Announcement PDF Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 1 of 27 A S X A N N O U N C E M E N T 1 0 A u g u s t 2 0 2 6 Silver ValleyIP Surveyidentifies Western Anomalies H I G H L I G H T S ▪ Initial IP survey completed across three lines at Silver Valley, providing new information on the geometry of the mineralised system. ▪ The work follows previously reported high-grade silver, lead and copper rock chip results from Silver Valley, including assays of up to 378g/t Ag, 44.9% Pb and 5.04% Cu.1 ▪ New rock chip samples collected from historical workings at Silver Valley have generated results of 470g/t Ag, 19.2% Cu and 23.2% Pb (sample SV2_06) and 342g/t Ag, 16.1% Cu and 36.8% Pb (sample SV2_08). ▪ Elevated chargeability occurs immediately west of the known Silver Valley workings, with additional elevated responses towards the western ends of the southern survey lines. Deeper low-resistivity zones identified on the southern lines may be mapping geological structure and will be assessed as part of the revised interpretation. ▪ Further IP lines are required to better test the emerging western structural corridor. Following completion of current MT and gravity surveys at Harts Range, Litchfield is actively redeploying field resources to Silver Valley to support completion of the revised IP program. ▪ Final assay results from Oonagalabi drilling campaign in hole OGDD003 yielded a best intercept of 5.3m at 0.64% Cu, 0.67% Zn and 2.2g/t Ag from 49.5m depth. OVERVIEW Litchfield Minerals Limited (ASX: LMS) (“Litchfield” or “the Company”) provides an update on the initial Induced Polarisation (IP) survey completed at its Silver Valley Project in the Northern Territory. Three planned survey lines, totalling 5.1-line kilometres were completed in July 2026. This work has materially improved the Company’s understanding of the Silver Valley mineralised system and, importantly, is beginning to highlight a stronger geophysical response towards the western side of the survey area that warrants redeployment of fieldwork to focus on completing a revised IP program. 1 Refer ASX announcement – 23/04/2026 – Diamond and RC drill program completed at Oonagalabi & Silver Valley Delivers High-Grade Silver-Lead-Copper Results Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 2 of 27 Five new rock chip samples collected from dumps next to historical shafts and workings have generated assays of up to 470g/t Ag, 19.2% Cu and 23.2% Pb (sample SV2_06), and 342g/t Ag, 16.1% Cu and 36.8% Pb (sample SV2_08; (Appendix 1)). The work follows previously reported high-grade silver, lead and copper rock chip results from elsewhere at Silver Valley, including assays of up to 378g/t Ag, 44.9% Pb and 5.04% Cu.1 The IP program was designed to better understand the continuation of this mineralisation beneath surface and assist with refining future drill targeting. The northern survey line identified a chargeability response immediately west of the known Silver Valley workings, with modelling suggesting potential depth extent towards the west. Elevated chargeability is also present towards the western ends of the two southern survey lines, while deeper low-resistivity features may represent geological structure. These emerging western responses are an important re-focussing of our follow-up work. When integrated with concurrent field mapping, the results suggest the IP survey design may not have fully tested the most prospective structural zones. The Company is prioritising follow-up work to better understand the relationship between the chargeability responses, deeper structural features and the known high-grade silver mineralisation before any further IP surveys are completed. LitchfieldManagingDirector,MatthewPustahyasaid: “The value of these first three IP lines is that they have challenged our original interpretation and given us a better basis for the next phase of work. Rather than continue spending money against a survey design that may no longer be optimally positioned, we made the decision to stop, integrate the data and investigate the western side of the system before completing the program. The western chargeability responses and deeper resistivity features may be pointing us towards an important structural control that was not adequately covered by the original survey footprint. Our geological team will now test that interpretation in the field and use those observations to optimise the remaining IP lines. This is the exploration discipline and agility that continue to apply across Litchfield: let the data challenge the model, change the plan when the evidence changes, and make sure each additional dollar is spent testing the best geological interpretation available.” Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 3 of 27 IP Survey Details The northern IP line contained a chargeability response immediately west of the known Silver Valley workings, with modelling suggesting possible continuation at depth towards the west. The two southern lines also show a more elevated chargeability towards their western ends. In the context of Silver Valley, the relatively modest IP responses from this initial survey are consistent with the style of mineralisation observed at surface. Galena, which hosts much of the lead and associated silver mineralisation, is conductive but typically produces a weaker chargeability response than other sulphides such as pyrite, meaning significant silver–lead mineralisation can be present without generating a strong IP anomaly (Figure 1). Figure 1: Three-dimensional perspective view (looking north) of the 2D inverted chargeability sections for lines 21100N, 20700N and 20500N. Elevated chargeability is concentrated towards the western ends of all three lines, immediately west of the Silver Valley 2 workings. Red dots are known mineral occurrences and pink dots are mapped old workings. The resistivity modelling provides an additional structural observation. While the basement is generally resistive, deeper low-resistivity zones are present on the two southern survey lines and may represent geological structure (Figure 2). The Company will now interpret the spatial relationship between these features,thewesternchargeability responsesandknown mineralisation with targetedfieldinvestigation before any further IP surveys are completed. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 4 of 27 Figure 2: Three-dimensional perspective view (looking north) of the 2D inverted resistivity sections. Deeper low-resistivity zones on the southern lines 20700N and 20500N sit beneath and to the west of the elevated chargeability and may be mapping the interpreted western structural corridor. Red dots are known mineral occurrences and pink dots are mapped old workings. New Rock Chip Resultsfrom Silver Valley Field reconnaissance at Silver Valley in May 2026 included the collection of 5 new rock chip samples from dumps next to historical shafts and workings (Figure 3) have generated assays of up to 470g/t Ag, 19.2% Cu and 23.2% Pb (sample SV2_06), and 342g/t Ag, 16.1% Cu and 36.8% Pb (sample SV2_08; (Appendix 1)). These results complement previously reported high-grade silver, lead and copper rock chip results from elsewhere at Silver Valley, including assays of up to 378g/t Ag, 44.9% Pb and 5.04% Cu.1 OGDD003 Drilling Results Oonagalabi Final assay results from the Oonagalabi prospect Q3 drilling campaign were returned in late June 2026. The best intercept from hole OGDD003 was 5.3m at 0.64% Cu, 0.67% Zn and 2.2g/t Ag from 49.5m depth (Appendix 2). Previous drilling descriptions and maps reported in previous announcement.2 2 Refer ASX Announcement – 03/06/2026 – Oonagalabi Drilling Strengthens Geological & Targeting Model. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 5 of 27 Figure 3: New rock chip sample locations from June 2026 are shown alongside historical rock chip samples collected in January 2026. The NTGS Silver Valley 2 location is also highlighted, as our field mapping, sampling and subsequent investigations indicate that the recorded location may be incorrect. Next Steps At Silver Valley, Litchfield will complete targeted field mapping and structural investigation west of the existing IP footprint and integrate these observations with completed chargeability and resistivity models. This work will aid the position and orientation of any follow-up IP lines. The Company is currently undertaking MT and gravity programs around our Oonagalabi tenement in the HartsRange. Once theseprograms are completed, Litchfield has the flexibility toredeploy its field teams to Silver Valley to support completion of the revised IP program whilst avoiding unnecessary standby and mobilisation costs. AUTHORISATION This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Litchfield Minerals Limited. Matthew Pustahya Managing Director Matthew@litchfieldminerals.com.au Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 6 of 27 ABOUT LITCHFIELD MINERALS Litchfield Minerals Limited (ASX: LMS) is a nimble, capital-efficient copper explorer in the Northern Territory, applying the disciplines used by major mining companies to discover and de-risk large-scale mineral systems. Our exploration strategy combines a Mineral Systems approach with structured decision gates, modern technology and rigorous capital allocation. Every exploration decision is guided by evidence, ensuring capital is deployed where it has the greatest potential to create value. By operating with the technical discipline, governance and decision-making processes expected by major mining companies, Litchfield is building high-quality exploration opportunities while positioning itself as a credible partner for future discovery. Follow us on: www.litchfieldminerals.com.au https://twitter.com/Litchfield_LMS https://www.linkedin.com/company/litchfield-minerals-limited/ PREVIOUSLY REPORTED INFORMATION This announcement refers to previously reported Silver Valley exploration results, including the high- grade silver-lead-copper rock chip results announced on 23 April 2026. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in that announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning that announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. CAUTIONARY STATEMENT This announcement contains forward-looking statements that involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results, performance, or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied. Such statements include but are not limited to, interpretations of geophysical data, planned exploration activities, and potential mineralisation outcomes. Visual estimates of mineral abundance and pXRF results should never be considered a proxy or substitute for laboratory analyses where concentrations of grades are the factors of principal economic interest. Visual estimates also potentially provide no information regarding impurities or deleterious physical properties relevant to valuation. Forward- looking statements are based on Litchfield Minerals Limited’s current expectations, beliefs, and assumptions, which are subject to change in light of new information, future events, and market conditions. While the Company believes that such expectations and assumptions are reasonable, they are inherently subject to business, geological, regulatory, and operational risks. Further work, including drilling, is required to determine the economic significance of any anomalies identified. Investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Litchfield Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 7 of 27 Minerals Limited disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this announcement, except as required by law. COMPETENTPERSON STATEMENT The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation compiled by Dr. Matthew McGloin (MGeol, PhD), a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and a full-time employee of Litchfield Minerals Limited. Dr. McGloin has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposits under consideration, and to the activity being undertaken, 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). Dr McGloin consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears. With regard to the Company’s ASX Announcements referenced in the above Announcement, the Company is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the Announcements. FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS This announcement may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors. Forward-looking statements include those that are predictive in nature, depend on or refer to future events or conditions, or include words such as may, will, expect, intend, plan, estimate, anticipate, believe, continue, target or similar expressions. Such statements are based on assumptions and judgements held by the company as at the date of this announcement and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. Litchfield Minerals Limited does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law or the ASX Listing Rules. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 8 of 27 Appendix 1 – Rock chip assay results from the Silver Valley project. Sample ID Easting (mE GDA94 Zone 53) Northing (mN GDA94 Zone 53) Ag (g/t) Bi (ppm) Cu (ppm) Pb (ppm) S (ppm) Au (g/t) SV1_02 489341 7677655 10.6 4.7 272 22 300 0.27 SV2_06 488309 7677790 470 829 192000 232000 10300 0.08 SV2_07 488295 7677667 58.8 12.9 4760 16500 1100 0.04 SV2_08 488296 7677822 342 656 161000 368000 23700 0.06 SV3_01 487854 7677285 33.8 19.5 256 47800 2400 <0.01 Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 9 of 27 Appendix 2– Assay results from hole OGDD003 at Oonagalabi. Sample ID Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Ag (g/t) Cu (ppm) Zn (ppm) SIX0444480 OGDD003 40 41 1 <0.2 <2 52 SIX0444481 OGDD003 41 42 1 <0.2 16 46 SIX0444482 OGDD003 42 43 1 <0.2 24 38 SIX0444483 OGDD003 43 44 1 <0.2 42 64 SIX0444484 OGDD003 44 45 1 <0.2 12 44 SIX0444485 OGDD003 45 46 1 <0.2 12 48 SIX0444486 OGDD003 46 47 1 <0.2 14 86 SIX0444487 OGDD003 47 48 1 <0.2 118 152 SIX0444488 OGDD003 48 49 1 <0.2 120 142 SIX0444489 OGDD003 49 49.5 0.5 <0.2 84 228 SIX0444490 OGDD003 49.5 50 0.5 2.4 4870 15000 SIX0444491 OGDD003 50 50.88 0.88 4 14600 16600 SIX0444492 OGDD003 50.88 51.8 0.92 0 616 736 SIX0444493 OGDD003 51.8 52.04 0.24 4.8 11700 10000 SIX0444494 OGDD003 52.04 53 0.96 2.8 8010 5450 SIX0444495 OGDD003 53 53.6 0.6 1.4 4880 1970 SIX0444496 OGDD003 53.6 54.17 0.57 0 180 468 SIX0444497 OGDD003 54.17 54.8 0.63 2.4 6270 3160 SIX0444498 OGDD003 54.8 56 1.2 <0.2 474 278 SIX0444499 OGDD003 56 57 1 <0.2 134 148 SIX0444500 OGDD003 57 58 1 <0.2 348 398 SIX0444501 OGDD003 58 59 1 <0.2 200 192 SIX0444502 OGDD003 59 59.35 0.35 <0.2 406 198 SIX0444503 OGDD003 59.35 60.13 0.78 0.6 3960 854 SIX0444504 OGDD003 60.13 60.8 0.67 <0.2 444 208 SIX0444505 OGDD003 60.8 61.3 0.5 <0.2 342 108 SIX0444506 OGDD003 61.3 62 0.7 <0.2 248 110 SIX0444507 OGDD003 62 63 1 0.2 796 232 SIX0444508 OGDD003 63 64 1 <0.2 150 374 SIX0444509 OGDD003 64 65 1 <0.2 1480 3510 Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 10 of 27 JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling techniques • 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. • This Announcement includes results of a ground Induced Polarisation (IP) survey and rock chip sampling from