ReeXploration Inc. - Audit Report / Information 2021

INDEPENDENT TECHNICAL REPORT, EUREKA RARE EARTH PROJECT, NAMIBIA

Prepared For Battery Road Capital Corp.

Effective Date: 2 August 2021 Signature Date: 10 September 2021

Qualified Persons: Martin Pittuck CEng, FGS, MIMMM Keith Webb MAIG

==> picture [455 x 191] intentionally omitted <==

Report Prepared by

SRK Consulting (UK) Limited UK30999

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 - Details

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER

Copyright (and any other applicable intellectual property rights) in this document and any accompanying data or models which are created by SRK Consulting (UK) Limited ("SRK") is reserved by SRK and is protected by international copyright and other laws. Copyright in any component parts of this document such as images is owned and reserved by the copyright owner so noted within this document.

The use of this document is strictly subject to terms licensed by SRK to the named recipient or recipients of this document or persons to whom SRK has agreed that it may be transferred to (the “Recipients”). Unless otherwise agreed by SRK, this does not grant rights to any third party. This document may not be utilised or relied upon for any purpose other than that for which it is stated within and SRK shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by such use or reliance. In the event that the Recipient of this document wishes to use the content in support of any purpose beyond or outside that which it is expressly stated or for the raising of any finance from a third party where the document is not being utilised in its full form for this purpose, the Recipient shall, prior to such use, present a draft of any report or document produced by it that may incorporate any of the content of this document to SRK for review so that SRK may ensure that this is presented in a manner which accurately and reasonably reflects any results or conclusions produced by SRK.

This document shall only be distributed to any third party in full as provided by SRK and may not be reproduced or circulated in the public domain (in whole or in part) or in any edited, abridged or otherwise amended form unless expressly agreed by SRK. Any other copyright owner’s work may not be separated from this document, used or reproduced for any other purpose other than with this document in full as licensed by SRK. In the event that this document is disclosed or distributed to any third party, no such third party shall be entitled to place reliance upon any information, warranties or representations which may be contained within this document and the Recipients of this document shall indemnify SRK against all and any claims, losses and costs which may be incurred by SRK relating to such third parties.

© SRK Consulting (UK) Limited 2020 version: Jan21_01

SRK Legal Entity:		SRK Consulting (UK) Limited
SRK Address:		5thFloor Churchill House
		17 Churchill Way
		Cardiff, CF10 2HH
		Wales, United Kingdom.
Date:		September 2021
Project Number:		UK30999
SRK Project Director:	Tim Lucks	Principal Consultant (Geology)
SRK Project Manager:	Martin Pittuck	Corporate Consultant (Mining Geology)
Client Legal Entity:		Battery Road Capital Corp.
Client Address:		6000-1741 Lower West Street
		Halifax NS
		B3J 0J2

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – QP Certificates

Author and Reviewer Signatures

Coordinating Author	Martin Pittuck CEng, FGS, MIMMM	signed
Contributing Author	Keith Webb MAIG	signed
Peer Reviewer	Mike Armitage PhD, C.Eng, C.Geol	signed

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx Page i of iii

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – QP Certificates

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

I, Martin Frank Pittuck, MSc., C.Eng, MIMMM do hereby certify that:

I am a Corporate Consultant of SRK Consulting (UK) Limited, 5[th] Floor, Churchill House, 17 Churchill Way, Cardiff, CF10 2HH, Wales, UK
The Technical Report to which this certificate applies is titled “Independent Technical Report, Eureka Rare Earth Project, Namibia” With an effective date of 02 August 2021 prepared for Battery Road Capital Corp..
I am a graduate with a Master of Science in Mineral Resources gained from Cardiff College, University of Wales in 1996 and I have practised my profession continuously since that time. Since graduating I have worked as a consultant at SRK on a wide range of mineral projects, including many gold deposits. I have undertaken many geological investigations, resource estimations, mine evaluation technical studies and due diligence reports. I am a Professional Member of the Institution of Materials Mining and Metallurgy (Membership Number 49186), a Fellow of the Geological Society of London and I am a Chartered Engineer;
I have read the definition of “Qualified Person” set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the purposes of NI 43-101.
I have not visited the Eureka Project.
I am responsible for all sections of this Technical Report except for sections 2, 4, 5 and 7.
I am independent of Battery Road Capital Corp. and the Eureka property as described in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.
I have had no prior involvement with the properties that are the subject of this Technical Report.
I have read NI 43-101 and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.
As of the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated this 10[th] day of September 2021.

Signed

Martin Pittuck (CEng, FGS, MIMMM) Corporate Consultant (Mining Geology) SRK Consulting (UK) Limited

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page ii of iii

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – QP Certificates

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

I, Keith Webb, MAIG, do hereby certify that:

I am an independent consulting/contract geologist 148 Eros Road, Eros Park, Windhoek, Namibia, 10009.
The Technical Report to which this certificate applies is titled “Independent Technical Report, Eureka Rare Earth Project, Namibia” With an effective date of 02 August 2021 prepared for Battery Road Capital Corp.
I hold a BSc Honours in Applied Geology from the University of Strathclyde, Scotland, 1985. I have been involved in mining and exploration geology for the past 35 years and have extensive experience within West, East and Southern Africa, as well as Turkey, covering a range of commodities including Gold, Copper, Nickel, Lead/Zinc, Uranium, and Diamonds. I am a member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists (Member ID 3688) and currently sit on the committee for the Geological Society of Namibia.
I have read the definition of “Qualified Person” set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the purposes of NI 43-101.
I visited the Eureka Project on 23[rd] June 2020 and 26[th] July 2021.
I am responsible for sections 2, 4, 5 and 7 of this Technical Report.
I am independent of Battery Road Capital Corp. and the Eureka property as described in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.
I have had no prior involvement with the properties that are the subject of this Technical Report.
I have read NI 43-101 and the parts of the Technical Report I am responsible for, and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.
As of the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated this 10[th] day of September 2021.

Signed

Keith Webb (MAIG)

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page iii of iii

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Table of Contents Main Report

1	SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 1
	1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................. 1
	1.2 Location ................................................................................................................................... 1
	1.3 Licence Description, Ownership and Terms ............................................................................ 2
	1.4 Geology and Mineralisation ..................................................................................................... 3
	1.5 Work Completed by E-Tech ..................................................................................................... 3
	1.5.1 Exploration ..................................................................................................................... 3
	1.5.2 Drilling ............................................................................................................................ 4
	1.5.3 Metallurgy and Processing ............................................................................................ 4
	1.5.4 Density ........................................................................................................................... 4
	1.5.5 Geological Modelling ..................................................................................................... 4
	1.5.6 Mineral Resource Estimation ........................................................................................ 5
	1.6 Mineral Resource Statement ................................................................................................... 5
	1.7 Conclusions and Recommendations ....................................................................................... 6
2	INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 8
	2.1 Issuer and Terms of Reference ............................................................................................... 8
	2.2 Sources of Information ............................................................................................................. 8
	2.3 Rare Earth Terminology ........................................................................................................... 8
	2.4 Site Inspections ....................................................................................................................... 9
3	RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS ................................................................... 10
4	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ................................................. 11
	4.1 Location ................................................................................................................................. 11
	4.2 Licence Description, Ownership and Terms .......................................................................... 12
	4.2.1 Licence Description and Obligations ........................................................................... 12
	4.2.2 Ownership and Transaction Details ............................................................................ 13
	4.3 Surface Rights and Exploration Access ................................................................................ 14
	4.3.1 Permitting .................................................................................................................... 14
	4.3.2 Access and Compensation Arrangements .................................................................. 15
5	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND
	PHYSIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................. 16
	5.1 Physiography and Climate ..................................................................................................... 16
	5.2 Project Access ....................................................................................................................... 16
	5.3 Infrastructure and Local Resources ....................................................................................... 17
6	HISTORY ........................................................................................................... 19
	6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 19
	6.2 Surface Exploration ............................................................................................................... 19
	6.3 Drilling .................................................................................................................................... 20
7	GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALISATION .......................................... 21

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page i of vi

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Table of Contents Main Report

	7.1 Regional Geology and Tectonics ........................................................................................... 21
	7.2 Local Geology and Structure ................................................................................................. 21
	7.3 Mineralisation ......................................................................................................................... 24
	7.3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 24
	7.3.2 Zones 1 and 2 .............................................................................................................. 26
	7.3.3 Zone 3 ......................................................................................................................... 26
	7.3.4 Zone 4 ......................................................................................................................... 26
8	DEPOSIT TYPES .............................................................................................. 29
9	EXPLORATION ................................................................................................. 29
	9.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 29
	9.2 Mapping ................................................................................................................................. 29
	9.3 Geophysics ............................................................................................................................ 30
	9.4 Trenching ............................................................................................................................... 34
	9.4.1 Planning and Surveying .............................................................................................. 34
	9.4.2 Logging ........................................................................................................................ 34
	9.4.3 Sampling ...................................................................................................................... 34
	9.4.4 Scintillometer measurements ...................................................................................... 34
	9.4.5 2020 Trenching ............................................................................................................ 35
	9.5 Aerial Photogrammetry Survey .............................................................................................. 37
	9.6 E-Tech Namibia Spend to Date ............................................................................................. 38
10	DRILLING .......................................................................................................... 39
	10.1 RC Drilling for the MRE ......................................................................................................... 39
	10.2 Logging .................................................................................................................................. 39
	10.3 Downhole Surveys ................................................................................................................. 39
	10.4 Summary of Drilling Results .................................................................................................. 43
	10.5 Sample Recovery .................................................................................................................. 44
	10.6 2020 & 2021 RC and Diamond Drilling .................................................................................. 45
	10.7 SRK Comments ..................................................................................................................... 47
11	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS AND SECURITY ................................. 48
	11.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 48
	11.2 RC Drilling Sampling Procedure ............................................................................................ 48
	11.3 Trench Sampling Procedure .................................................................................................. 49
	11.4 Sample Preparation ............................................................................................................... 50
	11.5 Sample Analysis .................................................................................................................... 50
	11.6 Laboratory Accreditation ........................................................................................................ 51
	11.7 QA/QC Samples .................................................................................................................... 51
	11.8 QA/QC Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 51
	11.8.1 Standards .................................................................................................................... 51
	11.8.2 Blanks .......................................................................................................................... 55

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page ii of vi

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Table of Contents Main Report

	11.8.3 Duplicates .................................................................................................................... 56
	11.9 TREO Determination ............................................................................................................. 58
	11.10 SRK Comments ........................................................................................................... 58
12	DATA VERIFICATION ....................................................................................... 59
13	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING ......................... 60
	13.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 60
	13.2 Size Fraction Analysis ........................................................................................................... 61
	13.3 Gravity Separation ................................................................................................................. 62
	13.4 Magnetic Separation .............................................................................................................. 63
	13.5 Monazite Chemistry ............................................................................................................... 66
	13.6 Assessment of Concentrate Radioactivity ............................................................................. 67
	13.6.1 Background ................................................................................................................. 67
	13.6.2 Referee analysis on concentrate product .................................................................... 67
	13.6.3 Specific activity ............................................................................................................ 68
	13.6.4 Dose rate measurement .............................................................................................. 69
	13.7 SRK Comments ..................................................................................................................... 70
14	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATION .............................................................. 71
	14.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 71
	14.2 Mineralisation Wireframes ..................................................................................................... 71
	14.3 Statistical Analysis ................................................................................................................. 73
	14.3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 73
	14.3.2 Compositing ................................................................................................................. 73
	14.3.3 Zone statistics .............................................................................................................. 73
	14.4 Density Analysis .................................................................................................................... 76
	14.5 Geostatistical Study ............................................................................................................... 77
	14.6 Interpolation Parameters ....................................................................................................... 79
	14.7 Block Modelling ...................................................................................................................... 80
	14.7.1 Block model parameters .............................................................................................. 80
	14.7.2 Grade interpolation ...................................................................................................... 80
	14.7.3 Drillhole count .............................................................................................................. 81
	14.8 Block model validation ........................................................................................................... 83
	14.8.1 Visual Validation .......................................................................................................... 83
	14.8.2 Global mean comparison ............................................................................................ 83
	14.9 Classification .......................................................................................................................... 85
	14.10 Mineral Resource Reporting ........................................................................................ 86
	14.10.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 86
	14.10.2 Pit Optimisation parameters ................................................................................... 86
	14.10.3 Reporting cut off grade ........................................................................................... 90
	14.11 Mineral Resource Statement ....................................................................................... 91

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page iii of vi

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Table of Contents Main Report

	14.12 Grade-Tonnage Sensitivity .......................................................................................... 91
	14.13 Exploration Potential.................................................................................................... 93
15	ITEMS 15 TO 22 OF FORM 43-101F1 .............................................................. 95
16	OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION ............................................ 96
17	INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................... 96
	17.1 Current Status ........................................................................................................................ 96
	17.2 Project Development ............................................................................................................. 97
18	RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................... 97
	18.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 97
	18.2 Phase 1 Programme .............................................................................................................. 98
	18.2.1 Phase 1a: Continued Exploration and Mineral Resource Estimate Update ............... 98
	18.2.2 Phase 1b: 12 month PEA programme, including: ....................................................... 98
	18.3 Phase 1 Project Development Budget ................................................................................... 99
	18.4 SRK Comments ................................................................................................................... 100
19	REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... I

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page iv of vi

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Table of Contents Main Report

List of Tables

Table	1-1:	Eureka REE Project, Mineral Resource, August 2021	6
Table	4-1:	License coordinates for EPL-6762	12
Table	9-1:	Summary of expenditure on the Eureka project to date	38
Table	10-1:	Significant Drillhole Intersections	44
Table	11-1:	Analytical detection limits: Actlabs 8-REE method	50
Table	11-2:	Insertion rates for QA/QC samples	51
Table	11-3:	REE Groupings and conversion factors for REO	58
Table	13-1:	SGS metallurgical sample head grades	61
Table	13-2:	Summary results for gravity and magnetic processing testwork	65
Table	13-3:	EPMA analyses of monazite grains	66
Table	13-4:	LAICPMS analyses of monazite grains	66
Table	13-5:	Comparison of Wheal Jane assays with Actlabs referee assays	68
Table	13-6:	IAEA guidance for transporting NORM	69
Table	14-1:	Modelling Domains and Estimation Zone codes	71
Table	14-2:	Eureka density regression formula	77
Table	14-3:	Run 1 Interpolation Parameters	79
Table	14-4:	Run 2 Interpolation Parameters	79
Table	14-5:	Run 3 Interpolation Parameters (estimates all blocks not estimated after Run 1 and Run
		2)	79
Table	14-6:	Block Model Framework	80
Table	14-7:	Block Grade vs Sample Grade	83
Table	14-8:	Eureka slope of regression by zone (Run 1 only)	84
Table	14-9:	Eureka average density by zone	85
Table	14-10:	Eureka Basket Price and Revenue Calculation	88
Table	14-11:	Pit optimisation parameters	89
Table	14-12:	Eureka REE Project, Mineral Resource, February 2021	91
Table	14-13:	Tonnage and Grade Sensitivity	92
Table	18-1:	Phase 1 Development Budget	99

List of Figures

Figure	1-1:	Project Location ............................................................................................................. 2
Figure	4-1:	Project Location ........................................................................................................... 11
Figure	4-2 :	EPL 6762 outlined in blue ........................................................................................... 12
Figure	5-1:	Major road and rail map of Namibia ............................................................................ 17
Figure	5-2:	Eureka Project local infrastructure .............................................................................. 18
Figure	6-1:	WMC Zone 1 surface geology, radiometric anomaly, pit and drillhole location map .. 19
Figure	7-1:	Geological context of the Project, Miller (2008) and Corner (2008) ............................ 22
Figure	7-2:	Monazite grains (orange) in a dolomite matrix (dark brown) ....................................... 23
Figure	7-3:	Example of exposed dyke from Zone 3 ....................................................................... 24
Figure	7-4:	Trench cutting of weathered carbonatite. .................................................................... 24
Figure	7-5:	1:5000 map of Zones 1–4 ........................................................................................... 25
Figure	7-6:	1:1500 map Zones 1 and 2 ......................................................................................... 27
Figure	7-7:	1:1000 map of trenches at Zone 3 .............................................................................. 28
Figure	9-1:	Extent of E-Tech Namibia’s mapping at Eureka ......................................................... 31
Figure	9-2:	Postion of the geophysical grid ................................................................................... 32
Figure	9-3:	Geophysics Interpretation ........................................................................................... 33
Figure	9-4:	Location of trenches and drillhole collars at Eureka .................................................... 35
Figure	9-5:	Location of new and old trenches in Zone 1 ............................................................... 36
Figure	9-6:	Location of new and old trenches in Zone 3 ............................................................... 37
Figure	10-1:	RC drilling and sample capture ................................................................................... 40
Figure	10-2:	Plan map of drillhole locations relative to outcropping mineralisation ......................... 41
Figure	10-3:	RC chip pad showing the dust and chips for each metre drilled. The red arrow
		demarcates carbonatite samples ................................................................................ 42
Figure	10-4:	Downhole optical scan and gamma log through the mineralised carbonatite in hole
		EU008 .......................................................................................................................... 43
Figure	10-5:	Average RC bag weights against depth downhole. .................................................... 45

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page v of vi

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Table of Contents Main Report

