. Analysis for goldonly was carried out by Fire Assay fusion technique with AAS finish (SGS Lab Code FAA505).
		KIN regularly insert blanks and CRM standards in each sample batch at a ratio of 1:50. This allowsfor at least one blank and one CRM standard to be included in each of the laboratory's fire assaybatch of 50 samples. Field duplicates are typically collected at a ratio of 1:50 samples and testsample assay repeatability. Blanks and CRM standards assay result performance is predominantly

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		within acceptable limits for this style of gold mineralisation.
		KIN requests laboratory pulp grind and crush checks at a ratio of 1:50 or less since May 2018 inorder to better qualify sample preparation and evaluate laboratory performance. Samples havegenerally illustrated appropriate crush and grind size percentages since the addition of thiscomponent to the sample analysis procedure.
		SGS include laboratory blanks and CRM standards as part of their internal QA/QC for samplepreparation and analysis, as well as regular assay repeats. Sample pulp assay repeatability, andinternal blank and CRM standards assay results are typically within acceptable limits.
		From late 2018 samples have been analysed by Intertek Genalysis, with sample preparation either attheir Kalgoorlie prep laboratory or the Perth Laboratory located in Maddington. . Sample preparationincluded oven drying (105°C), crushing (<6mm), pulverising (P90% passing 75µm) and split to obtain a50 gram catchweight. Analysis for gold only was carried out by Fire Assay fusion technique with AASfinish.
		KIN regularly insert blanks and CRM standards in each sample batch at a ratio of 1:25. Kin acceptsthat this ratio of QAQC is industry standard. Field duplicates are typically collected at a ratio of1:25 samples and test sample assay repeatability. Blanks and CRM standards assay resultperformance is predominantly within acceptable limits for this style of gold mineralisation.
		KIN requests laboratory pulp grind and crush checks at a ratio of 1:50 or less since May 2018 inorder to better qualify sample preparation and evaluate laboratory performance. Samples havegenerally illustrated appropriate crush and grind size percentages since the addition of thiscomponent to the sample analysis procedure.
		Genalysis include laboratory blanks and CRM standards as part of their internal QA/QC for samplepreparation and analysis, as well as regular assay repeats. Sample pulp assay repeatability, andinternal blank and CRM standards assay results are typically within acceptable limits.
		The nature and quality of the assaying and laboratory procedures used are considered to besatisfactory and appropriate for use in mineral resource estimations.
		Fire Assay fusion is considered to be a total extraction technique. The majority of assay data used forthe mineral resource estimations were obtained by the Fire Assay technique with AAS or ICP finish.AAS and ICP methods of detection are both considered to be suitable and appropriate methods ofdetection for this style of mineralisation
		Aqua Regia is considered a partial extraction technique, where gold encapsulated in refractorysulphides or some silicate minerals may not be fully dissolved, resulting in partial reporting of goldcontent.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		No other analysis techniques have been used to determine gold assays.
		Ongoing QAQC monitoring program identified one particular CRM returning spurious results. Furtheranalysis demonstrated that the standard was compromised and was subsequently removed anddestroyed. A replacement CRM of similar grade was substituted into the QAQC program.
		KIN continues to both develop and reinforce best practice QAQC methods for all drilling operationsand the treatment and analysis of samples. Regular laboratory site visits and audits have beenintroduced since April 2018 and will be conducted on an annual basis. This measure will ensure thatall aspects of KIN QAQC practices are adhered to and align with industry best practice.
		All rock chip samples have been submitted to Intertek Genalysis (Perth) for analysis by 50g Fire assay,with multi-element analysis via a 4-acid digest for a 48-element suite. Sample preparation includedoven drying (105°C), crushing (<6mm), pulverising (P90% passing 75µm). Blanks and standards areinserted by the lab at a minimum rate of 1 in 50. Lab repeats are performed for samples withparticularly high gold values. Due to the nature and intended uses of this data, this QAQC procedureis intentionally less rigorous than that used for drilling samples.
Verification of sampling andassaying	The verification of significant intersections by eitherindependent or alternative company personnel.The use of twinned holes.Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures,data verification, data storage (physical and electronic)protocols.Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	Verification of sampling, assay techniques, and results prior to 2004 is limited due to the legacy ofthe involvement of various companies, personnel, drilling equipment, sampling protocols andanalytical techniques at different laboratories.
		During 2009, a selection of significant intersections had been verified by Navigator's companygeologists and an independent consultant McDonald Speijers ("MS"). MS were able to validate 92%of the assay records in 50 randomly selected check holes, and only 6 assay discrepancies weredetected (< 0.2%), only 2 of those were considered significant. MS concluded that the very smallproportion of discrepancies indicated that the assay database was probably reliable at that time.
		In 2009, Runge Ltd ("Runge") completed a mineral resource estimate report for the Cardinia Projectarea, including the Helens, Rangoon, Kyte and Bruno-Lewis deposits. Runge's database verificationincluded basic visual validation in Surpac and field verification of drillhole positions in February 2009.Runge did not report any significant issues with the database.
		Since 2014, significant drill intersections have been verified by KIN company geologists during thecourse of the drilling programs.
		During 2017, Carras Mining Pty Ltd ("CM") carried out an independent data verification. 38,098 assayrecords for KIN 2014-2017 drilling programs were verified by comparing laboratory assay reportsagainst the database. 6 errors were found, which are not considered material and which representedonly 0.03% of all database records verified for KIN 2014-2017 drilling programs
		No adjustments, averaging or calibrations are made to any of the assay data recorded in thedatabase. QA/QC protocol is considered industry standard with standard reference material

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		submitted on a routine basis.
		Recent (2014-2018) RC and diamond drilling by KIN included twinning of some historical holes withinthe Helens and Rangoon resource areas. There is no significant material difference between historicaldrilling information and KIN drilling information.
		Areas without twinned holes illustrate a drill density that is considered sufficient to enablecomparison with surrounding historic information. No material difference of a negative nature existsbetween historical drilling information and KIN drilling information.
		KIN diamond holes drilled for metallurgical and geotechnical test work illustrate assay results withadequate correlation to both nearby historical and recent drilling results.
		No adjustment or calibration has been made to assay data.
Location of data points	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes(collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings	Several local grids were established and used by previous project owners. During the 1990s, SOGtransformed the surface survey data firstly to AMG and subsequently to MGA (GDA94 zone51).
	and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.Specification of the grid system used.Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	Navigator recognised errors in the collar co-ordinates resulting from transformations and as a result,a significant number of holes were resurveyed and a new MGA grid transformation generated.Historical collars have been validated against the original local grid co-ordinates and independentlytransformed to MGA co-ordinates and checked against the database. Navigator's MGA co-ordinateswere checked against the surveyor's reports.
		Drilling was carried out using these various local grids. Since 2004, All Navigators drill hole collarswere surveyed on completion of drilling in the Australian MGA94, Zone51 grid using RTK-DGPSequipment by licensed surveyors, with more than 80% of the pickups carried out by independentcontractors.
		Almost all the diamond and at least 70% of Navigator RC holes were downhole surveyed. PreNavigator, single shot survey cameras were used, with typical survey intervals of 30-40 metres.
		Recent KIN drill hole collars are located and recorded in the field by a contract surveyor using RTKDGPS (with a horizontal and vertical accuracy of ±50mm). Location data was collected in the GDA94Zone51 grid coordinate system.
		Downhole surveying was predominantly carried out by the drilling contractor which, prior to late2018, was Orbit Drilling Pty Ltd. This was conducted using a downhole electronic single shot magnetictool. (Relfex EZ-shot), which is industry standard practice. This is considered sufficiently accurateexcept where significant magnetic interference is encountered. The magnetic field is recorded onevery survey and flagged when likely to interfere with the reading. These surveys are downgraded inthe database. In addition, if the downhole survey tool is located within 15 metres of the surface,there is risk of influence from the drill rig affecting the azimuth readings. This was observed for the

