VITAL METALS LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2021

Aug 10, 2021

ASX / Media Announcement 11 August 2021

VITAL METALS LTD ENTERS AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE HEAVY RARE EARTH PROJECTS

HIGHLIGHTS

• Vital to acquire Quebec Precious Metals Corporation’s 68% interest in Kipawa and 100% of Zeus heavy rare earth projects in Quebec, Canada, for C$8 million staged over 5 years

• Kipawa and Zeus are heavy rare earth projects which complement Vital’s light rare earths operations at Nechalacho

• Acquisition has potential to transform Vital into the only producer of both light and heavy rare earths in North America

• Utilising similar alternate development and processing methodologies as implemented at its Nechalacho REE mine in NWT, Vital will optimise the 2013 Definitive Feasibility Study completed for Kipawa project to minimise capital and operating expenditure and reduce development timelines

• The Kipawa Project was previously held in a Joint Venture with Toyotsu Rare Earth Canada, Inc. (“Toyotsu”), a subsiduiary of Toyota Tsushu, which included off-take provisions. Toyotsu’s interest was converted into a 10% Net Profit Interest (“NPI”).

• NI 43-101 defined Mineral Resource Estimate as well as Proven and Probable Reserve Estimate on the Kipawa Project highlighting a mine life of 15 years

• Vital intends to duplicate the strong Indigenous and community employment and procurement model that it has demonstrated at its Nechalacho REE mine in the NWT

Vital Metals Limited (ASX: VML ) ( “VML”, “Vital”, “ Vital Metals ” or “ the Company ”) and Quebec Precious Metals Corporation (TSX.V: QPM , OTCQB: CJCFF , FSE: YXEP ) (“QPM”) are pleased to announce that they have signed a binding term sheet (the “Term Sheet”) for the acquisition by VML of QPM’s 68% interest in the Kipawa exploration project and 100% interest in the Zeus exploration project (the “Projects”). Joint Venture partner Investissement Québec (“IQ”) holds the remaining 32% of the Kipawa project on a contributing basis.

Kipawa is a heavy rare earths project, located 50km from Temiscaming in Quebec, with a Mineral Resource Estimate of 15.5Mt of eudialyte at 0.434% TREO and 0.873 ZrO2, 6.3Mt of mosandrite at 0.391% TREO, 1.018% ZrO2, 5.1Mt of britholite at 0.286% TREO, 0.944% ZrO2, and with a Proven and Probable Reserve Estimate of 19.8Mt at 0.411% TREO.

Investors should note that the terms “Mineral Resource”, “Mineral Reserve” and, “Proven and Probable Reserve” are as defined by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) as the CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves adopted by CIM council. These estimates are foreign estimates and are not reported in accordance with the Joint Ore Reserves Committee’s Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore

39131.158033.SRC.20140595.2

Reserves (the “JORC Code”). A competent person has not done sufficient work to classify these estimates as a mineral resource or ore reserve in accordance with the JORC Code and it is uncertain that following further exploration or evaluation work that the foreign estimates will be able to be reported as a mineral resource or ore reserve in accordance with the JORC Code.

Vital Metals’ Managing Director Geoff Atkins said: “ The acquisition of the Projects provides Vital with a unique opportunity to become a producer of both heavy and light rare earths. Having commenced operations of Canada’s first rare earths mine at our Nechalacho project in Northwest Territories, Canada, the potential to develop the Kipawa project will allow us to produce a full suite of rare earths. It has potential to increase Vital Metals’ position as a strategic player in the North American critical minerals supply chain at a time where demand continues to grow.”

“Part of Vital’s corporate DNA is our ability to identify the most efficient and effective way to develop rare earth projects. Similar to Nechalacho where we have applied an alternative development strategy to greatly reduce capital costs and development timelines, we see similar opportunities for improvements to the existing development strategy at Kipawa and we look forward to defining our development strategy over the coming months.”

“Further, we see the acquisition of this project as an ideal opportunity to cement Vital’s place as a leading rare earths producer not just in North America but globally. The introduction of heavy rare earths into our product suite will increase the value of the rest of our offering as we will be a single supply source for both heavy and light rare earths.”

“In addition, Kipawa is the only rare earth project in the world in which Toyota directly invested, with an initial stake of 49% which was converted to a 10% NPI in 2014.”

“A key element of our success to date at Nechalacho has been the minimization of environmental impacts by introducing sensor based ore sorting and the contributions made by the Indigenous and other nearby communities, not only through the overall support provided, but also in achieving high levels of Indigenous and local employment and contracting opportunities. Vital looks forward to establishing similar partnerships and relationships with the Indigenous and local communities of the Kipawa and Zeus projects and using the low impact processing technology that has been successfully demonstrated at the Nechalacho project.”

Projects Overview

The Projects total 73 claims over 43km[2] and lie in the Grenville geological province, approximately 55km south of the geological contact with the Superior geological province. The lithologies consist mainly of gneiss with a grade of metamorphism ranging from the greenschist facies to the amphibolite-granulite facies.

The Kipawa deposit is defined by three enriched horizons within the “Syenite Complex”, which contains some light rare earth oxides but primarily heavy rare earth oxides. Drilling since 2011 totals 293 drill holes (24,571m) and was used to prepare a feasibility study which was completed by Matamec Explorations Inc. in 2013.

Twelve heavy rare earth showings have been identified on the Zeus project, some of which contain niobium and tantalum.

==> picture [482 x 271] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 - Location of Kipawa project in Quebec, Canada

==> picture [408 x 241] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 - Schematic cross section of the Kipawa deposit, demonstrating the zones of heavy rare earth mineralisation.

==> picture [177 x 77] intentionally omitted <==

Eudialyte: Y-Fe-Zr Source of HREE and Zr

==> picture [188 x 76] intentionally omitted <==

Yttro-Titanite/Mosandrite: Na-Ca-Ti silicate Source of HREE

==> picture [101 x 77] intentionally omitted <==

Britholite: Ca-Y-Fe silicophosphate Source of HREE

Table 1 - Kipawa project Mineral Resources

==> picture [482 x 225] intentionally omitted <==

Table 2 - Kipawa project Mineral Reserve

==> picture [358 x 94] intentionally omitted <==

Table 3 - Kipawa project rare earth distribution

Investors should note that the terms “Mineral Resource”, “Mineral Reserve” and, “Proven and Probable Reserve” are as defined by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) as the CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves adopted by CIM council. These estimates are foreign estimates and are not reported in accordance with the JORC Code. A competent person has not done sufficient work to classify these estimates as a mineral resource or ore reserve in accordance with the JORC Code and it is uncertain that following further exploration or evaluation work that the foreign estimates will be able to be reported as a mineral resource or ore reserves in accordance with the JORC Code.