Figure	10-6:	2020-2021 RC and DD drilling locations with respect to MRE RC and trenching
		locations ...................................................................................................................... 46
Figure	11-1:	Samples ready for dispatch ......................................................................................... 49
Figure	11-2:	GRE02 CRM performance for Ce ............................................................................... 52
Figure	11-3:	GRE02 CRM performance for Pr ................................................................................ 52
Figure	11-4:	GRE02 CRM performance for La ................................................................................ 53
Figure	11-5:	GRE02 CRM performance for Nd ............................................................................... 53
Figure	11-6:	GRE06 CRM performance for Ce ............................................................................... 54
Figure	11-7:	GRE06 CRM performance for La ................................................................................ 54
Figure	11-8:	GRE06 CRM performance for Nd ............................................................................... 55
Figure	11-9:	GRE06 CRM performance for Pr ................................................................................ 55
Figure	11-10:	Blank performance ...................................................................................................... 56
Figure	11-11:	Field duplicate performance ........................................................................................ 57
Figure	13-1:	Plan showing the location of the surface metallurgical sample ................................... 60
Figure	13-2:	300 kg bulk metallurgical sample before shipping to UK ............................................ 61
Figure	13-3:	Recovery vs mass pull % for a range of grind sizes ................................................... 62
Figure	13-4:	Shaking table test separation of monazite (red zone) and magnetite (black zone) .... 63
Figure	13-5:	Magnetite removal from Eureka monazite concentrate ............................................... 64
Figure	13-6:	Eureka monazite concentrate ...................................................................................... 64
Figure	13-7:	Chondrite normalised plot displaying REE distribution in monazite from Eureka ....... 66
Figure	13-8:	TREO vs Th and P2O5grades ..................................................................................... 67
Figure	14-1:	Plan map of mineralisation wireframes and estimation domain codes ....................... 72
Figure	14-2:	Cross Section through mineralisation wireframes ....................................................... 73
Figure	14-3:	Eureka combined zone TREO% histogram (Source: BGS) ........................................ 74
Figure	14-4:	Eureka zone 10 pie chart (Source: BGS) .................................................................... 74
Figure	14-5:	Eureka zone LREO% Scatterplot against TREO% (Source: BGS) ............................ 75
Figure	14-6:	Density sampling of surface mineralised grab samples .............................................. 76
Figure	14-7:	Density vs Ce PPM (Source: BGS) ............................................................................. 77
Figure	14-8:	Eureka combined zone omni-directional variogram – TREO% (Source: BGS) .......... 78
Figure	14-9:	Eureka combined zone omni-directional variogram – P2O5% (Source: BGS) ............ 78
Figure	14-10:	Eureka 50 m x 50 m isotropic search ellipse (Source: BGS) ...................................... 80
Figure	14-11:	Eureka Block Model Estimation Run, (Source: BGS) ................................................. 81
Figure	14-12:	Eureka Block Model : visual validation of block grades in zone 10 pass 1 or 2 (Source:
		BGS) ............................................................................................................................ 82
Figure	14-13:	Eureka Slope of Regression for the Run 1 estimate (Source: BGS) .......................... 84
Figure	14-14:	Proportion of REOs in Eureka concentrate. ................................................................ 88
Figure	14-15:	Cross Section of pit shell and resource classification in Zone 1 ................................. 90
Figure	14-16:	Grade-Tonnage Curve ................................................................................................ 92
Figure	14-17:	Plan view of wider exploration potential ...................................................................... 94
Figure	14-18:	Near-resource exploration potential ............................................................................ 95

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page vi of vi

SRK Consulting (UK) Limited 5th Floor Churchill House 17 Churchill Way City and County of Cardiff CF10 2HH, Wales United Kingdom E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.srk.com Tel: + 44 (0) 2920 348 150

INDEPENDENT TECHNICAL REPORT, EUREKA RARE EARTH PROJECT, NAMIBIA

1 SUMMARY

1.1 Overview

SRK Consulting (UK) Ltd. (“SRK”) has been asked by Battery Road Capital Corp. (“Battery Road”, the “Company” or the “Client”) to review the Eureka Rare Earth Element (“REE”) Project in Namibia (“Eureka” or the “Project”) owned 100% by E-Tech Kalapuse Mining (Pty) Limited (“E-Tech Namibia”). This resulting Independent Technical Report (“ITR”) has been prepared in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”).

The ITR will be used in support of a reverse take-over (“RTO”) of E-Tech Namibia by Battery Road which is currently listed on the TSX Venture Exchange (TSXV:BTRY.P). The Transaction also contemplates a concurrent private placement) by Battery Road to further support on-going exploration activities by E-Tech Namibia of $5,000,000 on market terms.

This ITR describes the work undertaken to produce a maiden Mineral Resource estimate for the Project which was originally prepared by SRK on behalf of E-Tech Metals Ltd and the metallurgical testwork results obtained to date as well as describing the project geology, location and ownership. The ITR also describes the merits of the project, the challenges remaining to be faced and the Company’s proposed development programme.

1.2 Location

The project area is semi-arid desert in the Karibib District of the Erongo Region, Namibia as shown in Figure 1-1. The Trans-Kalahari highway passes within 2 km of the project site providing direct access to the capital Windhoek as well as port facilities at Walvis Bay. The Project is 250 km by road from the capital Windhoek, a journey of approximately 2.5 hours.

==> picture [66 x 38] intentionally omitted <==

Registered Address: 21 Gold Tops, City and County of Newport, NP20 4PG, Group Offices: Africa Wales, United Kingdom. Asia SRK Consulting (UK) Limited Reg No 01575403 (England and Wales) Australia Page 1 of 112 Europe North America South America

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 551] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1-1: Project Location

1.3 Licence Description, Ownership and Terms

The Eureka deposit lies within Exclusive Prospecting Licence (“EPL”) number EPL 6762; which covers Eureka Farm 99 and Sukses Farm 90 and encompasses a roughly rectangular area totalling 3,474 ha.

The previous licence holder, KALAPUSE GENERAL DEALERS cc (“KGD”) agreed to excise the Eureka licence area from its EPL 5469 licence area with the consent of Namibia’s Ministry of Mines & Energy in a letter received on 15 June 2017.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 2 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

EPL 6762 was then awarded to E-Tech Namibia on 12[th] February 2018 for an initial 3 year duration; and for the exploration of base and rare metals, industrial minerals, nuclear fuel minerals and precious metals until 12th February 2021. The licence was renewed on 20[th] July, 2021 until 19[th] July, 2023, and will be renewable from 19[th] July 2023 for another two year period. Additional licence renewals, beyond seven years, are possible with approval from the Minister of Mines and Energy.

At the time KGD ceded rights to E-Tech Namibia, a non-refundable consideration of GBP 7,500 (VAT excluded) was paid by E-Tech Namibia to KGD. and one half of the second nonrefundable consideration of GBP 7,500 was paid in November 2020 with the remaining half scheduled to be paid on completion of the RTO transaction.

Upon the successful conclusion of a prefeasibility study (“PFS”) and progression towards definitive feasibility studies and mine development, E-Tech Namibia is required to pay a further non-refundable consideration of GBP 50,000 (VAT excluded) to KGD. This has not yet been paid.

In addition, E-Tech Namibia pays under contract Early Prospecting Stage farmer compensation of NAD 2,500 per month.

1.4 Geology and Mineralisation

The Project is located within the Southern Central Zone of the Neoproterozoic Damara Belt. The intrusive that hosts the mineralisation at Eureka was emplaced at a similar time to the regional granites, it is the only currently known alkaline intrusion related to the Damara Orogeny.

At least 14 REE-bearing dolomite carbonatite dykes have been identified at Eureka, these are found in four Zones within several hundred metres of each other. The dykes intrude quartzofeldspathic and calc-silicate rocks of the Etusis and Khan formations respectively. These dykes are generally greater than 0.5 m thick and are principally composed of coarse dolomite with a variable abundance of coarse monazite (the host of the REEs), magnetite, graphite, calcite, hematite and minor quartz. Locally, the dykes are surrounded by a thin selvage of skarn-like rock comprising diopside, actinolite, monazite, and graphite.

1.5 Work Completed by E-Tech

1.5.1 Exploration

During Q4 2016 a ground magnetic and radiometric survey was completed which, combined with known carbonatite outcrops, generated a number of drill targets. In March 2017 E-Tech Namibia completed 19 reverse circulation (“RC”) drillholes for a total of 610 m in Zones 1, 2 and 3. Following this, a gravity orientation study was completed in Q3 2017 which added further exploration targets.

During Q2 2019, 1.2 km of trenching was completed on Zones 1, 2 and 3 and reconnaissance mapping found new mineralised float samples south of Zone 3 and in Zone 4.

At this time an aerial topographic imagery survey was also carried out, covering an area of approximately 1.5 x 1.0 km, centred on the known mineralisation in Zones 1, 2, 3 and 4.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 3 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

1.5.2 Drilling

Initially, 19 RC drillholes for 613m were completed mostly on Zone 1 and 2 with a few in Zone 3; these have been sampled and assayed and have been used in the Mineral Resource estimate given in this Technical Report.

In late 2020 and the first half of 2021, another 23 RC drillholes were completed for 3,305m; these provide some infill holes in Zone 1 and significantly improved drilling coverage in Zone 3.

In June 2021 a 5-hole diamond drilling programme was completed, these provide deep intersections in Zone 1 and 2.

None of the 2020-2021 drilling has been assayed at this stage.

1.5.3 Metallurgy and Processing

During Q4 2016, E-Tech Namibia collected a 300 kg bulk sample of fresh carbonatite from Zone 1 for metallurgical testing. A representative 100 kg crushed split of this sample was submitted to SGS Mineral Services in the UK. Monazite liberation and gravity separation was studied over a range of size fractions. A first-pass recovery of 65% to gravity concentrate was achieved and subsequent magnetic separation of the dry gravity concentrate improved its grade from 47% to 59% total rare earth oxide (“TREO”) without loss of monazite.

The original concentrates produced by SGS were analysed at Wheal Jane Laboratories using an ICP-OES method which does not assay Th and U accurately. Therefore, a number of samples of the gravity and magnetic separation concentrates were submitted to Actlabs (Canada) for umpire analysis using ICP-MS which provided comparable REE grades and significantly lower values for Th and U resulting in values in the expected range based on previous Laser Ablation Induced Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (“LA-ICPMS”) work.

During Q4 2019 E-Tech Namibia collected a 1 t bulk sample of fresh carbonatite from a test pit for further metallurgical testing by Bond Equipment of Klerksdorp, South Africa. The aim of this testwork was to further develop and optimise the processing flowsheet design for a potential gravity plant at Eureka.

1.5.4 Density

Density measurements have been collected for 21 grab samples of fresh mineralised carbonatite and waste rock.

1.5.5 Geological Modelling

E-Tech Namibia engaged the services of Impala Geomodelling LTD (“Impala”) to create a geological model based on surface mapping, lithological logging and assay data. Fourteen carbonatite dykes were modelled with a combined strike length of over 1,200 m. The dykes dip steeply, trend E-W to NW-SE and have been drill tested to a depth of up to 60 m below surface where they remain open along strike and at depth. The dykes are between 0.5 m and 5 m thick (averaging approximately 2 m thick), have sharp lithological contacts with the host rock which act as a natural cut-off grade of around 1% TREO and suggest that potentially economic mineralisation is contained entirely within the dykes, not in a metasomatic alteration halo around the dykes.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 4 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Weathering surfaces have not been produced as the base of weathering is shallow and not considered to be material to the Mineral Resource estimate.

1.5.6 Mineral Resource Estimation

Baker Geological Services Ltd (“BGS”) prepared a 3D block model for the Project and undertook statistical and geostatistical studies to determine appropriate interpolation parameters.

Grades of TREO%, and where possible, Th, U, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Sc and Y were then interpolated into the empty block model using Ordinary Kriging (“OK”) with the following post estimation processes being completed:

Slope of Regression calculation to enable an assessment of the quality of the estimate;
Conversion of all REE to oxides;
Calculation of the combined LREOs; and
Calculation of the combined HREOs.

The resulting block model grades were validated through visual and statistical methods with the input data and estimated block model grades showing a good correlation to one another despite the limited amount of data available.

1.6 Mineral Resource Statement

SRK has reviewed and adopted the geological models, made spot checks of the drilling database entries against assay certificates and has classified and run pit shells on the block model. SRK has then undertaken the work required to determine the reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, by limiting the reported tonnage to a pit shell and by applying a suitable cut-off grade of 1.3% TREO which was based on:-

benchmarked cost parameters;
a review of prevailing metal prices; and
a review of E-Tech’s expectations with respect to concentrate quality and pricing discounts.

SRK has then reported a Mineral Resource statement in accordance with guidelines and terminology given in the December 2012 Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves prepared by the Joint Ore Reserves Committee of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and the Minerals Council of Australia (“the JORC Code”).

The JORC Code is recognized under NI 43-101 as an acceptable foreign code that governs the estimation and disclosure of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves. The JORC Code uses definitions and categories that are consistent with the International Reporting Template, published by the Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (“the CRIRSCO Template”).

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 5 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The Mineral Resource statement has been prepared by Mr Martin Pittuck, CEng., MIMMM, FGS who is a Qualified Person (“QP”) according to the definition of this given in NI 43-101. Mr Pittuck is a full-time employee of SRK and is independent of Battery Road, E-Tech Namibia and E- Tech Metals Ltd and their subsidiaries. The statement is effective as of 02 August 2021.

The Mineral Resource statement is given in Table 1-1 below.

Table 1-1: Eureka REE Project, Mineral Resource, August 2021

Category	Tonnage (Kt)	Grade (%TREO)	of which NdPrO*
Measured	-	-	-
Indicated	-	-	-
Inferred	310	4.8	0.7

*the sum of the individual %Nd2O3 and %Pr2O3 grades

1.7 Conclusions and Recommendations

E-Tech Namibia has undertaken exploration in a cost-effective manner, using industry standard methods and this has enabled the production of a maiden Inferred Mineral Resource estimate for the Eureka Project carbonatite dykes of 310 Kt at a mean grade of 4.8% total rare earth oxide. If only considering the Nd2O3 and Pr2O3, which are of greatest interest to E-Tech Namibia and potential offtakers, their combined grade is 0.7%.

There is significant potential to increase the size of the Mineral Resource with further exploration. Based on the radiometric anomalies and mapped outcrops yet to be tested with trenching, SRK has also therefore reported an Exploration Target of between 500 and 1,500 Kt at an average grade of between 2% and 5% TREO.

Battery Road intends to use funds raised in the RTO to accelerate work on the Project over a 14 month period. The recommended work program will cover:

Assaying of the trench and drilling samples collected in 2020-2021;
Diamond drilling to infill and expand coverage on the known mineralised dykes;
Continued metallurgical testwork to improve recovery, product quality and confidence in related project cost estimates;
Costs associated with running the exploration programme; and
Initiation of certain studies which will contribute to a Prefeasibility Study.

Work will be undertaken in a methodical and staged manner with milestones and decision points along the way such as Mineral Resource updates and a PEA.

SRK believes there is good potential to increase the Mineral Resource on the Project through additional exploration and develop the many technical-economic aspects towards favourable outcomes. Inferred Mineral Resources have a low level of confidence by definition, and infill drilling with better quality sampling is required to increase the level of confidence and classify Indicated Mineral Resources in order to advance the Project to a Prefeasibility Study. Whilst SRK expects this to succeed, there is no guarantee that the Inferred Mineral Resources will be converted to Indicated Mineral Resources following infill drilling.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 6 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The technical-economic parameters presented in this report are mostly conceptual and they may change significantly as the work progresses to improve confidence in them. The rare earth prices are based on a 2.5 year trailing average as of June 2020 and these prices may increase or decrease in the future. The other assumptions around revenue, and price discounts in particular, are based on an understanding of what other producers in the industry are doing. E- Tech Namibia will need to develop its own arrangements in due course and these may be different for what is assumed in this ITR.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 7 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Issuer and Terms of Reference

SRK Consulting (UK) Ltd. (“SRK”) has been asked by Battery Road Capital Corp. (“Battery Road”, the “Company” or the “Client”) to review the Eureka Rare Earth Element (“REE”) Project in Namibia (“Eureka” or the “Project”) which is owned 100% by E-Tech Kalapuse Mining (Pty) Limited (“E-Tech Namibia”) and to summarise pertinent details in an Independent Technical Report (“ITR”).

The ITR will be used in support of a reverse take-over (“RTO”) of E-Tech Namibia by Battery Road which is currently listed on the TSX Venture Exchange (TSXV:BTRY.P). The Transaction also contemplates a concurrent private placement by Battery Road to raise $5,000,000 on market terms.

E-Tech Namibia has an Exclusive Prospecting Licence 6762 covering the Project area which is in the Erongo Region of Namibia.

This ITR describes the work undertaken to produce a maiden Mineral Resource for the Project, and the metallurgical testwork results obtained to date as well as describing the project geology, location and ownership. The ITR also describes the merits of the project, the challenges remaining to be faced and the Company’s proposed development programme.

2.2 Sources of Information

This ITR includes; a summary of exploration data collected up to August 2021, the technical work undertaken by E-Tech Metals in collaboration with Baker Geological Services Ltd (“BGS”) and Impala Geomodelling Limited (“Impala”) based on data collected up until May 2020, a presentation of the maiden Mineral Resource estimate for the Project and a discussion of exploration potential.

The data used for the Mineral Resource estimate, including the drillhole and trenching databases and topographic survey, was collected by E-Tech and Impala who maintained an onsite presence during the Q1 2017 drilling and the Q2 2019 trenching campaigns and assisted in collating the drillhole database, managing the exploration and Quality Assurance and Quality Control (“QA/QC”) activities as well as overseeing the drilling. E-Tech also engaged the services of Mr Howard Baker (FAusIMM(CP)) of BGS to prepare a block model for the project.

2.3 Rare Earth Terminology

The Eureka deposit comprises monazite-bearing carbonatite dykes intruding quartzofeldspathic rocks of the Etusis Formation. Rare Earth Elements (“REE”) within the carbonatite dykes are exclusively contained in the monazite in which light rare earth elements (“LREE”) account for 99.8% of the total REE and heavy rare earth element’s (“HREE”) account for the remaining 0.2%. In this report, REE may be reported as individual REE oxides (“REO”) or as total rare earth oxide or (“TREO”).

By virtue of the monazite concentration in the carbonatite dykes, the relative proportions of REEs in the monazite and the prevailing REE prices, Neodymium (Nd) and Praseodymium (Pr) are of key economic interest and Lanthanum (La), Cerium (Ce), Samarium (Sm), Europium (Eu) and Gadolinium (Gd) may be of lesser economic interest. The HREEs are present in trace quantities but are not currently considered to be of economic importance.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 8 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Further details are given in Section 11.9.

2.4 Site Inspections

In accordance with NI 43-101 Guidelines, Mr Keith Webb, an independent Associate Exploration Geologist with SRK, visited the Project and the sample preparation laboratory on 24[th] and 25[th] June 2020 and subsequently visited site on 26[th] July 2021. Mr Webb was accompanied by E-Tech Namibia’s Exploration Manager, Dr Tim Smalley. Many of the outcrops, drill collars and trench locations were inspected and their locations were independently verified. The field operations office, core yard as well as the chip tray and sample storage areas were noted to be in good order.