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		survey readings, which include total magnetic intensity (TMI) measurements, where TMI is spuriousfor readings taken at downhole depths less than 20 metres. These spurious readings are included inthe database, but are not used.
		Downhole surveying in 2019 has been conducted by the drilling contractors (Topdrill Pty Ltd andSwick Mining Services Pty Ltd) utilizing downhole electronic gyroscopic survey tools. These areconsidered very accurate and not susceptible to magnetic interference. No further surveyingrequired to check drill hole deviation.
		A small selection of drillhole collars, which do not have DGPS collar surveys, were picked up with ahandheld GPS and individually appraised in regards to their location prior to modelling; the positionof these collars is deemed appropriate for the resource estimation work.
		Considering the history of grid transformations and surviving documentation, there might be someresidual risk of error in the MGA co-ordinates for old drillholes, however this is not considered to bematerial for the resource estimation.
		Azimuth data was historically recorded relative to magnetic north. Much of the historical drilling datawas recorded relative to magnetic north. Variation in magnetic declination for the Cardinia Projectarea is calculated at +0.823° East (1985) to +1.301° East (2017), with a maximum variation of +1.575°in 2005. The difference between true north and magnetic north, and the annual variation in magneticdeclination since 1985 is not significant, therefore magnetic north measurements have been used,where true north data is unavailable, for all survey data used in resource estimation processes.
		The accuracy of drill hole collars and downhole data are located with sufficient accuracy for use inresource estimation work.
		For rock chip samples, locations are recorded at the time of sampling using a handheld GPS in theGDA94 Zone51 grid coordinate system.
Data spacing and distribution	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to	Drill hole spacing patterns vary considerably throughout the Cardinia Gold Project area and aredeposit specific, depending on the nature and style of mineralisation being tested.
	establish the degree of geological and grade continuityappropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserveestimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.Whether sample compositing has been applied.	Drill hole spacing within the resource areas is sufficient to establish an acceptable degree ofgeological and grade continuity and is appropriate for both the mineral resource estimation and theresource classifications applied.
Orientation of data in relation togeological structure	Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiasedsampling of possible structures and the extent to whichthis is known, considering the deposit type.If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the	The Cardinia greenstone sequence displays a NNW to NW trend. Drilling and sampling programs werecarried out to obtain unbiased locations of drill sample data, generally orthogonal to the strike ofmineralisation.At Helens mineralisation is structurally controlled in sub-vertical shear zones, with supergene

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to	components of varying lateral extensiveness present in the oxide profile.
	have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessedand reported if material.	The vast majority of historical drilling, pre-Navigator (pre-2004), and KIN drilling is orientated at -60°/245° (WSW) and -60°/065° (ENE).
		At Bruno-Lewis and Kyte, mineralisation is either stratigraphy parallel (trending NNW, steep tomoderately W-dipping) or cross-cutting and dipping shallowly to the NE (striking NW). The vastmajority of the drilling is therefore predominantly orientated at -60°/225-250° or -60°/090°. GradeControl drillholes were drilled vertically. Since late 2018, Kin's drilling has been largely oriented to070° to target contact lodes and 225-250° to target the NE-dipping potassic lodes.
		The chance of sample bias introduced by sample orientation is considered minimal. No orientationsampling bias has been identified in data thus far.
Sample security	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	No sample security details are available for pre-Navigator (pre-2004) drill or field samples.
		Navigator drill samples (2004-2014) were collected in pre-numbered calico bags at the drill rig site.Samples were then collected by company personnel from the field and transported to the secureNavigator yard in Leonora. Samples were then batch processed (drillhole and sample numbers loggedinto the database) and then packed into 'bulkabag sacks'. The bulkabags were tied off and storedsecurely in the Navigator yard until being transported to the selected laboratory. There was noperceived opportunity for the samples to be compromised from collection of samples at the drill siteto delivery to the laboratory.
		2017 -18 KIN RC drill samples were collected in pre-numbered calico bags at the drill rig site. Thesamples were then batch processed (drillhole and sample numbers encoded onto a hardcopy sampleregister) in the field, and then transported and stacked into 'bulkabag sacks' at the secure KIN yardlocation in Leonora. Bulkabags were tied off and stored securely in the yard until being transportedto the laboratory.
		2019-20 RC drill samples were collected in pre-numbered calico bags at the drill rig site. The sampleswere then batch processed (drillhole and sample numbers encoded onto a hardcopy sample register)in the field, and then transported and stacked into 'bulkabag sacks' at the Cardinia office.
		2017-18 KIN DD samples were obtained by KIN personnel in pre-numbered calico bags at the KINyard location in Leonora. Samples were then stacked into 'bulkabag sacks' at the yard location andstored securely until being transported to the laboratory.
		2019-20 samples were obtained by KIN personnel in pre-numbered calico bags at the core yardlocated at the Cardinia office. Samples were then stacked into 'bulkabag sacks' at the yard locationand stored securely until being transported to the laboratory.
		Both transport contractors and KIN personnel are utilised to transport samples to the laboratory. Noperceived opportunity for samples to be compromised from collection of samples at the drill site, to

