STELLAR RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2022

Nov 23, 2022

SEVERN MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE RETURNS A 29% INCREASE IN CONTAINED TIN

Stellar Resources Limited (ASX: SRZ, "Stellar" or the "Company") is pleased to announce the results of an updated Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for its flagship Heemskirk Tin Project.

Highlights

• Heemskirk Tin Project Total MRE of 7.6Mt @ 1.1% Sn (81,976t contained Sn), a 16% increase in contained tin.
• Severn Total MRE of 4.9Mt @ 1.0% Sn (46,764t contained Sn), a 29% increase in contained tin. Severn is the largest of the four deposits comprising the Heemskirk Tin Project.
• A 24% increase in the Heemskirk Tin Project Indicated MRE to 2.6Mt @ 1.1% Sn (29,798t contained Sn).
• Addition of the St Dizier Open Pit Indicated MRE (2.3Mt @ 0.6% Sn), extends the Heemskirk Tin Project Indicated MRE to 4.9Mt @ 0.9% Sn (43,580t contained Sn) and the Total MRE to 9.9Mt @ 1.0% Sn (95,768t contained Sn).
• The updated Heemskirk Tin Project Total MRE continues to rank as the highest-grade undeveloped tin project in Australia and third highest-grade globally, with the increase in contained tin now also placing it in the five largest tin projects globally, on a contained tin basis.
• The updated MRE is based on seven holes at Severn completed in the Phase 1 and Phase 2A drilling programs during 2021 and 2022.
• Phase 2B infill drilling program (8 holes for ~3,860m) underway at Severn focused on further increasing the Heemskirk Tin Project Indicated Mineral Resource, targeting high grade-thickness mineralisation areas of the Severn deposit.
• Good progress being made on the Phase 2B drilling program with two holes, ZS155 (595m) and ZS156 (556m) completed and assays pending. The third hole (ZS157) will commence in approximately one week's time following completion of scheduled rig maintenance.
• A further Mineral Resource update will be undertaken at the completion of the Phase 2B drilling program in mid-2023, prior to commencement of the Heemskirk Tin Project Pre-Feasibility Study planned for 2023 H2.

Executive Director Gary Fietz commented:

"Today's updated Severn Mineral Resource not only significantly increases the Total MRE but also increases the Indicated Mineral Resource and level of confidence in the Heemskirk Tin Project. The Phase 2B Severn infill drilling program underway is focused at further increasing resources in the Indicated category and a further MRE update is planned in mid-2023, prior to commencement of the Pre-Feasibility Study in 2023 H2."

Stellar Resources Limited ABN: 96 108 758 961 Level 4, 96 – 100 Albert Road, South Melbourne Victoria 3205, Australia T: +61 3 9692 7222 F: +61 3 9077 9233 E: srzinfo@stellarresources.com.au Web: www.stellarresources.com.au Twitter: @SRZ_Tin

Severn Infill Drilling Completed in 2021 and 2022

Seven inclined diamond drillholes (ZS140, ZS143, ZS143W, ZS148, ZS149, ZS150, ZS151) were completed at the Severn deposit during 2021 and 2022 as part of Stellar's Phase 1 and Phase 2A drilling programs. These holes have locally reduced the drill spacing which, along with previous drilling results, supports additions to the Severn Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource in these areas.

A total of 35 recent diamond drillholes (15,378m), inclusive of the 2021 and 2022 drilling programs, have been drilled by Stellar at the Severn deposit since 2010. A further 21 historic diamond drillholes (7,390m) have also been completed prior to 2010 by other companies over the Severn deposit.

Updated Mineral Resource Estimate

An updated Heemskirk Tin Project Total Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) of 7.6Mt @ 1.1% Sn (81,976t contained Sn) at a cut-off grade of 0.6% Sn has been defined in accordance with the JORC Code 2012 by Independent Technical Consultant, Ross Corben from Geowiz Pty. Ltd., as shown in Table 1.

Classification	Deposit	ResourceDate	Tonnes(Mt)	Sn(%)	ContainedSn (t)	Cassiterite % ofTotal Sn (%)	Cu(%)	Pb(%)	Zn(%)
Indicated	Upper Queen Hill	2019	0.3	1.0	3,254	87	0.2	2.1	1.0
	Lower Queen Hill	2019	0.7	1.4	9,299	97	0.0	0.1	0.1
	Severn	2022	1.7	1.0	17,235	98	0.1	0.0	0.0
Sub Total	Indicated		2.6	1.1	29,788	97	0.1	0.3	0.2
Inferred	Upper Queen Hill	2019	0.1	1.6	1,728	94	0.2	1.9	0.7
	Lower Queen Hill	2019	0.4	1.4	5,106	97	0.0	0.2	0.0
	Severn	2022	3.2	0.9	29,528	98	0.1	0.0	0.1
	Montana	2019	0.7	1.5	10,443	96	0.1	0.7	1.4
	Oonah	2019	0.6	0.9	5,382	36	0.8	0.1	0.1
Sub Total	Inferred		5.0	1.0	52,188	91	0.1	0.2	0.3
Sub Total	Queen Hill		1.4	1.3	19,387	95	0.1	0.7	0.3
Sub Total	Severn		4.9	1.0	46,764	98	0.1	0.0	0.0
Total	Heemskirk Tin Project		7.6	1.1	81,976	93	0.1	0.2	0.2

