Announcement PDF 1 November 2021 ASX ANNOUNCEMENT Multiple Intersections of Massive Sulphide at T5 HIGHLIGHTS  The first 60m south step-out diamond hole CBDD057 has intersected three massive to disseminated nickel-copper sulphide zones over a significant length of the hole (Table 1)  Upper zone - 34.34m(1) of massive, highly disseminated and disseminated sulphides from 398m down hole (Figure 1 Left)  Lower zone - 20.95m(1) of massive, semi-massive, highly disseminated and disseminated sulphides from 500.4m down hole (Figure 1 Centre)  Confirmed new zone – 3.50m(1) of massive, semi-massive and stringer sulphides from 567.2m on the T5-Broonhill basal contact (Figure 1 Right)  The upper two zones correspond with the south plunge of the Upper and Lower T5 Conductors  The lowest intersection corresponds to a new massive sulphide zone that is emerging below T5 previously blind to downhole geophysics (1) Downhole intersection quoted, uncertainty around the orientation of the basal contact makes true width estimate inacurate. Figure 1: Massive and highly-disseminated sulphide from the Upper, Lower and new zones respectively in CBDD057. Estrella Resources Limited (ASX: ESR) (Estrella or the Company) is pleased to announce multiple thick nickel-copper sulphide intersections in the first 60m southern step-out diamond drillhole CBDD057. _________________________________________________________________________________ Office Address London House, Level 11, 216 St Georges Terrace, PERTH WA 6000 Postal Address GPO Box 2517, PERTH WA 6831 Phone +61 8 9481 0389 Fax +61 8 9463 6103 Email info@estrellaresources.com.au Three zones of nickel-copper sulphides were intersected over the last 170m of the drill hole. All three zones contained significant widths of massive sulphides with accompanying globular, highly disseminated, disseminated, stringer and cloud sulphides. Geology details and visual estimates are presented Table 1. Managing Director Chris Daws commented: “It goes without saying that what is emerging at our drilling at Carr Boyd is very significant. It seems every time we put another exploration hole down, we hit more nickelcopper sulphides and on this occasion a completely blind massive nickel-copper sulphide intersection below T5. This hit appears to sit in-line with a distant northern and highly conductive EM plate which is as yet untested. We currently have a highly fertile nickel sulphide contact, open at depth, and open over more than 2km’s of strike with the most recent discovery announced at Broonhill giving us further confidence that we can expect to see a lot more as we continue our exploration efforts. I have always believed that Carr Boyd could deliver a world class orebody and its not disappointing me at this stage. I look forward to what is uncovered next.” As can be seen in Figure 2, the vectored exploration model developed during the close-spaced, Phase 3 drilling at T5 allows for multiple sulphide lodes that are formed when magma turbulence partially remobilises basal sulphides further down the Broonhill-T5 contact. These zones were noticed to overlap one another on drill sections to the north, explaining the current multiple intersection whilst still drilling oblique to the dip of mineralisation. The upper two sulphide zones intersected relate directly to the Upper and Lower T5 Conductors identified by downhole electromagnetics (DHEM) during Phase 2. An additional massive sulphide basal contact zone was also intersected below T5 and correlates directly to an intersection obtained by CBDD042A from which there was no DHEM response at the time (Figure 3). It is postulated that the DHEM response from this zone, is being masked by the overlapping Lower T5 Conductor. Figure 2 Left: Cross section through CBDD057 Right: Cross Section 100m to the North. The vectored exploration model incorporating magma flow direction predicts multiple zones of sulphide occurrences as observed in core during the Phase 3 drilling. A deeper DHEM platform hole has been pre-collared and is in the process of being drilled to achieve DHEM coverage below the new zone. This hole will target the basal contact some 100m to 150m below the lowest massive sulphide intersection in CBDD057 (Figure 3Figure 4). It is hoped that this platform hole will resolve DHEM responses from additional massive sulphides that may lie further down the basal contact below the CBDD042A and CBDD057 massive sulphide intersections as predicted by the vectored exploration model in use. CSIRO at Carr Boyd Three nickel experts from the CSIRO, including Professor Steve Barnes will spend three days at Carr Boyd (starting today). Together with ESR Geologists, they