Belltopper Gold Project Mineral Resource

• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. 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 (e.g. ‘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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

•  All drill holes within the Leven Star Reef project (“LSR”) were drilled as either diamond (“DD”) or reverse circulation (“RC”) holes. The detail of the various phases of drilling is discussed under drilling technique in the section below.
• Details of sampling and assay methods are discussed in the sections below under the headings Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation and Quality of assay data and laboratory tests, respectively.

•  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, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).

• Drilling in the project area includes both DD and RC drilling.

Summary of Leven Star drilling
A table accompanying this announcement is available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/a530c312-a7f1-438f-bc1d-23a67b14045f  

• LSR drilling comprises 15 (34%) RC and 29 (66%) DD holes for a total of 7,456 m (1,497 m / 20% RC and 5,959 m / 80% DD).

Max Depth

• MD12 is the deepest DD hole from the project at 1,000 m. The deepest RC hole was drilled to 118 m. The overall average hole depth from Belltopper is 228 m.

Drill Method

• All diamond drilling utilised standard wireline drilling methods.
• The MD Series (MD13-MD22) was drilled with triple tube HQ3 and NQ3 core diameter, all other drill phases were drilled with conventional HQ core (63.5 mm diameter) from surface with occasional NQ or NQ2 Core tails.

Core Orientation

• All diamond core from the MD Series onwards was orientated to varying degrees. The BTD series used a REFLEX ACT III™ digital core orientation system, while DD core from the MD13-MD22 series was orientated with a Boart Longyear TruCore™ orientation tool. Earlier DD core used varying methods of core orientation including a traditional spear method. Bedding and key foliation relationships are well understood and were often used to calibrate the orientation of drill core.

•  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.

• Diamond core recovery was recorded in logs run by run and, in general, core loss greater than or equal to 0.2 m was recorded in geological logs. Core loss zones were treated as zero grade in any significant intersection calculation.
• Drilling recovery data for RC drilling is recorded in drill logs as good, medium, or poor with recovery considered by the geologist logging as ‘good’.

• The sampling methods used are appropriate and representative of the drilled ground.
• Particularly in historical drilling, occasional core loss was observed within ore zones. More recent drilling efforts focused on ensuring good recovery in these zones.
• Significant sample bias or “high grading” due to any core loss has not been observed, though cannot be discounted in high core loss zones.
• No relationship exists between sample recovery and grade.

• 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.

• All diamond drill core was washed and metre-marked, orientated (where appropriate), and then selectively logged for geotechnical parameters (RQD, recovery and rock strength), lithology, mineralisation, weathering, alteration, quartz vein style and percentage and number of quartz veins per metre. Later core logging (BTD and MD series and relogging of historic core) included measurements for magnetic susceptibility, and representative density measurements. Additional comments relating to specific mineralised intervals were added once assays were received.
• Since 2020, many of the historic drilled DD holes have been relogged and infill sampled to ensure consistent interpretation of key features and the identification of any previously missed mineralised zones.
• Both wet and dry photographs are available for all MD and BTD series holes and for the vast majority of historic core.
• All logging is of a standard that allows identification and interpretation of key geological features to a level appropriate to support a possible mineral resource estimation in the future.

The CPs consider that the level of detail is sufficient for the reporting of Mineral Resources. Logging data provides information to support geological modelling, including weathering/oxidation, structure, and rock type.

• 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.