The main purposes of the site visit were to:

ascertain the geographical and geological setting of the Eureka deposit;
verify the exploration work completed to date including, but not limited to:
confirmation of sampling and trench locations;
inspection of core logging and sample storage facilities;
review of geological interpretation and inspection of RC drill chips and core;
review of procedures and protocols in relation to drilling and sampling methodologies;
assess logistical aspects and other constraints relating to the exploration property; and
assess the overall quantity and quality of on-site work.

The most recent site visit was undertaken to confirm that there had been no material change to the scientific and technical information about the property since the personal inspection on 25th June, 2020.

Since the effective date of this report, SRK has corresponded with E-Tech Namibia and Battery Road representatives to confirm that there has been no material change to the scientific and technical information pertaining to the property and we are informed that no further assaying will be completed until the completion of the contemplated Qualifying Transaction.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 9 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

SRK has not independently verified the status or legal standing of titles and agreements relating to mineral title and ownership described in this report and relies on documentation provided by the Company.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 10 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

4.1 Location

The Project is situated in the Karibib District of the Erongo Region, Namibia as shown in Figure

2-1.

==> picture [414 x 551] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4-1: Project Location

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 11 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

4.2 Licence Description, Ownership and Terms

4.2.1 Licence Description and Obligations

The Eureka deposit lies within Exclusive Prospecting Licence (“EPL”) 6762; which covers Eureka Farm 99 and Sukses Farm 90 and encompasses a roughly rectangular area totalling 3,474 ha. Coordinates for the EPL (both Lat-Long and WGS 84 UTM Zone 33S) are provided in Table 4-1 and shown in Figure 4-2.

Table 4-1: License coordinates for EPL-6762

POINT	LONGITUDE	LATITUDE
1	15.23110479	-22.00832942
2	15.24990324	-22.00000013
3	15.27896487	-22.00009618
4	15.27914855	-22.06510977
5	15.23121859	-22.06518448
POINT	UTM X	UTM Y
1	523851.0	7566233.1
2	525792.8	7567152.0
3	528792.6	7567136.2
4	528798.4	755939.8
5	523853.2	7559939.8

==> picture [413 x 239] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4-2 : EPL 6762 outlined in blue

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 12 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

EPL 6762 was then awarded to E-Tech Namibia on 12[th] February 2018 for an initial 3 year duration; and for the exploration of base and rare metals, industrial minerals, nuclear fuel minerals and precious metals until 12th February 2021. The licence may then be renewed for a further two periods of two years each. Additional licence renewals, beyond seven years, are possible with approval from the Minister of Mines and Energy.

E-Tech submitted their application and payment for licence renewal on 3[rd] November 2020, 90 days ahead of the expiry date; the licence was renewed on 20[th] July 2021 and is valid until 19[th] July 2023.

At the time KGD ceded rights to E-Tech Namibia, a non-refundable consideration of GBP 7,500 (VAT excluded) was paid by E-Tech Namibia to KGD and one half of the second non-refundable consideration of GBP 7,500 was paid in November 2020 the second half of which will be paid upon successful completion of the share exchange agreement between E-Tech Namibia shareholders and Battery Road.

In addition, E-Tech Namibia pays under contract Early Prospecting Stage farmer compensation of NAD 2,500 per month.

4.2.2 Ownership and Transaction Details

Battery Road entered into a definitive share exchange agreement with E-Tech Namibia dated October 10, 2020 (the “Definitive Agreement”), pursuant to which the holders of all of the outstanding shares of E-Tech Namibia will exchange all such shares to Battery Road in exchange for common shares of Battery Road. After conclusion of the transaction Battery Road (the "Resulting Issuer") will be the 100% owner of all the outstanding shares of E-Tech Namibia and will continue the business of E-Tech Namibia and initially will be engaged in the exploration and development of prospective mineral properties located in Namibia, with a focus on rare earth exploration and development.

On June 2, 2021, the Corporation entered into an agreement amending its Definitive Agreement with E-Tech Namibia. Amendments included:

(i) a financing be conducted by Battery Road through the issuance of subscription receipts convertible into common shares of Battery Road, as opposed to a financing conducted by offering shares of E-Tech Namibia,
(ii) the proposed completion of a stock split by Battery Road on the basis of 2 post-split common shares of Battery Road for every 1 pre-split common share of Battery Road, and
(iii) the exchange ratio of the Definitive Agreement was adjusted for the contemplated stock split such that each ordinary share of E-Tech Namibia will convert into 111,111.2 postsplit shares of the Corporation.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 13 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The amended Defintiive Agreement with E-Tech Namibia is intended to constitute the Qualifying Transaction of Battery Road, as such term is defined in Policy 2.4 of the TSX-V and will result in a reverse takeover of Battery Road wherein Battery Road will become the 100% owner of all outstanding shares of E-Tech Namibia.

To give effect to the amended Definitive Agreement, parties to the agreement will take several actions including:

Battery Road will conduct a 2 for 1 stock split and name change;
Battery Road will conduct a concurrent financing of subscription receipts convertible into post-split shares of the Corporation;
Convertible debentures of E-Tech Namibia will convert into ordinary shares of E-Tech Namibia;
The exchange of shares contemplated in the Definitive Agreement and the additional shares of E-Tech Namibia issued upon conversion of the convertible debentures of E-Tech Namibia will occur; and
Subscription receipts from the concurrent private placement will convert into post-split shares of Battery Road.

As a result of the Qualifying Transaction Battery Road will have acquired each of the issued and outstanding E-Tech Namibia shares pursuant to the terms of the Definitive Agreement, in exchange for 111,111.2 common shares of the Resulting Issuer. Existing shareholders of E- Tech Namibia’s 200 issued and outstanding E-Tech Namibia Shares are expected to receive 22,222,240 post-split common shares of the Resulting Issuer in aggregate at closing of the Qualifying Transaction. Holders of E-Tech Namibia’s convertible debentures in the amount of $1,596,000 are expected to receive 133 shares of E-Tech Namibia upon conversion, which will be exchanged for 14,777,790 post- split common shares of the Resulting Issuer. It is also expected that 20,000,000 post-split common shares of the Corporation will be issued pursuant to the concurrent private placement; and, current holders of Battery Road common shares will have an aggregate of 25,971,530 post-split common shares after the Qualifying Transaction.

In association with the transaction, the obligations outlined in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.3 will also be assumed by the Resulting Issuer in respect of the Eureka project. The Resulting Issuer will assume a royalty of 1.5% of the gross value of the products sold from mining.

4.3 Surface Rights and Exploration Access

4.3.1 Permitting

An Environmental Clearance Certificate (“ECC”) issued by the Ministry of Environment & Tourism, Namibia (“MET”), is the only permit required to undertake prospecting activities. An ECC was originally granted to E-Tech Namibia on behalf of KGD on 30[th] November 2016 and an updated ECC was granted on 3[rd] August 2018 which has a 3 year duration ending 2[nd] August 2021. An ECC renewal application was filed on 2[nd] June 2021 more than 60 days before the expiry date.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 14 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

E-Tech Namibia has met and exceeded the obligations to keep the ECC valid and whilst no formal decision has been made in respect of the ECC renewal as of the date of this report, the Company has no reason to believe that the Minister will not grant the renewal application. Until the application is granted or refused, the ECC remains valid and in force, notwithstanding the expiry date of 2[nd] August 2021.

Environmental Impact Assessments and ECC’s are regulated by the MET in terms of the Environmental Management Act, 7 of 2007 which was gazetted on 27[th] December 2007 (Government Gazette No. 3966).

The ECC application and update was undertaken by Alex Speiser Environmental Consultants (“ASEC”). ASEC undertook the Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) process and to compiled an Environmental Scoping Report and Management Plan for the proposed exploration activities on EPL 6762. E-Tech Namibian continues retain ASEC to carry out bi-annual environmental status reports on the EPL. The environmental aspects associated with the E- Tech Namibia’s exploration activities have been successfully identified, assessed and deemed to be of very low impact as part the completed EIA Scoping report. The company continues to successfully instated relevant mitigation measures that were identified in the EMP.

No environmental liabilities have been identified by the work undertaken to date.

4.3.2 Access and Compensation Arrangements

The Project is located within state owned “Eureka Farm 99”. E-Tech Namibia entered into a compensation agreement on 5[th] September 2016 with the state appointed farmer under Section 52 of Act No.33 of the Minerals (Prospecting and Mining) Act, 1992 which stipulates that the Prospector shall be granted access and may undertake prospecting including pitting (excluding soil sampling), trenching and drilling operations by means of percussion and/or diamond drills.

Compensation is paid according to the following terms (the NAD:CAD exchange rate is approximately 10:1)

NAD 5,000 per month.
NAD 500 per percussion drill hole.
NAD 1,000 per diamond drillhole.
NAD 5,000 per rig for each month there are more than 2 rigs drilling on the property.
• NAD 1,000 per month ground rental for a secure shipping container on site.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 15 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

5.1 Physiography and Climate

Namibia has a warm desert to semi-arid climate with two distinct wet seasons either side of summer. Temperatures during the summer months can reach into the high 30’s (°C) and during winter months temperature can be as low as 6 °C. Rainfall is extremely variable and the location can go without rainfall for numerous years.

The Project area is rocky semi-arid desert terrain located at the boundary between the Namib Desert and the Great Escarpment, vegetation in the areas is a combination of Namib grassland and sparse shrubland; some acacia trees grow in the ephemeral riverbeds on the Property. The Project area is at an elevation of approximately 1,080m above sea level, it is flat, arid and climatically stable with very low rainfall even during the rainy seasons resulting in an all-year operating season. The area lies at the eastern edge of the coastal fog zone which brings occasional costal moisture. There are many areas where site facilities and waste storage could potentially be situated.

The water table is at a depth of some 50m, this has been intersected by several reverse circulation drillholes, however the potential for this to provide sufficient water for any eventual mining and processing operations has not yet been assessed.

5.2 Project Access

Namibia is bordered by South Africa to the south, Angola to the north and Botswana to the east. In addition, Namibia shares narrow sections of border with Zambia and Zimbabwe along the Caprivi Strip and it is possible to enter Namibia by road from a number of border entry points. Namibia has a well-established road infrastructure with the majority of towns and communities accessible by a network of well-maintained gravel trunk, main and district roads totalling a distance of some 48,100 km, including 4,500 km of tarred roads.

The Trans-Kalahari and the Trans-Caprivi highways provide tarred road links between the Namibian port of Walvis Bay on the Atlantic coast, and landlocked neighbouring countries. The Trans-Kalahari highway passes within 2 km of the project site providing direct access to the capital Windhoek as well as port facilities at Walvis Bay. The Project is 250 km by road from the capital Windhoek, a journey of approximately 2.5 hours.

Namibia's railway network is managed by TransNamib Holdings Ltd. and comprises some 2,380 km of 1.067 m narrow gauge railway lines. The main line runs from the South African border at Ariamsvlei, through Windhoek and terminates at Walvis Bay, passing within 4 km of the Project site.

Namibia’s main road and rail network is shown in Figure 5-1 in relation to the project location.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 16 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 376] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5-1: Major road and rail map of Namibia

There are direct air links to Namibia from a number of cities including Johannesburg, Cape Town, Frankfurt and Addis Ababa although flight frequency has changed recently since the national airline ceased operations. Namibia has three international airports; Hosea Kutako, Eros and Walvis Bay with Hosea Kutako airport (30 km east of Windhoek) handling the vast majority of international flights.

Walvis Bay is the main deep-water port in Namibia, with a smaller secondary port at Luderitz. The port of Walvis Bay has a depth of 12.8 m and can accommodate container vessels with a maximum capacity of 2,400 tonnes. A new cargo and container quay wall has recently been completed at Walvis Bay Harbour which is 500 m in length with a channel draft of 8.15 m, and can accommodate vessels up to 150 m in length. The majority of Namibia’s exports and imports travel through Walvis Bay, typically from/to southern, western and central Africa and Europe.

5.3 Infrastructure and Local Resources

Local labour is easily sourced, either from the farms within the permit area, or from the larger towns of Usakos and Swakopmund. Namibia has a strong history of mining and exploration and skilled professionals, and drilling and exploration services, are readily available within country.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 17 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

High tension, 200 kV AC, power lines run close to the Project, with a substation approximately 10 km to the south southeast. A map of local infrastructure to the project site is shown in Figure 5-2.

==> picture [414 x 377] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5-2: Eureka Project local infrastructure

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 18 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

6 HISTORY

6.1 Introduction

There is no historical Mineral Resource and there has been no historical production.

The earliest known exploration for carbonatite style REE mineralisation was conducted by Western Mining Corporation (“WMC”) during the early 1980s, details of which are contained within an unpublished post-graduate thesis by Tibor Janos Dunai of Heidelberg University, Germany, completed in 1989. Subsequently the license was held by Reefton Mining and then Magna Mining, both of whom conducted exploration for tantalite pegmatite dykes. Reefton Mining identified alteration, postulated to be caused by the presence of a larger intrusive body at depth.

6.2 Surface Exploration

WMC undertook geological and radiometric mapping and identified areas of outcropping carbonatite and associated intrusive rocks; this work was compiled by E-Tech. In areas of poor outcrop, pitting was also used to assess the bedrock. In total, 8 pits were dug at Zone 1 and 2, and one at Zone 3 and some samples were taken for ore petrography. The original WMC map on the calcrete / carbonatite showing in Zone 1 is presented in Figure 6-1.

==> picture [414 x 312] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6-1: WMC Zone 1 surface geology, radiometric anomaly, pit and drillhole location map

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 19 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

6.3 Drilling

In 1982, WMC completed 9 small aperture percussion drillholes at Zone 1 and historical reports suggest that 7 of the drillholes intersected carbonatite. The two holes on Zone 2 drilled towards the south did not intersect carbonatite but this is unsurprising given that the dykes here are now understood to dip to the south. The 1989 Dunai report contains cross sections for 5 of the percussion holes and maps which provide some indication of hole collar locations, however, due to the uncertainty over location and assay quality, these holes have not been considered in the current study.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 20 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALISATION

7.1 Regional Geology and Tectonics

The Project is located within the Southern Central Zone of the Neoproterozoic Damara Belt (Miller 2008) which was formed as part of the Pan-African orogenic event spanning 550–495 Ma, related to the closure of the Khomas Ocean.

The Southern Central Zone comprises (in stratigraphic order):

Two suites of granites related to the Damara Orogeny.
Swakop Group sediments, of Neoproterozoic age, comprising mica schists and marbles.
Nosib group sediments comprising quartzite, gneiss, mica-schist, amphibolite, calc-silicate rocks and marble.
Abbabis Metamorphic Complex gneisses of the Kalahari Craton

The Damara Orogeny metamorphosed the Southern Central Zone sediments at high temperature but low-pressure to varying degrees, with higher metamorphic grades (close to granulite facies) attained in the west, compared with mid-amphibolite facies in the east. Estimates of the timing of peak metamorphism which may vary from place to place are in the range of 534–508 Ma (Nex et al., 2001).

Structurally, the Southern Central Zone has undergone at least three distinct deformation events, relating to the Damara Orogeny causing tight, southeast to south to southwest verging isoclinal folds and upright southeast verging folds which combine to create northeast-elongated dome structures. Eureka is located close to the core of one of these domes and also close to the intersection of the Omaruru and Welwitschia Lineaments, within the lower-most Etusis Formation of the Nosib Group as shown in Figure 7-1. These structural features often influence the location of intrusive bodies and are generally thought to influence exploration potential (Corner, 2008).

Two suites of granites occur in the Southern Central Zone, relating to partial melting of the basement gneiss and the Lower Nosib sediments. These occurred during, and after, deformation relating to the Damara Orogeny. Older (560–550 Ma), syn-tectonic, granites are less common while younger, post-tectonic (523–460 Ma (Miller 2008)) are more abundant.

7.2 Local Geology and Structure

The intrusives that host the mineralisation at Eureka have been dated as being emplaced at a similar time to the regional granites, with an emplacement age of 548 ± 4 Ma (Gonçalves et al., 2017) and are the only currently known alkaline intrusions related to the Damara Orogeny. Locally there are younger Cretaceous age northeast-striking dolerite dykes as shown in Figure 5-1, and minor dykes and pegmatites.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 21 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 566] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-1: Geological context of the Project, Miller (2008) and Corner (2008)

At least 14 REE-bearing dolomite carbonatite dykes have been identified at Eureka intruding quartzo-feldspathic and calc-silicate rocks of the Etusis and Khan formations respectively. These dykes are generally greater than 0.5 m thick and there are many additional thinner veinlets of the same material. These dykes are principally composed of coarse grained (1–2 mm) dolomite, with a variable abundance of monazite (~1 mm to >7 cm grain size), magnetite, graphite, calcite, hematite and minor quartz. Locally, the dykes are surrounded by a thin selvage of skarn-like rock comprising diopside, actinolite, monazite, and graphite.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 22 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Much of the area is covered by shallow gravel and/or calcrete, consequently the dykes show as float and localised fresh or friable outcrops (e.g. Figure 7-3 and Figure 7-4) which can be detected by elevated count rates on a scintillometer.

In the trenches, carbonatite dykes are predominantly replaced by a mixture of friable secondary minerals, mainly gypsum with fluorite as well as minor calcite. Quartzo-feldspathic rocks of the basement are also weathered and show little surface expression. Calc-silicate rocks, however, are typically fresh and frequently outcrop.

Limited structural measurements on basement rocks have indicated that the first deformation stage evident at Eureka is an antiform, plunging to the north coupled with a parallel synform. A second stage fold is inferred along an ENE-WSW strike line, refolding the pre-existing antiform. Carbonatite emplacement is locally parallel to these structural trends typically following preexisting calc-silicate units. However, thin splays of carbonatite, cross-cutting Etusis Formation rocks (Figure 7-5), demonstrate that the carbonatite dykes post-date the host rock deformation.

