RED MOUNTAIN MINING LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2020

Sep 15, 2020

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT RED MOUNTAIN MINING LTD 16 September 2020

COPPER-COBALT PROJECT UPDATE

Red Mountain Mining Limited (RMX or the, Company) is pleased to advise that it has received the formal report from Johannesburg based geological consultants, Minrom Consulting (Minrom), in respect of the Mukabe Kasari copper-cobalt project in the DRC.

Figure 1: Mukabe Kasari Copper-Cobalt Project

Despite stringent COVID related movement restrictions, Minrom was able to arrange an extensive reconnaissance soil sampling programme conducted at Mukabe Kasari based on the historical exploration data and proposed mineralisation model.

The programme aimed at determining whether the copper soil anomaly extends beyond the 2017 gridded soil sampling area thereby establishing whether the copper soil anomaly conforms with the proposed stratiform mineralisation model. This was achieved by sampling between the 2017 soil sample grids at a spacing of 100 metres. The soil samples were submitted to SGS in Lubumbashi and analysed by SGS in Johannesburg.

The results indicate that the soil anomaly indeed continue beyond the 2017 soil grinds and therefore confirms the possibility that the copper mineralisation continue laterally with the regional lithological strike.

The geochemical results are summarised as Appendix 1.

Figure 2: Soil Sampling Programme

Overall, Minrom has concluded that Mukabe-Kasari Copper Cobalt project holds the potential for a stratiform copper mineralised body with potential cobalt mineralisation. The available exploration, geological and mineralisation data propose a similar mineralisation model to that of the world class Kamoa-Kakula Copper Project. A proposed exploration programme would comprise of the following:

• Detailed Field Mapping: detailed lithological and structural mapping programme over the project area in order to determine the stratigraphic sequence and structural characteristics.
• Airborne Geophysical Survey: airborne electromagnetic and magnetic geophysical survey will provide data on possible mineralisation targets and major subsurface structural lineaments.
• Scout Diamond Core Drilling: proposed diamond core drilling aimed at providing detailed subsurface stratigraphic and mineralisation intersection for grade and metallurgy studies.

The Board will now assess the opportunity at Mukabe Kasari in the light of the Minrom report.

Authorised for and on behalf of the Board,

Mauro Piccini, Company Secretary

Competent Persons Statement

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results and other technical information complies with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code) and has been compiled and assessed under the supervision of Mr Bill Oliver. Mr Oliver is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and the Australasian Institute of Geoscientists. He has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the JORC Code. Mr Oliver consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Appendix 1. Geochemical Results

	-75µm	Al	As	Ba	Bi	Co	Cr	Cu	Fe	La	Li	Mn (ppm)	Mo	Ni	P	Pb	Sc	Sn	Sr	Ta	Ti	V	Zn (ppm)
	(%)	(%)	(ppm)	(ppm)	(ppm)	(ppm)	(%)	(ppm)	(%)	(ppm)	(ppm)		(ppm)	(ppm)	(%)	(ppm)	(ppm)	(ppm)	(ppm)	(%)	(%)	(ppm)
DetectionLimit (Lower)1	0.01 0.01		30	10	5	10	0.001		10 0.01	10	10	10	10		10 0.01	20	5	50	10	0.01 0.01		10	10
DetectionLimit (Upper)	0	25	100000	100000	25000	100000	10	100000	30	100000	100000	100000	100000	100000	25	100000	50000	50000	10000	50	25	50000	100000
NumberofSamples	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72	72
Min	94	5	15	345	3	5	0	5	2	21	34	135	5	24	0	10	7	25	11	0	0	54	21
Max	99	10	234	609	28	55	0	177	8	45	97	2250	5	71	0	10	17	25	44	0	1	160	73
Mean	98	7	19	445	9	13	0	38	4	37	56	502	5	40	0	10	12	25	29	0	1	101	41
Range	5	5	219	264	26	50	0	172	6	24	63	2115	0	47	0	0	10	0	33	0	0	106	52
Var	4.3	1.5	664.2	3470.7	40.8	75.0	0.0	1306.4	1.2	20.3	151.1	107050.7	0.0	84.7	0.0	0.0	6.5	0.0	55.1	0.0	0.0	509.9	167.9529
StDev	2.1	1.2	25.8	58.9	6.4	8.7	0.0	36.1	1.1	4.5	12.3	327.2	0.0	9.2	0.0	0.0	2.6	0.0	7.4	0.0	0.1	22.6	12.95967
CoV	0.0	0.2	1.4	0.1	0.7	0.7	0.2	0.9	0.3	0.1	0.2	0.7	0.0	0.2	0.3	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.1	0.2	0.317164
Mode		99 6.23	15	452	2.5		5 0.007		5 3.28	38	49	170	5		38 0.03	10	11.8	25	23	0.005 0.55		88	32
Median	99	7	15	440	7	12	0	24	4	38	53	455	5	38	0	10	12	25	29	0	1	103	39