Table 1: Heemskirk Tin Project Mineral Resource Statement 2022

Severn Long Sections and Cross Section

Figure 1 shows a long section of the Severn deposit main ore lens with drillhole pierce points and the Mineral Resource block model coloured by Sn% * thickness (i.e., Sn grade in percent multiplied by the thickness in metres), which provides a visual indication of the amount of contained tin. Additions to the Indicated MRE resulting from the seven Severn infill holes completed in 2021 and 2022 are highlighted on the long section.

Figure 1 - Severn Long Section looking west showing Severn Mineral Resource (main ore lens) and drill hole pierce points coloured by Sn% * Thickness. Indicated Mineral Resource Additions highlighted (Zeehan Mine Grid)

Figure 2 - Severn Cross Section 3800N (Zeehan Mine Grid)

Basis of Updated Mineral Resource Estimate

The updated MRE has been estimated by Independent Technical Consultant, Ross Corben from Geowiz Pty. Ltd., based upon:

• 1. Results of all drilling completed over the Heemskirk deposits including the 2021 and 2022 drilling programs, previous drilling completed by Stellar and historical drilling completed by other companies.
• 1. Mineralised intersections for the three main mineralised zones at Severn were manually coded within each drill hole using a nominal 0.4% Sn cutoff. The mineralised zones are generally stratabound and demonstrate reasonable sectional continuity given the broad drill spacing and style of mineralisation modelled. The boundaries between the three zones are low grade breaks that are parallel with the orientation of mineralisation. The coded mineralised intersections were loaded into Leapfrog software and vein geological models were generated from the coded intervals for the three main zones. The Leapfrog wireframes were exported into Surpac software to constrain the mineral resource modelling.
• 1. All samples were composited to 1m lengths within the coded domain intervals. A statistical analysis was undertaken on the sample composites and top cuts were applied to the Sn composites on a domain by domain basis in order to reduce the influence of extreme values on the mineral resource estimates. The top-cut values were chosen by assessing the high-end distribution of the grade population within each domain and selecting the value at which the distribution became erratic.
• 1. Statistical and geostatistical analysis was carried out using Leapfrog Edge software program on the one metre composited data from the three domains.
• 1. A block modelled resource estimation was calculated using a dynamic anisotropy ordinary kriged algorithm for Sn constrained by the Leapfrog generated solid models using only composites from within that domain. An ID2 algorithm was used to interpolate S, Cu, Pb, Zn, soluble Sn and SG into the resource model.
• 1. The estimation was validated by visually checking the interpolation results against drill hole data in plan and section, comparing input and output statistics, generating section swath plots and comparing with previous estimates. The estimate is considered to be robust on the basis of the above checks.
• 1. Classification of the Heemskirk Tin deposits taking into account data quality and distribution, spatial continuity, confidence in the geological interpretation and estimation confidence. Indicated Mineral Resources have been defined where higher confidence in the geological model and mineral resource estimation exists in areas with where the drill spacing is approximately 30m to 50m. The remainder of the mineral resource is classified as Inferred Mineral Resource due to the low confidence in the local grade estimation and moderate confidence in the geological interpretation resulting from short range variability of the mineralisation and the broad drill spacing (typically 100m between drilling intercepts).
• 1. Inferred and Indicated Mineral Resources were reported above a 0.6% Sn cut-off and classified according to the guidelines of the 2012 edition of the JORC Code.

Comparison with the Previous 2019 Resource Statement

The updated Severn Total MRE of 4.9Mt @ 1.0% Sn (46,764t contained Sn), is a 29% increase in contained tin compared with the 2019 estimate (3.9Mt @ 0.9% Sn).

The updated Severn Inferred MRE extends approximately 100m deeper than the 2019 MRE because of intercepts from Phase 1 drillholes ZS143 and ZS143W which significantly extend the Severn Mineral Resource down dip.

The updated Heemskirk Tin Project Total MRE of 7.6Mt @ 1.1% Sn (81,976t contained Sn), is a 16% increase in contained tin compared with the 2019 estimate (6.6Mt @ 1.1% Sn).

The updated Heemskirk Tin Project Indicated MRE of 2.6Mt @ 1.1% Sn (29,798t contained Sn) is 24% higher than the 2019 Indicated MRE (2.1Mt @ 1.1% Sn).

Addition of the St Dizier Open Pit Indicated MRE (2.3Mt @ 0.6% Sn), increases the Heemskirk Tin Project Indicated MRE to 4.9Mt @ 0.9% Sn (43,580t contained Sn) and the Total MRE to 9.9Mt @ 1.0% Sn (95,768t contained Sn). Open pit mining of 0.4Mt of the St Dizier Indicated Mineral Resource was included in the 2019 Scoping Study Mining Schedule for the Heemskirk Tin Project.

