Metals X Limited - Interim / Quarterly Report 2016

==> picture [152 x 56] intentionally omitted <==

Metals X Limited is a diversified group exploring and developing minerals and metals in Australia. It is Australia’s largest tin producer, a top 10 gold producer and holds a pipeline of assets from exploration to development including the world class Wingellina Nickel Project.

CORPORATE DIRECTORY

ASX Code: MLX OTCQX Code: MLXEF

Level 3, 18–32 Parliament Place West Perth WA 6005 Australia

PO Box 1959 West Perth WA 6872 Australia

t: +61 8 9220 5700 f: +61 8 9220 5757 [email protected] www.metalsx.com.au

QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE QUARTER

OPERATIONS

Significant progress made on the off-market takeover offer for copper producer Aditya Birla Minerals Limited (ABY) with acceptances of 29.8 % received. Subsequent to the end of the quarter (announced 26 April 2016), agreement was reached with ABY’s major shareholder, Hindalco (51%) to irrevocably accept the offer and the board of ABY to recommend acceptance. Pursuant to this, Metals X has agreed to increase its offer ratio to one (1) MLX share for each four and a half (4.5) ABY shares and to pay each acceptor to its offers eight (8c) cents per share. The payment of increased consideration is subject to no superior offer arising before 2 May 2016 and Hindalco receiving Reserve Bank of India (RBI) approval.
The Gold Division produced 47,951 ounces at a cash cost of A$1,217 per ounce and an AISC of A$1,388 per ounce reflecting the various stages its individual gold projects were at. Gold sales averaged A$1,616 for the quarter.
The Tin Division saw the Renison mine (MLX 50%) produce 1,676 tonnes of tin metal at a cash cost of A$14,455 per tonne of tin metal and an AISC of A$19,311 per tonne of tin metal. An unaudited cash inflow of $3.12M was generated. Tin sales averaged a price of A$21,170 per tonne for the quarter and have since risen to approximately A$23,000 per tonne.
Within the Nickel Division significant progress with the Public Environmental Review (PER) process was made and a final approval is expected to be imminent. Operationally, a revised high-grade cut-off model for the deposit was completed showing that using a 1.30% cut-off grade, the higher grade resource component is 25 million tonnes at 1.45% Ni, 0.1% Co and 53.5% Fe2O3. Initial mining studies suggest that this higher grade resource can be mined with an estimated 1.5:1 (waste:ore) stripping ratio.

CORPORATE

Metals X closed the quarter with a cash and working capital (and investments excluding ABY) position of $60.38 million.
Metals X made an off-market takeover offer for all the shares in copper producer, Aditya Birla Ltd during the quarter with conditional acceptances currently standing at 29.77%.

==> picture [152 x 138] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

ROVER
CLAUDE HILLS
MT DAVIES
FORTNUM WINGELLINA
CMGP
SKO
HGO
RENISON
RENTAILS
----- End of picture text -----

Shares on issue total 477,820,914. Shares allotted during the quarter were 19.6 million to accepting ABY shareholders under the off-market takeover offer.

ENQUIRIES

Peter Cook

Warren Hallam

[email protected]

GOLD DIVISION

OVERVIEW

Total gold production for the quarter was 47,591 ounces (including Cannon 3,505 ounces) at a cash cost of $A1,217 per ounce and an AISC of A$1,388 per ounce reflecting the various phases the individual gold operations are at.

Overall Performance for the gold group was temporarily dented by continued lower performance from the Trident Underground Mine at Higginsville, a slower than anticipated shift to ore stoping at Paddy’s Flat (CMGP) and also a poor reconciliation from the Whangamata Open Pit(CMGP). However, all are short-term performance matters and are now behind the operations. Of particular significance is the capital intensive phases at CMGP and the HBJ Underground Mine are beginning to significantly reduce.

Highlights of the Gold Division were:

Significant progress was made in the production build at CMGP with the Paddy’s Flat transitioning to ore stoping on the Vivian-Consols Lodes after delayed establishment of mine ventilation and emergency egress networks.
An increase in productivity, grade and mine-life at South Kal and the completion of a long-term mine ventilation network.
The re-start plan for the Fortnum Project made good progress with engineering and approvals works nearing completion. A re-modelling of ore sources in the initial 3 years of ore feed was completed as was the successful drilling of existing low grade ore stockpiles.
Detailed infill drilling at Mt Henry of the top 30 metres returned better than expected results and the project is advancing to replace the Trident Underground Mine as the main source of feed for the Higginsville operations in the second half of this calendar year.
The Cannon Mine continued to progress with excellent reconciliations and cost outcomes. Metals X continues to play banker to the project and has profit share of 50% of the surplus after all cost are repaid. The latest indications are that AISC of around $1,000 per ounce are achievable from the pit which will be complete early in 2017.
An agreement to buy the Gunga Mine, 30km west of Jubilee mill was made. The acquisition price is $1.5M in cash and a further $1M in a milestone payment when production exceeds 30,000 oz. The current resource at Gunga is1.33 million tonnes at 1.7 g/t Au containing 73,000 oz. Gunga is expected to provide a blended feed for the plant post Cannon until mid-2018.
Gold hedging at the end of the quarter stood at 208,750 ounces (including the gold prepay 21,250 oz @ A$1,490.6 per ounce) at an average price of A$1,624.2 per ounce.
Excellent exploration results across the operations were received including the following outstanding hits:

HBJ Underground 5.3 m at 12.30 g/t Au from 66.1 m in HBJUG0083 Mt Henry 16 m at 6.6 g/t Au from 12 m in MHGC0127 Paddy’s Flat 13 m at 13.7 g/t Au from 6 m in 16VIDD048 3 m at 297.56 g/t Au from 52 m in 16VIDD05 Trident 3.3 m at 24.32 g/t Au from 153 m in TUG2779

QUARTERLY REPORT 2 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

		Higginsville	South Kal	CMGP	Group
Physical Summary	Units		86,565 2.41 572,613 54,078 2.77	37,825 2.66 2,310,990 183,432 1.28	283,996 2.79 3,206,840 304,189 1.73
UG Ore Mined	t	159,607
UG Grade Mined	g/t	3.03
OP BCM Mined	BCM	323,237
OP Ore Mined	t	66,679
OP Grade Mined	g/t	2.11
Ore Processed	t	232,532	238,410 1.87 90.37% 13,006 11,293 1,616	371,327 1.12 92.14% 12,296 12,605 1,616	842,270 1.75 91.83% 44,086 45,570 1,616
Head Grade	g/t	2.64
Recovery	%	92.82%
Gold Produced	oz	18,783
Gold Sold	oz	21,673
Achieved Gold Price	A$/oz	1,616
Cost Summary			829 282 61 -153	733 514 240 18	771 366 138 -58
Mining	A$/oz	756
Processing	A$/oz	326
Admin	A$/oz	124
Stockpile Adj	A$/oz	-41
C1 Cash Cost (produced oz)	A$/oz	1,165	1,020 51 2 72 0 0	1,506 62 0 116 0 0	1,217 100 2 67 0 3
Royalties	A$/oz	158
Marketing/Cost of sales	A$/oz	2
Sustaining Capital	A$/oz	30
Reclamation & other adj.	A$/oz	0
Corporate Costs	A$/oz	8
All-in Sustaining Costs	A$/oz	1,363	1,145 296 17	1,684 1,004 344	1,388 438 112
Project Startup Capital	A$/oz	166
Exploration Holding Cost	A$/oz	27
All-in Cost	A$/oz	1,556	1,458 245	3,031 135	1,938 238
Depreciation & Amortisation	A$/oz	301

The two major projects in the Gold division that are not in production are the Fortnum Gold Project and the Rover CopperGold Project.

Activity levels on Fortnum were high with detailed engineering, planning, approvals and exploration drilling taking place. Due to the wet season, no field activity was undertaken at Rover. A review of the resource modelling to include the recently received bonanza copper-gold results from the last drill program commenced.

QUARTERLY REPORT 3 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

Safety stats for the Gold Division for the quarter are summarised below:

==> picture [525 x 103] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Operation LTI’s (for quarter) LTIFR TRIFR
Higginsville 0 1.27 93.12
South Kalgoorlie 1 1.8 99.9
CMGP 2 3.8 89.01
Fortnum 0 0 0
----- End of picture text -----

Year to date Gold Division output is summarised:

		Higginsville	South Kal	CMGP	Group
Physical Summary	Units		310,657 2.29 1,068,977 209,781 1.80	101,506 1.57 4,171,727 636,263 1.12	918,605 2.77 6,398,734 1,067,517 1.36
UG Ore Mined	t	506,442
UG Grade Mined	g/t	3.30
OP BCM Mined	BCM	1,158,030
OP Ore Mined	t	221,472
OP Grade Mined	g/t	1.64
Ore Processed	t	821,665	685,824 1.74 90.32% 34,643 32,046 1,584	658,804 1.09 91.54% 21,230 17,781 1,584	2,166,293 1.91 90.82% 121,766 115,829 1,584
Head Grade	g/t	2.72
Recovery	%	90.66%
Gold Produced	oz	65,892
Gold Sold	oz	66,002
Achieved Gold Price	A$/oz	1,584
Cost Summary			858 298 75 -18	731 397 185 30	766 324 119 -35
Mining	A$/oz	729
Processing	A$/oz	315
Admin	A$/oz	121
Stockpile Adj	A$/oz	-65
C1 Cash Cost (produced oz)	A$/oz	1,100	1,212 34 2 108 0 0	1,343 53 0 67 0 0	1,174 84 2 81 0 5
Royalties	A$/oz	121
Marketing/Cost of sales	A$/oz	2
Sustaining Capital	A$/oz	71
Reclamation & other adj.	A$/oz	0
Corporate Costs	A$/oz	9
All-in Sustaining Costs	A$/oz	1,303	1,357 435 33	1,464 1,876 487	1,346 515 112
Project Startup Capital	A$/oz	119
Exploration Holding Cost	A$/oz	32
All-in Cost	A$/oz	1,453	1,825 260	3,827 224	1,973 275
Depreciation & Amortisation	A$/oz	300

QUARTERLY REPORT 4 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

HIGGINSVILLE GOLD OPERATIONS (HGO) (MLX 100%)

The HGO remained in a transition period where the tail end of the Trident mine’s Artemis and Helios lodes is being mined. This area has lower overall grade, is approximately 1100m deep and is enduring spasmodic seismic events which make its extraction rates unpredictable. The ore system continues at depth with grades improving approximately 100m further down plunge into the Pluto lodes. The establishment of the decline access to this area requires significant capital investment including a major upgrade to the ventilation network and inequitable royalty imposts as the gold price increases. Consequently, a decision has been made to defer this development in favour of open pit ores from the Mt Henry gold mine, approximately 75km south of the plant. The Trident Mine will move to a care and maintenance mode.

Open pit mining from the Lake Cowan region continued and a cut-back to the Fairplay Pit just south of the plant commenced during the quarter. Open pit mining at Mt Henry is scheduled to start by mid-year. Infill drilling during the quarter significantly upgraded and confirmed the continuity of the near surface resource with the first stage of the open pit. This will have a low strip ratio with a grade above 2.3 g/t expected.

Quarterly gold production dropped to 18,783 ounces at a cash operating costs of A$1,165 per ounce and an AISC of A$1,363 per ounce. Financial year-to-date gold production now totals 65,892 ounces at a cash cost of A$1,100 per ounce and an AISC of A$1,303 per ounce.

HGO EXPLORATION

At HGO drilling continues to be focused on the Trident Underground Mine, with work this quarter being a combination of conceptual targeting and definition of future stoping panels. 3.3m at 24.32g/t Au from 153m in TUG2779 within the producing Artemis orebody, and 6.8m at 4.47g/t Au from 203m in TUG2810 testing the Pluto target have provided encouragement that Trident will continue to produce a significant volume of high margin ounces over its remaining Life of Mine. Importantly, significant advances have been made in preparing the recent Mount Henry acquisition for mining in the coming financial year.

Infill drilling to validate the recent Metals X resource model is ongoing, with the results returned to date validating our view that selective mining of a higher-grade portion of the Mount Henry resource is possible. Results such as 16m at 6.6g/t Au from 12m in MHGC0127, 22m at 4.35g/t Au from 7m in MHGC0141 and 22m at 5.28g/t Au from 10m in MHGC0230 have reinforced Metals X’s enthusiasm for the project, and positively reinforced the vision of Mount Henry as a long-term source of open pit ore feed for the Higginsville operation.

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS (SKO) (MLX 100%)

A relatively steady performance from SKO during the quarter with directly attributable (excluding Cannon 3,505 oz) ore processed totaling 238,410 tonnes at 1.87 g/t Au and a 90.37% recovery to yield 13,006 ounces.

Underground production from HBJ was steady and focused on the lower grade remnant stoping positions. Overall productivity was hampered by delays in establishing the primary ventilation circuit which was completed subsequent to the end of the quarter. The refurbishment of the old decline advanced to be in a position to access the first virgin lodes under historic mining late in the ensuing quarter which should see an overall increase in mine head grade.

HBJ ore was supplemented by open pit mining at the wholly owned Georges Reward Pit at Bulong and low-grade stocks. Open pit production was 54,078 tonnes at 2.77g/t Au and some 100,102 existing tonnes of low grade stocks were drawn.

Quarterly gold production increased to 13,006 ounces at a cash operating costs of A$1,020 per ounce (excluding Cannon) and an AISC of A$1,145 per ounce. Financial year-to-date gold production now totals 34,643 ounces at a cash cost of A$1,212 per ounce and an AISC of A$1,357 per ounce.

QUARTERLY REPORT 5 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

SKO EXPLORATION

At South Kalgoorlie, drilling has concentrated on firming-up mining panels in the HBJ mine as ongoing underground development opens up access to multiple mining fronts within the orebody. Better results at HBJ this quarter have included 5.26m at 12.30g/t Au from 66.1m in HBJUG0083, 3m at 3.23g/t Au from 69m in HBJUG0106 and 4.98m at 9.29g/t Au from 72m in HBJUG0150. Aside from the encouragement provided by the raw assay results, the geology revealed by the core in combination with exposures provided by underground development are adding significantly to the geological understanding of the mineralised system at HBJ. This will translate to better mining and exploration targeting outcomes moving forward.

CANON GOLD MINE (MLX 50% PROFIT SHARE)

Metals X has a financing and profit sharing agreement with Southern Gold Limited (SAU) over the Cannon Mine at Bulong in Western Australia. Pursuant to this agreement, Metals X will manage all technical aspects of the mining operation as well as fund all costs involved with the operation of the mine.

All ore from the mine is batched processed through the SKO Mill and all revenue first goes to repay costs. On the completion of mining surplus funds will be split on 50:50 basis (the profit share). In addition Metals X has made loan funds available to SAU of up to $2.5 million to fund its other working capital requirements. The loan funds earn interest at 8% per annum and are secured by a mortgage over the Cannon Mining Tenement. To date SAU has drawn on $1 million of these loan funds.

Mining has been underway at Cannon since September 2015. The current mine plan will see mining and processing continue until February 2017, after which assessment of underground mining opportunities will take place. Pit to date statistics are:

		March 2016 Qtr	Pit To Date	Estimated Remaining
Physicals	Units		1,947,926 1,881,638 66,288 142,258 2.54 130,123 2.60 92.0 9,979	2,007,490 1,878,717 128,773 336,862 4.29 348,997 4.20 85.1 40,091
Total Volume Moved	m³	784,121
Waste Volume	m³	779,742
Ore Volume	m³	4,379
Ore Tonnes Mined	t	11,796
Ore Grade	g/t	1.83
Ore Processed	t	43,790
Head Grade	g/t	2.68
Recovery	%	92.85
Gold Production	oz	3,505
Expenditure			$11.45 $4.19 $0.40 $16.04 $1607/oz	$22.42 $10.28 $1.90 $34.60 $865/oz
All Mining/Cartage/Admin	$M	$3.46
Processing	$M	$1.29
Royalty	$M	$0.14
Total	$M	$4.89
All in Cost (AIC)	$/oz	$1396/oz

One parcel of ore was toll processed during the quarter which totaled 43,790 tonnes at 2.68 g/t Au and a 92.85% recovery yielding 3,505 ounces.

All mining physicals and costs are tracking according to expectations.

QUARTERLY REPORT 6 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

CENTRAL MURCHISON GOLD PROJECT (CMGP) (MLX 100%)

The CMGP had its first full quarter of production since commissioning in late October 2015. Output was a modest increase over the previous quarter at 12,296 ounces produced from the processing of 371,327 tonnes at a head grade of 1.12 grams per tonne and an overall recovery of 92.14%.

The overall grade reflects a combination of the decision to process all low grade ore produced on a continuous basis through the plant as opposed to only the high grade open pit ores. Further, the grade also reflects some difficult reconciliations against reserve in the first two open pits mined (Batavia & Whangamata).

At Batavia the mine reconciliation against reserves so far has been 130% of tonnes, 72% of grade and 94% of metal, resulting in a higher unit cost per ounce. An additional 28,615 tonnes of low grade (0.92 g/t) was mined and has also been processed on a marginal cost basis.

At the larger Whangamata open pit the issue of segregation of low grade and high grade ore blocks from within the oxidised shear zone has been very difficult and as a consequence a decision was made to aggregate the two categories. On the aggregated basis the reconciliation has been 176% of the tonnes (407,000t) , 62% of the grade (0.84g/t) and 109% of the meta (11,709oz), again resulting in a higher unit cost of production. The impact of this to the start-up months is exacerbated as Whangamata has been 2/3rds of the ore processed so far. Whilst disappointed reconciliation, the impact of this issue is now behind us with these pits coming to an end in the near future.

The ensuing periods will have ore sourced from the Jack Ryan (at Reedy’s) and the Bluebird open pits which are not having the same issues. Most of the pre-strip at Jack Ryan was excavated during the quarter. Access to the Bluebird Pit was re-established and mining recommenced there during the quarter.

At the Paddy's Flat underground mine, timing delays with the establishment of the primary vent circuit and emergency egress had delayed the onset of stoping and also the access to the Prohibition lodes which were the planned early feed sources. Whilst this matter is resolved now, the capital development was continued at a proportionally higher rate in other areas. Ore driving on the Vivian Consols lodes on the first level at Paddy's Flat delivered good exposure and ore. So far reconciliations on this very small section of the overall orebody has been encouraging with mined to ore reserve reconciliations delivering 106% of tonnes, 89% of the grade and 94% of the metal. Processing subsequent to the end of the quarter suggest milled grades are overcalling mined estimates due to the variability and nugget effect of these ores. Encouragingly, productivity from Paddy’s Flat is now building and the Prohibition lodes have now been intersected with encouraging initial signs.

Dewatering at the Big Bell Underground Mine continued with re-access to the old portal expected late in the September 2016 quarter. A revised development plan using the higher cut-off resource estimate announced last quarter is underway. A development plan to commence underground mining at the Comet Mine near Cue was also commenced and submissions for statutory approvals have been lodged.

Quarterly gold production from the start up phase was 12,296 ounces at a cash operating cost of A$1,506 per ounce taking project to date output to 21,230 ounces at a cash operating cost of A$1,343 per ounce and an AISC of A$1,464 per ounce.

CMGP EXPLORATION

At CMGP, significant time and resources were allocated to the first ever underground drilling campaign at the new Paddy’s Flat Underground Mine. This drilling work was conducted to provide information ahead of the development front, and improve definition of ore panels ahead of the commencement of first stoping. Initial results have highlighted the significant endowment of this ore system with 2.6m at 37.11g/t Au from 96m in 16VIDD020, 13m at 13.7g/t Au from 6m in 16VIDD048 and 3m at 297.56g/t Au from 52m in 16VIDD057 being amongst the standout results. Metals X is undertaking the first modern underground ore production at Paddys Flat, where prior to 1985 over 830koz of gold was produced from handheld underground mining at an average grade of 16.8g/t.

QUARTERLY REPORT 7 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT (FGP) (MLX 100%)

During the quarter, Metals X continued to progress the Fortnum Gold Project (FGP) toward production. The FGP is a development ready project and located within historic Horseshoe, Peak Hill and Labouchere gold mining centres that were in production until 2006. The operation is leveraged to take advantages of the historical production base (+1.0Moz), synergies with Metals X’s nearby Central Murchison Gold Project and by utilising the existing 1.0Mtpa processing plant and operating infrastructure base which needs refurbishment.

The FGP mining area has recent past production of 11.5 million tonnes at 2.8g/t producing just over 1 million ounces.

The Fortnum Gold Mine has further progressed in the March Quarter towards a re-start implementation plan. The development strategy being worked upon is a simple 4 phase strategy

Phase 1 – Refurbish the plant, re-align permits and approvals, commission and operate on existing low grade ore stockpiles (expected to be able to provide an initial 12 months of feed on their own).

Phase 2 – Commence open pit mining from planned cutbacks to the existing open pits and extensions thereof. Start the mining of these when the plant is operational and slowly replace the lower grade stocks with these higher grade open pit ores.

Phase 3 – Dewater and recommission the Starlight Underground mine and replace/supplement the other ores with these higher grade ores increasing overall production.

Phase 4 – Explore and develop the numerous targets and opportunities to create sustainable production from the existing 2 million ounce resource base and additions to it.

Progress on Phase 1

A review, replacement and application for all permits, licensing and approvals for the project to proceed. The was effectively completed during the quarter with the following key components completed:

a. The clearing permits amended and transferred.
b. The mining proposals amended and transferred.
c. A revised/new Project Management Plan (PMP) approved.
d. Groundwater Licences transferred.
e. Submissions for Dangerous Goods licences lodged.
f. Tailings Dam 2 – works approval amended.
g. Quotes for Power Supply underway.
h. Scope of Works for Plant Refurbishment completed and tenders being assessed.
i. Workers Village partially refurbished.
j. Mine dewatering strategy and quotes underway.
k. Detailed Geotechnical and Hydrological studies nearing completion.

The LOW-CAPEX re-start plan was confirmed to be achievable with current estimates of $10-$15m being backed with firm quotations.

