·    Sub-surface brine samples were obtained using six different methods: Packer sampling, PVC airlift sampling, disposable bailer sampling, electric valve bailer sampling, Hydrasleeve sampling, and composite brine sampling during pumping tests.

·    Brine water samples were taken from the surface of the lagoon, in an 800 m sampling grid, including eight sampling duplicates at random locations. The samples were taken from a 0.5 m depth, and for positions with a depth above 5 m, a bottom sample was also obtained.

·    In the field, electrical conductivity and temperature were measured for every sample with a Hanna Multiparameter device. All materials and sampling bottles were first flushed with brine water before being filled.

·    For every sample, 2 liters of brine were obtained with a 1-liter double valve bailer, using a new bailer for each sampling position. All materials and sampling bottles were first flushed with 100 cc of brine water before receiving the final sample. Electrical conductivity was measured for every sample with a Hanna Multiparameter model HI98192. The last two samples that had similar stabilized electrical conductivity values were identified as the primary and duplicate samples.

·    For the packer sampling, a packer bit tool provided by the drilling company (Big Bear) was used. Once the sampling support was sealed, a purging operation took place until no drilling mud was detected. After the purging operation, a half an hour waiting period took place to let brine enter to the packer tool before sampling with a double valve bailer.

·    Successive 1-liter samples were taken every 30 minutes with a double valve bailer.

·    Packer samples were obtained approximately every 18 m.

·    PVC casing suction brine samples were extracted after well development. Once the well was clean and enough water was purged (at least three times the well volume), the PVC casing suction samples were taken from bottom to top while the 2-inch PVC was extracted from the well. A 20-liter bucket was filled with brine and samples were obtained from the bucket once the remaining fine sediments were decanted.

·      Brine airlift samples were taken every 6 m. 

·      Disposable bailer samples were obtained by JCP Ltda. specialists in water sampling. Samples were taken from the interest depths with a double valve disposable bailer. The bailer was lowered and raised with an electric cable winch to maintain a constant velocity and avoid bailer valves opening after taking the sample. A new bailer was used for each well.

·      Disposable bailer samples were obtained every 6 m.

·      In the first quarter of 2023, electric bailer samples were taken from wells LV05, LV06, and LV02 after their proper development. Depth-specific samples were obtained with a 1-liter electric bailer. This sampling process was undertaken by Geodatos. 

·    On all sampling procedures the materials and sampling bottles were first flushed with 100 cc of brine water before receiving the final sample.

·    Packer samples were taken in wells LV01, LV02, LV03, LV07, and LV11. Airlift samples were obtained from wells LV01, LV04, LV05, and LV06. Disposable bailer samples were taken in wells LV01 and LV02. Electronic bailer samples were obtained from wells LV02, LV05, and LV06. Hydrasleeve samples were taken from LV04 and LV11. Composite brine samples from pumping tests were taken at wells LV05 and LV06.

·    Diamond drilling with a PQ3 diameter was used to drill wells LV01 and LV03 to a depth of 320 m. Below that depth, the drilling diameter was reduced to HQ3.

·    At wells LV02 and LV04, diamond drilling with a PQ3 diameter was used to their final depth. 

·    For both diameters, a triple tube core barrel was used for the core recovery.

·    Except for drillhole LV04, custom-made packer bits provided by Big Bear were used to obtain brine samples.

·    Drillholes LV01, LV02 and LV04 were cased with 3" PVC and silica gravel. LV03 was not cased due to well collapse and tool entrapment.

·    Wells LV05 and LV06 were drilled using the flooded reverse drilling method with a 14 ¾ inch diameter to their final depths. Both wells were cased with 8-inch PVC and gravel pack.

·    Diamond drillholes LVM05a and LVM06c were drilled with a HQ3 diameter from surface to the final depth. LVM05b was drilled with Tricone 3 7/8" diameter from land surface to 41.5 m.

·    Diamond drillhole LV07 was drilled with PQ3 diameter from land surface to 300 m, and with HQ3 diameter from 300 to 650 m.

·    Diamond drillhole LV11 was drilled with PQ3 diameter from land surface to 254 m with no recovery in the first 50 meters, and it was drilled with HQ3 diameter from 254 to 412.85 m.

Development operations

·    After PVC casing and silica gravel installation took place at the exploration wells, a development process was undertaken to ensure clean aquifer water was available during sampling. The well development included injection of a hypochlorite solution to break the drilling additives, and purging via airlifting of a minimum three well volumes was undertaken to clean the cased well from drilling mud.

