CORE LITHIUM LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2020

Mar 9, 2020

ASX: CXO Announcement

10 March 2020

Outstanding Metallurgy Results from BP33

Highlights

• Excellent recoveries from recent gravity separation test work on spodumene pegmatite from BP33

• Exceptional Concentrate Quality Produced at High Recovery

• Concentrate Grade of 6% Li2O

• Low Impurities <0.5% Fe2O3

• 65-72% Recovery

• Improved results achieved from coarse 6-10mm crush size and coarser cut-off size

• Finniss’ superior quality, low-iron, coarse lithium concentrate differentiates Core in the quality-focussed battery and EV supply chain

• Further test work results expected in April

• Finniss Resource estimates expected in coming weeks ahead of Feasibility Study update in Q2 2020 targeting significantly increased mine-life and substantially improved economics

Advanced Australian lithium developer, Core Lithium Ltd ( Core or Company ) (ASX: CXO), is pleased to announce much improved metallurgical performance from recent testwork conducted on representative bulk samples of spodumene pegmatite core recently drilled from the BP33 deposit within the Finniss Lithium Project near Darwin in the NT.

1

These new results from the high lithium grade and low iron content ore body at BP33 improve on previous test work results in regard to producing exceptional quality lithium concentrate at better lithium grades, lower iron content, at higher recovery and at a larger crush size.

Core believes that the high-quality, low-iron, coarse Finniss lithium concentrate will be differentiated in a lithium battery and EV market focussed on demand for exceptional quality materials supplied from ethical and sustainable sources.

Testwork included a number of larger scale tests using the 100mm Dense Media Separation (DMS) cyclone circuit with results demonstrating the robust metallurgy of the BP33 deposit.

DMS Results (summarised below) were excellent showing that an overall lithium recovery of 72% could be achieved at the coarser cut-off of 0.85mm.

Iron grade in the combined concentrates was 0.44% Fe2O3, well below the maximum Fe2O3 grade of 1% required by customers.

Head Grade	Size	DMS	% mass	Grade	Li2O
% Li2O	fraction mm	fraction		% Li2O	Recovery
	-10 + 2	Concentrate	25.4	5.74	84.70%
		Tail	74.6	0.35	15.30%
	-2+ 0.85	Concentrate	20.1	5.38	84.60%
		Tail	79.9	0.25	15.40%
1.56	Overall	Concentrate	19.8	5.71	72.50%
		Tail	60.4	0.34	13.10%
		Fines	19.8	1.14	14.40%

These outstanding new metallurgical results from the high grade BP33 orebody will be incorporated along with new resource and reserve estimates into an updated Feasibility Study in Q2 2020 targeting a significantly increased mine life and substantially improved project economics.

Core’s recent drilling results are expected to significantly increase the size and confidence level of BP33 and other nearby lithium ore bodies within the Finniss Project.

Core is positioned to be Australia’s next Lithium Producer, developing one of Australia’s most capital efficient and lowest cost spodumene lithium projects located in close proximity to the capital city and port of Darwin, Australia’s closest port to Asia.

Core also has established an offtake and prepayment agreement and is also in the process of negotiating further agreements with some of Asia’s largest lithium consumers and producers.

2

Core’s 2019 DFS highlights production of 175,000tpa of high-quality lithium concentrate at a C1 Opex of US$300/t and US$50M Capex through simple and efficient DMS (gravity) processing of some of Australia’s highest-grade lithium resources.

Metallurgical Test Work Results from BP33

Very positive indicators of metallurgical performance have been received from two test campaigns done on bulk samples of spodumene pegmatite core drilled from the BP33 deposit in 2018 and more recently in 2019.

Preliminary Test Work

In the first series of preliminary tests, completed in early 2019, gravity separation tests on crushed core were completed using heavy liquid separation (HLS) analysis and at larger scale mini pilot plant DMS100.

Firstly, the concentrate quality was exceptional, with greater than 5.5% Li2O in the 2.9UF fraction and consistently less than 0.5% Fe2O3.

Secondly, the grade of the 2.7 Overflow (rejects) was 0.25% Li2O or less, which is generally accepted to be discard grade. In all cases the gravity discard mass was over 45%, which means the cleaner DMS circuit, if required, is smaller than the primary circuit.

