·      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 30g charge for fire assay'). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

·      Reference to prior surface and drilling sampling program reports is given in the associated geology reports (Biggs (2022a, b, c).

·      Many of the surface and drilling sampling programs, especially from the 1990's did include reference samples and duplicate analyses and other forms of QA/QC checking.

·      Sampling prior to 1988 generally has higher "below detection limits" and less or no QA/QC checks.

·      Regarding historical cores from holes held by the NSW Geological Survey across EL 8434 and 8435, selected sections that were reanalysed using pXRF have been cut by diamond saw for laboratory analysis. This work recovered one hundred and eighty-four (184) samples, each about 1m in length (of HQ, BQ, and NQ drill core) which were retested by ALS Brisbane, using ME-MS61R and PGM-ICP27 methods.

·      Quarter core was submitted to ALS for chemical analysis using industry standard sample preparation and analytical techniques.

·      Half core was also collected for metallurgical testwork from BH1.

·      The sample interval details and grades quoted for cored intervals described in Figure 1 in the main section are given in Table AB-1-1 at the end of this section.

·      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.).

·      Historical drilling consists of auger, rotary air blast, reverse circulation, and diamond coring.  In and around The Sisters model area are twelve (12) drillholes, however it should be noted that the majority of these are <50m in depth, and the number of holes >100m number around 4.  .

·      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.

·      Not applicable in this study, no new holes completed. Historical drillholes were documented to have >90% core recovery.

·      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.

·      The drilling that did occur was generally completed to modern-day standards. The preferred exploration strategy in the eighties and early nineties was to drill shallow auger holes to negate the influence of any Quaternary and Tertiary thin cover.

·      No downhole geophysical logging took place; however, measurements of magnetic susceptibility were taken on the six-library core relogged over the same intervals as the PXRF readings were taken.

·      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.

·      Not applicable, as no new drilling was undertaken.

·      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 (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.

Laboratory inserted standards, blanks and duplicates were analysed per industry standard practice. There was no evidence of bias from these results.

·      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.

·      None of the drillholes have been twinned, as they are historical holes.

·      Conversion of elemental analysis (REE parts per million) to stoichiometric oxide (REO parts per million) was undertaken by ROM geological staff using the below (Table AB-1) element to stoichiometric oxide conversion factors (https://www.jcu.edu.au/news/releases/2020/march/rare-earth-metals-an-untapped-resource)

·      Table AB-1:  Element -Conversion Factor -Oxide Form

·      Rare earth oxide is the industry accepted form for reporting rare earths. The following calculations are used for compiling REO into their reporting and evaluation groups:

·      TREO (Total Rare Earth Oxide) = La2O3 + CeO2 + Pr6O11 + Nd2O3 + Sm2O3 + Eu2O3 + Gd2O3 + Tb4O7 + Dy2O3 + Ho2O3 + Er2O3 + Tm2O3 + Yb2O3 + Y2O3 + Lu2O3.

·      TREO-Ce = TREO - CeO2

·      LREO (Light Rare Earth Oxide) = La2O3 + CeO2 + Pr6O11 + Nd2O3 + Sm2O3 

·      HREO (Heavy Rare Earth Oxide) = Eu2O3 + Gd2O3 + Tb4O7 + Dy2O3 + Ho2O3 + Er2O3 + Tm2O3 + Yb2O3 + Y2O3 + Lu2O3

·      CREO (Critical Rare Earth Oxide) = Nd2O3 + Eu2O3 + Tb4O7 + Dy2O3 + Y2O3

·      MREO (Magnetic Rare Earth Oxide) = Pr6O11 + Nd2O3 + Sm2O3 + Gd2O3 + Tb4O7 + Dy2O3.

·      Total Rare Earth Oxides (TREO):

·      To calculate TREO an oxide conversion "factor" is applied to each rare-earth element assay. 

·      The "factor" equates an elemental assay to an oxide concentration for each element. Below is an example of the factor calculation for Lanthanum (La).

·      Relative Atomic Mass (La) = 138.9055

·      Relative Atomic Mass (O) = 15.9994

·      Oxide Formula = La₂O₃

·      Oxide Conversion Factor = 1/ ((2x 138.9055)/(2x 138.9055 + 3x 15.9994)) Oxide Conversion Factor = 1.173 (3dp)

·      None of the historical data has been adjusted.

·      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.

·      In general, locational accuracy does vary, depending upon whether the samples were digitised off plans or had their coordinated tabulated.  Many samples were reported to AGD66 or AMG84 and have been converted to MGA94.Zone 54

·      It is estimated that locational accuracy therefore varies between 2-50m

·      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 average sample spacing across the tenure varies per prospect, and sample type, as listed in Table AB1-2, below:

Table AB-2:  EL 8434 and EL 8435 Drillhole Spacing

·      No sample compositing has been applied as yet.

·      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 current database does not contain any sub-surface geological logging for The Sisters, which is being compiled (75% complete)

·      Geological mapping by various companies has reinforced that the strata dips variously between 45 and 80 degrees.

·      The measures taken to ensure sample security.

·      The sample security measures, except for the Squadron Resources work programs is not known.  Squadron took samples to their Broken Hill office and transported samples for analysis to ALS Broken Hill

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

·      No external audits or reviews have yet been undertaken.