the Silver Valley project, and final assay results from diamond drill core at the Oonagalabi project. • The Ground geophysical Induced Polarisation (IP) survey was acquired by Australian Geophysical Services (AGS) on behalf of Litchfield Minerals between 8 and 17 July 2026, using a pole-dipole IP (PDIP) array. Equipment comprised a GDD TxIV 5 kVA transmitter and either a SmarTem 24 or a GDD 16- channel IP receiver. • Receiving electrodes were non- polarisable stainless steel plates and transmitter electrodes were buried aluminium plates. A transmit frequency of 0.125 Hz was used (2 seconds on-time, 2 seconds off-time). • Readings were acquired using 16 x 50 m receiver dipoles along each line, giving a nominal 50 m station interval. Each reading represents the bulk chargeability and resistivity response of a volume of rock rather than a discrete physical sample. • Functionality issues were experienced with the first SmarTem receiver deployed. The GDD receiver was substituted while a replacement SmarTem receiver was transported to site. Both are industry-standard instruments and data acquired with both receivers were processed and quality controlled identically. • Instrument calibration was undertaken by the acquisition Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 11 of 27 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary contractor in accordance with its own standard operating procedures. Calibration certificates have not been independently verified by Litchfield. • IP is an indirect geophysical measurement. Elevated chargeability may be caused by disseminated sulphides but can equally result from graphite, clays, magnetite, weathering effects or near-surface cultural features. A geophysical response is not a measure of mineralisation and cannot be used to infer grade, width or tonnage. • Surface Geochemical Sampling: Random rock chip samples were collected from areas of visible base metal mineralisation (oxidized and fresh sulfides). Rock chips were collected to provide a representative geochemical sample by collecting lots of small rock fragments from the target site. An approximate 1kg sample was submitted to Bureau Veritas Adelaide for analysis. • Diamond drill samples were cut as ½ core using a diamond saw. ½ core was then sampled at specific intervals to account for mineralisation and lithology (0.24m to 1.2m intervals, most at 1m). Drilling intervals selected for sampling were decided on a subjective basis by the person(s) responsible for supervision of the drilling campaign. Given the nature of the minerals being sampled, core sampling is considered by the Competent Person to be an appropriate method of sampling. • All ½ diamond core in the interval 40-65m in OGDD003 were sampled. Samples were Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 12 of 27 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary submitted to the Bureau Veritas Adelaide laboratory for analysis. All samples were pulverised. QAQC standards (blank, reference and lab duplicates) were included routinely. Litchfield standards were inserted along with laboratory standards. All samples were analysed by conventional multi-element and fire assay analysis (see Quality of Assay Data section below for further details). • Reported intercepts were calculated using a cut-off for Cu and Zn of 0.1%. There was no cut-off for Ag within these Cu and Zn cut-off zones. Diamond core internal dilution was 0.92m for both Cu and Zn. 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). • Diamond drill hole OGDD003 was completed by DDH1 Drilling using a Sandvik DE840 Multipurpose rig. Drill core was either HQ or NQ size. 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 fine/coarse material. • Samples were collected and logged at metre intervals (in some cases less for diamond drill core). • No relationship has been determined between sample recoveries and grade and there is insufficient data to determine if there is a sample bias. 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. • IP survey lines were positioned with reference to previous geological mapping, mapped historical workings and recorded mineral occurrences. • Geological mapping and field observations were undertaken concurrently with the survey. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 13 of 27 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. That mapping is ongoing, is qualitative in nature, and its results are not reported as Exploration Results in this announcement. • Rock Chip Sampling involved collecting geological notes recorded at each sampling site to record geology and/or soil horizon, colour, moisture, source, in situ vs trans etc. • Geological logging of diamond drill holes was done on a visual basis with logging including lithology, alteration, mineralisation, structure, weathering, oxidation, magnetic susceptibility etc. • All drillholes were geologically logged in their entirety. • A portable XRF instrument (Niton) was used to qualitatively facilitate identification of mineralised intervals where visual mineralisation was difficult to identify. Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • 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. • The sample size for diamond core samples is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style, application and analytical techniques used. • Individual diamond ½ core sampling varied in intervals, with 1m intervals typical, but the minimum interval being 0.24m. • For rock chips, an approximate 1 kg sample was submitted to the laboratory for analysis. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 14 of 27 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. • 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. • In respect of the geophysical instrumentation: a GDD TxIV 5 kVA transmitter was used with either a SmarTem 24 or GDD 16- channel IP receiver; a pole-dipole array with 16 x 50 m receiver dipoles; and a transmit frequency of 0.125 Hz (2 s on-time, 2 s off- time). Raw IP data supplied by AGS was imported into TQIPdb, a specialist IP data quality control and processing package. Individual chargeability decays at each station were inspected, and any noisy decays, bad repeat readings, or readings with very low primary received voltage were flagged in the database. Flagged readings were excluded from all subsequent stages of processing. • Final chargeability was calculated using a standard integration window of 590 ms to 1540 ms. • Data quality was assessed by Mitre Geophysics as generally good, with clean and repeatable decays. Because the measurement is geophysical rather than analytical, accuracy and precision in the assay sense (standards, blanks, duplicates, umpire laboratory checks) are not applicable. Repeat readings were acquired in the field and used as the basis for the decay repeatability assessment. • Rock chip and diamond core samples submitted to the lab contained sufficient repeat and duplicate samples as per QAQC industry standards. Several OREAS internal lab standards was analysed and produced acceptable results. One Litchfield standard was submitted to the laboratory. Rock chips were analysed using Bureau Veritas methods MA101 / Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 15 of 27 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary MA102 – Multi-Element (Aqua Regia Digest) and where higher grade using the MA201 (multi- element (4-acid-digest) method. Gold was analysed using a 30 g fire assay FA001 method with AAS finish. The assay methods used are considered appropriate. • QAQC standards, blanks and duplicates were routinely included. Further internal laboratory QAQC procedures included internal batch standards and blanks. Internal Litchfield standards were inserted with laboratory standards also used. The samples submitted to the lab contained sufficient repeat and duplicate samples as per QAQC industry standards. Verification of sampling and assaying • 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. • Data acquired by AGS was independently processed, quality controlled, inverted and reported by Mitre Geophysics Pty Ltd, a specialist geophysical consultancy, providing a level of verification independent of the acquisition contractor. • Primary data was recorded digitally in the field by AGS and supplied to Mitre Geophysics in raw form. Validation and QC were undertaken within the TQIPdb database. • Deliverables supplied to Litchfield comprise raw IP data as supplied by AGS; QAQC-passed data in ESF format (both all- repeat-readings and final averaged files, in local grid and GDA2020/MGA53 coordinates); survey coverage files; PDF section plots; geo-located 2D inversion model section images and contours; and a Geoscience Analyst 3D workspace. The ESF format data is suitable for statutory submission to the Northern Territory Geological Survey (NTGS). Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 16 of 27 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary • Data is stored electronically within Litchfield’s data management system, with the contractor retaining copies of the raw field data. • No adjustments have been made to the geophysical data or resulting models other than the quality control exclusions and inversion parameterisation described in this table. • Assay data from rock chip and diamond drill samples have been assessed and reviewed by Company geologists with QAQC completed on this data. 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. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control. • The IP survey was completed on a local grid. The local grid origin (10000E, 20000N) corresponds to 487141.3E / 7677012.6N in GDA2020 / MGA Zone 53. Line bearings are 110.0° / 290.0°. • Survey coverage (local grid coordinates): line 20500N, 10100E to 11900E, 1800 m; line 20700N, 10300E to 11900E, 1600 m; line 21100N, 10200E to 11900E, 1700 m. • Electrode positions were located by the acquisition contractor using handheld GPS along the pre-defined local grid lines. • Elevations were not surveyed in the field. Elevation values for each electrode were extracted from SRTM digital elevation data and integrated into the TQIPdb database for use in the inversion modelling. SRTM vertic