Announcement PDF 21 May 2024 DYSPROSIUM AND TERBIUM HEAVY RARE EARTHS RECOGNISED FROM SURFACE AT CENTIPEDE RANGE HIGHLIGHTS • Heavy rare earths bearing xenotime recognised at Hastings’ Centipede Range located 30km from the Yangibana Project site. • Rock chip samples demonstrate up to 2.08 kg/t dysprosium oxide (Dy203), 0.26 kg/t terbium oxide (Tb407), 13.55 kg/t yttrium oxide (Y203) & 946 ppm uranium oxide (U3O8). • High heavy rare earths oxides (“HREO”) to total rare earths oxides (“TREO”) ratio up to 94.4% and Dy203+Tb407 to TREO ratio of 11.8%. • XRD analysis confirmed xenotime (YPO4) as the source of the heavy rare earths dysprosium, terbium, and yttrium. • Aerial and ground geophysical surveys indicate the prospective sedimentary package at Centipede Range extends for 4.4km. Hastings Technology Metals Ltd (ASX:HAS) (“Hastings” or “the Company”) is pleased to announce confirmation of heavy rare earths bearing xenotime at its Centipede Range (E09/2399). Centipede Range is approximately 30km from Hastings’ Yangibana Rare Earths Project (“Yangibana Project”). In 2023, Hastings commissioned an airborne geophysical survey over Centipede Range. The data has been processed, with thorium and uranium radiometric anomalism clearly defined. Importantly this anomalism corresponds with a geological unconformity and a package of sedimentary rock comprised of conglomerate and sandstone. The strike of this anomalism is 4.4km and its high resolution has enabled the geo-location of historical spatial datasets. Analogues for this mineralisation style include Browns Range Project’s heavy rare earths element (“HREE”) deposits 1 and Bresnahan Project’s HREE prospects 2. Geochemical and mineralogical analyses have demonstrated that local enrichment of HREO likely occurs where faults intercept the sandstone package and is associated with hydrothermal emplacement. Hastings Chief Geologist Dr Louis Schurmann said: “The identification of extremely high-grade heavy rare earths mineralisation at Centipede Range highlights the tremendous exploration upside of the Yangibana region. In parallel with our focus on developing the Yangibana Project, we are continuing to build our geological knowledge of the region and believe there is significant potential to expand the range of rare earths minerals found in the area. We have a staged exploration plan which is expected to commence in Q3 CY2024 and are excited by the potential of the Centipede Range as a second ore source for the Yangibana Project. The Yangibana process plant will be suitable to concentrate both light rare earths and heavy rare earths. 1 2 ASX: NTU 22 November 2023. New Wolverine assay results available, and commencement of resource drilling program. ASX: DRE 26 October 2023. Significant HREE, Gold and Uranium Potential – Bresnahan. Figure 1 Nearology diagram outlining the proximity of the Centipede Range HREO mineralisation to the Yangibana processing plant. Also shown is the location of light rare earths oxide (“LREO”) ironstone/carbonatite mineralisation of the Yangibana Project and the surrounding areas. Centipede Range was initially explored for uranium in 1976 by Canadian Australian Petroleum N.L. Occidental Minerals Corporation of Australia refocussed on this area in 1979 when uranium and HREO anomalism was discovered in ground reconnaissance. Comprehensive geological mapping and ground scintillometer surveys were conducted by Occidental Minerals. Zone A has a strike length of 850m and was the domain where recent sampling was undertaken. Zone B has a strike length of 450m. Both have broad areas of radiometric anomalism consistently 2 x background (200 cps) and isolated peaks exceeding 500 cps (Figure 2). Figure 2 Plan view map of the Centipede Range prospect illustrating the anomalies generated from scintillometer readings taken in 1979 relative to the rock chip samples from recent geological mapping. Figure 3 Photo of the sandstone outcrop portraying the arkosic-sandstone escarpment eroded to form a range of low hills and ridges. The site is 3295 which yielded the highest HREO and U3O8 concentrations. The purpose of recent geophysical surveying and geological reconnaissance was to geolocate the results of scintillometer surveys and validate historical outcrop observations. Two transects were mapped and sampled with the southern transect yielding strong HREO concentrations (peaking at 2.06 kg/t Dy2O3 and 0.26 kg/t Tb4O7 and 946 ppm U3O8; Table 1). The outcrops were clay-altered sandstones comprising quartz, potassium feldspar and iron oxides. The HREO mineralisation occurs as discrete lenses, each with metre-scale thickness. The