·    The developing process was made using a small rig, a high-pressure compressor and 2-inch threaded PVC that can be coupled to reach any depth. The purging/cleaning operation was made from top to bottom, injecting air with a hose inside the 2-inch PVC and "suctioning" the water to emulate a reverse circulation (airlift) system.

·    Diamond core recovery was ensured by direct supervision and continuous geological logging in the field.

·    For wells drilled using the flooded reverse drilling method, drill cuttings were collected in 10 kg sample bags for geological logging and tests purposes. Direct supervision and continuous geological logging were applied to ensure reliable recovery and descriptions

·    Geological logging took place continuously during drilling in the field.  Descriptions were done by CleanTech and M&A.

·    Logging forms were prepared prior to field work and were used to ensure the same information and style was used regardless of the field geologist.

·      During the brine batch preparation process, the samples were transferred to new sampling bottles. Quality control samples, including standards (internal standards composed of a known stable brine), duplicates, and blank samples (distilled water) were randomly included in the batch. After quality control sample insertion, all samples were re-numbered before submitting to laboratory. Before transferring each sample, the materials used for the transfer were flushed with distilled water and were then shaken to remove water excess, avoiding contamination.

·      Brine samples were assayed by ALS Life Science Chile laboratory (ALS), for Li, K, B, Mg, Ca, Cu, and Na using the ICP-OES method described on QWI-IO-ICP-OES- 01 Edition A, Modification 0 EPA 3005A; EPA 200.2.

·      For density measurements, the method described by Thompson and Troeh Y "Los suelos y su fertilidad." 2002. Editorial Reverté S.A. Cuarta Edición. Págs.75-85, was used.

·      Chlorine determination was done based on Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 23rd Edition 2017. Método 4500-Cl-B QWI-IO-Cl-01 Emisión B, mod. 1. SM 4500-Cl- B, 22nd Edition 2012.

·      Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) determination was done using the method described on INN/SMA SM 2540 C Ed 22, 2012.

·      Sulfate was analyzed according to the method described in INN/SMA SM 4500 SO4-D Ed 22, 2012.

·      Duplicates were obtained randomly during brine sampling. Also, blanks (distilled water) and standards were randomly inserted during the laboratory batch preparation.

·      The 2022 standards were prepared by the Universidad Católica del Norte, Chile using a known stable brine. Standard nominal grade was calculated in a round-robin process that included four laboratories. The ALS laboratory was validated during the round-robin process.

·      Check samples composed by standards, duplicates, and blanks were inserted at a rate of one for each 20 original samples during the year 2022.

·      After the year 2023, quality control samples were inserted at a rate of one every 10 original samples. For the 2023 QA/QC process, a new set of standards was internally prepared using 200 liters of brine obtained from well LV02 during the development process. Standard nominal lithium grade was calculated in a round-robin process that included four laboratories.

·      For the 2024 sampling campaign, duplicates, standards, and blanks were utilized during brine sampling and were submitted for analysis. Standards for the 2024 campaign were prepared in the University of Antofagasta. Quality control samples were inserted at a rate of approximately one every 10 original samples.

Geophysics:

·      To measure the lake bathymetry, a Garmin Echomap CV44 and Eco Probe CV20-TM Garmin were used. The equipment has a resolution of 0.3 ft and maximum depth measurement of 2,900 ft. The bathymetry data was calibrated using a density of 1.14 g/cm³.

·      For the TEM geophysical survey, a Zonge multipurpose digital receiver model GDP-32 and TEM transmitter model ZT-30 were used.

·      For the first survey campaign in May 2021, a coincident transmission/reception loop was utilized with 11 lines and a 400 m separation. 167 stations were designated with a 100x100 m² loop and four stations with a 200x200 m² loop; a survey depth of 300 m and 400 m was reached, respectively.

·      For the second TEM geophysical survey in March 2022, 32 TEM stations were surveyed which utilized six lines and a 400 m separation. A coincident loop Tx=Rx of 200 x 200 m² allowed for the investigation to a depth of 400 m.

·      For the third TEM geophysical survey in January 2023, 14 TEM stations were surveyed with two lines and a 400 m separation. A coincident loop Tx=Rx of 200x200 m² allowed for investigation to a depth of 400 m.

·      The equipment used for the gravity survey was a Scintrex portable digital model CG-5 Autograv, "microgravity meter", with a 0.001 mGal resolution as well as a tidal, temperature, pressure, and automatic level correction system.

·      The topographic data measured during the gravity survey was acquired with a double frequency differential positioning equipment, brand CHC NAV, model I-80 GNSS, that consists of two synchronized instruments, the first of which was fixed at a known topographic station, and the other that is mobile through the surveyed gravimetric stations.