==> picture [417 x 313] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-2: Monazite grains (orange) in a dolomite matrix (dark brown)

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 23 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [413 x 191] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-3: Example of exposed dyke from Zone 3

==> picture [416 x 217] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-4: Trench cutting of weathered carbonatite

7.3 Mineralisation

7.3.1 Introduction

Mineralised dykes and veins occur in four areas termed ‘Zones 1–4’. Zones 1 and 2 probably contain the same dykes whose outcrops are separated by a dry river bed. Zone 3 occurs some 250 m south of Zones 1 and 2, and Zone 4 is located approximately 500 m south of Zone 3. Figure 7-5 shows the location of carbonatite dykes (purple lines), outcrop (purple circles) and trenches; green and cream dots indicate exposure of calc-silicate rocks and Etusis Formation rocks, respectively. The colour overlay represents the results of a radiometric survey.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 24 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 534] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-5: 1:5000 map of Zones 1–4

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 25 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

7.3.2 Zones 1 and 2

Zone 1 contains three major mineralised dykes, locally connected by at least three thinner veins. At Zone 2, trenching was less extensive, but at least three individual dykes occur. Two are 10 m apart, while a third occurs approximately 30 m further north. Trenches and limited drilling data from the dry riverbed between Zones 1 and 2 suggest that the dykes in each zone are connected along strike as shown in Figure 7-6. More trenching and/or drilling is required in this area to confirm the geometry of the dykes. Mineralised outcrop continues some 300 m SW of Trench T018 in Zone 2. A single occurrence of carbonatite outcrop occurs approximately 100 m SE of Trench 002 in Zone 1, these extensions are shown in Figure 7-5.

The true thickness of the dykes in Zones 1 and 2 varies between 0.5 and 4 m. At Zone 1, drilling intercepts indicate the dykes dip at 75° to the north. At Zone 2, drilling intercepts indicate the dyke dips at 75° to the south.

Carbonatite from Zone 1 is relatively fresh, brown/ dark brown in colour and is of medium grain size. It is rich in monazite, with the largest grains reaching up to 30 cm but most, on average, are around 1–2 cm (Figure 7-2). Carbonatite from Zone 2 is substantially more weathered than the other zones, it contains monazite and is lower grade than Zone 1. On the weathered surface, the carbonate groundmass has been replaced by chalcedony.

7.3.3 Zone 3

Zone 3 occurs approximately 250 m south of Zones 1 and 2. At least five carbonatite dykes have been identified in outcrop and trenches (Figure 7-7) in Zone 3, as well as some additional thinner carbonatite veins. Approximately 100 m to the south of the trenches a series of E-W striking mineralised carbonatite outcrops, shown in Figure 7-5., represent additional exploration potential.

Mineralisation in Zone 3 is less uniform than in Zones 1 and 2. The central dyke is monazitebearing over a distance of 75 m, the other dykes are also mineralised to a lesser extent. The monazite-bearing dyke is approximately 2.5 m thick and dips 75° to the southwest. Pegmatite dykes also occur in Zone 3, aligned approximately NW-SE. These are inferred to cross-cut carbonatite between trenches, as evidenced by a single example in outcrop.

7.3.4 Zone 4

Zone 4 is located approximately 500 m south of Zone 3 (Figure 7-5). It comprises an area of carbonatite outcrop with associated high scintillometer count rates, offering considerable exploration potential. At present, however, only limited trenching has taken place in Zone 4 but samples will not be assayed until further funds are raised and the Qualifying Transaction is completed.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 26 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [612 x 414] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-6: 1:1500 map Zones 1 and 2

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 27 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [618 x 422] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7-7: 1:1000 map of trenches at Zone 3

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 28 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

8 DEPOSIT TYPES

Geometrically, carbonatites are normally diatremes and poly-phase vent breccias from which dykes emanate typically covering an area measuring hundreds of metres. These bodies often cause fenitic metasomatism, chemically altering host rock minerals to alkali, ferromagnesian, sub-aluminous minerals.

Carbonatites are a mineralogically distinct family of igneous intrusion often associated with or an integral part of alkaline igneous complexes. They are depleted in silica and alumina and dominated by calcite and or dolomite. Carbonatites normally contain alkali and ferro-magnesian minerals and often contain unusual minerals hosting incompatible elements; they concentrate rare earth elements more effectively than most other rock types.

Most hard-rock commercial production of rare earth minerals is associated with carbonatites, notably the globally significant Bayan Obo mine in Inner Mongolia, the Mountain Pass mine in the USA and the Mt Weld mine in Australia.

The geometry and mineralogy of the Eureka dykes are in keeping with the characteristics associated with carbonatites globally but it remains to be seen how extensive these dykes are and whether or not they are associated with a larger body potentially near surface.

9 EXPLORATION

9.1 Introduction

This section describes the exploration data collected for the Project by E-Tech Namibia between January 2017 and August 2021.

E-Tech Namibia has been able to ground truth earlier work and to build on this with more detailed mapping, trenching and drilling. The geometry of the carbonatite dykes is now well established in many areas which have also been sampled to inform the Mineral Resource model whilst other areas have outcrop or radiometric anomalies which have yet to be followed up.

9.2 Mapping

E-Tech Namibia’s mapping was conducted in parallel with a 1.2 km trenching programme (Q2, 2019), centred on mineralisation at Zone 1 as denoted by the dashed black line in Figure 9-1. The weathering and poor exposure limits the effectiveness of mapping but when combined with the trenching, geophysical data, and radiometric data, the intermittent outcrops can be pieced together with some confidence.

Outcrop locations were recorded using a Garmin GPSMAP 66s, accurate to ± 3 m. Structural measurements were collected, with true north corrected from magnetic north by -11.5°. Structural measurements are predominantly limited to foliation in the Etusis Formation and the orientation of pegmatite dykes and quartz veins.

Polished thin sections of representative samples of all rock types, with the exception of pegmatites, were prepared in order to confirm field mineral identification and rock type.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 29 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

9.3 Geophysics

In September 2016, E-Tech Namibia commissioned Gregory Symons Geophysical Services, Namibia to undertake a ground magnetic and radiometric survey over a 1.2 km² grid to improve the response and resolution previously available from the Namibian government airborne data. Surveys were performed over the Eureka carbonatite at 25 m spaced lines on a grid trending 020°. A map showing the location of the survey lines in presented in Figure 9-2.

The aim of the survey was to detect carbonatite dykes in outcrop and under shallow calcrete cover. Like most carbonatites, Eureka contains accessory magnetite easily identified by magnetic geophysical surveys. The monazite also contains an average of ~0.6 wt.% thorium which can be identified at short distances by gamma detectors; thorium levels at Eureka are too low to be detected by airborne radiometrics but are easily resolved in the ground survey.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 30 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 518] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9-1: Extent of E-Tech Namibia’s mapping at Eureka

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 31 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 341] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9-2: Postion of the geophysical grid

The survey utilised the following equipment:

GEM GSM 19 Overhauser walk magnetometer.
GEM GSM 19 Overhauser base station.
Pico Envirotech walk Spectrometer

The survey was undertaken by Mr Willy Nuuyandja while processing, interpretation and quality control checks were undertaken by Mr Gregory Symons.

The following processing was applied to the raw magnetic data using Geosoft software:

Diurnal Correction
Removal of any spikes and smoothing
Levelling

The raw data was then gridded using kriging and processed to produce Analytic Signal (AS), Reduction to Pole (RTP) Tilt Derivative (TDR), Horizontal Gradient Tilt Derivatives and Vertical Derivatives (VD) files.

Spectral Stripping of data from counts per second (“CPS”) to equivalent elemental grades (ppm) and dose was then undertaken using Geosoft and once this processing was completed, the data was gridded and images showing CPS and equivalent elemental data were produced.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 32 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The image shown in Figure 9-3 is a compilation and interpretation of several layers of geophysical results from the Greg Symons report with an overlay of trench and RC drillhole collar positions representing the data used in the MRE.

==> picture [415 x 320] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9-3: Geophysics Interpretation

Notable features are:

a number of NNE-striking magnetic highs shown as thick black lines interpreted to represent dolerite dykes;
thin black contour lines representing magnetic highs associated with dolerite dykes and shallow magnetite-bearing carbonatite dykes further highlighted with thin purple lines;
thin green contour lines representing high thorium count features interpreted to be shallow monazite-bearing carbonatite dykes;
Yellow filled area labelled B1-B2 (representing Zone 3) interpreted to represent a magnetic carbonatite stock near surface at B1 represented by thin purple lines and deeper below surface at B2 represented by the thick purple line;
B4-B3 features (referred to as Zone 2 and Zone 1) representing high magnetic and thorium responses interpreted to represent a possible ring dyke feature arranged concentrically around the stock; and
an area with more frequent high thorium responses centred on the B2 area interpreted to be associated with monazite-bearing features.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 33 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

9.4 Trenching

9.4.1 Planning and Surveying

In Q2 2019 E-Tech Namibia undertook a 1.2 km trenching programme. The aim was to follow up on new targets generated from the 2017 drilling campaign, explore previously uninvestigated radiometric anomalies, and to improve the mapping of the deposit. Trenches were dug to competent bedrock at a depth of 0.5–3 m.

The trenches were variably spaced, depending on the position of existing drill holes, surface outcrop and radiometric anomalies. The locations of the trenches are shown in Figure 9-4.

As of Q1 2020, Trenches T002, T003 and the northern part of Trench T001 remain open and are fenced-off; other trenches have been logged, sampled and in-filled for safety purposes.

Trench locations were initially marked with a handheld GPS and then located more precisely to match the high-resolution aerial imagery described in Section 9.4.5.

9.4.2 Logging

Logging of the trenches was undertaken soon after excavation; each metre was logged for rock type and tested with dilute hydrochloric acid to help identify carbonate bearing lithologies. Structural measurements were taken on exposed foliation, fold hinges, and lithological contacts, where these were evident.

The lithological, CPS and structural data was digitally captured and stored in a custom database.

9.4.3 Sampling

Chip samples were collected along the entire length of each trench by channel sampling in onemetre intervals along the base of the western trench wall at a constant elevation above trench base. Each sample approximated 3-4 kg of material. Samples were bagged with a unique sample ID ticket, referenced to a sample ticket book and submitted for analysis

9.4.4 Scintillometer measurements

CPS measurements were taken for each metre using a “ThermoScientific Rad Eye PRD” device. In addition, for trenches 1–3, gamma ray spectra were obtained every 2 m using a “Georadis GT-32” gamma ray spectrometer. This instrument is capable of differentiating the source of ionising radiation and the results demonstrate that elevated CPS is caused almostexclusively by thorium which is associated with monazite and therefore correlates with TREO grade.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 34 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 560] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9-4: Location of trenches and drillhole collars at Eureka

9.4.5 2020 Trenching

A second trenching programme commenced in November 2020; 17 trenches were completed covering a total of 2.45 km; the first of these being TR030. Trenches were logged with a Rad Eye and the resultant CPR readings have been plotted; samples have been taken but these will not be submitted for assay until additional funds are in place. It is envisioned that only selective trench samples will be submitted, this selective submission will be guided by the Rad Eye readings.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 35 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The trenches tested the eastern part of Zone 1 where the current resource model is expected to continue along strike in a south easterly direction; and they extended to the southwest of this area where a number of new drilling targets have been delineated by high Rad Eye readings. Figure 9-5 shows the new and old trenches in Zone 1 with respect to the current resource model expression at surface.

==> picture [412 x 328] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9-5: Location of new and old trenches in Zone 1

Most of the new trenches provide more comprehensive coverage at Zone 3 and extend the trenched area to the south and east. A number of new drilling targets have resulted from several southeast-trending Rad Eye anomalies which tie-in to some extent with newly mapped dyke outcrops. Figure 9-6 shows the new and old trenches in Zone 3 with respect to the current resource model expression at surface; newly mapped dyke outcrops are shown as blue square symbols.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 36 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 330] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9-6: Location of new and old trenches in Zone 3

Four trenches were cut in Zone 4; the Rad Eye results from these along with newly mapped dyke outcrops show that similar mineralisation is present although widths and grades may be less than what has been encountered in Zones 1 and 3.

All trenches have been backfilled and rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the ASEC’s Biannual Environmental Audit dated December 2020.

The November 2020 trench results have not been used to influence the Mineral Resource model in this report.

9.5 Aerial Photogrammetry Survey

A 1.5 km x 1 km drone mounted aerial photogrammetry survey was completed in 2019 after trenching was completed, centred over Zones 1, 2 and 3. The aerial survey produced a topographic surface for the project area with an average resolution of 0.1 m. The survey was anchored and georeferenced using the drillhole collars coordinates determined by DGPS.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 37 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

9.6 E-Tech Namibia Spend to Date

A summary of E-Tech Namibia’s approximate total spend on the licence to date is provided in Table 9-1 below.

Table 9-1: Summary of expenditure on the Eureka project to date

Category	Amount Spent(CAD)
Transport & Accommodation	105,700
Environmental Assessment	33,500
Geophysical Surveys	34,000
Drillingand Trenching	1,284,000
Assaying	69,500
Storage	29,300
Metallurgical Test Work	24,000
Consultancy& Salaries	289,000
TOTAL	1,869,000

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 38 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

10 DRILLING

10.1 RC Drilling for the MRE

In March 2017, a number of positive geophysical anomalies and areas with outcropping mineralisation were tested with a 19 hole RC drilling campaign (totalling 610 m). Drilling was undertaken by Hammerstein Mining & Drilling cc. using a conventional RC rig with onboard compressor. Drilling used a 133 mm diameter hammer; a sample was collected from each drilled metre using a labelled woven sack before splitting. Holes were cased using steel casing to solid ground (typically 3 m), sufficient casing was left above ground to allow the collar ID, depth, azimuth and end of hole depth to be welded to the casing to permit easy identification of holes in the field. A photograph of the drilling and sample collection in progress is provided in Figure 10-1.

A variable drill spacing was used during the drilling campaign based on the scale and complexity of surface outcrop for each zone. An approximate 30 m spacing was used for Zone 1, 15 m for Zone 2 and 25 m for Zone 3. A plan map of drillhole locations, zones and outcropping mineralisation is provided in Figure 10-2.

Collars were initially located using a handheld Garmin 62s GPS, and subsequently captured by Differential GPS (“DGPS”) with a positional accuracy of <20 cm.

10.2 Logging

RC chips collected from each metre were logged for major rock type. In addition, scintillometer counts per second were recorded for each metre using a “ThermoScientific Rad Eye PRD” device to identify elevated radiation levels associated with carbonatite intervals. Each metre was also tested for reaction to dilute hydrochloric acid to help identify carbonate bearing lithologies. The weight of each sample sack was also recorded to monitor recoveries. A sample of the dust and washed chips for each metre were laid out into a chip pad and photographed, an example chip pad is shown in Figure 10-3. The lithological, CPS and recovery data was digitally captured and stored in a custom database.

10.3 Downhole Surveys

Immediately after the completion of the RC drill programme, down hole deviation, optical scanner and spectral gamma logging of all holes was completed by Terratec Geophysical Services. A downhole optical scan and spectral gamma plot through a typical mineralised horizon is presented in Figure 10-4.These logs have been integral in helping E-Tech Namibia map the mineralised dykes as well as providing information about the nature of contacts and orientation of structures. The dykes give an increased gamma response above the relatively stable background signal and often have a subtle brown/orange appearance.

The continuous downhole deviation survey, in conjunction with the DGPS unit used to locate the drillhole collars, provides an accurate 3D position for the drillhole sample locations. The deviation data captured in the first 5 m of each hole has been disregarded due to the impact of the steel casing on the magnetic field readings.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 39 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 550] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10-1: RC drilling and sample capture

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 40 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 437] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10-2: Plan map of drillhole locations relative to outcropping mineralisation

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 41 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [413 x 310] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10-3: RC chip pad showing the dust and chips for each metre drilled. The red arrow demarcates carbonatite samples

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 42 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 370] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10-4: Downhole optical scan and gamma log through the mineralised carbonatite in hole EU008

10.4 Summary of Drilling Results

In total, 18 out of the 19 drillholes intersected mineralised carbonatite with an intersected length of between 1 and 9 m. It should be noted that intersected length is greater than the true width of the mineralisation when the drilling intersection is at a shallow angle.

The deepest intersection was 60 m below surface. While mineralisation was not intersected in hole EU018, which targeted an isolated radiometric anomaly below surface cover, this hole did intersect pegmatite and subsequent trenching confirmed the presence of mineralised carbonatite over half a metre with unknown orientation in the vicinity of the hole.

A table of significant drillhole intersects is provided in Table 10-1.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 43 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Table 10-1: Significant Drillhole Intersections

Hole ID	From(m)	To(m)	Intersection Length(m)	TREO %
EU001	10	16	6	5.25
and	19	24	5	1.93
EU002	8	10	2	9.36
and	55	58	3	4.8
and	61	64	3	2.23
EU003	12	13	1	8.84
and	22	23	1	9.68
EU004	11	13	2	2.49
EU005	17	26	9	8.47
EU006	32	33	1	0.34
EU007	35	36	1	0.5
EU008	14	17	3	4.11
EU009	5	7	2	0.37
EU010	12	14	2	4.97
and	16	18	2	2.48
EU011	6	7	1	3.36
and	9	10	1	0.82
EU012	31	35	4	6.47
EU013	5	8	3	0.37
EU014	12	13	1	1.82
and	29	31	2	1.74
EU015	18	24	6	1.98
EU016	14	15	1	0.22
EU017	12	15	3	1.55
EU019	20	24	4	2.92

10.5 Sample Recovery

RC sample recoveries have been estimated by recording bag weights; a plot showing average bag weight against depth is provided in Figure 10-5.

In general, the downhole bag weight reduces with depth indicating a sample recovery of 7080%. Future exploration will assess the appropriateness of RC drilling through the application of diamond twin drillholes.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 44 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 428] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Depth Vs. RC Bag Weight
Bag weight per 1m drilled (Kg)
10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Depth (m)
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 10-5: Average RC bag weights against depth downhole.

10.6 2020 & 2021 RC and Diamond Drilling

A 3.3 km RC drilling programme was completed between December 2020 and August 2021. This represented 2.3 km less than originally planned as some of the deeper RC drillholes produced undesirable wet RC samples which meant it was not possible to properly drill and sample to the desired depths. Due to this operational constraint, diamond drilling recently commenced to provide the deeper planned drilling intersections.

7 RC drillholes were completed in Zone 1 scissoring some earlier drillholes and stepping back to provide deeper intersections. 3 of the Zone 1 drillholes were stopped before reaching target depth upon encountering wet samples.