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		delivery to the laboratory, where they were stored in their secure compound, and made ready forprocessing is deemed likely to have occurred.
		On receipt of the samples, the laboratory independently checked the sample submission form toverify samples received and readied the samples for sample preparation. SGS and Genalysis samplesecurity protocols are of industry standard and deemed acceptable for resource estimation work.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of samplingtechniques and data.	Historic drilling and sampling methods and QA/QC are regarded as not being as thoroughlydocumented compared to current standards. In house reviews of various available historicalcompany reports of drilling and sampling techniques indicates that these were most likely conductedto industry best practice and standards of the day.
		Independent geological consultants Runge Ltd completed a review of the Cardinia Project database,drilling and sampling protocols, and so forth in 2009. The Runge report highlighted issues with bulkdensity and QA/QC analysis within the supplied database. Identified issues were subsequentlyaddressed by Navigator and KIN.
		Carras Mining Pty Ltd (CM), an independent geological consultant, reviewed and carried out an auditon the field operations and database in 2017. Drilling and sampling methodologies observed duringthe site visits were to industry standard. No issues were identified for the supplied databases whichcould be considered material to a mineral resource estimation. During the review, Carras Mininglogged the oxidation profiles (base of complete oxidation and top of fresh rock) for each of thedeposit areas, based on visual inspection of selected RC drill chips from KIN's recent drillingprograms, and a combination of historical and KIN drillhole logging. Final adjustments were madewith input from KIN geologists. The oxidation profiles were used to assign bulk densities andmetallurgical recoveries to the 2017 resource models.
		Past bulk density test work has been inconsistent with incorrect methods employed, to derivespecific gravity or in-situ bulk density, rather than dry bulk density. Navigator (2009) and recent KIN(2017) bulk density test work was carried out using the water immersion method on oven dried,coated samples to derive dry bulk densities for different rock types and oxidation profiles. Thisinformation has been incorporated into the database for resource estimation work. CM conductedsite visits during 2017 to the laboratory to validate the methodology.
		Drilling, sampling methodologies, and assay techniques used in these drilling programs areconsidered to be appropriate and to mineral exploration industry standards of the day.
		Laboratory site visits and audits were introduced in April 2018 and are conducted on an annual basis.This measure ensures that all aspects of KIN QAQC practices are adhered to and align with industrybest practice.

Cardinia

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and landType, reference name/number, location and ownershiptenure statusincluding agreements or material issues with third parties suchas joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native titleinterests, historical sites, wilderness or national park andenvironmental settings.The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting alongwith any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operatein the area.	The Cardinia Project, 35-40km NE of Leonora is managed, explored and maintained by KIN, andconstitute a portion of KIN's Cardinia Gold Project (CGP), which is located within the Shire ofLeonora in the Mt Margaret Mineral Field of the North Eastern Goldfields.The Helens and Rangoon area includes granted mining tenements M37/316 and M37/317, Thetenements are held in the name of Navigator Mining Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of KIN.The Bruno-Lewis and Kyte areas includes granted mining tenements M37/86, M37/227,M37/277, M37/300, M37/428 and M37/646. The tenements are held in the name of NavigatorMining Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of KIN. The following royalty payment may beapplicable to the areas within the Cardinia Project's Bruno and Lewis areas that comprise thedeposits being reported on:
		1.Gloucester Coal Ltd (formerly CIM Resources Ltd and Centenary International Mining Ltd) inrespect of M37/86 - 1% of the quarterly gross value of sales for gold ounces produced, inexcess of 10,000 ounces.
		There are no known native title interests, historical sites, wilderness areas, national park orenvironmental impediments over the outlined current resource areas, and there are no currentimpediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
Exploration done by otherparties	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	At Cardinia, from 1980-1985, Townson Holdings Pty Ltd ("Townson") mined a small open pitover selected historical workings at the Rangoon prospect. Localised instances of drillingrelating to this mining event are not recorded and are considered insubstantial and immaterialfor resource modelling. Companies involved in the collection of the majority of the goldexploration data since 1985 and prior to 2014 include: Thames Mining NL ("Thames") 1985; MtEden Gold Mines (Aust) NL (also Tarmoola Aust Pty Ltd "MEGM") 1986-2003; CentenaryInternational Mining Ltd ("CIM") 1986-1988, 1991-1992; Metana Minerals NL ("Metana") 1986-1989; Sons of Gwalia Ltd ("SOG") 1989, 1992-2004; Pacmin Mining Corporation ("Pacmin")1998-2001, and Navigator Resources Ltd ("Navigator") 2004-2014.In 2009 Navigator commissioned Runge Limited ("Runge") to complete a Mineral Resourceestimate for the Bruno, Lewis, Kyte, Helens and Rangoon deposits. Runge reported a JORC 2004compliant Mineral Resource estimate, at a cut-off grade of 0.7g/t Au, totaling 1.45Mt @ 1.3 g/tau (61,700 oz Au) for Helens and Rangoon, and totaling 4.34Mt @ 1.2 g/t au (169,700 oz Au) forBruno, Lewis and Kyte.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		A trial pit (Bruno) was mined by Navigator in 2010, and a 'test parcel' of ore was extracted andtransported firstly to Sons of Gwalia's processing plant in Leonora, and finally to Navigator'sprocessing plant located at Bronzewing, where approximately 100,000 tonnes were processedat an average head grade of 2.33 g/t au (7,493 oz Au).
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	The Cardinia Project area is located in the central part of the Norseman-Wiluna Greenstone Belt,which extends for some 600km on a NNW trend across the Archean Yilgarn Craton of WesternAustralia.
		The regional geology comprises a suite of NNE-North trending greenstones positioned within theMertondale Shear Zone (MSZ) a splay limb of the Kilkenny Lineament. The MSZ denotes thecontact between Archaean felsic volcanoclastics and sediment sequences in the west andArchaean mafic volcanics in the east. Proterozoic dolerite dykes and Archaean felsic porphyrieshave intruded the sheared mafic/felsic volcanoclastic/sedimentary sequence.
		Locally within the Cardinia Project area, the stratigraphy consists of intermediate, mafic andfelsic volcanic and intrusive lithologies and locally derived epiclastic sediments, which strikeNNW, dipping steep-to-moderately to the west. Structural foliation of the areas stratigraphypredominantly dips steeply to the east but localised inflections are common and structuralorientation can vary between moderately (50-75°) easterly to moderately westerly dipping.
		Mineralisation at Helens is controlled by a cross-cutting fault, hosted predominantly in maficrock units, adjacent to the felsic volcanic/sediment contacts. The ore zones are associated withincreased shearing, intense alteration and disseminated sulphides. Minor supergene enrichmentoccurs locally within mineralised shears throughout the regolith profile.
		Mineralisation at Bruno-Lewis is largely controlled by the stratigraphic contact between basaltand felsic volcanics. Gold is associated with significant sulphide mineralisation in the sedimentsand volcaniclastics between the 2 volcanic units. Gold Is also hosted within shallowly NE-dippinglodes, associated with increased potassic-sericite alteration and quartz stockwork veining. Theselodes also host the mineralisation at Kyte. Substantial supergene mineralisation sits above bothstyles of mineralisation.
Drill hole Information	A summary of all information material to the understanding ofthe exploration results including a tabulation of the followinginformation for all Material drill holes:easting and northing of the drill hole collarelevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea levelin metres) of the drill hole collardip and azimuth of the hole	Material drilling information for exploration results has previously been publicly reported innumerous announcements to the ASX by Navigator (2004-2014) and KIN since 2014.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	down hole length and interception depthhole length.If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis thatthe information is not Material and this exclusion does notdetract from the understanding of the report, the CompetentPerson should clearly explain why this is the case.
Data aggregation methods	In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averagingtechniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (egcutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Materialand should be stated.Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of highgrade results and longer lengths of low grade results, theprocedure used for such aggregation should be stated andsome typical examples of such aggregations should be shownin detail.The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalentvalues should be clearly stated.	When exploration results have been reported for the resource areas, the intercepts are reportedas weighted average grades over intercept lengths defined by geology or lower cut-off grades,without high grade cuts applied. Where aggregate intercepts incorporated short lengths of highgrade results, these results were included in the reports.Since 2014, KIN have reported RC drilling intersections with low cut off grades of >= 0.5 g/t Auand a maximum of 2m of internal dilution at a grade of <0.5g/t Au.There is no reporting of metal equivalent values.
Relationship betweenmineralisation widths andintercept lengths	These relationships are particularly important in the reportingof Exploration Results.If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drillhole 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 holelength, true width not known').	The orientation, true width, and geometry of mineralised zones have been primarily determinedby interpretation of historical drilling and continued investigation and verification of KIN drilling.Drill intercepts are reported as downhole widths not true widths.Accompanying dialogue to reported intersections normally describes the attitude ofmineralisation.
Diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations ofintercepts should be included for any significant discoverybeing reported These should include, but not be limited to aplan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectionalviews.	Appropriate maps and sections are included in the main body of this report.
Balanced reportingOther substantive exploration	Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is notpracticable, representative reporting of both low and highgrades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleadingreporting of Exploration Results.Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be	Public reporting of exploration results by KIN and past tenement holders and explorers for theresource areas are considered balanced.Representative widths typically included a combination of both low and high grade assay results.All meaningful and material information relating to this mineral resource estimate is or has beenpreviously reported.Since 2018, a campaign of determining Bulk Densities has been undertaken. The water
data	reported including (but not limited to): geological observations;	displacement method is used on drill samples selected by the logging geologist. These