·      In January 2023, a gravity survey was made consisting of 111 stations, with a separation of 200 m to 300 m, and arrangement through four lines around the lagoon area.

·    The assay data was verified by M&A and C. Feddersen based on the assay certificates.

·    Data from bathymetry and geophysics was used as delivered by Servicios Geológicos Geodatos SAIC.

·    Geological logs were managed by the geology contractor GEOMIN and were checked by the Competent Persons.

·    Brine samples batches were prepared personally by the competent person, JCP Ltda., Geomin SpA or according to Competent Person's instructions. All data was stored in Excel files.

·    Sample coordinates were obtained with a non-differential hand-held GPS unit.

·    The bathymetry coordinates in Laguna Verde were obtained by a Thales Navigation differential GPS system, which consists of two GPS ProMark3 devices designed to work in geodesic, cinematic, and static modes of high precision, where one of the instruments was installed as a base station and the other on board of the craft.

·    The TEM geophysical survey coordinates were obtained with a non-differential hand-held GPS unit.

·    Drillhole collars were obtained with a non-differential hand-held GPS unit. Positions were verified by the mining concession field markings.

·    Gravity stations were located with a double frequency differential positioning equipment, brand CHC NAV, model I-80 GNSS, that consists of two synchronized pieces of equipment, one fixed at a known topographic station, and the other mobile at the surveyed gravimetric stations. 

·    The coordinate system is UTM, Datum WGS84 Zone 19J.

·    Topographic control is not considered critical as the lagoon and its surroundings are generally flat lying and the samples were definitively obtained from the lagoon.

·    The geochemical lagoon sample spacing was approximately 800 m, covering the entire lagoon area.

·    Packer brine samples were taken vertically every 18 m.

·    PVC bailer samples (disposable and electric) were taken vertically every 6 m.

·    For bathymetry, two grids were used, one of 400 m and the other of 200 m in areas where the perimeter has more curves.

·    For TEM geophysical surveys, the distance between stations was 400 m.

·    For the gravimetric survey, the distance between stations was 200 - 300 m.

·    The author believes that the data spacing and distribution are sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the resource estimate.

·    The lagoon in Laguna Verde is a free water body, and no mineralized structures are expected in the sub-surface deposits.

·      All brine samples were marked and kept on site before transporting them to the Copiapó warehouse where the laboratory sample batch was prepared and stored in sealed plastic boxes. Subsequently, the Laguna Verde samples were sent via courier to the ALS laboratory in Antofagasta. The transport of samples was directly supervised by the Competent Person.

·      ALS laboratory personnel reported that the samples were received without any problem or disturbance.

·      The assay data was verified by M&A and C. Feddersen against the laboratory certificates.

·      The July 2021 JORC technical report was reviewed by Montgomery & Associates Vice President and CP Michael Rosko, MS PG, SME Registered Member #4064687. In the report, he concludes that "The bulk of the information for the Laguna Verde exploration work and resulting initial lithium resource estimate was summarized Feddersen (2021). Overall, the CP agrees that industry-standard methods were used, and that the initial lithium resource estimate is reasonable based on the information available".

·      The September 2022 JORC Report Laguna Verde Updated Resource Estimation Report, and data acquisition and QA/QC protocols were audited in October 2022 by Don Hains, P. Geo. from Hains Engineering Company Limited (D. Hains October 2022 QA/QC Procedures, Review, Site Visit Report).

·      Hains concluded that "The overall QA/QC procedures employed by CleanTech are well documented and the exploration data collected and analysed in a comprehensive manner. There are no significant short comings in the overall programme."

·      With respect to the exploration program, Hains stated that "the overall exploration program has been well designed and well executed. Field work appears to have been well managed, with excellent data collection. The drill pads have been restored to a very high standard. The TEM geophysical work has been useful in defining the extensional limits of the salar at Laguna Verde".

·      With respect to specific yield, Hains stated that "RBRC test work at Danial B. Stevens Associates has been well done. It is recommended obtaining specific yield data using a second method such as centrifuge, nitrogen permeation or NMR. The available RBRC data indicates an average Sy value of 5.6%. This is a significant decrease from the previously estimated value of approximately 11%. The implications of the lower RBRC value in terms of the overall resource estimate should be carefully evaluated".

·      Several recommendations were made by Mr. Hains in his report to improve the QA/QC protocols, data acquisition, assays, presentation, and storage. His recommendations have been considered and included in the exploration work schedule since October 2022.

·    For the previous resource estimate (Feddersen, 2023), all databases were built from original data by Competent Person C. Feddersen and were checked by project personnel.

