Announcement PDF www.kglresources.com.au 29 July 2015 KGL increases and upgrades copper, silver, lead and zinc Resources at Jervois, NT Highlights of Resource Update  21% increase in Total Resource to 30.5Mt  36% increase in Indicated Resources to 11.5Mt  17% increase in contained copper to 327,000 tonnes  26% increase in contained silver to 22.6Moz  59% increase in contained lead‐zinc to 190,000 tonnes KGL Resources Limited (KGL) announces that the global resource at Jervois in the Northern Territory has been increased by 21% to 30.5 Mt @ 1.07% copper and 23.0 g/t silver for a total of 327,000 tonnes of contained copper at a cut off of 0.5% copper and 22.6 million ounces of contained silver as detailed in Table 1. This includes 10.6 Mt @ 1.37% copper for 146,000 tonnes of contained copper at Marshall‐Reward and 5.4Mt @ 1.62% copper for 88,000 tonnes of contained copper at Bellbird at a cut off of 0.75% copper. The Resource Update follows a recent drilling program to increase and upgrade the resource. The drilling has been central to the current work of optimising the Pre‐Feasibility Study as KGL moves towards the development of Jervois as a significant copper, silver and multi‐metal mine. A specific objective of the drilling was to upgrade the resources within the proposed open pit boundaries to increase confidence in the material to be delivered to the mill in the early years of operation. This has been successfully achieved with a 36% increase in total Indicated Resources. Included is a substantially higher level of increase in the indicated category of lead‐zinc resource by 0.7Mt to 1Mt due mostly to infill drilling at the Green Parrot deposit. With recent metallurgical test work confirming that good recoveries could be achieved for lead and zinc at Jervois, this type of mineralisation was also targeted by the recent drilling. The lead‐zinc resources increased by 70% from 2.2Mt to 3.8Mt with the Green Parrot resource increasing from 1.1Mt to 1.9Mt and the high‐grade Reward lead‐zinc resource increasing by 0.5Mt. A number of mineral occurrences parallel to and along strike from Marshall‐Reward were tested including Sykes and Johannsen. This near surface mineralisation has the potential to provide additional low cost, open cut mining material though typically at a lower grade to the main copper resources. Page 1 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au KGL Resources Managing Director Simon Milroy commented: “We are very pleased with the progress made in the priorities we set for our drilling program ‐  To upgrade the confidence in the resource for those critical first few years of mine life, and  To increase the resource by step out drilling from earlier high grade intercepts, so that we can begin to assess the true potential of the Jervois project.” “The drilling program assessed the potential of several zones of shallow mineralisation at other new prospects that had the potential to provide low cost open pit material to the mill. Some of these new zones, previously fell within the planned pit outlines and hence were previously classified as waste.” “The PFS announced last December found Jervois to be a viable project. We confidently expect the optimised PFS to be completed in October to result in further improved economic parameters and considerably increased free cash flow. “There is clearly the prospect of more discoveries at Jervois. We expect the recently completed 3DIP survey will define the potential for near surface mineralisation in new areas that have not previously been explored. “ The new Exploration Potential of the larger deposits identified by H&S Consulting consists of areas peripheral to the current Inferred Resources within the interpreted mineral wireframes, unconstrained by depth. This is estimated to be a combined total for Marshall‐Reward, Bellbird and Green