Exploration Upside

Phase 1 drillhole ZS140 demonstrates the potential for the Severn Inferred MRE to extend significantly down dip with the ZS140 intercept located approximately 100m below the bottom of the updated Severn Inferred MRE.

Mineralisation in all of the Heemskirk Tin project deposits remains open down dip and down plunge.

Benchmarking the Heemskirk Tin Project

The Heemskirk Tin Project Total Mineral Resource is the highest-grade undeveloped tin mineral resource in Australia and third highest-grade globally. The increase in contained tin in the 2022 updated Mineral Resource also places the Heemskirk Tin Project in the five largest tin projects globally, on a contained tin basis (see Figure 3 and Table 2).

Figure 3 – Benchmarking of Heemskirk Tin Project Total Mineral Resource with Peer Company Projects

Project	Company	Country	Products	Project StageCompleted	TotalResourceTonnes(Mt)	TotalResourceGrade(%)	TotalResourceContainedTin (kt)	Measured	IndicatedResource Resourcein Total (%) in Total (%) in Total (%)	InferredResource	Source / Company Announcement Date
South Crofty	Cornish Metals	UK	Sn	PFS	4.0	1.6	65	z.	51%	49%	7 June 2021 Resource Update
Nazareth	Minsur	Peru	Sn	Exploration	7.6	1.2	88	1%	92%	7%	Minsur 2020 Annual Report, deep deposit
Heemskirk	Stellar	Australi	Sn. minor Cu	Scoping	7.6	1.1	82		36%	64%	24 November 2022 Resource update announcement(excludes Cu credits)
Tellerhauser	First Tin	Germany	Sn	PFS	5.3	1.0	53	÷	38%	62%	First Tin website / Resources and Reserves.Sep 2021 resource @ 0.50% Sn COG
Cleveland	Elementos	Australia	Sn-Cu	Scoping	7.5	0.8	56	÷.	83%	17%	ELT website. September 2018 resource@ 0.35% Sn COG (excludes Cu credits)
Achmmach	Kasbah	Morocco	Sn	FS	22.4	0.7	156	11%	89%	$\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{A}}$	31 October 2022 - Annaul Report Pg 4https://www.kasbahresources.com/site/pdf/85516d44-5858-4042-9e91-582d039f5bcb/Annual-Report-to-Shareholders.pdf
Gottesberg	First Tin	Germany	Sn	Exploration	6.8	0.5	33		29%	71%	First Tin website / Resources and Reserves.Dec 2021 resource @ 0.35% Sn COG
Rentails	BMT JV	Australia	Sn. minor Cu	FS	23.9	0.4	105	100%		٠	Metals X Website / Mineral Resources and Reserves,18/05/2018 resource estimate (excludes Cu credits)
Oropresa	Elementos	Spain	Sn	(Optimised)Scoping	18.9	0.4	76	23%	62%	15%	ELT website. 8 Nov 2021 resource@ 0.15% Sn COG
Syrymbet	JSC Tin One	Kazakhstan	Sn	FS	123.3	0.4	489	$\overline{a}$	48%	52%	JSC Tin One & ITA websites, 2014 CSAGlobal Resource Estimate
Mt Garnet	Consolidated TinMines	Australia	Sn-Fe-F	PFS	13.1	0.4	52	16%	58%	27%	CSD 30/09/2013 announcement PFS results - alldeposits. Now delisted.(Excludes Fe and F credits)
Mt Lindsav	Venture	Australia	Sn-W. minor Cu	FS	4.7	0.4	17	38%	44%	17%	VMS website Resource Statement @ 0.7% Sn COG(underground mine FS) (excludes W and Cu credits)
Kanbauk	Kanbauk	Myanmar	Sn-W-CaF2	Exploration	30.0	0.3	79	٠	$\overline{\phantom{a}}$	100%	Knabauk website. 2017 resource @ 0.1% Sn COG(Excludes W. CaF credits)
GreatPyramid	TinOne Resources	Australia	Sn	Exploration	5.2	0.2	10	$\overline{\phantom{a}}$	$\overline{\phantom{a}}$	100%	TinOne Resources / Great Pyramid Project Page
Taronga	First Tin	Australia	Sn	PFS	36.4	0.2	58	٠	79%	21%	First Tin website / Resources and Reserves, Aug 2013resource @ 0.10% Sn COG
EastKemptville	Avalon	Canada	Sn-In	PFS	37.2	0.1	55	2%	62%	36%	AVL website. May 2018 resource @ 0.1% Sn COG(excludes Indium credits)

Table 2 - Benchmarking Assumptions – Heemskirk Tin Project

Advancement of Heemskirk Tin Project Development

The Phase 2B infill drilling program (8 holes for ~3,860m) underway at Severn is focused on further increasing the Heemskirk Tin Project Indicated Mineral Resource, targeting high grade-thickness mineralisation areas of the deposit.

A further Mineral Resource update will be undertaken at the completion of the Phase 2B drilling program in mid-2023.