• DD core was sampled by cutting it using a diamond saw longitudinally in half. Samples were cut to geological boundaries or to a preferred length of 1 m. Where a core orientation line was present, core was cut 2 cm to the left of the line (when looking down hole). When no cut line was present, core was cut longitudinally down the apex line of the most prominent geological feature (such as bedding or vein boundaries). Once cut, the upper half of core (left side of the tray when looking down hole) is placed in a pre-labelled calico bag and dispatched for analysis. The lower half of core is returned to the core tray in its original orientation.
• In general, sample intervals ranged from 0.3 m to 1.3 m.
• RC samples (LSRC series) were split using a Jones riffle splitter to a nominal 3-5 kg sample weight.
• Field duplicates were representative of the original primary pair either as a quarter core duplicate or RC riffle-split duplicate.
• Once at the laboratory, all sample material was crushed and pulverized prior to analysis. Samples from the BTD and MD13-MD22 Series were coarse crushed using the ALS method CRU-21 and pulverise up to 3 kg to 85% passing 75 microns (ALS Method PUL-23).
• The sampling methods and sample sizes are appropriate to the style of mineralisation (fine-grained free gold, fine grained disseminated auriferous sulphides, or the oxidized equivalents).
• If any coarse gold is present, noting records of visible gold in historical writings, then this may not have been represented effectively by the recent preparation-assay protocols.

The CPs consider the sampling, sample preparation and assay methods are reasonable for the stage of the project and resource classification.

• 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 (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.

• For the recent BTD series, drilling of MD13-MD22, MD12 and any recent infill sampling of historic holes, samples have been submitted to ALS Laboratories Adelaide for analysis using the methods described below:
  • Gold was analysed with a 50 g ore grade (LDL of 0.01 g/t Au) Au fire assay and an atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) finish (ALS Method Au-AA26). Original assaying of MD12 used trace level (LDL of 0.001 g/t Au) ALS Lab Method Au-AA21 with a nominal 30 g sample weight.
  • Multielement geochemistry was analysed for a suite of 48 elements obtained by a four-acid near-total digestion with a combination of Inductively coupled plasma (ICP) Mass Spectrometry (MS) and Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (AES) finish on a 0.25 g pulp sample (ALS Lab Method ME-MS61).
• Samples from GBM MD01 to MD11 series holes were originally assayed at Amdel Laboratories in Adelaide
  • Gold was analysed with Fire Assay method FA1 (LDL of 0.01 g/t Au)
  • Multielement geochemistry was analysed with method IC3E using a sample of up to 0.2 g of the analytical pulp digested using a HF/multi acid digest, with solution presented for analysis with ICP Optical Emission Spectroscopy (OES).
• Samples from original LSRC, LSRC/D, LSDDH and HMDDH series utilised ALS laboratory method PM203 for gold analysis (LDL of 0.02 g/t Au) based on the aqua regia digestion of a 50 g charge and a fire assay with an Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) finish. It is noted that aqua regia digestion is an incomplete method of assay, thus grades by this method are likely to be undercalled. This undercall may be further compounded by the refractory nature of the LSR mineralisation.
• The original lab method for DDHMA series holes could not be determined with confidence. Any gold assay of significant grade (0.1 g/t Au) has been resampled using the same lab method as used by the BTD series (Au-AA26 and ME-MS61).
• All assays were performed at external laboratories.

QA/QC

• For the recent BTD series drilling, drilling of MD13-MD22 and any recent infill sampling of historic holes (Includes earlier MD, LSDDH DDHMA series holes), staff used an industry accepted QAQC methodology incorporating field duplicates, blanks, and certified reference materials (CRM) standards. Standards and blanks were inserted at a rate of 1 in 25 (see Standard ID table below), and field duplicates were also inserted at a nominal rate of 1 in 25 with geologist discretion for duplicate placement.

• Laboratory QA/QC involves the use of internal lab standards using certified reference material, blanks, splits, and replicates as part of the in-house procedures.
• QA/QC insertion rates for early-stage drilling are in line with industry standards at the time.
  • The LSRC series included the insertion of field blanks and standards at a rate of approximately 1 in 20 samples and conducted riffle split field duplicates nominally at 20 to 30 m intervals.
  • Original LSDDH and HMDDH series sampling included the insertion of approximately 1 in 100 field duplicates and the occasional insertion of field blanks and standards.
  • No QA/QC assay data was reported with original DDHMA series samples.
• For pre-GBM drilling (1990-1994) no QC is reported. QC was introduced from 2007 across the GBM, GBM/Novo and Novo programmes.
• No issues of concern were identified in a review of QA/QC data associated with the LSR project.

