01 Dec 2021

Positive Assays From Norseman Sulphides

Page 1 | 16 1 December 20 2 1 ASX: GAL Corporate Directory Directors Chairman & MD Brad Underwood Non-Executive Director Noel O’Brien Non-Executive Director Mathew Whyte Projects Fraser Range Project Nickel-Copper-Cobalt Norseman Project Palladium-Nickel-Cobalt Contact Details T: +61 8 9463 0063 E: info@galmining.com.au W: www.galileomining.com.au 13 Colin St, West Perth, WA POSITIVE ASSAYS FROM NORSEMAN SULPHIDES Highlights • First assays from Norseman aircore drill program show magmatic nickel-copper-cobalt-palladium mineralisation • One metre of sulphide from 60 metres downhole with o 1 metre @ 0.24% nickel, 0.35% copper, 0.04% cobalt and 0.25 g/t palladium (NAC105) • Aircore drilling unable to break through massive sulphide and drill intersection is open in all directions • Sulphide from end of hole in NAC105 was a priority sample with the bulk of results from the current drill program expected to be returned in January • Massive sulphide intercept at shallow depth significantly increases the prospectivity of Galileo’s project area • Follow-up work to include EM surveying prior to RC drill testing Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL, “Galileo” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce the first assay results from aircore drilling at the Company’s 100% owned Norseman project in Western Australia. Figure 1 – Aircore drilling at Galileo’s Norseman project. Page 2 | 16 Galileo’s Managing Director Brad Underwood commented; “ The first assays from our Norseman aircore drilling program show that we have intercepted magmatic sulphide mineralisation containing nickel, copper, cobalt and palladium metal. The mineralisation is at shallow depth and, due to the small aircore rig not drilling through the sulphide at the bottom of hole, is open in all directions. The sulphide occurs on the margin of a large ultramafic intrusion which can be traced along strike over several kilometres. This is the exact setting where mineral deposits can occur and at just over 50 metres below surface the potential for further sulphides is exceptional. Approximately 8,000 metres of aircore drilling have been completed to date with the drill program expected to be concluded over the coming days. Samples have been submitted to the laboratory for assaying with the majority of results expected in January. Follow up work on the massive sulphide prospect will include EM surveying prior to RC drill testing planned for 2022 .” Figure 2 –– End of hole aircore sample from NAC105 at 60 metres downhole depth Page 3 | 16 Figure 3 ––Aircore drill samples from NAC105 with 1 metre of sulphide mineralisation at the end of hole (right foreground with sieve) Table 1: One metre sample assays from end of hole NAC105. Four acid digest and nickel sulphide collection used to determine results. Rh, Ru, Ir and Os assays were individually < 40 ppb. Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval Ni (%) Cu (%) Co (%) Pd (g/t) Pt (ppb) Au (ppb) NAC105 60 61 1 0.24 0.35 0.04 0.25 34 21 The sulphide mineralisation in NAC105 was intersected on the northern side of target JD1 (Figures 4 and 5) under alluvium and clay cover. JD1 occurs in the central position of the ultramafic Jimberlana Dyke where surface soil sampling identified maximum palladium values in soils of 0.81 g/t Pd while the maximum nickel recorded was 0.2% Ni (1) . Surface geochemical anomalism is associated with the outcropping Jimberlana Dyke layered intrusion. Prospective areas of the dyke to the north and south occur under shallow cover with soil sampling ineffective due to the cover material. Aircore drilling was designed to extend over these areas where cover prevented effective soil sampling. Page 4 | 16 Figure 4 ––Priority aircore drill targets at Norseman (over TMI magnetic image) (1) Refer to Galileo’s ASX announcements dated 17th May 2021 and 25th August 2021 NAC105 SULPHIDES Page 5 | 16 Figure 5 ––Aircore drilling on northern edge of JD1 target showing interpreted sulphide zone on contact between ultramafic and mafic rock units (over TMI magnetic image) NAC105 was drilled to a depth of 61 metres with the final metre intersecting fresh massive sulphide at the end of the hole. The host rock appears to be a mafic/ultramafic intrusion based on drill chips immediately above the sulphide. Drill holes to the south intersected ultramafic rocks and those to the north were logged as mafic/ultramafic at the end of hole (Figure 5). A summary log of NAC105 is presented in Table 2 with collar details and end of hole lithologies in Appendices 1 and 2 respectively. Thin section petrography is required to determine the precise rock classifications. Full laboratory assays and petrography will be undertaken to determine the metal values within the sulphides and the geological setting of the identified mineralisation. Page 6 | 16 Table 2: NAC105 Drill Log Summary From (m) To (m) Comment 0 13 Alluvium and clay cover 13 41 Weathered saprolite 41 47 Silcrete/silica cap 47 60 Lower saprolite 60 61 M assive sulphide at end of hole with minor mafic/ultramafic chips within the logged interval Figure 6 – Norseman project location map with a selection of regional mines and infrastructure Sulphide Intercept Page 7 | 16 Competent Person Statement The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Brad Underwood, a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and a full time employee of Galileo Mining Ltd. Mr Underwood has sufficient experience that is relevant to the styles of mineralisation and