No New Information

·       Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised 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 fire 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 fine/coarse material.

·       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.

·       If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.

·       If non-core, whether riffled, 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 insitu material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.

·       Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.

·       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 verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.

·       The use of twinned holes.

·       Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.

·       Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

·       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.

·       Specification of the grid system used.

·       Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

·       Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.

·       Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.

·       Whether sample compositing has been applied.

·       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.

·       The measures taken to ensure sample security.

·       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 parties.

·       Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.

·       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 justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

·       In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.

·       Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.

·       The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

·       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 effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known').

·       Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.

·       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.

·       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.