==> picture [421 x 372] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1: Rare Earth Oxide distribution at Current Prices

1Rare earth distribution of North T and Tardiff zones as determined under the Vital’s 2012 JORC Report (refer 15 April 2020) and as detailed in announcement 2[nd] February 2021.

2 Rare earth distribution of Kipawa 2013 Feasibility Study (refer https://www.qpmcorp.ca/en/projects/kipawa/)

3 Rare earth prices sourced from Shanghai Metals Market (www.metal.com) as at 8 July 2021

Term Sheet Conditions

The Term Sheet contemplates the acquisition by VML of a 68% legal and beneficial interest in the Kipawa project, and all of QPM’s rights, title and interest in the Joint Venture Agreement with IQ, and 100% legal and beneficial interest in Zeus project. Key terms of the Term Sheet are as follows:

• QPM agrees to sell to VML or an affiliate of VML (the “Purchaser”) the Projects for a total purchase price of C$8m payable as follows:

• C$150,000 deposit on signing the Term Sheet;

• C$2.35m on acquisition of the Projects;

• C$2.5m on the first anniversary of acquisition;

• C$1m on the second anniversary of acquisition;

• C$1m on the third anniversary of acquisition; and

• C$1m on the fourth anniversary of acquisition.

Purchaser will grant security over the Projects to QPM until the consideration is paid in full.

• Acquisition of the interests in the Projects is to occur at the completion of the sale and purchase by Purchaser when all conditions precedent have been satisfied or waived.

• Following the execution of the Term Sheet on August 10 (the “Execution Date”), VML shall conduct due diligence within one of the following periods, whichever is applicable:

• 3 months following the Execution Date, provided that VML’s nominated personnel visit the Projects within a period of 2 months following the Execution Date; or

• In the event VML’s nominated personnel are unable to visit the Projects within a period of 2 months following the Execution Date, on the earlier of: (i) 1 month following the date of arrival of VML’s nominated personnel on either the Kipawa and Zeus Projects, and (ii) 6 months following the Execution Date.

• Conditions precedent include:

• VML due diligence;

• QPM shall have delivered to VML executed releases as to the discharge of all encumbrances over the Projects, other than permitted encumbrances;

• VML shall have obtained from the ASX confirmation that ASX Listing Rule 11.1.3 does not apply to the transactions as contemplated by this term sheet, and if ASX determine that ASX Listing Rule 11.1.2 applies to the transactions, the shareholders of VML approving the transactions for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 11.1.2. ASX has confirmed that neither Listing Rule 11.1.3 or Listing Rule 11.1.2 apply to this transaction;

• QPM shall have delivered to VML all consents or agreements required to assign the existing royalties (being the 10% NPI with Toyotsu Rare Earth Canada, Inc.) from QPM to VML and as required to grant the security over the Projects to QPM;

• In respect of the joint venture agreement (“JV Agreement”) with IQ:

  • § IQ shall have waived its right of first refusal under the JV Agreement;

• § IQ shall have consented to the sale of QPM’s rights and interests in the Kipawa project and the JV Agreement to VML; and

• § VML shall have delivered to IQ a written notice in accordance with the JV Agreement accepting to be bound by the terms and conditions of the JV Agreement.

o Other customary conditions of closing, including various third party approvals.

The Term Sheet contains other terms and conditions considered standard for an agreement of its nature including representations and warranties given by the parties.

Consideration will be paid from VML’s existing cash reserves. Dependent upon access for due diligence as set out above, the acquisition will complete by 28 February 2022.

Vital will provide more updates on the planned acquisition as it progresses.

- ENDS-

Contacts: Mr Geoff Atkins Managing Director Vital Metals Limited Phone: +61 2 8823 3100 Email: vital@vitalmetals.com.au

This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Vital Metals

Qualified/Competent Persons Statement

Information and statement relating to the Mineral Resource Estimate for the Kipawa Rare Earth Project is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Matamec Explorations Inc and the “Qualified Person” under NI 43101 is Mr Yann Camus, Eng from SGS Canada Inc. The data in this press release has been reviewed by Mr Brendan Shand. Mr Shand is a Competent Person and a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and an employee of the Company. Mr Shand has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Shand confirms that the information is an accurate representation of the available data and studies including the Technical Report and Resource estimation obtained from a NI43-101 Compliant Feasibility Study for the Kipawa Project submitted by Matamec Explorations Inc (Effective Date: September 3 2013, Issue Date: October 17, 2013).

ABOUT QUEBEC PRECIOUS METALS CORPORATION

QPM is a gold explorer with a large land position in the highly-prospective Eeyou Istchee James Bay territory, Quebec, near Newmont Corporation’s Éléonore gold mine. QPM’s flagship project is the Sakami project with significant grades and well-defined drill-ready targets. QPM’s goal is to rapidly explore the project to advance it to the mineral resource estimate stage.

ABOUT VITAL

Vital Metals Limited (ASX: VML) is Canada’s rare earths producer following commencement of operations at its Nechalacho rare earths project in Canada in June 2021. It holds a portfolio of rare earths, technology metals and gold projects located in Canada, Africa and Germany.

Nechalacho Rare Earth Project - Canada

The Nechalacho project is a high grade, light rare earth (bastnaesite) project located at Nechalacho in the Northwest Territories of Canada and has potential for a start-up operation exploiting high-grade, easily accessible near surface mineralisation. The Nechalacho Rare Earth Project hosts within the Upper Zone, a JORC Resource of 94.7MT at 1.46% TREO comprised of a Measured Resource of 2.9MT at 1.47% TREO, an Indicated Resource of 14.7MT at 1.5% TREO, and an Inferred Resource of 77.1MT at 1.46% TREO.

Compliance Statements

This announcement contains information relating to Mineral Resource Estimates in respect of the Nechalacho Project extracted from ASX market announcements reported previously and published on the ASX platform on 13 December 2019 and 15 April 2020. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcements and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the original market announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Forward-Looking Statements

This release includes forward -looking statements. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “may”, “will”, “expect”, “intend”, “plan”, “estimate”, “anticipate”, “continue”, and “guidance”, or other similar words and may include, without limitation statements regarding plans, strategies and objectives of management, anticipated production or construction commencement dates and expected costs or production output.

