Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Qualified Person

I,     Daniel R. Palo           ,      PE               on behalf of Barr Engineering Co., hereby consent to:

Barr Engineering Co. is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, all chapters of the Report, except for chapters 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, and subsections 18.2.2 and 18.3.2.

Report Effective Date: September 04, 2025.

Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Qualified Person

I, Jeffrey Woods                    , License (i.e., PE) or QP Designation on behalf of Woods Process Services, LLC., hereby consent to:

Woods Process Services, LLC., is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, the following Chapters of the Report: Only Chapters 10 and 14 and sections 18.2.2 and 18.3.2.

Report Effective Date: September 04, 2025.

Exhibit 23.3

Consent of Qualified Person

I, Jacob Anderson                , CPG, MAusIMM       on behalf of Dahrouge Geologic Consulting Ltd., hereby consent to:

Dahrouge Geologic Consulting Ltd. is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, the following Chapters of the Report: Only chapters 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11.

Report Effective Date: September 04, 2025.

Exhibit 96.1

Important Notice

This Report was prepared for American Battery Technology Company by the qualified persons (QPs) identified in the Report’s Date and Signature Page.

This Report contains estimates, projections, and conclusions that are forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking statements are based upon the responsible QPs opinions at the time that they are made but, in most cases, involve significant risk and uncertainty.

Although each of the responsible QPs has attempted to identify factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those described in this Report, there may be other factors that cause events or results to not be as anticipated, estimated, or projected. None of the QPs undertake any obligation to update the forward-looking information.

This Report is intended to be used by American Battery Technology Company subject to the terms and conditions of its contracts with each of the QPs. Except for the purposes legislated under United States securities law, any use of, or reliance on, this Report by any third party is at that party’s sole risk.

Date and Signature Page

Tonopah Flats Lithium Project
Pre-Feasibility Study

September 2025

Contents

Tables

Figures

Appendices

Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Units

1   Executive Summary

Barr Engineering Co. has prepared this Technical Report Summary (TRS) for the Tonopah Flats Lithium Project (TFLP), Esmeralda and Nye Counties, Nevada, USA, at the request of American Battery Technology Company (ABTC), a Nevada Corporation and a United States (U.S.) listed company (NASDAQ: ABAT) based in Reno, Nevada, USA. The purpose of this TRS is to disclose the results of a Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) for the project. The Tonopah Flats property is considered a material property as defined under U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300 (S-K 1300).

ABTC is an integrated battery-critical material manufacturing company focused on the supply of low-cost, low-environmental impact, and domestically-sourced critical materials through its three core operations to support a sustainable closed-loop battery critical material economy. These core operations include the recycling of lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries, the development of domestic critical mineral mines, and the refining of these primary critical materials into refined products. ABTC’s development of its lithium (Li) claystone resource and its associated claystone to lithium hydroxide refinery near Tonopah, Nevada, namely the Tonopah Flats Lithium Project, is a key project to achieving the company’s mission.

The Tonopah Flats property consists of 517 unpatented federal lode mining claims covering approximately 4,322 hectares (ha) (10,680 acres [ac]) and is centered at 469500.9 E, and 4218056.0 N (NAD 83 UTM Meters Zone 11N). ABTC owns 100% of the claims comprising the Tonopah Flats property. Ownership of the unpatented mining lode claims is in the name of the holder (locator), subject to the paramount title of the United States of America. Under the Mining Law of 1872, the locator has the right to explore, develop, and mine minerals on unpatented mining lode claims without payments of production royalties to the U.S. government. The 517 unpatented lode claims include rights to all locatable subsurface minerals.

The Tonopah Flats property is in a broad alluvial basin of subdued topography between the San Antonio Mountains to the east and the Monte Cristo Mountains to the west, approximately 11 kilometers (km) (seven miles) northwest of the town of Tonopah, Nevada. Quaternary alluvial fan and pediment sedimentary deposits cover most of the property and are generally composed of silt, sand, and gravel from local sources. The alluvial cover has an average thickness of less than 15 meters (m) (50 feet [ft]) over much of the property and overlies a thick sequence of fluvial and lacustrine epiclastic claystone, volcanic conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, and tuff of the Miocene age Siebert Formation. The overall sedimentary package within the project area is flat lying to gently dipping.

Lithium mineralization occurs predominantly in the claystone of the Siebert Formation. Drilling by ABTC has so far defined an area of generally continuous lithium mineralization 7,925 m (26,000 ft) north to south by 1,524 m to 4,572 m (5,000 ft to 15,000 ft) east to west, with thicknesses ranging from 122 m to 436 m (400 ft to 1,430 ft).

In addition to the 5,704 m from 30 drill holes already reported, ABTC has conducted additional exploration through May 2025 consisting of 2,856 m from eight boreholes. From January 2025 to February 2025, eight core holes were drilled and from April 2025 to May 2025 an additional six sonic holes were drilled to collect geotechnical data on the alluvial gravels and assay data. Lithium mineralization was encountered in the majority of the boreholes drilled.

ABTC has conducted material characterization, mineral processing, and metallurgical testing on sample cuttings from its drill programs and cuttings collected from bulk samples. Two processing routes were employed to empirically evaluate this material: i) conventional mineral acid leaching, and ii) internally-developed pretreatment and selective lithium leaching. Subsequent purification and conversion processes of the extracted lithium to battery grade lithium hydroxide monohydrate (LHM) were performed and evaluated for each processing route.

The conclusions from the conventional mineral acid leaching efforts were generally aligned with commercially reported observations. These trials demonstrated high lithium extraction efficiencies (>90%), however low selectivity for lithium extraction relative to other elements. This low selectivity resulted in the need for extensive purification and conversion processes that require high reagent and water consumption and result in significant operating expenses.