The CPs consider the sampling, sample preparation and assay methods are reasonable for the stage of the project and resource classification applied. Future drilling programmes should include higher insertion rates for QC.

• 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.

• All significant intersections were checked and verified internally by Novo senior geological staff. CP, Dr Simon Dominy reviewed drill core at the Novo core facility located in Castlemaine, VIC.
• Twinned holes were not completed.
• All primary drill data was documented, verified (including QAQC analysis), and stored within an industry-standard SQL database.
• No assays were routinely adjusted. However, below-detection assay values were replaced with half-detection-limit values. Two intervals affected by significant core loss were conservatively adjusted assuming lost core carried zero grade.

• 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.

• All BTD and MD series collars were initially surveyed by company staff using a hand-held GPS. At the completion of each program all collars were surveyed in MGA94 Zone 55 and MGA2020 zone 55 by a Registered Licensed Surveyor using a Differential GPS system (DGPS).
• Holes drilled by Eureka and most holes drilled by Pittson in the mid 1990’s (LSRC/D & LSRC Series and HMDDH & LSDDH Series respectively) were surveyed in AMG84 Zone 55 by a Registered Licensed Surveyor using a theodolite.
• The collar positions for the DDHMA Series are considered less dependable, as they have been digitised off old plan maps. Although the general drill pads for these holes could be located, Novo staff were unable to locate the collar positions.
• Most collar positions, except for the DDHMA series collars, have been validated in the field.
• A high-resolution LIDAR survey flown in Dec 2022 over the Belltopper project has assisted in validating the collar position of all Belltopper drill holes.
• All drill collars have been converted to and are presented in MGA94 Zone 55.

Downhole surveys

• Downhole surveying of DD for the MD and BTD series were conducted at a nominal depth of 6 m, then every 25 m from thereon and at end of hole. The BTD series drilling used a REFLEX EZ-TRAC™ digital magnetic hole survey system, while the MD13-MD22 series used a Boart Longyear TruShot™ magnetic multi-shot tool. DD holes MD01-MD11 were surveyed with a magnetic single shot camera
• Earlier DD holes were surveyed using a magnetic single shot camera at the collar, then at nominal 50 m intervals down hole and at end of hole depth. RC holes were surveyed at collar and end of hole depth.

The CPs consider that the topographic control is suitable to support the Mineral Resource.

• 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.

• Drilling in the area has focused on the LSR. Drilling along this mineralised trend has been at a nominal 30-50 m spacing along strike and down-dip. The deepest LSR intersection occurs approximately 400 m below the surface topography.
• DD core samples were not physically composited.
• RC samples were physically composited into four-meter intervals for initial sampling. Any composited samples returning grade were subsequently resampled at a one-meter infill intervals.

The CPs believe that the mineralised wireframes have sufficient geological and grade continuity to support the classification applied to the Mineral Resources given the current drill pattern.

• 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.

• In most cases, holes were drilled across strike at a high angle to the interpreted mineralisation geometry.
• No sampling bias is considered to have been introduced by the drilling orientation.
• Further discussion regarding drilling orientation is presented under the heading “Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths”.

• The measures taken to ensure sample security.

• All samples from the BTD and MD13-MD22 series were transported by a commercial courier directly to ALS Laboratories in Adelaide from the Novo/GBM core facility in Castlemaine, VIC.
• During previous drill programs, samples were either delivered via courier or directly delivered by staff to the appropriate laboratory.
• Pre-2007 sample security is not documented.
• Available core, coarse rejects, and pulps are stored at the Novo core facility in Castlemaine, VIC.

• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.

• No audit of sampling techniques and data has been undertaken other than by the CPs in the course of their work.

• 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.

