Addendum to previous release 19 May 2021

·      Between 2014 and 2021, the Company commenced a core drilling program and collected samples from core splits in line with JORC Code guidelines. 

·      Sample intervals honour geological or visible mineralization boundaries and vary between 50 cm and 2 m. Majority of samples is 1 m in length

·      The samples are half or quarter of core; the latter applied for large diameter core.

·      Between 1952 and 1989, the Cinovec deposit was sampled in two ways: in drill core and underground channel samples.

·      Channel samples, from drift ribs and faces, were collected during detailed exploration between 1952 and 1989 by Geoindustria n.p. and Rudne Doly n.p., both Czechoslovak State companies. Sample length was 1 m, channel 10x5 cm, sample mass about 15 kg. Up to 1966, samples were collected using hammer and chisel; from 1966 a small drill (Holman Hammer) was used. 14179 samples were collected and transported to a crushing facility.

·      Core and channel samples were crushed in two steps: to -5mm, then to -0.5mm. 100g splits were obtained and pulverized to -0.045mm for analysis.

·      The metalurgical samples were hand-selected from drill core from drill holes in the southern part of the Cínovec deposit, recovered in the exploration programme taking place in August-October 2020. The total weight of the sample was 76.6 kg.

·      Refer to ASX Release 2 February 2021 "Resource Drilling Update" for drillhole locations.  The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Persons' findings are presented have not materially modified from the original market announcement.

·        The sample was blended to match the average lithium grade and mineral composition assumed in the current mine model.

·      The metalurgical samples were composed of three different simplified lithologies as shown in the above table. Each lithology (3 in total) was crushed at Nagrom laboratory in Perth. The three crushed samples were then composited (mixed) into a single sample to give a crushed ore representative of the expected run-of-mine in the first 5 years of the mine life, in accordance with the ratio of lithologies in the mining model for those first five years. The equipment used by Nagrom was standard laboratory-scale crushing equipment and the compositing was performed with Nagrom's standard laboratory procedures

·      In 2014, three core holes were drilled for a total of 940.1m. In 2015, six core holes were drilled for a total of 2,455.9m. In 2016, seventeen core holes were drilled for a total of 6,081m. In 2017, six core holes were drilled for a total of 2697.1m. In 2018, ten core holes were drilled for a total of 1831.55m. From 2020 until now 17 core holes were drilled for a total 4,998m.

·      In 2014 and 2015, the core size was HQ3 (60mm diameter) in upper parts of holes; in deeper sections the core size was reduced to NQ3 (44 mm diameter). Core recovery was high (average 98%). In 2016 and 2017 up to four drill rigs were used, and select holes employed PQ sized core for upper parts of the drillholes. In deeper sections HQ core was produced.

·      Historically only core drilling was employed, either from surface or from underground. 

·      Surface drilling: 78 holes, total 30,214.8 meters; vertical and inclined, maximum depth 1596 m (structural hole). Core diameters from 220 mm near surface to 110 mm at depth. Average core recovery 89.3%.

·      Underground drilling: 999 holes for 54,974.74 m; horizontal and inclined. Core diameter 46mm; drilled by Craelius XC42 or DIAMEC drills.

·      Core recovery for historical surface drill holes was recorded on drill logs and entered into the database.

·      No correlation between grade and core recovery was established.

·      In 2014-2021, core descriptions were recorded into paper logging forms by hand and later entered into an Excel database.

·      Core was logged in detail historically in a facility 6 km from the mine site.  The following features were logged and recorded in paper logs: lithology, alteration (including intensity divided into weak, medium and strong/pervasive), and occurrence of ore minerals expressed in %, macroscopic description of congruous intervals and structures and core recovery.

·      In 2014-21, core was washed, geologically logged, sample intervals determined and marked then the core was cut in half. Larger core was cut in half and one half was cut again to obtain a quarter core sample.  One half or one quarter samples were delivered to ALS Global for assaying after duplicates, blanks and standards were inserted in the sample stream. The remaining drill core is stored on site for reference.

·      Sample preparation was carried out by ALS Global in Romania, using industry standard techniques appropriate for the style of mineralisation represented at Cinovec.

·      Historically, core was either split or consumed entirely for analyses.

·      Samples are considered to be representative.

·      Sample size and grains size are deemed appropriate for the analytical techniques used.

·      The metallurgical samples was then ground down with a laboratory rod mill to a P90 of 250 microns. No size fractions were discarded in this step.