When implementing ABTC’s internally-developed pretreatment and selective lithium leaching processes, moderate lithium extraction (>65%) was demonstrated, however with very high selectivity of lithium to other elements. This resulted in the use of simplified purification and conversion processes with very low consumption of chemical reagents and water, and very low processing lithium losses.

ABTC has constructed and is operating a multi-tonne per day integrated demonstration scale facility that utilizes lithium-bearing claystone feedstock specifically from the Tonopah Flats deposit as feedstock and processing this material through each of the refining operations of ABTC’s internally-developed pretreatment, selective lithium leaching, and refining operations. This facility is demonstrating the attributes of the internally-developed pretreatment and selective lithium leaching technology and generating large quantities of battery grade lithium hydroxide for evaluation by customers and stakeholders.

In addition to this selective leaching technique, it has been observed that the lithium within the claystone is not uniformly distributed throughout the various mineralizations. Initial test work has been performed that has allowed for the beneficiation of this claystone material, where the non- and low-lithium bearing minerals are separated from the bulk material, and the high-lithium bearing minerals are concentrated. These initial trials have demonstrated an increase in the grade of approximately 2.85x to over 2,000 parts per million (ppm) lithium. These beneficiation processes have the potential to substantially increase overall lithium extraction efficiencies and further reduce reagent and energy consumption.

The mineral resources for Tonopah Flats described and tabulated in this report are classified as Measured, Indicated, and Inferred in accordance with the SEC S-K 1300 New Mining Disclosure Rule and were estimated to reflect potential open-pit extraction. These resources were constrained with an optimization and cut-off grade satisfactorily to meet the requirement of reasonable prospects for economic extraction using a cut-off of 300 ppm within the mineralized units.

Sequential Gaussian Simulation (SGSim) was used to generate the mineral resource estimate for Li (ppm), which reduced uncertainty from the previous results. The Measured mineral resource blocks were classified within approximately 300 m of multiple drill holes and where the simulation variance did not exceed ±15% at the 90% confidence interval (CI). The Indicated mineral resource blocks were classified within approximately 600 m of multiple drill holes and where the variance was within ±15% at the 70% CI. The Inferred mineral resource blocks comprise the remaining blocks that fell outside of those criteria or are located more than 600 m from multiple drill holes.

The mineral resource for 2025 reported below is inclusive of the mineral reserve based on a 300 ppm cut-off.

ktonnes = kilotonnes

ppm = parts per million

tonnes = metric tonnes

There is some risk that a significant commodity price drop would change the economic inputs to the pit constraints used to report this resource. As a result, a conservative cut-off concentration of 300 ppm Li within the optimized pit is used in this analysis. It should be noted that without this grade constraint, the resulting pit shell using these parameters would be larger than has been used for the resources reported herein.

To convert a mineral resource into a mineral reserve, estimates of commodity prices, mining dilution, process recovery, refining/transport costs, royalties, mining costs, processing, and general and administration costs were used to estimate cut-off grades (COGs). These input parameters, along with geotechnical slope recommendations, formed the basis for the selection of economic mining blocks.

The economic mining blocks were identified using the Lerchs-Grossmann Pit Optimization Algorithm in the Maptek Vulcan software package, which produced a series of optimized open-pit shapes. The Qualified Person (QP) has selected one of the pit shells for detailed design and quantified the mineral reserves at the determined COG within the final pit design.

The lithium resources at Tonopah Flats are not subject to royalty. A mill recovery of 48% was utilized for the pit optimization. The mineral resources and reserves were reported undiluted, as the strip ratio is very low and the deposit shows little variability at the 300 ppm COG. No additional tonnage adjustment was necessary.

A summary of the mineral reserves for the TFLP is shown in Table 1-2 within the designed final pit for the Tonopah Flats deposit. In the detailed mine production schedule, the COG has been held constant at 300 ppm Li. The QPs have not identified any known legal, political, environmental, or other risks that would materially affect the potential development of the mineral reserves, except for the risk of not being able to secure the necessary permits from the government for the development and operation of the project; however, the QPs are not aware of any unique characteristics of the project that would prevent permitting.

ktonnes = kilotonnes

LHM = lithium hydroxide monohydrate

ppm = parts per million

tonnes = metric tonnes

The mine will be developed using conventional open-pit mining, selected based on the resources and reserves defined in the previous section, and its relatively low cost. This method encompasses drilling, blasting, loading and hauling, and related support activities. Due to the predominantly soft rock conditions within the project area, drilling and blasting requirements are expected to be minimal, accounting for only approximately 5% of the clay material.

A pit optimization process was utilized to generate the ultimate pit shell, along with eight intermediate pit shells representing the phases (pushbacks). These pit shells served as the basis for the final pit and phase designs, which were subsequently used to develop the life of mine (LOM) production schedule. These phases are designed to optimize production rates, facilitate construction activities, and support backfill operations.

The pit designs utilize 10-m-high benches with a 9.65-m-wide catch bench installed on every other bench (double-benching), or 20 vertical meters apart. The bench face angle used is 45º. The resulting inter-ramp slope is 34º. The design road width of 30 m is used resulting in the overall stope angle of 33º.

Ore production rate was established in alignment with the refinery’s throughput of 30,000 tonnes (t) of LHM per year, necessitating an approximate feed rate of 12,400,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) over the LOM. The mine is planned to operate continuously, with two 12-hour shifts per day, 365 days per year. Key milestones within the LOM production schedule are summarized as follows:

The waste management infrastructure comprises a waste rock facility (WRF), dry-stack tailings storage facility (TSF), a coarse gangues (CG) dump, and one backfill dump split into eight phases. These facilities were designed in accordance with geotechnical guidelines to ensure slope stability and overall structural integrity. The waste rock from the pit, along with waste generated from refinery, will be sent to these destinated waste management facilities.