The strategy to commence ore processing on low grade stocks (only) was validated with drill testing of existing low grade stocks. So far 810,000 tonnes of low grade stock averaging 0.81 g/t has been confirmed with drilling and have been slotted into a plan. A further 500,000t (approx.) of existing stockpiles from past mining are under evaluation and will be check drilled or sampled before being slotted into the development plan. The following table summarises the results and progress:

QUARTERLY REPORT 8 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

==> picture [525 x 299] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

LG Stocks Confirmed Cut-off (g/t) Tonnes Grade Oz
ROM 0.6 51,000 1.30 2,132
Skyway 0.6 57,000 0.75 1,466
Eldorardo 0.6 107,000 0.71 2,408
Toms 0.6 250,000 0.62 4,823
Yarlarweelor LG 0.6 162,000 0.64 3,125
Horseshoe-Cassidy 0.8 178,000 1.20 6,867
Sub-total 810,000 0.81 20,858
LG Stocks to be Confirmed Cut-off (g/t) Tonnes Grade Oz
Peak Hill 0.8 100,000 0.90 2,894
Harmony 0.8 190,000 0.90 5,498
Labouchere 0.6 75,000 0.90 2,170
Nathans/Wilthorpe 0.6 108,000 1.00 3,472
Sub-total 473,000 0.92 14,034
Total LG Stocks Total 1, 283,000 0.84 34,892
----- End of picture text -----

Phase 2 Progress

The ore reserves estimates for the three open pits closest to the process plant (direct haul) were revised during the quarter. In the case of the southerly extension to the Yarlarweelor Pit, this included a round of validation drilling top confirm the resource model. The results of this drilling is included in Appendix 1. This enabled the planned mining of the first 3 pits to be slotted into the development plan with the following outcomes:

==> picture [525 x 107] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Open Pit Cut-off Category Tonnes Grade Oz Strip Ratio
Toms 0.9 Probable 162,000 1.92 10,016 3.3
Yarlarweelor 0.9 Probable 2,123,000 1.90 129,800 11.5
Callies 0.9 Probable 211,000 2.03 13,729 9.3
Total 2,496,000 1.91 153,544
----- End of picture text -----

Works are continuing on a number of additional open pit opportunities including Horseshoe, Cassidy, Jubilee, Harmony, 5-Ways, Nathans and Labouchere.

Progress on Phase 3

The data for the previously mined Starlight underground has been collated and is under evaluation. The mine produced 612,000 tonnes at 5.8 g/t (113,000 ounces) from its first 4 levels when it was abruptly stopped by Perilya in 2004. Initial reviews suggest excellent potential to recover remnants and re-start the operation on known extensions and newly outline parallel lodes.

Metals X expects to be in a position to present a complete development plan in the ensuing quarter.

ROVER GOLD PROJECT (MLX 100%)

Due to the wet season in the Tennant Creek Region, no field activity was undertaken at Rover during the quarter. Works did commence on a revised resource model integrating the bonanza high grade gold and copper hits received during the last drill program which targeted the 600-900 m vertical depth area.

QUARTERLY REPORT 9 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

TIN DIVISION RENISON PROJECT (MLX 50%)

Tin production for the quarter was 1,676 tonnes, a 12% fall from the previous quarter but in-line with expectations from the mining schedule. The cash costs of tin sales was A$14,455 per tonne of tin metal and the AISC was A$19,311 per tonne of tin metal produced. The project remains cash positive with an unaudited cash inflow of A6.24M generated for the quarter (MLX 50% share $3.12M).

World tin prices had a modest gain (3%) for the quarter and currently sits in the A$22,000 – A$23,000 range. Whilst the price is improving and reported stocks are low, the price continues to remain soft and in-line with the general poor sentiment of commodities overall

In a focus to produce tin at the lowest possible cost, the Joint Venture (JV) made a decision not to re-new the underground mining contract at the end of its term (end of April 2016) and is moving to an owner-operator position. The company believes that the operations have reached a long-term steady-state production level and with the changing landscape of a hungry labour-pool in the Tasmanian mining sector the time is right for such transition. A predominantly new fleet of underground equipment has been acquired and the employment of an owner miner’s team is advanced. It is expected that additional cost saving will be achieved moving forward despite some one-off costs in the next quarter associated with contractor de-mobilisiation.

Tin Division output is summarised:

==> picture [457 x 447] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

March Quarter Year to Date
Physical Summary Units
UG Ore Mined t 171,143 513,160
UG Grade Mined g/t 0.013 0.014
Ore Processed t 173,729 524,985
Head Grade g/t 1.33% 1.36%
Recovery Sn% 72.29% 72.61%
Tin Produced t 1,676 5,209
Tin Sold t 1,914 5,032
Achieved Tin Price A$/t Sn 21,170 21,054
Cost Summary
Mining A$/t Sn 9,179 8,931
Processing A$/t Sn 4,180 3,931
Admin A$/t Sn 896 839
Stockpile Adj A$/t Sn 201 335
C1 Cash Cost (produced t) A$/t Sn 14,455 14,035
Royalties A$/t Sn 547 571
Marketing/Cost of sales A$/t Sn 1,882 1,949
Sustaining Capital A$/t Sn 2,409 2,441
Reclamation & other adj. A$/t Sn 14 33
Corporate Costs A$/t Sn 3 11
All-in Sustaining Costs A$/t Sn 19,311 19,041
Project Startup Capital A$/t Sn - -
Exploration Holding Cost A$/t Sn - -
All-in Cost A$/t Sn 19,311 19,041
Depreciation & Amortisation A$/t Sn 2,357 2,355
----- End of picture text -----

QUARTERLY REPORT 10 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

RENISON EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

At Renison, work around the producing Area 4 and Lower Federal Zones continues to highlight exciting near-term production opportunities, with outstanding true width results such as 13.5m at 5.41% Sn from 90.7m (U5626) in Area 4 and 4.2m at 18.22% Sn from 4.7m (U5611) in Lower Federal returned this quarter. In addition a hole drilled into Lower Federal appears to have clipped the boundary of a dolomite replacement horizon for a significant portion of its length (making the judgement of true width difficult). This hole has returned an interval averaging above 1% Sn for a length of over 60m, which illustrates the scale of the future opportunity in this massive mineralised system (62.9m at 1.02% Sn from 243.6m in U5492). Renison remains open at depth, along strike and up-plunge.

RENTAILS PROJECT (MLX 50%)

The operating JV completed review of the Rentails tin fuming technologies during the quarter. The planned Ausmelt technology for tin fuming was compared against the proprietary Box-fumer technology of Yunnan Tin Group. The conclusions were that any saving in capital and/or operating costs were offset by the copper credit from tapping a copper matte from the Ausmelt top- lance furnace.

The JV partners agreed to review and update the feasibility study for Rentail’s and refresh its capital cost and construction methodology as the Australian dollar tin price was approaching a level that made the development feasible and bankable.

QUARTERLY REPORT 11 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

NICKEL DIVISION WINGELLINA PROJECT (MLX 100%)

As advised in the December quarterly report the final Public Environmental Review (PER) document was completed and approved by the EPA for release to the public for an 8 week review period on 14 September 2015 and ended on 9 November 2015. There was a total of 6 submissions received by the department of which none of the submission raised any specific issues that required a response from Metals X. The Board of the EPA has now considered the PER and the Office of the Department of the EPA is now currently finalizing its recommendations for final approval. This is a significant milestone for the Wingellina Nickel-Cobalt project as it completes a further significant step towards the development of the project.

Interaction with the State and Federal Governments in relation to infrastructure requirements within Central Australia continued during the quarter. An application has been submitted to the NT Government to obtain “Significant Project Status” for the road and gas infrastructure, which will result in further cooperation by the territory. Strong support from the other states and Commonwealth is ongoing.

During the quarter a review of the resource model was completed at varying cut-off grades as part of determining the capability of a smaller but higher grade resource to be mined and processed using new pyro-metallurgical processes for nickel recovery.

The revised model used geostatistical analysis specific to mining on a selective basis. Objectively, using a 1.30% cut-off grade, the higher grade resource component is 25 million tonnes at 1.45% Ni, 0.1% Co and 53.5% Fe2O3. Initial mining studies suggest that this higher grade resource can be mined with an estimated 1.5 : 1 (waste:ore) stripping ratio. Comparisons of both resource models are made below:

==> picture [275 x 197] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Cut-Off Tonnes (2008) Ni (2008) Tonnes (2016) Ni (2016) Variance
0.5 183,438,428 0.977 182,560,403 0.92 -0.5%
0.6 174,017,516 1 172,589,722 0.94 -0.8%
0.7 154,005,117 1.045 141,102,473 1.01 -8.4%
0.8 132,803,853 1.092 95,075,111 1.14 -28.4%
0.9 103,814,638 1.16 67,410,122 1.26 -35.1%
1 79,466,830 1.225 60,391,690 1.3 -24.0%
1.1 55,320,911 1.303 56,304,727 1.31 1.8%
1.2 35,632,223 1.392 43,330,568 1.36 21.6%
1.3 20,199,888 1.503 24,803,631 1.45 22.8%
1.4 11,611,152 1.616 12,578,261 1.56 8.3%
1.5 7,270,272 1.717 6,445,265 1.67 -11.3%
1.6 4,352,112 1.835 3,425,558 1.79 -21.3%
1.7 2,649,456 1.96 1,942,585 1.91 -26.7%
1.8 1,649,808 2.091 1,156,401 2.02 -29.9%
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [361 x 209] intentionally omitted <==

QUARTERLY REPORT 12 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

For completeness, and because of the importance of co-mineralisation and hence co-product production, estimates of associated Cobalt and Iron oxides were completed and compared at a 1.2% Ni cut-off grade with the following outcomes and categorisation:

==> picture [472 x 285] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

2008 2016
Tonnes Grade Metal Tonnes Grade Metal
Measured 14,989,824 1.40 209,408 Measured 11,329,092 1.37 155,209
Indicated 17,436,240 1.39 242,538 Indicated 29,327,045 1.36 398,848
Inferred 3,206,160 1.37 44,053 Inferred 2,674,431 1.32 35,302
Total 35,632,224 1.39 495,999 Total 43,330,568 1.36 589,359
Measured 14,989,824 0.10 15,440 Measured 11,329,092 0.099 11,216
Indicated 17,436,240 0.10 16,913 Indicated 29,327,045 0.106 31,087
Inferred 3,206,160 0.09 2,757 Inferred 2,674,431 0.088 2,353
Total 35,632,224 0.10 35,110 Total 43,330,568 0.10 44,656
Measured 14,989,824 52.48 7,867,109 Measured 11,329,092 53.31 6,039,539
Indicated 17,436,240 51.24 8,934,155 Indicated 29,327,045 54.65 16,027,230
Inferred 3,206,160 47.58 1,525,363 Inferred 2,674,431 49.45 1,322,506
Total 35,632,224 51.43 18,326,627 Total 43,330,568 53.98 23,389,275
Ni
Co
Fe032
----- End of picture text -----

In addition a significant amount of scandium (40-60ppm) exists within the higher grade component which is recoverable as a co-product. It is not reported in the tables as the level of sampling relates to bulk composites only.

QUARTERLY REPORT 13 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

CORPORATE

Metals X closed the quarter with cash, working capital and investments of $60.38 million.

The following waterfall chart shows cash movements during the quarter:

==> picture [362 x 240] intentionally omitted <==

GOLD HEDGING

Metals X replenished its gold pre-pay facility during the quarter adding an additional 15,000 oz at A$1,550 per ounce ($23.25m) with Citibank.

Metals X continued with the strategy of always selling at the highest possible gold price including the pre-delivery into its flat forward hedges if required.

Metals X has the following gold hedges across the group as at the end of the March quarter which provide sound revenue protection aligned with the gold division’s capital investment strategy.

==> picture [515 x 137] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Type Volume & Price Term
Flat Forward 6,250 per month @ A$1,637.7/oz 29 months (May 2016 to Aug 2018)
Spot Contract 6,250 ounces @ A$1,685.2/oz May 2016
Gold Prepay 1,250 per month @ A$1,490.6/oz 17 months (May 2016 to Sep 2017)
Total Ounces Covered 208,750
Average Covered Price A$1,624.16/oz
----- End of picture text -----

DIESEL HEDGING

Metals X has significant exposure to the diesel price for its electricity generation. Metals X has moved to protect itself from unexpected upward movement in the diesel price with some hedging via a zero cost collar protection.

At the end of the quarter the diesel hedging in place cover 10,000 barrels of (1 barrel = 159 litres) 10ppm Diesel per month from April 2016 to September 16 with call strikes at AUD$95 and put strikes at AUD$75. The forward curve is currently circa AUD$70 and hedge book has a mark to market of circa -$500k.

QUARTERLY REPORT 14 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

OFF MARKET TAKEOVER - ADITYA BIRLA MINERALS LIMITED

Metals X made an off-market takover for Aditya Birla Minerals Limited (ASX:ABY) in late October 2015.

So far Metals X has received acceptance of 29.77% to its now unconditional scrip offer of 1 MLX share for 4.75 ABY shares. Subsequent to the end of the quarter, Metals X concluded discussion with the Board of ABY and its major shareholder, Hindalco Industries Limited ( Hindalco ) and has agreed to increase its consideration to one (1) MLX share for every four and one-half (4.5) ABY shares plus an additional 8 cents per ABY share in cash, subject to Hindalco acceptance. The ABY board has recommended acceptance of the offer. Hindalco have conditionally advised of their intent to accept the offer pending Reserve Bank of India ( RBI ) approval and no superior offer materialising before 2 May 2016 (5 days from agreement). Metals X will pay the increased consideration to all acceptees when Hindalco's acceptance is received. The offer has been extended until 29 July 2016 to enable adequate time for RBI approval.

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENTS

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources compiled by Metals X technical employees under the supervision of Mr. Jake Russell B.Sc. (Hons), who is a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Russell is a full-time employee of the company, and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the styles of mineralisation and types of deposit under consideration and to the activities which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Russell consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Mr Russell is eligible to participate in short and long term incentive plans and holds performance rights in the Company as has been previously disclosed.

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Targets, Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Mr Peter Cook BSc (App. Geol.), MSc (Min. Econ.) MAusIMM (11072) who has sufficient experience that is relevant to the styles of mineralisation, the types of deposits under consideration and the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Cook is the CEO and an Executive Director and a full time employee of Metals X Limited and consents to the inclusion in the reports of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Mr Cook is a shareholder of Metals X and is entitled to participate in Metals X’s short term and long term incentive plans details of which are included in Metals X’s Remuneration Report in the Annual Report.

QUARTERLY REPORT 15 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER HIGGINSVILLE GOLD OPERATIONS

==> picture [526 x 382] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Collar Intercept
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E From (m) Dip Azi
RL (True Width)
Ares TUG2623B 379,999 6,489,971 -675 1.7m at 3.68g/t Au 84 60 232
TUG2755 380,050 6,489,921 -719 1.9m at 1.33g/t Au 96 26 282
Collar Intercept
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E From (m) Dip Azi
RL (True Width)
Artemis TUG2779 379,948 6,489,939 384 3.3m at 24.32g/t Au 153 -30 318
Helios Sh TUG2657 379,945 6,490,130 336 21.2m at 2.65g/t Au 55 -30 237
TUG2659 379,946 6,490,132 336 29.6m at 0.23g/t Au 75 -29 298
Pluto TUG2810 379,946 6,490,132 336 6.8m at 4.47g/t Au 203 -69 262
Pluto FW TUG2810 379,946 6,490,132 336 5.8m at 1.48g/t Au 65 -69 262
Pluto ED’s TUG2687 379,947 6,490,135 336 5.5m at 5.08g/t Au 29 -34 343
Collar Intercept
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E From (m) Dip Azi
RL (Int Width)
Cocytus HIGR083 382,281 6,480,724 320 10m at 0.37g/t Au 270 -60 270
HIGR085 382,237 6,480,785 320 8m at 1.15g/t Au 270 -60 270
Cocytus S HIGR081 382,218 6,480,438 320 5m at 0.8g/t Au 270 -60 270
Igloo IGLR002 400,650 4,689,160 320 2m at 1.09ppm Au 090 -60 090
2m at 1.19ppmAu
----- End of picture text -----

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT

==> picture [525 x 333] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept
Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL From (m) Dip Azi
(Downhole Width)
MHGC0007 385,863 6,417,002 275 7m at 5.02g/t Au 16 -60 92
15m at 3.88g/t Au 27
MHGC0055 385,907 6,417,664 302 13m at 3.9g/t Au 1 -60 92
MHGC0081 385,878 6,416,946 272 18m at 1.76g/t Au 20 -60 92
MHGC0082 385,885 6,416,946 273 15m at 2.75g/t Au 18 -60 92
MHGC0088 385,874 6,416,952 272 19m at 2.44g/t Au 21 -60 92
MHGC0089 385,880 6,416,952 273 20m at 2.23g/t Au 17 -60 92
MHGC0095 385,883 6,416,957 274 30m at 3.13g/t Au 12 -60 92
MHGC0100 385,878 6,416,964 274 15m at 2.42g/t Au 15 -60 92
MHGC0101 385,885 6,416,964 275 13m at 5.76g/t Au 12 -60 92
MHGC0102 385,891 6,416,964 275 11m at 6.3g/t Au 10 -60 92
MHGC0106 385,874 6,416,971 274 10m at 3.15g/t Au 22 -60 92
MHGC0107 385,881 6,416,971 275 10m at 4.11g/t Au 17 -60 92
MHGC0108 385,886 6,416,971 275 15m at 3.31g/t Au 9 -60 92
MHGC0114 385,886 6,416,977 276 10m at 3.46g/t Au 11 -60 92
----- End of picture text -----

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

==> picture [525 x 710] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept
Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL From (m) Dip Azi
(Downhole Width)
MHGC0118 385,867 6,416,984 275 15m at 2.7g/t Au 28 -60 92
MHGC0120 385,880 6,416,983 276 12m at 3.11g/t Au 15 -60 92
MHGC0121 385,886 6,416,983 277 15m at 3.86g/t Au 7 -60 92
MHGC0127 385,879 6,416,989 276 16m at 6.6g/t Au 12 -60 92
MHGC0128 385,885 6,416,989 277 22m at 2.88g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0129 385,891 6,416,989 278 18m at 2.05g/t Au 0 -60 92
8m at 4.26g/t Au 28
MHGC0133 385,873 6,416,996 276 18m at 2.37g/t Au 12 -60 92
MHGC0134 385,880 6,416,996 277 20m at 4.27g/t Au 5 -60 92
MHGC0135 385,886 6,416,996 278 22m at 2.33g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0136 385,893 6,416,996 279 18m at 2.04g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0139 385,868 6,416,971 274 18m at 2.89g/t Au 23 -60 92
MHGC0141 385,875 6,417,002 277 22m at 4.35g/t Au 7 -60 92
MHGC0142 385,882 6,417,002 278 20m at 2.89g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0143 385,889 6,417,002 279 19m at 1.71g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0147 385,869 6,417,015 276 8m at 5.28g/t Au 13 -60 92
MHGC0153 385,867 6,417,021 276 8m at 6.05g/t Au 13 -60 92
MHGC0154 385,873 6,417,021 277 11m at 2.87g/t Au 2 -60 92
MHGC0161 385,871 6,417,027 276 10m at 4.44g/t Au 4 -60 92
MHGC0167 385,870 6,417,034 276 21m at 1.55g/t Au 6 -60 92
MHGC0172 385,865 6,417,040 275 15m at 2.35g/t Au 24 -60 92
MHGC0187 385,858 6,417,052 275 21m at 1.86g/t Au 28 -60 92
MHGC0189 385,872 6,417,052 277 19m at 1.61g/t Au 11 -60 92
MHGC0194 385,868 6,417,058 277 13m at 3.25g/t Au 19 -60 92
MHGC0199 385,873 6,417,065 278 30m at 1.85g/t Au 8 -60 92
MHGC0205 385,866 6,417,071 277 12m at 2.68g/t Au 24 -60 92
MHGC0211 385,866 6,417,077 277 14m at 2.35g/t Au 23 -60 92
MHGC0222 385,867 6,417,090 278 17m at 2.19g/t Au 14 -60 92
MHGC0230 385,868 6,417,096 277 22m at 5.28g/t Au 10 -60 92
MHGC0231 385,873 6,417,096 278 22m at 3.1g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0272 385,864 6,417,177 282 10m at 3.74g/t Au 19 -60 92
MHGC0274 385,854 6,417,184 280 13m at 3.43g/t Au 30 -60 92
MHGC0279 385,865 6,417,196 283 14m at 2.16g/t Au 17 -60 92
MHGC0280 385,871 6,417,196 284 18m at 1.92g/t Au 8 -60 92
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 17

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

==> picture [525 x 710] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept
Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL From (m) Dip Azi
(Downhole Width)
MHGC0283 385,871 6,417,202 284 14m at 2.44g/t Au 10 -60 92
MHGC0284 385,878 6,417,202 285 20m at 2.79g/t Au 1 -60 92
MHGC0285 385,854 6,417,209 282 25m at 2.73g/t Au 26 -60 92
MHGC0286 385,866 6,417,208 284 20m at 1.7g/t Au 16 -60 92
MHGC0287 385,873 6,417,208 285 20m at 2.99g/t Au 8 -60 92
MHGC0288 385,879 6,417,208 286 23m at 2.74g/t Au 5 -60 92
MHGC0291 385,881 6,417,214 287 18m at 2.9g/t Au 2 -60 92
MHGC0293 385,874 6,417,215 286 17m at 3.17g/t Au 7 -60 92
MHGC0294 385,883 6,417,221 289 16m at 3.13g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0296 385,868 6,417,215 285 16m at 2.04g/t Au 14 -60 92
MHGC0297 385,877 6,417,221 288 17m at 2.45g/t Au 3 -60 92
MHGC0298 385,886 6,417,227 291 14m at 2.77g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0299 385,871 6,417,221 286 18m at 1.78g/t Au 7 -60 92
MHGC0300 385,880 6,417,227 290 18m at 2.61g/t Au 1 -60 92
MHGC0303 385,865 6,417,233 287 25m at 2.31g/t Au 14 -60 92
MHGC0304 385,876 6,417,239 290 19m at 2.37g/t Au 9 -60 92
MHGC0305 385,882 6,417,239 292 12m at 3.66g/t Au 2 -60 92
MHGC0307 385,869 6,417,240 288 14m at 3.62g/t Au 19 -60 92
MHGC0310 385,879 6,417,246 291 18m at 2.59g/t Au 6 -60 92
MHGC0314 385,867 6,417,246 289 17m at 2.78g/t Au 19 -60 92
MHGC0315 385,879 6,417,252 293 17m at 2.27g/t Au 7 -60 92
MHGC0316 385,873 6,417,252 291 19m at 2.96g/t Au 15 -60 92
MHGC0318 385,866 6,417,252 289 19m at 2.5g/t Au 19 -60 92
MHGC0319 385,881 6,417,258 294 15m at 2.55g/t Au 7 -60 92
MHGC0321 385,868 6,417,258 290 20m at 3.2g/t Au 19 -60 92
MHGC0322 385,875 6,417,258 293 17m at 2.81g/t Au 14 -60 92
MHGC0323 385,884 6,417,264 296 12m at 2.5g/t Au 1 -60 92
MHGC0325 385,871 6,417,271 294 19m at 2.39g/t Au 17 -60 92
MHGC0326 385,881 6,417,271 296 19m at 1.86g/t Au 5 -60 92
MHGC0327 385,885 6,417,271 297 10m at 3.97g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0329 385,883 6,417,277 298 21m at 1.54g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0330 385,878 6,417,277 297 18m at 1.83g/t Au 5 -60 92
MHGC0332 385,873 6,417,277 295 19m at 2.49g/t Au 12 -60 92
MHGC0333 385,882 6,417,283 298 15m at 2.1g/t Au 4 -60 92
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 18