·    For the resource estimate detailed in this report and the previous resource report (M&A, 2025), databases were reviewed by M&A staff and the CPs.

·    A site visit was undertaken by Competent

Person C. Feddersen from June 2nd to June 4th, 2021. The outcome of the visit was a general geological review and the lagoon water brine geochemical sampling that led to the July 2021 JORC Technical Report. 

·    Competent Person M. Rosko conducted a site visit in October 2021 to review the exploration activities.

·    The January to May 2022 drilling campaign was continually supervised by the Competent Person C. Feddersen, that led to the September 2022 updated JORC Technical Report.

·    The October 2022 to May 2023 drilling campaign was also supervised by Competent Person C. Feddersen.

·    The 2024 campaign was supervised by M&A Competent Persons and staff.

·    For the surface brine resource, an average lithium grade was used for the entire surface water body based on the consistent values obtained; thus, there is a high certainty.

·    For the sub-surface resource, the geological interpretation was made based on the TEM and gravity surveys conducted by Geodatos. The lithological interpretation was confirmed by the January - May 2022 diamond drillhole campaign (LV01 to LV04), December 2022 - May 2023 drillhole campaign (LV05 & LV06), and 2024 campaign (LV07 & LV11).

·    Low resistivities are associated with volcaniclastic sediments saturated in brines, but also with tuff, very fine sediments, or clays. The direct relationship between the low resistivity layer with the overlying hypersaline lagoon raises the confidence that the low resistivities are associated with brines.

·    Drillholes confirm the geological interpretations.

·    For the surface brine resource, the lagoon dimensions are 14,682,408 m² of area with depths ranging from 0 m to 7.18m with an average depth of 4.05 m.

·    The sub-surface brine resource is a horizontal lens closely restricted to the lagoon perimeter with an area of approximately 55 km² and depths of more than 400 m, from approximately 4,309 m a.s.l. to the deepest exploration well (LV07; 650 m deep). 

·      For the surface brine resource, the surface lake brine water volume is directly obtained by the bathymetry study detailed on Section 4.2.

·      Lithium sample values are in general homogeneously distributed along the lagoon, thus the lithium content in the lake was not estimated via kriging or another geostatistical method. The average lithium value of 246 mg/L was used for the surface brine resource estimate.

·      The subsurface resource was updated using a block model in the Leapfrog software (Seequent, 2023). During the resource estimation process, the CPs considered the Canadian Institute of Mining (CIM, 2012) Best Practice for Reporting of Lithium Brine Resources and Reserves as well as the Houston et al. (2011) guidelines for brine deposits.

·      Leapfrog is an industry-standard software program which uses a 3-D implicit modeling approach (Seequent, 2023); with Leapfrog Geo, the geological model was created, and subsequently, the resource block model construction and mass calculations were undertaken using the Edge extension. Considering the horizontal and vertical spacing of obtained field samples, the block model discretization was 150 m by 150 m (horizontal spacing), with a vertical spacing of 5 m, and the total number of blocks corresponds to 1,926,123.

·      Lithium brine concentration results obtained from sampling were utilized as an input for the resource block model; original ALS results from a variety of sampling methods (including packer, airlift, and pumping tests) were used for a majority of the wells. Packer samples were prioritized for the resource estimate, as they result in depth-specific concentrations, and other methods were used where packer samples were not available.

·      Drainable porosity values for the hydrogeologic units in Laguna Verde were estimated based on the results of Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. (DBS&A) laboratory (LV01, LV02, LV03 and LV04) and GSA Laboratory (LV07 and LV11) testing, and their reasonableness was confirmed based on lithology of the unit.

·      Prior to the resource block modeling, an exploratory data analysis (EDA) phase was undertaken for lithium concentrations to identify trends such as univariate statistics and histograms, box plots, and spatial correlations.

·      Ordinary kriging was employed for the interpolation of lithium concentrations within the subsurface block model.

·      The resource block model was validated by visual inspection and comparison of the measured and block model concentrations. Swath plots were also utilized.

·    Moisture content is not relevant for the estimation of brine resources.

·    A lithium cut-off grade of 100 mg/L was applied to the resource estimate based on the chosen DLE processing method, as Lanshentec has reportedly recovered lithium content as low as 80 mg/L from raw brine. Furthermore, the applied cut-off grade of 100 mg/L is reasonable based on an assumed projected LCE price of $15,000 USD, capital expenditure of $800 million USD, and operating expenses of $6,000 USD per tonne of LCE. Only blocks with interpolated lithium grades equal to or greater than the applied cut-off grade (100 mg/L) were considered for the resource estimate. 