types of deposit 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” (JORC Code). Mr Underwood consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his 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. Authorised for release by the Galileo Board of Directors. Investor information: phone Galileo Mining on + 61 8 9463 0063 or email info@galmining.com.au Media: David Tasker Managing Director Chapter One Advisors E: dtasker@chapteroneadvisors.com.au T: +61 433 112 936 About Galileo Mining: Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL) is focussed on the exploration and development of nickel, palladium, copper, and cobalt resources in Western Australia. GAL has Joint Ventures with the Creasy Group over tenements in the Fraser Range which are highly prospective for nickel-copper sulphide deposits similar to the operating Nova mine. GAL also holds tenements near Norseman with over 26,000 tonnes of contained cobalt, and 122,000 tonnes of contained nickel, in JORC compliant resources (see JORC Table below). JORC Mineral Resource Estimates for the Norseman Cobalt Project (“Estimates”) (refer to ASX “Prospectus” announcement dated May 25 th 2018 and ASX announcement dated 11 th December 2018, accessible at http://www.galileomining.com.au/investors/asx-announcements/ ). Galileo confirms that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Estimates continue to apply and have not materially changed). Cut - off Cobalt % Class Tonnes Mt Co Ni % Tonnes % Tonnes MT THIRSTY SILL 0.06 % Indicated 10.5 0.12 12,100 0.58 60,800 Inferred 2.0 0.11 2,200 0.51 10,200 Total 12.5 0.11 14,300 0.57 71,100 MISSION SILL 0.06 % Inferred 7.7 0.11 8,200 0.45 35,000 GOBLIN 0.06 % Inferred 4.9 0.08 4,100 0.36 16,400 TOTAL JORC COMPLIANT RESOURCES 0.06 % Total 25.1 0.11 26,600 0.49 122,500 Page 8 | 16 Appendix 1: Aircore Drillhole Details Hole ID Prospect East North RL Dip Azimuth Depth EOH Lithology NAC105 JD1 376295 6442098 306 -60 0 61 Ma s sive Sulphide NAC106 JD1 376295 6442048 306 -60 0 54 Ultramafic NAC107 JD1 376295 6441998 306 -60 0 65 Ultramafic NAC108 JD1 376295 6441948 306 -60 0 61 Ultramafic NAC109 JD1 376292 6441905 306 -60 0 63 Ultramafic NAC122 JD1 376343 6442145 305 -60 0 50 Mafic NAC123 JD1 376239 6442171 305 -60 0 33 Mafic NAC124 JD1 376295 6442129 305 -60 0 56 Mafic/Ultramafic NAC125 JD1 376296 6442073 306 -60 0 67 Ultramafic Note: Easting and Northing coordinates are GDA94 Zone 51. Appendix 2: Logging of Sulphide Mode, Type, and Percentage Cautionary Statement: Sulphide estimates are completed by visual observation with analytical laboratory results pending for all drill holes. Galileo Field Logging Guide Sulphide Mode Percent Range (visually estimated) Weakly disseminated < 1 % Disseminated & blebby 1 – 5 % Heavily disseminated 5 – 20 % Matrix 20 – 40 % Net textured 20 – 40 % Semi-massive >40 to < 80 % Massive >80 % Page 9 | 16 Appendix 3: Galileo Mining Ltd – Norseman Project 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 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. • Aircore drilling was completed on traverses testing geological targets based on aeromagnetic interpretation and/or surface geochemistry. • Drill cuttings representative of each 1m down hole interval of sample return were collected direct from the drill rig sample return system (cyclone) into a 20-litre plastic bucket and ground dumped in rows. • Each 1m sample pile from the residual (non-transported) portion of each hole was spear sampled to obtain representative sub-samples to end of hole for laboratory analysis. A 1m bottom of hole sub-sample was also collected for laboratory analysis. • Sub-sample composite weights were in the range 2-3kg. • Bottom of hole sample weights were approximately 1kg • Certified QAQC standards (blank & reference) and field duplicate samples were included routinely with 1 per 50 primary sub samples being a certified standard, blank or a field duplicate. • Samples have been submitted to an independent commercial assay laboratory. • Bulk of drill program assay results are pending 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). • The Aircore drilling method was used with an 85mm blade bit. • KTE Mining was the drilling contractor for the program utilising a KL150 model rig. 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. • Sample recoveries are visually estimated for each metre by the geologist supervising the drilling. Poor or wet samples are recorded in the drill and sample log sheets. • The sample cyclone was routinely cleaned between holes and when deemed necessary within the hole. • No relationship has been determined between sample recover y and Page 10 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary geology/ 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. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. • Geological logging of drill holes was done on a visual basis with logging including lithology, grainsize, mineralogy, texture, deformation, mineralisation, alteration, veining, colour and weathering. • Logging of drill chips is semi- quantitative and based on the presentation of representative drill chips retained for all 1m sample intervals in the chip trays. • All drill holes were logged in their entirety 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. • All Aircore drill samples were collected using a PVC spear as 4m composites (2-3kg). Other composites of 3m, 2m and 1m were collected where required ie, at the bottom of hole or through zones of interest as identified by the geologist supervising the program. A specific 1m bottom of hole sub-sample was also collected by PVC Spear or Scoop (1-2kg). • QAQC reference samples and duplicates were routinely submitted with each batch. • The sample size is considered appropriate for the mineralisation style, application and analytical techniques used. 