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

==> picture [525 x 294] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept
Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL From (m) Dip Azi
(Downhole Width)
MHGC0336 385,882 6,417,289 299 21m at 1.45g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0337 385,877 6,417,289 298 25m at 1.51g/t Au 2 -60 92
MHGC0338 385,869 6,417,283 296 21m at 2.27g/t Au 14 -60 92
MHGC0339 385,868 6,417,277 294 19m at 2.48g/t Au 17 -60 92
MHGC0340 385,867 6,417,290 296 20m at 2.16g/t Au 17 -60 92
MHGC0341 385,872 6,417,290 297 22m at 1.93g/t Au 10 -60 92
MHGC0342 385,869 6,417,296 298 24m at 1.48g/t Au 13 -60 92
MHGC0344 385,880 6,417,296 299 16m at 1.97g/t Au 1 -60 92
MHGC0352 385,877 6,417,302 299 23m at 1.58g/t Au 5 -60 92
MHGC0355 385,883 6,417,308 300 20m at 1.87g/t Au 0 -60 92
MHGC0356 385,859 6,417,309 295 22m at 2.29g/t Au 22 -60 92
MHGC0358 385,878 6,417,308 299 20m at 1.97g/t Au 5 -60 92
MHGC0360 385,872 6,417,315 298 17m at 1.89g/t Au 11 -60 92
----- End of picture text -----

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS

==> picture [525 x 393] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept From
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL Dip Azi
(Downhole Width) (m)
HBJ HBJUG0083 366,742 6,566,097 14 6.56m at 1.18 ppm 37.2 -35 32
5.26m at 12.30 ppm 66.1 -35 32
HBJUG0098 366,546 6,566,435 116 32.97m at 1.53 ppm 16.9 -11 59
8.11m at 5.44 ppm 72.7
HBJUG0100 366,547 6,566,434 115 40.9m at 1.30 ppm 11.1
27.77m at 2.94 ppm 60.0
HBJUG0101 366,546 6,566,435 116 79.51m at 1.21 ppm 10.6
HBJUG0102 366,547 6,566,433 115 3.26m at 2.68 ppm 6.0 -15 89
22.81m at 1.12 ppm 11.5
26.57m at 0.77 ppm 61.5
7.22m at 5.08 ppm 90.1
HBJUG0103 366,546 6,566,435 115 45.67m at 1.21 ppm 10.3 -28 66
21.05m at 1.28 ppm 58.7
9.8m at 2.60 ppm 92.4
HBJUG0104 366,547 6,566,434 115 84.62m at 1.38 ppm 10.5
HBJUG0105 366,547 6,566,434 115 29.57m at 1.16 ppm 11.3
11.68m at 0.80 ppm 68.8
13.27m at 0.55 ppm 88.0
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 19

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS (CONTINUED)

==> picture [525 x 710] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept From
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL Dip Azi
(Downhole Width) (m)
HBJ (Continued) HBJUG0106 366,547 6,566,434 115 4.28m at 4.18 ppm 23.3 -42 12
53m at 3.23 ppm 69.0
28.67m at 0.54 ppm 141.7
HBJUG0107 366,547 6,566,434 115 9.6m at 1.03 ppm 29.4
69.46m at 1.38 ppm 45.5
23.3m at 1.13 ppm 124.0
HBJUG0144 366,613 6,566,189 61 3.6m at 6.55 ppm 83.7 -20 18
10.5m at 1.53 ppm 118.0
HBJUG0145 366,613 6,566,189 60 2.98m at 1.67 ppm 87.4
10.34m at 1.55 ppm 117.4
HBJUG0146 366,615 6,566,189 60 9.77m at 0.90 ppm 125.2
13.5m at 1.20 ppm 148.0
HBJUG0147 366,615 6,566,188 60 8.32m at 1.15 ppm 85.8
7.78m at 4.21 ppm 128.9
HBJUG0148 366,616 6,566,188 60 2.46m at 3.90 ppm 100.6
10.71m at 1.42 ppm 119.9
HBJUG0150 366,743 6,566,097 17 6m at 2.14 ppm 19.0 32 45
5.84m at 1.59 ppm 54.6
4.98m at 9.29 ppm 72.0
6.49m at 1.04 ppm 79.0
HBJUG0152 366,743 6,566,097 15 8m at 0.67 ppm 19.1 -9 65
HBJUG0152 366,743 6,566,097 15 4m at 2.76 ppm 42.0 -9 65
3.22m at 8.48 ppm 52.6
4.27m at 1.42 ppm 59.6
HBJUG0153 366,745 6,566,096 15 7.37m at 0.86 ppm 25.0 -10 102
7.88m at 2.69 ppm 58.0
HBJUG0154 366,745 6,566,095 15 6.03m at 3.22 ppm 32.6
4.8m at 5.37 ppm 67.5
HBJUG0155 366,743 6,566,097 14 4.82m at 4.30 ppm 63.2
HBJUG0156 366,743 6,566,096 14 6.52m at 5.91 ppm 64.8
HBJUG0157 366,745 6,566,096 14 14.74m at 3.91 ppm 72.0
HBJUG0158 366,745 6,566,095 14 7.44m at 3.52 ppm 72.0
4.78m at 6.97 ppm 81.4
HBJUG0162 366,735 6,566,141 19 5.17m at 7.14 ppm 39.4
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 20

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS (CONTINUED)

==> picture [525 x 393] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept From
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL Dip Azi
(Downhole Width) (m)
HBJ (Continued) HBJUG0163 366,736 6,566,141 19 4.52m at 3.50 ppm 26.8 -20 49
HBJUG0184 366,568 6,566,400 47 45.27m at 1.03 ppm 12.9 -2 128
17m at 0.92 ppm 61.2
7.83m at 1.64 ppm 80.2
HBJUG0185 366,568 6,566,400 47 20.59m at 1.35 ppm 10.9 -2 115
15m at 1.19 ppm 38.0
24.89m at 0.89 ppm 55.6
HBJUG0186 366,568 6,566,400 47 28.7m at 1.46 ppm 11.5 -15 121
15m at 1.11 ppm 62.0
HBJUG0187 366,568 6,566,400 47 24.4m at 2.04 ppm 14.6 -32 125
1.94m at 4.94 ppm 1.8
HBJUG0189 366,568 6,566,400 47 19m at 0.51 ppm 22.0
4.27m at 1.85 ppm 57.5
HBJUG0190 366,568 6,566,400 47 30.77m at 2.17 ppm 13.2 -45 123
12m at 1.69 ppm 57.0
HBJUG0192 366,568 6,566,400 47 37.13m at 1.80 ppm 13.8 -53 115
19.83m at 1.33 ppm 60.9
7.07m at 2.47 ppm 129.5
----- End of picture text -----

CENTRAL MURCHISON GOLD PROJECT

==> picture [525 x 293] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept From
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL Dip Azi
(Downhole Width) (m)
Vivian-Consols 15VIDD021 7,056,068 650,015 421 1.76m at 3.39 ppm 59 -15 306
15VIDD023 7,056,068 650,015 421 1m at 7 ppm 100 -65 306
16VIDD001 7,056,394 650,187 423 1m at 14.6 ppm 7 0 37
16VIDD004 7,056,394 650,186 424 1m at 6.6 ppm 5 0 48
5m at 2.27 ppm 18
1m at 5.3 ppm 33
0.8m at 22.1 ppm 69
16VIDD005 7,056,394 650,187 423 0.85m at 6.51 ppm 30 -8 48
16VIDD006 7,056,050 649,906 418 6.2m at 3.25 ppm 2 -30 143
2.9m at 9.67 ppm 13
16VIDD014 7,056,303 650,136 402 1.2m at 8.35 ppm 72 2 32
1m at 6.6 ppm 88
16VIDD016 7,056,364 650,156 422 2.6m at 5.2 ppm 26 -46 59
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 21

CENTRAL MURCHISON GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

==> picture [525 x 710] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept From
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL Dip Azi
(Downhole Width) (m)
Vivian-Consols 0.9m at 7.95 ppm 32
16VIDD017 7,056,364 650,156 425 1m at 7.99 ppm 13 30 31
16VIDD019 7,056,369 650,259 422 1m at 7.9 ppm 74 -8 281
0.3m at 56.02 ppm 75
0.4m at 68.03 ppm 78
16VIDD020 7,056,369 650,259 423 1m at 6.63 ppm 90 9 269
7,056,369 650,259 423 2.6m at 37.11 ppm 96
16VIDD029 7,056,370 650,260 423 4.5m at 6.23 ppm 66 15 321
16VIDD031 7,056,349 650,153 423 4.46m at 1.33 ppm 3 6 301
16VIDD035 7,056,228 650,106 423 6.5m at 3.05 ppm 19 20 323
5.5m at 3.45 ppm 27
5m at 1.44 ppm 35
16VIDD036 7,056,238 650,110 423 3m at 1.75 ppm 7 27 324
5.5m at 3.91 ppm 12
16VIDD037 7,056,254 650,118 423 2m at 2.71 ppm 10 29 310
4m at 1.41 ppm 19
16VIDD040 7,056,033 649,906 419 2.1m at 4.9 ppm 4 -1 208
6.1m at 9.89 ppm 8
3m at 7.34 ppm 24
16VIDD041 7,056,033 649,906 419 3.4m at 3.62 ppm 6 -1 228
6m at 1.99 ppm 21
16VIDD042 7,056,056 649,908 418 1m at 5.77 ppm 7 -55 112
16VIDD043 7,056,065 649,910 417 9.5m at 2.32 ppm 8 -52 139
5.05m at 1.44 ppm 20
16VIDD044 7,056,064 649,919 419 2.7m at 3.36 ppm 2 19 212
16VIDD045 7,056,064 649,919 419 2.5m at 5.07 ppm 2 19 208
4m at 9.74 ppm 23
10.57m at 5.03 ppm 30
5.7m at 2.6 ppm 58
4.8m at 3.91 ppm 69
0.2m at 25.9 ppm 75
16VIDD046 7,056,065 649,919 420 3m at 8.3 ppm 1 20 219
0.7m at 16.61 ppm 31
6m at 5.77 ppm 37
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 22

==> picture [526 x 595] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept From
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL Dip Azi
(Downhole Width) (m)
Vivian-Consols 1.65m at 14.04 ppm 49
0.6m at 13.16 ppm 53
16VIDD047 7,056,078 649,930 418 0.85m at 21.62 ppm 11 -16 230
11m at 0.79 ppm 14
1m at 11.79 ppm 34
16VIDD048 7,056,078 649,930 418 13m at 13.7 ppm 6 -21 228
16VIDD055 7,056,033 649,905 418 2m at 2.81 ppm 2 -36 228
16VIDD056 7,056,033 649,905 419 4.2m at 1.68 ppm 6 -21 208
2m at 9.99 ppm 21
16VIDD057 7,056,033 649,905 420 4.6m at 1.19 ppm 0 17 208
7m at 3.73 ppm 25
13m at 2.67 ppm 35
3m at 297.56 ppm 52
16VIDD058 7,056,291 650,099 401 7m at 1.09 ppm 46 7 153
16VIDD059 7,056,291 650,099 401 19.37m at 1.77 ppm 27 7 172
16VIDD060 7,056,293 650,094 402 15.48m at 3.57 ppm 37 3 181
16VIDD067 7,056,291 650,099 401 7m at 1.82 ppm 30 -1 163
8.3m at 4.03 ppm 45
16VIDD068 7,056,291 650,099 401 21m at 1.94 ppm 31 -5 181
16VIDD072 7,056,493 650,271 424 1m at 67 ppm 2 21 43
3.4m at 1.56 ppm 36
5m at 1.05 ppm 56
Mudlode 16VIDD063 7,056,342 650,239 425 4.35m at 13.73 ppm 0 68 299
16VIDD066 7,056,369 650,266 423 1m at 5.4 ppm 4 16 107
Collar Intercept
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E From (m) Dip Azi
RL (Downhole Width)
Jess 16JSRC001 7,044,734 642,595 473 20m at 2.89 ppm 3 -90 0
16JSRC002 7,044,753 642,629 473 7m at 0.73 ppm 11 -60 333
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 23

RENISON TIN PROJECT

Renison Tin Mine - Significant (> 2% Sn) Intercepts for December 2015 Quarter

==> picture [525 x 690] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL From (m) Dip Azi
(True Width)
Area 4 U5434 66,483.3 44,617.5 1,172.5 3.3m at 1.97% Sn and 0.22% Cu 78.3 -69 244
2.7m at 2.14% Sn and 0.15% Cu 164.3
U5587 66,373.8 44,634.3 1,109.1 1.8m at 1.69% Sn and 0.01% Cu 155.4 -63 194
4.5m at 4.26% Sn and 0.14% Cu 211.0
2.3m at 5.34% Sn and 0.11% Cu 347.0
U5624 66,688.3 44,553.3 1,201.5 8.2m at 4.78% Sn and 0.13% Cu 94.0 -5 89
U5625 66,717.7 44,609.3 1,128.3 0.4m at 9.12% Sn and 0.64% Cu 177.3 -27 76
U5626 66,703.3 44,524.1 1,187.7 0.8m at 7.75% Sn and 0.99% Cu 74.5 -18 74
13.5m at 5.41% Sn and 0.13% Cu 90.7
2.2m at 6.19% Sn and 0.35% Cu 161.5
U5627 66,758.1 44,604.9 1,164.5 1.1m at 6.64% Sn and 1.46% Cu 172.6 -15 65
U5628 66,795.6 44,578.3 1,189.4 0.6m at 2.5% Sn and 0.41% Cu 166.7 -7 47
U5659 66,407.3 44,612.2 1,203.9 0.3m at 5.15% Sn and 0.03% Cu 70.1 -37 225
U5659 66,396.2 44,600.9 1,190.9 0.3m at 6.23% Sn and 0.03% Cu 90.7 -37 225
U5660 66,394.7 44,595.3 1,162.5 1.4m at 6.76% Sn and 0.21% Cu 114.4 -48 227
U5661 66,348.3 44,587.1 1,160.9 0.4m at 2.37% Sn and 0.08% Cu 145.4 -35 213
6.9m at 1.89% Sn and 0.36% Cu 206.2
CFB U5651 66,284.0 44,483.1 1,505.6 0.7m at 6.78% Sn and 0.33% Cu 0.8 -10 290
U5652 66,265.1 44,487.2 1,504.5 5.2m at 1.51% Sn and 0.8% Cu 0.8 -11 290
4.7m at 0.91% Sn and 0.87% Cu 24.0
U5653 66,262.8 44,493.1 1,503.6 4m at 0.43% Sn and 1.11% Cu -11 111
U5654 66,249.3 44,449.7 1,507.9 3.6m at 2.04% Sn and 1.1% Cu 38.5 -5 290
U5655 66,224.7 44,496.3 1,504.3 5.5m at 2.22% Sn and 0.74% Cu 5.2 -4 89
U5658 66,178.8 44,490.4 1,505.1 11.2m at 1.3% Sn and 0.44% Cu 2.5 -19 104
Low Federal U5488 66,199.0 44,561.3 1,127.9 5m at 3.66% Sn and 0.22% Cu 111.0 -35 71
U5492 66,320.2 44,681.0 1,057.3 62.9m at 1.02% Sn and 0.05% Cu 243.6 -29 55
3.7m at 2.09% Sn and 0.07% Cu 243.6
12.6m at 1.31% Sn and 0.05% Cu 261.0
6.5m at 1.31% Sn and 0.05% Cu 261.0
7.4m at 2.79% Sn and 0.24% Cu 288.7
U5493 66,135.3 44,574.9 1,066.1 1.4m at 1.29% Sn and 0.07% Cu 158.7 -51 105
U5494 66,209.2 44,575.3 1,061.5 1.6m at 1.52% Sn and 0.03% Cu 166.0 -50 69
2.9m at 3.2% Sn and 0.14% Cu 185.0
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 24

==> picture [525 x 452] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Intercept
Lode Hole Collar N Collar E Collar RL From (m) Dip Azi
(True Width)
Low Federal U5592 66,223.1 44,551.5 1,200.5 3.1m at 2.92% Sn and 0.92% Cu -18 100
2.5m at 4.42% Sn and 0.15% Cu 20.7
U5595 66,204.0 44,554.3 1,202.0 5.7m at 1.89% Sn and 0.23% Cu -6 100
4.2m at 0.97% Sn and 0.35% Cu 12.0
U5596 66,178.1 44,565.1 1,196.5 2.7m at 1.29% Sn and 0.66% Cu 10.3 -19 99
U5599 66,126.8 44,574.0 1,195.4 3.5m at 0.75% Sn and 0.27% Cu 8.3 -19 101
U5601 66,088.7 44,565.2 1,200.0 3.7m at 1.7% Sn and 0.08% Cu 7 272
U5602 66,047.2 44,594.0 1,194.7 1.6m at 0.98% Sn and 0.06% Cu 16.6 -17 98
U5604 66,030.3 44,598.2 1,202.8 3.2m at 2.9% Sn and 0.09% Cu 17.7 6 95
U5608 65,972.6 44,597.5 1,203.6 1m at 4.88% Sn and 0.13% Cu 8.0 9 97
U5611 65,846.0 44,610.9 1,206.2 4.2m at 18.22% Sn and 0.16% Cu 4.7 -13 110
U5612 66,326.2 44,528.4 1,203.3 1.5m at 2.88% Sn and 0.13% Cu 1.4 -3 276
U5630 66,343.4 44,530.3 1,180.2 2.8m at 1.08% Sn and 0.09% Cu 3.0 -7 318
U5632 66,302.4 44,547.0 1,178.5 1.9m at 2.13% Sn and 0.1% Cu -7 100
U5635 66,228.6 44,551.1 1,178.4 2m at 3.05% Sn and 1.67% Cu -2 87
0.8m at 2.53% Sn and 0.13% Cu 29.2
U5637 66,189.1 44,563.6 1,177.8 0.3m at 11.63% Sn and 0.02% Cu 10.6 -2 98
4.3m at 1.05% Sn and 0.38% Cu 15.7
U5638 66,165.4 44,586.7 1,179.5 2.9m at 1.02% Sn and 0.99% Cu 27.3 -2 91
1.9m at 1.52% Sn and 0.27% Cu 37.9
U5641 66,057.4 44,609.6 1,177.5 1.1m at 3.63% Sn and 0.11% Cu 28.5 -1 87
----- End of picture text -----

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER 25

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION (RELATING TO EXPLORATION RESULTS) SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised HGO
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specifc specialised	HGO
Drilling techniques Drill sample recovery	industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fre assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fne/coarse material.	• Diamond Drilling The bulk of the data used in resource calculations at Trident has been gathered from diamond core. Four types of diamond core sample have been historically collected. The predominant sample method is half-core NQ2 diamond with half-core LTK60 diamond, Whole core LTK48 diamond and whole core BQ also used. This core is logged and sampled to geologically relevant intervals. The bulk of the data used in resource calculations at Chalice has been gathered from diamond core. The predominant drilling and sample type is half core NQ2 diamond. Occasionally whole core has been sampled to streamline the core handling process. Historically half and whole core LTK60 and half core HQ diamond have been used. This core is logged and sampled to geologically relevant intervals. • Face Sampling Each development face / round is chip sampled at both Trident and Chalice. One or two channels are taken per face perpendicular to the mineralisation. The sampling intervals are domained by geological constraints (e.g. rock type, veining and alteration / sulphidation etc.) with an efort made to ensure each 3kg sample is representative of the interval being extracted. Samples are taken in a range from 0.1 m up to 1.2 m in waste / mullock. All exposures within the orebody are sampled. • Sludge Drilling Sludge drilling at Chalice and Trident is performed with an underground production drill rig. It is an open hole drilling method using water as the fushing medium, with a 64 mm or 89 mm hole diameter. Samples are taken twice per drill steel (1.9 m steel, 0.8 m sample). Holes are drilled at sufcient angles to allow fushing of the hole with water following each interval to prevent contamination. • RC Drilling For Fairplay, Vine, Lake Cowan, Two Boys, Mousehollow, Pioneer and Eundynie the bulk of the data used in the resource estimate is sourced from RC drilling. Minor RC drilling is also utilised at Trident, Musket, Chalice and the Palaeochannels (Wills, Pluto, Mitchell 3 & 4). Drill cuttings are extracted from the RC return via cyclone. The underfow from each 1 m interval is transferred via bucket to a four tiered rife splitter, delivering approximately three kilograms of the recovered material into calico bags for analysis. The residual material is retained on the ground near the hole. Samples too wet to be split through the rife splitter are taken asgrabs and are recorded as such.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 26

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		• RAB / Air Core Drilling Drill cuttings are extracted from the RAB and Aircore return via cyclone. 4 m Composite samples are obtained by spear sampling from the individual 1 m drill return piles; the residue material is retained on the ground near the hole. In the Palaeochannels 1 m samples are rife split for analysis. There is no RAB or Aircore drilling used in the estimation of Trident, Chalice, Corona, Fairplay, Vine, Lake Cowan and Two Boys. SKO SKO is a long-term producing operation with a long history of drilling and sampling to support exploration and resource development. • Sampling Techniques Chips from the RC drilling face-sampling hammer are collected for assaying. Sample return lines are cleaned with compressed air each metre and the cyclone sample collector is cleaned following each rod. Samples are rife split through a three-tier splitter with a split ~3kg sample (generally at 1 m intervals) pulverised to produce a 30g charge analysed via fre assay. Diamond drill-core is geologically logged and then sampled according to geology (minimum sample length of 0.4 m to maximum sample length of 1.5 m) – where consistent geology is sampled, a 1 m length is used for sampling the core. The core is sawn half-core with one half sent of for analysis. Samples have been collected from numerous other styles of drilling at SKO, including but not limited to RAB, aircore, blast-hole, sludge drilling and face samples. • Drilling Techniques Historical data includes DD, RC, RAB and aircore holes drilled between 1984 and 2010. Not all the historical drilling programmes at SKO are documented and many historical holes are assigned a drill type of ‘unknown’. Over 4,000 km of drilling has been completed on the tenure. Drilling by the most recent previous owners (Alacer Gold Corporation) has predominantly been RC, with minor DD and aircore drilling. RC drilling is used predominantly for defning and testing for near-surface mineralisation and utilises a face sampling hammer with the sample being collected on the inside of the drill-tube. RC drillholes utilise downhole single or multi shot cameras. Drillhole collars were surveyed by onsite mine surveyors. Diamond drilling is used for either testing / targeting deeper mineralised systems or to defne the orientation of the host geology. Many of these holes had RC pre-collars generally to a depth of between 60 – 120 m, followed by a diamond tail. The majority of these holes have been drilled at NQ2 size with minor HQ sized core. All diamond holes were surveyed during drilling with downhole cameras, and then at end of hole using a Gyro Inclinometer at 5 or 10 m intervals. Drillhole collars were surveyed by onsite mine surveyors.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 27