• The Belltopper Project is enclosed within retention license RL006587 (Originally granted on 23^rd September 2020 for a period of 10 years) and EL007112 (Originally granted on 3^rd of July 2020 for a period of 5 years; and renewed for a further period of 5 years, with a current expiry date of 2^nd July 2030). All reported drilling associated with the Belltopper Project is located within RL006587
• The rights, title, and interest of RL006587 and EL007112 are held under Rocklea Gold Pty Ltd (100% subsidiary of Novo resources Corp.)
• Part of retention license RL006587 is located within the Fryers Ridge Conservation Reserve. The Reserve is classified as ‘restricted Crown land’ under the Mineral Resources Development Act 1990 and may be used for mineral exploration and mining, subject to the approval of the Minister for Environment and Conservation.
• Novo has accepted the Schedule 4 conditions of the Land Use Activity Agreement between the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation and the State of Victoria applying to all Crown land including road reserves within the retention license.

• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.

• The project area has been explored by several companies since the 1970s. In 1987 Molopo/Paringa drilled 3 DD holes for 741.55 m. In 1990-92 Pittson drilled 16 DD holes for 2245.8 m. In 1994 Eureka drilled 15 RC holes for 1682.1m and 2 RC holes with DD tails for a further 185.1 m.
• GBM Resources drilled 12 DD holes (MD01 to MD11 including MD08A) for 3694 m in 2008 followed by a single 999.8 m hole (MD12) which was drilled in March 2010).
• In joint venture with GBM Resources, Novo Resources drilled 3161.7 m of HQ and NQ diamond core across 11 holes (MD13 to MD22 including MD18A).

• Deposit type, geological setting, and style of mineralisation.

• The geology within the project area consists of a series of Early Ordovician turbidites that form part of the Castlemaine Supergroup within the Ballarat-Bendigo Structural Zone of the Lachlan Fold Belt. The sediments comprise of a very uniform and well-bedded sequence of marine sandstone and mudstone interbedded with fossiliferous black shale. The Drummond North goldfield is a north-trending belt of fault-related mineralised zones, extending from the Humboldt reef in the north to the Queen’s Birthday reef in the south, around 4 km. Approximately 30% of the tenement area is covered by basalt cover.
• Most modern exploration has targeted the LSR with only modest attention paid to the other reefs on Belltopper or to the reef lines south of the hill where the bulk of historical production occurred.
• The LSR reaches up to 8 m in width, follows a narrow, brittle fault zone with associated intense fracturing and quartz vein development in the country rock. Deformity and reef width are controlled by lithology with the best development in coarser-grained sandstone units or rheological domain boundaries. Sulphide mineralisation occurs as; fine-grained pyrite/stibnite/bismuth-telluride/bismuthinite in quartz veins and country rock fractures, disseminated clots of pyrite-arsenopyrite-stibnite-pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite, and as fine needles and radial clots associated with sericite. Pyrite is most widespread while stibnite-arsenopyrite are restricted to stockwork veins and larger-scale quartz veins. Alteration is dominated by sericite, within quartz veins and as vein selvedge. Carbonate/sulphide alteration is extensive as haloes around breccia zones. Skarn-like assemblages of scheelite/fluorite/cassiterite with coarse bladed calcite and muscovite are also present.
• Mineralisation may be associated with buried intrusion(s) of IRG or porphyry affinity. Evidence for intrusion-related mineralisation includes; outcropping auriferous and altered porphyritic monzogranite with overprinting gold-bearing sheet veins, a Falcon gravity low anomaly spatially associated with the hill and mineralisation, presence of Mo-Bi-W-Te-Sb in soils and rocks on Belltopper, and anomalous Mo-Bi-Sn-W-Cu-Sb-Zn to significant depth in the deep exploration hole MD12.

• 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:
  • easting and northing of the drill hole collar
  • elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar
  • dip and azimuth of the hole
  • down hole length and interception depth
  • 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.

• Drill hole locations are shown on the map within the body of the release.
• All drill holes are listed in Appendix 1.
• No drill information into LSR has been excluded.