sedimentary sandstone succession hosting each separate lens is 70 metres thick. Figure 4 Representation of the thorium and uranium radiometric images for the Centipede Range prospect. The 4.4km strike of the anomalism is shown as well as the rock chips presented in Table 1. The unconformable contact between the Mt Augustus sandstone and underlying Proterozoic-aged monzogranite of the Moorarie Supersuite is the target horizon for HREO and uranium enrichment. As implied in Figure 6, basement structures play a role as the conduit for hydrothermal activity and is a key driver of generating economic grades of mineralisation. Settings similar to this are described by Northern Minerals at its Browns Range project 3. In particular, sites 3293 and 3295 are considered to be strong Dy2O3 + Tb4O7 concentrations (Table 1). The (Dy2O3 + Tb4O7)/TREO ratio of 11.85 compares favourably to the mean value of the Wolverine deposit at Browns Range of 9.9 4. Dy2O3 kg/t Tb4O7 kg/t Y2O3 kg/t TREO percent U3O8 ppm HREO /TREO Percent Dy2O3 + Tb4O7 /TREO Percent Site Easting Northing 3293 436786 7325371 1.16 0.14 7.94 1.14 51 94.4 11.36 3295 436788 7325345 2.08 0.26 13.55 1.98 946 94.1 11.85 3296 436981 7325293 0.05 0.01 0.34 0.11 12 41.7 5.21 3299 437111 7325347 0.08 0.01 0.42 0.12 9 49.2 7.70 Table 1. Details of HREO anomalous rock chip samples assayed for geochemical composition. 3 4 ASX : NTU 22 November 2023. New Wolverine assay results available, and commencement of resource drilling program. ASX : NTU 10 October 2022. Independent review increases Wolverine REE Mineral Resource estimate by 47% at Browns Range. Figure 5 Plan view map of the Centipede Range prospect showing the location of rock samples collected in relation to the monzogranite unconformity and the geophysical anomalism. The inset for figure 2 is shown. Figure 6 Schematic section illustrating the conceptual model of HREO and uranium mineralisation; (modified from Nazari-Dehkordi, 2018). The next phase of exploration at the Centipede Range prospect is to drill test the scintillometer anomalies. The moderate dip of the stratigraphy supports relatively shallow drill design. The prospect will require baseline heritage, flora, and fauna studies in addition to Regulatory Approvals prior to the commencement of drilling. Authorised by the Board for release to the ASX. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Lew Executive Chairman +65 6220 9220 MEDIA ENQUIRIES: Chris Manly Platform Communications +61 430 308 552 chris@platformcommunications.com.au ABOUT HASTINGS TECHNOLOGY METALS LIMITED Hastings Technology Metals Limited is a Perth-based rare earths company focused on the development of its 100% owned Yangibana Rare Earths Project. Located in the Gascoyne region of Western Australia, the Yangibana Project contains one of the most highly valued deposits of NdPr in the world with an NdPr to Total Rare Earths Oxide ratio of up to 52% in some areas of the orebody. With an initial mine life of 17 years, the Yangibana Project will become a globally significant source of NdPr, a critical component in the manufacture of permanent magnets used in advanced technology products including electric vehicles, renewable energy, humanoid robotics, and digital devices. The Yangibana Project is fully permitted for immediate development and is well-timed to meet the forecast supply gap for rare earths elements accelerated by the growth in electric vehicles and wind turbines, both vital for the global energy transition. It will be developed in two stages with an initial focus on the construction of the mine and beneficiation plant to produce 37,000 tonnes per annum of mixed rare earths concentrate. Hastings continues to assess downstream processing opportunities including the development of a hydrometallurgical plant to capture more of the rare earths value chain. The Company holds a strategic 21.15% shareholding in TSX-listed Neo Performance Materials Inc., a leading global rare earths processing and advanced permanent magnets producer, providing future optionality to explore the creation of a mine to magnet supply chain. For more information, please visit www.hastingstechmetals.com COMPETENT PERSON'S STATEMENT The information in this release relating to Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves have been prepared by a Competent Person in accordance with the 2012 edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’ (“JORC Code”) and have been extracted from the release title ‘Annual Report to shareholders’ dated 28 September 2023 which is available to view at www.asx.com.au under the code “HAS” (the original release). The