AuKing Mining Limited Prospectus

A U K ING M INING L IMITED I NDEPENDENT T ECHNICAL A SSESSMENT R EPORT – W ESTERN A USTRALIAN M INERAL A SSETS CSA Global Report Nº R278.2020 Criteria Commentary Quality of assay data and laboratory tests Diamond drill core and RC chip samples were submitted to Genalysis Laboratory Services in Perth, Western Australia (WA). Each sample was analysed for gold, silver, copper, lead, zinc, barium, arsenic, bismuth, antimony, nickel, cobalt, iron, and magnesium. Ore grade samples were subjected to a modified four-acid (HF, HNO3, HClO3, HCl) digest followed by optical emission spectroscopy (OES) analysis for all elements excluding gold. Gold was analysed by Fire Assay with atomic absorption spectroscopy finish (AAS) using a 50 g charge. This technique is considered total. Samples without visible mineralisation were treated by a normal four-acid (HF, HNO3, HClO3, HCl) digest followed by OES analysis for all elements excluding gold. These samples were analysed for gold by aqua regia digest of a 50 g charge followed by solvent extraction and flame AAS (Code B5/SAAS). Quality control (QC) procedures utilised included certified reference materials (CRMs, or “standards”), blanks and umpire analyses of sample pulps. Standards for the 2006 drilling program were supplied by Geostat and comprised two “low grade oxide” and two “high grade sulphide” samples. Results for copper and lead mostly fall within 2 standard deviations (SDs) and all within 3 SDs. Results for zinc were considered to be poor quality, and erratic over time, with two results falling outside 3 SDs. However, the average result falls within 1 SD. The poor and erratic results were attributed to a function of the high-grade nature of the standard, with a high degree of scatter also observed on the umpire analyses results. The blank standard submitted during the 2006 drilling showed good results for lead and zinc, but poor for copper, which was attributed to possible sample contamination during sample preparation. The amount of contamination was not considered to be significant. A total of 210 umpire check samples were submitted to Ultratrace laboratory at the completion of the 2006 drill program, with strong correlation between the original and umpire results. An additional six RC drillholes were drilled subsequent to the 2006 program and completion of the 2009 Mineral Resource estimate. No QC was independently submitted by the property owner at the time. The 2009 Mineral Resource relied upon the internal laboratory QC results for those holes. The Competent Person considers the analytical techniques used and the QC protocols and results to be appropriate for the style of mineralisation and support the reporting of the Mineral Resource. Verification of sampling and assaying Significant intercepts were verified by independent geologists from CSA Global Pty Ltd (CSA Global) during the 2006 drilling and relogging program, and by senior Anglo Australian Resources NL (AAR) geological personnel. Twin drilling was not used. CSA Global managed the drillhole database during the 2006 drilling and relogging program and imported all assays into a secure relational database. CSA Global procedures were followed regarding data entry and storage. No adjustments were made to assay data. The Competent Person considers the data verification work carried out was sufficient to support the reporting of the Mineral Resource. Location of data points Drillhole collars were surveyed by licensed surveyors using a differential global positioning system (GPS). Historical holes were surveyed in Australian Map Grid (AMG) and these collars were later translated to GDA. All holes were translated to a local mine grid using a two-point transformation. A topographic digital terrain model (DTM) was constructed using contour data derived from aerial photography flown in November 2007, with a horizontal spatial accuracy of 4 cm and vertical accuracy of 3 cm. The DTM is considered of adequate quality to support the Mineral Resource estimate. The Competent Person considers the data survey work carried out was sufficient to support the reporting of the Mineral Resource. Data spacing and distribution Drillholes are mostly orientated along an east-west line, with holes spaced between 25 m and 50 m along strike (north-south) and spaced 25 m along the drill line. Drillhole spacing is considered sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource estimation procedures and classifications applied. Drillholes were not composited prior to geological modelling or Mineral Resource estimation. AuKing Mining Limited | PROSPECTUS 121