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulksamples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical testresults; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rockcharacteristics; potential deleterious or contaminatingsubstances.	measurements are entered into the logging software interface and loaded to the Datasheddatabase.
Further work	The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests forlateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-outdrilling).Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,including the main geological interpretations and future drillingareas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	KIN intend to continue exploration and drilling activities at in the described area, with theintention to increase the project's resources.

Bruno-Lewis

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database integrity	Measures taken to ensure that data has not beencorrupted by, for example, transcription or keyingerrors, between its initial collection and its use forMineral Resource estimation purposes.Data validation procedures used.	The data used for the MRE were collected both from recent drilling carried out in2020/2021 and drill data collected before 2020.
		These data have been uploaded into Maxwell's Datashed application by the DatabaseAdministrator (DBA). This application includes quality protocols which must be met inorder for uploading to occur (examples: data duplication, validation of geological field).
		Finally, the data are reviewed upon upload to Micromine before final use. (Examples:DHsurveys present, overlapping intervals, 'From' and 'To's concurrent).
		Data used in the Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") were provided to Cube as a series of .csvexports, which were imported into an Access database where further database validation wascarried out, including the following:
		Checks for mismatched maximum holedepths between drill hole tables: collar,

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		survey, assay, lithologySample depth overlapsDuplicate collar ID3D visual validation of holes in plan and section view to check for obviousdrillhole trace and hole collar errors.Replacing negative values to half detection values
Site visits	Comment on any site visits undertaken by theCompetent Person and the outcome of those visits.	KIN's geological team have an onsite presence which includes supervision andmanagement of drill programs within each of the Resource areas.
	If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why thisis the case.	Mr. Andrew Grieve of Cube Consulting conducted a formal site visit duringNovember 2020, visiting Cardinia.
Geological interpretation	Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) thegeological interpretation of the mineral deposit.	The geological interpretation for Bruno-Lewis was carried out by Kin Mining on predominantly20m by 20m drill hole spacing, with some areas of tighter 10m x 10m grade control drilling andwider 20m+ spaced drilling. 7,602 drill holes were used in the mineralisation interpretationwhich consist of 4,318 RC, 46 DD, 1,546 RAB and 1,692 AC drill holes. The increased geologicalunderstanding of the project by Kin Mining though the 2020/2021 drilling program has guidedthe geological interpretation of Bruno-Lewis. The confidence in the interpretation is directlyreflected in the classification of the MRE. A nominal bottom cut-off of 0.4g/t Au was used in theinterpretation of the mineralised lodes, with a 'minimum mining width' allowance for inclusionof internal waste.
	Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made	The Bruno-Lewis prospect stratigraphy constitutes a lower felsic volcanic unit which is overlainby a much thinner unit of felsic volcaniclastics interbedded with sediments (predominantlyshales and siltstones). This unit is in turn overlain by the mafic sequence comprising pillowbasalts with occasional dolerite units. At the approximate location of the Lewis trial pit, thestratigraphy is offset by faulting, exhibiting sinistral strike slip movement. This offsets thenorthern block to the SW by approximately 350m. The stratigraphy is intruded by several NEdipping felsic porphyry units as well as later Proterozoic dolerite dykes.
		The mineralisation model consists of the following:
		Potassic Lodes (99 domains): Moderately NE-dipping, NW-striking primary mineralisation lodes,associated with and sub-parallel to the aforementioned NE-dipping porphyry intrusions.Characterised by potassic alteration, quartz stockwork veining and disseminated pyrite. 6different trends (Bruno, Liston, Cooper, Lewis, Cassius and Frazier) have so far been identified,with numerous lodes belonging to each.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Contact Lodes (41 domains): Moderate to steeply W-dipping, stratigraphy-parallel primarymineralisation lodes. Located on or near the stratigraphic contacts, or within the centralinterbedded volcaniclastic and sediment unit. Typically, pyrite-rich with limited strike extent.They have been divided into 'Contact North' and 'Contact South', separated by theaforementioned fault offset at the approximate location of the Lewis trial pit. Due to the deeperweathering in the north, and a lack of drilling into fresh rock, the Contact North lodes are muchmore poorly defined than the contact south lodes. Criteria for definition of continuity in thecontact lodes are not considered to be as reliable as those for the potassic lodes.
		Supergene (37 domains): Flat-lying, near-surface supergene lodes. These lie above both thepotassic and contact-related primary mineralisation. The supergene lodes have been definedand grouped based on the primary mineralisation they are interpreted to be associated with.
		Topographic surface and weathering surfaces were provided by Kin Mining which were used tocode the block model for oxidation and for assigning density to the blocks.
	The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations onMineral Resource estimation.	No alternative interpretations were carried out.
	The use of geology in guiding and controlling MineralResource estimation.	Geological observations, particular the presence of lithologies (contacts) and structuralfeatures (faults), support this interpretation.
	The factors affecting continuity both of grade andgeology.	The gold mineralisation is interpreted to be structurally and stratigraphically controlled.
Dimensions	The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource	The three types of mineralised lodes interpreted at Bruno-Lewis occur as follows:
	expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), planwidth, and depth below surface to the upper and lowerlimits of the Mineral Resource.	Potassic Lodes: These occur between 6812700mN and 6814900mN, for a totalstrike length of 2,200m and range between elevations of 230mRL and 420mRL.Contact Lodes: These occur between 6812400mN and 6814500mN, for a totalstrike length of 2,100m and have been delineated between elevations of260mRL and 420mRL.Supergene Lodes: These occur between 6812800mN and 6814900mN, for atotal strike length of 2,100m and have been delineated between elevations of360mRL and 420mRL.
	The nature and appropriateness of the estimation	Although most drill types were used to undertake the mineralisation interpretations, only