16 RC drillholes were completed in Zone 3 significantly improving the coverage achieved in the earlier drilling used for the MRE.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 45 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Five diamond drillholes were drilled starting in mid-June 2021, each 250m long. These have been collared with HQ and continued to depth with NQ diameter core. Core recovery has been good, exceeding 90%. The drillcore has been visually logged and then stored in core boxes on site ready for core sawing and sampling to be undertaken when funds are available to do so.

Three of the diamond drillholes were collared to the northeast of the RC drillholes, to step back and provide deeper intersections at a depth known to return wet RC samples. One of the diamond drillholes provides a deep scissor pair and the fifth aims to provide a long intersection through the geology under the river bed between Zone 1 and 2.

Figure 10-6 shows the collar positions of the new RC drillholes (blue) and diamond drillholes (red) in relation to trenches and the collars of the RC drillholes used for the MRE (black).

Rad Eye results, whilst not conclusive, suggest that a number of monazite-bearing dykes potentially have been intersected by the new RC drillholes. These intersects will only be confirmed to once assay results are obtained.

The samples collected from the 2020-2021 RC and diamond drilling programmes will not be submitted for assay until the RTO transaction with Battery Road is complete and the resulting issuer provides the required funds.

==> picture [405 x 326] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10-6: 2020-2021 RC and DD drilling locations with respect to MRE RC and trenching locations

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 46 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

10.7 SRK Comments

The exploration strategy used by E-Tech Namibia has been cost effective, using a traditional approach of mapping and geophysics to generate targets for more detailed investigation. The geological map interpretations rely on extrapolation which may not always be accurate. Despite this, the trenching and drilling discovery rate has been very good as a result of the geological interpretation, based on outcrops, and targeting radiometric anomalies generated by the REEhosting monazite. Many of the most obvious targets have been sampled but there remain a number of additional targets to follow up with more trenching.

The RC drillholes and trenches for which assays are available haves delineated a number of dykes which, in some places are well defined in 3D based on mapping and trench sampling at surface extending to depth based on shallow drillhole intersections and occasional deeper drilling intersections. Trench/drill spacing is better than 20 m in parts of Zones 2 and 3 and is better than 40 m in most of Zone 1 where the best grades are encountered.

The geometry and assay distribution is sufficiently well understood to allow an Inferred Mineral Resource to be estimated.

SRK recommends additional infill trenching and drilling should be completed to improve the interpretation of the dyke continuity and thickness so that high and low grade domains can be delineated with better confidence. A significant amount of this work is part-completed, samples have been collected from 23 RC drillholes, five diamond drillholes and a number of trenches positioned to achieve these infill and expansion objectives; however, the assaying of these samples has not yet taken place and will not take place until completion of the Qualifying Transaction.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 47 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS AND SECURITY

11.1 Introduction

This section of the report details the sample collection and analysis process as well as the QA/QC work undertaken to ensure the accuracy and precision of sample grades.

11.2 RC Drilling Sampling Procedure

Each drilled metre was collected from the rig-mounted cyclone and then split in a 7:1 (8 way) splitter, the split fraction was then split again 1:1 (2 way) to create two approximately 2 kg subsamples. One sample was retained as a reference sample for future work, the other sample was collected as a laboratory sample stream. All sample bags were marked with the hole ID and the interval depth.

Samples to be sent for assay were selected based on lithological logging (carbonatite) and/or elevated radiation (>60 cps typically). The selected samples were re-bagged into bags marked with a sample code and a corresponding sample ticket was placed into the bag with the sample. A sample sheet was created to catalogue the samples that had been selected for analysis which was entered into the company’s database. The samples were laid out for submission, photographed and then sealed into rice sacks and submitted as a single batch. An example sample batch is shown in Figure 11-1.

5% standards were inserted into the sampling stream (1 in every 20 samples). Two CRM standards are alternated and were inserted at the container shed on site prior to dispatch. 5% blanks were inserted in the sampling stream (1 in every 20 samples). The blanks were inserted at the container shed on site prior to dispatch. Duplicates were submitted at 5% into the sample stream (1 in every 20 samples) and was generated through splitting of the 25% process sample at the container shed. Each sample was provided with a unique sample number and the duplicate and originals were inserted seamlessly into the sample stream.

The reference sample and the remaining samples from the laboratory sample stream were then stored in a secure container for future analysis, if required.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 48 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 400] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-1: Samples ready for dispatch

11.3 Trench Sampling Procedure

Sampling of the trenches was conducted for each metre along the length of the trench by creating 1 m composite chip samples for each interval. Starting in 2017, sampling was limited to intervals which returned anomalous Rad-Eye CPS results.

For each sampled metre, approximately 3–4 kg of material was collected for analysis by channel sampling with a geologist’s pick through the largely friable material exposed in the trenches. Each sample was assigned a unique sample code from a sample ticket book and a corresponding ticket stub was inserted into each bag. CRM, blank and duplicate samples were then inserted into the sample series following the same methodology as described for the RC drilling.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 49 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

11.4 Sample Preparation

Samples were transported to Windhoek by Dr Tim Smalley in a 4x4 vehicle covered by tarpaulin. Sample preparation was undertaken at Activation Laboratories Ltd. (“Actlabs”) Namibia PTY using the RX1 methodology for both RC samples and trench samples. This sample preparation involves crushing the sample to 90% passing 2 mm, riffle splitting a 250 g sub-sample and pulverizing to 95% passing 105 µm. E-Tech Namibia staff conducted an inspection of the sample preparation laboratory prior to submission and found it to be clean and well organised.

11.5 Sample Analysis

After sample preparation, a 50 g pulp was submitted to Actlabs Ancaster- Ontario, Canada for REE analysis by method 8-REE. The analytical method, utilized for both RC samples and trench samples, is described below:

Sample ground to 95%-200 mesh to ensure complete fusion of resistate minerals;
Lithium metaborate/tetraborate fusion;
Analysis by ICP-OES and ICP-MS; and
Mass balance calculated as an additional quality control technique to ensure complete analysis.

Analytical detection limits for the elements and oxides analysed by Actlab Ancaster’s 8-REE method are presented in Table 11-1.

Table 11-1: Analytical detection limits: Actlabs 8-REE method

Element	Detection Limit (%)	Element	Detection Limit (ppm)	Element	Detection Limit (ppm)	Element	Detection Limit (ppm)
Al2O3	0.01	Ag	0.5	Ge	1	Sm	0.1
CaO	0.01	As	5	Hf	0.2	Sn	1
Fe2O3	0.01	Ba	3	Ho	0.1	Sr	2
K2O	0.01	Be	1	In	0.2	Ta	0.1
LOI	0.01	Bi	0.4	La	0.1	Tb	0.1
MgO	0.01	Ce	0.1	Lu	0.04	Th	0.1
MnO	0.001	Co	1	Mo	2	Tl	0.1
Na2O	0.01	Cr	20	Nb	1	Tm	0.05
P2O5	0.01	Cs	0.5	Nd	0.1	U	0.1
SiO2	0.01	Cu	10	Ni	20	V	5
TiO2	0.001	Dy	0.1	Pb	5	W	1
		Er	0.1	Pr	0.05	Y	2
		Eu	0.05	Rb	2	Yb	0.1
		Ga	1	Sb	0.5	Zn	30
		Gd	0.1	Sc	1	Zr	4

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 50 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

11.6 Laboratory Accreditation

Actlabs Ancaster is ISO 17025 accredited and/or certified to 9001: 2008

11.7 QA/QC Samples

Standards, blanks and field duplicates were added into the sample sequence every 15 to 20 samples, as noted in Section 11.2 and 11.3.

Two REE standards were used both of which are Certified Reference Materials (“CRM”), sourced from Geostats PTY. GRE-02 (4.31% TREO) and GRE-06 (41.71% TREO). A total of 12 CRM were inserted into the sample stream, 4 low grade GRE02 CRM and 8 high grade GRE06 CRM.

Blank material was sourced locally from weathered marble material, taken from the Karibib Marble formation and is considered to be free from REE.

Field duplicates were created by splitting the original sample into two sub samples, each of which was assigned a unique sample code and inserted into the sample stream. A total of 346 normal samples and 30 QA/QC samples have been submitted for analysis. The overall insertion rate for each QA/QC sample type is presented in Table 11-2 below.

Table 11-2: Insertion rates for QA/QC samples

Sample Type	Number Inserted	Percentage of samples
Field Duplicate	10	3
Standard GRE-02	4	1
Standard GRE-06	8	2
Blank	8	2
Total	30	8

11.8 QA/QC Analysis

11.8.1 Standards

All 12 CRM returned assay values within two standard deviations of the stated CRM grade for the 4 main elements of interest (Cerium, Praseodymium, Lanthanum and Neodymium). A graphical analysis of CRM GRE02 is provided for each of the main elements of interest in Figure 11-2 to Figure 11-5. A graphical analysis of CRM GRE06 is provided for each of the main elements of interest in Figure 11-6 to Figure 11-9.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 51 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 245] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-2: GRE02 CRM performance for Ce

==> picture [417 x 250] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-3: GRE02 CRM performance for Pr

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 52 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 244] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-4: GRE02 CRM performance for La

==> picture [416 x 249] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-5: GRE02 CRM performance for Nd

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 53 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 235] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-6: GRE06 CRM performance for Ce

==> picture [415 x 235] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-7: GRE06 CRM performance for La

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 54 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 233] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11-8: GRE06 CRM performance for Nd

==> picture [416 x 226] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

GRE02-Pr pmm
23000
22000
21000
20000
19000
18000
17000
16000
4048 4104 4142 4048 4104 F6041 F6101 F6161
Sample ID
3SD+ 2SD+ 2SD- 3SD- Mean Assay Value
Ce ppm
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 11-9: GRE06 CRM performance for Pr

11.8.2 Blanks

A total of 8 blank samples were inserted into the sample stream. The performance of the blank samples is considered acceptable and does not indicate any contamination between samples. A graphical analysis of blank performance is presented in Figure 11-10.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 55 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 196] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Blank Performance
Detection Limit Blank Samples
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Blank Sample
TREO%
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 11-10: Blank performance

11.8.3 Duplicates

Analytical precision and sample variability has been monitored by submitting field duplicates for analysis as part of the sample stream. The performance of the duplicate samples indicates good analytical precision and limited grade-variability within the homogenised samples. A graphical analysis of duplicate performance is provided in Figure 11-11.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 56 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [412 x 585] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Duplicates TREO% Duplicates La ppm
6.00 20000
y = 1.0465x + 0.0018 y = 1.0441x + 12.514
5.00
R² = 0.9944 R² = 0.9954
15000
4.00
3.00 10000
2.00
5000
1.00
0.00 0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Original TREO % Original TREO %
Duplicates Ce ppm Duplicates Nd ppm
30000 6000
y = 1.0478x + 8.6294 y = 1.0486x - 3.8701
25000 R² = 0.994 5000 R² = 0.9927
20000 4000
15000 3000
10000 2000
5000 1000
0 0
0 10000 20000 30000 0 2000 4000 6000
Original TREO % Original TREO %
Duplicates Pr ppm
2500
y = 1.0458x + 1.5414
2000 R² = 0.9939
1500
1000
500
0
-500 500 1500 2500
Original TREO %
Duplicate TREO % Duplicate TREO %
Duplicate TREO % Duplicate TREO %
Duplicate TREO %
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 11-11: Field duplicate performance

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 57 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

11.9 TREO Determination

Total Rare Earth Oxides (TREO) is the industry-standard form of reporting REE grades. It is the sum of the oxides of trivalent rare earths (REE2O3). TREO contents are calculated by multiplying the elemental concentration reported by the laboratory by the conversion factors provided in Table 11-3. To convert from ppm to %, the values are divided by 10,000.

When considering the light, medium and heavy rare earth elements (LREE, MREE and HREE), the approach differs between companies. E-Tech Namibia uses the scheme provided in Table 11-3. Note, as is often the case, yttrium is included in the HREE group, it behaves like a rare earth but is not officially categorised as a rare earth element.

Table 11-3: REE Groupings and conversion factors for REO

REE type	Element name	Symbol	Oxide	Conversion factor
HREE	Yttrium	Y	Y2O3	1.2699
LREE	Lanthanum	La	La2O3	1.1728
	Cerium	Ce	Ce2O3	1.1713
	Praseodymium	Pr	Pr2O3	1.1703
	Neodymium	Nd	Nd2O3	1.1664
MREE	Samarium	Sm	Sm2O3	1.1596
	Europium	Eu	Eu2O3	1.1579
	Gadolinium	Gd	Gd2O3	1.1526
HREE	Terbium	Tb	Tb2O3	1.1510
	Dysprosium	Dy	Dy2O3	1.1477
	Holmium	Ho	Ho2O3	1.1455
	Erbium	Er	Er2O3	1.1435
	Thulium	Tm	Tm2O3	1.1421
	Ytterbium	Yb	Yb2O3	1.1387
	Lutetium	Lu	Lu2O3	1.1371

11.10 SRK Comments

The sample collection methods used for RC drilling and trenching and the subsequent sample preparation methods are standard for exploration projects. The QAQC programme with an 8% sample submission rate is appropriate at this early stage whilst total sample numbers are relatively low. The higher grade TREO CRM is of only limited usefulness in SRK’s opinion, as it is much higher grade than the deposit and will be more useful to quality control the grade determinations of mineral concentrate in due course. SRK has therefore recommended that the Company identifies alternative commercially available materials and ensures these are matrix matched as far as possible, or alternatively invests in creating project specific standards using RC reject samples.

The field duplicates show that the mineralisation is reasonably homogeneous within each drill sample and that very little error is introduced in the sample splitting process; the duplicate and CRM results together demonstrate consistent performance by the assay laboratory.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 58 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

12 DATA VERIFICATION

SRK has not witnessed samples being taken in the field, however, Mr Keith Webb, was able to observe and verify trench and drillhole locations, make geological observations and visit the sample storage facility and sample preparation laboratory.

E-Tech Namibia’s well documented working practices coupled with the QAQC programme generally support the accuracy of the laboratory, provide sufficient confidence in the quality of the data supporting the Mineral Resource estimate presented in Section 14. Independent sampling, however, metallurgical testwork samples have provided external corroboration of the grades encountered at the project.

SRK has undertaken a spot check of database entries against assay laboratory certificates and found there to be no errors in those entries that were checked.

Overall, despite the risks generally associated with relying on data generated by a project operator, the QP has sufficient confidence in the Mineral Resource estimates presented in this Technical Report and the data upon which these are based.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 59 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

13 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

13.1 Introduction

In Q4 2016, E-Tech Namibia collected a 300 kg bulk sample of mineralised dolomite carbonatite from a test pit in Zone 1; this was used for metallurgical testing at SGS Mineral Services UK (“SGS”). The sample was taken from historical pitting in Zone 1 shown in Figure 13-1. The sample is shown prior to submission in Figure 13-2. The sample was subsequently split down to a 100 kg sub-sample and submitted to SGS for gravity release analysis across a range of size fractions. The remaining 200 kg is in container storage in the UK. Head grades of the sample received by SGS, as determined by the Wheal Jane assay laboratory, are presented in Table 13-1.

During Q4 2019 E-Tech Namibia collected a 1 t bulk sample of fresh carbonatite from a test pit for further metallurgical testing by Bond Equipment of Klerksdorp, South Africa where the material is currently stored. When funds allow, this testwork will further develop and optimise the processing flowsheet design for a potential gravity plant.

==> picture [412 x 434] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-1: Plan showing the location of the surface metallurgical sample

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 60 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Table 13-1: SGS metallurgical sample head grades

Element	Grade(%)
Fe	6.08
P2O5	2.24
Ce	3.05
La	2.17
Nd	0.681
Pr	0.24

Head grade analysis was undertaken by Wheal Jane Laboratory (UK) via Inductive Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (“ICP-OES”). Wheal Jane Laboratory is a United Kingdom Accreditation Service (“UKAS”) accredited testing laboratory. Environmental and management control systems meet as a minimum ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and ISO 17025 requirements.

==> picture [416 x 220] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-2: 300 kg bulk metallurgical sample before shipping to UK

13.2 Size Fraction Analysis

Liberation of the REE-bearing monazite occurred at all size fractions tested, with the best liberation characteristics attained below 250 µm and best concentration of monazite achieved in the -125 to +75 µm size range. A sieved size fraction analysis graph for P2O5 (a proxy for monazite and therefore REE) is presented in Figure 13-3.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 61 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 238] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-3: Recovery vs mass pull % for a range of grind sizes

13.3 Gravity Separation

A sub-sample of 90 kg was milled to a P80 of 250 µm. The sample was processed on a Holman 2000 shaking table. An unsorted first-pass recovery of P2O5 of 65% to gravity concentrate was achieved on the unwashed grind for a mass pull of approximately 10%. The sample under processing is shown in Figure 13-4. The initial gravity recovery may be improved with further investigation of the middlings and tailings fractions, with further particle size analysis and mineralogy.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 62 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 505] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-4: Shaking table test separation of monazite (red zone) and magnetite (black zone)

The resulting gravity concentrate graded 25.41 % Fe, approximately 50% of which is contained within magnetite, 15.44% P2O5, 13.9% La, 4.26% Nd and 1.59% Pr.

13.4 Magnetic Separation

Dry low-intensity magnetic separation of the gravity concentrate removed magnetite and further improved the concentrate grades to 19.73% P2O5, 17.77% La, 5.45% Nd, and 2.12% Pr. The magnetite recovery to the low intensity magnet was 99% efficient without loss of REE. The gravity concentrate under magnetic separation is shown in Figure 13-5.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 63 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [413 x 236] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-5: Magnetite removal from Eureka monazite concentrate

==> picture [413 x 382] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-6: Eureka monazite concentrate

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 64 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The final post gravity and magnetic separation concentrate is shown in Figure 13-6.

Recommendations from SGS for impoved recovery include investigating rougher-scavengercleaner optimisation of the fine gravity circuit with potential regrind on the midlings fraction.

The results of the SGS metallurgical testing are shown in Table 13-2.