The Phase 2B drilling program results are expected to support a Pre-Feasibility Study on the Heemskirk Tin Project planned for 2023 H2, following the completion of the Phase 2B drilling program.

Competent Persons Statement – Heemskirk Tin Project

The information in this announcement that relates to exploration results, exploration targets and mineral resources has been compiled by Mr. Ross Corben who is an independent consultant. Mr. Corben is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the JORC Code). Mr. Corben has reviewed the contents of this news release and consents to the inclusion in this announcement of exploration results in the form and context in which they appear.

Forward Looking Statements

This report may include forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include but are not limited to statements concerning Stellar Resources Limited's planned activities and other statements that are not historical facts. When used in this report, the words such as "could", "plan", "estimate", "expect", "intend", "may", "potential", "should" and similar expressions are forward-looking statements. In addition, summaries of Exploration Results and estimates of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves could also be forward-looking statements. Although Stellar Resources Limited believes that its expectations reflected in these forwardlooking statements are reasonable, such statements involve risks and uncertainties and no assurance can be given that actual results will be consistent with these forward-looking statements. The entity confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in this announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning this announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. Nothing in this report should be construed as either an offer to sell or a solicitation to buy or sell Stellar Resources Limited securities.

This announcement is authorised for release to the market by the Board of Directors of Stellar Resources Limited.

For further details please contact:

Gary Fietz Executive Director Stellar Resources Limited T: 0408 489 957 E: gary@widerange.net.au For broker and media enquiries: Zander Beacham White Noise Communications T: 0433 515 723 E: zander@whitenoisecomms.com