·    Mining will be undertaken by pumping brine from vertical production wells and re-injection of spent brine will subsequently occur back in the aquifer.

·      Pumping tests conducted to date support individual well flow rates of up to 15 L/s.

·    The main environmental impact that could occur at Laguna Verde is a reduction of the surface water features due to brine pumping; however, reinjection will be aimed to sustain the surface water features and limit impacts from production pumping. Other potential environmental factors may be associated with the main plant installation.

·    Bulk density is not relevant to brine resource estimation.

·    The preferential concession area used for the resource calculation, which corresponds to licenses held by CleanTech as the preferential holder (with no conflicting applications or concessions from other mining companies). The area outside the preferential licenses that could be converted to CleanTech's control (based on the Government CEOL polygon) was considered as potential upside.

·    The areal extent of the resource categories was largely based on the suggestions of Houston et al. (2011) for immature salt flats:

o  Measured resources were limited to within 1.25 km from the exploration well

o  Indicated resources were limited to within 2.5 km from the exploration well

o  Inferred resources were limited to within 5 km from the exploration well

·      The determination of the Indicated resource areas was dependent on the availability of depth-specific brine analyses, drainable porosity measurements and QA/QC. Differentiation between these areas and Measured areas was largely dependent on the well spacing, amount and reliability of field data, pumping test results, and overall lithologic and grade continuity between wells.

·      An extension of the Inferred resources to 5 km is supported by the conducted geophysics which indicates probable brine in sediments underlying the young volcanic outcrops surrounding the lake. Furthermore, inclusion of the lower volcanic rock unit is supported by the following: (i) it was possible to obtain packer samples in the deepest portion of LV07; (ii) the density contrast used to set the upper contact of the lower volcanic rock (-0.35 gr/cc) was intermediate and not the deepest density contrast; (iii) conceptually, Laguna Verde is found in a tectonically active region with fractures in the host rock, as indicated by hydrothermal activity along the eastern side of the lake.

·      The July 2021 JORC technical report were reviewed by Montgomery & Associates Vice President Michael Rosko, MS PG SME Registered Member #4064687.

·      In the report he concludes that "The bulk of the information for the Laguna Verde exploration work and resulting initial lithium resource estimate was summarized by Feddersen (2021). Overall, the CP agrees that industry-standard methods were used, and that the initial lithium resource estimate is reasonable based on the information available".

·      The September 2022 JORC Report Laguna Verde Updated Resource Estimate, and data acquisition and QA/QC protocols were audited in October 2022 by Don Hains, P. Geo. from Hains Engineering Company Limited (D. Hains October 2022 QA/QC Procedures, Review, Site Visit Report).

·      In the report, Hains concludes that "The overall QA/QC procedures employed by CleanTech are well documented and the exploration data collected and analysed in a comprehensive manner. There are no significant short comings in the overall programme".

·      With respect to the exploration program Hains' comments are "The overall exploration program has been well designed and well executed. Field work appears to have been well managed, with excellent data collection. The drill pads have been restored to a very high standard. The TEM geophysical work has been useful in defining the extensional limits of the salar at Laguna Verde".

·      With respect to the specific yield estimates, Hains' comments are "RBRC test work at Daniel B. Stevens Associates has been well done. It is recommended obtaining specific yield data using a second method such as centrifuge, nitrogen permeation or NMR. The available RBRC data indicates an average Sy value of 5.6%. This is a significant decrease from the previously estimated value of approximately 11%. The implications of the lower RBRC value in terms of the overall resource estimate should be carefully evaluated".

·      Several recommendations were made by Mr. Hains in his report to improve the QA/QC protocols, data acquisition, assays, presentation and storage. His recommendations have been considered and included in the exploration work schedule since October 2022.

·    The estimated tonnage represents the in-situ brine with no recovery factor applied. It will not be possible to extract all the contained brine by pumping from production wells. The amount which can be extracted depends on many factors including the permeability of the sediments, the specific yield, and the recharge dynamics of the aquifers.

·    No production data is available yet for comparison.

·      Potential sources of uncertainty related the resource estimate include:

·      Potential permitting restrictions, including the approval of the CEOL and environmental limitations related to eventual extraction of the surface brine resource in the lake.

·      The modeled concentration distribution and lower lithium grades associated with hydrothermal upwelling to the east of Laguna Verde.

·      The assigned drainable porosity of the lower volcanic rock (1%), which is based on limited core testing of that unit; additional deep exploration and sampling would help resolve uncertainty regarding the Inferred Resource at depth.