Parrot of 4–8 Mt @ 0.8 to 1.2% copper and 7 to 15g/t silver at a 0.5% copper cut off (40,000 to 100,000 tonnes copper and 1.5 to 5 Mozs silver) (See Figures 1 and 2). The resources are open at depth and there is additional potential along strike. The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Potential is conceptual in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define a Mineral Resource. It is uncertain if further exploration will result in the determination of a Mineral Resource. Page 2 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au 30 450 400 Contained Silver (Moz) Contained Copper Metal (kt) 25 350 300 250 200 150 20 15 10 100 5 50 0 May 2011 July Jan 2011 2012 0 Nov Sep July 2012 2014 2015 May July Jan Nov Sep July 2011 2011 2012 2012 2014 2015 Copper Indicated Copper Inferred Exploration Potential Silver Indicated Silver Inferred Exploration Potential 50 160 45 140 Contained Zinc Metal (kt) Contained Lead Metal (kt) 40 120 100 80 60 35 30 25 20 15 40 10 20 5 0 0 May July Jan Nov Sep July 2011 2011 2012 2012 2014 2015 May July Jan Nov Sep July 2011 2011 2012 2012 2014 2015 Lead Indicated Lead Inferred Zinc Indicated Zinc Inferred Figure 1 Charts of contained metal resource growth at Jervois by KGL Resources Page 3 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Table 1 2015 Jervois Resource Estimate Jervois Copper Resources Marshall Copper Reward Copper East Reward Bellbird Cox’s Find Rock Face TOTAL Jervois Lead/Zinc Resources Reward Lead/Zinc Green Parrot Lead/Zinc Bellbird North TOTAL 2015 Combined 2014 Combined 2015/2014 Category Tonnes Mt 1.4 0.3 5.0 7.6 2.0 4.1 4.3 0.7 0.7 10.5 16.2 26.7 Copper % 1.45 0.90 1.14 1.02 0.82 1.22 1.29 0.87 0.82 1.21 1.06 1.12 Silver g/t 35.6 20.2 25.3 22.2 7.1 7.7 8.5 2.8 3.1 19.8 14.6 16.6 Lead % Zinc % Copper kt 20.1 2.5 57.1 78.0 16.9 49.9 55.9 6.0 6.0 127.0 172.1 299.1 Silver Moz 1.6 0.2 4.1 5.4 0.5 1.0 1.2 0.1 0.1 6.7 7.6 14.3 Lead kt Zinc kt Cut‐off Cu% 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Indicated Inferred Indicated Inferred Inferred Indicated Inferred TOTAL Tonnes Mt 0.5 0.8 0.5 1.4 0.7 1.0 2.8 3.8 Copper % 0.74 0.51 0.99 0.81 0.57 0.87 0.67 0.72 Silver g/t 70.7 90.9 64.0 78.0 17.9 67.3 67.6 67.5 Lead % 6.8 8.6 0.9 1.8 1.7 3.8 3.7 3.7 Zinc % 0.9 1.2 0.6 0.9 2.5 0.8 1.4 1.2 Copper kt 3.6 4.1 5.1 11.1 3.8 8.7 19.0 27.7 Silver Moz 1.1 2.3 1.1 3.4 0.4 2.2 6.2 8.4 Lead kt 33.6 69.4 4.7 24.4 11.3 38.3 105.1 143.4 Zinc kt 4.4 9.4 3.2 12.8 16.7 7.6 38.9 46.5 Cut‐off Cu% None None 0.3 0.3 0.2 TOTAL TOTAL % Variance 30.5 25.3 21 1.07 1.10 23.0 22.1 327 280 17 22.6 18.0 26 143 84 72 47 36 30 Indicated Inferred Indicated Inferred Inferred Indicated Inferred Inferred Inferred Indicated Inferred TOTAL Category *These tables may contain minor rounding errors Page 4 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au TOTAL RESOURCE 40 35 Resource (Mt) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 May 2011 July 2011 Jan 2012 Indicated Resource Nov 2012 Sep 2014 July 2015 Inferred Resource Exploration Potential Figure 2 Chart of Resource tonnes growth at Jervois by KGL Resources Table 2 2014 Jervois Gold Resource Estimate (This is a sub set of the resource shown in Table 1.) Jervois Category Marshall‐Reward Bellbird Green Parrot TOTAL Inferred Inferred Inferred Indicated Inferred TOTAL Tonnes Mt 13.9 7.5 Gold g/t 0.19 0.12 Gold koz 85 28 21.4 21.4 0.16 0.16 113 113 Cut‐off Cu% 0.5 0.5 0.5 *These tables may contain minor rounding errors A global gold resource is 21.4Mt @ 0.16g/t for 113,000ozs at a copper cut off of 0.5% (Table 2). The gold resource has not been updated since the Sept 2014 estimate. Validation of gold assays from 2015 drilling are pending. Updating of the gold resource will be completed when this is finalised. Gold grades have been included in the resource estimates though the amount of historical