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 – Heemskirk Tin Project

Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data (criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Samplingtechniques	Nature and Quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels,random chips or specific specialized industrystandard measurement tools appropriate to theminerals under investigation, such as downholegamma sondes, or hand held XRF instrumentsetc.).Include reference to measures taken to ensuresamplerepresentivityandtheappropriatecalibration of any measurement tools or systemsused.Aspects of the determination of mineralisationthat are Material to the Public Report.In cases where 'industry standard' work has beendone this would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reversecirculation drilling was used to obtain 1m samplesfrom which 3kg was pulverized to produce 30gcharge for fire assay').In other cases, moreexplanation may be required, such as wherethere is coarse gold that has inherent samplingproblems.Unusual commodities or samplingtypes (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrantdisclosure of detailed information.	The Zeehan Tin depositshavebeen delineatedentirely by diamond drilling. Numerous drillingcampaigns were completed between 1960 and 1992by Aberfoyle, Gippsland and Abminco. Post 2010,drilling was completed by Stellar with the lastdrillhole ZS151 completed in 2022.Pre 2010 Severn deposit drilling 21 diamond drillholes for 7,389.9mPost 2010 Severn deposit drilling 35 holes for15,377.9m.Logged sulphide and siderite altered zones wereselected for geochemical analysisApproximately 1m samples of 2-3kg were taken fromdiamond saw cut drill core whilst respectinggeological boundaries
DrillingTechniques	Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open holehammer, rotary air blast, auger, bangka, sonicetc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple orstandard tube, depth of diamond tails, facesampling bit or other type, where core is orientedand if so by what method, etc)	All drill sampling by standard wireline diamonddrilling. All Post 2010 holes oriented by wire linespear and post 2017 drilling oriented using CoretellGen 4 device.A combination of BQ, NQ, HQ and PQ drill sizes havebeen utilised, with both standard tube and tripletube drilling used.
Drill samplerecovery	Method of recording and assessing core and chipsample recoveries and results assessed.Measures taken to maximize sample recovery andensure representative nature of the samples.Whether a relationship exists between samplerecovery and grade and whether sample bias mayhave occurred due to preferential loss/gain offine/coarse material	Corereconstituted,markedupandrecoverymeasured for all drillholesRecoveries generally excellent (95-100%)No relationship between recovery and grade wasobserved
Logging	Whether core and chip samples have beengeologically and geotechnically logged to a levelof detail to support appropriate Mineral Resourceestimation, mining studies and metallurgicalstudies.Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative innature.Core(orcostean,channeletc.)photography.The total length and percentage of the relevantintersections logged.	Geological logging has been carried out on all holesby experienced geologists and technical staff.Holes logged for lithology, weathering, alteration,structural orientations, RQD and mineralisation.All holes photographed wet and dry before cutting.Logs loaded into excel spreadsheets and uploadedinto access database.Pre-2010 paper logs entered into access database byexperienced geologists.Standard lithology codes used for all drillholes.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
SubSamplingtechniquesand samplepreparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whetherquarter, half or all core taken.If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotarysplit, etc. and whether sampled wet or dryFor all sample types, the nature, quality andappropriatenessofthesamplepreparationtechnique.Quality control procedures adopted for all subsampling stages to maximize representivity ofsamples.Measures taken to ensure that the sampling isrepresentative of the insitu material collected,includingforinstanceresultsoffieldduplicate/second half sampling.Whether sample sizes are appropriate to thegrain size of the material being sampled	Half core split by diamond saw over 0.3 – 1.0msampleintervalswhilerespectinggeologicalcontacts. Most sample intervals are 1.0m.Assay sample weights between 1 and 4kg areconsidered appropriate with respect to any coarsetin that may be present.Half core crushed and pulverized over the Pre- andPost-2010 drilling campaigns. Post-2010 samplescrushed to 70% passing 2mm and rifle split to 1kgwhich was then pulverized to 85% passing 75ubefore division of fusion disk XRF sample.
Quality ofassay dataandlaboratorytests	The nature, quality and appropriateness of theassaying and laboratory procedures used andwhether the technique is considered partial ortotal.For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheldXRF instruments, etc., the parameters used indetermining the analysis including instrumentmake and model, reading times, calibrationfactors applied and their derivation etc.Nature of quality control procedures adopted(e.g.standards,blanks,duplicates,externallaboratory checks) and whether acceptable levelsof accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision havebeen established.	Pre 2010 total Sn analyses were conducted at variouscommercial and company laboratories by pressedpowder XRF. Care is required for matrix matchedstandards when using this technique.Post-2010 total Sn analyses were conducted at ALSLaboratories using a fused disc XRF technique, whichis the current industry standard for ore-grade tin.Fused disc XRF is considered a total technique, as itextracts and measures the whole of the elementcontained within the sample.Pre 2017 Soluble Sn, Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag analysed byacid leach followed by AAS.Post 2019 Soluble Sn, Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag analysed byacid leach followed by ICP.Pre and Post 2010 drilling campaign assay samplessubmittedtoindependentlaboratorychecksampling.No certified reference material, blanks or duplicatesamples were employed in the drilling campaignsprior to 2017.Post 2017 drilling involved the insertion of standards,blanks and duplicates.All analyses were withinacceptable limits.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Verificationof samplingand assaying	The verification of significant intersections byeitherindependentoralternativecompanypersonnelThe use of twinned holes.Documentation of primary data, data entryprocedures,dataverification,datastorage(physical and electronic) protocols.Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	Significantintersectionsreviewedbycompanypersonnel.Metallurgicaltestworkcompletedonsomequartered core.Eight twinned holes have been drilled at Heemskirkwith six holes demonstrating moderate to high Sngrade variability between 20 and 50%. Two holesdemonstrating extreme grade and or geologicalvariability.Datais collectedbyqualifiedgeologistsandexperienced field assistants and entered into excelspreadsheets. Data is imported into Microsoft accesstables resource geologists for errors. Data is regularlybacked up and archival copies of the database storedin separate offices.Negative values in the database have been adjustedto half the detection limit for statistical analysis fromthe excel spreadsheets. Data checked by thedatabase and resource geologists for errors. Data isregularly backed up and archival copies of thedatabase stored in separate offices.Negative values in the database have been adjustedto half the detection limit for statistical analysis.
Location ofdata points	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locatedrill holes (collar and downhole surveys) trenches,mine workings and other locations used inmineral resource estimationSpecification of grid system usedQuality and accuracy of topographic control.	Pre 2010 drill collars surveyed by licensed surveyorusing the total station method.All Post 2010 drill collars surveyed by licensedsurveyor using differential GPS.All coordinates in Zeehan Mine Grid (ZMG).RL's as MSL +1000mPre 2017 down hole surveys by downhole camera orTropari.Post 2017 down hole surveys holes by Deviflex gyrosurvey tools.The Digital Terrain Model has been generated fromTasmanian Lands Department 10m contours dataand adjusted with surveyed drill collar and controlpoints.
Data Spacinganddistribution	Data spacing for reporting Exploration ResultsWhetherdataspacinganddistributionissufficient to establish the degree of geologicaland grade continuity appropriate for the MineralResourceandOreReserveestimationprocedure(s) and classifications applied.Whether sample compositing has been applied	Drillhole intersection spacing approximately 30-60mfor Severn deposit above 850m RL and above750mRl between 3720N and 3820N.Drillhole intersection spacing generally 60-100m fordown plunge of Severn.Drill spacing is considered to be appropriate for theestimation of Indicated Mineral resources for part ofthe Severn deposit.Drill spacing is considered to be appropriate for theestimation of Inferred Mineral Resources for theremainder of the Severn deposit.Samples have been composited on 1m interceptsinsidedomaininterceptsfortheresourceestimation.

Orientationof data inrelation togeologicalstructure	Whether the orientation of sampling achievesunbiased sampling of possible structures and theextent to which this is known, considering thedeposit type.Iftherelationshipbetweenthedrillingorientation and the orientation of key mineralisedstructures is considered to have introduced asampling bias, this should be assessed andreported if material.	The majority of drill holes have been drilled grid eastwest or west east sub-perpendicular to the steeplyeast dipping mineralisation in the Severn Deposit.Drill hole orientation is not considered to haveintroduced any material sampling bias.Three drillholes, ZS132, ZS135 and ZS135A weredrilled at a low angle to the strike of the orebody.These drillholes resulted in local data clustering onthe hanging wall and footwall of multiple domains.These holes were utilized in wireframing for orebodyorientation andZS132 wasremoved from theresource estimation.
SampleSecurity	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Post 2010 chain of custody is managed by Stellarfrom the drill site to ALS laboratories in Burnie.All samples ticketed, bagged in calico bags anddelivered in labelled poly-weave bags.Pre 2010 sample security is not documented.
Audits orReviews	The results of any audits or reviews of samplingtechniques and data.	Noauditsorreviewsofsamplingdataandtechniques have been completed.

Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section)

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Mineraltenement andland tenurestatus	Type, reference name/number, location andownership including agreements or materialissues with third parties such as joint ventures,partnerships, overriding royalties, native titleinterests, historical sites, wilderness or nationalpark and environmental settings.The security of tenure held at the time ofreporting along with known impediments toobtaining a license to operate the area	ML2023P/M, RL5/1997 and EL13/2018 hosting theHeemskirk Tin Project in Western Tasmania is 100%owned by Stellar Resources Ltd.
Explorationdone by otherparties	Acknowledgement and appraisal of explorationby other parties.	Early mining activity commenced in the 1880's withthe production of Ag-Pb sulphides and Cu-Snsulphides from fissure loads.Modern exploration commenced by Placer in the mid1960's with the Queen Hill deposit discovered byGippsland in 1971.The Aberfoyle-Gippsland JV explored the tenementsuntil 1992 with the delineation of the Queen Hill,Severn and Montana deposits.
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style ofmineralization.	The Heemskirk Tin Deposits are granite related tinsulphide-siderite vein and replacement style depositshosted in the Oonah Formation and Crimson CreekFormation sediments and volcanics. Numerous PbZn-Ag fissure lodes are associated with the peripheryofthemineralizingsystem.Mineralisationisessentially stratabound controlled by northeastplunging fold structures associated with northwesttrending faults. Tin is believed to be sourced from agranite intrusion located over 1km from surfacebelow the deposit.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Drill holeinformation	A summary of all information material to theunderstandingoftheexplorationresultsincludingatabulationofthefollowinginformation for all Material drill holes:-easting and northing of the drill holecollar-elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevationabove sea level in metres) of the drill hole	Not applicable.This announcement refers to theResource Estimation of the Zeehan Tin Deposit and isnot a report on Exploration Results.See StellarResources website for ASX announcements on onexploration results including the 2021 and 2022drilling results and historic drilling results.
	collar-dip and azimuth of the hole-downhole length and interception depth
	-hole lengthIf the exclusion of this information is justifiedon the basis that the information is notMaterial and this exclusion does not detractfrom the understanding of the report, theCompetent Person should clearly explain whythis is the case
Dataaggregationmethods	In reporting of Exploration Results, weightingaveragingtechniques,maximumand/orminimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of highgrades) and cutoff grades are usually materialand should be stated.	Exploration results are not included in this resourceestimation report.A nominal lower cut-off grade of 0.4% Sn has beenapplied for mineralised domain modelling. Domainmodels include internal dilution (i.e. 1m grading
	Where aggregate interceptsinclude shortlengths of high grade results and longer lengthsof low grade results, the procedure used foraggregationshouldbestatedandsomeexamples of such aggregations should beshown in detail	<0.4% Sn) provided the average grade of anyintercept that includes the 1m internal dilution isgreater than 0.4% Sn.No metal equivalents have been used.
	The assumptions used for any reporting ofmetal equivalent values should be clearlystated.
Relationshipbetweenmineralisationwidths andinterceptlengths	These relationships are particularly importantin the reporting of Exploration Results.If the geometry of the mineralization withrespect to the drill hole angle is known, itsnature should be reported.If it is not known and only the downholelengths are reported, there should be a clear	Exploration results are not included in this resourceestimation report.All drillholes modelled 3 dimensionally for resourceestimation.
	statement to this effect (e.g. down hole length,true width not known)
Diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales)and tabulated intercepts should be included forany significant discovery being reported. Theseshould include, but not be limited to a planview of drill collar locations and appropriatesectional views.	See body of the announcement for relevant plan andsectional views.
Balancedreporting	WherecomprehensivereportingofallExplorationResultsisnotpracticable,representative reporting of both low and highgrades and/ or widths should be practiced toavoidmisleadingreportingofExplorationResults	Exploration results are not included in this resourceestimation report.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Othersubstantiveexplorationdata	Other exploration data, if meaningful andmaterial, should be reported including (but notlimited to): geological observations; geophysicalsurvey result; geochemical survey results; bulksamples –size and method of treatment;metallurgicaltestresults;bulkdensity,groundwater,geotechnicalandrockcharacteristics;potentialdeleteriousorcontaminating substances.	Metallurgical test work completed by ALS/BRLlaboratories and supervised by Worley-Parsons overa number of different campaigns on drill coresamples.Deposits zoned mineralogically and metallurgicallyCassiterite is the dominant tin-bearing mineraloccurring as free grains and in complex mineralcomposites.Grain sizes vary according to ore type, with Severnhaving the coarsest and Upper Queen Hill having thefinest.Cassiterite liberation generally commences at a grindof 130 microns and is largely complete at 20 microns.Based on the work undertaken by ALS metallurgy,Stellaranticipatesthatconcentratesgradingapproximately 48% tin at an overall tin recovery of73% will be obtained from the Zeehan Tin ores.
Further work	The nature and scale of planned further work(e.g. test for lateral extensions or depthextensions or large scale step out drilling).Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas ofpossibleextensions,includingthemaingeological interpretations and future drillingareas,providedthisinformationisnotcommercially sensitive.	Phase 2B Resource infill drilling is underway.Pre-Feasibility Studyincludingfurther technicalstudies planned for 2023 H2 following completion pfPhase 2B drilling.The mineral deposit remains open down dip anddown plunge and will be explored as access becomesavailable with underground mine development.

