·     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).

·      Five phases of drilling were undertaken at the Project using RC and DD techniques.  All the RC drilling used face sampling hammers.

·      Phase 1 and 2 programmes used a 5.25-inch hammers while Phase 3 and 5 used a 5.75-inch hammer.

·      All DD holes were completed using PQ and HQ core from surface (85mm and 63.5mm).

·      All DD holes were drilled in conjunction with a Reflex ACT II tool; to provide an accurate determination of the bottom-of-hole orientation.

·      All fresh core was orientated to allow for geological, structural and geotechnical logging by a Company geologist. 

·     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.

·      A semi-quantitative estimate of sample recovery was completed for the vast majority of drilling.  This involved weighing both the bulk samples and splits and calculating theoretical recoveries using assumed densities. Where samples were not weighed, qualitative descriptions of the sample size were recorded.  Some sample loss was recorded in the collaring of the RC drill holes.

·      DD recoveries were measured and recorded.  Recoveries in excess of 95.8% have been achieved for the DD drilling programme. Drill sample recovery and quality is adequate for the drilling technique employed.

·      The DD twin programme has identified a positive grade bias for iron in the RC compared to the DD results. 

·     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 drill sample intervals were geologically logged by Company geologists.

·      Where appropriate, geological logging recorded the abundance of specific minerals, rock types and weathering using a standardised logging system that captured preliminary metallurgical domains.

·      All logging is qualitative, except for the systematic collection of magnetic susceptibility data which could be considered semi quantitative.

·      Strip logs have been generated for each drill hole to cross-check geochemical data with geological logging.

·      A small sample of washed RC drill material was retained in chip trays for future reference and validation of geological logging, and sample reject materials from the laboratory are stored at the Company's field office.

·      All drill holes have been logged and reviewed by Company technical staff.

·      The logging is of sufficient detail to support the current reporting of a Mineral Resource.

·     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.

·      RC samples were cone split at the drill rig.  For interpreted waste zones the 1 or 2m rig splits were later composited using a riffle splitter into 4m composite samples.

·      DD core was cut with a core saw and selected half core samples dispatched to Nagrom Laboratory in Perth for preliminary metallurgical test work. 

·      The other half of the core, including the bottom-of-hole orientation line, was retained for geological reference.

·      The remaining DD core was quarter cored for geochemical analysis.

·      Since December 2018, samples were submitted to Intertek Tarkwa (SP02/SP12) for sample preparation. Samples were weighed, dried and crushed to -2mm in a Boyd crusher with an 800-1,200g rotary split, producing a nominal 1,500g split crushed sample, which was subsequently pulverised in a LM2 ring mill.  Samples were pulverised to a nominal 85% passing 75µm.  All the preparation equipment was flushed with barren material prior to the commencement of the job.  Coarse reject material was kept in the original bag.  Lab sizing analysis was undertaken on a nominal 1:25 basis. Final pulverised samples (20g) were airfreighted to Intertek in Perth for assaying. •  

·      The pulps were submitted for analysis by Sodium peroxide fusion (Nickel crucibles) and Hydrochloric acid to dissolve the melt. Analysed by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (FP6MS) / Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical (Atomic) Emission Spectrometry (FP6/OE). The analytical suite consisted of Al, B, Ba, Be, Ca, Cs, Fe, K, Li, Mg, Mn, Nb, P, Rb, S, Si, Sn, Sr, Ta and Ti.

·      The vast majority of samples were drilled dry. Moisture content was logged qualitatively.  All intersections of the water table were recorded in the database.

·      Field sample duplicates were taken to evaluate whether samples were representative and understand repeatability, with good repeatability.

·      Sample sizes and laboratory preparation techniques were appropriate and industry standard.

·     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.

·      Analysis for lithium and a suite of other elements for Phase 1 drilling was undertaken at SGS Johannesburg / Vancouver by ICP-OES after Sodium Peroxide Fusion. Detection limits for lithium (10ppm - 100,000ppm). Sodium Peroxide fusion is considered a "total" assay technique for lithium.

·      Review of standards and blanks from the initial submission to Johannesburg identified failures (multiple standards reporting outside control limits). A decision was made to resubmit this batch and all subsequent batches to SGS Vancouver - a laboratory considered to have more experience with this method of analysis and sample type.