Company confirms that it is not aware of any other new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. Hastings confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcements. The information in this announcement that relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Dr Louis Schürmann. Dr Schürmann is a full-time employee of the Company and a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM; 308067). Dr Schürmann has sufficient experience relevant to the styles of mineralisation and types of deposits which are covered in this announcement and to the activity which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code. Dr Schürmann consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears. CAUTIONARY STATEMENT The exploration results have been prepared and reported in accordance with the 2012 edition of the JORC Code. There has been insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource for all target areas reported. It is uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource. FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENT This release contains reference to certain intentions, expectations, future plans, strategies and prospects of the Company. Those intentions, expectations, future plans, strategies and prospects may or may not be achieved. They are based on certain assumptions, which may not be met or on which views may differ and may be affected by known and unknown risks. The performance and operations of the Company may be influenced by a number of factors, many of which are outside the control of the Company. No representation or warranty, express or implied, is made by the Company, or any of its directors, officers, employees, advisers, or agents that any intentions, expectations, or plans will be achieved either totally or partially or that any particular rate of return will be achieved. Given the risks and uncertainties that may cause the Company’s actual future results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from those expected, planned or intended, recipients should not place undue reliance on these intentions, expectations, future plans, strategies and prospects. The Company does not warrant or represent that the actual results, performance, or achievements will be as expected, planned or intended. The Company is under no obligation to, nor makes any undertaking to, update or revise such forward looking statements, but believes they are fair and reasonable at the date of this release. TERMINOLOGY USED IN THIS REPORT Total Rare Earths Oxides, TREO, is the sum of the oxides of lanthanum (La), cerium (Ce), praseodymium (Pr), neodymium (Nd), and samarium (Sm), europium (Eu), gadolinium (Gd), terbium (Tb), dysprosium (Dy), holmium (Ho), erbium (Er), thulium (Tm), ytterbium (Yb), lutetium (Lu), and yttrium (Y). Heavy Rare Earths Oxides, HREO, is the sum of the oxides for the heavy rare earths elements, terbium (Tb), dysprosium (Dy), holmium (Ho), erbium (Er), thulium (Tm), ytterbium (Yb), lutetium (Lu), and yttrium (Y). Light Rare Earths Oxides, LREO, is the sum of the oxides of the light rare earths elements lanthanum (La), cerium (Ce), praseodymium (Pr), neodymium (Nd) as well as the intermediates samarium (Sm), europium (Eu), gadolinium (Gd). SCHEDULE 1: TENEMENT LISTING Tenement Holder Hastings Technology Interest E09/2385 Ark Gold Pty Ltd 100% E09/2399 Ark Gold Pty Ltd 100% TABLE 2: ROCK CHIP ASSAYS FROM FIELD ACTIVITIES Sample ID Easting Northing Dy2O3_kg/t Tb4O7_kg/t Y2O3_kg/t U3O8_ppm HREO_ppm 3286 435720 7327451 0.01 0.00 0.02 4 28 3287 435713 7327442 0.00 0.00 0.02 4 27 3288 435702 7327411 0.01 0.00 0.04 9 63 3289 435677 7327376 0.00 0.00 0.02 2 25 3290 435653 7327348 0.00 0.00 0.01 1 15 3291 435600 7327284 0.01 0.00 0.04 3 64 3292 434524 7326888 0.00 0.00 0.01 4 19 3293 436786 7325371 1.16 0.14 7.94 51 10774 3294 436786 7325350 0.01 0.00 0.04 4 55 3295 436788 7325345 2.08 0.26 13.55 946 18638 3296 436981 7325293 0.05 0.01 0.34 14 469 3297 437010 7325271 0.01 0.00 0.04 12 52 3298 437145 7325218 0.02 0.00 0.11 9 155 3299 437111 7325347 0.08 0.01 0.42 9 608 Sample ID TREO (Dy2O3 + Tb4O7)/TREO HREO/TREO 3286 0.06 % 1.00 % 4.3 % Lithology Description 2.6-3 cps, arkose, clay alteration after feldspar, rounded grains. Regular large goethite/dark banding. 3287 0.08 % 0.72 % 3.3 % Medium coarse grained. Arkose, 2.6-3.0 cps. Coarse grained arkose, some black box 3288 0.12 % 0.91 % 5.4 % works, cream to pale green clay after feldspar. 3289 0.06 % 0.92 % 4.0 % Coarse grained arkose, cps of 1.5-1.8. 3290 0.04 % 0.87 % 3.5 % 3291 0.03 % 2.86 % 21.2 % 2.8 cps arkose, more vughs after feldspar. 