·      For the metallurgical recovery work the blended ore was crushed and passed through magnetic separation in line with the current flowsheet.

·      Chemical Analysis was by X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy.  The main element composition was analyzed on representative samples by X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF, S8 Tiger by Bruker AXS) according to DIN EN ISO 12677.

·      Loss on ignition was determined according to DIN EN ISO 12677.

·      Lithium and Rubidium Analysis was by Na2O2Fusion.  The samples were prepared in a sodium peroxide (Na2O2) fusion, where the Na2O2 oxidizes the samples and form compounds that are soluble in a dilute acidic solution. The samples were analyzed for their respective lithium and rubidium contents using inductively coupled plasma spectrometry (Varian, Vista MPX).

·      In 2014-21, core samples were assayed by ALS Global. The most appropriate analytical methods were determined by results of tests for various analytical techniques.

·      The following analytical methods were chosen: ME-MS81 (lithium borate fusion or 4 acid digest, ICP-MS finish) for a suite of elements including Sn and W and ME-4ACD81 (4 acid digest, ICP-AES finish) additional elements including lithium. In 2020 and 2021, the method ME-MS89L (lithium borate fusion or 4 acid digest, ICP-MS finish) was used, which covers all elements of interest, incl. Li, Sn and W.

·      About 40% of samples were analysed by ME-MS81d (ME-MS81 plus whole rock package). Samples with over 1% tin are analysed by XRF. Samples over 1% lithium were analysed by Li-OG63 (four acid and ICP finish).

·      Standards, blanks and duplicates were inserted into the sample stream.  Initial tin standard results indicated possible downgrading bias; the laboratory repeated the analysis with satisfactory results. 

·      Historically, tin content was measured by XRF and using wet chemical methods. W and Li were analysed by spectral methods.

Analytical QA was internal and external.  The former subjected 5% of the sample to repeat analysis in the same facility. 10% of samples were analysed in another laboratory, also located in The Czech Republic. The QA/QC procedures were set to the State norms and are considered adequate. It is unknown whether external standards or sample duplicates were used.

·      Overall accuracy of sampling and assaying was proved later by test mining and reconciliation of mined and analysed grades.

·      During the 2014-21 drill campaigns the Company indirectly verified grades of tin and lithium by comparing the length and grade of mineral intercepts with the current block model.

·      In 2014-21, drill collar locations were surveyed by a registered surveyor.

·      Down hole surveys were recorded by a contractor.

·      Historically, drill hole collars were surveyed with a great degree of precision by the mine survey crew.

·      Hole locations are recorded in the local S-JTSK Krovak grid.

·      Topographic control is excellent.

·      Historical data density is very high. 

·      Spacing is sufficient to establish an inferred resource that was initially estimated using MICROMINE software in Perth, 2012.

·      Areas with lower coverage of Li% assays have been identified as exploration targets.

·      Sample compositing to 1m intervals has been applied mathematically prior to estimation but not physically.

·      In 2014-21, drill hole azimuth and dip was planned to intercept the mineralized zones at near-true thickness.  As the mineralized zones dip shallowly to the south, drill holes were vertical or near vertical and directed to the north. Due to land access restrictions, certain holes could not be positioned in sites with ideal drill angle.

·      The Company has not directly collected any samples underground because the workings are inaccessible at this time. 

·      Based on historic reports, level plan maps, sections and core logs, the samples were collected in an unbiased fashion, systematically on two underground levels from drift ribs and faces, as well as from underground holes drilled perpendicular to the drift directions.  The sample density is adequate for the style of deposit.

·      Multiple samples were taken and analysed by the Company from the historic tailing repository and waste dump. Only lithium was analysed (Sn and W too low).  The results matched the historic grades.

·      In the 2014-21 programs, only the Company's employees and contractors handled drill core and conducted sampling. The core was collected from the drill rig each day and transported in a company vehicle to the secure Company premises where it was logged and cut.  Company geologists supervised the process and logged/sampled the core.   The samples were transported by Company personnel in a Company vehicle, or by international courier to the ALS Global laboratory pick-up station. The remaining core is stored under lock and key.

·      Historically, sample security was ensured by State norms applied to exploration.  The State norms were similar to currently accepted best practice and JORC guidelines for sample security.

·      Beneficiation and analysis for the metallurgical testwork was performed by Nagrom, Perth 

·