Forward-looking statements inherently involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results, performance and achievements to differ materially from any future results, performance or achievements. Relevant factors may include, but are not limited to, changes in commodity prices, foreign exchange fluctuations and general economic conditions, increased costs and demand for production inputs, the speculative nature of exploration and project development, including the risks of obtaining necessary licences and permits and diminishing quantities or grades of resources or reserves, political and social risks, changes to the regulatory framework within which the entity operates or may in the future operate, environmental conditions including extreme weather conditions, recruitment and retention of personnel, industrial relations issues and litigation.

Forward-looking statements are based on the entity and its management’s good faith assumptions relating to the financial, market, regulatory and other relevant environments that will exist and affect business and operations in the future. There are no assurances that the assumptions on which forward-looking statements are based will prove to be correct, or that the business or operations will not be affected in any material manner by these or other factors not foreseen or foreseeable by the entity or management or beyond the entity’s control.

Although there have been attempts to identify factors that would cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those disclosed in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that could cause actual results, performance, achievements or events not to be anticipated, estimated or intended, and many events are beyond the reasonable control of the entity. Accordingly, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements in this release are given as at the date of issue only. Subject to any continuing obligations under applicable law or any relevant stock exchange listing rules, in providing this information the entity does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any of the forward-looking statements or to advise of any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.

Listing Rule 5.12 Foreign Resource Estimate information

The information in this announcement relating to the Mineral Resource Estimate and Ore Reserve for the Kipawa Project is reported in accordance with the requirements applying to foreign estimates in the ASX Listing Rules (the “Foreign Estimates”) and, as such are not reported in accordance with the 2012 edition of the JORC Code. As such, the following information is provided in accordance with ASX Listing Rules 5.10 & 5.12:

1. The source and date of the foreign estimate (LR 5.12.1)

The source of the foreign estimate is taken from public documents released by Matamec Explorations Inc. on October 21, 2013. Further information on these releases may be found on SEDAR website (www.sedar.com).

2. Whether the foreign estimates use categories of mineralisation other than those defined in JORC Code 2012 and if so, an explanation of the differences (LR 5.12.2)

• Categories described are the same as those defined in JORC Code 2012, whereby resources were classified as Inferred, Indicated or Measured

3. The relevance and materiality of the foreign estimates to the entity (LR 5.12.3)

VML considers the foreign estimates to be both material and relevant to the Kipawa project as it provides an indication of the size and scale of the project.

4. The reliability of the foreign estimates, including reference to any criteria in Table 1 of JORC Code 2012 which are relevant to understanding of the reliability of the foreign estimates (LR 5.12.4)

It is the opinion of VML that these estimates are reliable and represent the results of work done to very high standards, using high quality sampling, testing and geological and geostatistical modelling. The foreign estimates represent best practice work at the time. Further details of the foreign estimates, referenced to the criteria in Table 1 of JORC Code 2012 are as attached to this announcement.

5. To the extent known, a summary of the work programs on which the foreign estimates are based and a summary of the key assumptions, mining and processing parameters and methods used to prepare foreign estimates (LR 5.12.5)

The Technical Report includes key assumptions for commodity prices, mining and processing costs. The Technical Report in its current form is considered to be a comprehensive compilation of all available data applicable to the estimation of mineral resources. A summary of key assumptions and methods used to prepare the Foreign Estimate include:

• The resource is reported according to CIM Definition Standards (2010)

• By using SGS Geostat model, the mineral reserve for the Feasibility Study was prepared, estimated and supervised by Roche using a cut-off value of $48.96/t with 5% dilution and a mining recovery of 95.2%. The Kipawa open-pit design utilized a marginal (or milling) cut-off value of $48.96/t and a break-even cutoff value of $60.70/t. Included in the reserves are 632,000 tonnes of low-grade material lying between these 2 cut-off values. This material will be sent on a low-grade stockpile, close to the mine site, and will be processed at the end of the operation after mine depletion.

• The Foreign Estimate and current Technical Report is based on a total of 293 drill holes totalling 24,571m and 13 trenches totalling 631m. Historical Unocal holes are not in the count and were not used for the estimates. The mineralised zones were interpreted on vertical sections and meshed into volumes as per industry standard. Ordinary kriging was used to estimate the block model with block size set at 10m x 5m x 5m. The measured and indicated resources required drill grids 25m and 50m respectively. Resources extrapolated beyond 30m of those drill grids are considered inferred.

Further details of the foreign estimate are set out in Table 1 of JORC Code 2012 as attached to this announcement.

6. Any more recent estimates or data relevant to the reported mineralisation available to the entity (LR 5.12.6) No further resource estimates or data relevant to the resource estimation are available.

7. The evaluation and/or exploration work that needs to be completed to verify the foreign estimates as mineral resources or reserves in accordance with JORC Code 2012 (LR 5.12.7)

A revision of the historical drilling information will be completed, to further ensure the integrity of the data, followed by another estimation of the resource, with updated classification based on the level of information available. In addition, VML intends to conduct further drilling, bulk sampling, geotechnical and hydrological testing.

8. The proposed timing of any evaluation and/or exploration work that the entity intends to undertake and a comment on how the entity intends to fund that work (LR 5.12.8)

VML intends to conduct drilling, bulk sampling, geotechnical and hydrological testing and will embark on this work as access permits are granted and intend to complete this work within several months. The work will be funded from existing working capital.

Cautionary Note for Australian Investors

Investors should note that the information in this announcement relating to Mineral Resource Estimates and Ore Reserve are foreign estimates and are not reported in accordance with the JORC Code. A competent person has not done sufficient work to classify this foreign estimate as a mineral resource or ore reserve in accordance with the JORC Code and it is uncertain that following further exploration or evaluation work that this foreign estimate will be able to be reported as a mineral resource or ore reserves in accordance with the JORC Code.