• 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 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.

• Exploration Results are not being reported.
• No metal equivalents are reported.

• 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’).

• Reported gold intersections from drilling represent apparent downhole widths.
• Most drill holes intersecting mineralisation at an acute angle of between 30° and 65°. As a result, true widths of most significant intersections are likely to be a reduced factor of reported apparent downhole widths. In general, it is estimated that true width is between 40% and 85% less than the reported downhole widths.
• BTD001 intersects Leven Star at a shallow angle. True widths for these intersections will be between 50% and 60% lower than the reported downhole widths.  

• 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.

• See body of the release.

• 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.

• Exploration Results are not being reported.

• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.

• Research has been completed on historic data reported in various newspapers including the Kyneton Observer, Kyneton Guardian, The Age (Melbourne Newspaper), and The Argus (Melbourne Newspaper). These 19th Century newspaper reports are accessible via the TROVE website maintained by the National Library of Australia. In addition, publications of the Geological Survey of Victoria and the Mines Department were accessed. Research indicated minimal workings on the LSR.

• 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.

Limited drilling toward the southwest margin of the LSR highlight open higher-grade intersections that have not been extensively drilled and represent potential target higher-grade “shoot” zones within the current resource model. This zone broadly correlates with the modelled intersection(s) between the sub-vertical, NE-trending LSR and several parallel NE-dipping reefs including the Missing Link, Panama, and West Panama Faults. Near term drilling is designed to assess down-plunge of existing high-grade open intersections within this developing shoot zone and pending positive results may result in future resource expansion drilling down-plunge and beyond the existing resource model (See below).

The LSR represents one out of eight individual reefs that collectively comprise the 2026 Exploration Target (ET) at Belltopper. Near-term scoping level drilling (ca. 100 x 100 m) of the remaining seven reefs is planned to gain confidence across all ET reefs and/or to evaluate additional known historic reefs that currently sit outside of the ET. Longer term resource-level drilling of the seven additional known reefs at Belltopper will be contingent on initial scoping-level drilling results. The goal being incremental growth at Leven Star in parallel with the seven additional Exploration Target Reefs and/or any other known historic reefs that may be included (See below).

A figure accompanying this announcement is available at
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b4df5255-1fb9-4c84-993a-e51d9291261b

The image below highlights higher block grades in the SW region of the LSR (LSR MRE block model long section). This is a priority target area that is lightly drilled and warrants further drilling.

A figure accompanying this announcement is available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b78fca45-1115-45b4-a0b6-cae4da9ca6a6

• Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.
• Data validation procedures used.

Downhole surveys were reviewed to ensure that the database did not contain any erratic survey measurements. Many of the drillholes are vertical. Each record was reviewed to determine if there were issues, and no problems were identified.

MRE26 was estimated using RC and DD holes, as summarised below.

A table accompanying this announcement is available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/400cb593-587e-4a01-836d-a0331be82a3e

The CPs have taken steps to review the sample data to verify their veracity. Steps taken included:

• Audit visits to Metallurgy P/L metallurgical testing facilities (Perth, WA) with reference to the 2023 metallurgical testwork program.
• Discussions with Novo exploration personnel.
• Review of sample collection and preparation/assaying procedures.
• Review of core photographs and drill logs.
• Inspection of historical and 2022 diamond drill core.
• Review of selected results files and certificates supplied by laboratories.
• Analysis of historical, Novo and laboratory QC.
• Site visit in May 2022.

No issues were encountered during the verification process. The CPs consider the LSR database appropriate to support the MRE.

• Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.
• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.

Ms Graham has not visited site.

• Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.
• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.
• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.
• The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.
• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.

Three alternate geological/wireframe models for the LSR were produced (Models A, B and C – LSA, LSB and LSC). The LSC model was the most realistic interpretation of the LSR. The LSC model integrates additional downhole data obtained from the recently drilled (2023) diamond hole BTD001. Hole BTD001 successfully extended the LSR mineralisation up to 120 m down-dip from the previous MD16 intersections and confirmed the position of the Far East Hanover Fault.