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		• Sample Recovery Sample recovery is generally good, and there is no indication that sampling presents a material risk for the quality of the evaluation of any deposit at SKO. CMGP • Diamond Drilling A signifcant portion of the data used in resource calculations at the CMGP has been gathered from diamond core. Multiple sizes have been used historically. This core is geologically logged and subsequently halved for sampling. Grade control holes may be whole-cored to streamline the core handling process if required. • Face Sampling At each of the major past underground producers at the CMGP, each development face / round is horizontally chip sampled. The sampling intervals are domained by geological constraints (e.g. rock type, veining and alteration / sulphidation etc.). The majority of exposures within the orebody are sampled. • Sludge Drilling Sludge drilling at the CMGP was performed with an underground production drill rig. It is an open hole drilling method using water as the fushing medium, with a 64 mm (nominal) hole diameter. Sample intervals are ostensibly the length of the drill steel. Holes are drilled at sufcient angles to allow fushing of the hole with water following each interval to prevent contamination. Sludge drilling is not used to inform resource models. • RC Drilling RC drilling has been utilised at the CMGP. Drill cuttings are extracted from the RC return via cyclone. The underfow from each interval is transferred via bucket to a four tiered rife splitter, delivering approximately three kilograms of the recovered material into calico bags for analysis. The residual material is retained on the ground near the hole. Composite samples are obtained from the residue material for initial analysis, with the split samples remaining with the individual residual piles until required for re-split analysis or eventual disposal. • RAB / Aircore Drilling Combined scoops from bucket dumps from cyclone for composite. Split samples taken from individual bucket dumps via scoop. RAB holes are not included in the resource estimate. • Blast Hole Drilling Cuttings sampled via splitter tray per individual drill rod. Blast holes not included in the resource estimate. All geology input is logged and validated by the relevant area geologists, incorporated into this is assessment of sample recovery. No defned relationship exists between sample recovery and grade. Nor has sample bias due to preferential loss or gain of fne or coarse material been noted.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 28

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged	• Metals X surface drill-holes are all orientated and have been logged in detail for geology, veining, alteration, mineralisation and orientated structure. Metals X underground drill-holes are logged in detail for geology, veining, alteration, mineralisation and structure. Core has been logged in enough detail to allow for the relevant mineral resource estimation techniques to be employed. • Surface core is photographed both wet and dry and underground core is photographed wet. All photos are stored on the companies servers, with the photographs from each hole contained within separate folders. • Development faces are mapped geologically. • RC, RAB and Aircore chips are geologically logged. • Sludge drillingis logged for lithology, mineralisation and vein,
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether rifed, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for feld duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	HGO • NQ2 and LTK60 diameter core is sawn half core using a diamond-blade saw, with one half of the core consistently taken for analysis. LTK48 and BQ are whole core sampled. Sludge samples are dried then rife split. • The un-sampled half of diamond core is retained for check sampling if required. • For the onsite Intertek facility the entire dried sample is jaw crushed (JC2500 or Boyd Crusher) to a nominal 85% passing 2 mm with crushing equipment cleaned between samples. An analytical sub-sample of approximately 500-750 g is split out from the crushed sample using a rife splitter, with the coarse residue being retained for any verifcation analysis. Sample preparation techniques are appropriate for the type of analytical process. • Where Fire assay has been used the entire half core sample (3-3.5 kg) is crushed and pulverised (single stage mix and grind using LM5 mills) to a target of 85-90% passing 75μm in size. A 200g sub-sample is then separated out for analysis. • Core and underground face samples are taken to geologically relevant boundaries to ensure each sample is representative of a geological domain. Sludge samples are taken to nominal sample lengths. • The sample size is considered appropriate for the grain size of the material being sampled. • For RC, RAB and Aircore chips regular feld duplicates are collected and analysed for signifcant variance to primary results. • RAB and Aircore sub-samples are collected through spear sampling. SKO • NQ2 and HQ diameter core is sawn half core using a diamond-blade saw, with one half of the core consistently taken for analysis. Smaller sized core (LTK48 and BQ) are whole core sampled. The un-sampled half of diamond core is retained for check sampling if required. • SKO staf collect the sample in pre-numbered calico sample bags which are then submitted to the laboratoryfor analysis. Deliveryof the sample is bya SKO staf member.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 29

==> picture [772 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
• RC samples are collected at 1 m intervals with the samples being riffle split through a three-
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
		• RC samples are collected at 1 m intervals with the samples being rife split through a three-
		tier splitter. The samples are collected by the RC drill crews in pre-numbered calico sample bags which are then collected by SKO staf for submission. Delivery of the sample to the laboratory is by a SKO staf member. • Upon delivery to the laboratory, the sample numbers are checked by the SKO staf member against the sample submission sheet. Sample numbers are recorded and tracked by the laboratory using electronic coding. • Sample preparation techniques are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation being tested for – this technique is industry standard across the Eastern Goldfelds. CMGP • Blast holes -Sampled via splitter tray per individual drill rods. • RAB / AC chips - Combined scoops from bucket dumps from cyclone for composite. Split samples taken from individual bucket dumps via scoop. • RC - Three tier rife splitter (approximately 5kg sample). Samples generally dry. • Face Chips - Nominally chipped horizontally across the face from left to right, sub-set via geological features as appropriate. • Diamond Drilling - Half-core niche samples, sub-set via geological features as appropriate. Grade control holes may be whole-cored to streamline the core handling process if required. • Chips / core chips undergo total preparation. • Samples undergo fne pulverisation of the entire sample by an LM5 type mill to achieve a 75µ product prior to splitting. • QA/QC is currently ensured during the sub-sampling stages process via the use of the systems of an independent NATA / ISO accredited laboratory contractor. A signifcant portion of the historical informing data has been processed by in-house laboratories. • The sample size is considered appropriate for the grain size of the material being sampled. • The un-sampled half of diamond core is retained for check sampling if required. For RC chips regular feld duplicates are collected and analysed for signifcant variance toprimaryresults.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	HGO • At the Intertek on-site facility, analysis is performed using a 500g PAL method. The accurately weighed sub-sample is further processed utilising a PAL1000B to grind the sample to a nominal 90% passing 75µm particle size, whilst simultaneously extracting any cyanide amenable gold liberated into a Leachwell liquor. The resulting liquor is then analysed for gold content by organic extraction with fame AAS fnish, with an overall method detection limit of 0.01ppm Au content in the original sample. This method is appropriate for the type and magnitude of mineralisation at Higginsville. • Quality control procedures include the use of standards, blanks and duplicates. Standards and duplicates are used to test both the accuracy and precision of the analytical process, while blanks are employed to test for contamination during the sample preparation stage. The analyses have confrmed the analytical process employed at Higginsville is adequately precise and accurate for use aspart of the mineral resource estimation.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 30

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		SKO • Only nationally accredited laboratories are used for the analysis of the samples collected at SKO. • The laboratory dry and if necessary (if the sample is >3kg) rife split the sample, which is then jaw crushed and pulverised (the entire 3kg sample) in a ring mill to a nominal 90% passing 75 microns. All recent RC and Diamond core samples are analysed via Fire Assay, which involves a 30g charge (sub-sampled after the pulverisation) of the analytical pulp being fused at 1050°C for 45 minutes with litharge. The resultant metal pill is digested in aqua regia and the gold content determined by atomic adsorption spectrometry – detection limit is 0.01 ppm Au. • Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) samples are routinely submitted by SKO staf and comprise standards, blanks, assay pills, feld duplicates, lab duplicates and repeat analyses. The results for these QA/QC samples are routinely analysed by Senior Geologists with any discrepancies dealt with in conjunction with the laboratory prior to the analytical data being imported into the database. • There is limited information available on historic QA/QC procedures. SKO has generally accepted the available data at face value and carry out data validation procedures as each deposit is re-evaluated. • The analytical techniques used are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation being tested for – this technique is industry standard across the Eastern Goldfelds. • Ongoing production data generally confrms the validity of prior sampling and assaying of the mined deposits to within acceptable limits of accuracy. CMGP • Recent drilling was analysed by fre assay as outlined below; » A 50g sample undergoes fre assay lead collection followed by fame atomic adsorption spectrometry. » The laboratory includes a minimum of 1 project standard with every 22 samples analysed. » Quality control is ensured via the use of standards, blanks and duplicates. • No signifcant QA/QC issues have arisen in recent drilling results. • Historical drilling has used a combination of Fire Assay, Aqua Regia and PAL analysis. • These assaymethodologies are appropriate for the resources inquestion.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 31

==> picture [772 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Verification of sampling and • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company • No independent or alternative verifications are available.
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Verifcation of sampling and	• The verifcation of signifcant intersections by either independent or alternative company	• No independent or alternative verifcations are available.
assaying	personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verifcation, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	• Virtual twinned holes have been drilled in several instances across all sites with no signifcant issues highlighted. Drillhole data is also routinely confrmed by development assay data in the operating environment. • Primary data is collected utilising LogChief. The information is imported into a SQL database server and verifed. • All data used in the calculation of resources and reserves are compiled in databases (underground and open pit) which are overseen and validated by senior geologists. • No adjustments have been made to anyassaydata.
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specifcation of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	HGO • Collar coordinates for surface drill-holes were generally determined by GPS, with underground drill-holes generally determined by survey pick-up. Downhole survey measurements for most surface diamond holes were by Gyro-compass at 5 m intervals. Holes not gyro-surveyed were surveyed using Eastman single shot cameras at 20 m intervals. Downhole surveys for underground diamond drill-holes were taken at 15 – 30 m intervals by Refex single-shot cameras. Routine survey pick-ups of underground and surface holes where they intersected development indicates (apart from some minor discrepancies with pre-Avoca drilling) a survey accuracy of less than 5 m. • All drilling and resource estimation is undertaken in local mine grid at the various projects. • Topographic control is generated from Diferential GPS. This methodology is adequate for the resource in question. SKO • Collar coordinates for surface RC and diamond drill-holes were generally determined by either RTK-GPS or a total station survey instrument. Underground drill-hole locations (Mount Marion and HBJ) were all surveyed using a Leica refectorless total station. • Recent surface diamond holes were surveyed during drilling with down-hole single shot cameras and then at the end of the hole by Gyro-Inclinometer at 5 or 10 mm intervals. Holes not gyro-surveyed were surveyed using Eastman single shot cameras at 20 m intervals. RC drill-holes utilised down-hole single shot camera surveys spaced every 15 to 30 m down- hole. • Down-hole surveys for underground diamond drill-holes were taken at 15 – 30 m intervals by Refex single-shot cameras. • The orientation and size of the project determines if the resource estimate is undertaken in local or MGA 94 grid. Each project has a robust conversion between local, magnetic and an MGA grid which is managed by the SKO survey department. • Topographic control is generated from RTK GPS. This methodology is adequate for the resources inquestion.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 32

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		CMGP • All data is spatially oriented by survey controls via direct pickups by the survey department. Drillholes are all surveyed downhole, deeper holes with a Gyro tool if required, the majority with single / multishot cameras. • All drilling and resource estimation is preferentially undertaken in local mine grid at the various sites. • Topographic control is generated from a combination of remote sensing methods and ground- based surveys. This methodologyis adequate for the resources inquestion.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufcient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifcations applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	HGO • Drilling in the underground environment at Trident is nominally carried-out on 20 m x 30 m spacing for resource defnition and in flled to a 10 m x 15 m spacing with grade control drilling. At Trident the drill spacing below the 500RL widens to an average of 40 m x 80 m. • Drilling at the Lake Cowan region is on a 20 m x 10 m spacing. Historical mining has shown this to be an appropriate spacing for the style of mineralisation and the classifcations applied. • Compositing is carried out based upon the modal sample length of each project. SKO • HBJ: Drill spacing ranges from 10 m x 5 m grade control drilling to 100 m x 100 m at deeper levels of the resource. The majority of the Indicated Resource is estimated using a maximum drill spacing of 40 m x 40 m. The resource has been classifed based on drill density with mining of the 2.2km long HBJ Open-Pit confrming that the data spacing is adequate for the resource classifcations applied. • Mount Martin: Drill spacing ranges from 10 m x 5 m grade control drilling to 60 m x 60 m for the Inferred areas of the resource. The drill spacing for the majority of the Indicated Resource is 20 m x 20 m. The resource has been classifed primarily on drill density and the confdence in the geological/grade continuity – the data spacing and distribution is deemed adequate for the estimation techniques and classifcations applied. • Pernatty: Drill spacing for the reported resource is no greater than 60 m x 60 m with the majority of the Indicated resource based on a maximum spacing of 40 m x 40 m. The geological interpretation of the area is well understood, and is supported by the knowledge from open pit and underground operations. However given the mineralisation is controlled by shear zones the mineralisation continuity is considered to be less understood. The resource is classifed on a combination of drill density and the number of samples used to estimate the resource blocks.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 33

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		• Mount Marion: Drill-spacing ranges from 20 m x 20 m to no greater than 60 m x 60 m for the reported resource Given that the geological and mineralisation understanding is well established via mining operations, this drill-spacing is considered adequate for the classifcations applied to the resource. Compositing is carried out based upon the modal sample length of each project. CMGP • Data spacing is variable dependent upon the individual orebody under consideration. A lengthy history of mining has shown that this approach is appropriate for the Mineral Resource estimation process and to allow for classifcation of the resources as they stand. • Compositingis carried out based upon the modal sample length of each individual domain.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• Drilling intersections are nominally designed to be normal to the orebody as far as underground infrastructure constraints / topography allows. • Development sampling is nominally undertaken normal to the various orebodies. • Where drilling angles are sub optimal the number of samples per drill hole used in the estimation has been limited to reduce any potential bias. • It is not considered that drillingorientation has introduced an appreciable samplingbias.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• The core is transported to the core storage facility by either drilling company personnel or geological staf. Once at the facility the samples are kept in a secure location while logging and sampling is being conducted. The storage facility is enclosed by a fence which is locked at night or when the geology staf are absent. The samples are transported to the laboratory facilityor collectionpoint by geological staf.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data	HGO • A review of the grade control practices on site has been undertaken by an external consultant. No formal external audit or review has been performed on the resource estimate. Site generated resources and reserves and the parent geological data is routinely reviewed by the Metals X Corporate technical team. SKO • No formal external audit or review has been performed on the sampling techniques and data. Site generated resources and reserves and the parent geological data is routinely reviewed by the Metals X Corporate technical team. CMGP • Site generated resources and reserves and the parent geological data is routinely reviewed bythe Metals X Corporate technical team.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 34

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	HGO • State Royalty of 2.5% of revenue applies to all tenements. • The Trident Resource is located within mining leases M15/0642, M15/0351 and M15/0348. M15/0351 and M15/0642 also incur the Morgan Stanley royalty of 4% of revenue after 100,000 oz of production and the Morgan Stanley price participation royalty at 10% of incremental revenue for gold prices above AUD$600/oz. M15/0642 is also subject to the Mitchell Royalty at AUD$32/oz. • The Chalice Resource is located on mining lease M15/0786. There are no additional royalties. • Lake Cowan is located on mining lease M15/1132. Lake Cowan is subject to an additional royalty (Brocks Creek) of $1/tonne of ore. SKO • State Royalty of 2.5% of revenue applies to all tenements, although does not apply to the 16 freehold titles (which host the majority of SKO’s Resource inventory). There are a number of minor agreements attached to a select number of tenements and locations with many • of these royalty agreements associated with tenements with no current Resources and/or Reserves. • Private royalty agreements are in place that relate to production from HBJ open-pit at $10/ oz. In addition, a royalty is payable in the form of 1.75% of the total gold ounces produced from the following resources: Shirl Underground, Golden Hope, Bellevue, HBJ Open-pit, Mount Martin open-pit, Mount Martin Stockpiles and any reclaimed tailings. • SKO consists of 141 tenements including 16 freehold titles, 6 exploration licenses, 47 mining leases, 12 miscellaneous licenses and 60 prospecting licenses, all held directly by the Company. • There are no known issues regarding security of tenure. • There are no known impediments to continued operation. CMGP • Native title interests are recorded against several CMGP tenements. • The CMGP tenements are held by the Big Bell Gold Operations (BBGO) of which Metals X has 100% ownership. • Several third party royalties exist across various tenements at CMGP, over and above the state government royalty. • BBGO operates in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the leases. • There are no known issues regarding security of tenure. • There are no known impediments to continued operation.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 35

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Exploration done by other parties Geology	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other partie • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Higginsville region has an exploration and production history in excess of 30 years. • The SKO tenements have an exploration and production history in excess of 100 years. • The CMGP tenements have an exploration and production history in excess of 100 years. • Metals X work has generally confrmed the veracity of historic exploration data. HGO • Trident is hosted primarily within a thick, weakly diferentiated gabbro with subordinate mafc and ultramafc lithologies and comprises a series of north-northeast trending, shallowly north-plunging mineralised zones. The deposit comprises two main mineralisation styles; large wallrock-hosted ore-zones comprising sigmoidal quartz tensional vein arrays and associated metasomatic wall rock alteration hosted exclusively within the gabbro; • and thin, lode-style, nuggetty laminated quartz veins that formed primarily at sheared lithological contacts between the various mafc and ultramafc lithologies. • Lake Cowan mineralisation can be separated into two types. Structurally controlled primary mineralisation in ultramafcs, basalts and felsics host (e.g. Louis, Josephine and Napoleon), and saprolite / palaeochannel hosted supergene hydromorphic deposits, including Sophia, Brigitte and Atreides. SKO • HBJ: The HBJ lodes form part of a gold mineralised system along the Boulder-Lefroy shear zone that is over 5km long and includes the Celebration, Mutooroo, HBJ and Golden Hope open- pit and underground mines. The lodes are hosted within a steeply-dipping, north-northwest striking package of mafc, ultramafc and sedimentary rocks and schists that have been intruded by felsic to intermediate porphyries. Gold mineralisation is structurally controlled and is focused along lithological contacts, within stockwork and tensional vein arrays and within shear zones. The main mineralised zone has a length in excess of 1.9 km and an average width of 40 m in the Jubilee workings but is generally narrower to the north in the Hampton -Boulder workings. • Mount Marion: • The Mount Marion deposit is located on the eastern side of the Coolgardie Domain within a fexure in the Karramindie Shear Zone. It is hosted within a sub-vertical sequence of meta- komatiites intercalated with metasediments that have been metamorphosed to amphibolite facies. Gold mineralisation occurs in a footwall and hangingwall lode, each ranging in thickness from 2 to 15 m. The mineralisation plunges steeply to the west and is open at depth. • Mount Martin: The Mount Martin Tribute Area, is located within a regional scale north-northwest trending Archean Greenstone Belt. Within the Mount Martin - Carnilya area, the greenstone belt comprises a mixed sequence of ultramafc (predominantly komatiitic) and fne-grained, variably sulphidic sedimentary lithologies with subsidiary mafc units. Known gold and nickel mineralisation at the Mount Martin Mine is associated with a series of stacked, westerly dipping, sulphide and quartz-carbonate bearing lodes which are mainly hosted within intensely deformed and altered chloritic schists sandwiched between talc-carbonate ultramafc lithologies.