3292 0.01 % 2.33 % 19.7 % Ferricrete and calcrete, 2.8 cps. 3293 1.14 % 11.36 % 94.4 % 3294 0.01 % 5.34 % 42.2 % 3295 1.98 % 11.85 % 94.1 % Surface black coating and secondary alteration in arkose. 1.5-2cps. Intense clay altered arkose with orange grains in clusters – xenotime may be visual. Rotten arkose with white clay and patchy brown crystals in patches. Low outcrop of arkose, all feldspar is leached out, just quartz and iron oxides left, 250cps reading. 3296 0.11 % 5.21 % 41.7 % 4.5 cps silicic arkose, some dark banding. 3297 0.09 % 0.98 % 5.9 % 4.5 cps arkose. 3298 0.03 % 5.97 % 44.9 % Quartz vein and breccia of arkose. 3299 0.12 % 7.70 % 49.2 % Arkose, moderate to well oxidised, 118cps. The following section is provided for compliance with requirements for the reporting of exploration results under the JORC code (2012 edition). SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections) Criteria Sampling techniques • • • Drilling techniques • Drill sample recovery • • • Logging • • JORC Code explanation Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.). Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography. The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. • Commentary Rock chip samples were collected from outcropping areas of geological note. Samples were collected using a geological hammer to dislodge hand specimens. • Rock chip samples referenced are from outcrops and are not biased to target specific minerals. • Scintillometer readings were collected at each sample site with elevated levels indicative of areas that may present enrichment of minerals hosting HREO and U. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. Criteria Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • • • • • • Quality of assay data and laboratory tests Verification of sampling and assaying JORC Code explanation If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether sampled wet or dry. For all sample types, the nature, quality, and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. • Commentary No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • No sample preparation occurred prior to laboratory submission. • No standards were inserted. • No field duplicates were submitted. • Rock chip samples of outcropping sandstones were of sufficient size to minimise bias to specific minerals. Intertek Genalysis (Perth) was used for all analysis work. This encompasses a sodium peroxide fusion using nickel crucibles and hydrochloric acid to dissolve the melt (FP6) together with ICP/OE & ICP/MS. Fusion digestion ensures complete dissolution of the refractory minerals such as xenotime. Mineralogy was performed by Quantitative XRD; preparing the sample drying at 50 degrees Celsius, milling to <60 µm and analysing using XRDQUANT01. The field scintillometer used in recent exploration was a Radiation AlertTM Ranger Radiation Detector. The late 1970’s exploration was undertaken with a Geometric International Incorporated CR101A Scintillometer with readings taken at hip height using fast accumulation period when ever practical. The laboratory used its own internal blanks and standards. • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. The use of twinned holes. Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • • • • • • • • • Discuss any adjustment to assay data. The quantitative XRD corroborated the assay results generated by the sodium peroxide fusion. No drilling results included in release. Sample coordinates and identifying remarks were recorded into a field notebook and submitted to be captured digitally. The assay data were converted from reported elemental assays for a range of Criteria JORC Code explanation Location of data points Data spacing and distribution • Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • • • Specification of the grid system used. Quality and adequacy of topographic control. Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. Whether the data spacing, and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. Whether sample compositing has been applied. Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. 