·      Results of analyses for field sample duplicates are consistent with the style of mineralisation and considered to be representative. Internal laboratory QAQC checks are reported by the laboratory, including sizing analysis to monitor preparation and internal laboratory QA/QC. These were reviewed and retained in the company drill hole database.

·      155 samples were sent to an umpire laboratory (ALS) and/assayed using equivalent techniques, with results demonstrating good repeatability.

·      ALL's review of QAQC suggests the SGS Vancouver and Intertek Perth laboratories performed within acceptable limits.

·      No geophysical methods or hand-held XRF units have been used for determination of grades in the Mineral Resource.

·     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.

·      Significant intersections were visually field verified by company geologists and Shaun Searle of Ashmore during the 2019 site visit.

·      Drill hole data was compiled and digitally captured by Company geologists in the field. Where hand-written information was recorded, all hardcopy records were kept and archived after digitising.

·      Phase 1 and 2 drilling programmes were captured on paper or locked excel templates and migrated to an MS Access database and then into Datashed (industry standard drill hole database management software).  The Phase 3 to 5 programmes were captured using LogChief which has inbuilt data validation protocols.  All analytical results were transferred digitally and loaded into the database by a Datashed consultant.

·      The data was audited, and any discrepancies checked by the Company personnel before being updated in the database.

·      Twin DD holes were drilled to verify results of the RC drilling programmes. Results indicate that there is iron contamination in the RC drilling process.

·      Reported drill hole intercepts were compiled by the Chief Geologist.

·      Adjustments to the original assay data included converting Li ppm to Li₂O%.

·     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 collar locations were surveyed in WGS84 Zone 30 North using DGPS survey equipment, which is accurate to 0.11mm in both horizontal and vertical directions.  All holes were surveyed by qualified surveyors.  Once validated, the survey data was uploaded into Datashed.

·      RC drill holes were routinely down hole surveyed every 6m using a combination of EZ TRAC 1.5 (single shot) and Reflex Gyroscopic tools. 

·      After the tenth drill hole, the survey method was changed to Reflex Gyro survey with 6m down hole data points measured during an end-of-hole survey.

·      All Phase 2 and 3 drill holes were surveyed initially using the Reflex Gyro tool, but later using the more efficient Reflex SPRINT tool. Phase 4 and 5 drill holes were surveyed using a Reflex SPRINT tool.

·      LiDAR survey Southern Mapping to produce rectified colour images and a digital terrain model (DTM) 32km2, Aircraft C206 aircraft-mounted LiDAR Riegl Q780 Camera Hasselblad H5Dc with 50mm Fixfocus lens.

·      Coordinate system: WGS84 UTM30N with accuracy to ±0.04.

·      The topographic survey and photo mosaic output from the survey is accurate to 20mm. 

·      Locational accuracy at collar and down the drill hole is considered appropriate for resource estimation purposes.

·     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.

·      The RC holes were initially drilled on 100m spaced sections and 50m hole spacings orientated at 300° or 330° with dips ranging from -50° to -60°. Planned hole orientations/dips were occasionally adjusted due to pad and/or access constraints.

·      Hole spacing was reduced to predominantly 40m spaced sections and 40m hole spacings. Holes are generally angled perpendicular to interpreted mineralisation orientations at the Project.

·      Samples were composited to 1m intervals prior to estimation.

·     Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.

·     If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

·      The drill line and drill hole orientation are oriented as close as practicable to perpendicular to the orientation of the general mineralised orientation.

·      Most of the drilling intersects the mineralisation at close to 90 degrees ensuring intersections are representative of true widths. It is possible that new geological interpretations and/or infill drilling requirements may result in changes to drill orientations on future programmes.

·      No orientation based sampling bias has been identified in the data.

·     The measures taken to ensure sample security.

·      Samples were stored on site prior to road transportation by Company personnel to the SGS preparation laboratory.  

·      With the change of laboratory to Intertek, samples were picked up by the contractor and transported to the sample preparation facility in Tarkwa.

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

·      Prior to the drilling programme, a third-party Project review was completed by an independent consultant experienced with the style of mineralisation.

·      In addition, Shaun Searle of Ashmore reviewed drilling and sampling procedures during the 2019 site visit and found that all procedures and practices conform to industry standards.