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Estimation and modellingtechniques	technique(s) applied and key assumptions, includingtreatment of extreme grade values, domaining,interpolation parameters and maximum distance ofextrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted	hole types deemed to have collected assay samples of sufficiently high quality were usedto interpolate gold grade. Some 4,362 RC and DD drill holes, for a total of 185,404m ofdrilling were used in the interpolation of gold for the MRE – all other hole types wereexcluded.
	estimation method was chosen include a description ofcomputer software and parameters used.	The mineralised lodes and weathering surfaces were modelled in Micromine. Thesewireframes were re-imported to Surpac and validated.
		Each object of the interpreted mineralised lodes were given a unique object number,which were used to flag the drill hole database. Samples were composited to 1mdownhole within the flagged domains, using "best fit" methodology in Surpac with a 25%or 0.25m threshold for flagging "short" samples. These short composite samples werecompared to the longer ones and were found to not be biased in terms of gold grade,and so were incorporated in the gold grade interpolation.
		Basic statistics for gold grade were calculated for all estimation domains in order tostatistically characterise each domain as well as identify statistical outliers. Most of thedomains have low-to-moderate CV following top capping for gold grade. The selection ofthe top cut value was aided using the histogram, log probability plots and the spatiallocation of the outlier. Distance limiting of high-grade composites was also applied to theestimate for the second pass interpolation run, in order to mitigate the spatial influence ofelevated Au grade and control grade smearing in areas of wider spaced drilling. Adistance limit grade threshold of 2g/t Au was applied and composites with a grade higherthan this were ignored at distances greater than 21m from the sample.
		Cube used Isatis software to carry out the analysis of the spatial continuity of the datathrough variography. The analysis was carried out on the top cut 1m composites for themore well-informed domains. As the gold grade population is positively skewed, aGaussian transformation was applied to the data to convert the data to a standardnormal distribution. The Gaussian transformation reduces the effect of outliers and helpsto identify the underlying structure of the variable. The variogram models were thenback-transformed to real space for use in the estimation process. The nugget effect wasdefined using downhole variograms for the domain to be assessed.
		Omnidirectional variogram models in the plane of the mineralised lodes (i.e. themajor/semi-major plane) were modelled for the experimental variograms for the mainshear and porphyry lodes. A high degree of anisotropy between the major/semi-majorplane and the minor (lode-perpendicular) direction was observed and modelled. Themodelled nugget values vary between 15% and 34% of the total sill and the modelledranges vary between 11 and 42m. Essentially, the various domain types were observedto have relatively similar spatial structure for gold grade, resulting in the choice of

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		relatively uniform search neighbourhood parameters for interpolation across all the lodes.
		Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis ("KNA") was used to assist with assessing the mostappropriate search parameters especially with respect to minimum and maximumallowable samples (set at min=6 to max=16 throughout). A search radius ratio of 3:3:1was used for the major:semi:minor axis, respectively, based on the observed anisotropyratios in the variography. The search was divided into four sectors, with a maximum offour samples per sector allowed, in order to ensure that block estimates were informedfrom a range of directions. First pass interpolation runs used search radii of 21m:21m:7m(major:semi:minor) with just the top cuts implemented while Pass 2 search radii wereinflated until all remaining blocks were estimated. The distance limiting previouslydescribed was only implemented in Pass 2. Dynamic local rotations, set using digitisedtrend surfaces for each group of lodes, were used to locally vary both the variogram andsearch orientation during
		Ordinary Kriging ("OK") and Nearest Neighbour ("NN") were used to estimate the goldgrade. The NN served as a check estimate only, and it is the OK model which has beenreported.
	The availability of check estimates, previous estimatesand/or mine production records and whether theMineral Resource estimate takes appropriate accountof such data.
	The assumptions made regarding recovery of by	No assumptions were made regarding recovery of by-products
	products.	No potential by products noted in drill logs.
	Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-gradevariables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acidmine drainage characterisation).	No estimates of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables were undertaken.
		Some sulphide rich lodes are noted at Bruno-Lewis.
		No other deleterious elements noted in drill logs.
	In the case of block model interpolation, the block sizein relation to the average sample spacing and thesearch employed.	Drill spacing at Cardinia Hill is at 20m x 20m spacing or tighter in most of the wellmineralised areas. The parent and estimation block size of the block model was chosento be 10mE x 10mN x 5mRL, which is half the drillhole nominal spacing and withinindustry standard practice. The parent cells were sub-blocked to 2.5mE x 2.5mN x1.25mRL, for accurate representation of the volume of the modelled lodes.
		Gold was estimated in two passes, using a search distance between 21m and 150m.Very poorly informed domains (no. of composites of 5 or less) were not estimated using

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		OK but were instead assigned the mean cut composite grade of the samples within thedomain, or of a closely spatially associated domain.
	Any assumptions behind modelling of selective miningunits.	No assumptions were made with respect to selective mining units. The model cannot beconsidered to be a local recoverable estimate, and the estimation block size is slightlylarger than what would reasonably be expected from an eventual grade control andmining selection.
	Any assumptions about correlation between variables.	No assumptions were made on the correlation between variables.
	Description of how the geological interpretation wasused to control the resource estimates.	Lodes are modeled to represent material mineralised by fluid flow through planarstructural and/or stratigraphic features. The mineralised domains act as hard boundariesto control the gold interpolation.
	The process of validation, the checking process used,	Block model validation was undertaken by the following means:
	the comparison of model data to drill hole data, anduse of reconciliation data if available.	 Visual validation of blocks values vs drill hole data.
		 Comparison of global estimated block means by domain vs declustered cutcomposite means and the NN check estimate.
		 Swath plots showing estimated block means vs composite means and the NNcheck estimates in several directions.
		 No reconciliation data are available.
Moisture	Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis orwith natural moisture, and the method of determinationof the moisture content.	Tonnages estimated on a dry basis only. Moisture was not considered in the densityassignment
Cut-off parameters	The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or qualityparameters applied.	The lower cut-off gold grade for reporting mineral resources was 0.4 g/t Au. This wasdetermined by KIN's management to be appropriate with a gold price of $2600 AUD perounce and based on reasonable operating costs.
Mining factors or assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible miningmethods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or,if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is alwaysnecessary as part of the process of determiningreasonable prospects for eventual economic extractionto consider potential mining methods, but theassumptions made regarding mining methods andparameters when estimating Mineral Resources may	No mining method assumptions were made for the estimation of this model.Assumptions were made for open pit mine design and pit optimisation used to constrainthe Mineral Resource for reporting.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, thisshould be reported with an explanation of the basis of
	the mining assumptions made.