As part of the comprehensive mine planning process, detailed plans have been developed for equipment selection, drilling, blasting, staffing, reclamation, ROM ore handling, tailings and coarse gangue handling, and overall costing. The primary mining fleet for this project will include hydraulic shovels, wheel loaders, haul trucks, dozers, graders, water trucks, etc. This primary equipment will be supplemented by ancillary equipment as required. Both routine and preventive maintenance will be conducted in-house, while the owner and equipment vendors will collaboratively manage major repairs and equipment overhauls.

The initial process design is scaled to produce 30,000 tpa of battery grade LHM, and the process plant is based on achieving a nameplate feed tonnage of 11.9 million tpa (Mtpa) of claystone. Refinery installation is planned in three phases of 5,000 tpa, 12,500 tpa, and 12,500 tpa, in Phases 1-3, respectively. The process flow sheet consists of six process areas, namely: Feed Comminution and Screening, Extraction, Impurity Removal and Concentration, Impurity Crystallization, Sulfate Crystallization, and Lithium Hydroxide Conversion.

The refinery will receive lithium claystone from the open pit mine via mine haul trucks. Claystone will be processed through the comminution circuit where it will be sized, processed, and pretreated as part of the extraction. Lithium will be extracted into an aqueous phase from the pretreated claystone. Impurities are to be removed from the aqueous phase using precipitation, membrane technology, and crystallization. LHM will be produced using a combination of electrochemical conversion and crystallization. The filtered tailings from the extraction and impurity removal process, along with solids generated from off-gas handling, are planned to be combined and placed in a temporary dry-stack tailing impoundment. As areas of the pit are mined out, tailings will be placed as backfill.

A TSF is planned to be located between the proposed pit and the refinery facility. This TSF, storing both the CG and the tailings in two separate facilities, will be used until the tailings can be returned back into the open pit. A stability analysis was performed for both static and earthquake conditions, indicating that the TSF can be safely built using 2.5-horizontal to 1-vertical slopes (2.5H:1V) with a 9-m-high perimeter berm encapsulating both tailing facilities. Surface water from outside the mining site will be diverted to a series of ponds on the southern portion of the site. Runoff from within the mining site will be diverted to a pond located on the western edge of the facility.

The capital and operating cost estimates for this project were based on the costs associated with mining, processing/refining, safety and training, infrastructure, site reclamation and closure, and all other relevant direct and indirect expenditures necessary to ensure the successful execution of this project. These cost estimates were developed using data collected from in-house databases, vendor quotations, contractors, reliable publicly available sources, benchmarking from similar lithium projects, operational experiences, and other industry-standard estimating factors.

These costs in this report are presented in 2025 USD on a calendar year basis. No escalation or inflation is included.

The capital cost projections were defined and developed based on expected quantities of materials, labor, and equipment. The expected quantities were derived from engineering drawings, early-stage 3D models, and preliminary facility layout. The capital costs in this report have an expected accuracy of +/-25% based on AACE International guidance related to Class 4 capital cost estimates.

Process capital costs were estimated by ABTC and Woods Process Services, LLC. (Woods), while mining, infrastructure, and other capital expenses were estimated by ABTC and Barr. The total estimated capital cost for the design, construction, installation, and commissioning of project facilities includes approximately $2.0 billion in pre-production and initial capital expenditures through year 5, and $205.6 million in new and sustaining capital costs over the remaining LOM, as reflected in Table 1-3, bringing the total capital requirement over the 45-year mine life considered in this PFS to an estimated $2.2 billion.

yr = year

The average LOM operating cost equates to $6,994/t of LHM produced. The project average annual operating cost is approximately $199.5 million, supporting a refinery’s throughput of 30,000 tpa of LHM, along with an average refinery feed rate of 12.4 Mtpa, and an average mining rate of 15.6 Mtpa. Table 1-4 presents a summary of the operating cost.

LOM = life of mine

t = metric tonne

LHM = lithium hydroxide monohydrate

ABTC and Barr created a cash-flow model based on the production schedule and resulting revenue stream in accordance with the costs presented. Only Measured and Indicated mineral resources were used to create the revenue stream. The PFS limits the TFLP to a mine life of 45 years for approximately 599.8 Mt with an average of 805 ppm Li grade processed and a total recovery including beneficiation, extraction, and refining of 48%. With $2.0 billion in initial capital costs, processing costs of $4,307/t of LHM, overall operating costs of $6,994/t of LHM produced, and average production of 30,000 tpa of LHM, this project is estimated to have a $2.57 billion after-tax net present value (NPV) at an 8% discount rate. At a discount rate of 10%, the after-tax net NPV is $1.75 billion. The project has a 21.8% Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and 7.5-year payback of initial capital. Mineral resources that are not categorized as reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

Revenues, operating costs, and capital costs were evaluated from +/-30% of the values in 10% increments, using the PFS cash flow model. Figure 1-1 shows the cash flow sensitivity in NPV (8%) graphically. The steeper slope of the revenue line shows that the project is most sensitive to the price of lithium and less sensitive to the operating and capital costs.

This PFS has integrated drilling, testing, design, and economic evaluation data, as described in the various sections of this report. This PFS represents a significant step forward from the previously published IA, providing an updated resource estimate, reserve estimate, viable mining plan, technically feasible processing scenario, tailings and mine waste management approach, update on permitting considerations, and a resultant economic evaluation.

The Mineral Resource estimate has been updated with additional drilling conducted in 2025. This resulted in the updating of the geologic and mineralization domains. The Mineral Resource exclusive of the Mineral Reserve within Measured and Indicated categories consists of 2,333,767 ktonnes at 712 ppm Li.

The drilling has thus far defined an area of generally continuous mineralization 7,925 m (26,000 ft) north to south by 1,524 m to 4,572 m (5,000 ft to 15,000 ft) east to west, with known thicknesses up to 436 m (1,430 ft). Clay beds with higher concentrations of lithium are localized to semi-continuous, and the lithium-bearing beds are generally contained in a 1,219- to 3,048-m wide (4,000- to 10,000-ft wide) corridor in multiple stratigraphic horizons from 6.1 m to 35 m (20 ft to 115 ft) in thickness, running north to south through the central portion of the property.