The most encouraging takeout from these results was evidence that the material could be crushed at 6-10mm, which was the conclusion for the neighbouring Grants deposit.

These results were un-optimised as they didn’t include the benefits of re-crushing DMS middlings but demonstrated that 63% to 72% overall lithium recovery could be achieved. Concentrate grades were generally in excess of the target grade of 5.5% Li2O set at the time.

These results indicated that the BP33 ore would behave in a similar manner to Grants and would be compatible with the facilities that had been designed for Grants.

Current Test Work

A second drilling campaign was undertaken in mid-2019 and core samples were subjected to a second test work campaign, which started in October 2019 and is still ongoing.

Since the earlier campaign was completed in early 2109, Core’s test work has focussed on producing a high-quality lithium concentrate grading up to 6% Li2O.

Initial HLS tests were done at 10mm and 6.3mm crush sizes and increasing the cut-off size to 0.85mm to see if recovery could be maintained at the coarser size – as DMS cyclones perform better on a closer size range.

3

Good concentrate grades, well in excess of 6% Li2O, were achieved at both sizes and overall lithium recovery was fairly consistent at 64% to 66% for both. These results were considered to be on par or better than the results achieved in the preliminary testwork.

A number of larger scale tests were then done using the 100mm DMS cyclone circuit. At the same time a two stage DMS flowsheet was adopted by screening the crushed feed at 2mm and running two DMS circuits, whilst maintaining the 0.85mm bottom size.

These results are summarised below:

Head Grade	Size	DMS	% mass	Grade	Li2O
% Li2O	fraction mm	fraction		% Li2O	Recovery
	-10 + 2	Concentrate	25.4	5.74	84.70%
		Tail	74.6	0.35	15.30%
	-2+ 0.85	Concentrate	20.1	5.38	84.60%
		Tail	79.9	0.25	15.40%
1.56	Overall	Concentrate	19.8	5.71	72.50%
		Tail	60.4	0.34	13.10%
		Fines	19.8	1.14	14.40%

These results were excellent showing that an overall lithium recovery of 72% could be achieved at the coarser cut-off of 0.85mm.

Iron grade in the combined concentrates was 0.44% Fe2O3, well below the recognised maximum of 1%.

Overall these results demonstrate the robust metallurgy of the BP33 deposit.

Further test work is continuing to assess the impact of finer crushing at 6.3mm and reducing the cut-off size to 0.5mm. It is expected that these results, which will be available in April, will meet grade and discard requirements, whilst maintaining or improving recovery.

By-Products Testwork

Ongoing work has also highlighted the possibility of valuable by-products, including lithium fines, being produced at Finniss and this will be reported in subsequent announcements.

Authorised for release by the Board of Core Lithium Ltd.

For further information please contact: For Media and Broker queries:

Stephen Biggins Andrew Rowell Managing Director Director - Investor Relations Core Lithium Ltd Cannings Purple +61 8 8317 1700 +61 400 466 226 info@corelithium.com.au arowell@canningspurple.com.au

4

Competent Persons Statements

Metallurgy

The information in this release that relates to metallurgy and metallurgical test work has been reviewed by Mr Noel O’Brien, FAusIMM, MBA, B. Met Eng. Mr O’Brien is not an employee of the company but is employed as a contract consultant. Mr O’Brien is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, he has sufficient experience with the style of processing response and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activities undertaken, to qualify as a competent person as defined in the 2012 edition of the “Australian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (The JORC Code). Mr O’Brien consents to the inclusion in this report of the contained technical information in the form and context as it appears.

Core confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in this announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Mineral Resource estimates in the announcements “Grants Lithium Resource Increased by 42% ahead of DFS” dated 22 October 2018, “Over 50% Increase in BP33 Lithium Resource to Boost DFS” dated 6 November 2018, “Maiden Sandras Mineral Resource Grows Finniss to 6.3Mt” dated 29 November 2018, “Finniss Mineral Resource Grows to 8.6Mt with Hang Gong” dated 31 January 2019, “Upgrade of Mineral Resource at Carlton Grows Finniss Project” dated 12 March 2019, “Finniss Feasibility Study and Maiden Ore Reserve” dated 17 April 2019 and “Initial Resource for Lees Drives Finniss Mineral Resource” dated 6 May 2019 continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves underpinning the production target have been prepared by a Competent Person in accordance with the requirements of the JORC code. Core confirms that all material assumptions underpinning production target and forecast financial information derived from the production target announced on 17 April 2019 as “Finniss Definitive Feasibility Study and Maiden Ore Reserve” continue to apply and have not materially changed. The metallurgical results have been derived from drill samples announced as “Over 50% Increase in BP33 Lithium Resource to Boost DFS” on 6 November 2018 and “World-class HighGrade Lithium Intersection at Finniss” on 16 January 2020. Core confirms that it is not aware of any new information in this announcement.