Metallurgical factors or assumptions	The basis for assumptions or predictions regardingmetallurgical amenability. It is always necessary aspart of the process of determining reasonableprospects for eventual economic extraction to considerpotential metallurgical methods, but the assumptionsregarding metallurgical treatment processes andparameters made when reporting Mineral Resourcesmay not always be rigorous. Where this is the case,this should be reported with an explanation of the basisof the metallurgical assumptions made.	Metallurgical assumptions in line with PFS level test-work at other Cardinia depositswere made for the estimation of this model.A range of recoveries were used for the optimisation to constrain the MRE, depending onmaterial type. (See table above).
Environmental factors orassumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible waste andprocess residue disposal options. It is alwaysnecessary as part of the process of determiningreasonable prospects for eventual economic extractionto consider the potential environmental impacts of themining and processing operation. While at this stagethe determination of potential environmental impacts,particularly for a greenfields project, may not always bewell advanced, the status of early consideration of	No environmental assumptions have been made for the estimation of this model.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	these potential environmental impacts should bereported. Where these aspects have not beenconsidered this should be reported with an explanationof the environmental assumptions made.
Bulk density	Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, thebasis for the assumptions. If determined, the methodused, whether wet or dry, the frequency of themeasurements, the nature, size andrepresentativeness of the samples.	Dry bulk density measurements were collected primarily from diamond drill core. Thedata collected were mainly in the transitional and fresh zone. Density assignment wasbased on weathering status on a dry basis. A minor amount of dump material wasassigned a density value based on Cube's experience.
	The bulk density for bulk material must have beenmeasured by methods that adequately account for voidspaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differencesbetween rock and alteration zones within the deposit.	The weight in air versus weight in water method was used to measure dry density. Bulkdensity work considered void spaces and were sealed prior to the wet measurement.
	Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used	The average bulk density assigned for the May 2021 MRE is as follows:
	in the evaluation process of the different materials.	Dump = 1.80t/m3
		Oxide = 2.00t/m3
		Transition = 2.34t/m3
		Fresh Porphyry = 2.77t/m3
Classification	The basis for the classification of the MineralResources into varying confidence categories.	Blocks have been classified as Inferred, Indicated or Measured based on the followingcriteria:
		Measured:
		Blocks falling within interpreted mineralisation/estimationdomains.
		Only within domains containing more than 3 drill holes and morethan 5 composite samples.
		Drill spacing of 10m x 10m or tighter.
		Indicated:
		Blocks falling within interpreted mineralisation/estimationdomains.
		Only within domains containing more than 3 drill holes and morethan 5 composite samples.
		Drill spacing of 20m x 20m or tighter.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Inferred:Blocks falling within interpreted mineralisation/estimationdomains.Drill spacing wider than 20m x 20m.This process was also visually and qualitatively guided by:The current understanding of geological and mineralisation continuity.Data quality.Estimation quality: by means of assessing OK quality parameters such asslope of regression.Validation results by comparing global statistics between composited data andthe estimated block, and locally through trend plots.DTM wireframes for the Indicated and Measured boundaries were constructed using theabove criteria, so as to smoothly vary the shape of the volume being classified (i.e. toavoid the 'spotted dog' phenomenon. For the sake of continuity, small volumes within theMineral Resource may not conform exactly to the criteria listed above. The entire volumeoutside of the interpreted mineralisation/estimation domains was not classified as Mineral
	Whether appropriate account has been taken of allrelevant factors (ie relative confidence intonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data,confidence in continuity of geology and metal values,quality, quantity and distribution of the data.Whether the result appropriately reflects theCompetent Person's view of the deposit.	Resource.All relevant factors affecting classification have been considered.The MRE appropriately reflects the view of the Competent Persons.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of MineralResource estimates.	No audits and reviews have been completed on this MRE.
Discussion of relative accuracy/confidence	Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracyand confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimateusing an approach or procedure deemed appropriateby the Competent Person. For example, theapplication of statistical or geostatistical procedures to	The relative accuracy of the Mineral Resource Estimate is reflected in the reporting of theMRE in accordance with the guidelines of the 2012 JORC Code.The classification of the Mineral Resources as Inferred, Indicated and Measured isdeemed appropriate by the CP as noted within the criteria used for the classification.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	quantify the relative accuracy of the resource withinstated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is notdeemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of thefactors that could affect the relative accuracy andconfidence of the estimate.
	The statement should specify whether it relates toglobal or local estimates, and, if local, state therelevant tonnages, which should be relevant totechnical and economic evaluation. Documentationshould include assumptions made and the proceduresused.	The MRE constitutes a global resource estimate.
	These statements of relative accuracy and confidenceof the estimate should be compared with productiondata, where available.	Production data are not available.

Hobby

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
Measures taken to ensure that data has not beenDatabase integritycorrupted by, for example, transcription or keyingerrors, between its initial collection and its use forMineral Resource estimation purposes.Data validation procedures used.	Drill hole data are uploaded into Maxwell's Datashed application by the DatabaseAdministrator (DBA). This application includes quality protocols which must be met inorder for uploading to occur (examples: data duplication, validation of geological field).Finally, the data are reviewed upon upload to Micromine before final use. (Examples:DHsurveys present, overlapping intervals, 'From' and 'To's concurrent).
	Data used in the Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") were provided to Cube as a series of .csvexports, which were imported into an Access database where further database validation wascarried out, including the following:

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Checks for mismatched maximum hole depths between drill hole tables: collar,survey, assay, lithologySample depth overlapsDuplicate collar ID3D visual validation of holes in plan and section view to check for obviousdrillhole trace and hole collar errors.
		Replacing negative values to half detection values
Site visits	Comment on any site visits undertaken by theCompetent Person and the outcome of those visits.	KIN's geological team have an onsite presence which includes supervision andmanagement of drill programs within each of the Resource areas.
	If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why thisis the case.	Mr. Andrew Grieve of Cube Consulting conducted a formal site visit duringNovember 2020, visiting Cardinia.
Geological interpretation	Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) thegeological interpretation of the mineral deposit.	The increased geological understanding of the project by Kin Mining through the 2020 drillingprogram has guided the geological interpretation of Hobby, which also incorporated structuraldata. The confidence in the interpretation is directly reflected in the classification of the MRE.
	Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made	The geological interpretation for Hobby was carried out by Kin Mining on 40 by 40m drillholespacing. 274 drill holes were used in the mineralisation interpretation which consist of 162 RAB,40 AC, 70 RC and 2 diamond drillholes.
		The mineralised lodes interpreted by Kin Mining incorporated lithological, structural, alterationand grade information. These were subsequently reviewed by Cube and a minimum width of 2mwas applied for all mineralised domain interpretations. Two mineralised settings were definedby Kin Mining:
		Porphyry contacts: dominant mineralised setting at Hobby, located on the margins ofporphyry intrusion, both on hanging wall and footwall. Associated with significantpyrite and strong sericite-albite-carbonate alteration.
		Shear lodes: Typically narrow zones of shearing, sub-parallel to stratigraphy.Associated with quartz veining, pyrite mineralisation and sericite alteration.
		Topographic surface and weathering surfaces were provided by Kin Mining which were used tocode the block model for oxidation and for assigning density to the blocks.
	The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on	No alternative interpretations were carried out.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Mineral Resource estimation.The use of geology in guiding and controlling MineralResource estimation.The factors affecting continuity both of grade andgeology.	Geological observations, particular the presence of lithologies (contacts) and structuralfeatures (faults), support this interpretation.The gold mineralisation is interpreted to be structurally and stratigraphically controlled.
Dimensions	The extent and variability of the Mineral Resourceexpressed as length (along strike or otherwise), planwidth, and depth below surface to the upper and lowerlimits of the Mineral Resource.	Two mineralisation types were interpreted at Hobby and consist of the following:Porphyry Contacts: HW porphyry which contains most of the metal at Hobby.and extends over a strike length of 450m and is of 2-4m average thickness. Itstrikes NW-SE and dip 65oto the west and is modelled down to 200m depthextent. The FW porphyry is much lesser grade than the HW porphyry andextends over 200m strike length, dips 65° to the West and is modelled to 150mvertical depth.Shear Lodes which consist of 9 lodes where the main lode extends over a strikelength of 450m and run sub-parallel to the HW porphyry. All lodes dip between55oto 65oto the west.
Estimation and modellingtechniques	The nature and appropriateness of the estimationtechnique(s) applied and key assumptions, includingtreatment of extreme grade values, domaining,interpolation parameters and maximum distance ofextrapolation from data points. If a computer assistedestimation method was chosen include a description ofcomputer software and parameters used.	72 drill holes were used in the compilation of the MRE and consist of 70 RC and 2diamond drill holes.The mineralised lodes and weathering surfaces were modelled in Micromine. Thesewireframes were re-imported to Surpac and validated.Each object of the interpreted mineralised lodes was given a unique object number,which were used to flag the drill hole database. Samples were composited to 1mdownhole within the flagged domains, using "best fit" methodology in Surpac with 50%threshold for flagging "short" samples, meaning the minimum allowable composite size is0.5m.Basic statistics for gold grade were calculated for all estimation domains in order tostatistically characterise each domain as well as identify statistical outliers. Most of thedomains have low CV and required no top capping for gold. However, some domainswith high CV were top cut to between 5 and 12g/t Au. The selection of the top cut valuewas aided using the histogram, log probability plots and the spatial location of the outlier.Local top cutting was also applied to the estimate for selected domains in order tomitigate the spatial influence of elevated Au grade and control grade smearing.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Cube used Supervisor software to carry out the analysis of the spatial continuity of thedata through variography. The analysis was carried out on the top cut 1m composites forthe well-informed main shear domain. As the gold grade population is positively skewed,a normal scores transformation was applied to the data to convert the data to a standardnormal distribution. The normal score transformation reduces the effect of outliers andhelps to identify the underlying structure of the variable. The variogram models wereback-transformed to real space for use in the estimation process. The nugget effect wasdefined using downhole variograms for the domain to be assessed.
		A south plunging structure can be identified from visual inspection of the grade distribution ofthe 1m composites. This is most prominent in the main lode of the shear lodes group, and theFW porphyry lode. The orientation can also be delineated in the variogram map on the dipplanes.Modelling the experimental variograms in the plunging direction could not, however,delineate short range structure due to widely spaced data. Therefore, omnidirectionalvariogram models in the plane of mineralisation were modelled for most of the wellinformed domains. The modelled nugget values vary between 50% and 65% of the totalsill and the modelled ranges vary between 3 to 30m. Variograms of the well-informeddomains were used for the less informed domains. The known anisotropy in the mainlode of the shear lode group was accounted for by using a search neighbourhoodelongated in the mineralisation plunge direction, despite this not being able to beresolved in the variogram.
		The Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis ("KNA") function within Snowden's Supervisorsoftware ("Supervisor v8.8") software was used to assist with assessing the mostappropriate block sizes and other estimation parameters such as minimum andmaximum samples, discretisation, to be used for the estimation.
		Ordinary Kriging ("OK") and Inverse distance to the power of 2 ("ID2") were used toestimate the gold grade. The ID2 served as a check estimate only, and it is the OKmodel which has been reported.
	The availability of check estimates, previous estimatesand/or mine production records and whether theMineral Resource estimate takes appropriate accountof such data.	A previous estimate was reported in Feb 2020. The current MRE takes into account theadditional information obtained from new drill holes during the 2020 drilling program, andthe changes reflect the incorporation of the new data.
	The assumptions made regarding recovery of by	No assumptions were made regarding recovery of by-products
	products.	No potential by products noted in drill logs.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade	No estimates of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables were undertaken.
	variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acidmine drainage characterisation).	No other deleterious elements noted in drill logs.
	In the case of block model interpolation, the block sizein relation to the average sample spacing and thesearch employed.	Drill spacing at Hobby is at 40m x 40m spacing on average. The parent and estimationblock size of the block model was chosen to be 20m x 20m x 5m in the XYZ directionsrespectively, which is half the drillhole spacing and within industry standard practice. Theparent cells were sub-blocked to 1.25mX x 1.25mY x 1.25mRL, for accuraterepresentation of the volume of the modelled lodes.
		Gold was estimated in a single pass using a search distance between 150 and 350m.The search ellipse was oriented to conform with the observed south plunging structurewith associated anisotropy for the main lode of the shear group and for the FW porphyry.The search ellipse for the HW porphyry was oriented to conform to the orientation of thecorresponding lode. A minimum and maximum number of samples of 6 and 16 to 20were used for the estimate. The very poorly informed domains were assigned thedeclustered top cut mean gold grade of the 1m composites of their respective domains.
units.	Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining	No assumptions were made with respect to selective mining units. The model cannot beconsidered to be a local recoverable estimate, and the estimation block size issignificantly larger than what would reasonably be expected from an eventual gradecontrol and mining selection.
	Any assumptions about correlation between variables.	No assumptions were made on the correlation between variables.
	Description of how the geological interpretation wasused to control the resource estimates.	Lodes are modeled to represent material mineralised by fluid flow through planarstructural and/or stratigraphic features. The mineralised domains act as hard boundariesto control the gold interpolation.
	The process of validation, the checking process used,	Block model validation was conducted by the following means:
	the comparison of model data to drill hole data, anduse of reconciliation data if available.	 Visual validation of blocks values vs drill hole data.
		 Comparison of global estimated block means by domain vs declustered cutcomposite means.
		 Swath plots showing estimated block means vs composite means in space.
		 No reconciliation data are available.
Moisture	Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis orwith natural moisture, and the method of determination	Tonnages estimated on a dry basis only. Moisture was not considered in the density