gold data is limited and as a result the gold resource estimate is classed as Inferred. Page 5 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Geology & Mineralisation The Jervois deposit has been characterised as a hybrid SEDEX‐VHMS deposit by both CSIRO and an independent study conducted by the NTGS in 2014. Characteristics observed at Jervois that are consistent with this style of mineralisation include:  Cu‐Pb‐Zn mineralisation is stratiform and extending over several kilometres along strike with repeating stratigraphy due to folding  Mineralisation occurred syngenetically as a hydrothermal exhalative event, prior to metamorphism and deformation  The sedimentary host rocks and mineral zonation suggest a SEDEX deposit, while high Cu grade is more common in VHMS deposits. The mineralisation is hosted by a sequence of meta‐sediments (schists) comprising siltstone, mudstone, sandstone with lesser limestone that have been strongly deformed and display a well‐ developed foliation. Proximal to mineralisation there is a characteristic alteration that may include silica, magnetite, garnet, chlorite and epidote. The host sediments and sulphide lenses have been folded to form the distinctive ‘J‐Shaped’ Jervois Range. The Jervois Project comprises six main areas of economic interest, namely Marshall‐Reward, Green Parrot, Bellbird and Bellbird North, Rockface and Cox’s Find. Each area has sufficient drilling for the identification of a mineral resource. Bellbird (Cu), Rockface (Cu) and Cox’s Find (Cu) are essentially copper (+silver) deposits, while the Marshall‐Reward deposit is predominantly copper/silver with some lenses of high grade lead/zinc mineralisation adjacent to or interleaved with the copper mineralisation. Those deposits that exhibit a more polymetallic nature include Green Parrot, Bellbird North and the southern part of the Bellbird East deposit. A location map of the deposits with the regional geology is shown in Figure 3. Next Steps The updated resource block models are now being used as the basis for the pit optimisation and mine design. This will lead to an updated mine schedule to be used in the optimised pre‐feasibility study to be completed in October. The results of the 3DIP survey are expected to be finalised in the next few days. Drill testing of the anomalies generated in the 3DIP survey will commence shortly. Page 6 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Johannsen Chubko Figure 3 Location and Regional Geology Map Figure 4 Copper Grade Thickness of Marshall‐Reward Page 7 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Figure 5 Lead + Zinc Grade Thickness of Marshall‐Reward Figure 6 Silver Grade Thickness of Marshall‐Reward Page 8 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Figure 7 Copper Grade thickness of Bellbird West and North lodes Figure 8 Silver Grade thickness of Bellbird West and North lodes Page 9 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Figure 9 Copper grade thickness of Green Parrot East & West lodes Figure 10 Lead + Zinc grade thickness of Green Parrot East & West lodes Page 10 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au For further information contact: Mr Simon Milroy Managing Director Phone: (07) 3071 9003 About KGL Resources KGL Resources Limited is an Australian mineral exploration company focussed on increasing the high grade Resource at the Jervois Project in the Northern Territory and developing it into a multimetal mine. Competent Person Statement The Jervois Exploration data in this report is based on information evaluated by Martin Bennett, who is a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and a full time employee of KGL Resources Limited. Mr. Bennett has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of the mineralisation and the type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to 