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. • A C Chip samples were analysed for a multielement suite (48 elements) by ICP-OES following a four-acid digest. Assay for Au, Pt, Pd, Rh, Ru, Ir, and Os have been completed by 25gram Nickel Sulphide Collection Fire Assay with an ICP-MS finish. The assay methods used are considered appropriate. • QAQC standards and duplicates were routinely included at a rate of 1 per 50 samples • Further internal laboratory QAQC procedures included internal batch standards and blanks • Sample preparation was completed at Intertek Genalysis Laboratory, (Perth) with digest and assay conducted by Intertek-Genalysis Laboratory Services (Perth) using a four acid (4A/MS) for multi-element assay and 25gram Nickel Sulphide Collection Fire Assay Page 11 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary with an ICP - MS finish for Au, Pt, Pd , Rh, Ru, Ir, Os ( NS 25/MS). 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. • Field data is collected on site using a standard set of logging templates entered directly into a laptop computer. Data is then sent to the Galileo database manager (CSA Global - Perth) for validation and upload into the database. 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. • Aircore d rill hole collars are surveyed with a handheld GPS with an accuracy of +/-5m which is considered sufficient for drill hole location accuracy. • Co-ordinates are in GDA94 datum, Zone 51. • Downhole depths are in metres from surface. • Topographic control has an accuracy of 2m based on detailed satellite imagery derived DTM. 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. • Aircore drill traverse spacing is not regular, the holes being placed to provide a systematic traverse pattern coverage of the geophysical/geochemical target area of interest. • Drill spacing along traverses has been at selective 50m intervals specific to the target zone and ongoing observations from the geologist during the drilling program. This spacing has been deemed adequate for first pass assessment only and is not considered sufficient to determine JORC Compliant Inferred Resources and therefore laboratory assay results and additional drilling would be required. • Drill holes were sampled from surface on a 4m composite basis or as 1m, 2m, or 3m samples as determined by the end of hole depth or under instruction from the geologist supervising the program. A 1m sub- sample from end of hole has also been collected. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • 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. • All holes are inclined at 60 degrees . • It is unknown whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures as the target setting is hosted in soft regolith material with no measurable structures recorded in drill core. • No quantitative measurements of Page 12 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary mineralised zones/structures exist and all drill intercepts are reported as down hole length, true width unknown. Blade refusal depth of the drill rig will vary due to rock type, structure and alteration intersected as well as in-hole drilling conditions. Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. • Each sub - sample was put into a nd tied off inside a calico bag. • Several of the samples were placed in a large plastic “polyweave” bag which are then zip tied closed, for transport to laboratory analysis no loss of material. • Laboratory analysis samples are delivered directly to the laboratory in Perth or Kalgoorlie by Galileo staff . Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • Continuous improvement internal reviews of sampling techniques and procedures are ongoing. No external audits have been performed. Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.) Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status • Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • The Norseman Project comprises two exploration licenses, eighteen granted prospecting licenses and one mining lease covering 278km 2 • All tenements within the Norseman Project are 100% owned by Galileo Mining Ltd. • The Norseman Project is centred around a location approximately 10km north-west of Norseman on vacant crown land. • All tenements in the Norseman Project are 100% covered by the Ngadju Native Title Determined Claim. • The tenements are in good standing and there are no known impediments. Exploration done by other parties • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. Between the mid- 1960’s and 2000 exploration was conducted in the area for gold and base-metals ( most notably Ni sulphides). Exploration focussed on the Mt Thirsty Sill and eastern limb of the Mission Sill. Central Norseman Gold Corporation/WMC (1966-1972) • Explored the Jimberlana Dyke for Ni-Cu- PGE - Cr. Soil sampling generated Page 13 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary several C u anomalies 160 - 320ppm Cu. Barrier Exploration and Jimberlana Minerals Between (1968 and 1974) • Explored immediately south of Mt Thirsty for Ni-Cu sulphide. IP, Ground Magnetic Surveys, Soil Sampling, Soil Auger Sampling and Diamond Drilling was completed. Resolute Limited, Great Southern Mines Ltd and Dundas Mining Pty Ltd (1993-1996) • Gold focussed exploration. Several gold anomalies were identified in soil geochemistry but were not followed up. Resolute assayed for Au, Ni, Cu, Zn but did not assay for PGE. • Resolute Limited drilled laterite regolith profiles over the ultramafic portions of the Mt Thirsty Sill and identified a small Ni-Co Resource with high Co grades. Kinross Gold Corp Australia (1999) • C ompleted a 50m line spaced aeromagnetic survey. 