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	of the moisture content.	assignment
Cut-off parameters	The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or qualityparameters applied.	The lower cut-off gold grade for reporting mineral resources was 0.4 g/t Au. This wasdetermined by KIN's management to be appropriate with a gold price of $2600 AUD perounce and based on reasonable operating costs.
Mining factors or assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible miningmethods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or,if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is alwaysnecessary as part of the process of determiningreasonable prospects for eventual economic extractionto consider potential mining methods, but theassumptions made regarding mining methods andparameters when estimating Mineral Resources may	No mining method assumptions were made for the estimation of this model.Assumptions were made for open pit mine design and pit optimisation used to constrainthe Mineral Resource for reporting.


	not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this
	should be reported with an explanation of the basis ofthe mining assumptions made.





Metallurgical factors or assumptions	The basis for assumptions or predictions regardingmetallurgical amenability. It is always necessary aspart of the process of determining reasonableprospects for eventual economic extraction to considerpotential metallurgical methods, but the assumptionsregarding metallurgical treatment processes andparameters made when reporting Mineral Resourcesmay not always be rigorous. Where this is the case,this should be reported with an explanation of the basis	Metallurgical assumptions in line with PFS level test-work at other Cardinia depositswere made for the estimation of this model.
		A range of recoveries were used for the optimisation to constrain the MRE, depending onmaterial type. (See table above).

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	of the metallurgical assumptions made.
Environmental factors orassumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible waste andprocess residue disposal options. It is alwaysnecessary as part of the process of determiningreasonable prospects for eventual economic extractionto consider the potential environmental impacts of themining and processing operation. While at this stagethe determination of potential environmental impacts,particularly for a greenfields project, may not always bewell advanced, the status of early consideration ofthese potential environmental impacts should bereported. Where these aspects have not beenconsidered this should be reported with an explanationof the environmental assumptions made.	No environmental assumptions have been made for the estimation of this model.
Bulk density	Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, thebasis for the assumptions. If determined, the methodused, whether wet or dry, the frequency of themeasurements, the nature, size andrepresentativeness of the samples.	Bulk density measurements were collected from diamond drill core. The data collectedwere mainly in the transitional and fresh zone. There were not enough samples todistinguish between ore and waste and the sub-domaining was carried out basedprimarily on weathering status. The oxide zone was assigned a density value based onCube's experience.
	The bulk density for bulk material must have beenmeasured by methods that adequately account for voidspaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differencesbetween rock and alteration zones within the deposit.	Bulk Density work considered void spaces and were sealed prior to the wetmeasurement.
	Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates usedin the evaluation process of the different materials.	The average bulk density assigned for the December MRE is as follows:
		Oxide = 2.00t/m3
		Transition = 2.24t/m3
		Fresh Other = 2.80t/m3
Classification	The basis for the classification of the MineralResources into varying confidence categories.	Blocks have been classified as Inferred only based on the following uncertainties:
		Current understanding of geological and structural controls.
		Current understanding of mineralisation continuity: unable to define robustvariogram models due to wide spaced data.
		Estimation quality: by means of assessing kriging parameters such as slope of

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		regression.Validation results by comparing global statistics between composited data andthe estimated block, and locally through trend plots.DTM wireframes for the Inferred boundary were constructed using the above criteria andblocks located outside this boundary were not classified as Mineral Resources.Estimation domains which were assigned a gold value were also not classified.Classification was discussed with interpreting Geologists to ensure classificationrepresents geological confidence as well as statistical confidence.
	Whether appropriate account has been taken of allrelevant factors (ie relative confidence intonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data,confidence in continuity of geology and metal values,quality, quantity and distribution of the data.Whether the result appropriately reflects theCompetent Person's view of the deposit.	All relevant factors affecting classification have been considered.The MRE appropriately reflects the view of the Competent Persons.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of MineralResource estimates.	No audits and reviews have been completed on this MRE.
Discussion of relative accuracy/confidence	Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracyand confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimateusing an approach or procedure deemed appropriateby the Competent Person. For example, theapplication of statistical or geostatistical procedures toquantify the relative accuracy of the resource withinstated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is notdeemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of thefactors that could affect the relative accuracy andconfidence of the estimate.The statement should specify whether it relates toglobal or local estimates, and, if local, state therelevant tonnages, which should be relevant totechnical and economic evaluation. Documentationshould include assumptions made and the proceduresused.	The relative accuracy of the Mineral Resource Estimate is reflected in the reporting of theMRE in accordance with the guidelines of the 2012 JORC Code.The classification of 100% of the Mineral Resources as Inferred is deemed appropriateby the CP as noted within the criteria used for the classification.The MRE constitutes a global resource estimate.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	These statements of relative accuracy and confidenceof the estimate should be compared with productiondata, where available.	Production data are not available.

AI assistant

PATRONUS RESOURCES LIMITED Capital/Financing Update 2021

65620_rns_2021-05-16_8a203c87-25e9-41a9-85fd-931e7020ec07.pdf

ASX Announcement 17 May 2021 CARDINIA GOLD PROJECT RESOURCE INCREASES TO 1.23MOZ

Highlights

Bruno-Lewis

Hobby

Bruno-Lewis Mineral Resource

Hobby Mineral Resource

-ENDS-

Authorised for release by the Board of Directors

Investor enquiries Media enquiries

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT

Resource Estimation

Exploration Results

Table 1 Contents

Appendix A

JORC 2012 TABLE 1 REPORT

Cardinia Gold Project - Section 1

Cardinia

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Cardinia

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Bruno-Lewis

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Hobby

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

AI assistant

PATRONUS RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2021

65620_rns_2021-05-16_8a203c87-25e9-41a9-85fd-931e7020ec07.pdf

ASX Announcement 17 May 2021 CARDINIA GOLD PROJECT RESOURCE INCREASES TO 1.23MOZ

Highlights

Bruno-Lewis

Hobby

Bruno-Lewis Mineral Resource

Hobby Mineral Resource

-ENDS-

Authorised for release by the Board of Directors

Investor enquiries Media enquiries

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT

Resource Estimation

Exploration Results

Table 1 Contents

Appendix A

JORC 2012 TABLE 1 REPORT

Cardinia Gold Project - Section 1

Cardinia

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Cardinia

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Bruno-Lewis

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Hobby

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

More from PATRONUS RESOURCES LIMITED

PATRONUS RESOURCES LIMITED Capital/Financing Update 2021