The criteria for wireframe construction were:

• Mineralized indicator grade: 0.3 g/t Au;
• Maximum consecutive internal dilution (downhole) of 2 m; and
• No minimum downhole width.

The BTD001 intersections significantly influence the overall width of LSC at depth. Previous modelling had postulated that the widths identified in MD16 continued at depth, converging at an RL proximal to the intersections now assessed by BTD001 (see below).

A figure accompanying this announcement is available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/633abe0b-7040-4a3e-91a0-f539a9fde37e

The true width of mineralisation in hole BTD001 appears to be narrower than expected. Additionally, the multiple reefs originally interpreted to intersect around the depth of BTD001 are likely to converge at greater depth. This concept is further supported by multiple interpreted LSR intersections identified at depth in both MD03 and LSDDH7.

In addition to the Main LSR, recent modelling and relogging of historic core has identified several minor LSR parallel reefs. These are highlighted by semi-continuous zones of mineralisation. The geological representation of these hanging wall and footwall reefs aligns well with common observations of tectonic brecciation, increased quartz veining, and alteration along these trends. Lower-grade composite intervals have guided the wireframe for the hanging wall, and footwall models associated with LSC. Unfortunately, many of these historic intercepts were drilled with RC and sample residues were not retained. Where possible, the hanging wall and footwall models have been constrained to specific smaller intervals within the composite grade based on logging. In cases where no obvious constraining feature exists, the wireframe width representative of the 4 m composite has been maintained.

Further investigation has allowed a more confident interpretation of four post- or syn-tectonic faults that offset or influence the LSR. These key faults include the Far East Hanover Fault, NW Fault 1, Granite Gully Thrust, and NW Fault 18. The most significant of these faults is Far East Hanover Fault which intersects the LSR at a shallow angle and is interpreted to be a sub-vertical structure with minor interpreted dextral offset and eastern side upthrown. Movement along this results in the main LSR system being intersected up to three times in MD16, BTD001, and other proximal holes due to structural repetition. In contrast, holes distal to this central zone around the Far East Hanover Fault only intersect the main LSR structure twice.

The LSC model represents increased geological understanding of the LSR deposit and has the benefit of additional drilling and interpretation compared to the original LSA and LSB models. LSC is considered the current best interpretation of the deposit in context of both geological and grade continuity.

The CPs are of the opinion that the geology of the deposit and mineralisation is sufficiently understood at a level appropriate to the current drill spacing, data density, and stage of the project.

• The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.

In resource modelling terms, LSR is interpreted as a steep to near-vertical system striking approximately 040°, with the main reef accompanied by minor parallel hanging-wall and footwall reefs. Recent drilling, particularly BTD001, extended known mineralisation by up to 120 m down-dip from previous intersections to around 400 m from surface.

• The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used.
• The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data.
• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.
• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation).
• In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed.
• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.
• Any assumptions about correlation between variables.
• Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates.
• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.
• The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.

Geological interpretation is based on the LSC model, integrates the 2023 BTD001 diamond hole, which extended the interpreted mineralisation down dip and improved understanding of the Far East Hanover Fault. The LSC model includes the main LSR structure and several minor parallel hanging-wall and footwall reefs.

For estimation, drillhole data were coded by mineralized domain, fault area, and weathering state. Contact analysis found no strong grade break between oxide, transitional and fresh material sufficient to justify separate estimation domains at this stage, so weathering states were combined within each mineralized domain. Samples were composited to 1 m within domain boundaries. Below-detection assay values were replaced with half-detection-limit values. Two intervals affected by significant core loss were conservatively adjusted assuming lost core carried zero grade. Gold top-cuts were applied only where required, notably in the 100 domain and one smaller domain.