2000-2004 • Australian Gold Resources (“AGR”) held “Mt Thirsty Project” from 2000 to 30 th June 2004. Works identified Ni-Co resources on the Project. • Anaconda Nickel Ltd (“ANL”) explored AGR Mt Thirsty Project as part of the AGR/ANL Exploration Access Agreement 2000-2001. AGR/ANL (2000-2001) • Mapping focussed on identifying Co-Ni enriched regolith areas. • RC on 800mx100m grid at Mission Sill targeting Ni-Co Laterite (MTRC001- MTRC035). Nickel assay maximum of 0.50%, Co 0.16%, Cu to 0.23%. • Concluded the anomalous Cu-PGE association suggested affinity with Bushveldt or Stillwater style PGE mineralisation. A lack of an arsenic correlation cited as support for magmatic rather than hydrothermal PGE source. Page 14 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary AGR (2003 - 2004) • Soil sampling over the Mission Sill and Jimberlana Dyke. • RC drilling (MTRC036- 052) confirmed shallow PGE anomalism with best results of 1m at 2.04 combined Pt-Pd in MTRC038 from surface. • Petrography identified sulphide textures indicative of primary magmatic character. • Sixty samples were re-assayed for PGE when assays returned >0.05% Cu. A further 230 samples were re-assayed based on the initial Au-Pd- Pt results. The best combined result for Au-Pd-Pt was 5.7g/t. Galileo Galileo commenced exploration on the Norseman Project from 30 th June 2004 after sale of the tenement by AGR. Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. • The Norseman target geology and mineralisation style is komatiite nickel sulphide mineralisation and nickel- copper-PGE mineralisation related to layered intrusions occurring within the GSWA mapped Mount Kirk Formation • The Mount Kirk formation is described as “Acid and basic volcanic rocks and sedimentary rocks, intruded by basic and ultrabasic rocks” 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. • 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. • Refer to drill hole collar table in Appendix 1, summary geological log in Table 2, and assay results in Table 1 Page 15 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Data aggregation methods • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. • Tables of the relevant assay interval of significance are included in this release. Criteria for inclusion are based on one metre end of hole sulphide sample • Parts-per-million data reported from the assay laboratory for Ni, Cu and Co have been converted to percent values and reported as percent values rounded to 2 decimal places • Parts-per-billion data reported from the assay laboratory for Pd have been converted to ppm (g/t) and reported as g/t rounded to 2 decimal places Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths • 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 (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’). • It is unknown whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures as no measurable structures recorded in drill chips. • No quantitative measurements of mineralised zones/structures exist, and all drill intercepts are reported as down hole length in metres, true width unknown. Diagrams • 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. • Project location map and plan map of the drill hole locations with respect to each other and with respect to other available data. Drill hole locations have been determined with hand-held GPS drill hole collar location (Garmin GPS 78s) +/ - 5m in X/Y/Z dimensions Balanced reporting • 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. • All available relevant information is presented. Other substantive exploration data • 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. • D etailed 50m line spaced aeromagnetic data has been used for interpretation of underlying geology. Data was collected by Magspec Airborne Surveys Pty Ltd using a Geometrics G-823 caesium vapor magnetometer at an average flying height of 30m. Page 16 | 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Further work • The nature and scale of planned further work (eg 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. • EM surveying of prospective su lphide zone • Follow up RC drilling of sulphide mineralisation • Ongoing aircore drilling
Information on this Website is provided for general information purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice. ASX Information (including company announcements and prices) is delayed by at least 20 minutes. JSE Information (including company announcements and prices) is delayed by at least 15 minutes. Reliance on the information you access on or from this Website is solely at your own risk. We make no representation or warranty in relation to the future performance of the companies that appear on this Website. Investment in securities involves risk and you should obtain independent professional legal, financial, investment or company advice before acting on any of the information you access on this Website. Using, browsing or otherwise accessing this Website is subject to our Terms and Conditions and our Privacy Policy.

© 2022 Listcorp. ABN 60 166 140 307

Never miss news from Galileo Mining Limited (ASX:GAL) when you join Listcorp.