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
Databaseintegrity	Measures taken to ensure that the data has notbeen corrupted by, for example, transcriptionor keying errors, between its initial collectionand its use for Mineral Resource estimationpurposes.Data validation procedures used.	Data provided as access databaseHistoric data validated by checking paper logsand assay sheetsPost 2010 data received electronically andloaded into databaseData integrity validated with Surpac Software forEOHdepthandsampleoverlapsandtranscription errors.1m composite statistical analysis checked forsignificant variations or anomalous figures. Nomaterial errors identified.
Site visits	Comment on any site visits undertaken by theCompetent Person and the outcome of thosesite visits.If no site visits have been undertaken indicatewhy this is the case.	Two site visits made during drilling programs since2021.Periodic advice on infill drilling and QAQC procedureshave been provided.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Geologicalinterpretation	Confidence in (conversely, the uncertainty of)the geological interpretation of the mineraldeposit.Nature of the data used and of any assumptionsmade.The effect, if any, of alternative interpretationson Mineral Resource estimation.The use of geology in guiding and controllingMineral Resource estimation.The factors affecting continuity both of gradeand geology.	High confidence in the global geological model.Potential for geological models to vary significantlyon a local scale. Although models are considered tobe appropriate for definition of Mineral Resourcesforfeasibilitystudies,re-modellingpriortoproduction with input from infill drilling, mapping,face and blast-hole sampling will be required.Noalternativegeologicalinterpretationswereattempted for this estimation. Geology model doesnotvarysignificantlyfromhistoricgeologyinterpretations.Geology/gradecontourusedasaguideformineralised domain selection.Mineralised trends well defined from drilling andalso field mapping for some deposits.
Dimensions	The extent and variability of the MineralResource expressed as length (along strike orotherwise), plan width, and depth belowsurface to the upper and lower limits of theMineral Resource.	Severn deposit is a north trending moderate tosteeply east dipping and north plunging stratabounddeposit.Comprisedofseverallensesofmineralisation in a broader sulphide halo. Strikeextending north over 500m, width 3-50m and downdip extent over 700m.
Estimationand modellingtechniques	Thenatureandappropriatenessoftheestimationtechnique(s)appliedandkeyassumptions, including treatment of extremegradevalues,domaining,interpolationparametersandmaximumdistanceofextrapolation from data points. If a computerassisted estimation method was chosen includeadescriptionofcomputersoftwareandparameters used.The availability of check estimates, previousestimates and/or mine production records andwhether the Mineral Resource estimate takesappropriate account of such data.The assumptions made regarding recovery of	All modelling and estimation work is carried out inthree dimensions via Leapfrog and Surpac software.Minimum width of 2m downhole @ nominal 0.4% Sncutoff but lower grades sometimes included tocontinue ore zones.Internal dilution generally restricted to 3m withallowances for geological continuityData composited on 1m intervals including Total SnSoluble Sn, Cu, Pb, Zn, S and SG.Top cutting based on CV and grade histograms.Metal association analysis suggests good correlationbetween Sn, Soluble Sn, S and SG.The block model extends between 3,200 and 4,300min the y direction, 59,900and 61,550 in the x
	by-products.Estimation of deleterious elements or othernon-grade variables of economic significance(egSulphurforacidminedrainagecharacterization).	direction and between 400 to 1280m RL. Block sizeswere set at 10m x 10m x 10m with sub-celling to1.25m in the x and y direction and 2.5m in the zdirection.Variogram models are reasonably well constructedwith moderate to high nugget effect (50-70%) and
	In the case of block model interpolation, theblock size in relation to the average samplespacing and the search employed.	maximum ranges of 50 to 70m to sill for majorgeological domains.Dynamicsearchellipsoidusedwitha100m
	Any assumptions behind modelling of selectivemining units.	maximum range.Dynamic anisotropy ordinary kriged estimation for Snconstrained by geology solid model
	Any assumptions about correlation betweenvariables	Inverse distance squared estimation of Sol Sn, Cu,Pb, Zn, S and SG.
	Descriptionofhowthegeologicalinterpretation was used to control the resourceestimates.	Sn % as Stannite for Severn derived from sol Sninterpolation.Block grades validated visually against input data and
	Discussion of basis of using or not using gradecutting or capping.	by comparing global inputs with estimate outputs.Good grade correlation with previous estimation.
	The process of validation, the checking processused, the comparison of model data to drillhole data, and use of reconciliation data if anyavailable.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Moisture	Whether the tonnages estimated on a dry basisor with natural moisture, and the method ofdetermination of the moisture content.	The estimate based on a dry tonnage basis
Cut-offparameters	The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) orquality parameters applied.	Cut off grades have been determined from miningrecoveries (90%), metallurgical recoveries (73%),estimated industry costs ($115/t), prevailing mineralprice (US$22,000) and exchange rate estimations($US/$A0.76).A block cutoff of 0.6% Sn has been applied for thereporting of the mineral resources
Mining factorsorassumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible miningmethods, minimum mining dimensions andinternal (or, if applicable, external) miningdilution. It is always necessary as part of theprocess of determining reasonable prospectsfor eventual economic extraction to considerpotential mining methods, but the assumptionsmaderegardingminingmethodsandparameters when estimating Mineral Resourcesmay not always be rigorous. When this is thecase,thisshouldbereportedwithanexplanationofthebasisoftheminingassumptions made.	Mining studies completed by Mining One (2013,2016, 2019) and Polberro (2015).Decline accessed underground mineA combination of Long Hole Stoping and Drift and Fillmining methods with 25m bench stopes and CAFback fillMining loss of 10% and dilution of 10%
Metallurgicalfactors orassumptions	The basis for assumptions or predictionsregarding metallurgical amenability. It is alwaysnecessary as part of the process of determiningreasonable prospects for eventual economicextraction to consider potential metallurgicalmethods,buttheassumptionsregardingmetallurgicaltreatmentprocessesandparameters made when reporting MineralResources may not always be rigorous. Wherethis is the case, this should be reported with anexplanation of the basis of the metallurgicalassumptions made.	Post 2010 Metallurgical test work completed by ALSBurnie and plant design by GRES/Mincore.Standard crushing grinding circuit followed bysulphide flotation, gravity separation and Sn flotationof gravity tails.Testwork suggests a 48% Sn concentrate can beachieved with a 73% recovery.