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 and 2 – Kipawa rare earth Project Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut	• A total of 293 diamond drill holes totalling
techniques	channels, random chips, or specific	24,581 metres were used in the Matamec
	specialised industry standard	feasibility study.
	measurement tools appropriate to the	• Sampling of the diamond drill core were half
	minerals under investigation, such as	splits of drill core using a core splitter.
	down hole gamma sondes, or handheld	• Samples were collected from REO
	XRF instruments, etc). These examples	mineralisation zones with lengths ranging
	should not be taken as limiting the broad	from 0.5 to 1.5 metres. End intervals
	meaning of sampling.	correlated with changes in lithologies.
	• Include reference to measures taken to	• Each sample was crushed to 70% passing
	ensure sample representivity and the	2mm. a 250g sub-spilt was extracted using
	appropriate calibration of any	a riffle splitter and then pulverised to 85%
	measurement tools or systems used.	passing 75microns and sent to ALS
	• Aspects of the determination of	laboratory in Vancouver. At the laboratory
	mineralisation that are Material to the	the sample was assayed for rare earth and
	Public Report.	other elements using induced coupled
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work	plasma-mass spectrometry. Over-limits for
	has been done this would be relatively	were reanalysed using XRF.
	simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling	• A total of 360 density measurements were
	was used to obtain 1 m samples from	carried out using the immersion method.
	which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a	Two standards and one blank was
	30 g charge for fire assay’). In other	submitted for every 25 core samples for
	cases more explanation may be	QA/QC purposes.
	required, such as where there is coarse
	gold that has inherent sampling
	problems. Unusual commodities or
	mineralisation types (eg submarine
	nodules) may warrant disclosure of
	detailed information.
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation,	• All the drill holes are diamond core. A total
techniques	open-hole hammer, rotary air blast,	of 271 holes were NQ holes and 22 holes
	auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details	were HQ holes. No information is currently
	(eg core diameter, triple or standard	available on whether the holes were
	tube, depth of diamond tails, face-	orientated and by what method they were
	sampling bit or other type, whether core	orientated.
	is oriented and if so, by what method,
	_etc). _
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core	• RQD was measured on all the core by a
recovery	and chip sample recoveries and results	geologist. No data is available to Vital Metals
	assessed.	for the results of the RQD logging.
	• Measures taken to maximise sample	• No mention of measures taken to maximise
	recovery and ensure representative	recoveries in the Matamec feasibility study.
	nature of the samples.	• No mention of relationships between
	• Whether a relationship exists between	recoveries and grade in the Matamec
	sample recovery and grade and whether	feasibility study.
	sample bias may have occurred due to
	preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse
	material.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have	• All core was logged in the required detail by
	been geologically and geotechnically	a geologist.
	logged to a level of detail to support	• Thegeologists wrote detailed logs of the

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		appropriate Mineral Resource		lithology, structures, mineralisation and
		estimation, mining studies and		alteration. Photos of the core were taken.
		metallurgical studies.	•	No information is available at present to Vital
		• Whether logging is qualitative or		Metals on the total length logged. The
		quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,		feasibility study notes that all holes were
		channel, etc) photography.		logged and hence it is assumed 100% of the
		• The total length and percentage of the		relevant intersections were logged.
		relevant intersections logged.
	Sub-sampling	• If core, whether cut or sawn and	•	All core was halved using a core splitter.
	techniques and	whether quarter, half or all core taken.	•	Half core is appropriate for sampling core.
	sample	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube	•	The reduction from half core to <2mm then
	preparation	sampled, rotary split, etc and whether		to <75microns and the reduction weights at
		sampled wet or dry.		these particle sizes is considered
		• For all sample types, the nature, quality		appropriate for this material.
		and appropriateness of the sample	•	No mention of QA/QC for sub-sampling
		preparation technique.		stages in the feasibility study. Standards of
		• Quality control procedures adopted for		known grades and blanks were submitted to
		all sub-sampling stages to maximise		verify the QA/QC of the whole process.
		representivity of samples.	•	Re-analysis of reject pulps were carried out
		• Measures taken to ensure that the		at external laboratories.
		sampling is representative of the in situ
		material collected, including for instance
		results for field duplicate/second-half
		sampling.
		• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to
		the grain size of the material being
		sampled.
	Quality of assay	• The nature, quality and appropriateness	•	The assay methods for the REE include
	data and	of the assaying and laboratory		lithium borate fusion followed by ICP-MS
	laboratory tests	procedures used and whether the		and are thus considered total. Over-limits
		technique is considered partial or total.		were re-assayed using XRF analysis
		• For geophysical tools, spectrometers,		methods. This is considered industry
		handheld XRF instruments, etc, the		standard for REE.
		parameters used in determining the	•	A combination of standards of different
		analysis including instrument make and		grades, blanks and external laboratory
		model, reading times, calibrations		checks were carried out. The data presented
		factors applied and their derivation, etc.		in the Matamec feasibility study indicates
		• Nature of quality control procedures		acceptable accuracy and precision was
		adopted (eg standards, blanks,		established.
		duplicates, external laboratory checks)
		and whether acceptable levels of
		accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision
		have been established.
	Verification of	• The verification of significant	•	SGS Geostat carried out a verification of the
	sampling and	intersections by either independent or		data before estimating the Mineral
	assaying	alternative company personnel.		Resource.
		• The use of twinned holes.	•	No twinned holes have been drilled to verify
		• Documentation of primary data, data		the Matamec data.
		entry procedures, data verification, data	•	No documentation of data entry procedures,
		storage (physical and electronic)		data verification and data storage protocols
		protocols.		were mentioned in the Matamec feasibility
		• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		study.
			•	The rare earth element data was converted
				to rare earth oxide data. This is normal
				industry practice.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to	• The Matamec feasibility study states the
data points	locate drill holes (collar and down-hole	hole locations were surveyed to centimetric
	surveys), trenches, mine workings and	precision. This indicates the topographic
	other locations used in Mineral Resource	control in the drill locations are adequate.
	estimation.	• The grid system used for the area is NAD83
	• Specification of the grid system used.	UTM Zone 17N.
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic
	control.
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration	• The spacing of the drilling of 25 to 50 metres
and distribution	Results.	with assays 0.5-1.5 metres was sufficient to
	• Whether the data spacing and	establish the degree of geological and grade
	distribution is sufficient to establish the	continuity appropriate for the Mineral
	degree of geological and grade	Resource and Ore Reserve estimations.
	continuity appropriate for the Mineral	• Sample compositing was applied.
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation
	procedure(s) and classifications applied.
	• Whether sample compositing has been
	applied.
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling	• The orientation of the drill holes at close to
data in relation	achieves unbiased sampling of possible	perpendicular to the dip and strike of the
to geological	structures and the extent to which this is	mineralisation has achieved unbiased
structure	known, considering the deposit type.	sampling of the deposit.
	• If the relationship between the drilling
	orientation and the orientation of key
	mineralised structures is considered to
	have introduced a sampling bias, this
	should be assessed and reported if
	material.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample	• The core was managed by the Matamec
	security.	employees from the drill rigs to the ALS
		laboratory.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of	• No reviews or audits were mentioned in the
reviews	sampling techniques and data.	Matamec feasibility study.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location	• The Kipawa and Zeus projects are located
tenement and	and ownership including agreements or	50km east of Teminscaming in southwestern
land tenure	material issues with third parties such as	Quebec
status	joint ventures, partnerships, overriding	• The Kipawa Project consists of 22 claims
	royalties, native title interests, historical	(13 km2) with Quebec Precious Metals
	sites, wilderness or national park and	having a 68% interest, with Joint Venture
	environmental settings.	partner Investissement Quebec holding the
	• The security of the tenure held at the	remaining 32% of the Kipawa Project
	time of reporting along with any known	• The Zeus project consists of 51 claims (30
	impediments to obtaining a licence to	km2) with Quebec Precious Metals having a
	operate in the area.	100% interest.
		• In 2014, Matamec Explorations Inc and
		Toyotsu Rare Earth Canada Inc (“TRECan”)
		signed a termination agreement for the
		Kipawa project, pursuant to which Matamec
		paid TRECan$280,000 and TRECan