Table 13-2: Summary results for gravity and magnetic processing testwork

		Gravity 250µm 1st-pass unwashed	Gravity 250µm 1st-pass unwashed	Gravity 250µm 1st-pass unwashed
Element	Assayed Head grade	Gravity concentrate grade	Recovery	Middlings grade	Recovery	Tailings grade	Recovery
Fe mag
Fe	6.08%	25.41%	33.38%	7.78%	14.09%	5.17%	52.53%
P2O5	2.24%	15.44%	65.29%	0.96%	5.60%	0.89%	29.11%
Ce	3.05%	19.80%	65.96%	1.24%	5.69%	1.10%	28.36%
La	2.17%	13.90%	65.93%	0.87%	5.69%	0.78%	28.38%
Nd	0.68%	4.26%	65.48%	0.27%	5.70%	0.24%	28.82%
Pr	0.24%	1.59%	69.01%	0.09%	5.24%	0.08%	25.75%
SEG & HREE	0.07%	0.57%	60.00%	0.04%	5.50%	0.04%	34.50%
TREE	6.21%	40.12%		2.51%		2.24%
TREO (converted to oxide)	7.27%	46.98%	65.28%	2.94%	5.56%	2.62%	29.16%
		After First Magnetic Separation
Element	Assayed Head grade	Grade non- mag conc	Stage Recovery	Grade mag conc	Stage Recovery
Fe mag		0.10%	0.64%		99.4%
Fe	6.08%	5.25%	26.40%	61.97%	73.6%
P2O5	2.24%	19.73%	99.76%	0.20%	0.2%
Ce	3.05%	24.60%	99.48%	0.54%	0.5%
La	2.17%	17.70%	99.52%	0.35%	0.5%
Nd	0.68%	5.45%	99.49%	0.12%	0.5%
Pr	0.24%	2.12%	99.78%	0.20%	0.2%
SEG & HREE	0.07%	0.78%	99.50%	0.30%	0.5%
TREE	6.21%	50.65%		1.51%
TREO (converted to oxide)	7.27%	59.31%	99.55%	1.76%	0.4%

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 65 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

13.5 Monazite Chemistry

The REE at Eureka is contained within monazite. In-situ analysis of the major elements (those above ~0.25 wt.%) in monazite grains was undertaken at Camborne School of Mines by Electron Probe Micro Analysis (“EPMA”). In order to evaluate the full deportment of REE in the monazite, additional in-situ trace element analyses by Laser-Ablation ICP MS (“LA-ICPMS”) were undertaken at Leeds University. The results of the EPMA and LA-ICPMS analyses are presented in Table 13-3 and Table 13-4 below. Monazite is enriched in LREE compared to HREE, as represented in the chondrite normalised plot in Figure 13-7.

Table 13-3: EPMA analyses of monazite grains

		SiO2								CaO	SrO	ThO2	UO2	F
	P2O5		La2O3	Ce2O3	Pr2O3	Nd2O3	Sm2O3	Gd2O3	Ho2O3						Total
Average wt. % St Dev (1σ) n=	31.26 0.30 93	0.23 0.20 28	24.46 2.21 93	32.69 0.49 93	2.45 0.33 93	8.03 1.01 93	0.39 0.10 71	0.18 0.02 2	0.09 0.01 3	0.08 0.03 92	0.18 0.07 79	0.63 0.13 93	0.06 0.01 53	0.13 0.03 4	100.49 0.83 93

Table 13-4: LAICPMS analyses of monazite grains

		Y	Ba				Sm	Eu	Gd	Tb	Dy	Ho	Er	Tm	Yb	Lu	Pb	Th	U
	Sr			La	Ce	Pr
Average ppm St Dev (1σ) n=	1765 890 60	140 50 60	9 5.5 59	261000 42000 60	347000 34500 60	23200 1000 60	2680 300 60	430 75 60	1250 86 60	44 6 60	76 17 60	6.4 1.6 60	8.1 2.2 60	0.50 0.2 60	1.4 0.6 60	0.2 0.1 59	180 30 60	5500 900 60	90 40 60

*Nd not reported as this is used to calibrate LAICPMS equipment

==> picture [416 x 289] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-7: Chondrite normalised plot displaying REE distribution in monazite from Eureka

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 66 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Multiple EPMA spot analyses of the monazite grains confirm a consistency to the fractionation of REE and actinides (Th & U). This shows the absence of geochemical zonation within the monazite grains and generally homogeneous chemistry of the monazite at Eureka.

With regard to thorium content, the standard deviation is narrow from both sets of analyses. The consistency of this relatively low thorium grade in the Eureka monazite is positive for future material handling purposes - the implications of this are described in more detail in Section 13.6. Thorium is strongly correlated with phosphorus and REE grades as illustrated in Figure 13-8 below, indicating that thorium occurs almost exclusively in monazite.

==> picture [413 x 283] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13-8: TREO vs Th and P2O5 grades

13.6 Assessment of Concentrate Radioactivity

13.6.1 Background

REE ore concentrates typically contain traces of thorium (Th) and uranium (U) and are considered as “naturally occurring radioactive materials” (“NORM”) under international classification.

13.6.2 Referee analysis on concentrate product

The initial metallurgical testwork undertaken by SGS produced a concentrate that was analysed by Wheal Jane Laboratory Services using peroxide fusion Optical Emission Spectrometry (“ICP-OES”) which does not produce accurate Th and U data. A sub-sample of the same concentrate product was therefore sent to Actlabs (Canada) in September 2017 for referee analysis using ICP-MS which is more accurate for analysing U and Th.

The Actlabs analysis of the concentrate product shows much lower Th and U than reported by Wheal Jane Laboratory resulting in a specific activity of 19.5 Bq/g compared with 50 Bq/g based on the original Wheal Jane assay.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 67 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The referee analysis of the 1[st] pass magnetic concentrate (showing a 88% pure monazite concentrate with 0.43 wt.% Th) corresponds well with Electron Probe Micro Analysis (“EPMA”) and Laser-Ablation ICP MS (“LA-ICPMS”) multi-spot analyses of the 100% monazite grains which give a Th content of 0.6% Th, supporting the Actlabs ICP-MS in favour of the Wheal Jane grades.

The results of the referee analysis are presented in Table 13-5 below. Results are also provided for a further dry magnetic separation pass conducted by E-Tech Namibia staff using a permanent bar magnet prior to submission to Actlabs. The additional dry magnetic separation undertaken by E-Tech Namibia staff shows improved TREO values over the single pass magnetic separation.

Table 13-5: Comparison of Wheal Jane assays with Actlabs referee assays

Element	Gravity concentrate grade	Gravity concentrate grade	After First Pass Magnetic Removal	After First Pass Magnetic Removal	After Second Pass Magnetic Removal
	Wheal Jane	Actlabs referee	Wheal Jane	Actlabs referee	Actlabs only
Fe mag			0.10%
Fe	25.41%	23.90%	5.25%	8.08%	4.72
P2O5	15.44%	19.99%	19.73%	24.50%	26.4
Ce	19.80%	20.60%	24.60%	25.10%	25.4
La	13.90%	13.70%	17.70%	16.30%	16.6
Nd	4.26%	4.55%	5.45%	5.57%	5.94
Pr	1.59%	1.70%	2.12%	2.04%	2.14
SEG & HREE	0.57%	0.38%	0.78%	0.46%	0.51
TREE	40.12%	40.93%	50.65%	49.47%	50.59%
TREO*	46.98%	47.93%	59.31%	57.93%	59.24%
Th	0.61%	0.35%	1.14%	0.43%	0.45%
U	0.04%	0.01%	0.03%	0.01%	0.01%
Specific Activity Bq/g	29.7	15.4	50.0	18.7	19.5

13.6.3 Specific activity

The radioactivity of the concentrate, known as the specific activity, is measured in Becquerels per gramme, Bq/g, calculated using the Th and U grades. Bq/g values can be measured directly by gamma spectroscopy or determined based on elemental analysis for Th and U (41 Bq/g for every 1% Th plus 125 Bq/g for every 1% U).

The monazite concentrate created by SGS during the metallurgical testing has a specific activity of 18.7 Bq/g according to the more accurate Actlabs assays. Based on the EPMA values, pure Eureka monazite has a specific activity of 26.6 Bq/g, so it is not likely that the Eureka monazite concentrate would exceed 27 Bq/g.

Material below 10 Bq/g is exempt from radioactive transport regulations as outlined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (“IAEA”) and can be shipped as general cargo. Material above this level is “Class 7” and must be transported according to international and national regulations as outlined by the IAEA.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 68 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

13.6.4 Dose rate measurement

For Class 7 shipments, customs officials typically test the ionizing radiation dose-rate at the external surface of packaged material; this is measured in microsieverts per hour (“µSv/h”). This measurement scale is partly dependent on specific activity and partly dependent on radionuclide chemistry and the shielding effect of packaging.

Class 7 material measuring below 5 µSv/h is considered an “Excepted Package” under the low risk applicable code UN 2910. The regulatory requirements are simplified for UN2910 to reflect the low risk of this material. Goods with surface dose-rate values above 5 µSv/h are classed as UN2912 and are subject to stricter regulations.

E-Tech Namibia measured the dose rate emanating from the monazite concentrate stored in a glass container (seen in Figure 13-6) and recorded a value of 3.5 µSv/h. Whilst this is encouraging it is not known how this would change according to different container materials and larger consignment volumes.

If necessary, there are options to reduce the detectable dose rate, firstly by using a substantial container such as a steel drum rather than plastic materials. Secondly there is the option to blend magnetite into the concentrate to bring the Th and U grades down, thereby lowering specific activity; magnetite can then easily be removed after shipping by dry magnetic separation.

Some of the key differences between UN 2910 and UN 2912 are outlined in Table 13-6 below.

Table 13-6: IAEA guidance for transporting NORM

UN2910	UN2912
May contain and be transported with other goods.	The package may not contain any items other than those that are necessary for the use of the radioactive material
Must be packaged.	May be transported unpackaged under “Exclusive Use”.
The radiation level at any point on the external surface of an excepted package may not exceed 5 μSv/h.	The maximum radiation level at any point on any external surface of the package or overpack may not exceed 2 mSv/h (note alternatives and exceptions).
Transport Index (TI) tri-foilnotrequired.	Transport Index (TI) tri-foil type to be determined. packages and overpacks are assigned to category IWHITE, category II-YELLOW or category III- YELLOW.
Mark each package with “UN 2910”.	Mark each package with “UN 2912” and “RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (LSA-I)”. Also mark each package that conforms to an IP-1 design with “TYPE IP-1”.
Marking with the word “RADIOACTIVE” on an internal surface in such a manner that a warning of the presence of radioactive material is visible on opening the package.	Labels must be fixed to two opposite sides of the outside of the package or overpack, or on all four sides of a freight container. Mark the label with the contents “LSA-I” and the maximum activity of the contents (in MBqor GBq).
May be sent by domestic and international shipping.	Various restrictions and requirements to be implemented duringtransport and shipping.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 69 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

13.7 SRK Comments

The SGS testwork programme, described by SGS as “scoping”, resulted in the production of a concentrate containing 59% TREO at a recovery rate of between 60% (Sm) and 69% (Pr), with the recovery of Ce, La and Nd averaging 65%, the same recovery as reported for P2O5, which was used in the testwork as the proxy for monazite. Recovery was by gravity separation with magnetic separation used for magnetite removal as a finishing stage.

SGS notes that there is potential to improve recovery by treating the middlings and tailings streams from the gravity separation stage, possibly with further grinding and/or using a combination of gravity separation and flotation and SRK endorses this view.

Further upgrading of the gravity concentrate by gravity separation and/or flotation, with or without regrinding, may have the potential to increase the TREO grade of the concentrate, albeit likely at the expense of recovery. Reprocessing of the tailings from such upgrading stages would therefore be required in order to attempt to achieve further recovery without compromising grade.

Further testwork will therefore be required to:

optimise the process route;
determine the optimum TREO concentrate grade, recovery and mass yield;
assess and quantify the variability in metallurgical response across the deposit; and
determine the costs and benefits associated with dose rate control measures if necessary.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 70 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATION

14.1 Introduction

The geological modelling was undertaken by Impala using Leapfrog Geo software and the block modelling was undertaken by Baker Geological Services. Both processes were completed in Q2 2020 and both have been reviewed by SRK. SRK also performed spot checks of the database against digital assay certificates, determined an appropriate cut-off grade, made an assessment of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, and reported the Mineral Resource in accordance with the JORC Code.

14.2 Mineralisation Wireframes

Impala created a geological model based on the lithological logging in trenches and RC drillholes, spectral gamma logging, surface mapping and assay data resulting in 14 distinct carbonatite dyke wireframes reflecting the mapped surface expression and extrapolated to 75 m below surface based on drillhole intersections. In certain situations, where drilling and trenching data has not been collected yet, or is limited (particularly in zones 3 and 4), wireframes for mapped carbonatite dykes have been constructed based on surface mapping data only, with the dip aligned to surface structural measurements and thicknesses assigned from the surface mapping. These unsampled dykes have been constructed for exploration and planning purposes and do not form part of the Mineral Resource estimate.

The mineralisation wireframes have been clipped to a topographic surface constructed from drone stereographic aerial imagery with an average accuracy of 0.1 m.

Due to the limited extent of surface weathering and cover, no weathering wireframes have been created for the Project.

Table 14-1 lists the domains that were created.

Table 14-1: Modelling Domains and Estimation Zone codes

Domain	Zone
1A	10
1B	11
1C	12
1D	13
1E	14
1F	15
1H	17
2A	20
3A	30
3B	31
3C	32
3D	33
3E	34
3MC	35

A plan map showing the estimation domain wireframes is presented below in Figure 14-1 and a cross section through the wireframes is shown in Figure 14-2.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 71 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 369] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-1: Plan map of mineralisation wireframes and estimation domain codes

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 72 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [414 x 349] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-2: Cross Section through mineralisation wireframes

14.3 Statistical Analysis

14.3.1 Introduction

This section presents the results of the statistical studies undertaken on the available assay data to determine their suitability for use in the Mineral Resource estimation process and to establish suitable block model grade estimation parameters.

14.3.2 Compositing

Data compositing is often undertaken to regularise sample lengths and thus remove bias, and to generate sample sizes appropriate to the scale and methods of the mining operation envisaged.

Given the limited amount of data at this stage of the Project, the consistent sample length and the relatively thin and steeply dipping nature of the host dykes, it was decided to work with the raw sample interval length of 1 m. No compositing was therefore required.

14.3.3 Zone statistics

Figure 14-3 shows histogram of %TREO encompassing all of the samples in all of the mineralisation zones (a total of 161 samples) and which have a mean grade of 3.3% TREO.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 73 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-3: Eureka combined zone TREO% histogram (Source: BGS)

It is noted that the LREO’s (La2O3, Ce2O3, Pr2O3, Nd2O3 and Sm2O3) make up over 99% of the TREO with the HREO component making 0.39% of the TREO. Figure 14-4 shows a pie chart for the highest grade Estimation Zone 10.

Figure 14-5 shows the scatterplots of each LREO against the TREO%. As shown, all LREO’s have a strong correlation with TREO%. Given that over 99% of the REO fall within the LREO category, the scatterplots of HREO and TREO% has not been shown.

==> picture [415 x 247] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

% of TREO - Zone 10
0.7% 0.39%
4.2% 10 La2O3
11.4%
10 Ce2O3
33.5%
10 Pr2O3
10 Nd2O3
10 Sm2O3
10 HREO
49.8%
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 14-4: Eureka zone 10 pie chart (Source: BGS)

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 74 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [646 x 407] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-5: Eureka zone LREO% Scatterplot against TREO% (Source: BGS)

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 75 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

14.4 Density Analysis

Due to an absence of appropriate sample material, systematic density measurements have not yet been undertaken for the Project. Density measurements have however been made on surface grab samples of fresh carbonatite, which provide a reasonable representation of mineralised carbonatite and waste rock. During the metallurgical testwork a total of 10 density measurements were also made using the water immersion displacement method. Subsequently, a further 18 carbonatite and 3 waste rock grab samples were collected from surface outcrops for density analysis using the same method. The samples of fresh carbonatite and waste rock are not considered porous or vuggy enough to warrant coating or wrapping prior to immersion). Each of the grab samples were then submitted for assay at Wheal Jane Laboratory (UK) and analysed for Ce and P via ICP-OES to allow a linear regression between Ce and density to be established. Images of the density measurements being taken are provided in Figure 14-6 below.

==> picture [200 x 267] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [214 x 264] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-6: Density sampling of surface mineralised grab samples

Density has been applied to the model using a regression equation which relates Ce ppm to the measured density. Table 14-2 shows the regression formula which is based on the best fit line shown in Figure 14-7.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 76 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [416 x 253] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Density vs Ce PPM
4
3.8
y = 0.00000853x + 2.80507649
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000
Ce PPM
Density g/cm3
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 14-7: Density vs Ce PPM (Source: BGS)

Table 14-2: Eureka density regression formula

Variable	Regression Formula
Ceppm	CEDEN=(0.00000853*Ce) + 2.80507649

14.5 Geostatistical Study

Given the limited amount of data, directional variography by domain was not possible. For the geostatistical study, all zones were therefore combined and experimental omni-directional variograms run on the TREO % and P2O5 % assays only. The omni-directional variograms were created using the 1 m composite drillhole file.

Despite the low levels of data, the omni-directional variograms showed a reasonable structure. A two-structure modelled line of best fit was possible with a total range of 44 m. The same variogram model was used to fit the TREO and P2O5 experimental variograms. The variograms enabled Ordinary Kriging (“OK”) to be used as the interpolation technique which then allows the estimation quality to be assessed through further studies.

Figure 14-8 and Figure 14-9 show the combined zone omni-directional variograms for TREO and P2O5, respectively.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 77 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-8: Eureka combined zone omni-directional variogram – TREO% (Source: BGS)

==> picture [415 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-9: Eureka combined zone omni-directional variogram – P2O5% (Source: BGS)

The results of the variography were used to assign the appropriate weighting parameters to the sample pairs utilised to inform the block model grade.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 78 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The total range modelled is also incorporated to help define the optimum search parameters and the search ellipse radii dimensions used in the interpolation. Ideally, sample pairs that fall within the range of the variogram (where a strong covariance exists between the sample pairs) should be utilised if the data allows.

The results of the variography suggest that Ordinary Kriging (“OK”) is an appropriate interpolation technique despite the limited sample support.

14.6 Interpolation Parameters

The interpolation parameters were selected following a visual assessment of the sample support. Numerous interpolation runs were undertaken using varying parameters with the estimates completed being validated after each run. This process resulted in the parameters shown in Table 14-3 to Table 14-5 being used for each estimation run.