will be initiating studies on the age, formation and characterisation of the Carr Boyd Igneous Complex as well as studying the formation and modes of mineralisation at T5, Broonhill, Tregurtha and the historical Carr Boyd Mine. Apart from Estrella’s approach in 2021, very little work of this nature has been conducted at Carr Boyd since the early 1970’s. The information gathered will aid in Estrella’s vectored exploration model and risk-based approach as the Company expands Phase 4 exploration and begins planning Phase 5 after the Broonhill Massive Sulphide Discovery last week (refer to ASX announcement dated 27th October 2021). The Broonhill Discovery (location shown in Figure 4) has significantly increased the likelihood for more massive sulphide intersections on the Broonhill-T5 basal contact. With 2km of the basal contact explored by ESR to a depth of 280m, there is still another 2km of this contact to be drilled during Phase 4. Phase 5 will test any Phase 4 anomalous or intersection results with diamond core and DHEM, down to a depth of 900m (potentially deeper depending on initial results) through a staged approach. There are also several other basal contact pyroxenites with assimilated sulphides, together with BroonhillT5 totalling 30km of strike (Figure 5Figure 3). The Company’s vectored exploration model will continue to be developed and, in partnership with the CSIRO’s world-class expertise, will be essential to explore the vast potential within the Carr Boyd Igneous Complex in an effective and timely manner. Figure 3: Long section of the T5 Discovery mineralisation in relation to the three intersections in CBDD057 Figure 4: 3D rendering of the Basal Contact showing the CBDD057 intersection down plunge of the T5 Discovery in relation to the entire Broonhill – T5 prospective basal contact and Phase 4 Significant Intersections to date. Figure 5: Plan view of the regional magnetics and the location of the Basal Contact, in particular A-B-C location points of the 3D rendered surface. Table 1: CBDD057 Intersection Geology and Visual Sulphide Estimates2 Hole ID & Zone Depth From Depth To 365.28 382.10 383.78 CBDD057 396.00 398.00 Upper 400.80 406.85 Zone 412.43 34.34m 412.72 413.96 414.91 418.42 432.34 435.79 442.92 496.77 500.40 501.25 501.70 502.20 502.50 503.10 CBDD057 503.90 Lower 505.60 507.70 Zone 508.60 20.95m 509.30 516.00 517.50 518.43 519.80 521.15 521.35 521.60 526.00 567.20 CBDD057 567.73 New 568.00 568.37 Zone 569.00 3.50m 570.40 570.70 382.10 383.78 396.00 398.00 400.80 406.85 412.43 412.72 413.96 414.91 418.42 432.34 435.79 442.92 496.77 500.40 501.25 501.70 502.20 502.50 503.10 503.90 505.60 507.70 508.60 509.30 516.00 517.50 518.43 519.80 521.15 521.35 521.60 526.00 567.20 567.73 568.00 568.37 569.00 570.40 570.70 EOH Interval Sulphide Texture 16.82 1.68 12.22 2.00 2.80 6.05 5.58 0.29 1.24 0.95 3.51 13.92 3.45 7.13 53.85 3.63 0.85 0.45 0.50 0.30 0.60 0.80 1.70 2.10 0.90 0.70 6.70 1.50 0.93 1.37 1.35 0.20 0.25 4.40 41.20 0.53 0.27 0.37 0.63 1.40 0.30 Barren Pyroxenite Disseminated Barren Pyroxenite Cloud Disseminated Cloud Highly Disseminated Disseminated Globular Massive Highly Disseminated Highly Disseminated Dolerite Dyke Feldspar Porphyry Barren Pyroxenite Cloud Disseminated Cloud Globular Disseminated Globular Cloud Disseminated Cloud Disseminated Highly Disseminated Disseminated Highly Disseminated Semi-Massive Highly Disseminated Massive Stringer Cloud Feldspar Porphyry Barren Pyroxenite Disseminated Semi-Massive Massive Semi-Massive Massive Stringer Basal Contact Basalt Visual Sulphide Estimation Visual Pentlandite Estimation Visual Chalcopyrite Estimation 5% 1% 0.5% 1% 2% 1% 10% 2% 30% 70% 20% 10% Tr 0.5% Tr 2% 0.5% 8% 10% 5% 3% Tr 0.5% Tr 1% 0.5% 2% 4% 4% 3% 8% 1% 20% 2% 20% 1% 5% 1% 3% 10% 7% 10% 60% 10% 85% 15% 1% 2% Tr 5% Tr 5% Tr 1% Tr 1% 2% 2% 2% 15% 2% 20% 1% Tr 2% Tr 10% 1% 10% Tr 2% Tr 1% 5% 2% 2% 15% 2% 20% 10% Tr 2% 60% 70% 60% 80% 15% 1% 12% 20% 12% 23% 7% 0.5% 12% 10% 12% 11% 7% 2 In relation to the disclosure of visual mineralisation, the Company cautions that visual estimates of sulphide abundance should never be considered a proxy or substitute for laboratory analysis. Laboratory assay results are required to determine the widths and grade of mineralisation. The Company will update the market when laboratory analytical results become available. The Board has authorised for this announcement to be released to the ASX. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Christopher J. Daws Managing Director Estrella Resources Limited +61 8 9481 0389 info@estrellaresources.com.au Media: David Tasker Managing Director Chapter One Advisors E: dtasker@chapteroneadvisors.com.au T: +61 433 112 936 Competent Person Statement The information in this announcement relating to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Steve Warriner, who is the Exploration Manager of Estrella Resources, and a member of The Australasian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr. Warriner has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activity 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 Resource and Ore Reserves”. Mr. Warriner consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Table 2: Drill hole collar details Hole ID Final Depth Easting Northing RL Dip Azimuth Status CBDD057 606.7 367370 6673580 431.9 -69.5 258 Completed APPENDIX 1 JORC TABLE 1 - JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION – TABLE 1 Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.) Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling  Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut  DD core samples have been half cut with an automatic techniques channels, random chips, or specific core saw. specialised industry standard  0.25m-1.1m samples are collected from the core trays as measurement tools appropriate to the marked out by the supervising geologist. minerals under investigation, such as  A handheld XRF tool was used to verify the mineralisation down hole gamma sondes or handheld with samples reporting >0.3% Ni in disseminated zones XRF instruments, etc.). These and >1% Ni in the matrix sulphide zones. examples should not be taken as  XRF results have not been reported and are used as a limiting the broad meaning of sampling. logging/sampling verification tool only.  Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.  Core is cut and sampled to ensure the sample is representative and no bias is introduced. Cutting of specific, banded or stringer sulphide zoned core is done orthogonal to the banding to ensure there is no bias.  Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are material to the Public Report.  Determination of mineralisation has been based on geological logging, visual sulphide estimates and confirmation using a pXRF machine. Samples were dispatched to an accredited laboratory for multi-element analysis. .  Diamond core drilling was used to obtain 3m length samples from the core barrel which are then marked in one meter intervals, based on core block measurements.  Samples are selected based on geological logging boundaries or on nominal meter marks.  Collected samples weigh a nominal 2-3 kg (depending on sample length).  Samples have been dispatched to an accredited commercial laboratory in Perth for analysis.  Samples are being analysed using a 4-acid digest, MEICP for 33 elements and ore zone samples are also being tested for Au & PGE elements using ICP analysis.  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 30g 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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information Drilling techniques Drill sample recovery  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, facesampling 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.  Drilling was undertaken using NQ2 sized drill core.  Holes have been collared with mud rotary from surface, HQ rough cored to top of fresh rock then NQ2 cored to EOH.  Core recovery was recorded by the field crew and verified by the geologist.  RQD measurements were digitally recorded to ensure recovery details were captured.  Sample recovery in all mineralised zones is high with negligible core loss observed.  Diamond core drilling is the highest standard and no relationship has been established between sample recovery and reported grade as the core is in very good condition. _________________________________________________________________________________ Criteria Logging Subsampling techniques and sample preparation Quality of assay data and laboratory tests Verification of sampling and assaying JORC Code explanation  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 in-situ 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.  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 (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. Commentary  Detailed industry standard of collecting core in core trays, marking meter intervals & drawing core orientation lines was undertaken.  Core trays were photographed wet and dry prior to sampling.  Drill hole logs are recorded in Excel spread sheets and validated in Micromine Software as the drilling progresses.  The entire length of all holes is logged.  The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.  The use of twinned holes.  