Appendix 2. JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Samplingtechniques	•Nature and quality of sampling (e.g.cut channels, random chips, orspecific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriateto the minerals under investigation, such as downhole gamma sondesor handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not betaken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.•Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representavityand the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systemsused.•Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to thePublic Report.•Incases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would berelatively simple (e.g.'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain1m samples from which 3 kg werepulverised to produce a 30 g chargefor fire assay'). In other cases,more explanations may be requirede.g.where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g.submarinenodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	•Soil samples representing the B or the C soil horizon were taken at adepth ranging between 30–50 cm below surface. Each pit was dug byconventional means. The pit wall was then scraped clean andinformation regarding the soil profile, slope angle of sampling area,vegetation type and cover was recorded prior to sampling. Eachsample weighed app. 2 kg.•Care was taken not to contaminate soil samples with jewellery orsampling equipment. Small plastic sampling shovels were used totake the individual samples. Every 10th sample location included a fieldduplicate sample. Thus, a duplicate sample was collected at each ofthese locations and submitted separately with the original sample aspart of the QC measure.•Samples were dried and pulverised to 85% passing 75 microns. Eachpulverised sample was then split to produce a 50g sample aliquot.•Every 10th sample was duplicated in the field and analysed as part ofthe field QC measurement.
Drillingtechniques	•Drill type (e.g.core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary airblast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g.core diameter,triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit orother type, whether core is orientated,and if so, by what method,etc).	•No drilling performed
Drill samplerecovery	•Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveriesand results assessed.•Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensurerepresentative nature of the samples.•Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and gradeand whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferentialloss/gain of fine/coarse material.	•N/A
Logging	•Whether core and chip samples have been geologically andgeotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriateMineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical	•N/A