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
				converted its undivided 49% interest in the
				project into a 10% interest on net profits
				from future production
			•	There are no known environmental
				impediments or protection zones that would
				prevent mining development
	Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of	•	The company CP has determined the quality
	done by other	exploration by other parties.		and integrity of the historic work completed
	parties			by Matamec is adequate for inclusion,
				consideration and interpretation with any
				new work carried out by Vital Metals.
	Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and	•	The association of radioactive mineralization
		style of mineralisation.		with rare elements in the vicinity of the
				Kipawa Complex is likely to represent a
				polymetallic deposit type of rare elements (Zr,
				Y, Nb, Be, U, Th, Ta, REE and Ga) associated
				with aperalkaline syenite
	Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to	•	Vital Metals does not have access to the drill
	Information	the understanding of the exploration		hole data. All the information Vital Metals
		results including a tabulation of the		has is sourced from the Matamec feasibility
		following information for all Material drill		study and the feasibility study does not give
		holes:		details of individual drill holes. For this
		o easting and northing of the drill hole		reason, Vital Metals is unable to give the
		collar		details of the material drill holes.
		o elevation or RL (Reduced Level –
		elevation above sea level in metres)
		of the drill hole collar
		o dip and azimuth of the hole
		o down hole length and interception
		depth
		o hole length.
		• If the exclusion of this information is
		justified on the basis that the information
		is not Material and this exclusion does
		not detract from the understanding of
		the report, the Competent Person
		should clearly explain why this is the
		case.
	Data	• In reporting Exploration Results,	•	The Matamec feasibility study does not have
	aggregation	weighting averaging techniques,		this information except for cut-off grades.
	methods	maximum and/or minimum grade		No cut-off grades were used.
		truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades)
		and cutoff grades are usually Material
		and should be stated.
		• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate
		short lengths of high grade results and
		longer lengths of low grade results, the
		procedure used for such aggregation
		should be stated and some typical
		examples of such aggregations should
		be shown in detail.
		• The assumptions used for any reporting
		of metal equivalent values should be
		clearly stated.

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Relationship	• These relationships are particularly	• All drill holes have intersected the
	between	important in the reporting of Exploration	mineralisation at approximately 90 degrees.
	mineralisation	Results.	Therefore, all intervals will be close to true
	widths and	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with	width of the mineralisation.
	intercept	respect to the drill hole angle is known,
	lengths	its nature should be reported.
		• If it is not known and only the down hole
		lengths are reported, there should be a
		clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down
		_hole length, true width not known’). _
	Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with	• These are not available in the Matamec
		scales) and tabulations of intercepts	feasibility study.
		should be included for any significant
		discovery being reported These should
		include, but not be limited to a plan view
		of drill hole collar locations and
		appropriate sectional views.
	Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all	• This information is not available to Vital
	reporting	Exploration Results is not practicable,	Metals.
		representative reporting of both low and
		high grades and/or widths should be
		practiced to avoid misleading reporting
		of Exploration Results.
	Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and	• Matamec has carried out a feasibility study
	substantive	material, should be reported including	in 2013 on the Kipawa Deposit outlining all
	exploration data	(but not limited to): geological	the other meaningful data.
		observations; geophysical survey results;
		geochemical survey results; bulk
		samples – size and method of treatment;
		metallurgical test results; bulk density,
		groundwater, geotechnical and rock
		characteristics; potential deleterious or
		contaminating substances.
	Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further	• Update the 2013 feasibility study.
		work (eg tests for lateral extensions or
		depth extensions or large-scale step-out
		drilling).
		• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas
		of possible extensions, including the
		main geological interpretations and
		future drilling areas, provided this
		information is not commercially
		sensitive.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database	• Measures taken to ensure that data has	•No mention of measures taken to ensure
integrity	not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between	the data was not corrupted during data entry was mentioned in the Matamec
	its initial collection and its use for	feasibility study. SGS Geostat checked
	Mineral Resource estimation purposes.	the database for errors and discrepancies
	• Data validation procedures used.	before carrying out the resource
		estimation. SGS Geostat also re-assayed
		50 drill hole intersections to validate the
		original Matamec data.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken	•No site visit has been carried out by the
	by the Competent Person and the	competent person. The competent person
	outcome of those visits.	was not involved in the foreign Mineral
	• If no site visits have been undertaken	Resource estimation and with Covid travel
	indicate why this is the case.	restrictions has been unable to travel to
		the site.
Geological	• Confidence in (or conversely, the	•The close drill spacing has allowed for a
interpretation	uncertainty of ) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.	lot of confidence in the geological interpretation.
	• Nature of the data used and of any	•Both the assay data and geological logs
	assumptions made.	have been used to interpret the geology.
	• The effect, if any, of alternative	•The 3 different rare earth mineral zones
	interpretations on Mineral Resource	have been used to develop different
	estimation.	zones in the Mineral Resource.
	• The use of geology in guiding and	•Each of the 3 zones of rare earth
	controlling Mineral Resource estimation.	mineralization have demonstrated strong
	• The factors affecting continuity both of	continuity.
	_grade andgeology. _
Dimensions	• The extent and variability of the Mineral	•The mineralisation is approximately
	Resource expressed as length (along	1.45km in length and 200m in width. The
	strike or otherwise), plan width, and	thickness of the mineralization is
	depth below surface to the upper and	approximately 100m extending from the
	lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	surface to a depth of approximately 165m.
Estimation and	• The nature and appropriateness of the	•The kriging method was used to estimate
modelling techniques	estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining,	the REO resource estimations. Envelopes around the 3 types of RE mineralisation were used constrain the data searches to
	interpolation parameters and maximum	each of the zones. No high-grade cuts
	distance of extrapolation from data	were used. Areas with 25m drill hole
	points. If a computer assisted estimation	spacing were assigned as Measured
	method was chosen include a	Resources and areas with 50m drill hole
	description of computer software and	spacing were assigned indicated
	parameters used.	Resources. Areas with wider spaced
	• The availability of check estimates,	drilling were assigned as Inferred
	previous estimates and/or mine	Resources. The type of the kriging
	production records and whether the	method used was not stated in the
	Mineral Resource estimate takes	feasibility study and the competent person
	appropriate account of such data.	is unable to make a call on the
	• The assumptions made regarding	appropriateness of the kriging method
	recovery of by-products.	used to estimate the foreign resource
	• Estimation of deleterious elements or	estimation.
	other non-grade variables of economic	•There is no check estimates or mine data
	significance (eg sulphur for acid mine	available to check the resource estimation
	_drainage characterisation). _	with.