Results verified internally by Company personnel  Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.  Discuss any adjustment to assay data.  Core is half cut using an automatic core saw to achieve a half-core sample for laboratory submission.  The sample preparation technique is considered industry best standard practice.  No field duplicates have been collected in this program. Field duplicates will be collected once initial results are returned and resampling of the mineralised zones is warranted.  Sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the mineralisation.  No handheld XRF results are reported however the tool was used to verify the mineralisation with reporting >0.3% Ni in disseminated zones and >1% Ni in the matrix sulphide zones.  DHTEM parameters are as follows;  Tx Loop size: 500 x 800 m  Transmitter: GAP HPTX-70  Receiver: EMIT SMARTem24  Sensor: EMIT DigiAtlantis  Station spacing: 2m to 10m  Tx Freq: 0.5 Hz  Duty cycle: 50%  Current: ~130 Amp  Stacks: 32-64  Readings: 2-3 repeatable readings per station  Hole CBDD0028 is twinning hole CBP042. No other twinning is warranted at this stage.  The data was collected and logged using Excel spreadsheets and validated using Micromine Software. The data will be loaded into an externally hosted and managed database.  No adjustments have been made to the assay data other than length weighted averaging. Criteria Location of data points JORC Code explanation  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 and distribution  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.  The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure Sample security Audits or reviews Commentary  The holes were pegged using a hand-held GPS + 3m  The rig was setup over the nominated hole position and final GPS pickup occurred at the completion of the hole.  Holes are progressively surveyed by DGPS on a batch basis.  MGA94_51  Topography is relatively flat and control is more than adequate given the early stage of the project. A 3D drone ortho-photographic survey had been used to create a DTM of the project area.  Refer to Cross Sections and Plans included  Not applicable, no Mineral Resource is being stated.  No compositing has been applied. Intercepts are quoted as length weighted intervals.  The drill hole orientation does not introduce a sample bias.  Samples are in the possession of Estrella’s personnel from field collection to laboratory submission.  No audits or reviews have been conducted for this release given the early stage of the project. Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.) Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Mineral  Type, reference name/number,  Carr Boyd Nickel Pty Ltd (a wholly owned subsidiary of tenement and location and ownership including ESR) holds a 100% interest in the nickel and base metal land tenure agreements or material issues with rights to the project. status third parties such as joint ventures,  There are no known impediments to operate in the area. 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  Acknowledgment and appraisal of  The Carr Boyd Rocks deposit was discovered by Great done by other exploration by other parties. Boulder Mines, in a joint venture with North Kalgurli Ltd parties in 1968. The deposit was mined between 1972 and 1975, during which time they explored for additional breccia pipe occurrences near the mine.  WMC acquired Great Boulder Mines Ltd in 1975, briefly reopening the mine in 1977 before closing it permanently shortly thereafter due to a collapse in the nickel price. The mine had produced 210,000t at 1.44% Ni and 0.46% Cu before its closure.  From 1968 Pacminex Pty Ltd held most of the ground over the CBLC outside of the immediate mine area. Between 1968 and 1971 they conducted extensive exploration programs searching for large basal contact and/or stratabound Ni-Cu deposits. It was during this time that most of the disseminated and cloud sulphide occurrences such as those at Tregurtha, West Tregurtha and Gossan Hill were discovered.  Defiance Mining acquired the regional tenements from Pacminex in 1987 and focused on exploration for PGE deposits between 1987 and 1990. In 1990 Defiance purchased the Carr Boyd Rocks mine from WMC and switched focus to the mine area between 1990 and 2001, leaving many PGE targets untested.  From 1990 Defiance dewatered the mine to conduct testwork and feasibility studies on the remnant mineralisation. Metallurgical testwork, Mineral Resource estimations, and scoping studies were completed. Around 1996 the focus shifted again to regional exploration for large tonnage basal contact deposits.  