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		• Pernatty: The Pernatty deposit is hosted within a granophyric phase of a gabbro and is controlled by a structurally complex interaction of a number of major shear zones. Shearing has altered the original granophyric quartz dolerite to a biotite-carbonate-plagioclase-pyrite schist. The sequence has also been intruded by mafc and felsic porphyritic dykes, which are also mineralised. CMGP • The CMGP is located in the Achaean Murchison Province, a granite-greenstone terrane in the northwest of the Yilgarn Craton. Greenstone belts trending north-northeast are separated by granite-gneiss domes, with smaller granite plutons also present within or on the margins of the belts. • Mineralisation at Big Bell is hosted in the shear zone (Mine Sequence) and is associated with the post-peak metamorphic retrograde assemblages. Stibnite, native antimony and trace arsenopyrite are disseminated through the K-feldspar-rich lode schist. These are intergrown with pyrite and pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite. Mineralisation outside the typical Big Bell host rocks (KPSH), for example 1,600N and Shocker, also display a very strong W-As-Sb geochemical halo. • Numerous gold deposits occur within the Cuddingwarra Project area, the majority of which are hosted within the central mafc-ultramafc ± felsic porphyry sequence. Within this broad framework, mineralisation is shown to be spatially controlled by competency contrasts across, and fexures along, layer-parallel D2 shear zones, and is maximised when transected by corridors of northeast striking D3 faults and fractures. • The Great Fingall Dolerite hosts the majority gold mineralisation within the portion of the greenstone belt proximal to Cue (The Day Dawn Project Area). Unit AGF3 is the most brittle of all the fve units and this characteristic is responsible for its role as the most favourable lithological host togold mineralisation in the Greenstone Belt.
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: » easting and northing of the drill hole collar » elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar » dip and azimuth of the hole » down hole length and interception depth » hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justifed on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearlyexplain whythis is the case.	• Tables containing drillhole collar, downhole survey and intersection data are included in the body of the announcement.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 37

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-of grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for anyreportingof metal equivalent values should be clearlystated.	• All results presented are length weighted. • No high-grade cuts are used. • Reported results contain no more than two contiguous metres of internal dilution below 1 g/t. • Results are reported above a variety of gram / metre cut-ofs dependent upon the nature of the hole. These are cut-ofs are clearly stated in the relevant tables. No metal equivalent values are stated.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this efect (eg‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• Unless indicated to the contrary, all results reported are true width. • Given restricted access in the underground environment the majority of drillhole intersections are not normal to the orebody.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any signifcant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	• Appropriate diagrams are provided in the body of the release.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reportingof Exploration Results.	• Appropriate balance in exploration results reporting is provided.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• There is no other substantive exploration data associated with this release.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• Ongoing surface and underground exploration activities will be undertaken to support continuing mining activities at Metals X Gold Operations.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 38

==> picture [771 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	• The CMGP comprises 6 granted exploration leases, 10 granted general purpose leases, 31 granted mis- cellaneous leases, 210 granted mining leases and 14 granted prospecting leases. • Native title interests are recorded against several CMGP tenements. • The CMGP tenements are held by the Big Bell Gold Operations (BBGO) of which Metals X has 100% own- ership. • Several third party royalties exist across various tenements at CMGP, over and above the state govern- ment royalty. • BBGO operates in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the leases. • There are no known issues regarding security of tenure. • There are no known impediments to continued operation.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• The CMGP area has an exploration and production history in excess of 100 years. • On balance, BBGO work hasgenerallyconfrmed the veracityof historic exploration data.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 39

==> picture [771 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The CMGP is located in the Achaean Murchison Province, a granite-greenstone terrane in the northwest of the Yilgarn Craton. Greenstone belts trending north-northeast are separated by granite-gneiss domes, with smaller granite plutons also present within or on the margins of the belts. • Mineralisation at Big Bell is hosted in the shear zone (Mine Sequence) and is associated with the post- peak metamorphic retrograde assemblages. Stibnite, native antimony and trace arsenopyrite are dis- seminated through the K-feldspar-rich lode schist. These are intergrown with pyrite and pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite. Mineralisation outside the typical Big Bell host rocks (KPSH), for example 1,600N and Shocker, also display a very strong W-As-Sb geochemical halo. • Numerous gold deposits occur within the Cuddingwarra Project area, the majority of which are hosted within the central mafc-ultramafc ± felsic porphyry sequence. Within this broad framework, minerali- sation is shown to be spatially controlled by competency contrasts across, and fexures along, layer-par- allel D2 shear zones, and is maximised when transected by corridors of northeast striking D3 faults and fractures. • The Great Fingall Dolerite hosts the majority gold mineralisation within the portion of the greenstone belt proximal to Cue (The Day Dawn Project Area). Unit AGF3 is the most brittle of all the fve units and this characteristic is responsible for its role as the most favourable lithological host to gold mineralisation in the Greenstone Belt. • The Paddy’s Flat area is located on the western limb of a regional fold, the Polelle Syncline, within a sequence of mafc to ultramafc volcanics with minor interfow sediments and banded iron-formation. The sequence has also been intruded by felsic porphyry dykes prior to mineralisation. Mineralisation is located along four sub-parallel trends at Paddy’s Flat which can be summarised as containing three dominant mineralisation styles: Sulphide replacement BIF hosted gold. Quartz vein hosted shear-related gold. Quartz-carbonate-sulphide stockwork vein and alteration related gold. • The Yaloginda area is a gold-bearing Archaean greenstone belt situated ~15 km south of Meekatharra. The deposits in the area are hosted in a strained and metamorphosed volcanic sequence that consists primarily of ultramafc and high-magnesium basalt with minor komatiite, peridotite, gabbro, tholeiitic basalt and interfow sediments. The sequence was intruded by a variety of felsic porphyry and interme- diate sills and dykes. • The Reedy’s mining district is located approximately 15 km to the south-east to Meekatharra and to the south of Lake Annean. The Reedy gold deposits occur within a north-south trending greenstone belt, two to fve kilometres wide, composed of volcano-sedimentary sequences and separated multiphase syn- and post-tectonic granitoid complexes. Structurally controlled the gold occurs at the sheared contacts of dolerite, basalt, ultramafc schist,quartz-feldsparporphyry, and shale.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 40

==> picture [771 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Drill hole Informa- tion	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: `o`easting and northing of the drill hole collar `o`elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar `o`dip and azimuth of the hole `o`down hole length and interception depth `o`hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justifed on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	• Presented in tables above. • Excluded results are non-signifcant and do not materially afect understanding of the CMGP deposits.
Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-of grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions usedfor any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	• Results are reported on a length weighted average basis. • Results are reported above a 5g/m Au cut-of. • Results reported may include up to two metres of internal dilution below a 0.5 g/t Au cut-of. • No metal equivalent values are reported.
Relationship between minerali- sation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this efect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• Interval widths are downhole width unless otherwise stated.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any signifcant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	• Images are presented in the body of the text as appropriate.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative re- porting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading re- porting of Exploration Results.	• Excluded results are non-signifcant and do not materially afect understanding of the CMGP deposit.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limit- ed to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics;potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• Relevant information presented in the body of the above.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations andfuture drilling areas,provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• Exploration and mine planning assessment continues to take place at the CMGP.

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION 41

APPENDIX 3 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – TIN DIVISION (RELATING TO EXPLORATION RESULTS) SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specifc specialised	• Diamond Drilling
Drilling techniques Drill sample recovery	industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fre assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fne/coarse material.	The bulk of the data used in resource calculations at Renison has been gathered from diamond core. Three sizes have been used historically NQ2 (45.1 mm nominal core diameter), LTK60 (45.2 mm nominal core diameter) and LTK48 (36.1 mm nominal core diameter), with NQ2 currently in use. This core is geologically logged and subsequently halved for sampling. Grade control holes may be whole-cored to streamline the core handling process if required. NQ and HQ core sizes have been recorded as being used at Mount Bischof. This core is geologically logged and subsequently halved for sampling. There is no diamond drilling for the Rentails Project. • Face Sampling Each development face / round is horizontally chip sampled at Renison. The sampling intervals are domained by geological constraints (e.g. rock type, veining and alteration / sulphidation etc.). Samples are taken in a range from 0.3 m up to 1.2 m in waste / mullock. All exposures within the orebody are sampled. A similar process would have been followed for historical Mount Bischof face sampling. There is no face sampling for the Rentails Project. • Sludge Drilling Sludge drilling at Renison is performed with an underground production drill rig. It is an open hole drilling method using water as the fushing medium, with a 64 mm (nominal) hole diameter. Sample intervals are ostensibly the length of the drill steel. Holes are drilled at sufcient angles to allow fushing of the hole with water following each interval to prevent contamination. There is no sludge drilling for the Mount Bischof Project. There is no sludge drilling for the Rentails Project. • RC Drilling RC drilling has been utilised at Mount Bischof. Drill cuttings are extracted from the RC return via cyclone. The underfow from each interval is transferred via bucket to a four tiered rife splitter, delivering approximately three kilograms of the recovered material into calico bags for analysis. The residual material is retained on the ground near the hole. Composite samples are obtained from the residue material for initial analysis, with the split samples remaining with the individual residual piles until required for re-split analysis or eventual disposal. There is no RC drillingfor the Renison Project.

APPENDIX 3 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – TIN DIVISION 42

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

		• Percussion Drilling This drilling method was used for the Rentails project and uses a rotary tubular drilling cutter which was driven percussively into the tailings. The head of the cutting tube consisted of a 50 mm diameter hard tipped cutting head inside which were ftted 4 spring steel fngers which allowed the core sample to enter and then prevented it from falling out as the drill tube was withdrawn from the drill hole. There is no percussion drilling for the Renison Project. There is no percussion drilling for the Mount Bischof Project. All geology input is logged and validated by the relevant area geologists, incorporated into this is assessment of sample recovery. No defned relationship exists between sample recovery and grade. Nor has sample bias due to preferential loss or gain of fne or coarse material been noted.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged	• Diamond core is logged geologically and geotechnically. • RC chips are logged geologically. • Development faces are mapped geologically. • Logging is qualitative in nature. • All holes are logged completely, all faces are mapped completely.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether rifed, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for feld duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	• Drill core is halved for sampling. Grade control holes may be whole-cored to streamline the core handling process. • Samples are dried at 90°C, then crushed to <3 mm. Samples are then rife split to obtain a sub-sample of approximately 100g which is then pulverized to 90% passing 75um. 2g of the pulp sample is then weighed with 12g of reagents including a binding agent, the weighed sample is then pulverized again for one minute. The sample is then compressed into a pressed powder tablet for introduction to the XRF. This preparation has been proven to be appropriate for the style of mineralisation being considered. • QA/QC is ensured during the sub-sampling stages process via the use of the systems of an independent NATA / ISO accredited laboratory contractor. • The sample size is considered appropriate for the grain size of the material being sampled. • The un-sampled half of diamond core is retained for check sampling if required. • For RC chips regular feld duplicates are collected and analysed for signifcant variance to primaryresults.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• Assaying is undertaken via the pressed powder XRF technique. Sn, As and Cu have a detection limit 0.01%, Fe and S detection limits are 0.1%. These assay methodologies are appropriate for the resource in question. • All assay data has built in quality control checks. Each XRF batch of twenty consists of one blank, one internal standard, one duplicate and a replicate, anomalies are re-assayed to ensure quality control. • Specifc gravity / density values for individual areas are routinely sampled during all diamond drillingwhere material is competent enough to do so.

APPENDIX 3 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – TIN DIVISION 43

==> picture [772 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Verification of sampling and • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company • Anomalous intervals as well as random intervals are routinely checked assayed as part of
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Verifcation of sampling and	• The verifcation of signifcant intersections by either independent or alternative company	• Anomalous intervals as well as random intervals are routinely checked assayed as part of
assaying	personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verifcation, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	the internal QA/QC process. • Virtual twinned holes have been drilled in several instances across all sites with no signifcant issues highlighted. Drillhole data is also routinely confrmed by development assay data in the operating environment. • Primary data is loaded into the drillhole database system and then archived for reference. • All data used in the calculation of resources and reserves are compiled in databases (underground and open pit) which are overseen and validated by senior geologists. • Noprimaryassays data is modifed in anyway.
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specifcation of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	• All data is spatially oriented by survey controls via direct pickups by the survey department. Drillholes are all surveyed downhole, currently with a GyroSmart tool in the underground environment at Renison, and a multishot camera for the typically short surface diamond holes. • All drilling and resource estimation is undertaken in local mine grid at the various sites. • Topographic control is generated from remote sensing methods in general, with ground based surveys undertaken where additional detail is required. This methodology is adequate for the resource inquestion.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufcient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifcations applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• Drilling in the underground environment at Renison is nominally carried-out on 40 m x 40 m spacing in the south of the mine and 25 m, x 25 m spacing in the north of the mine prior to mining occurring. A lengthy history of mining has shown that this data spacing is appropriate for the Mineral Resource estimation process and to allow for classifcation of the resource as it stands. • Drilling at Mount Bischof is variably spaced. A lengthy history of mining has shown that this data spacing is appropriate for the Mineral resource estimation process and to allow for classifcation of the resource as it stands. • Drilling at Rentails is usually carried out on a 100 m centres. This is appropriate for the Mineral resource estimation process and to allow for classifcation of the resource as it stands. • Compositing is carried out based upon the modal sample length of each individual domain.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• Drilling intersections are nominally designed to be normal to the orebody as far as underground infrastructure constraints / topography allows. • Development sampling is nominally undertaken normal to the various orebodies. • It is not considered that drilling orientation has introduced an appreciable sampling bias.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• At Renison, Mount Bischof and Rentails samples are delivered directly to the on-site laboratory by the geotechnical crew where they are taken into custody by the independent laboratorycontractor.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data	• Site generated resources and reserves and the parent geological data is routinely reviewed bythe Metals X Corporate technical team.

APPENDIX 3 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – TIN DIVISION 44

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

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

==> picture [772 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status Exploration done by other parties Geology	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other partie • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• All Tasmania resources are hosted within 12M1995 and 12M2006. Both tenements are standard Tasmanian mining leases. • No native title interests are recorded against the Tasmanian tenements. Native title interests are recorded against the Queensland tenements. • Tasmanian tenements are held by the Bluestone Mines Tasmania Joint Venture of which Metals X has 50% ownership. • No royalties above legislated state royalties apply for the Tasmanian tenements. • Bluestone Mines Tasmania Joint Venture operates in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the mining leases. • There are no known issues regarding security of tenure. • The Renison and Mount Bischof areas have an exploration and production history in excess of 100 years. • Bluestone Mines Tasmania Joint Venture work has generally confrmed the veracity of historic exploration data. • Renison is one of the world’s largest operating underground tin mines and Australia’s largest primary tin producer. Renison is the largest of three major Skarn, carbonate replacement, pyrrhotite-cassiterite deposits within western Tasmania. The Renison Mine area is situated in the Dundas Trough, a province underlain by a thick sequence of Neoproterozoic-Cambrian siliciclastic and volcaniclastic rocks. At Renison there are three shallow-dipping dolomite horizons which host replacement mineralisation. • Mount Bischof is the second of three major Skarn, carbonate replacement, pyrrhotite- cassiterite deposits within western Tasmania. The Mount Bischof Mine area is situated within the Dundas Trough, a province underlain by a thick sequence of Neoproterozoic- Cambrian siliciclastic and volcaniclastic rocks. At Mount Bischof folded and faulted shallow-dipping dolomite horizons host replacement mineralisation with fuid interpreted to be sourced from the forceful emplacement of a granite ridge and associated porphyry intrusions associated with the Devonian Meredith Granite, which resulted in the complex brittle / ductile deformation of the host rocks. Lithologies outside the current mining area are almost exclusively metamorphosed siltstones. Major porphyry dykes and faults such as the Giblin and Queen provided the major focus for ascending hydrothermal • fuids from a buried ridge of the Meredith Granite. Mineralisation has resulted in tin-rich sulphide replacement in the dolomite lodes, greisen and sulphide lodes in the porphyry and fault / vein lodes in the major faults. All lodes contain tin as cassiterite within sulphide mineralisation with some coarse cassiterite as veins throughout the lodes. • The Rentails resource is contained within three Tailing Storage Facilities (TSF’s) that have been built up from the processing of tin ore at the Renison Bell mine over the period 1968 to 2013.

APPENDIX 3 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – TIN DIVISION 45

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Drill hole Information • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results • Excluded results are non-significant and do not materially affect understanding of the
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results	• Excluded results are non-signifcant and do not materially afect understanding of the
	including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: » easting and northing of the drill hole collar » elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar » dip and azimuth of the hole » down hole length and interception depth » hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justifed on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearlyexplain whythis is the case.	Renison deposit.
Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-of grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for anyreportingof metal equivalent values should be clearlystated.	• Results are reported on a length weighted average basis. • Results are reported above a 4%m Sn cut-of.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this efect (eg‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• Interval widths are true width unless otherwise stated.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any signifcant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	• Presented in the body of the text above when appropriate.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	• Presented above. • Excluded results are non-signifcant and do not materially afect understanding of the Renison deposit.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• No relevant information to be presented.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• Exploration assessment and normal mine extensional drilling continues to take place at Renison. • Exploration assessment continues to progress at Mount Bischof. • Project assessment continues to progress at Rentails.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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

==> picture [772 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specifc specialised	• The deposit has been extensively sampled using Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond
Drilling techniques Drill sample recovery	industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fre assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fne/coarse material.	drilling (DD) techniques. The Mt Henry (MH) resource database subset contains 743 RC & DD holes for a total of 59,401m. • The grid drill spacing is typically 25m X 25m over the extent of the mineralisation. • RC holes were sampled by collecting 1m samples and splitting then down using either on- board rig or manual rife splitters to produce an assay sample of ~3kg size. • Diamond holes are typically NQ2 (NQ for some historical holes) & occasionally HQ size and were sampled by cutting the core in half or quarter for the HQ core over geologically logged intervals between 20cm and 1m in length. • All recent Panoramic resource assay samples were submitted to SGS Laboratories in Perth for gold analysis by FA50 (Fire Assay) technique. Of the historical RC & DD gold assays in the database, the dominant assay methodology is Fire Assay. A minor proportion of the data (4%) has been assayed via Aqua Regia.
		• The drilling methods used on this deposit are predominantly RC and DD drilling. The RC drilling was typically completed using 5¼ inch hammers and recently 5¼ inch face sampling hammers. • The DD drilling was typically NQ (47.6mm), and more recently NQ2 (50mm) and HQ (63.5mm) diameter core. • HQ size core was typicallydrilled asgeotechnical holes from surface byPanoramic.
		• RC sample recoveries were monitored by Panoramic by recording visual estimates of the sample bags prior to sampling. Typical recoveries for RC were greater than 90%. • Core recovery is noted during drilling and geological logging processes as a percentage recovered vs. expected drill length. Core was reconstructed into continuous runs on a length of angle iron to enable accurate geological logging and estimation of core recovery. Core recovery is typically 100 percent. • No apparent relationships were noted in relation to sample recoveryandgrade.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged	• All drill holes in the MH resource database subset have been geologically logged. • Both chip and core samples in recent Panoramic drill holes have been logged using geological legends at detail to support geological confdence in Mineral Resource estimates. • Logging details lithology, weathering, oxidation, veining, mineralisation and structural features where noted in drill core. • All mineralised drill intersections and associated samples have been logged in full.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MT HENRY 47

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether rifed, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for feld duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	• Both historical NQ and recent NQ2 core was typically sawn in half and half core sampled. Recent HQ geotechnical core was quarter core sampled where mineralised. Core sample lengths typically varied between 0.2 and 1.0 metre. • The standard RC sample length is 1 metre with samples collected directly from the rig cyclone system. The individual 1m RC samples are then reduced to a 3-5kg assay sample by either automated on-board rig splitters or manually by rife splitting. • The sample preparation process for all samples submitted for analysis follow accepted industry standards, including oven drying sample for a minimum of 8 hrs, crushing and pulverising to 85% passing 75 microns. • Quality control procedures have included the insertion of standards, blanks and duplicates to monitor the sampling and analytical process. • The sample sizes used are accepted industry standard sizes used extensively throughout the goldfelds and are appropriate for the style of deposit.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• The standard analytical technique used is Fire Assay, mostly by AAS fnished. Of the 43,478 Au assays in the MH resource database subset, 2,851 historical assays (7%) do not have a recorded technique or are by technique other than Fire Assay. Where non gold analyses exist they are either by AAS or ICP OES determination. • No other geophysical or analytical tools have been used to estimate grade. • QA/QC has been completed routinely during all sampling throughout the life of the Project; though less so historically than more recently. The QA/QC results indicate that the RC and DD assays being used for resource estimation are a fair representation of the material that has been sampled.
Verifcation of sampling and assaying	• The verifcation of signifcant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verifcation, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	• The deposit is very continuous in terms of mineralisation and grade intercepts. The continuity and consistency of the grade intercepts in section and along-strike provides strong confdence in the verifcation of the grade and style of deposit. he similarity and consistency of intersections reported by past operators over many years is further verifcation of the reliability of the data. • No recent twin holes were completed. Historical twin holes verifed mineralisation continuity. Infll verifcation holes were completed by Panoramic to test both geological and mineralisation continuity on selected sections. In each instance the expected geological and mineralogical interpretation was confrmed and no major discrepancies were identifed. • Logging was completed in logging code protected MS Excel templates on laptops and then imported into the Project SQL database for validation. Sections were then generated and visual validation completed to ensure integrity of the data. • No adjustments were made to assaydata.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MT HENRY 48

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specifcation of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	• All recent drill collars and where possible historical drill collars have been accurately located by diferential GPS. A range of downhole survey instruments, including single shot, electronic multi-shot and gyroscopic tools have been used. Gyroscopic surveys undertaken by Panoramic and previous companies demonstrate that holes do not deviate signifcantly from design. • The MH drill hole database contains local, AMG and MGA coordinates. The resource has been estimated in local grid which is rotated +1.079 degrees from MGA GDA94 zone 51. • Conversion from local grid to AMG AGD84 zone 51 is based on a two point transformation: 5,000E, 14,000N = 385,844.34E, 6,421,899.31N 5,000E, 6,400N = 385,701.32E, 6,414,302.52N • Fugro 2.5m topographic contour data was the primary topographical control. In places this was modifed bydiferential GPS height data.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufcient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifcations applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• The drilling density is on a nominal 25m by 25m spacing through the majority of the deposit. This spacing is sufcient to provide strong geological and mineralogical confdence in the style of deposit being estimated. • As a general rule sample compositing has not be used. Sample compositing of RC pre-collars outside the main mineralised zone was undertaken at times.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• Virtually all drilling has been completed perpendicular to the main strike of the deposit geometry and angled to best intercept the west dipping mineralisation. • No sampling bias is apparent from the direction of drilling.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Little is known about the sample security practices adopted by previous companies. Panoramic samples were freighted in sealed bulka-bags direct from site to the SGS Laboratory in Perth.
Audits or reviews	• The results of anyaudits or reviews of samplingtechniques and data	• No audits or review of the Panoramic sampling procedures andprotocols has been completed.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MT HENRY 49

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status Exploration done by other parties	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other partie	• The Mount Henry resource is located on tenement M63/0515. • State Royalty of 2.5% of revenue applies to all tenements. • There are no known issues regarding security of tenure. • There are no known impediments to continued operation. • Central Norseman Gold Corporation held most of the tenements in the Mount Henry region until 1980. Exploration was then carried out by: • ESSO Australia (1980–82). • Australis Mining NL (1982–88). • Great Western Mining (1987–89). • Australasian Gold Mines (1994-97). • Kinross Gold Corporation (1998-2004). • Australian Gold Investments (2004-2006). • Kalgoorlie Boulder Resources (2006-2008). • Matsa Resources (2008-2012). • Panoramic Resources (2012 – 2015). • Metals X (2015 – Present).