ABTC, in partnership with Hazen Research, Inc. (Hazen), Pocock Industrial Inc. (Pocock), and SGS Canada, Inc. (SGS), has been conducting a comprehensive mineral processing and metallurgical testing program since Spring 2022 to produce high-purity lithium hydroxide from lithium-bearing claystone. Initial efforts using conventional acid leaching (HCl and H₂SO₄) achieved high lithium extraction rates (>80%) but also extracted unwanted gangue minerals and deleterious elements, increasing reagent consumption and complicating purification. To address this, ABTC developed pretreatment methods that improved selectivity by converting lithium into more leachable forms while minimizing impurity extraction. These methods maintained strong lithium recovery (70–85%) and significantly reduced impurities in the pregnant leach solution (PLS), streamlining downstream purification and improving economic viability.

Building on successful bench-scale results, ABTC constructed and operated a 5-tpd pilot plant, validating the feasibility of producing battery-grade LHM. The team also explored beneficiation techniques to concentrate lithium-bearing minerals, achieving a 2.85x upgrade ratio from run-of-mine ore, which reduced processing costs and improved efficiency. Process simulations using METSIM and Aspen were employed to optimize operational parameters and economics. The report highlights bench-scale and pilot plant results, beneficiation and pretreatment studies, and ongoing efforts to refine reagent use and enhance final product purity. Further testing and pilot runs are planned to support the upcoming feasibility study (FS).

It should be noted that this PFS was limited to a mine life of 45 years and only a portion of the South Pit was included in the mine life and economic analysis. A 45-year mine life will not exhaust the known mineral reserves and resources.

The QPs believe that the data provided by ABTC, and the geological interpretations Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. (Dahrouge) has derived from the data, are an accurate and reasonable representation of the project, subject to those concerns written elsewhere in this report.

The current lithium resources remain open to the south, southwest, and at depth. It is reasonable to assume that there is the potential to significantly expand the resources with further drilling extending to the south and southwest property boundaries, and at greater depths.

Processing lithium-clay deposits is an uncommon practice in lithium production worldwide, currently. The work to date has demonstrated the likely economic extraction of the resources reported herein, based on the test work described in this report. To address this risk, ABTC has constructed and continues to operate a multi-tonne per day pilot plant that operates on representative bulk samples from the deposit and these operations will continue to derisk the processing approach.

The operating expenditure (OPEX) for this project are heavily weighted to the power consumption of the refinery. As a result, the power supply to the TFLP is a major risk factor. ABTC has addressed this through a combination of power sources, namely solar power production, with battery energy storage, combined with grid power supplied by NV Energy. Furthermore, ABTC has an operational plan that prorates production during times of high and low power availability or constraint. Further refinement of this approach through power system modeling and process design modifications will help reduce the risk in this area.

The price of LHM can vary widely. This represents a major risk to project economics. Expected reasonable near-term lithium price variations are addressed in the sensitivity analysis of this report.

While the PFS indicates positive cash flow, additional studies are needed to advance to the FS, as described below.

NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act

2    Introduction

Barr Engineering Co. (Barr). has prepared this Technical Report Summary (TRS) for the Tonopah Flats Lithium Project (TFLP), Esmeralda and Nye Counties, Nevada, USA, at the request of American Battery Technology Company (ABTC), a Nevada Corporation and a United States (U.S.) listed company (NASDAQ: ABAT) based in Reno, Nevada, USA. The purpose of this TRS is to disclose the results of a Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) for the Project. The Tonopah Flats property is considered a material property under S-K 1300.

ABTC is an integrated battery critical material manufacturing company focused on the supply of low-cost, low-environmental impact, and domestically sourced critical materials through its three core operations to support a sustainable closed-loop battery critical material economy. These core operations include the recycling of lithium-ion (Li) batteries, the development of domestic critical mineral mines, and the refining of these primary critical materials into refined critical material products. ABTC’s development of its primary lithium claystone resource and its associated claystone-to-lithium-hydroxide refinery near Tonopah, Nevada, namely the TFLP, is a key project to achieving the company’s mission.

In this report, measurements are generally reported in metric (SI) units. However, some test work was originally conducted with U.S. customary units of measure and may not have been converted to metric units within the chapters and sections of this report.

Unless otherwise indicated, all references to dollars ($) in this report refer to 2025 United States Dollars.

The scope of this updated PFS includes a review of pertinent technical reports and data provided to Barr, Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. (Dahrouge), and Woods Process Services, LLC (Woods) by ABTC relative to the general setting, geology, project history, exploration activities and results, methodology, quality assurance, interpretations, drilling programs, and metallurgy and mineral processing. Chapters 6 through 9 and chapter 11 were contributed by Dahrouge and chapters 10 and 14 were contributed by Woods.

Barr, Dahrouge, and Woods, as applicable, have relied on data and information provided by ABTC for the completion of this report as well as other sources of information cited specifically in portions of this PFS and listed in chapter 24, such as third-party laboratory test work and the associated reports. Additionally, information has been relied upon as previously disclosed in the initial assessment (IA) report for the Tonopah Flats Lithium Project, by Respec Company, LLC, and Woods Process Services (2024). The QPs have reviewed much of the available data and have made judgments about the general reliability of the underlying data. Where deemed either inadequate or unreliable, the data were either eliminated from use or procedures were modified to account for lack of confidence in that specific information. The QPs have made such investigations as deemed necessary in their professional judgment to be able to reasonably present the conclusions discussed herein.

Barr’s QP conducted a site visit of the TFLP on September 27, 2024. The visit included a tour of the core storage shed and multiple stops throughout the Tonopah Flats property. A selection of core and bulk samples were reviewed at the core shed. The visit to the mine site included stops at some of the drill hole collars, test pits, lithium resource outcrops, powerline corridors, and general viewing of the property topography.