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Environmentalfactors orassumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible wasteand process residue disposal options. It isalways necessary as part of the process ofdetermining reasonable prospects for eventualeconomic extraction to consider the potentialenvironmental impacts of the mining andprocessing operation. While at this stage thedeterminationofpotentialenvironmentalimpacts, particularly for a greenfield project,many not always be well advanced, the statusof early consideration of these potentialenvironmental impacts should be reported.Where these aspects have not been consideredthis should be reported with an explanation ofthe environmental assumptions made.	Historic mining centre.Baseline environmental studies and conceptualmining plan in support of ML2023P/M completed.FinalDevelopmentPlanandEnvironmentalManagement Plan in progress.
Bulk density	Whether assumed or determined. If assumed,the basis for the assumptions. If determined,the method used, whether wet or dry, thefrequency of the measurements, the nature,size and representativeness of the samples.The bulk density for bulk material must havebeen measured by methods that adequatelyaccount for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc),moisture and differences between rock andalteration zones within the deposit.Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimatesused in the evaluation process of the differentmaterials.	Bulk density derived from diamond drill core usingair pycnometer and the Archimedes method atvarious laboratories.Core is un-oxidised and free of cavitiesSg of mineralised intersections determined on assayintervals inside coded domainsSG interpolated into block model using ID2 algorithm.Waste rock assigned SG of 3.0 from the mean SG ofsamples with <0.1% Sn.
Classification	The basis of the classification of the MineralResource into varying confidence categories.Whether appropriate account has been takenof all relevant factors (ie relevant confidence intonnage/grade estimations, reliability of inputdata, confidence in continuity of geology andmetal values, quality, quantity and distributionof the data)Whether the result appropriately reflects theCompetent Person's view of the deposit.	Confidence in the geological model, data quality andinterpolation is considered to be sufficient forMineral Resource located within 50m of sample datato be classified as Indicated Resource.Resource estimated >50m of drilling data has beenclassified as Inferred Resource.The resource classification appropriately reflects theviews of the Competent Person.
Audits orreviews	The results of any audits or reviews of theMineral Resource estimates.	No audits or reviews have been completed for thisestimation.
Discussion ofrelativeaccuracy/confidence	Where appropriate a statement of the relativeaccuracy and confidence level in the MineralResource estimate using an approach orproceduredeemedappropriatebytheCompetent Person.	The geological model is robust at a global levelbetween sections and down dip of cross sections.Broad drill spacing of inferred resources and shortrange variability reduce confidence in the estimatewhich is reflected in the resource classification.
	The statement should specify whether it relatesto global or local estimates, and, if local statetherelevanttonnages,whichshouldberelevant to technical and economic evaluation.These statements of relative accuracy and	The effects of localized brittle faulting and gradevariability is likely to impact the geology model on alocal level. Infill drilling, face mapping and samplingwillbenecessaryforgradecontrolduringproduction.Grade and geological variance is highlighted by
	confidence of the estimate should be comparedwith production data, where available.	twinned holes and variogram models.No production data is available for reconciliation.