In 2001 Titan Resources Ltd (Titan) acquired the project and recommenced economic evaluations of the remnant material at Carr Boyd Rocks before embarking on another regional exploration program focusing on the basal contact. An aeromagnetic survey, airborne EM reprocessing, and several programs of RAB and RC drilling were completed.  From 2005 Yilgarn Mining entered a JV with Titan and continued with some regional exploration but focused most attention in and around the Carr Boyd Rocks mine.  In 2007 Titan was acquired by Consolidated Minerals Ltd (Consmin). Consmin conducted IP surveys and detailed gravity surveys but did not drill any targets before selling the project to Salt Lake Mining (SLM) in 2013. SLM completed limited drilling to meet expenditure Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary commitments, before selling the project to Apollo Phoenix Resources in 2016.  Apollo sold the project to ESR in 2018. Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.  The Carr Boyd project lies within the Achaean Yilgarn Craton in a 700km belt of elongate deformed and folded mafic, ultramafic rocks and volcanic sediments intruded by granitoids which is referred to as the NorsemanWiluna Belt. The belt has been divided into several geological distinct terranes, with the project area lying at the northern end of the Gindalbie terrane (Swager, 1996).  The geology of the Carr Boyd area is dominated by the Carr Boyd mafic-ultramafic intrusive complex (CBIC).  Several distinctive styles of Ni and Ni-Cu mineralisation have been identified within the CBIC. At the Carr Boyd Rocks Nickel Mine Ni-Cu mineralisation is hosted within several 20 - 60m diameter brecciated pipe-like bodies that appear to be discordant to the magmatic stratigraphy. Mineralisation is hosted by a matrix of sulphides (pyrrhotite, pentlandite, pyrite and chalcopyrite) within brecciated Bronzite and altered country rock clasts.  Stratiform Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation has been identified at several different locations within the layered magmatic complex.  Estrella is in the process of re-mapping and reclassifying the Carr Boyd Igneous Complex. Previous “Layered Intrusive” models are misleading as the complex is made up of many overprinted and juxtaposed, smaller layered and non-layered intrusives that have progressed from Ultramafic to Mafic over time. The complex is better described as a magma feeder zone, where the earliest melts passing through the Morelands Formation have assimilated graphitic sulphidic shales, reached sulphur saturation and deposited nickel sulphides along basal contacts.  These basal contacts are not restricted to the base of the complex, but can form within the complex, wherever access was gained by these earlier flows.  The complex has then been intruded and inflated over time by progressively more mafic, barren magmas to produce what we see today. 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.  All relevant drillhole information can be found in the Tables and sections within the announcement. Criteria Data aggregation methods Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths Diagrams Balanced reporting Other substantive exploration data JORC Code explanation  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 (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.  Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of highgrade 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 (e.g. ‘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 Commentary  No information is excluded.  Intersections are reported on a 0.5% Ni cut-off with SG and length weighted intervals.  All intercepts are reported using SG and length weighted intervals.  No metal equivalents have been stated  True widths have not been stated. The variable orientation of mineralisation within magma feeders combined with a structural overprint and steep drill angles make true width calculations highly misleading.  Maps and sections with drill hole locations are included in the announcement.  All new drillhole information within this announcement is reported  Everything meaningful and material is disclosed in the body of the report.  Geological observations are included in the report.  No bulk samples, metallurgical, bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and/or rock characteristics test were carried out. Criteria Further work JORC Code explanation samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.  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 and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. Commentary  There are no known potential deleterious or contaminating substances.  Diamond drilling and DHTEM geophysical testing is continuing.