All zones used an isotropic search with Run 1 adopting a search radius of 50 m with a minimum of 4 samples and a maximum number of 10 samples required to estimate the block grade. A maximum of 2 samples were allowed from a single drillhole, effectively forcing the search ellipse to use at least 2 drillholes in the estimate should the minimum of 4 samples be used. For the estimate to use 10 samples in the grade estimate, 5 drillholes would be required. Run 2 captured blocks not estimated into by Run 1 using a larger search ellipse and Run 3 ensured the rest of the blocks were all estimated by using a larger range and lower minimal number of samples. The first pass search ellipse applied at Eureka is shown in Figure 14-10.

Table 14-3: Run 1 Interpolation Parameters

Zone	Ellipse range Ellipse range Ellipse range Angle 1 Angle 2 Angle 3 Min Samples Max Samples Max Samples per Drillhole X Y Z
All	50 50 50 0 0 0 4 10 2

Table 14-4: Run 2 Interpolation Parameters

Zone	Ellipse range Ellipse range Ellipse range Angle 1 Angle 2 Angle 3 Min Samples Max Samples Max Samples per Drillhole X Y Z
All	100 100 100 0 0 0 4 10 2

Table 14-5: Run 3 Interpolation Parameters (estimates all blocks not estimated after Run 1 and Run 2)

Zone	Ellipse range Ellipse range Ellipse range Angle 1 Angle 2 Angle 3 Min Samples Max Samples Max Samples per Drillhole X Y Z
All	500 500 500 0 0 0 2 10 2

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 79 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

14.7 Block Modelling

14.7.1 Block model parameters

The block model was created using a parent cell block size of 10 mY by 10 mX by 5 mZ with sub-cells used to a minimum size of 0.5 mX x 0.5 mY x 0.5 mZ. A small sub-cell size was deemed appropriate due to the thin nature of the mineralised dykes and the requirement to honour the contacts and maintain an accurate volume. Table 14-6 summarises the block model parameters.

Table 14-6: Block Model Framework

	ORIGIN	MAX	DISTANCE	SIZE	BLOCKS
X Y Z	525750 7561950 1005	526600 7562750 1110	850 800 105	10 10 5	85 80 21

==> picture [414 x 291] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-10: Eureka 50 m x 50 m isotropic search ellipse (Source: BGS)

14.7.2 Grade interpolation

Grades of TREO%, P2O5, Th, U, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Sc and Y were interpolated into the empty block model using OK and the interpolation parameters based on the results of geostatistical study. A three-pass approach was used to ensure themajority of blocks were estimated in estimation runs 1 and 2 using an isotropic search ellipse dimension of half the geostatistical range (50 m) and at the geostatistical range (100 m) respectively; a larger third search ensured all blocks within the estimation domains were assigned a grade.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 80 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Individual REE element grades were subsequently converted to REO grades using the conversion factors given in Table 11-3.

Post estimation processes included the following:

Slope of Regression calculation to enable an assessment of the quality of the estimate;
Conversion of all REE to oxides;
Calculation of the combined LREOs; and
Calculation of the combined HREOs.

Figure 14-11 shows the block model coloured by the estimation pass with the green blocks being those captured by Run 1, the orange blocks being those additional blocks captured by Run 2 and the red blocks being those final blocks only captured by Run 3. The white blocks were not interpolated into by any run. Figure 14-11 clearly shows that the Run 1 estimate captures most of the block model area supported by drillholes and the Run 2 estimate is more distant from the samples therefore carrying a higher risk in terms of estimation accuracy.

==> picture [416 x 294] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-11: Eureka Block Model Estimation Run, (Source: BGS)

14.7.3 Drillhole count

The average number of drillholes used to estimate the block grades was determined per zone; zones 10, 12, 13, 20 and 30 used between 4 and 5 drillholes with other zones using fewer drillholes.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 81 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [588 x 415] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-12: Eureka Block Model : visual validation of block grades in zone 10 pass 1 or 2 (Source: BGS)

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 82 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

14.8 Block model validation

The block model has been validated using the following techniques:

visual inspection of block grades in plan and section and comparison with drillhole grades;
comparison of global mean block grades and sample grades within mineralised zones; and
a review of the slope of regression.

14.8.1 Visual Validation

Figure 14-12 shows an example of the visual validation checks highlighting the reasonable correspondence between the block TREO% grades and the sample TREO% grades. That said, it is acknowledged that the low levels of data support generally restricts the quality of the estimated grade distribution.

14.8.2 Global mean comparison

A comparison of the block mean grades and the composite sample means of TREO is provided in Table 14-7. This was only completed on those blocks that were estimated in Run 1 of the estimation as it has been shown that Run 1 effectively estimates the grades surrounding the drillhole data and that Runs 2 and 3 are lower confidence estimates whereby a larger search ellipse is required and those blocks estimated in Runs 2 and 3 are clearly more distant from the drillhole samples. The difference between sample grades and block grades is due to clustering of drillhole intersection locations and also the localisation of the block grade estimate, differences are tolerably small in most domains higher in others indicating the need for better drilling coverage to improve confidence in the grade estimation in future.

Table 14-7: Block Grade vs Sample Grade

			Block
ZONE	Field / Unit	No. Of Composite Samples	Model Mean – Run	Composite Mean	Absolute Difference	Relative Difference
			1
10	TREO %	33	6.17	6.01	-0.16	3%
12	TREO %	12	3.14	2.53	-0.62	20%
13	TREO %	13	5.11	4.21	-0.9	18%
14	TREO %	8	2.11	2.28	0.17	8%
15	TREO %	5	8.96	9.32	0.36	4%
17	TREO %	6	1.67	1.7	0.04	2%
20	TREO %	33	2.59	3.16	0.57	22%
30	TREO %	17	1.84	2	0.16	9%
32	TREO %	8	0.74	1.86	1.12	152%
35	TREO %	13	0.35	0.32	-0.03	10%

Slope of Regression

The slope of regression can be used as a guide to assess the quality of the grade estimate; a value approaching 1 being deemed a high-quality estimate. Table 14-8 shows the mean slope of regression values for those blocks estimated in Run 1. As shown the mean values are relatively low with the highest mean recorded in zone 10.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 83 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Table 14-8: Eureka slope of regression by zone (Run 1 only)

ZONE	FIELD	MINIMUM	MAXIMUM	MEAN
10 12 13 14 15 17 20 30 32 35	TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL TREO_SL	0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00	0.93 0.80 0.86 0.89 0.75 0.78 0.92 0.89 0.79 0.23	0.56 0.42 0.35 0.41 0.35 0.26 0.42 0.43 0.35 0.07

Figure 14-13 shows the distribution of blocks coloured by the Run 1 slope of regression where it is clear that higher values are clustered around the drillhole data with the slope of regression reducing significantly, even within the Run 1 estimate as the blocks become more distant from the samples.

==> picture [416 x 294] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-13: Eureka Slope of Regression for the Run 1 estimate (Source: BGS)

Tonnage Estimation

As discussed in Section 14.4, a variable density value has been determined based on the Ce assay value to reflect the influence that the dense mineral monazite has on the density of the carbonatite. The regression was applied to all blocks upon completion of the grade estimate. Table 14-9 shows the average calculated average for each zone.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 84 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Table 14-9: Eureka average density by zone

ZONE	DENSITY
10 11 12 13 14 15 17 20 30 31 32 33 34 35	3.02 2.83 2.92 2.98 2.87 3.12 2.86 2.88 2.87 2.83 2.83 2.89 2.89 2.82

14.9 Classification

In SRK’s opinion, the trench and drillhole sampling is of sufficient quality and coverage to enable the reporting of an Inferred Mineral Resource in many areas. However, several parts of the model particularly at depth are based on considerable extrapolation of surface mapping and trenching or are informed by relatively wide spaced drilling. In SRK’s opinion these areas require better definition before being reported as a Mineral Resource.

Specifically, SRK has limited the Inferred Mineral Resource to a 50 m extrapolation beyond trenching and drilling intersections and surface mapping where this is available to support the sampled parts of the model. This distance reflects the many dykes which have multiple observation points demonstrating strike continuity over at least 100m.

The RC drilling method limits the accuracy with which dyke thickness can be assessed due to the fixed 1m sampling arrangement. Given the thin nature of the dykes in many places and the small-scale mining approach therefore needed to achieve good selectivity, SRK considers it important to improve the accuracy of dyke thickness determinations with diamond core drilling before the model is ready to use for mine planning.

The RC drilling method also is also prone to grade smearing between adjacent samples and loss of fines which may introduce a sampling bias. This is another reason to limit the classification to ‘Inferred’ (rather than the higher confidence categories of ‘Indicated’ and ‘Measured’) at this time. Good quality diamond drilling will overcome this concern and also provide much more accurate dyke geometry information as well as samples that can be used for comminution testwork.

SRK considers it will be necessary to infill the drilling coverage to achieve better than 30 m drill spacing horizontally and vertically so that localised geometrical features and high or low grade areas within the dykes with can be determined with better confidence.

The assaying QAQC should be continued and ideally improved with more relevant grade CRMs to make the assessment of laboratory accuracy much more robust. It may also become important to introduce CRMs for thorium assay determinations so that the premise of a constant ratio of dose rate to TREO can be demonstrated with high confidence.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 85 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The density determinations provide a reasonable basis for tonnage estimation although with core drilling in the future there will be the opportunity to increase the number of density determinations to improve confidence.

Part of the resource in the vicinity of T026 has not been influenced by the low grade encountered in the trench, this area has not been included in the Mineral Resource. SRK has further limited the Inferred Mineral Resource to a pit shell derived using optimistic input parameters, so as to capture mineralisation with reasonable prospects of being mined economically in addition to that which would be economical today so reflecting the requirements of a Mineral Resource as detailed in Section 14.10.2.

14.10 Mineral Resource Reporting

14.10.1 Introduction

In order to determine a suitable reporting cut-off grade and to assess the reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, a pit optimisation exercise has been undertaken by SRK. This has been based on technical-economic parameters derived from comparable projects and typical costs for the types of processes currently envisaged. It is important to understand that beyond the metallurgical testwork described in Section 12, no dedicated technical-economic studies have yet been completed for Eureka. The numbers presented in this ITR are therefore provisional and approximate estimates which SRK considers reasonable for the purposes of reporting Mineral Resources. Notably, revenue parameters are based on current REO prices and an assessment of discount rates currently prevailing in the industry.

All the pit optimisation parameters presented in this report are conceptual, have been derived purely for the purpose of limiting the Mineral Resource to mineralisation with reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, and are subject to change following more detailed work that will be undertaken as part of future technical studies.

14.10.2 Pit Optimisation parameters

It is assumed that mining will be by open pit, with conventional truck and excavator mining methods, focussing on selective extraction, rather than particularly high production rates, to minimise dilution of the mineralised carbonatite dykes with waste rock. For the purpose of pit optimisation, the sub-blocked model was regularised to 1 x 1 x 1 m cubes which had the effect of incorporating dilution which likely to be incurred despite fine-scale mining selectivity.

Operating Costs

A mining cost of 5 USD per tonne moved has been used when considering cut-off grade and pit optimisation parameters. This is at the upper end of typical open pit mining costs in Africa reflecting the low assumed total mining rate of approximately 3 Mt per annum.

Concentration of the monazite is expected to be achieved using simple gravity and magnetic processes, as demonstrated by metallurgical test work described in Section 13.2. The testwork was a first pass assessment which achieved a 65% TREO recovery, a mass pull of 10% and a concentrate grade of 59% TREO. SRK considerers it reasonable that with further mineral processing testwork, recovery might improve to a 70% recovery and this has been used when considering cut-off grade and pit optimisation parameters. At this stage the concentrate production rate is provisionally expected to be approximately 400 to 500 tonnes per month.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 86 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The gravity plant is likely to consist of a primary jaw crusher, secondary cone crusher, screens, spirals, jigs and shaking tables. A low intensity magnetic separator (“LIMS”) can also be added to the processing circuit if magnetite separation from the monazite concentrate is desirable. A provisional processing cost of 25 USD per tonne milled is considered reasonable in the absence of any specific cost estimate; this is the most significant component of operating costs and has been used when considering cut-off grade and pit optimisation parameters.

General and Administrative costs are estimated at 6 USD per milled tonne and an additional allowance of 7 USD per tonne of concentrate has been made to cover the 140 km road haul from the mine to Walvis Bay and likely port handling fees.

A pit slope of 55 degrees has been used to reflect the competent nature of the host rocks as evidenced at the nearby Navachab gold mine.

Concentrate Price Determination

E-Tech Namibia’s concept for the Eureka Project is to produce a monazite concentrate and to ship this from Walvis Bay to traders, refiners and/or end-use customers. Further downstream refining will be undertaken by other parties and therefore the price paid to the Eureka Project owners per tonne of concentrate will be at a discount to the theoretical market value of the contained individual Rare Earth Oxide (“REO”) amounts.

The mineral concentrate price depends on:

the average market price of the individual REOs weighted by their proportion in the TREO grade known as the “basket” price;
the TREO grade of the concentrate;
a payability reduction, typically discounting by 60-70% to reflect the downstream costs for the end buyer to produce separated pure REO products on which basis market prices are reported; and
further discounts for impurities and complex mineralogy may also be applied.

E-Tech Namibia has based its expected concentrate value calculation on the main value drivers experienced by Rainbow Rare Earth’s (LSE:RBW) (“RBW”) Gakara Project in Burundi. Gakara has stockworks of narrow, high-grade veins of almost pure bastnäsite and monazite; the ore requires minimal treatment achieve the 54% TREO grade required for export and sale. The resulting concentrate comprises both bastnäsite and monazite, two chemically different REE minerals.

RBW has an offtake agreement in place with Thyssenkrupp Materials Trading (“TK”) for its rare earth concentrate; the price paid for its mineral concentrate is based on the prevailing market “basket” price of the contained REEs less an overall discount. The current discount rate is approximately 70% and may vary depending on the arrangements TK negotiates with new customers or renegotiates with existing customers.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 87 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

The Eureka mineral concentrate TREO basket, like that of RBW, is weighted towards the light REOs and SRK considers it reasonable to assume the concentrate would be priced on a similar basis. However, the mono-mineralic nature of the Eureka concentrate (monazite only) is likely to make the downstream process less costly which may therefore result in a lower discount factor. Furthermore the TREO grade of the Eureka concentrate is likely to be closer to 59% higher than the 54% achieved by RBW which would similarly be expected to attract a lower discount factor.

On this basis E-Tech Namibia assumes a 60% discount factor will be applied to the basket value of the TREO contained in concentrate, compared with the 70% discount applied to the RBW concentrate.

A breakdown of REO proportions for the Eureka TREO “basket” is provided in Figure 14-14 below.

==> picture [416 x 267] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

% TREO Eureka concentrate
1.0%
11.7% La2O3
4.2%
32.9%
Ce2O3
Pr2O3
Nd2O3
50.2%
SEG + HREE
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 14-14: Proportion of REOs in Eureka concentrate.

The basket price for Eureka TREO used in this ITR is based on the average of prices between January 2018 and July 2019 based on records available from Argus Metals; the price being based on 99.5% – 99.9% pure separated REO products FOB China. Table 14-10 illustrates the main value drivers in the Eureka product and how revenue per tonne of concentrate would be derived based on the assumptions described in the text above. The revenue so calculated is exclusive of duties, taxes and royalties (the latter is likely to be 2 or 3%).

Table 14-10: Eureka Basket Price and Revenue Calculation

	Market price	Proportion of	Value Contribution to 1 kg Eureka
REO	(USD/kg)	Eureka TREO	TREO (USD)
Nd	46.0	11.7%	5.12
Pr	55.6	4.2%	2.34
Ce	2.0	50.2%	1.00
La	2.0	32.9%	0.65
M&HREO	-	1.0%	0.27

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 88 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Market price	Proportion of	Value Contribution to 1 kg Eureka
REO (USD/kg)	Eureka TREO	TREO (USD)
Basket value 1kg TREO (USD)		9.39
		Concentrate Value Calculation
Basket value 1t TREO (USD)		9,390
Concentrate TREO grade		59%
Basket value 1t concentrate (USD)		6,100
Discount Factor Assumption		60%
Resultant Payable Value (USD / t concentrate)		2,440

The pit optimisation parameters used are summarised in Table 14-11 below.

Table 14-11: Pit optimisation parameters

Parameter	Units	Value
Geotechnical
Overall Slope angle	Degrees	55
Mineral Recovery
Mineral Recovery to 59% TREO concentrate	%	70
MiningLoss and Dilution
MiningLoss	%	0
MiningDilution	%	20
OperatingCosts
Mining	USD/t moved	5
Processing	USD/t milled	25
Transport andport handling	USD/t concentrate	7
General & Administration	USD/t milled	6
Basket Price
TREO (9,390plus 30%premium)	USD / tTREO	12,207
Discount factor applied to contained TREO (assuming monominerallic and 60% TREO grade)	%	60
Government Royalty	%	3

The optimised pit shell and the block model colour coded by classification status are shown in cross-section view in Figure 14-15 where green blocks that exceed cut-off grade are classified as Inferred Mineral Resources and grey blocks are excluded from Mineral Resource being below the pit or too far from sampling to be included in the Mineral Resource at present. Some 1% of blocks inside the pit are more than 50m away from sampled intervals.

The optimised pit is larger and deeper in Zone 1 due to there being multiple dykes with grades exceeding 4% TREO, the pit flows round to Zone 2 where the single dyke carries a similar grade at its eastern end.

In Zone 3 the pit is limited to a depth of some 5 m, due to the grade in the dyke being between 2% and 4% TREO. In other areas where dykes are lower grade, there is no pit shell developed.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 89 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [412 x 391] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-15: Cross Section of pit shell and resource classification in Zone 1

14.10.3 Reporting cut off grade

When assessing reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction and determining a suitable reporting cut-off grade, it is normal practice to apply a premium to commodity price to ensure the Mineral Resource captures mineralisation that has potential to become economic rather than just that mineralisation already demonstrated to be economic. In this case therefore SRK has applied a 30% increase to the average REO prices over the period of January 2018 to July 2020.