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. Bennett has consented to the inclusion of this information in the form and context in which it appears in this report. The data in this report that relates to Mineral Resource Estimates and Exploration Potential is based on information evaluated by Mr Simon Tear who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM) and who has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity 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 (the “JORC Code”). Mr Tear is a Director of H&S Consultants Pty Ltd and he consents to the inclusion in the report of the Mineral Resource in the form and context in which they appear. The data in this report that relates to cut off grades and mining assumptions is based on information evaluated by Mr Simon Milroy who is a member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM) and who has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity 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 (the “JORC Code”). Mr Milroy is a full-time employee of KGL Resources Limited and he consents to the inclusion in the report of the cut off grades and mining assumptions in the form and context in which they appear. The 2014 Jervois Resources information was first released to the market on 15 September 2014 and complies with JORC 2012. Page 11 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Figure 11 Plan of drilling at Jervois Page 12 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Table 3 Marshall‐Reward Global Grade Tonnage Data Lode Cu Cut off % Tonnes Cu % Ag g/t Cu tonnes Ag ozs Marshall 0.5 1,674,056 1.35 33.0 22,660 1,774,876 Reward 0.5 13,217,931 1.07 26.9 141,273 11,445,623 Rew_East_HW 0.5 2,048,966 0.82 7.1 16,861 470,274 Rew_East_FW 0.5 521,309 1.34 12.6 6,980 210,904 Sykes 0.5 42,839 0.65 6.5 278 8,893 Total 0.5 17,505,101 1.07 24.7 188,057 13,910,645 Marshall 0.75 1,246,720 1.60 38.6 19,992 1,546,775 Reward 0.75 7,966,632 1.37 30.5 109,199 7,815,753 Rew_East_HW 0.75 989,188 1.05 8.8 10,382 281,012 Rew_East_FW 0.75 420,881 1.51 13.9 6,364 188,666 Sykes 0.75 6,711 0.99 5.8 66 1,244 Total 0.75 10,630,132 1.37 28.8 146,005 9,833,385 Marshall 1.0 944,860 1.84 44.2 17,370 1,343,767 Reward 1.0 4,988,458 1.67 32.5 83,178 5,211,254 Rew_East_HW 1.0 451,179 1.27 10.7 5,738 155,113 Rew_East_FW 1.0 334,201 1.68 15.2 5,605 162,942 Sykes 1.0 1,802 1.37 5.3 25 309 Total 1.0 6,720,500 1.67 31.8 111,910 6,873,494 Marshall 1.5 533,391 2.31 55.42 12,312 950,551 Reward 1.5 2,118,530 2.29 39.58 48,614 2,696,460 Rew_East_HW 1.5 56,749 1.80 13.34 1,022 24,338 Rew_East_FW 1.5 153,166 2.23 19.92 3,420 98,115 Sykes 1.5 652 1.82 6.08 12 128 Total 1.5 2,862,487 2.28 40.96 65,379 (use of significant figures does not imply accuracy) 3,769,647 Table 4 Bellbird Global Grade Tonnage Data Lode Cu Cut off % Tonnes Cu % Ag g/t Cu tonnes Ag ozs West 0.5 7,583,817 1.30 8.4 98,665 2,044,217 West 2 0.5 361,021 0.85 4.1 3,083 48,128 East 2 0.5 188,508 1.22 11.4 2,305 68,948 East 1 0.5 290,972 0.58 4.0 1,688 37,555 8,424,317 1.26 8.1 105,725 2,198,991 Total West 0.75 5,092,493 1.64 10.3 83,415 1,687,400 West 2 0.75 142,790 1.25 4.0 1,788 18,329 East 2 0.75 161,804 1.31 11.1 2,126 57,885 East 1 0.75 18,727 0.92 5.0 172 2,981 5,415,814 1.62 10.1 87,520 1,766,496 3,614,037 1.95 12.2 70,582 1,417,609 Total West 1.0 Page 13 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au West 2 1.0 100,336 1.42 4.1 1,424 13,150 East 2 1.0 133,222 1.41 11.7 1,876 50,012 East 1 1.0 2,871 1.33 6.4 38 595 3,850,466 1.92 12.0 73,890 1,481,377 15.6 52,384 1,063,827 Total West 1.5 2,124,238 2.47 West 2 1.5 30,881 1.86 3.8 575 3,797 East 2 1.5 53,056 1.74 13.2 925 22,493 East 1 1.5 1,138 1.80 8.4 20 309 Total 2,209,313 2.44 15.4 53,907 1,090,449 (use of significant figures does not imply accuracy) Table 5 Bellbird North Global Grade Tonnage Data