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MT HENRY 50

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. • The Mt Henry Project covers 347km [2] of the prolific South Norseman-Wiluna Greenstone belt
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Mt Henry Project covers 347km2of the prolifc South Norseman-Wiluna Greenstone belt
		of the Eastern Goldfelds in Western Australia. • Although the greenstone rocks from the Norseman area can be broadly correlated with those of the Kalgoorlie – Kambalda region they form a distinct terrain which is bounded on all sides by major regional shears. The Norseman Terrane has prominent banded iron formations which distinguish it from the Kalgoorlie – Kambalda Terrane. • The Mt Henry gold deposit is hosted by a silicate facies BIF unit within the Noganyer Formation. Gold mineralisation is predominantly hosted by the silicate facies BIF unit but is also associated with minor meta-basalt and dolerite units that were mostly emplaced in the BIF prior to mineralisation. The footwall to the BIF is characterised by a sedimentary schistose unit and the hanging wall by the overlying dolerites of the Woolyeener Formation. • The Mt Henry gold deposit is classifed as an Archean, orogenic shear hosted deposit. The main lode is an elongated, shear-hosted body, 1.9km long by 6 - 10 metres wide and dips 65-75 degrees towards the west. • Mineralisation is pervasive within sheared BIF throughout the entire length of the deposit; however there are discrete zones (or shoots) that contain higher grades and thicker intervals of mineralisation that plunge to the north-northwest. The host shear to the mineralisation strikes north-south and dips 60 degrees towards the west, more or less contiguously with the upper contact of the BIF unit with the overlying Woolyeener Formation. The relative movement is reverse (footwall down). There does not appear to be any signifcant strike- slip component. Minor mineralisation is also associated with other shear zones. These typically either emanate from the main shear or are associated with other discrete shears stratigraphically lower down in the BIF unit. In addition to these footwall lodes, two small discrete supergene lodes are recognised. • Sulphide minerals range from trace to 10%. The predominant sulphide is pyrrhotite with minor pyrite, arsenopyrite, chalcopyrite and marcasite. The pyrrhotite is often formed by the replacement and sulphidisation of magnetite. Gold occurs in narrow discrete quartz veins, and in clouds within silicate minerals. It also occurs in close proximity or attached to sulphide minerals, particularly pyrrhotite. • The mineralisation is infrequentlycut byfat lying, dilationalpegmatite dykes and sills.
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: » easting and northing of the drill hole collar » elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar » dip and azimuth of the hole » down hole length and interception depth » hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justifed on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearlyexplain whythis is the case.	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-of grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for anyreportingof metal equivalent values should be clearlystated.	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this efect (eg‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any signifcant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reportingof Exploration Results.	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• No exploration information is being presented in this release.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 52

SECTION 3 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Database integrity Site visits Geological interpretation	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. • Data validation procedures used. • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. • If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. • Confdence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. • Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. • The efect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation. • The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation. • The factors afecting continuity both of grade and geology.	• Database integrity is maintained via the use of DataShed software which restricts access to the SQL database. DataShed prevents the import of invalid data. • Data validation was completed internally in SQL Server by setting allowable and expected values. Automated queries are run as the data is imported to ensure it meets specifed criteria. • For resource estimation a subset of the SQL database, restricting the data to the Mt Henry Resource area was exported into an MS Access database. Additional data checks were run to ensure appropriate data robustness for the Resource Estimation. • Mr Russell undertakes regular visits to site. • systematic approach to ensure that the resultant estimated Mineral Resource fgure was both sufciently constrained, and representative of the expected sub-surface conditions. In all aspects of resource estimation the factual and interpreted geology was used to guide the development of the interpretation. • The confdence in the geological interpretation is high, as the overall form of the interpretation has been confrmed by extensive past mining of the deposit. • There is a strong geological control to the mineralisation interpretation. The deposit is essentially strata hosted within a sheared Banded Iron Formation (BIF). The shear is essentially contiguous along the upper contact of the BIF and an overlying mafc unit. There is some interpreted supergene mineralisation in the northern extents of the deposit that is controlled byweatheringhorizons and typicallycross cuts stratigraphyat shallow levels.
Dimensions	• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	• The Mt Henry mineralised domain is approximately 2km long and has a down dip extent of 280m and is open at depth. The deposit consists of a main lode that varies between 3m and 40m thick with numerousparallel lodes at various stages alongthe length of the deposit.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 53

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Estimation and modelling techniques	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used. • The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data. • The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. • Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic signifcance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). • In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed. • Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. • Any assumptions about correlation between variables. • Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates. • Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. • The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	• All modelling and estimation work undertaken by Metals X is carried out in three dimensions via Surpac Vision. • After validating the drillhole data to be used in the estimation, interpretation of the orebody is undertaken in sectional and / or plan view to create the outline strings which form the basis of the three dimensional orebody wireframe. Wireframing is then carried out using a combination of automated stitching algorithms and manual triangulation to create an accurate three dimensional representation of the sub-surface mineralised body. • Drillhole intersections within the mineralised body are defned; these intersections are then used to fag the appropriate sections of the drillhole database tables for compositing purposes. Drillholes are subsequently composited to allow for grade estimation. In all aspects of resource estimation the factual and interpreted geology was used to guide the development of the interpretation. • Once the sample data has been composited, a statistical analysis is undertaken to assist with determining estimation search parameters, top-cuts etc. Variographic analysis of individual domains is undertaken to assist with determining appropriate search parameters. Which are then incorporated with observed geological and geometrical features to determine the most appropriate search parameters. • An empty block model is then created for the area of interest. This model contains attributes set at background values for the various elements of interest as well as density, and various estimation parameters that are subsequently used to assist in resource categorisation. The block sizes used in the model will vary depending on orebody geometry, minimum mining units, estimation parameters and levels of informing data available. This is determined via QKNA in Snowden’s Supervisor v8.3. • Grade estimation was then undertaken, with the ordinary kriging estimation method considered as standard. There are no assumptions made about recovery. • The resource was then depleted for mining voids and subsequently classifed in line with JORC guidelines utilising a combination of various estimation derived parameters and geological / mining knowledge. • This approach has proven to be applicable to Metals X’s gold assets. • Estimation results are routinely validated against primary input data, previous estimates and miningoutput.
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	• The tonnages are reported as dry tonnes.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 54

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Cut-off parameters • The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied. • The mineralisation wireframes were modelled on a gold lower grade cut-off of 1.0 g/t Au.
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Cut-of parameters	• The basis of the adopted cut-of grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	• The mineralisation wireframes were modelled on a gold lower grade cut-of of 1.0 g/t Au.
		This value was determined by visual assessment of grade continuity in Surpac. A geological model of the mineralised BIF unit was alsogenerated.
Mining factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	• The Mt Henry deposit has been modelled under the assumption that it will be mined by conventional open pit mining methods, using excavators and trucks. Mineralisation wireframes were constructed based on minimum thickness of 2m downhole in order to replicate the smallest possible mining selectivity.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	• No metallurgical assumptions have been made in respect to the generation of the estimate.
Environmental factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfelds project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.	• Metals X operates in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the respective mining leases.
Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. • The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and diferences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. • Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the diferent materials.	• A total of 2,501 bulk density (BD) determinations are recorded in the Mt Henry resource database subset. Panoramic completed most of these with measurements on 2,104 whole core samples by Archimedes water immersion method. There are a small number of historical measurements by pycnometer (7HENC115 & 7HENC116 for 54 samples) and down hole geophysical tool (NHC127, NHD120 and NHD121 for 343 one metre intervals). This data was used to generate a default SG for all lithological types. The default was then assigned to unmeasured intervals, and the density was estimated. • The host rock type for mineralisation and surrounding mafc material is non-porous and void space porosity is not considered to be of relevance to the measurements. • BD estimation for the resource was generated by grouping the 2,501 recorded measurements by rock type to provide an average SG for each of the main lithological rock types. The assay table in the database was tagged with the actual BD or an average value based on rock type grouped average. The BD value was then extracted with the Au grade in the 2m composite fle. The densities were estimated using the variogram models and search parameters for the various domains.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 55

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Classification • The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories. • The classification of the resource has been based on the Competent Person’s confidence in
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Classifcation	• The basis for the classifcation of the Mineral Resources into varying confdence categories.	• The classifcation of the resource has been based on the Competent Person’s confdence in
	• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confdence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confdence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data). • Whether the result appropriately refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	the geological model; supported by the 25 x 25m spaced RC and diamond drilling and 20m x 20m spaced drilling through northern extents of deposit which demonstrates consistency and continuity of the mineralisation (gold mineralisation is highly continuous over a 2.0km strike length and is strata bound). • The mineral resource refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	• No external reviews have been conducted at this point. • The resource has been subject to review byMetals X senior technicalpersonnel.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confdence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confdence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confdence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could afect the relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • These statements of relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate should be compared withproduction data, where available.	• The resource classifcation is based on standard practices and guidelines as prescribed in JORC 2012. • The resource estimate relates to a global estimate of tonnes and grade. • No reliable production data exists for the small open pit operated within the confnes of the Mt Henry resource by Australis Mining in the 1980’s to compare with this resource estimate.

SECTION 4 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in sections 2 and 3, also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves Site visits Study status	• Description of the Mineral Resource estimate used as a basis for the conversion to an Ore Reserve. • Clear statement as to whether the Mineral Resources are reported additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore Reserves. • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. • If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. • The type and level of study undertaken to enable Mineral Resources to be converted to Ore Reserves. • The Code requires that a study to at least Pre-Feasibility Study level has been undertaken to convert Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves. Such studies will have been carried out and will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release. • No reserve information is being presented in this release. • No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Cut-ofparameters	• The basis of the cut-ofgrade(s) orquality parameters applied.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Mining factors or assumptions	• The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study to convert the Mineral Resource to an Ore Reserve (i.e. either by application of appropriate factors by optimisation or by preliminary or detailed design). • The choice, nature and appropriateness of the selected mining method(s) and other mining parameters including associated design issues such as pre-strip, access, etc. • The assumptions made regarding geotechnical parameters (e.g. pit slopes, stope sizes, etc.), grade control and pre-production drilling. • The major assumptions made and Mineral Resource model used for pit and stope optimisation (if appropriate). • The mining dilution factors used. • The mining recovery factors used. • Any minimum mining widths used. • The manner in which Inferred Mineral Resources are utilised in mining studies and the sensitivity of the outcome to their inclusion. • The infrastructure requirements of the selected miningmethods.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that process to the style of mineralisation. • Whether the metallurgical process is well-tested technology or novel in nature. • The nature, amount and representativeness of metallurgical test work undertaken, the nature of the metallurgical domaining applied and the corresponding metallurgical recovery factors applied. • Any assumptions or allowances made for deleterious elements. • The existence of any bulk sample or pilot scale test work and the degree to which such samples are considered representative of the orebody as a whole. • For minerals that are defned by a specifcation, has the ore reserve estimation been based on the appropriate mineralogyto meet the specifcations?	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Environmental	• The status of studies of potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. Details of waste rock characterisation and the consideration of potential sites, status of design options considered and, where applicable, the status of approvals for process residue storage and waste dumps should be reported.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Infrastructure	• The existence of appropriate infrastructure: availability of land for plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk commodities), labour, accommodation; or the ease with which the infrastructure can beprovided, or accessed.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 57

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Costs	• The derivation of, or assumptions made, regarding projected capital costs in the study. • The methodology used to estimate operating costs. • Allowances made for the content of deleterious elements. • The source of exchange rates used in the study. • Derivation of transportation charges. • The basis for forecasting or source of treatment and refning charges, penalties for failure to meet specifcation, etc. • The allowances made for royaltiespayable, both Government andprivate.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Revenue factors	• The derivation of, or assumptions made regarding revenue factors including head grade, metal or commodity price(s) exchange rates, transportation and treatment charges, penalties, net smelter returns, etc. • The derivation of assumptions made of metal or commodity price(s), for the principal metals, minerals and co-products.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Market assessment	• The demand, supply and stock situation for the particular commodity, consumption trends and factors likely to afect supply and demand into the future. • A customer and competitor analysis along with the identifcation of likely market windows for the product. • Price and volume forecasts and the basis for these forecasts. • For industrial minerals the customer specifcation, testing and acceptance requirements prior to a supplycontract.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Economic	• The inputs to the economic analysis to produce the net present value (NPV) in the study, the source and confdence of these economic inputs including estimated infation, discount rate, etc. • NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations in the signifcant assumptions and inputs.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Social	• The status of agreements with key stakeholders and matters leading to social licence to operate.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project and/or on the estimation and classifcation of the Ore Reserves: • Any identifed material naturally occurring risks. • The status of material legal agreements and marketing arrangements. • The status of governmental agreements and approvals critical to the viability of the project, such as mineral tenement status, and government and statutory approvals. There must be reasonable grounds to expect that all necessary Government approvals will be received within the timeframes anticipated in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility study. Highlight and discuss the materiality of any unresolved matter that is dependent on a third party on which extraction of the reserve is contingent.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 58

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Classification • The basis for the classification of the Ore Reserves into varying confidence categories. • No reserve information is being presented in this release.
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Classifcation	• The basis for the classifcation of the Ore Reserves into varying confdence categories.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
	• Whether the result appropriately refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit. • The proportion of Probable Ore Reserves that have been derived from Measured Mineral Resources (if any).
Audits or reviews	• The results of anyaudits or reviews of Ore Reserve estimates.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confdence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confdence level in the Ore Reserve estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the reserve within stated confdence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors which could afect the relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • Accuracy and confdence discussions should extend to specifc discussions of any applied Modifying Factors that may have a material impact on Ore Reserve viability, or for which there are remaining areas of uncertainty at the current study stage. • It is recognised that this may not be possible or appropriate in all circumstances. These statements of relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	• No reserve information is being presented in this release.

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY 59

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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

==> picture [772 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specifc specialised	• Diamond Drilling
Drilling techniques Drill sample recovery	industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fre assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fne/coarse material.	A small portion of the data used in resource calculations at the Central Musgrave Project (CMP) has been gathered from diamond core. This core is geologically logged prior to sampling. • RC Drilling RC drilling has been utilised extensively at the CMP. Drill cuttings are extracted from the RC return via cyclone. The underfow from each interval is transferred via bucket to a four tiered rife splitter, delivering approximately three kilograms of the recovered material into calico bags for analysis. The residual material is retained on the ground near the hole. Composite samples are obtained from the residue material for initial analysis, with the split samples remaining with the individual residual piles until required for re-split analysis or eventual disposal. • Historical A variety of drilling methods were employed by INCO, including churn drilling (102 holes) DDH (19 holes) RAB Drilling (2,643 holes) Vacuum (77 holes) Becker Drilling (102 holes). • Sample recovery from early drilling by INCO is not known. Sample recovery from RC drilling carried out from RC drilling after 2001 was generally very good, except where the drill hole encountered strong water fow from the hole. • All geology input is logged and validated by the relevant area geologists, incorporated into this is assessment of sample recovery. No defned relationship exists between sample recovery and grade. Nor has sample bias due to preferential loss or gain of fne or coarse material been noted.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged	• Diamond core is logged geologically and geotechnically. • RC hole chips are logged geologically. • Logging is quantitative in nature. • All holes are logged completely.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 60

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether rifed, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for feld duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	• A sample of each 5ft of drilling from INCO drilling were quartered and forwarded for assay, either to AMDEL in Adelaide, or to INCO’s in-house laboratory at Blackstone. • Samples of RC drilling taken prior to 2006 were composited on 3 or 4m basis, and the composite assayed. A 1m rife-split sample was also taken for each metre drilled, and was submitted for analysis if the composite assayed >0.4%Ni. • Sub sampling for the 2006 and later RC drilling were rife split each 2m sample drilled. • Chips / core chips undergo total preparation. • QA/QC is currently ensured during the sub-sampling stages process via the use of the systems of an independent NATA / ISO accredited laboratory contractor. A portion of the historical informing data has been processed by in-house laboratories. • The sample size is considered appropriate for the grain size of the material being sampled. • The un-sampled half of diamond core is retained for check sampling if required. • For RC chips regular feld duplicates are collected and analysed for signifcant variance to primaryresults.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• Samples of INCO’s drilling were dried and assayed by AAS either at AMDEL in Adelaide, or at INCO’s in-house laboratory at Blackstone. The digest method was not specifed. Samples were assayed for Ni, Co and Fe. Analytical quality control was maintained by the by the insertion of standard samples and re-analysis of duplicates at separate laboratories at a frequency of two check analyses for every twenty samples. • Composite samples of RC drilling completed in 2001 were submitted to AMDEL, dried and pulverised, and assayed for Ni, Co, Ag, As, Bi, Cu, Cr, Fe, Mg, Mn, Pb, S, Sb, Ti, V, Zr, Ca and Al by HF-multi-acid digest / ICP-OES. The 1m rife-splits for any composite sample assaying >0.4%Ni were retrieved, and re-assayed using the same method. • Composite samples from 2002-2004 were assayed for Al, Ca, Cr, Fe, Mg, Mn, Ni, Si, Ti by borate fusion ICP-OES, and for Ag, As, Bi, Co, Cu, Ni, Pb, S, Sb, V, Zr by HF-multi-acid digest / ICP-OES. • During 2005 two-metre composite rife-split (or spear-sampled for wet samples) samples were sent to SGS Laboratories in Perth. Each 2m composite sample was dried and pulverised to a nominal 90 per cent passing 75 microns and analysed for: As, Bi, Co, Cu, Ni, Pb, S and Zn by ICP-OES. Samples returning >0.4%Ni were re-assayed for Ni, Co, Al2O3, CaO, K2O, Fe2O3, MgO, MnO, Na2O, SiO2, V2O5, TiO2, Cr, SO3, Cu, Zn by fused disc XRF. • After 2005 two-metre composite rife-split (or spear-sampled) samples were sent to SGS Laboratories in Perth. Each sample was pulverised to nominal 90 per cent passing 75 micron for analysis for assay for Ni, Co, Al2O3, SiO2, TiO2, Fe2O3, MnO, CaO, K2O, MgO, SO3, Na2O, V2O5, Cr, Cu and Zn by fused disc XRF. • Duplicate samples were taken by spearing the sample pile on the ground approximately every 20 samples, and an in-house standard was inserted into the sample run every alternate 20 samples. • No signifcant QA/QC issues have arisen in recent drilling results. • These assaymethodologies are appropriate for the resource inquestion.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 61

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Verification of sampling and • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company • Anomalous intervals as well as random intervals are routinely checked assayed as part of
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Verifcation of sampling and	• The verifcation of signifcant intersections by either independent or alternative company	• Anomalous intervals as well as random intervals are routinely checked assayed as part of
assaying	personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verifcation, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	the internal QA/QC process. • Virtual twinned holes have been drilled in several instances across all sites with no signifcant issues highlighted. • Primary data is loaded into the drill hole database system and then archived for reference. • All data used in the calculation of resources and reserves are compiled in databases which are overseen and validated by senior geologists. • Noprimaryassays data is modifed in anyway.
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specifcation of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	• All hole collar locations for RC holes drilled after 2000 were surveyed using a Real Time Kinematic GPS. This measured X, Y and Z to sub-centimetre accuracy in terms of the MGA 94, Zone 52 metric grid. • Hole collars for almost all INCO drill holes were re-located, and surveyed in using the TREK GPS. Several INCO collars could not be located, and their MGA positions are estimated from their drilled location on the original INCO Imperial local grid. • Topographic control is generated from a combination of remote sensing methods and ground- based surveys. This methodologyis adequate for the resource inquestion.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufcient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifcations applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• Drill hole spacing at CMP is generally on a 120m x 50m spacing. This has been flled-in to 60 x 50 and 30m x 25m spacing in some areas. The data spacing is sufcient for both the estimation procedure and resource classifcation applied. • Compositing of drill assay data to 2m was used in the estimate.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• Drilling intersections are nominally designed to be sub-normal to the orebody. • It is not considered that drilling orientation has introduced an appreciable sampling bias.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Samples are delivered to a third party transport service, who in turn relay them to the independent laboratorycontractor. Samples are stored securelyuntil theyleave site.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data	• Site generated resources and reserves and the parent geological data is routinely reviewed bythe Metals X Corporate technical team.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 62

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status Exploration done by other parties	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other partie	• The CMP comprises 5 granted exploration leases and 1 granted miscellaneous lease. • Native title interests are recorded against the CMP tenements. • The CMP tenements are held by Austral Nickel Pty Ltd (South Australia) and Hinckley Range Pty Ltd (Western Australia). Metals X has 100% ownership of both companies. • One third party royalty agreement applies to the tenements at CMP, over and above the state government royalty. • Hinckley Range and Austral Nickel operate in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the leases. • There are no known issues regarding security of tenure. • There are no known impediments to continued operation. • The CMP area has an exploration history which extends to the 1960’s, with signifcant contributors being INCO, Acclaim and Metex Nickel (Metals X). • On balance, Metals X work hasgenerallyconfrmed the veracityof historic exploration data.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Musgrave Block is an east-west trending, structurally bounded mid-Proterozoic terrane some 130,000km² in area, straddling the common borders of Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory. • Deep weathering of olivine-rich ultramafc units has resulted in the concentration of nickel mineralisation. The olivines in the ultramafc units have background values of about 0.15% Ni to 0.3% Ni. The almost complete removal of MgO and SiO2to ground waters during the weathering of olivines in the ultramafc units resulted in extreme volume reductions and consequent signifcant upgrading of other rock forming oxides (Fe2O3, Al2O3) and metal element concentrations in the weatheredprofle.
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: » easting and northing of the drill hole collar » elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar » dip and azimuth of the hole » down hole length and interception depth » hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justifed on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearlyexplain whythis is the case.	• No drill hole information is being presented.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 63

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-of grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for anyreportingof metal equivalent values should be clearlystated.	• No drill hole information is being presented.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this efect (eg‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• No drill hole information is being presented.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any signifcant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	• No drill hole information is being presented.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reportingof Exploration Results.	• No drill hole information is being presented.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• No drill hole information is being presented.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• No drill hole information is being presented.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 64

SECTION 3 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Database integrity Site visits	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. • Data validation procedures used. • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. • If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	• Drillhole data is stored in a Maxwell’s DataShed system based on the Sequel Server platform which is currently considered “industry standard”. • As new data is acquired it passes through a validation approval system designed to pick up any signifcant errors before the information is loaded into the master database. The information is uploaded by a series of Sequel routines and is performed as required. The database contains diamond drilling (including geotechnical and specifc gravity data), and some associated metadata. By its nature this database is large in size, and therefore exports from the main database are undertaken (with or without the application of spatial and various other flters) to create a database of workable size, preserve a snapshot of the database at the time of orebody modelling and interpretation and preserve the integrity of the master database. • The site is manned continually by Senior Geological personnel. • The Competent Person has undertaken site visits in the recent past.
Geological interpretation	• Confdence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. • Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. • The efect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation. • The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation. • The factors afecting continuity both of grade and geology.	• Confdence in the geological model used to constrain the Wingellina estimate is high, with the genetic model for lateritic nickel development well understood. Logged geology has been used to drive the mineralisation interpretation, with the base of laterite defned with drill holes, or its level on a given section interpreted from surrounding drill sections. Continuity of the interpretation across and along the Wingellina deposit is for the most part good, with intersections of hard rock in drill holes, and well mapped outcropping basement the primary causes of breaks within the mineralised horizon. • No alternative interpretations are currently considered viable. • Geological interpretation of the deposit was carried out using a systematic approach to ensure that the resultant estimated Mineral Resource fgure was both sufciently constrained, and representative of the expected sub-surface conditions. In all aspects of resource estimation the factual and interpreted geology was used to guide the development of the interpretation. • The protolithology is the dominant control on grade continuity at the CMP. Structural controls which infuence depth of weatheringare secondarycontrols ongrade distribution.
Dimensions	• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	• Individual deposit scales vary across the CMP. • The Wingellina deposits have a strike length of >9km, a lateral extent of up to 2.5km and a depth of upto 200m.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 65

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Estimation and modelling techniques	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used. • The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data. • The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. • Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic signifcance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). • In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed. • Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. • Any assumptions about correlation between variables. • Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates. • Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. • The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	• All modelling and estimation work undertaken was carried out in three dimensions via Micromine or Surpac Vision. • After validating the drill hole data to be used in the estimation, interpretation of the orebody is undertaken in sectional and / or plan view to create the outline strings which form the basis of the three dimensional orebody wireframe. Wireframing is then carried out using a combination of automated stitching algorithms and manual triangulation to create an accurate three dimensional representation of the sub-surface mineralised body. • Drillhole intersections within the mineralised body are defned, these intersections are then used to fag the appropriate sections of the drill hole database tables for compositing purposes. Drill holes are subsequently composited to allow for grade estimation. In all aspects of resource estimation the factual and interpreted geology was used to guide the development of the interpretation. • Once the sample data has been composited, a statistical analysis (using Snowden Supervisor v8.5) is undertaken to assist with determining estimation search parameters, top-cuts etc. Variographic analysis of individual domains is undertaken to assist with determining appropriate search parameters. Which are then incorporated with observed geological and geometrical features to determine the most appropriate search parameters. • An empty block model is then created for the area of interest. This model contains attributes set at background values for the various elements of interest as well as density, and various estimation parameters that are subsequently used to assist in resource categorisation. The block sizes used in the model will vary depending on orebody geometry, minimum mining units, estimation parameters and levels of informing data available. • Grade estimation is then undertaken, with the ordinary kriging estimation method considered as standard, although in some circumstances where sample populations are small, or domains are unable to be accurately defned, inverse distance weighting estimation techniques may be used. Both by-product and deleterious elements are estimated at the time of primary grade estimation if required. It is assumed that by-products correlate well with Nickel. There are no assumptions made about the recovery of by-products. • The resource is then depleted for mining voids and subsequently classifed in line with JORC guidelines utilising a combination of various estimation derived parameters and geological / mining knowledge. • This approach has proven to be applicable to Metals X’s nickel assets. • Estimation results are routinely validated against primary input data, previous estimates and miningoutput.
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	• Tonnage estimates are dry tonnes.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 66

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Cut-off parameters • The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied. • The resource reporting cut-off grade is 0.5% Ni.
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Cut-of parameters	• The basis of the adopted cut-of grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	• The resource reporting cut-of grade is 0.5% Ni.
		• The reporting cut-of used was based on MLX’s current interpretation of commodity markets, and to allowpeergroupcomparison.
Mining factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	• Not considered for Mineral Resource. Applied during the Reserve generation process.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	• Not considered for Mineral Resource. Applied during the Reserve generation process.
Environmental factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfelds project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.	• MLX operates in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the respective leases.
Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. • The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and diferences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. • Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the diferent materials.	• Sampling of HQ diamond drill core was used to determine the dry density of laterite ore. Average measured dry density is 1.23t/m3 for limonite ore and 1.40t/m3 saprolite ore. • A total of 281 triple-tube HQ core samples were collected immediately from the core barrel and measured for bulk density on site. The core length was measured for diameter and length (square-cut ends), dried for 24 hours in a gas oven at 120C, and weighed. • Density was calculated by dividing the weight (kg) of dry sample by the volume of the core piece.
Classifcation	• The basis for the classifcation of the Mineral Resources into varying confdence categories. • Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confdence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confdence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data). • Whether the result appropriatelyrefects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	• Resources are classifed in line with JORC guidelines utilising a combination of various estimation derived parameters, the input data and geological / mining knowledge. • This approach considers all relevant factors and refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 67

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	• Resource estimates are peer reviewed by the site technical team as well as Metals X’s Corporate technical team.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confdence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confdence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confdence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could afect the relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • These statements of relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate should be compared withproduction data, where available.	• All currently reported resources estimates are considered robust, and representative on both a global and local scale.