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	studies.•Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core(orcostean, channel,etc.) photography.•The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
Sub-samplingtechniquesand samplepreparation	•If core:whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all coretaken.•If non-core:whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc.andwhether sampled wet or dry.•For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of thesample preparation technique.•Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages tomaximise representativity of samples.•Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of thein-situ material collected including for instance results for fieldduplicate/second-half sampling.•Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the materialbeing sampled.	•N/A
Quality ofassay dataandlaboratorytests	•The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying andlaboratory procedures used and whether thetechnique is consideredpartial or total.•For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc.the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrumentmake and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and theirderivation, etc.•Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g.standards, blanks,duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levelsof accuracy (i.e.lack of bias) and precision have been established.	•All samples were submitted to SGS in Lubumbashi and analysed bymeans of a sodium peroxide fusion and ICP-OES analysis (SGS code–ICP90A).•Field duplicates were taken at every 10th sample location. The coppervalue for the duplicate and original samples reports within acceptablerange.•The laboratory implemented standard internal QC measures whichconsisted of inserting a blank and CRM into each sample batch. Arandom sample were also re-analysed as a duplicate.•Quality control procedures and results were within acceptablestandards and can be regarded as accurate and precise.
Verification ofsampling andassaying	•The verification of significant intersections by either independent oralternative company personnel.•The use of twinned holes.•Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, dataverification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.•Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	•No drilling was performed during this exploitation phase.•Data was collected on a standard soil sample logging templatecontaining the following logging criteria: Sample Position ID, UniqueSample Number, Longitude, Latitude, Datum, Elevation, SampleDepth (m), Sample type, Sample Nature, Regolith, Soil Horizon,Vegetation Cover, Vegetation Type, Topography Slope, SampleCondition (wet/dry) and comments (general Description of sample)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•Each sample location was also photographed and pictures kept forreference.
Location ofdata points	•Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar anddownhole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations usedin Mineral Resource estimation.•Specification of the grid system used.•Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	•Handheld Garmin GPSs (Garmin64) co-ordinates that is generallyaccurate to within 5 m radius, were used to capture the spatial location ofeach sample point. Elevation measurements are out by tens of metres.•Surveys were not performed by a qualified surveyor.
Data spacinganddistribution	•Data spacing for reporting of exploration results.•Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish thedegree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the MineralResource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) andclassifications applied.•Whether sample compositing has been applied.	•Soil samples were spaced 100 m apart. Exploration results are notdeemed sufficient to support a mineral resource.
Orientation ofdata inrelation togeologicalstructure	•Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling ofpossible structures and the extent to which this is known, consideringthe deposit type.•If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientationof key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced asampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	•Soil sample grid lines were orientated perpendicular to the interpretedregional stratigraphy strike.
Samplesecurity	•The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Soil samples were sealed at each sampling location, transported backto site camp and stored at a secure location. The field teamtransported all the soil samples upon the completion of theprogramme to SGS's preparation facility in Lubumbashi.
Audits orreviews	•The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•Audits and reviews were not undertaken.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineraltenement and	•Type, reference name/number, location and ownership includingagreements or materialissues with third parties such as jointventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,	•The project area is covered by a total of twenty-three(23) licencestermed "Zones d'Exploitation Artisanales Instituées (ZEA)" (ArtisanalExploitation Zones in English), measuring app. 80 km² in total.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
land tenurestatus	historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmentalsettings.•The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with anyknown impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	•The CP is not aware of any ventures, partnerships, overridingroyalties, native title interests, or any environmental settingsassociated with the project area.•Artisanal Exploitation Zone is owned by a natural person. Thesetypes of licences are not subject to a valid period but each are rathersubject to mining and environmental compliance as stipulated by theDRC's Mining Regulations.
Explorationdone by otherparties	•Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•CSA Global performed the initial exploration in 2017 consisting of afield due diligence followed by a gridded soil sampling and RABdrilling programme.
Geology	•Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•The Mukabe-Kasari project is believed to contain a stratiform coppercobalt mineralised body within the upper Kungelungu Groupsediments in the Lufilian Foreland of the Lufilian Arc. Coppermineralisation was observed within the grey shale and siltstones withclose proximity to reddish oxidised shales and sandstones.
Drill holeInformation	•A summary of all information materialto the understanding of theexploration results including a tabulation of the following informationfor all Material drill holes:easting and northing of the drill hole collaroelevation or RL (Reduced Level –elevation above sea level inometres) of the drill hole collardip and azimuth of the holeodown hole length and interception depthohole length.o•If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basisthat theinformation is not materialand this exclusion does not detract fromthe understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearlyexplain why this is the case.	•N/A
Dataaggregationmethods	•In reporting exploration results, weighting averaging techniques,maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g.cutting of highgrades) and cut-off grades are usually materialand should be stated.•Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high graderesults and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure usedfor such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples ofsuch aggregations should be shown in detail.	•N/A

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	•The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent valuesshould be clearly stated.
Relationshipbetweenmineralisationwidths andinterceptlengths	•These relationships are particularly important in the reporting ofexploration results.•If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill holeangle is known, its nature should be reported.•If it is not known and only the downhole lengths are reported, thereshould be a clear statement to this effect (e.g.'downhole length, truewidth not known').	•N/A
Diagrams	•Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations ofintercepts should be included for any significant discovery beingreported These should include, but not be limited to,a plan view ofdrill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	•Refer to Minrom Report with reference MIN 20-009 titled: MUKABEKASARI CU CO PROJECT, KATANGA PROVINCE, DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OF THE CONGO –Reconnaissance Soil SamplingProgramme
Balancedreporting	•Where comprehensive reporting of all exploration results is notpracticable, representative reporting of both low and high gradesand/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting ofexploration Results.	•Exploration results only include soil samples ranging in copperconcentrations between 5 ppm (lower detection limit) to 177 ppm.See Table 6for list of reportable results.
Othersubstantiveexplorationdata	•Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reportedincluding (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysicalsurvey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples –size andmethod of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potentialdeleterious or contaminating substances.	•Refer to Minrom Report with reference MIN 20-009 titled: MUKABEKASARI CU CO PROJECT, KATANGA PROVINCE, DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OF THE CONGO –Reconnaissance Soil SamplingProgramme
Further work	•The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g.tests for lateralextensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).•Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensionsincluding the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,providingthis information is not commercially sensitive.	•Recommended future exploration consists of detailed mapping,airborne electromagnetic and magnetic survey's, along with scoutingstage diamond core drilling.•Refer to Minrom Report with reference MIN 20-009 titled: MUKABEKASARI CU CO PROJECT, KATANGA PROVINCE, DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OF THE CONGO –Reconnaissance Soil SamplingProgramme