On June 26, 2025, Barr QPs visited the ABTC pilot plant in Sparks, Nevada. The visit included a thorough tour of the pilot plant operation and viewing of the bulk feed materials being used for the pilot testing. Barr’s QPs also viewed bulk samples (supersacks) of combined tailings material from the pilot plant operations.

Mr. Jeff Woods, of Woods, the QP for chapters 10 and 14 of this report, has visited the pilot plant multiple times during the course of the project, including observing the pilot plant in operation.

The effective date of the current mineral resources and of this TRS is the date of this report.

3   Property Description and Location

Barr has relied fully on ABTC for the information in Section 3.1 through Section 3.5 as summarized in Section 25.

The Tonopah Flats property is in the southeastern portion of Big Smoky Valley approximately 11 km northwest of Tonopah in Esmeralda and Nye Counties, Nevada, USA. (Figure 3-1).

The Tonopah Flats property (Figure 3-2) is centered at 469500.9E, and 4218065.9N (NAD 83 UTM Meters Zone 11N). The property consists of 517 unpatented federal lode mining claims covering approximately 4,322 hectares. Appendix A provides a list of the individual lode claims that comprise the Tonopah Flats property.

In 2021, ABTC acquired an exploration license with an option to purchase lode claims 1 through 305 from 1317038 Nevada Ltd. Inc. The option was exercised by ABTC after a due diligence period and the agreement closed escrow in October 2022. ABTC staked additional lode claims in December 2021 (lode claims 306 through 427) and February 2022 (lode claims 428 through 517).

Ownership of the unpatented mining lode claims is in the name of the holder (locator), subject to the paramount title of the United States of America, under the administration of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Under the Mining Law of 1872, which governs the location of unpatented mining lode claims on federal lands, the locator has the right to explore, develop, and mine minerals on unpatented mining lode claims without payments of production royalties to the U.S. government, and subject to the surface management regulation of the BLM. The 517 unpatented lode claims include rights to all locatable subsurface minerals. Currently, annual claim-maintenance fees of $200 per claim are the only federal payments related to unpatented mining lode claims. As of the effective date of this report, these fees have been paid in full. The annual Nevada Division of Mineral Claim Notice of Intent to Hold fee is currently $12 per claim and due on or before November 1st of each year. The annual claim holding costs a total of $109,604 (Table 3-1).

Surface rights sufficient to explore, develop, and mine minerals on the unpatented mining lode claims are inherent to the claims as long as the claims are maintained in good standing. The surface rights are subject to all applicable state and federal environmental regulations.

The Tonopah Flats property is owned 100% by ABTC with no significant encumbrances or agreements such as leases, options, or purchase payments known to Barr. Tonopah Flats is currently operated as a mid-stage project with studies advancing for mineral resources, metallurgy and processing, engineering and economics, and environmental permitting. Key BLM permits and bonding for these activities are in place as of the effective date of this report and include:

There are no royalties associated with the Tonopah Flats property.

Barr is not aware of any significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the property other than those described in Sections 3.1 through 3.5.

4   Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography

The Tonopah Flats lithium property is located approximately 11 kilometers (km) northwest of Tonopah, Nevada and 129 km east of Bishop, California in the southeastern portion of the Big Smoky Valley. The property covers flat to gently sloping, shrub-covered high desert. Vegetation includes sage brush, rabbit brush, and other hardy desert plant communities. Elevations range from approximately 1,500 m in the northwestern portion of property to 1,640 m in the southeastern portion of the property.

Access to the Tonopah Flats lithium property is via U.S. Highways 6 and 95, (US 6/95) which bisects the central portion of the property from southeast to northwest. The Gabbs Pole Line Road parallels the eastern boundary of the property. Numerous unpaved roads extend through the property allowing for easy access throughout. The nearest commercial airport and railroads are in Reno, Nevada, approximately 266 km northwest of the property.

The climate at the Tonopah Flats property area is semi-arid. As shown in Table 4-1 January is the coldest month of the year, with an average high temperature of 6 °C and average low temperature of -7 °C. July is the hottest month with an average high temperature of about 33 °C and average low temperature of 14 °C. Average annual precipitation includes approximately 127 millimeters (mm) of rainfall and 406 mm of snow (Weather Averages Tonopah, Nevada, n.d.). In general, the area is dry, with monsoonal rains during the summer and cold, snowy storms in the winter. Exploration and mining activities can be conducted year-round.

mm = millimeters

Power is available to the site from high-voltage powerlines that extend along the Gabbs Pole Line Road immediately east of the property and from lines that run along US 6/95 through the central portion of the property. ABTC has used metered municipal water from the city of Tonopah during their exploration drilling programs and will continue to do so for future drilling. ABTC has identified a suitable water source for the project through water exploration drilling. An exploration well and a water production well have been drilled on the project site. Current hydrologic studies by ABTC indicate sufficient water is available for the project. Anticipated future water usage for development of the property will require an application to the State of Nevada, Division of Water Resources for a temporary (25 years or less) mining and milling water usage permit.

Tonopah is situated roughly equidistant from Reno and Las Vegas, Nevada. Necessary supplies, equipment, and services to carry out full sequence exploration and mining development projects are available in Tonopah and the larger Nevada communities. Additionally, a trained mining-industrial workforce is available in Tonopah and much of Nevada. The Tonopah Flats property area is uninhabited. The overall subdued topography that characterizes much of the property provides ample ground for the siting of mine facilities, tailings, and waste dumps. It is anticipated that a right-of-way (ROW) along US 6/95 corridor will be developed with appropriate federal, state, and local agencies as the project progresses.

ABTC currently has an office with storage and laboratory space located on South Main Street in Tonopah, approximately 11 km southeast of the subject property. An additional 139 square meters (m2) of warehouse and office space and fenced outdoor storage area for exploration equipment and sample storage bins are located on Ketten Road in Tonopah. The Ketten Road property also houses ABTC’s core logging and cutting facility.