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		• In the case of block model interpolation,	•Inverse distance estimations were also
		the block size in relation to the average	caried out for U, Th and Zr. U and Th
		sample spacing and the search	were assayed as they add extra cost to
		employed.	the processing. Zr has potential to add
		• Any assumptions behind modelling of	value to the project.
		selective mining units.	•The block size was 10mx5mx5m with the
		• Any assumptions about correlation	drill spacing varying between 25 and 50
		between variables.	metres.
		• Description of how the geological	•The envelopes around the 3 types of
		interpretation was used to control the	mineralisation were used to constrain data
		resource estimates.	searches to each individual zone.
		• Discussion of basis for using or not	•No high grade cutting was used as the
		using grade cutting or capping.	grades were reasonably uniform across
		• The process of validation, the checking	each zone.
		process used, the comparison of model	•No mention was made in the Matamec
		data to drill hole data, and use of	feasibility study on any validation or
		reconciliation data if available.	checking of the model data. No
			reconciliation data is available.
	Moisture	• Whether the tonnages are estimated on	•The tonnage is estimated on a dry basis.
		a dry basis or with natural moisture, and
		the method of determination of the
		moisture content.
	Cut-off	• The basis of the adopted cut-off	•A cut-off grade of 0.2%TREO was used in
	parameters	grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	the Matamec feasibility study. The cut-off grade is the minimum grade above which
			material was estimated to be economical
			to mine.
	Mining factors	• Assumptions made regarding possible	•The Matamec feasibility study used an
	or assumptions	mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if	open pit mining method for the Kipawa deposit. The design is approximately
		applicable, external) mining dilution. It is	1000m long, 200m wide and 165m deep.
		always necessary as part of the process	A rigorous feasibility study demonstrated
		of determining reasonable prospects for	in 2013 mining of the resource had strong
		eventual economic extraction to	potential to be economically extracted.
		consider potential mining methods, but
		the assumptions made regarding mining
		methods and parameters when
		estimating Mineral Resources may not
		always be rigorous. Where this is the
		case, this should be reported with an
		explanation of the basis of the mining
		assumptions made.
	Metallurgical	• The basis for assumptions or predictions	•Matamec developed a detailed
	factors or assumptions	regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for	metallurgical flowsheet to extract the rare earth oxides using a combination of magnetic separation, leaching and solvent
		eventual economic extraction to	extraction.
		consider potential metallurgical
		methods, but the assumptions regarding
		metallurgical treatment processes and
		parameters made when reporting
		Mineral Resources may not always be
		rigorous. Where this is the case, this
		should be reported with an explanation
		of the basis of the metallurgical
		assumptions made.

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Environmental	• Assumptions made regarding possible	•At the time of writing the Matamec
	factors or assumptions	waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable	feasibility study, work had begun on getting the required environmental approvals. Vital Metals has no information
		prospects for eventual economic	on the current status of these approvals.
		extraction to consider the potential	The feasibility study gave no indication of
		environmental impacts of the mining and	any environmental factors that would stop
		processing operation. While at this stage	the project from going ahead.
		the determination of potential
		environmental impacts, particularly for a
		greenfields project, may not always be
		well advanced, the status of early
		consideration of these potential
		environmental impacts should be
		reported. Where these aspects have not
		been considered this should be reported
		with an explanation of the environmental
		assumptions made.
	Bulk density	• Whether assumed or determined. If	•A total of 360 density measurements were
		assumed, the basis for the assumptions.	carried out using the immersion method of
		If determined, the method used, whether	core pieces with representative bulk
		wet or dry, the frequency of the	density sampling of all 3 zones of REO
		measurements, the nature, size and	mineralisation. There is very little porosity
		representativeness of the samples.	of the mineralisation and hence bulk
		• The bulk density for bulk material must	density estimations were considered quite
		have been measured by methods that	robust.
		adequately account for void spaces
		(vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and
		differences between rock and alteration
		zones within the deposit.
		• Discuss assumptions for bulk density
		estimates used in the evaluation
		process of the different materials.
	Classification	• The basis for the classification of the	•The areas with 25m spaced drillholes
		Mineral Resources into varying	were classified as Measured Resources.
		confidence categories.	Areas with 50 spaced drillholes were
		• Whether appropriate account has been	classified as Indicated Resources and
		taken of all relevant factors (ie relative	minor areas with wider spaced drilling
		confidence in tonnage/grade	were classified as Inferred Resources.
		estimations, reliability of input data,	SGS Geostat carried out statistical
		confidence in continuity of geology and	analysis of the data to demonstrate these
		metal values, quality, quantity and	classifications were reasonable.
		distribution of the data).	•Without access to the database the
		• Whether the result appropriately reflects	competent person is unable to form a
		the Competent Person’s view of the	view on whether the foreign Mineral
		deposit.	Resource estimation appropriately reflects
			the deposit.
	Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of	•No audits or reviews of the foreign Mineral
	reviews	Mineral Resource estimates.	Resource estimation is known by the
			competent person.
	Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the	•The competent person has no access to
	relative	relative accuracy and confidence level in	the database or block model and is
	accuracy/ confidence	the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person.	unable to make a statement on the accuracy of the foreign Resource Estimation
		For example, the application of

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	statistical or geostatistical procedures to
	quantify the relative accuracy of the
	resource within stated confidence limits,
	or, if such an approach is not deemed
	appropriate, a qualitative discussion of
	the factors that could affect the relative
	accuracy and confidence of the
	estimate.
	• The statement should specify whether it
	relates to global or local estimates, and,
	if local, state the relevant tonnages,
	which should be relevant to technical
	and economic evaluation.
	Documentation should include
	assumptions made and the procedures
	used.
	• These statements of relative accuracy
	and confidence of the estimate should
	be compared with production data,
	where available.