Grade estimation used Ordinary Kriging into a rotated block model aligned with the approximate strike of mineralisation. The block model used parent blocks of 2 m (E) by 40 m (N) by 30 m (RL), sub-celled to 0.5 m (E) by 2 m (N) by 2 m (RL) determined by Quantitative Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis (QKNA). An initial (P1) search ellipse of 110 m by 30 m by 15 m was defined based on the results of the variography and assessment of the data coverage. A minimum of eight and maximum of 25 samples was used for the initial search pass. Second pass (P2) was two times the initial search ellipse with a minimum of eight and maximum of 25 samples. Third pass (P3) was three times the initial search with a minimum of four and maximum of 15 samples. The fourth pass was used for model completeness, (P4) was eight times the initial search pass with a minimum of two and maximum of 15. All passes had a maximum of three samples per drillhole applied for the gold estimate.

Validation included global comparisons of composites and block estimates, visual inspection in long sections, and swath plots. The gold estimate for the main (100) domain validated well against declustered composites.

Extrapolation occurs along strike and down dip, with the maximum extrapolated distance from a drill hole being 180 m. Passes 1 (0.5x the variogram range) and 2 (1x the variogram range) of the search area are defined as interpolation. Pass 3 (1.5x the variogram range) is defined as extrapolation. Approximately 21% of the reported gold ounces are based on extrapolation, equivalent to 20% of the reported tonnes. The figure below shows the extrapolated versus interpolated areas of the Leven Star main (100) domain by tonnes.

A figure accompanying this announcement is available at: 
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/86da12a6-c002-4267-8a15-5e1ad648acf7  

The MRE is global in nature.

No depletion has been applied to the model. It is understood that minimal mining has taken place at LSR.

A previous estimate was reported in 2008 and re-reported with no changes in 2019 (Allwood, 2008; 2019). The MRE was classified as an Inferred Mineral Resource containing 820,000 t at 3.95 g/t Au for 104,000 oz Au. The estimate was based on an inverse distance (squared) weighted block model using 2 m composited samples. No variography was undertaken, with the model search ellipse aligned along strike to capture samples from two drill sections. The MRE was reported at a nominal cut-off of 2.5 g/t Au, with no optimisations applied. An underground operation was assumed.

• Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.

• The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.

A cut-off grade of 1.9 g/t Au was applied, calculated from the inputs provided to the MSO optimisation process. Refer to the “Mining factors or assumptions” section for MSO input parameters.

• Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.

The optimized MSO stope shapes were estimated with the following indicative parameters:

• Gold price: AU$5,250/oz gold (equivalent to US$3,675 based on a consensus US$:AU$ exchange rate of 0.7).
• Bulk density applied: oxide mineralisation 2.50 t/m³ (waste 2.35 t/m³), transitional mineralisation 2.60 t/m³ (waste 2.45 t/m³) and fresh mineralisation 2.65 t/m³ (waste 2.70 t/m³).
• AU$162/t mining cost (including grade control).
• AU$119/t processing cost (including G&A and haulage).
• Metallurgical recovery at 88%.
• Mining is based on sub-level open stoping with 15 m level to level separation, mining recovery of 90%, minimum mining width at 1.5 m and 0.2 m HW and FW dilution.
• Victorian State Royalty of 2.75%.
• Discount factor 8%.
• Effective cut-off grade 1.9 g/t Au.

Mining costs were defined on a “comparison” basis at a rate of 250,000 t/a. The mining method is based on a mechanized sub-level open stoping operation with 3 m wide by 3 m high drives; with a floor-to-floor separation of 15 m; mining recovery of 90%, minimum mining width of 1.5 m and 0.2 m dilution skins.
The cut-off grade is based on output from the MSO optimisation based on the input parameters listed above.
A time period of between 5 to 10 years is considered appropriate for “eventual economic extraction” for LSR, noting that gold price and OPEX may change during the period.
It is assumed that mineralisation would be fed to a process plant with a flotation circuit within reasonable haulage distance.

• The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.