SECTION 4 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in sections 2 and 3, also apply to this section.)

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
Mineral Resource estimate for • Description of the Mineral Resource estimate used as a basis for the conversion to an Ore • At all projects, all resources that have been converted to reserve are classified as either
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Mineral Resource estimate for	• Description of the Mineral Resource estimate used as a basis for the conversion to an Ore	• At all projects, all resources that have been converted to reserve are classifed as either
conversion to Ore Reserves Site visits Study status	Reserve. • Clear statement as to whether the Mineral Resources are reported additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore Reserves. • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. • If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. • The type and level of study undertaken to enable Mineral Resources to be converted to Ore Reserves. • The Code requires that a study to at least Pre-Feasibility Study level has been undertaken to convert Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves. Such studies will have been carried out and will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.	an Indicated or Measured Resource. Indicated Resources are only upgraded to Probable Reserves after adding appropriate modifying factors. Some Measured Resource may be classifed as Proven Reserves and some is classifed as Probable Reserve based on whether is capitally or fully developed. • Irregular site visits have been undertaken. The reserve has remained consistent since the 2008 Feasibility Study was completed. • A Feasibility Study utilising a combination of internal and external expertise has been undertaken to allow the conversion of Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves.
Cut-of parameters	• The basis of the cut-of grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	• The cut-of grade used for inclusion in the CMP Reserve were determined through the Feasibility Study process. • Cobalt co-product revenue is considered bythe FeasibilityStudy.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 68

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Mining factors or assumptions	• The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study to convert the Mineral Resource to an Ore Reserve (i.e. either by application of appropriate factors by optimisation or by preliminary or detailed design). • The choice, nature and appropriateness of the selected mining method(s) and other mining parameters including associated design issues such as pre-strip, access, etc. • The assumptions made regarding geotechnical parameters (e.g. pit slopes, stope sizes, etc.), grade control and pre-production drilling. • The major assumptions made and Mineral Resource model used for pit and stope optimisation (if appropriate). • The mining dilution factors used. • The mining recovery factors used. • Any minimum mining widths used. • The manner in which Inferred Mineral Resources are utilised in mining studies and the sensitivity of the outcome to their inclusion. • The infrastructure requirements of the selected miningmethods.	• Whittle 4D was used to formulate optimal pit shell, with subsequent designs being undertaken in Surpac. • Mining studies indicate most material will be free digging, but an allowance has been made to blast some material. • The material outcrops on surface and has an overall strip ratio of 1.1:1. Due to the shallow nature and expected ground conditions, slope angles are low. Geotechnical data has been obtained through logging. • The Mineral Resource was used to formulate the Ore Reserves. • Due to the bulk nature of the deposit, limited dilution factors have been used, combined with high recovery factors.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that process to the style of mineralisation. • Whether the metallurgical process is well-tested technology or novel in nature. • The nature, amount and representativeness of metallurgical test work undertaken, the nature of the metallurgical domaining applied and the corresponding metallurgical recovery factors applied. • Any assumptions or allowances made for deleterious elements. • The existence of any bulk sample or pilot scale test work and the degree to which such samples are considered representative of the orebody as a whole. • For minerals that are defned by a specifcation, has the ore reserve estimation been based on the appropriate mineralogyto meet the specifcations?	• Based on this preliminary assessment, the Wingellina Deposit may be processed by a pressure acid leach fowsheet. • Pressure acid leach is a proven nickel extraction method both in Australia and globally • Extensive test-work including at pilot plant scale has been conducted on CMP material over the period 1965 to 2013. • Alternate processing options are actively being tested.
Environmental	• The status of studies of potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. Details of waste rock characterisation and the consideration of potential sites, status of design options considered and, where applicable, the status of approvals for process residue storage and waste dumps should be reported.	• Waste dumps were considered during the Feasibility Study. • A draft Public Environmental Notice has been completed and will be published.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 69

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Infrastructure	• The existence of appropriate infrastructure: availability of land for plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk commodities), labour, accommodation; or the ease with which the infrastructure can be provided, or accessed.	• Limited infrastructure is currently present. All required infrastructure was considered in the Feasibility Study. • Infrastructure is considered standard for a remote site set-up.
Costs	• The derivation of, or assumptions made, regarding projected capital costs in the study. • The methodology used to estimate operating costs. • Allowances made for the content of deleterious elements. • The source of exchange rates used in the study. • Derivation of transportation charges. • The basis for forecasting or source of treatment and refning charges, penalties for failure to meet specifcation, etc. • The allowances made for royaltiespayable, both Government andprivate.	• The Feasibility Study was completed in 2008 using both independent and internal cost estimates. These costs were updated in 2012. • Both government and private royalties are payable. All royalties were considered as part of the Feasibility Study.
Revenue factors	• The derivation of, or assumptions made regarding revenue factors including head grade, metal or commodity price(s) exchange rates, transportation and treatment charges, penalties, net smelter returns, etc. • The derivation of assumptions made of metal or commodity price(s), for the principal metals, minerals and co-products.	• The Feasibility Study progressed utilising assumptions regarding foreign exchange rates and commodity prices presented below. These prices have been set by corporate management and are considered a realistic forecast of expected commodity prices and exchange rates over the initial period of projected operation at Wingellina. • Ni = US $20,000/t • Co = US $45,000/t • Exchange Rate ($AUD : $US) US $0.85 • Headgrades have been defned via Whittle optimisation and subsequent scheduling.
Market assessment	• The demand, supply and stock situation for the particular commodity, consumption trends and factors likely to afect supply and demand into the future. • A customer and competitor analysis along with the identifcation of likely market windows for the product. • Price and volume forecasts and the basis for these forecasts. • For industrial minerals the customer specifcation, testing and acceptance requirements prior to a supplycontract.	• Detailed economic studies of the nickel market and future price estimates are considered by Metals X and applied in the estimation of revenue, cut-of grade analysis and future mine planning decisions. • There remains strong demand and no apparent risk to the long term demand for the nickel generated from the project.
Economic	• The inputs to the economic analysis to produce the net present value (NPV) in the study, the source and confdence of these economic inputs including estimated infation, discount rate, etc. • NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations in the signifcant assumptions and inputs.	• For the CMP, which is yet to be funded, an 8% real discount rate is applied to NPV analysis. • Sensitivity analysis of key fnancial and physical parameters is applied to future development project considerations and mine.
Social	• The status of agreements with key stakeholders and matters leading to social licence to operate.	• The CMP is yet to start and will require environmental and other regulatory permitting.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 70

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary

Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project and/or on the estimation and classifcation of the Ore Reserves: • Any identifed material naturally occurring risks. • The status of material legal agreements and marketing arrangements. • The status of governmental agreements and approvals critical to the viability of the project, such as mineral tenement status, and government and statutory approvals. There must be reasonable grounds to expect that all necessary Government approvals will be received within the timeframes anticipated in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility study. Highlight and discuss the materiality of any unresolved matter that is dependent on a third party on which extraction of the reserve is contingent.	• A Native Title agreement has been reached.
Classifcation	• The basis for the classifcation of the Ore Reserves into varying confdence categories. • Whether the result appropriately refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit. • The proportion of Probable Ore Reserves that have been derived from Measured Mineral Resources (if any).	• The basis for classifcation of the resource into diferent categories is made on a subjective basis. Measured Resources have a high level of confdence and are generally defned in three dimensions. Indicated resources have a slightly lower level of confdence but contain substantial drilling and are well defned from a mining perspective. Inferred resources always contain signifcant geological evidence of existence and are drilled, but not to the same density. There is no classifcation of any resource that isn’t drilled or defned by substantial physical sampling works. • Some Measured Resources have been classifed as Proven and some are defned as Probable Reserves based on subjective internal judgements,. • The result appropriatelyrefects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Ore Reserve estimates.	• Site generated reserves and the parent data and economic evaluation data is routinely reviewed by the Metals X Corporate technical team. Resources and Reserves have in the past been subjected to external expert reviews, which have ratifed them with no issues. There is no regular external consultant reviewprocess inplace.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confdence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confdence level in the Ore Reserve estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the reserve within stated confdence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors which could afect the relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • Accuracy and confdence discussions should extend to specifc discussions of any applied Modifying Factors that may have a material impact on Ore Reserve viability, or for which there are remaining areas of uncertainty at the current study stage. • It is recognised that this may not be possible or appropriate in all circumstances. These statements of relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	• All currently reported reserve calculations are considered representative on a global scale. • Only material considered as part of the Feasibility Study has been included as part of the reserve statement. • Limited modifying factors have been applied due to the massive nature of the deposit and the closeness to the surface.

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT 71

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised • Historic reverse circulation drilling was used to collect samples at 1m intervals with sample quality,
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specifc specialised	• Historic reverse circulation drilling was used to collect samples at 1m intervals with sample quality,
	industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fre assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	recovery and moisture recorded on logging sheets. Bulk samples were composited to 4-5m samples by PVC spear. These composites were dried, crushed and split to produce a 30g charge for aqua regia digest at the Fortnum site laboratory. • For Metals X (MLX) RC Drilling drill cuttings are extracted from the RC return via cyclone. The underfow from each interval is transferred via bucket to a four tiered rife splitter, delivering approximately three kilograms of the recovered material into calico bags for analysis. The residual material is retained on the ground near the hole. Composite samples are obtained from the residue material for initial analysis, with the split samples remaining with the individual residual piles until required for re-split analysis or eventual disposal. • In the case of grade control drilling, 1m intervals were split at the rig via a 3-tier splitter box below the cyclone and collected in calico bags with bulk samples collected into large plastic bags. These 1m splits were dried, pulverised and split to produce a 50g charge for fre assay at an ofsite laboratory. • Where composite intervals returned results >0.15g/t Au, the original bulk samples were split by 3-tier rife splitter to approximately 3-4kg. The whole sample was dried, pulverised and split to produce a 50g charge for fre assay at an ofsite laboratory. • Historic diamond drilling sampled according to mineralisation and lithology resulting in samples of 10cm to 1.5m. Half core pulverised and split to produce a 50g charge for fre assay at an ofsite laboratory.
Drilling techniques	• Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.).	• All reverse circulation at nominal 5.5” diameter, utilising face sampling hammers to reduce the risk of sample contamination. • Diamond drilling utilised 10-40m RC pre-collars to penetrate transported cover then continued as NQ core. Core was oriented bydown-hole spear.
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fne/coarse material.	• Reverse circulation recorded sample quality, recovery and moisture for 1m samples. The majority of samples were of good quality with ground water having minimal efect on sample quality or recovery. Statistical analysis of sample quality for samples over an Au bottom cut of 0.1ppm indicates negligible sample bias. • Diamond drilling recorded rock hardness, recovery and RQD. Core recovery was good.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography. • The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged.	• Reverse circulation chips were washed and stored in chip trays in 1m intervals. Chips were visually inspected, recording lithology, weathering, alteration, mineralisation, veining and structure. • Diamond core was visually inspected, recording data related to lithology, weathering, alteration, mineralisation, veining and structure. Photographs of each core tray were taken wet. • All mineralised intersections from both diamond core and reverse circulation were logged.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 72

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether rifed, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for feld duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to thegrain size of the material being sampled.	• Diamond core samples to be analysed were taken as half core. Sample mark-up was controlled by geological domaining represented by alteration, mineralisation and lithology. • Reverse circulation samples were split from dry, 1m bulk sample via a 3-tier rife splitter. Field duplicates were inserted at a ratio of 1:20, analysis of primary vs duplicate samples indicate sampling is representative of the insitu material. • Field Standard material was documented as being inserted at a ratio of 1:100 for both RC and diamond drilling. • Detailed discussion of sampling techniques and Quality Control are documented in publicly available exploration technical reports compiled by prior owners (Homestake, Perilya, Gleneagle, RNI).
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• Historic assaying of RC and core was done by 50g charge fre assay with Atomic Absorption Spectrometry fnish at Analabs. The method is standard for gold analysis and is considered appropriate in this case. No Laboratory Certifcates are available for historic assay results pre 2008 however, evaluation of the database identifed the following; Standards are inserted at a ratio of 1:100, Assay repeats inserted at a ratio of 1 in 20. • QAQC analysis of this historic data indicates the levels of accuracy and precision are acceptable. • Assay of recent (post 2012) sampling was done by 40g charge fre assay with Inductively Coupled Plasma – Optical Emission Spectroscopy fnish at Bureau Veritas (Ultratrace), Perth. The method is standard for gold analysis and is considered appropriate in this case. Laboratory Certifcates are available for the assay results and the following QAQC protocols used include; Laboratory Checks inserted 1 in 20 samples, CRM inserted 1 in 30 samples and Assay Repeats randomly selected 1 in 15 samples. • QAQC analysis of this data indicates the levels of accuracy and precision are acceptable with no signifcant bias observed. • Detailed discussion of analytical QAQC is documented in the individual resource reports.
Verifcation of sampling and assaying	• The verifcation of signifcant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verifcation, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	• No twinned holes drilled historically. • All sampling, geological logging, borehole location, laboratory analysis results and QA/QC data is retained in DataShed, a relational database which has thorough built-in triggers for validation of imported data. An experienced Database Administrator oversees quality control of input data. • Borehole, geological and sampling data is captured in specifcally designed spreadsheets with built invalidation for data entry felds, using established procedures. • No adjustment toprimaryassaydata is made.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 73

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Location of data points	• .Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specifcation of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	• The grid system used for historic Fortnum drilling is the established Fortnum Mine Grid. Control station locations and traverses have been verifed by eternal survey consultants (Ensurv). Collar locations of boreholes have been established by either total station or diferential GPS (DGPS). The Yarlarweelor, Callie’s and Eldorado open pits (currently abandoned) was picked up by DGPS at the conclusion of mining. The transformation between Mine Grid and MGA94 Zone 50 is documented and well established. • A LIDAR survey over the project area was undertaken in 2012 and results are in agreement with survey pickups of pits, low-grade stockpiles and waste dumps. • Historic drilling by Homestake was routinely surveyed at 25m, 50m and every 50m thereafter, using a single shot CAMTEQ survey tool. RC holes have a nominal setup azimuth applied. Perilya YLRC series holes had survey shots taken by Gyro every 10m. Historic drilling in the area did not appear to have any signifcant problems with hole deviation. • Drilling by RNI / MLX was picked up by DGPS on MGA94. Down hole surveys were taken by digital single shot camera every50m or via agyro surveytool.
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufcient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifcations applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• Borehole spacing is a nominal 40m x 40m that has been in-flled to a nominal 20m x 20m in the main zone of mineralisation at Yarlarweelor, Callie’s and Eldorado with 10m x10m RC grade control within the limits of the open pit.s • The spacing is considered sufcient to establish geological and grade continuity for appropriate Mineral Resource classifcation. • During the historic exploration phase, samples were composited to 4m by spearing 1m bulk samples. Where the assays returned results greater than 0.15ppm Au, the original 1m bulk samples were split usinga 3-tier rife splitter and analysed as described above.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• Multiple phases of drilling at diferent orientations: Homestake RC and diamond drilling oriented south east. Perilya RC drilling oriented east and vertical. • MLX drilling intersections are nominally designed to be normal to the orebody as far as underground infrastructure constraints / topography allows. • A report analysing the potential of bias between sampling types and drilling orientations was undertaken and determined no bias exists.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Sample bags tagged and logged, sealed in bulka bags. • Dispatch by third party contractor, recording consignment note for tracking. • In-companyreconciliation with laboratorysample reconciliation and assayreturns.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data..	• Database compilation into DataShed for data integrity. • Program review by external consultants. • QA/QC report on historic sampling and analysis is included in the individual resource reports, and verifed aspart of the QA/QC reviewprocess for 2016 Yarlarweelor Mineral Resource Estimate (MLX).

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 74

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	• The Fortnum resources are located on Mining Lease 52/132, located 170km north-northwest of Meekatharra at the Fortnum mining centre. The tenement is 100% owned by Metals X through subsidiary company Aragon Resources Pty. Ltd. • The following Royalties apply to the tenement: `o` $10/oz after frst 50,000oz (capped at $2M)- Perilya `o` State Government – 2.5% NSR • The tenure is currentlyingood standing.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• Drilledby RAB, AC, RC and diamond coring, assayed gold only. • Various parties not limited to RNI NL, Eagle Gold Ltd, Gleneagle Gold Ltd,PerilyaMines Ltd, Homestake Gold Mines Australia Ltd and Dominion MiningLtd.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Fortnum deposits are Paleoproterozoic shear-hosted gold deposits within the Fortnum Wedge, a localised thrust duplex of Narracoota Formation within the overlying Ravelstone Formation. Both stratigraphic formations comprise part of the Bryah Basin in the Capricorn Orogen, Western Australia. • The deposits are hosted within a highly siliceous and deformed unit (jasperoid) and in proximal highly sheared siltstones and felsic to intermediate volcaniclastic rocks. Primary mineralisation manifests as brecciated zones in jasperoid with associated quartz veining and pyritisation, and in surrounding shear zones as an orogenic lode style, evident as fne to coarse euhedral pyrite within sericite-quartz- carbonate-albite alteration around quartz-carbonate veining. Veins are spatially associated with high strain zones with adjacent competent rock units.
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: `o` easting_and northing of the drill hole collar_ `o` elevation_or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole_ collar `o` dip and azimuth of the hole `o` down_hole length and interception depth_ `o` hole_length. • _If the exclusion of this information is justifed on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	• Tables containing drillhole collar, downhole survey and intersection data are included in the body of the announcement.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 75

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-of grades are usually Material and should be stated.Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions usedfor any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	• All results presented are length weighted. • No high-grade cuts are used. • Reported results contain no more than two contiguous metres of internal dilution below 1g/t. • Results are reported above a variety of gram / metre cut-ofs dependent upon the nature of the hole. • These are cut-ofs are clearly stated in the relevant tables.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this efect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	• Unless indicated to the contrary, all results reported are true width.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any signifcant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	• Appropriate diagrams are provided in the body of the release.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	• Appropriate balance in exploration results reporting is provided.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics;potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	• There is no other substantive exploration data associated with this release.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations andfuture drilling areas,provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	• Ongoing surface exploration activities will be undertaken to support continuing feasibility works at the Fortnum Gold Project.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 76

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

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

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Database integrity	• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. • Data validation procedures used.	• Geological logging, borehole location, laboratory analysis results and QAQC data is retained in a relational database. MLX uses DataShed as the relational database which has thorough built-in triggers for validation of imported data. An experienced Database Administrator oversees quality control of data. • Borehole, Geological and Sampling data is captured in specifcally designed spreadsheets with built in validation for data entry felds, using established procedures. • Industry standard validation checks were conducted and included, but were not limited to: `o` No overlapping intervals. `o` Downhole surveys at 0m depth and also at the end of hole. `o` Consistency of depths between diferent data tables. `o` Check gaps in the data. `o` Sample number matching between feld sample records and laboratory results. • Additional validation checks included comparison against historic databases (2014, 2011 and 2009) and the database stored on the DMP WAMEX database system (A035439). Approximately, 10% of the original collar, survey and assay (i.e. at least three intervals per hole) information was validated against the original or scans of the original hard copies.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. • If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	• Mr. Russell visits Metals X Gold Operations regularly