5   History

Exploration on the subject property, as an extension of the Tonopah mining district, dates to the early 20th century. At least two shallow, hand-dug vertical shafts for precious metal exploration are present in the southern and northwestern portions of the property. The shafts are caved but likely did not exceed 30 m in depth and did not reach bedrock. They were later used as water sources, as one has the remains of an old windmill.

Past exploration, estimated to date from the 1970s, consists of numerous shallow bulldozer excavations, likely completed as required annual assessment work for historical maintenance of BLM lode claims. Several historical drill holes have also been located on the property and are presumed to be part of the assessment. No further information is known about the historical exploration program or project owners at the time of this work.

In 2020, Nevada Alaska Mining Company (NAMC) staked 305 unpatented lode claims for lithium claystone similar to that found on the adjacent American Lithium TLC deposit. Forty-four surface samples were collected by hand-digging small pits to depths ranging from approximately 0.46 m to 0.9 m or more and placing representative material into labeled sample bags. The samples were collected at locations where tuff, sandstone, and clay crop out at the surface. Each sample location was recorded on paper maps at the time of collection. The samples were assayed at ALS Limited – Geochemistry (ALS) in Reno, Nevada and returned an average of 780 parts per million (ppm) lithium over an area of approximately 4 km by 3 km. The highest reported lithium value was 1,530 ppm.

NAMC’s claims were acquired by 1317038 Nevada Ltd. in 2020. In 2021, ABTC secured an exploration license with an option to purchase from 1317038 Nevada Ltd. Following a due diligence period, the option was exercised and ABTC gained 100% ownership of the claims in October 2022. ABTC subsequently staked 212 additional lode claims in December 2021 and February 2022.

A discussion of ABTC’s exploration activities is presented in Chapter 7 of this report.

6   Geologic Setting, Deposit Type, and Mineralization

The TFLP is situated in a broad alluvial basin of subdued topography between the San Antonio Mountains to the east and the Monte Cristo Mountains to the west. The project area is along the eastern margin of the Walker Lane tectonic belt, an approximately 80 km wide, northwest- trending zone in western Nevada and eastern California (Stewart, 1988). Prominent northwest-trending strike-slip faults and related north-south to northeast trending normal faults characterize much of the Walker Lane tectonic belt and accommodate part of the motion between the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate. The belt separates the Sierra Nevada and Basin and Range physiographic provinces.

The regional geologic setting is characterized by late Miocene to Quaternary alluvial basins surrounded by uplifted ranges generally exposing Cretaceous intrusive cores which are structurally overlain by Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary rocks and Cenozoic volcanic rocks. The Cenozoic volcanic rocks in the San Antonio Mountains are of Oligocene and Miocene ages that vary in composition from rhyolite to trachyandesite (Bonham & Garside, 1979). The Oligocene volcanic rocks include thick units of felsic ash-flow tuff erupted from the Central Nevada Caldera Complex north of the San Antonio Mountains. The Miocene units were interpreted to have been erupted from volcanic centers within the San Antonio Mountains (Bonham & Garside, 1979), including the Fraction caldera and the Heller caldera of the Tonopah volcanic center (John & Henry, 2022). Miocene volcanism near Tonopah has been linked to ancestral Cascade arc magmatism (du Bray et al., 2019; John & Henry, 2022).

The Tonopah Mining District lies on the eastern portion of a zone of NW-SE trending disrupted structure, known as the Walker Lane tectonic belt that separates the Sierra Nevada batholith from the Basin and Range province in the Great Basin of Nevada. The Basin and Range is a tectonic province west of the Rocky Mountains and Colorado Plateau, which underwent crustal extension and elevated thermal activity in the mid-Tertiary that developed the characteristic basin and range physiography. The ranges are comprised of fault-bounded mountain ranges that are dominantly composed of Proterozoic and Paleozoic sedimentary rocks, while the basins were filled with volcanic deposits and erosional detritus shed from the ranges (Bonham & Garside, 1979).

The Miocene-aged Siebert Formation is composed of epiclastic fluviatile and lacustrine conglomerates, sandstone, siltstone, and subordinate quantities of both subaerially and subaqueously deposited ashfall and lithic tuffs. Northerly-trending faults in the area are believed to be contemporaneous with Basin and Range faulting (Bonham & Garside, 1979). There is evidence of later plutonism as the Siebert Formation is locally intruded by intermediate to felsic plutons and dikes. Outcrops of the Siebert Formation are shown on Figure 7-1 and Figure 7-2 as “Ts.”

Much of the geologic information presented in this section is from Bonham and Garside (1979), which included a geologic map of the Tonopah, Lone Mountain, Klondike, and Northern Mud Lake Quadrangles, Nevada, with accompanying text.

The TFLP is entirely within a low-lying portion of the Big Smoky Valley. Quaternary fan and pediment deposits cover most of the property and are generally composed of silt, sand, and gravel from local sources. Ephemeral stream deposits are located along the southwestern edge of the property. The stream deposits are transitional between upland fans and pediments and lower relief areas and are distinguished from other alluvial fans by their position near valley floors (Bonham & Garside, 1979). The alluvial cover averages less than 12 to 15 m over much of the property and overlies a thick sequence of claystone interbedded with tuff and sandstone of the Miocene-age Siebert Formation. The Siebert Formation has been dated at 13 to 17 Ma and contains a wide range of sedimentary and pyroclastic rocks. The bulk of the formation includes fluvial and lacustrine epiclastic volcanic conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, and lesser subaerial and subaqueous tuff (Bonham & Garside, 1979). The thickness of the formation varies from 183 to 450 m but may be as much as 914 m in the center of Montezuma Valley, approximately 24 km south of the property. The Siebert Formation was derived from local sources in the San Antonio Mountains and Lone Mountain, which bounds the southern part of the valley. Much of the formation was deposited under alternating fluvial and lacustrine conditions. Fossil mammals, fish, and invertebrates have been identified within the formation and fossil bird tracks have been identified approximately 5 m west of Tonopah.