Section 4 Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in sections 2 and 3, also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	• Description of the Mineral Resource	•The Mineral Resource estimation used in
Resource	estimate used as a basis for the	the Foreign Ore Reserve estimation was
estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves	conversion to an Ore Reserve. • Clear statement as to whether the Mineral Resources are reported additional to, or inclusive of, the Ore	generated by SGS Geodata and has been reported in the 2013 Matamec feasibility study. •The foreign Ore Reserves stated in the
	Reserves.	Matamec feasibility study are inclusive of
		the Mineral Resources stated in the
		Matamec feasibility study.
Site visits	• Comment on any site visits undertaken	•No site visit has been carried out by the
	by the Competent Person and the	competent person. The competent person
	outcome of those visits.	was not involved in the foreign resource
	• If no site visits have been undertaken	estimation and with Covid travel
	indicate why this is the case.	restrictions has been unable to travel to
		the site.
Study status	• The type and level of study undertaken	•Matamec conducted a definitive feasibility
	to enable Mineral Resources to be	study to convert the foreign Mineral
	converted to Ore Reserves.	Resources to the foreign Ore Reserves.
	• The Code requires that a study to at
	least Pre-Feasibility Study level has
	been undertaken to convert Mineral
	Resources to Ore Reserves. Such
	studies will have been carried out and
	will have determined a mine plan that is
	technically achievable and economically
	viable, and that material Modifying
	Factors have been considered.
Cut-off	• The basis of the cut-off grade(s) or	•A cut-off grade of 0.2%TREO was used in
parameters	quality parameters applied.	the Matamec feasibility study. The cut-off grade is the minimum grade above which
		material was estimated to be economical

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			to mine.
	Mining factors	• The method and assumptions used as	•The resource model had a monetary
	or assumptions	reported in the Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Study to convert the Mineral	value assigned to each block calculated using the value of the 15 REOs, the
		Resource to an Ore Reserve (i.e. either	metallurgical recovery and the grade of
		by application of appropriate factors by	the 15 REOs. The model was then
		optimisation or by preliminary or detailed	imported into Gemcom pit optimization
		design).	software. Costs were assigned in the pit
		• The choice, nature and appropriateness	optimization software to be used to
		of the selected mining method(s) and	generate an optimized pit shell that gave
		other mining parameters including	the highest profit. A pit design was
		associated design issues such as pre-	generated using the pit shell to guide the
		strip, access, etc.	design.
		• The assumptions made regarding	•The mineralisation is at or near surface
		geotechnical parameters (eg pit slopes,	and open pit mining is the most
		stope sizes, etc), grade control and pre-	appropriate mining method.
		production drilling.	•Detailed geotechnical studies were
		• The major assumptions made and	carried out to determine the pit slopes.
		Mineral Resource model used for pit and	•The mining dilution factor used was
		stope optimisation (if appropriate).	95.24% and the dilution factor used was
		• The mining dilution factors used.	5%.
		• The mining recovery factors used.	•No minimum mining widths were
		• Any minimum mining widths used.	mentioned in the Matamec feasibility
		• The manner in which Inferred Mineral	study. Bulk mining methods were planned
		Resources are utilised in mining studies	for the deposit.
		and the sensitivity of the outcome to	•No Inferred Resources were included in
		their inclusion.	the foreign Ore Reserve estimation.
		• The infrastructure requirements of the	•The main infrastructure identified in the
		selected mining methods.	Matamec feasibility study was mine and
			access roads and a garage.
	Metallurgical	• The metallurgical process proposed and	•Matamec developed a detailed
	factors or assumptions	the appropriateness of that process to the style of mineralisation. • Whether the metallurgical process is	metallurgical flowsheet to extract the rare earth oxides using a combination of magnetic separation, leaching and solvent
		well-tested technology or novel in	extraction. These methods are industry
		nature.	standard in the REO industry.
		• The nature, amount and	•Significant bench test work was carried
		representativeness of metallurgical test	out followed by pilot plant test-work to
		work undertaken, the nature of the	determine a final metallurgical flowsheet.
		metallurgical domaining applied and the	Recoveries range from 57.6% for Ce2O3
		corresponding metallurgical recovery	to 77.7% for Dy2O3.
		factors applied.	•The process flowsheet included removal
		• Any assumptions or allowances made	of U and Th.
		for deleterious elements.	•The bulk samples used for metallurgical
		• The existence of any bulk sample or	test-work was collected by a combination
		pilot scale test work and the degree to	of blasting trenches at the surface and HQ
		which such samples are considered	core samples in the lower parts of the
		representative of the orebody as a	mineralisation. The Matamec feasibility
		whole.	study states these samples were
		• For minerals that are defined by a	representative of the mineral zones.
		specification, has the ore reserve
		estimation been based on the
		appropriate mineralogy to meet the
		specifications?
	Environmen-tal	• The status of studies of potential	•Rock characterization test work shows
		environmental impacts of the mining and	none of the material in the mineplan is