5

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary

• Sampling • Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or techniques 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 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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

• Metallurgical testwork results reported herein relate to materials sourced from Diamond Drill Holes (DDH) drilled by Core Lithium Ltd (“Core” or “CXO”) at BP33, over the period October 2018 to July 2019. A list of the 3 hole IDs and positions can be found in the “Drill hole information” section below.

Sampling methods

• Drill core was collected directly into trays, marked up by metre marks and secured as the drilling progressed. Geological logging and sample interval selection took place soon after.

• DDH Core was cut in half longitudinally along a consistent line between 0.3m and 1m in length, ensuring no bias in the cutting plane. The half core was then collected on a metre basis (where possible), bagged and sent to the Nagrom Laboratory in Perth, for analysis.

• The residual half core from the DDH hole has been retained at Core’s storage shed in Berry Springs.

• DDH sampling of pegmatite for assays is done over the sub-1m intervals described above. 1m-sampling continued into the barren phyllite host rock.

• Subsequently, Metallurgical composites were made up from representative intervals of these samples based on lithium assays and including internal waste and 1-2m of waste in contact with the representative interval.

Drilling	•	Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	•	Drilling technique was DDH. Drilling was carried out by WDA Drilling (Humpty Doo
techniques		blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple		NT; UDR1000 truck-mounted DDH using PQ/HQ rods and wireline triple tube).
		or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other
		type,whether core is oriented and if so,bywhat method,etc).

6

• Drill sample • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries recovery 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.

• 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.

• Sub-sampling • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core techniques and taken. sample • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and preparation 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.

• Drill collars are sealed to prevent sample loss and holes are normally drilled dry to prevent poor recoveries and contamination caused by water ingress. Wet intervals are noted in case of unusual results.

• DDH core recovery is 100% in the pegmatite zones and in fresh host-rock, but in the top 50m is diminished to 80-90% by the weathered ground.

• There has been no material bias recognised in drill core sampling to date. The assessment involves a detailed assessment of assay grade vs drill core geology, including visual spodumene concentration.

• Detailed geological logging was carried out on all DDH drill holes.

• Logging recorded lithology, mineralogy, mineralisation, weathering, colour, and other sample features.

• DDH core is kept in PQ and HQ trays.

• All holes were logged in full. DDH holes have been geotechnically logged.

• Pegmatite sections are also checked under a single-beam UV light for spodumene identification on an ad hoc basis. These only provide indicative qualitative information.

• DDH core trays are photographed and stored on the CXO server.

DDH Samples

• Half Drill Core sample intervals were constrained by geology, alteration or structural boundaries, intervals varied between a minimum of 0.3 metres to a maximum of 1 m. The core is cut along a regular Ori line to ensure no sampling bias. It is not advisable to create duplicates of the DDH core given the grainsize (heterogeneity) and limited amount of material available. Instead, as is explained below, the half core is crushed first to a minimum acceptable for metallurgical testwork and laboratory duplicates taken.

• DDH samples were prepared at Nagrom Laboratory in Perth, WA.

• Half core was crushed to a nominal size to pass through a rotary splitter, approximately -20mm. The purpose being to use the residue for metallurgical testwork. One eighth of the material (approximately 500g of the 3-4 kg of each metre-samples) was split and used for conventional assaying for determination of significant drill intercepts, reported to the ASX on 27/3/2019 and 14/10/2019.

• The aggregated assays compare favourably with the head assays of 3 bulk metallurgical samples prepared with the same intervals, weighing approximately

7

100 kg each. Comparison shows a degree of variability where mineralised pegmatite and waste material were blended (metre-assays bias low by average 13%), but for mineralised-only samples they were within 1%. This is considered an excellent reconciliation.

• Head assays are also in line with significant intercepts of surrounding holes.

Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	DDH Samples	DDH Samples
assay data and	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered	•	Sample analysis for DDH samples occurs at Nagrom Laboratory in Perth, WA.
laboratory	partial or total.	•	Two methods are used to obtain a broad suite of elements, Peroxide fusion ICP-
tests	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,		MS/OES and Fusion XRF, for petrological and metallurgical purposes.
	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument	•	Peroxide fusion ICP-MS/OES uses a 0.3 g sub-sample, which is fused with 1g of
	make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their		Sodium Peroxide Fusion flux and then digested in 10% hydrochloric acid. ICP-OES
	derivation, etc.		is used for the following elements: B, S and Sc. ICP-MS is used for Be, Bi, Cd, Ce, Cs,
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.	•	Dy, Eu, Ga, La, Li, Lu, Nd, Rb, Th and U. The detection limit for lithium is 10 ppm. For XRF, a sub-sample is fused with lithium borate flux with lithium nitrate additive, the resultant bead then analysed by XRF using matrix matched calibrations. The following elements are determined:Al2O3, As2O3, BaO, CaO, Cl,
			CoO, Cr2O3, CuO, Fe2O3, K2O, MgO, MnO, MoO3, Na2O, Nb2O5, NiO, P2O5, PbO,
			Sb2O3, SiO2, SnO2, SO3, SrO, Ta2O5, TiO2, V2O5, WO3, ZnO and ZrO2
		•	Nagrom also determined Loss on Ignition at 1000 degrees Celsius using
			conventional furnace techniques (Lab code LOI1000).
		•	There were no significant issues identified with anyof this data.

Verification of	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	• Senior technical personnel have visually inspected and verified the metallurgical
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	test results.
assaying	• The use of twinned holes.	• Metallic Lithium percent was multiplied by a conversion factor of 2.15283/10000
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data	to report Li ppm as Li2O%.
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	• Hole collars were captured by DGPS.
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations	• The grid system is MGA_GDA94, zone 52 for easting, northing and RL.
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.	• All hole traces were surveyed by north seeking gyro tool operated by the drillers
	• Specification of the grid system used.	and the collar is oriented by a line of sight compass and a clinometer.

8

	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	• The nominal drill hole spacing at BP33 is 40 metres between drill sections. The
and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish	majority of sections have had more than one hole drilled. The drill intercept
distribution	the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the	spacing down dip is roughly 40m.
	Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and	• The mineralisation and geology show good continuity from hole to hole and will
	classifications applied.	be sufficient to support the definition of a Mineral Resource and the classifications
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.	contained in the JORC Code (2012 Edition). • Holes selected for metallurgical testwork cover a range of positions in the
		resource body, both in terms of long section and pierce point. These are
		considered representative of the resource.
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	• Drilling is oriented approximately perpendicular to the interpreted strike of
data in relation	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	mineralization (pegmatite body) as mapped. Because of the dip of the hole, drill
to geological	the deposit type.	intersections are apparent thicknesses and overall geological context is needed to
structure	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have	estimate true thicknesses. • No sampling bias is believed to have been introduced.
	introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if
	material.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Sample security was managed by the CXO. After preparation in the field or CXO’s
security		warehouse, samples were packed into polyweave bags and transported by the
		Company directly to the assay laboratory. The assay laboratory audits the samples
		on arrival and reports any discrepancies back to the Company. No such
		discrepancies occurred.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	• No audits or reviews of the data associated with this drilling have occurred.
reviews

9

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 obtaininga licence to operate in the area.		• Drilling by CXO took place within EL29698 and EL30015, which are 100% owned by CXO. • The BP33 resource lies across the boundary of EL29698 and EL30015, both of which are 100% owned by CXO. • The area being drilled comprises Vacant Crown land. • There are no registered heritage sites covering the areas being drilled. • The tenements are in good standing with the NT DPIR Titles Division.
Exploration done by other parties • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.		• The history of mining in the Bynoe area dates back to 1886 when tin was discovered by Mr. C Clark.

• By 1890 the Leviathan Mine and the Annie Mine were discovered and worked discontinuously until 1902.

• In 1903 the Hang Gong Wheel of Fortune was found, and 109 tons of tin concentrates were produced in 1905. In 1906, the mine produced 80 tons of concentrates.

• By 1909 activity was limited to Leviathan and Bells Mona mines in the area with little activity in the period 1907 to 1909.