In the project area, claystone and tuff beds of the Siebert Formation crop out in several locations. Bonham and Garside (1979) mapped a high-angle fault extending across the property from the southwest to the northeast (Figure 6-1). This structure is interpreted to be related to Basin and Range extensional faulting.

Precambrian rocks of the Wyman Formation, Deep Springs Formation, and Reed Dolomite are present along the flanks of Lone Mountain. These units are intruded by Mesozoic rocks of the Lone Mountain Pluton which range in composition from gabbro through quartz monzonite and granite. A silicic porphyry dike swarm of Tertiary age intrudes the plutonic units.

To the east of the Tonopah Flats property is the San Antonio Mountains and the center of the Tonopah mining district. The volcanic units east of the property generally consist of silicic flow-domes, intrusions, ash-flow tuffs, breccias, and tuffaceous sedimentary rocks of the Tonopah Formation, Mizpah Formation, and the Tonopah Summit Member of the Fraction Tuff.

Source: RESPEC Company, LLC, and Woods Process Services, 2024

ABTC’s drilling, as summarized in Section 7.2 and 7.3 of this report, has intersected a thick sequence of massive to finely bedded, poorly lithified to unlithified, calcareous claystone below approximately 6 to 12 m of alluvium. The claystone appears to have been deposited in a reduced or anoxic environment. Thin (generally 3 m or less) interbeds of siltstone, tuffaceous sandstone, conglomerate, and tuffs are present to depths of up to approximately 436 m or more. A semi-continuous, one- to three-meter-thick crystal tuff “marker” bed has been intersected in many of the drill holes at depths ranging from 122 m to 159 m. Opal sinter and fault breccias have been locally intersected in drilling. ABTC geologists have divided the claystone into three separate units based on the observed depositional environments (upper, middle, and lower units) identified during core logging from the most recent drilling campaign (discussed in Section 7.3). The crystal tuff “marker” bed separates the lower and middle claystone units. Cross-sections through the Tonopah Flats property are presented in Figure 6-2 and Figure 6-3. A detailed stratigraphic column is shown in Figure 6-4.

Alluvial gravel (light yellow), gray-green (upper lithium clay unit), brown-green (middle lithium clay unit), green (lower lithium clay unit), red dashed line (crystal tuff marker bed), blue dashed line (faults).

Alluvial gravel (light yellow), gray-green (upper lithium clay unit), brown-green (middle lithium clay unit), green (lower lithium clay unit), red dashed line (crystal tuff marker bed), blue dashed line (faults).

Source: RESPEC Company, LLC, and Woods Process Services, 2024

Lithium mineralization has been identified within the Miocene Siebert Formation in the southeastern portion of Big Smoky Valley. Lithium mineralization occurs within a thick sequence of lacustrine claystones with thin (3 m or less) interbeds of silt, tuffaceous sandstone, and crystal tuffs. The identified claystone thickness in the project area exceeds 436 m and appears to thicken toward the sedimentary basin to the west. The overall sedimentary package within the project area is flat lying to gently dipping as indicated by a tuffaceous marker bed identified in drill hole chips and core.

A drill hole on the western edge of the drilled area encountered 160 m of alluvial cover and did not reach the claystone unit. However, the hole was collared adjacent to a fault mapped by Bonham and Garside (1979) that bounds thicker Quaternary fill to the west. Drilling on an adjacent property to the west of the Tonopah Flats property has also confirmed a thick sequence of alluvial material west of the fault. Oligocene and older Miocene volcanic rocks below the Siebert Formation have not been encountered at the maximum depth of present drilling (436 m).

Drilling by ABTC has so far defined an area of generally continuous lithium mineralization 7,925 m north to south by 1,524 m to 4,572 m east to west, with thicknesses up to 436 m. Clay beds with higher concentrations of lithium are localized to semi-continuous, and the lithium-bearing beds are generally contained in a 1,219 m- to 3,048 m-wide corridor in multiple stratigraphic horizons.

Elevated lithium mineralization from 6 m to 67 m in thickness and grading up to 1000 ppm trends north to south through the central portion of the property. Interbeds of tuffaceous sandstone, crystal tuff, and siltstone less than 3 m thick show a general decrease in lithium with values of 200 ppm or less

The lithium deposit, defined as of the effective date of this PFS, underlies and extends continuously, both north and south of US 6/95. For this reason, the lithium mineral resources estimated in Section 11.8 have been defined within two areas, the “North Pit” and the “South Pit”, which are located north and south of the highway, respectively. For the purpose of this PFS only the South Pit is being evaluated.

The TFLP is a sedimentary- or clay-hosted lithium deposit. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) presented a descriptive model of lithium in smectites of closed basins in the 2011 Open File Report 91-11A (Asher-Bolinder, 1991). These deposits are commonly tuffaceous, lacustrine rocks that contain swelling smectite clays. It has been suggested that the smectite clays may also be altered to illite during or post diagenesis.

This model proposed three forms of genesis for clay-hosted lithium deposits:

Tectonic settings that typically accommodate sedimentary- or clay-hosted lithium deposits are characterized by crustal or rift extension and bimodal volcanism with a depositional environment consisting of high rates of sedimentation within a closed or semi-closed basin. Controlling factors for these types of deposits can include the extent of lacustrine beds and the source or availability of lithium from silicic volcanic rocks (Asher-Bolinder, 1991).