SRK’s reporting cut-off grade is the in-situ grade that generates sufficient revenue, based on the premium price, to cover the marginal operating costs which are those incurred after hauling ore to surface and getting product to point of sale. The cut-off grade for Mineral Resource reporting applied to the in-situ grades in the block model accounts for an estimated 20% grade dilution as a result of mining. On this basis SRK’s reporting cut-off grade is 1.3% TREO.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 90 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

14.11 Mineral Resource Statement

The maiden Mineral Resource statement in this ITR is dated 02 February 2021 and has been reported in accordance with guidelines and terminology given in the December 2012 Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves prepared by the Joint Ore Reserves Committee of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and the Minerals Council of Australia (“the JORC Code”).

The JORC Code is recognized under NI 43-101 as an acceptable foreign code that governs the estimation and disclosure of mineral resources and mineral reserves. The JORC Code uses mineral resource and mineral reserve definitions and categories that are substantially the same as the CIM definitions mandated in NI 43-101, and also use mineral resource and mineral reserve categories that are consistent with the International Reporting Template, published by the Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (“the CRIRSCO Template”).

The Mineral Resource statement has been prepared by Mr Martin Pittuck, CEng., MIMMM, FGS who is a Competent Person according to the definition given in the JORC Code and a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101. Mr Pittuck is a full-time employee of SRK and is independent of Battery Road, E-Tech Metals Ltd. and their subsidiaries.

SRK has reviewed the data collection, geological modelling and block modelling undertaken by E-Tech Namibia and their consultants and determined that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economical extraction based on

benchmarked cost parameters;
a review of prevailing metal prices;
a review of E-Tech Namibia’s expectations with respect to concentrate quality and pricing discounts;
a preliminary pit optimisation based on the above; and
the application of a 1.3% TREO cut off grade.

The Mineral Resource statement is given in Table 14-12 below.

Table 14-12: Eureka REE Project, Mineral Resource, February 2021

Category	Tonnage (Kt)	Grade (%TREO)	of which NdPrO*
Measured	-	-	-
Indicated	-	-	-
Inferred	310	4.8	0.7

*the sum of the individual %Nd2O3 and %Pr2O3 grades

14.12 Grade-Tonnage Sensitivity

The sensitivity of the tonnage and grade above cut-off grade is illustrated below in Table 14-13 and Figure 14-16, this grade tonnage information is not a Mineral Resource statement.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 91 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Table 14-13: Tonnage and Grade Sensitivity

Cut off Grade (%TREO)	Tonnage above cut off grade (Kt)	Average Grade above cut off grade (%TREO)
0.0	325	4.6
1.0	315	4.8
2.0	275	5.2
3.0	235	5.7
4.0	210	6.0
5.0	155	6.5
6.0	85	7.3
7.0	65	8.4
8.0	40	9.1
9.0	10	10.0
10.0	5	10.6
11.0	0	11.4

==> picture [416 x 369] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-16: Grade-Tonnage Curve

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 92 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

14.13 Exploration Potential

SRK considers there to be good potential to increase the Mineral Resource. Notably:-

Despite some drilling and trenching ‘misses’ which may have been due to poor targeting / siting of trenches, there is some potential to extend the Zone 1 mineralisation westwards through the riverbed to join up with Zone 2.
There is potential to add a dyke to the model based on existing intersections in T028, EU007 and EU006.
Based on recent trenching, there is also potential to extend some of the dykes eastwards in Zones 1 and 3 and to find new dykes in the south part of Zone 1;
The carbonatite outcrops southwest of Zone 2 should be sampled.
Trenches 023 and 024 to the north of Zone1 and Zone 2 warrant some follow up trenching.
The area to the east of Zones 1 and 3 including Zone 4 should be comprehensively mapped with a view to identifying additional trenching targets.
The wider licence area should be covered initially with ground or airborne geophysics to build the geological picture and potentially identify other prospects.

Figure 14-17 below shows the wider exploration potential mentioned in points 8 and 9 above. The block model is shown in yellow and the parts of the model which provide the Mineral Resource are located in the pit rims shown as grey lines. The background is coloured based on the radiometric survey results showing total counts per second. The higher values (pink-redorange-yellow) have the best potential to represent buried carbonatite dykes, although the large area of high values in the southern part of the image are understood to represent a large granite body. Thin red lines represent an interpretation of possible dykes based on the radiometric anomalies and the general trend of dykes delineated in the Mineral Resource. The low (blue) values may represent unmineralized host rocks or thick alluvial cover masking an underlying signal as is the case in the riverbed between Zones 1 and 2.

Existing trenches are shown as white lines and proposed trenches are shown as black lines. The thick brown line represents the area in which surface mapping has been concentrated to date, outside of this some reconnaissance work has been completed but comprehensive mapping has not yet been undertaken.

The inset image in the lower right corner represents the total licence area; this highlights the relatively small area on which work has been conducted to date.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 93 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [415 x 330] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-17: Plan view of wider exploration potential

By considering the Mineral Resource tonnage and its relationship to dyke outcrop metres, it is possible to start to quantify exploration potential associated with the length of radiometric anomalies. There are some 1,200 m of linear dyke outcrop within the pit rim used to constrain the Mineral Resource which equates to roughly 250 t of Mineral Resource per metre of dyke outcrop. This could be higher where there are multiple dykes such as found in Zone 1.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 94 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

==> picture [419 x 298] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14-18: Near-resource exploration potential

There are some 2,400 strike metres of target anomalies identified in Figure 14-18. Additionally, in Figure 14-17, the linear anomalies to the east of the currently mapped area provide some 2,000 metres of exploration target.

By assuming that the trenching of these targets results in dyke intersections with the same frequency and with similar thickness and grade to those in the area hosting the Mineral Resource, SRK has derived an Exploration Target as defined by the JORC Code of between 500 Kt and 1,500 Kt at an average grade of between 2% and 5% TREO. This is based on the ratio of tonnage to surface length of dykes in the Mineral Resource area, applying this to the combined length of radiometric anomalies, and then creating a range based on 50% success rate and 150% success rate.

It should be noted that these estimates of potential tonnage and grade are conceptual in nature, that there has been insufficient exploration in any case to define a Mineral Resource and that it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the target being delineated as a Mineral Resource.

15 ITEMS 15 TO 22 OF FORM 43-101F1

The Project is not considered an Advanced Property at this stage in accordance with NI 43-101 and therefore items 15 to 22 of Form 43-101F1 are not applicable to this ITR. The items include:

Item 15: Mineral Reserve Estimates
Item 16: Mining Methods
Item 17: Recovery Methods

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 95 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

Item 18: Project Infrastructure
Item 19: Market Studies and Contracts
Item 20: Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community Impact
Item 21: Capital and Operating Costs
Item 22: Economic Analysis
Item 23 Adjacent Properties

No relevant information is available.

16 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

No other information is provided.

17 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

17.1 Current Status

E-Tech Namibia has previously completed cost effective exploration work on the Eureka Project resulting in a maiden Inferred Mineral Resource of 310 Kt at an average grade of 4.8% TREO which has reasonable potential to be economically exploited by open pit mining and small-scale mill and gravity circuits.

In terms of adding to the Mineral Resource, there are additional areas which warrant further mapping and trenching based on the area where geophysics has produced radiometric anomalies, and beyond this in the rest of the licence area. SRK has therefore also reported an Exploration Target of between 500 Kt and 1,500 Kt at a grade of between 2% and 5% TREO, as outlined further under Exploration Potential below.

It will be important for E-Tech Namibia to improve confidence in the technical-economic parameters influencing operating costs and revenue potential. It will also be important to develop capital cost estimates to which overall project economics will be quite sensitive given the small scale of operations suggested by results to date.

A number of technical-economic assumptions have been used to determine the Mineral Resource reporting criteria; these should be expected to change in future as dedicated studies, more detailed testwork and quoted estimates for certain costs are completed. The future trend of REE prices is not known and no attempt to predict this has been made, the Mineral Resource deliberately uses a premium on the average prices prevailing between January 2018 and June 2020; there is a risk that actual costs and revenues could be quite different from those presented in this ITR.

Overall SRK considers there is merit in undertaking the staged Phase 1 development programme outlined in Section 18.2 below.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 96 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

17.2 Project Development

The Eureka deposit’s combination of monomineralic REE-ore composition, potential for lowcost concentrate production through conventional gravity processing, and favourable deposit accessibility and jurisdiction, present an attractive REE sector investment opportunity.

While there remains considerable potential to increase the size of the deposit; it will be as important to de-risk the Project going forward by addressing the multidisciplinary aspects in a staged manner.

The technical-economic parameters presented in this report, in determination of the Mineral Resource estimate, are mostly conceptual and they may change significantly as the work progresses to improve confidence in them. The rare earth prices are based on a 2.5 year trailing average, these prices may increase or decrease in the future. The other assumptions around revenue, and price discounts in particular, are based on an understanding of what other producers in the industry are doing, E-Tech Namibia will need to develop its own arrangements in due course and these may be different for what is assumed in this ITR.

As a more detailed understanding is achieved and study milestones are reached, decisions to proceed to the next stage, or not, will be made. There is no guarantee that the Project will reach a successful outcome.

SRK is of the opinion that the E-Tech Namibia team has been prudent with plans and costs to date and has established relationships with employees and contractors which lend confidence to planning and budgeting at this stage.

18 RECOMMENDATIONS

18.1 Introduction

Following the milestone achievement of a maiden Mineral Resource estimate and the positive results from the initial metallurgical testing, it is recommended that the Project be advanced in a staged manner towards a Preliminary Feasibility Study (“PFS”) contingent on results of each phase of work. This will involve further exploration, deposit delineation, metallurgical optimisation and further technical and economic studies.

It is recommended exploration be continued with the objective of infilling and expanding the sample coverage in and around the Mineral Resource model; some of this sampling has been completed with the 2020 and 2021 trenching and drilling; these samples now need to be assayed when new funds become available.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 97 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

More widespread trenching and drilling should be conducted along resource model extension areas and in areas of untested radiometric anomalies and carbonatite outcrops. Diamond drilling has recently been introduced to provide core samples and better lithological and structural information from deeper intersections of the carbonatite and to provide geotechnical data and samples for comminution testwork. It is recommended diamond drilling be continued as infill to existing drilling which would allow for possible delineation of Indicated Mineral Resources.

18.2 Phase 1 Programme

Phase 1 of the development programme is sub-divided as follows to allow for periodic review in a reasonable timeframe:

18.2.1 Phase 1a: Continued Exploration and Mineral Resource Estimate Update

This phase includes:

Maintaining environmental monitoring.
Metallurgical test work on representative composite samples for continuing beneficiation optimisation work.
Completion of core logging, core sampling and assaying of samples collected form initial diamond drilling completed for depth extent.
Assaying of samples collected in the 2020-2021 trenching and drilling programmes.
Updating of the Mineral Resource estimate and Technical Report.

18.2.2 Phase 1b: 12 month PEA programme, including:

2,500 m of trenching and mapping in the area to the east of Zones2, 3 & 4.
Follow-up drilling and infill drilling: 4,000 m of diamond core drilling to test the depth extensions in Zone 1 and Zone 3, as well as selective infilling existing drilling whilst gathering structural and geotechnical data, based on results from Phase 1a.
3,500 m of RC Drilling to test the lateral and depth extent of newly identified targets, based on trenching results over Zones 2, 3 & 4.
Regional early-stage exploration focused on identifying new areas of interest for possible further extension areas through field mapping, ground geophysics, ground truthing, trenching and initial RC drilling
Metallurgical test work on material for continuing beneficiation optimisation work, based on results from Phase 1a.
Marketing investigations to define the quality and specification of REE concentrate product and deliverable tonnages. Sending test material to interested offtake parties for independent assessment of price indicators. The potential of a value added intermediate “cracked” REE product to also be evaluated.
Concurrent environmental monitoring and assessment, as well as stakeholder and community engagement.
Updating of Mineral Resource Estimate targeting some Indicated Mineral Resources defined from the infill drilling, although there is no guarantee that this will be achieved.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 98 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

completion of a Preliminary Economic Assessment.
Deploying remaining funds to progress PFS tasks, dependant on results.
conducting and confirming socio/environmental work
engineering studies for
- surface infrastructure,
- process plant and waste disposal designs.
If budget allows, further work could include concept/optmization studies for value adding mixed LREO production, or investment in other exploration targets in the wider property.

18.3 Phase 1 Project Development Budget

The proposed budget for Phase 1 is shown in Table 18-1.

Table 18-1: Phase 1 Development Budget

Phase	Timeframe	Description	Budget (CAD)
1a	Month 1 – 6	Completion of drilling programme, assaying of RC. Trenching and Diamond drilling samples	215,000
1a	Month 4-6	Updating of Inferred Mineral Resources and Technical Report.	85,000
1a-1b	Month 1-14	RC, Trenching and Core and sample storage	20,000
1a	Month 1-6	Assaying of samples collected in the 2020-2021 trenching, RC drilling and dd programmes.	352,000
1a-1b	Month 1-14	Wider early-stage exploration to identify new areas of interest for extension areas.	300,000
1-1b	Month 1-14	Follow up infill and extension drilling	150,000
1-1b	Month 1-14	Continued assaying andMetallurgical testing	185,000
1-1b	Month 1-14	Baseline Enviromental, ongoing monitoringand assessment	60,000
1-1b	Month 6-14	Compilation of updated resource	160,000
Sub-total			1,527,000
Corporate 1a-1c	Month 1-14	Working capital, administration, contingency	1,076,400
Total			2,603,400

Upon the successful completion of Phase 1, a follow up programme (“Phase 2”) will be required. Dependant on the results from phase 1, the Phase 2 program might include the completion of a PFS.

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 99 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – Main Report

18.4 SRK Comments

The proposed Phase 1 programme will advance the geological understanding and test the additional geological potential considerably. Metallurgical testwork will also advance significantly, it will be important to not only develop the process methods and concentrate quality but also to test many samples representing different grades and rock types.

Overall, the staged programme represents a logical approach to fast tracking the Project development using an industry standard approach.

The proportion of budget for work done on the ground (as opposed to corporate overheads) will be approximately 60%.

signed

Keith Webb Independent Consultant (Exploration Geology)

For and on behalf of SRK Consulting (UK) Limited

signed signed Martin Pittuck, Tim Lucks, Corporate Consultant (Mining Geology), Principal Consultant (Geology), Project Manager Project Director SRK Consulting (UK) Limited SRK Consulting (UK) Limited

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page 100 of 100

SRK Consulting

Eureka NI43-101 – References

19 REFERENCES

Bond Equipment, Klerksdorp, RSA: Carbonatite Bulk Sample Gravity Test Work For E-Tech Metals, 20th May 2019

Burger, A.J., et al. Mineralogical and radiometric studies of monazite and sphene occurrences in the Namib desert, SouthWest Africa. Mineralog. Mag., 35, 519–528, 1965

Corner, B., The crustal framework of Namibia derived from an integrated interpretation of geophysical and geological data. In: Miller, R. McG (ed), The geology of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia: Ministry of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey, 2008.

Dunai, T.J., Petrographische, geochemische und lagerstattenkundliche Untersuchungen an Karbonatitgangen auf der Farm Eureka Nr 99, Damaraland, Namibia. Unpublished Diploma, 1989. Heidelberg University.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 2018 Edition. Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material. Specific Safety Requirements No. SSR-6 (Rev. 1). IAEA Safety Standards for protecting people and the environment

Krishnamurthy, N., Gupta, C.K., 2015. Extractive Metallurgy of Rare Earths

Miller, R. McG., The geology of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia: Ministry of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey, 2008.

Miller R, McG., The Pan-African Damara Orogen of South West Africa/Namibia, The Geological Society of South Africa Special publication; no. 11; 527, 1983

Nex P.A.M., et al., Spinel-bearing assemblages and P-T-t evolution of the Central Zone of the Damara Orogen, Namibia. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 32, 471–489, 2001

SGS Mineral Services Gravity Scoping Testwork on Eureka Ore Prepared for E-Tech Metals Ltd, Project Number – 10866-711, 24th February 2017.

Woolley, A. R. and Kjarsgaard, B. A., Carbonatite Occurrences of the World: Map and Database. Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report 5796, 2008

September 2021

30999_Eureka_NI43101_ITR_Final.docx

Page i of i

AI assistant

ReeXploration Inc. — Audit Report / Information 2021

47620_rns_2021-09-15_6a0cb7a1-7e0f-4c02-af60-adc50f95d840.pdf

INDEPENDENT TECHNICAL REPORT, EUREKA RARE EARTH PROJECT, NAMIBIA

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER

Author and Reviewer Signatures

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

Signed

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

INDEPENDENT TECHNICAL REPORT, EUREKA RARE EARTH PROJECT, NAMIBIA

1 SUMMARY

1.1 Overview

1.2 Location

1.3 Licence Description, Ownership and Terms

1.4

Geology and Mineralisation

1.5 Work Completed by E-Tech

1.5.1 Exploration

1.5.2 Drilling

1.5.3 Metallurgy and Processing

1.5.4 Density

1.5.5 Geological Modelling

1.5.6 Mineral Resource Estimation

1.6

Mineral Resource Statement

1.7 Conclusions and Recommendations

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1

Issuer and Terms of Reference

2.2

Sources of Information

2.3

Rare Earth Terminology

2.4

Site Inspections

3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

4.1 Location

4.2 Licence Description, Ownership and Terms

4.2.1 Licence Description and Obligations

4.2.2 Ownership and Transaction Details

4.3 Surface Rights and Exploration Access

4.3.1 Permitting

4.3.2 Access and Compensation Arrangements

5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

5.1 Physiography and Climate

5.2 Project Access

5.3 Infrastructure and Local Resources

6 HISTORY

6.1

Introduction

6.2

Surface Exploration

6.3 Drilling

7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALISATION

7.1

Regional Geology and Tectonics

7.2

Local Geology and Structure

7.3 Mineralisation

7.3.1 Introduction

7.3.2 Zones 1 and 2

7.3.3 Zone 3

7.3.4 Zone 4

8 DEPOSIT TYPES

9 EXPLORATION

9.1

Introduction

9.2

Mapping

9.3 Geophysics

9.4 Trenching

9.4.1 Planning and Surveying

9.4.2 Logging

9.4.3 Sampling

9.4.4 Scintillometer measurements

9.4.5 2020 Trenching

ReeXploration Inc. Audit Report / Information 2021