Cu Cut off % Tonnes Cu % Ag g/t Pb % Zn % Cu tonnes Ag ozs Pb tonnes Zn tonnes 0.2 661,453 0.57 17.9 1.71 2.52 3,777 380,644 11,298 16,662 0.5 336,455 0.83 21.1 2.24 3.12 2,786 228,443 7,550 10,497 0.75 175,318 1.01 21.5 2.53 3.44 1,772 121,426 4,432 6,033 1 69,913 1.24 23.5 3.12 4.14 865 52,853 2,182 2,897 1.5 8,312 1.75 21.5 4.02 4.92 145 (use of significant figures does not imply accuracy) 5,753 334 409 Table 6 Green Parrot Global Grade Tonnage Data Lode Cu Cut off % Tonnes Cu % Ag g/t Pb % Zn % Cu tonnes Ag ozs Pb tonnes Zn tonnes West 0.3 986,586 0.77 60.9 1.23 0.71 7,567 1,933,233 12,174 7,044 East 0.3 894,737 0.96 88.9 1.90 1.00 8,581 2,558,056 16,955 8,947 Total 0.3 1,881,322 0.86 74.2 1.55 0.85 16,142 4,491,278 29,142 15,991 West 0.5 584,196 1.02 75.6 1.37 0.75 5,970 1,420,442 7,980 4,376 East 0.5 612,711 1.22 109.9 2.10 1.15 7,487 2,165,608 12,885 7,065 Total 0.5 1,196,907 1.12 93.2 1.74 0.96 13,453 3,586,064 20,862 11,442 West 0.75 314,616 1.37 91.6 1.42 0.75 4,310 927,055 4,461 2,356 East 0.75 447,960 1.45 125.7 2.33 1.32 6,486 1,810,695 10,446 5,913 Total 0.75 762,576 1.42 111.7 1.96 1.08 10,798 2,737,746 14,908 8,266 West 1.0 177,888 1.76 102.8 1.41 0.72 3,127 587,854 2,508 1,283 East 1.0 299,141 1.73 147.2 2.90 1.67 5,178 1,415,581 8,666 5,002 Total 1.0 477,028 1.74 130.6 2.34 1.32 8,305 2,003,441 11,177 6,282 West 1.5 69,261 2.66 104.8 1.67 0.82 1,844 233,439 1,159 571 East 1.5 153,558 2.20 182.9 4.06 2.47 3,377 903,178 6,228 3,799 Total 1.5 222,819 2.34 158.6 3.32 1.96 (use of significant figures does not imply accuracy) 5,221 1,136,613 7,389 4,369 Page 14 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au 1 JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION – TABLE 1 1.1 Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.) Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling techniques   Diamond drilling and reverse circulation (RC) drilling were used to obtain samples for geological logging and assaying.  RC drill holes are sampled at 1m intervals and split using a cone splitter attached to the cyclone to generate a split of ~3kg.  Diamond core was quartered with a diamond saw and generally sampled at 1m intervals with shorter samples at geological contacts.  RC samples are routinely scanned with a Niton XRF. Samples assaying greater than 0.1% Cu, Pb or Zn are submitted for analysis at a commercial laboratory.  Other sampling techniques may have been used prior to KGL Resources involvement in 2011. 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. Drilling techniques  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).  RC Drilling was conducted using a reverse circulation rig with a 5.25” face-sampling bit. Diamond drilling was either in NQ or HQ drill diameters. 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. RC samples were not weighed on a regular basis but no sample recovery issues were encountered during the drilling program.  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.  All RC and diamond core samples are geologically logged. Core samples are also orientated and logged for geotechnical information.  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. RC drill holes are sampled at 1m intervals and split using a cone splitter attached to the cyclone to generate a split of ~3kg.  Diamond core was quartered with a diamond saw and generally sampled at 1m intervals with shorter samples at geological contacts. Logging Sub‐sampling techniques and sample preparation  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.  RC sample splits (~3kg) are pulverized to 85% passing 75 microns.  Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.  Diamond core samples are crushed to 70% passing 6mm and then pulverized to 85% passing 75 microns.  Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.  