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. The measures taken to ensure sample security. • • • • • Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • Sample security • Audits reviews or • • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. Commentary elements to the equivalent oxide compound as applicable to rare earths oxides. All sample easting and northing coordinates were collected by GPS. Historical ground scintillometer surveys have been georeferenced utilising geomorphology, geological mapping and cross-checks of radiometric anomalism again airborne techniques. • Grid system used is MGA 94 (Zone 50) Topographic control has not been applied. No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • The chain of custody is managed by the project geologist who places calico sample bags in polyweave sacks. Up to 10 calico sample bags are placed in each sack. Each sack is clearly labelled with: • Hastings Technology Metals Ltd • Address of laboratory • Sample range • Samples were transported by RM Transport from site to Perth and delivered Genalysis. • The freight provider delivers the samples directly to the laboratory. Detailed records are kept of all samples that are dispatched, including details of chain of custody. No audit has been conducted. • SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.) Criteria Mineral tenement and land tenure status • • JORC Code explanation Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • Commentary The reported exploration program is located within leases listed in Schedule 1, which includes each lease’s ownership. Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. • Drill hole Information • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: • easting and northing of the drill hole collar • elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar • dip and azimuth of the hole of down hole length and • hole depth • At the time of reporting, there are no known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area other than those listed, and the tenements are in good standing. Previously exploration was undertaken by Canadian Australian Petroleum N.L (1976) Occidental Minerals Corporation of Australia (1978-79). WAMEX Report A8598. Both companies were exploring for uranium. Details of this exploration is provided in the body of this announcement. From 1982 – 1989 Esmeralda Exploration explored for heavy rare earths and gold. Rock chip sampling occurred with peak concentrations of 3,500 ppm uranium and 1.91% yttrium. Bulk testing of consolidated alluvial material was conducted. The mean percentage of heavy minerals was 0.23 with a maximum assay of 88 ppm yttrium. WAMEX Reports A12045, A13663, A17445, A23223, A24746, A28241. No other significant exploration has been conducted. A conceptual model for this type of deposit is provided in the body of the announcement. The mineralisation style is unconformity related HREO and uranium enrichment and deposition via hydrothermal processes. Pertinent minerals include xenotime. No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. Exploration done by other parties • Acknowledgment and appraisal exploration by other parties. of • • • • Criteria • Data aggregation methods • • • Relationship between mineralisatio n widths and intercept lengths • • • Diagrams • Balanced reporting • Other substantive exploration data • JORC Code explanation 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. In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. 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’). Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional view. Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced avoiding misleading reporting of Exploration Results. Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock Commentary • No drilling results included in release. • No data aggregate methods have been applied. • Both TREO and HREO are terms used in this report. There calculation is detailed in the section ‘Terminology used in this report’. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • No drilling results included in release. • Diagrams detailing the plan view giving context of the samples assayed and geophysical surveys have been provided in the text. Table 1 provides rock chips with significant assays and Table 2 provides information on all rock chips collected in 2023. Care has been taken to collect both geochemical and mineralogical information for pertinent rock chip samples. • • All relevant geophysical and geological observations have been provided in the context of the assay and mineralogical information. Criteria Further work • • JORC Code explanation characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. The nature and scale of planned further 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. Commentary • • The next phase of exploration is to undertake additional reconnaissance mapping and sampling. In additional base line heritage and biological surveys will be conduct in lieu of drilling. Relevant diagrams highlight additional zones of radiometric anomalism along a 4.4 km strike is provided in the body of the announcement.