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 77

==> picture [772 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Geological • Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the • Three mineralisation styles have been observed:
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Geological	• Confdence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the	• Three mineralisation styles have been observed:
interpretation	geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. • Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. • The efect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation. • The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation. • The factors afecting continuity both of grade and geology.	`o` Sheeted and stockwork quartz-pyrite veins associated with brittle deformation of the jasperoid lithologies. The mineralisation is hosted within quartz vein stockworks and sheeted vein arrays proximal to or within brecciated zones within jasperoid units. Quartz veins hold minimal internal grade, with the majority of mineralisation associated with coarse grained disseminated euhedral pyrite along the vein selvages and within zones of strong silicifcation. Jasperoid bodies are host to the majority of mineralisation are bounded within the intensely foliated, west-northwest dipping, east-northeast striking shear zones. These bodies are strongly folded on a macro scale with a pronounced moderate southwesterly plunge. `o` Structurally controlled stockwork veins within volcaniclastics. The structurally controlled vein stockworks occur in the footwall of major thrust faults and located within intermediate tufs and tufaceous siltstones. Gold mineralisation is associated with zones of pyritisation, silicifcation, albitisation or sericitisation in quartz vein selvedges. `o` Supergene associated mineralisation. • Low-grade stockpiles are derived from previous mining of the mineralisation styles outlined above. • Geological matrixes were established to assist with interpretation and construction of the estimation domains. • Confdence in the interpretation is high as the geometry, geology, alteration and tenor of the mineralised zones was observed to be consistent along strike and down dip • The interpretations was based on 10m and 20m north-south spaced sections. • The information used in the construction and estimation of the respective resources mineralisation is based on Air Core (AC), Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond Drill (DDH) hole information. The AC was included in the poorly information estimation domains and this was considered during the classifcation of these domains. • Oxidation surfaces were constructed from the logged information on 20m north south sections.
	• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	• The Yarlarweelor mineral resource extends over 1,400m in strike length, 570m in lateral extent and 190m in depth. • The Callie’s mineral resource extends over 1,100m in strike length, 270m in lateral extent and 180m in depth. • The Eldorado mineral resource extends over 240m in strike length, 100m in lateral extent and 100m in depth.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 78

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Estimation and modelling tech- niques	• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used. • The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data. • The assumptions made regarding recovery of by- products. • Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic signifcance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). • In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed. • Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. • Any assumptions about correlation between variables. • Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates. • Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. • The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	• All modelling and estimation work undertaken by Metals X is carried out in three dimensions with Surpac Vision, Snowden’s Supervisor v8.3 and or Isatis 2015. • Ordinary kriging (OK) and Localised Indicator Kriging (LIK) has been used for the estimation of the Yarlarweelor and Callies’ mineralisation. LIK was used for the estimation of all Jasperoid related estimation domains due to mosaic mineralisation style. Ordinary kriging only was used for Eldorado. Length weighting of assay values related to surveyed volumes was undertaken for low-grade stockpiles. • All estimates were validated where possible against historical production records and previous estimates. • After validating the drillhole data to be used in the estimation, interpretation of the orebody is undertaken in sectional and / or plan view to create the outline strings which form the basis of the three dimensional orebody wireframe. Wireframing was carried out using a combination of automated stitching algorithms and manual triangulation to create an accurate three dimensional representation of the sub-surface mineralised body. Domaining was constructed on 20m and 10m spaced sections and was based on logged lithologies, quartz percentage and gold value. • Drillhole intersections within the mineralised body are defned; these intersections are then used to fag the appropriate sections of the drillhole database tables for compositing purposes. Assay data was composited to 1m downhole using Surpac “best ft” algorithm. The “best ft” algorithm eliminates residual composites and the estimation domains boundaries defned the start and end position of the compositing routine. In all aspects of resource estimation; the factual and interpreted geology was used to guide the development of the interpretation. • Support analysis of the diference drill types (Air Core (AC), Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond Drill holes (DDH)) was performed and the mixing these deemed acceptable. The AC drill holes were used in the estimation of the poorly informed estimation domains. • Statistical analysis was carried out on the composited data to assist with determining estimation search parameters, top-cuts and spatial continuity. Data for some of the domains exhibit an increased degree of skewness and top cuts were applied to reduce the skewness of distribution. The appropriateness of the top cuts was assessed for each domain utilising log-probability plots, mean and variance plots, histograms and univariate statistics for the composite Au variable. • Variogram modelling was undertaken using Isatis™ software and defned the spatial continuity of gold within all domains and these parameters were used for the interpolation process. Indicator variograms were generated within the Jasperoid related estimation domains to the used in the LIK estimation process. • Volume models were generated in Surpac using topographic surfaces, oxidation surfaces and mineralised zone wireframes as constraints. • Quantitative Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis was used optimise the search parameters. • Search ellipses were aligned parallel to the maximum continuity defned during the variographic analysis. The search dimensions, generally, approximated the ranges of the interpreted variograms and ranged from 50 to 100m. The minimum and maximum number of samples range from 7 to 11 and 18 to 30, respectively. Second and third pass searches were implement to fll the un-estimated cells / blocks if they were not estimated during the frst search pass and these search parameters involved increasing in the search distances and reducing in the minimum number of samples used in the estimation process. • The extrapolation was control through the interpreted estimation domains, which was limited to half the drill hole spacing within section and half the section spacing between sections. • Block estimation for gold was undertaken using Isatis™ and hard boundaries were used between domains for estimation of gold grade. • No assumptions were made about recovery during the OK and LIK estimation processes. • Grade estimation was undertaken, with the ordinary kriging (OK) estimation method for all non-jasperoid related estimation domains. • Check estimates were run using Localised Uniform Conditioning (LUC) for the LIK estimation domains, which produces a similar form of result to LIK. The LIK and LUC models were compared, with reasonable agreement at lower cut-ofs and diferences at higher cut-ofs refecting higher estimated gold variability in the LIK model. The LIK is believed to be better suited to the style of mineralisation for the Jasperoid related estimation domains and has been favoured for ofcial reporting of the Mineral Resources. APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 79

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

		• The estimation is validated using the following: a visual interrogation, a comparison of the mean composite grade to the mean block grade for each domain, a comparison of the wireframe volume to the block volume for each domain, Grade trend plots (moving window statistics), comparison to the previous resource estimate. • The only element of economic interest modelled is gold. • The Isatis™ block models were transferred and imported to Surpac Mining Software. The transfer and importing process was validated against the Isatis™ block model. The resource was then depleted for mining voids and subsequently classifed in line with JORC guidelines utilisinga combination of various estimation derivedparameters andgeological / miningknowledge.
Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	• Tonnages are estimated as dry metric.
Cut-of parameters	• The basis of the adopted cut-of grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	• Interpretation cut-of ≥0.50g/t. • Various top-cut values have been applied to the data dependent on domains used in the OK estimation process. No top-cutting was applied to the Jasperoid related estimation domains because of the LIK estimation methodology was implemented. • The reported ≥0.7 g/t Au cutof grade is based on surface mining techniques and was determined through interval engineering investigations. • Low-grade stocks are reportedglobally.
Mining factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	• Conventional open cut mining with 120t class hydraulic backhoe excavators and 90t rigid dump trucks. • 2m minimum mining width has been assumed. • No mining dilution or ore loss has been modelled in the Resource model or applied to the reported Mineral Resource.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	• Horizons were modelled based on oxidation state of the host rocks, taken from the drilling information. These were: Transported and lateritic residuum, oxidised, transitional and fresh. • Jasperoid was fagged in the model due to it’s hardness and difering heap leach characteristics as identifed in recent metallurgical scoping studies.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 80

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Environmental factors or assumptions	• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfelds project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.	• Metals X operates in accordance with all environmental conditions set down as conditions for grant of the respective mining leases.
Bulk density	• .Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. • The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and diferences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. • Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluationprocess of the diferent materials.	• A total of 432 bulk density determinations were collected within the Yarlarweelor mineralised area. The bulk densities were separated into diferent weathering domains and lithological domains (i.e. jasperoid domains). Density determinations were made on diamond drill core representing mineralisation utilised the water immersion method (Archimedes Principle) • The assigned bulk densities were: transported 1.90 t/m3, oxide 2.00 t/m3, oxide Jasperoid 2.50 t/m3, transitional 2.20 t/m3, transitional Jasperoid 2.20 t/m3, fresh 2.70 t/m3and fresh Jasperoid 2.70 t t/m3.
Classifcation	• The basis for the classifcation of the Mineral Resources into varying confdence categories. • Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confdence in tonnage/ grade estimations, reliability of input data, confdence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data). • Whether the result appropriately refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	• The continuity of geology and mineralisation is well understood, with most of the reported resource being covered by either 20 x2 0m resource drilling or 10 x1 0m grade control drilling. • The non-linear, local estimation method used is considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation and assumed mining selectivity. • A combination of gold estimation quality parameters and drill spacing were ultimately used to defne resource confdence categories. • The Competent Person believes that the classifcation fairly represents the confdence in the resource estimates, as they are described in the JORC (2012) code.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	• Resource estimates are peer reviewed by the site technical team as well as Metals X’s Corporate technical team.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 81

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Discussion of relative accuracy/ confdence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confdence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confdence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could afect the relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • These statements of relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	• Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the guidelines of the 2012 edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves and refects the relative accuracy of the Mineral Resource estimates. • The current Mineral Resource model represents a robust estimate of the in-situ gold mineralisation for Fortnum resource reported. The method used is designed to provide an estimate of local mineable resources, based on current mining methods.

Section 4 Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in sections 2 and 3, also apply to this section.)

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves	• Description of the Mineral Resource estimate used as a basis for the conversion to anOre Reserve. • Clear statement as to whether the Mineral Resources are reported additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore Reserves.	• The total Reserve Statement of 174k Oz is a combination of the individual ‘Resource’ models, as 31st March 2016, with the appropriate mining, geotechnical, processing and hydrological modifying factors applied. • The total Resource for Measured and Indicated categories is 7,918k tonnes @ 1.5 g/t for 388k contained Ounces (based on cut-ofs specifc to the individual orebodies). The Mineral Resources are inclusive of Ore Reserves. • All resources that have been converted to Reserve are classifed as either Indicated or Measured. Indicated Resources are only upgraded to Probable Reserves after adding appropriate modifying factors. Some Measured Resource may be classifed as Proven Reserves and some are classifed as Probable Reserve based on whether it is developed and /or has drill hole density/ historicalproduction.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome ofthose visits. • Ifno site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	• Mr Anthony Buckingham has been an employee of Metals X (and its subsidiaries) for the past 7 years and has over 15 years’ experience specifcally in the Western Australian mining industry. Mr Buckingham visits the Fortnum mine site on a regular fortnightly basis and is the primary engineer involved in mineplanning, site infrastructure andproject management.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 82

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Study status	• The type and level of study undertaken to enable Mineral Resources to beconverted to Ore Reserves. • The Code requires that a study to at least Pre-Feasibility Study level has beenundertaken to convert Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves. Such studies will have been carried out and will have determined a mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, and that material Modifying Factors have been considered.	• The Fortnum Gold Mine Operation ceased production in May 2007 when owned by Gleneagle Gold. Previous to this the operation was operated by Perilya and Homestake, and frst began commercial mining operations in the late 1980’s. Extensive mining and processing records are therefore available in each of the deposits. • Various open pit styles and host domains have been mined since discovery of the area by Homestake in 1980’s. Mining during this time has ranged from open pit cut backs, virgin surface excavations to extensional underground developments. • The Fortnum Gold Mine Open Pit inventory had a Pre-feasibility study completed by MLX in early 2016. Additional details and a revision of the Resources (with classifcation) have continued since this initial fnancial evaluation. The Fortnum Gold Mine is therefore now at a budgetary level analysis with specifc details on processing components and reagent costs, specifc mining contractor cost profles as well as site specifc G&A.
Cut-of parameters	• The basis of the cut-of grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	• The pit rim cut of grade (COG) was determined as part of the Reserve estimation. The pit rim COG determines which material will be processed by equating the operating cost of processing, surface haulage, G&A and selling cost to the value of the mining block in terms of recovered metal and the expected selling price. The COG is then used to determine whether or not a mining block should be delivered to the treatment plant for processing or taken to the waste dump as waste. • A COG of 0.9g/t was applied to the Reserve open pit inventory, with local Low grade piles having a 0.6g/t determinant and the regional low grade stocks of Horseshoe being cut at 0.8g/t. • Low Grade stockpiles incurred a low cost profle than open pits for processing, because of the predominantly oxide material, as well as G&A, as the operation would have limited fxed management when millingthis inventory.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 83

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Mining factors or assumptions	• The method and assumptions used as reported in the Pre-Feasibility or FeasibilityStudy to convert the Mineral Resource to an Ore Reserve (i.e. either by application of appropriate factors by optimisation or by preliminary or detailed design). • The choice, nature and appropriateness of the selected mining method(s) and other mining parameters including associated design issues such as pre-strip, access, etc. • The assumptions made regarding geotechnical parameters (e.g. pit slopes, stope sizes, etc.), grade control and pre-production drilling. • The major assumptions made and Mineral Resource model used for pit and stope optimisation (if appropriate). • The mining dilution factors used. • The mining recovery factors used. • Any minimum mining widths used. • The manner in which Inferred Mineral Resources are utilised in mining studies andthe sensitivity of the outcome to their inclusion. • The infrastructure requirements of the selected mining methods.	Following consideration of the various modifying factors the following rules were applied to the reserve estimation process for the conversion of measured and indicated resource to reserve for suitable evaluation. • The mining shape in the reserve estimation is generated by a wireframe (geology interpretation of the ore zone) which overlays the block model. Where the wire frame cuts the primary block, sub blocks fll out the remaining space to the wire frame boundary (efectively the mining shape). It is reasonable to assume that the mining method can selectively mine to the wire frame boundary with the additional dilution provision stated in point 2 below. • Ore Reserves are based on Pit shape designs – with appropriate modifcations to the original Whittle Shell outlines to ensure compliance with practical mining parameters. • Geotechnical parameters allied to the Open Pit Reserves are either based on observed existing pit shape specifcs or domain specifc expectations / assumptions. Various geotechnical reports and retrospective reconciliations were considered in the 2016 design parameters. A majority of the open pits have a fnal design wall angle of 38-420, which is seen as conservative. • Dilution of the ore through the mining process has been set at 15% which is considered as additional ore mined in relation to mining to the wire frame boundary as identifed in point 1 above, albeit at a grade of 0.0 g/t. The amount of dilution is considered appropriate based on orebody geometry, historical mining performance and the size of mining equipment to be used to extract ore. • Expected mining recovery of the ore has been set at 95%. • Minimum Mining widths have been accounted for in the designs, with the utilization of 90T trucking parameters. • No specifc ground support requirements are needed outside of suitable pit slope design criteria based on specifc geotechnical domains. • Mining sequence is included in the mine scheduling process for determining the economic evaluation and takes into account available operating time and mining equipment size and performance. • NoInferredmaterial is included within the open pit statement, though in various pit shapes inferred material ispresent. In these situations this inferred material is classifed as waste.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	• The metallurgical process proposed and the appropriateness of that process to the style of mineralisation. • Whether the metallurgical process is well-tested technology or novel in nature. • The nature, amount and representativeness of metallurgical test work undertaken, the nature of the metallurgical domaining applied and the corresponding metallurgical recovery factors applied. • Any assumptions or allowances made for deleterious elements. • The existence of any bulk sample or pilot scale test work and the degree to whichsuch samples are considered representative of the orebody as a whole. • For minerals that are defned by a specifcation, has the ore reserve estimation been based on the appropriate mineralogy to meet the specifcations?	• Fortnum Gold Mine has an existing conventional CIL processing plant – which has been operational in various periods since the late 1980’s. The plant has anameplatecapacity of 1.0Mtpa though this can be varied between 0.8-1.2Mtpa pending rosters and material type. • Grindsize for the sulphide material has historically been 130 µm. • An extensive database of historical CIL recoveries as well as detailed metallurgicaltestwork is available for the various deposits and these have been incorporated into the COG analysis and fnancial models. • For the 2016 Reserve, Plant recoveries of 93-95% have been utilised.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 84

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Environmental	• The status of studies of potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. Details of waste rock characterisation and the consideration of potential sites, status of design options considered and, where applicable, the status of approvals for process residue storage and waste dumps should be reported.	• The Fortnum Gold Mine has normal Western Australian permitting requirements.
Infrastructure	• The existence of appropriate infrastructure: availability of land for plant development, power, water, transportation (particularly for bulk commodities), labour, accommodation; or the ease with which the infrastructure can beprovided, or accessed.	• Fortnum Gold Mine, despite being under Care and Maintenance since 2007, has anexistingoperational infrastructure base with a 108 man camp facility, various water bores, existing TSF, a processing plant, airstrip, communications and main road access ways.
Costs	• The derivation of, or assumptions made, regarding projected capital costs in the study. • The methodology used to estimate operating costs. • Allowances made for the content of deleterious elements. • The source of exchange rates used in the study. • Derivation of transportation charges. • The basis for forecasting or source of treatment and refning charges, penalties for failure to meet specifcation, etc. • The allowances made for royalties payable, both Government and private.	• Open Pit Mining costs have been sourced from MLX CMGP operations whereby several contracting companies are undertaking mining works. These costs include pit load and haul as well as drill and blast, dewatering and maintenance. The costs are based on recent tender submissions (early 2016) for the CMGP which islocated200km south of the Fortnum Gold Mine. • Additional to direct mining costs, surface haulage is based on recent 2016 request for quotation. Where specifc tkm rates are not available, a default value of $0.10-0.15 /tkm has been used. • Processing costs are based on the 2016 Pre-Feasibility costs. These costs are inlinewith previous operating conditions and are aligned to the cost profle seen in MLX’s neighbouring operation of CMGP. • Royaltiesapplicable to the open pit and stockpile inventory vary pending tenement, though a summary of these are: `o` $10/oz after frst 50,000oz (capped at $2M)- Perilya `o` State Government – 2.5% NSR
Revenue factors	• The derivation of, or assumptions made regarding revenue factors including head grade, metal or commodity price(s) exchange rates, transportation and treatment charges, penalties, net smelter returns, etc. • The derivation of assumptions made of metal or commodity price(s), for the principal metals, minerals and co-products.	• Assessedat A$1,550 / Oz.
Market assessment	• The demand, supply and stock situation for the particular commodity, consumption trends and factors likely to afect supply and demand into the future. • A customer and competitor analysis along with the identifcation of likely market windows for the product. • Price and volume forecasts and the basis for these forecasts. • For industrial minerals the customer specifcation, testing and acceptance requirements prior to a supply contract.	• Assessed at A$1,550 / Oz
Economic	• The inputs to the economic analysis to produce the net present value (NPV) in the study, the source and confdence of these economic inputs including estimated infation, discount rate, etc. • NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations in the signifcant assumptions and inputs.	• A straight undiscounted Cash Flow Model has been used to analyse the Fortnum Gold Mine. The 3 years term does not warrant extensive Discount / Infationary modelling.

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 85

==> picture [772 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Social	• The status of agreements with key stakeholders and matters leading to social licence to operate.	• No negative social impacts noted. • Local stakeholders have been consulted regarding MLX plan for the Fortnum Gold Mine. • MLXcontinues to work with local governments, business owners and residence around the Fortnum Gold Mine.
Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the following on the project and/or on the estimation and classifcation of the Ore Reserves: • Any identifed material naturally occurring risks. • The status of material legal agreements and marketing arrangements. • The status of governmental agreements and approvals critical to the viability of the project, such as mineral tenement status, and government and statutory approvals. There must be reasonable grounds to expect that all necessary Government approvals will be received within the timeframes anticipated in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility study. Highlight and discuss the materiality of any unresolved matter that is dependent on a third party on which extraction of the reserve is contingent.	• A Mining Proposal for the various 2016 Open Pit Reserves has been approved. • A Project Management Plan for the re-start of the operations (processing, dewatering and mining) has been approved. • Native Title Agreements are established in all Reserve areas.
Classifcation	• The basis for the classifcation of the Ore Reserves into varying confdence categories. • Whether the result appropriately refects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit. • The proportion of Probable Ore Reserves that have been derived from Measured Mineral Resources (if any).	• Only a small vertical fitch within Tom’s Resources has been classifed as Measured (with fnal grade control density drilling completed in 2007) with all other Resources having an Indicated designation. • All Open Pit Reserves therefore have been classifed as Probable. • The LG stocks have been classifed as Probable to account for material type variations as well as any possible surveyand densitydiscrepancies.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of Ore Reserve estimates.	• Various technical mining and fnancial analysis reports have been undertaken on the operations since May 2007 as part of re-start programs. • These external independent reports and cost models have been used as a reference for the 2016 Reserve calculation / mining modifcation factors in order to validate MLX assumptions and or parameters.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confdence	• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confdence level in the Ore Reserve estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the reserve within stated confdence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors which could afect the relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate. • The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • Accuracy and confdence discussions should extend to specifc discussions of any applied Modifying Factors that may have a material impact on Ore Reserve viability, or for which there are remaining areas of uncertainty at the current study stage. • It is recognised that this may not be possible or appropriate in all circumstances. These statements of relative accuracy and confdence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	• Various sensitivity analyses have been undertaken on the 2016 Reserve models in order to understand and subsequently control risk.
APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT 86

AI assistant

Metals X Limited — Interim / Quarterly Report 2016

10401_rns_2016-04-28_29be209a-e7fa-47d3-b725-6bb7e95f4fff.pdf

CORPORATE DIRECTORY

QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2016 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE QUARTER

OPERATIONS

CORPORATE

ENQUIRIES

Peter Cook

Warren Hallam

GOLD DIVISION

OVERVIEW

HIGGINSVILLE GOLD OPERATIONS (HGO) (MLX 100%)

HGO EXPLORATION

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS (SKO) (MLX 100%)

SKO EXPLORATION

CANON GOLD MINE (MLX 50% PROFIT SHARE)

CENTRAL MURCHISON GOLD PROJECT (CMGP) (MLX 100%)

CMGP EXPLORATION

FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT (FGP) (MLX 100%)

Progress on Phase 1

Phase 2 Progress

Progress on Phase 3

ROVER GOLD PROJECT (MLX 100%)

TIN DIVISION RENISON PROJECT (MLX 50%)

RENISON EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

RENTAILS PROJECT (MLX 50%)

NICKEL DIVISION WINGELLINA PROJECT (MLX 100%)

CORPORATE

GOLD HEDGING

DIESEL HEDGING

OFF MARKET TAKEOVER - ADITYA BIRLA MINERALS LIMITED

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENTS

APPENDIX 1 – SIGNIFICANT EXPLORATION RESULTS FOR THE QUARTER HIGGINSVILLE GOLD OPERATIONS

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

MT HENRY GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS (CONTINUED)

SOUTH KALGOORLIE OPERATIONS (CONTINUED)

CENTRAL MURCHISON GOLD PROJECT

CENTRAL MURCHISON GOLD PROJECT (CONTINUED)

RENISON TIN PROJECT

APPENDIX 2 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – GOLD DIVISION (RELATING TO EXPLORATION RESULTS) SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

APPENDIX 3 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – TIN DIVISION (RELATING TO EXPLORATION RESULTS) SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

APPENDIX 4 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – MOUNT HENRY SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

SECTION 3 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES

SECTION 4 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES

APPENDIX 5 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – CENTRAL MUSGRAVE PROJECT SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

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

SECTION 3 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES

SECTION 4 ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF ORE RESERVES

APPENDIX 6 – JORC 2012 TABLE 1 – FORTNUM GOLD PROJECT SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Section 4 Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves

More from Metals X Limited

Metals X Limited Interim / Quarterly Report 2016