• The records of production for many mines are not complete, and in numerous cases changes have been made to the names of the mines and prospects which tend to confuse the records still further. In many cases the published names of mines cannot be linked to field occurrences.

• In the early 1980s the Bynoe Pegmatite field was reactivated during a period of high tantalum prices by Greenbushes Tin which owned and operated the Greenbushes Tin and Tantalite (and later spodumene) Mine in WA. Greenbushes Tin Ltd entered into a JV named the Bynoe Joint Venture with Barbara Mining Corporation, a subsidiary of Bayer AG of Germany.

• Greenex (the exploration arm of Greenbushes Tin Ltd) explored the Bynoe pegmatite field between 1980 and 1990 and produced tin and tantalite from its Observation Hill Treatment Plant between 1986 and 1988.

• They then tributed the project out to a company named Fieldcorp Pty Ltd who operated it

10

Criteria JORC Code explanation

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		between 1991 and 1995.

• In 1996, Julia Corp drilled RC holes into representative pegmatites in the field, but like all their predecessors, did not assay for Li.

• Since 1996 the field has been defunct until recently when exploration has begun on ascertaining the lithium prospectivity of the Bynoe pegmatites.

• The NT geological Survey undertook a regional appraisal of the field, which was published in 2004 (NTGS Report 16, Frater 2004).

• LTR drilled the first deep RC holes at BP33, Hang Gong and Booths in 2016, targeting surface workings dating back to the 1980s. The operators at that time were seeking Tin and Tantalum.

• CXO subsequently drilled BP33, Grants, Far West, Central, Ah Hoy and several other prospects in 2016.

• After purchase of the Liontown tenements in 2017, CXO drilled Lees, Booths, Carlton and Hang Gong.

• Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.

• The tenements listed above cover the northern and central portion of a swarm of complex zoned rare element pegmatite field, which comprises the 55km long by 10km wide West Arm – Mt Finniss pegmatite belt (Bynoe Pegmatite Field; NTGS Report 16). The main pegmatites in this belt include Mt Finniss, Grants, BP33, Hang Gong and Sandras

• The Finniss pegmatites have intruded early Proterozoic shales, siltstones and schists of the Burrell Creek Formation which lies on the northwest margin of the Pine Creek Geosyncline. To the south and west are the granitoid plutons and pegmatitic granite stocks of the Litchfield Complex. The source of the fluids that have formed the intruding pegmatites is generally accepted as being the Two Sisters Granite to the west of the belt, and which probably underlies the entire area at depths of 5-10 km.

• Lithium mineralisation has been identified historically as occurring at Bilato’s (Picketts) and Saffums 1 (both amblygonite) but more recently LTR and CXO have identified spodumene at numerous other prospects, including Grants, BP33, Booths, Lees, Hang Gong, Ah Hoy, Far West Central and Sandras.

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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.		Hole_ID Prospect Tenement Drill_Type Easting NDD001 BP33 EL30015 DDH 694392 FDD008 BP33 EL29698 DDH 694550 FDD009 BP33 EL29698 DDH 694340	Northing RL Azimuth Dip Total_Depth 8593543 17 130 -61 240.2 8593357 12 302 -66 351.2 8593484 17 121 -61 236.7
Data aggregation methods • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. 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.		• Any sample compositing reported here is calculated via length weighted averages of the 1 m assays. Length weighted averages are acceptable method because the density of the rock (pegmatite) is constant. • 0.4% Li2O was used as lower cut off grades for compositing and reporting intersections with allowance for including up to 3m of consecutive drill material of below cut-off grade (internal dilution). • No metal equivalent values have been used or reported.
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.		• The holes have been drilled at angles of between 61 - 66° and approximately perpendicular to the strike of the pegmatites as mapped (refer to Table above for azi and dip data). • Pegmatite strike roughly NE and steep east dipping or sub-vertical. Holes were drilled orthogonal to strike and therefore represent about 50-70% of the true width.

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).
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.		• Refer to Figures and Tables in the announcement and releases on 6 November 2018 and 16 January 2020.
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 exploration results have been reported on 6 November 2018 and 16 January 2020.
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 contaminatingsubstances.		• All meaningful and material data has been reported.
Further work • The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. 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 commerciallysensitive.		• CXO is currently undertaking an update of the Mineral Resource Estimate.

13