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		processing operation. Details of waste	going to cause any environmental issues.
		rock characterisation and the	When the feasibility study was issued
		consideration of potential sites, status of	both province and federal environmental
		design options considered and, where	approvals were required. Vital Metals has
		applicable, the status of approvals for	no further information on the
		process residue storage and waste	environmental approvals since the
		dumps should be reported.	feasibility study was issued in 2013.
	Infrastructure	• The existence of appropriate	•The project is in an area with land
		infrastructure: availability of land for	available for infrastructure. The Matamec
		plant development, power, water,	feasibility study had plans in it locating all
		transportation (particularly for bulk	the infrastructure.
		commodities), labour, accommodation;
		or the ease with which the infrastructure
		can beprovided, or accessed.
	Costs	• The derivation of, or assumptions made,	•The capital costs in the Matamec
		regarding projected capital costs in the	feasibility study were estimated in 2013.
		study.	Vital Metals has not evaluated how these
		• The methodology used to estimate	costs fall in 2021. Where possible
		operating costs.	Matamec used a detailed unit cost
		• Allowances made for the content of	approach.
		deleterious elements.	•Matamec included removal of the U and
		• The source of exchange rates used in	Th in the processing costs.
		the study.	•In the feasibility study exchange rates
		• Derivation of transportation charges.	used were 1CAD=1USD, 1CAD=0.75EUR
		• The basis for forecasting or source of	and 1CAD=0.65GBP.
		treatment and refining charges,	•The Matamec feasibility study made no
		penalties for failure to meet	mention of how transport costs were
		specification, etc.	derived.
		• The allowances made for royalties	•The Matamec feasibility study stated no
		payable, both Government and private.	royalties applied to the Kipawa Project.
	Revenue factors	• The derivation of, or assumptions made	•The Rare Earth oxide prices used in the
		regarding revenue factors including	Feasibility Study were based on a
		head grade, metal or commodity price(s)	contracted market survey by Asian Metals
		exchange rates, transportation and	in conjunction with discussions with key
		treatment charges, penalties, net	industry end users
		smelter returns, etc.	•The refining costs were not evaluated in
		• The derivation of assumptions made of	the Feasibility Study however a payability
		metal or commodity price(s), for the	factor of 30% was applied to forecast
		principal metals, minerals and co-	separated rare earth prices to account for
		products.	refining costs
			•Vital Metals has not reviewed the forecast
			rare earth prices
	Market	• The demand, supply and stock situation	•The feasibility study was based on a
	assessment	for the particular commodity,	market assessment undertaken by Asian
		consumption trends and factors likely to	Metals in Jun 2013. This included an
		affect supply and demand into the	evaluation of supply demand assessment,
		future.	customer and competitor analysis and
		• A customer and competitor analysis	price and volume forecasts
		along with the identification of likely	•Vital Metals has not reviewed the market
		market windows for the product.	assessment
		• Price and volume forecasts and the
		basis for these forecasts.
		• For industrial minerals the customer
		specification, testing and acceptance
		requirementsprior to a supply contract.

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Economic	• The inputs to the economic analysis to	•The Feasibility Study economic/financial
		produce the net present value (NPV) in	analysis of the Kipawa project was based
		the study, the source and confidence of	on price projections from the second
		these economic inputs including	quarter of 2013 and cost estimates in
		estimated inflation, discount rate, etc.	Canadian currency.
		• NPV ranges and sensitivity to variations	•No provisions were made for the effects of
		in the significant assumptions and	inflation.
		inputs.	•An at-par exchange rate was assumed to
			convert the USD price projections into
			CAD.
			•The evaluation was carried out on a 100%
			equity basis.
			•2013 Canadian tax regulations were
			applied to assess corporate tax liabilities
			•A sensitivity was carried out to assess the
			impact of changes in market prices, total
			pre-production expenditure and operating
			costs on the project’s NPV @10% and
			IRR. Each variable was examined one-at-
			a-time. Sensitivities of +/-30% with
			increments of 10% were used for all three
			variables.
	Social	• The status of agreements with key	•At the time of completing the feasibility
		stakeholders and matters leading to	study negotiations with local First Nations
		social licence to operate.	communities were yet to be finalised
	Other	• To the extent relevant, the impact of the	•An assessment of potential risks and
		following on the project and/or on the	factors which may impact the project
		estimation and classification of the Ore	and/or on the estimation and classification
		Reserves:	of the Ore Reserves will be undertaken
		• Any identified material naturally	during due diligence.
		occurring risks.
		• The status of material legal agreements
		and marketing arrangements.
		• The status of governmental agreements
		and approvals critical to the viability of
		the project, such as mineral tenement
		status, and government and statutory
		approvals. There must be reasonable
		grounds to expect that all necessary
		Government approvals will be received
		within the timeframes anticipated in the
		Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility study.
		Highlight and discuss the materiality of
		any unresolved matter that is dependent
		on a third party on which extraction of
		the reserve is contingent.
	Classification	• The basis for the classification of the	•Foreign Measured Mineral Resources that
		Ore Reserves into varying confidence	were economical to mine were converted
		categories.	to foreign Proved Ore Reserves and
		• Whether the result appropriately reflects	foreign Indicated Mineral Resources that
		the Competent Person’s view of the	were economical to mine were converted
		deposit.	to foreign Probable Ore Reserves.
		• The proportion of Probable Ore	•Without access to the database the
		Reserves that have been derived from	competent person is unable to form a
		Measured Mineral Resources (if any).	view on whether the foreign Mineral
			Resource estimation appropriatelyreflects

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
			the deposit.
	Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of	•No audit or review of the foreign Ore
	reviews	Ore Reserve estimates.	Reserve in the Matamec feasibility study
			is known to Vital Metals.
	Discussion of	• Where appropriate a statement of the	•The competent person has no access to
	relative	relative accuracy and confidence level in	the database or block model and is
	accuracy/ confidence	the Ore Reserve estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person.	unable to make a statement on the accuracy of the foreign Ore Reserve estimation. Further to this the Competent
		For example, the application of	Person does not have recent cost
		statistical or geostatistical procedures to	information to determine if the costs used
		quantify the relative accuracy of the	in 2013 are still relevant in 2021.
		reserve within stated confidence limits,
		or, if such an approach is not deemed
		appropriate, a qualitative discussion of
		the factors which could affect the
		relative accuracy and confidence of the
		estimate.
		• The statement should specify whether it
		relates to global or local estimates, and,
		if local, state the relevant tonnages,
		which should be relevant to technical
		and economic evaluation.
		Documentation should include
		assumptions made and the procedures
		used.
		• Accuracy and confidence discussions
		should extend to specific discussions of
		any applied Modifying Factors that may
		have a material impact on Ore Reserve
		viability, or for which there are remaining
		areas of uncertainty at the current study
		stage.
		• It is recognised that this may not be
		possible or appropriate in all
		circumstances. These statements of
		relative accuracy and confidence of the
		estimate should be compared with
		production data, where available.