Novo undertook metallurgical testwork on a 28 kg composite (assayed head weighted grade 4.5 g/t Au) from core and RC residues in 2023. Based on this testwork, the fresh/sulphide mineralisation from the LSR displays strong refractory characteristics.

A single stage GRG test indicated a GRG value of 12%, which is low and would not support the use of a gravity circuit. Given previous mineralogical studies indicate fine and lattice-locked gold, gold reporting to the Knelson concentrate may represent rare coarse gold and free sulphide-hosted gold. The size-by-assay indicates that most of the gold is fine (as free or composite particles), where 73.5% is <75 µm.

Flotation at P80 90 µm indicates a gold recovery of 92% with a mass pull of 12%. Flotation was undertaken on the SGRG tails.

Gold recoveries by cyanidation across the three grind sizes are extremely low (<11%), indicating refractory mineralisation. The leach solution grades are broadly invariant with time, indicating that increased leach time has minimal effect.

The total gold recovery across the gravity plus flotation testwork is 93%. The true gravity recovery could be two thirds of the experimental value, e.g. 8%. In such a case gravity recovery is not warranted and much of the GRG is likely to report to the flotation concentrate assuming a strong sulphide association.

The “testwork” gold recovery based on a single sample across gravity-leach is c. 22%. This is a strong reflection that a standard gravity-CIL plant would recover little gold from the fresh mineralisation.

The diagnostic leach test was based on the 89.2% gold (4.17 g/t Au) of non-free cyanide gold retained in the LT02 tails. Of this 89.2%, some 7.4% is carbonate hosted; 91.2% associated with sulphides (arsenopyrite); and a further 1.4% in other sulphides (pyrite).

Subject to further testwork, it is assumed that a flotation concentrate would be produced for direct sale.

No metallurgical recovery factors have been applied to the Mineral Resource, though were included in the Datamine MSO optimisation process used to report the MRE. The optimisation process used a conservative metallurgical recovery of 88%.

• Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.

Investigations into possible waste and process residue disposal options have begun. No conclusions have been reached. The assumptions made in this regard are that processing is to occur offsite and that mine waste disposal will be minimised by filling mined voids with waste rock.

At the appropriate time, Novo will also investigate waste rejection through ore sorting technology which could reduce the tonnage to be hauled between the operation and plant. This could also result in a higher feed grade to the plant. There is no guarantee that such technology is suited to LSR mineralisation. No testwork has been completed to date.

• Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples.
• The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit.
• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.

A total of 213 bulk density measurements were reviewed, but only 52 measurements are reported as falling within mineralisation. The data show minor variation by weathering domain, though the dataset is small and insufficiently distributed for a comprehensive analysis.

For the MRE26 model, density was not estimated block-by-block. Instead, fixed density values were assigned by material type and weathering state, with reference to the available measured means (see Table below).

A table accompanying this announcement is available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/8d233a65-1b85-4257-8d80-f025b5c61c12

• The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories.
• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data).
• Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.

The model has been classified on a domain-by-domain basis; in practical terms a wireframe was constructed to encapsulate material meeting the criteria for each classification category used to delineate and code the model.

No areas of the MRE have been classified as Measured or Indicated Mineral Resources.

Inferred Mineral Resources have been defined at LSR. Areas classified as Inferred Mineral Resources are informed by drilling spaced from 20 m up to >50 m, and have been estimated within the first, second, or the third estimation pass with a slope of regression greater than zero. Individual domains have been reviewed and classified accordingly. Areas that have not been estimated in the third pass have been categorized as ‘unclassified’ and have not been reported.

Eighty percent of the MRE26 by tonnes is supported by interpolation, with the remaining 20% by extrapolation.

• The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.

No other audits or reviews were undertaken outside of Novo or Snowden Optiro.

• Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.
• The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used.
• These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.

The Mineral Resource statement relates to a global estimate of in-situ tonnes and grades.

MRE26 is classified as an Inferred Mineral Resource.

No quantification of accuracy/confidence has been undertaken.