Sampling techniques used by KGL are appropriate and generate sub-samples for analysis that are representative of the whole sample. Page 15 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary 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. The QAQC data includes standards, duplicates and laboratory checks. In ore zones Standards are added at a ratio of 1:10 and duplicates and blanks 1:20.  Basemetal samples are assayed using a four acid digest with an ICP AES finish. Gold samples are assayed by Aqua Regia with an ICP MS finish. Samples over 1ppm Au are re-assayed by Fire Assay with an AAS finish.  An umpire laboratory is used to check ~1% of samples analysed.  Assay methods are appropriate for the style of mineralisation and provide results of acceptable accuracy.  Verification of sampling and assaying Location of data points Data spacing and distribution Orientation of data in relation to geological structure 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.  Data is validated on entry into the Datashed database.  The use of twinned holes.   Further validation is conducted when data is imported into Vulcan. Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.   Discuss any adjustment to assay data. Below detection limit results are replaced in the database with values of half the detection limit.  Selected holes are twinned.  Intersections in selected historic holes were visually validated.  Surface collar surveys were picked up using a Trimble DGPS.  Downhole surveys were taken during drilling with a Ranger or Reflex survey tool every 30m with checks conducted with a Gyrosmart gyro and Azimuth Aligner.  All drilling is conducted on the MGA 94 Zone 53 grid. All downhole magnetic surveys were converted to MGA 94 grid.  A digital terrain model was generated using grid based DGPS data and surveyed drillhole collar data.  Drilling for Inferred resources has been conducted at a spacing of 50m along strike and 80m within the plane of the mineralized zone. Closer spaced drilling was used for Indicated resources.  Shallow oxide RC drilling was conducted on 80m spaced traverses with holes 10m apart.  4m RC composite samples were used in unmineralised portions of the hangingwall and footwall.  Holes were drilled perpendicular to the strike of the mineralization a default angle of -60 degrees but holes vary from -45 to 80.  There is no sampling bias based on drill hole orientation.  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. Sample security  The measures taken to ensure sample security.  Samples were stored in sealed polyweave bags on site and transported to the laboratory at regular intervals by KGL staff. Audits or reviews  The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.  The sampling techniques are regularly reviewed. Page 16 of 24 www.kglresources.com.au 1.2 Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.) 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.  Exploration done by other parties  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.  Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.   Drill hole Information Data aggregation methods Relationship between mineralisation widths and  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. The Jervois project is within E25429 and contains two Mining Leases, ML30180 and ML30182 100% owned by Jinka Minerals and operated by Kentor Minerals (NT), both wholly owned subsidiaries of KGL Resources. The Jervois project is covered by Mining Licences owned by KGL Resources subsidiary Jinka Minerals. Previous exploration has primarily been conducted by Reward Minerals, MIM and Plenty River. E25429, ML30180 and ML30182 lie on the Huckitta 1: 250 000 map sheet (SF 5311). The tenement is located mainly within the Palaeo-Proterozoic Bonya Metamorphics on the northeastern boundary of the Arunta Orogenic Domain. The Arunta Orogenic Domain in the nort