During crystallization of lithium-enriched magma, lithium is incorporated into pyroxenes, amphiboles, and micas. If the magma then erupts, the lithium is deposited within phenocrysts contained in volcanic lavas and tuffs. Over thousands to millions of years, weathering and erosion of the volcanic rocks will preferentially leach lithium that can be redeposited in sediments in nearby basins. If the basin is a hydrologically closed or semi-closed system, such as were present during the Neogene and Quaternary in Nevada, the volcanic sediments can form clays by diagenetic processes.

Hydrothermal systems may also play an important role in deposition or remobilization of lithium. These systems can pick up lithium from downward percolating surface water, in-situ clays, or from leaching of lithium-bearing volcanic rocks and redeposit it into pre-existing clays (Starkey, 1982), particularly those of the montmorillonite (smectite) group.

Recent work by Dr. Thomas Benson and researchers at the University of Nevada, Reno, on the origin of the Thacker Pass lithium deposit in north-central Nevada, has suggested that in addition to leaching of lithium enriched tuffs by meteoric water, degassing and devitrification of tuffs underlying the McDermitt Caldera lake sediments resulted in the release of lithium and other metals. The lithium mobilized from the degassing was then incorporated into authigenic clays forming at the bottom of the caldera lake. The caldera served as a closed basin during degassing, sediment deposition, diagenesis, alteration, and weathering. The lithium captured within the caldera has resulted in one of the largest known lithium resources in the United States (Benson, 2022).

Additional work is required to better understand the origins of clay-type lithium enrichment. Figure 6-5 shows a recent schematic geologic model for sedimentary and clay-hosted lithium deposits.

Clay lithium deposits that formed in closed or semi-closed basins are located in a broad area of southwestern Nevada and adjacent to the TFLP, including the American Lithium TLC project, located immediately to the northeast and the Pan American Horizon project, located immediately to the south. These projects, including Tonopah Flats, may be part of a semi-continuous zone of enriched lithium-bearing sediments within the southeastern portion of Big Smoky Valley.

7    Exploration

Exploration conducted by ABTC commenced in the summer of 2021 and has included surface sampling and drilling as summarized below.

ABTC collected 29 surface samples in June 2021 prior to entering the agreement with 1317038 Nevada Ltd. The purpose of the sampling was to confirm elevated lithium values found in samples collected by NAMC and to conduct an initial survey of lithium mineralization present in alluvium and sedimentary units that are exposed at various locations throughout the property. Sample chips were generated utilizing a three-horsepower, two-cycle auger to depths ranging from 0.15 to 1.12 m. Samples were placed in 480 mm by 330 mm cloth sample bags and labeled with a unique identification number. The samples generally ranged in weight from 5 to 7 kilograms (kg). All samples were collected within the initial group of the 305 lode claims. Each sample location was recorded with a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) unit. All samples were collected under the supervision of Mr. Greg Kuzma, consulting geologist, or Mr. Ross Leisinger of ABTC. The NAMC and ABTC surface sample locations coded by lithium assay values are shown in Figure 7-1.

The ABTC 2021 samples were assayed at American Assay Laboratory (AAL) in Sparks, Nevada and returned an average of 314 ppm lithium over an area of approximately 5 km by 1.6 km. The highest reported lithium value for the surface samples was 882 ppm.

ABTC commenced drilling at the Tonopah Flats property in December 2021. A total of 3,658 m were drilled in 10 reverse circulation (RC) holes and 12 air core (AC) holes during 2021 and 2022 as summarized in Table 7-1. The drill hole locations were laid out in a rough grid within the initial 305 lode claims (Figure 7-2). Drillholes were spaced approximately 549 m to 1,067 m feet apart and were collared on easily accessible jeep roads that extend across the property. The purpose of the drilling program was early-stage exploration to determine the general depth, thickness, continuity, and tenor of the clay lithium mineralization at the property and to obtain samples to begin metallurgical testing. All holes were drilled vertically and ranged from 122 m to 270 m in depth.

The first six holes (TF-2101 through TF-2106) were drilled by Harris Exploration of Fallon, Nevada with a T-685 Schram track-mounted RC rig. The equipment included a 5 3/8-inch (136 mm) hammer bit and rotary splitter. The sample interval was 1.5 m with water injection. Each sample was collected in a cloth bag inside a 19-liter (L) bucket to assure that representative coarse and fine material was collected. Sample bags were numbered, labeled with pertinent information, and laid out sequentially. A separate line of bags was designated for duplicate samples which were collected for every 30 m of drilling. The samples were allowed to air dry at the drill site (weather permitting) prior to transportation to ABTC’s secure facility in Tonopah, Nevada. Chip samples from each 1.5 m interval were collected for geologic logging from a screen below the main outlet of the rotary sample splitter and placed in plastic chip trays. Separate geological samples were collected for each sample interval in labeled plastic bags for reference. Each drill hole collar location was recorded with a survey-grade GPS RTK unit accurate to 10 mm.

Drillholes TF-2207 through TF-2216 were drilled by Drill Rite NV, Inc. of Dayton, Nevada. The holes were advanced with a truck-mounted AC rig. The rig utilized a 5 3/8-inch (136 mm) AC bit, reduced to 3 7/8-inch (98.4 mm) as necessary and a rotary splitter. Samples were collected every 1.5 m in a cloth bag inside a 19-L bucket to assure that representative coarse and fine material was collected. Sample bags were numbered, labeled with pertinent information, and laid out sequentially. A separate line of bags was designated for duplicate samples which were collected every for every 30 m of drilling. The samples were allowed to air dry at the drill site (weather permitting) prior to removal to ABTC’s secure facility in Tonopah, Nevada. Chip samples for logging purposes were collected on a screen below the splitter and placed in plastic chip trays. Separate geological samples were collected for each sample interval in labeled plastic bags for reference. Each drill hole collar location was recorded with a survey grade GPS RTK unit accurate to 10 mm.

A second round of exploration drilling was conducted between July and September 2022. A total of 1,253 m were drilled in two AC and four RC holes (Table 7-1). Most of the holes for this phase of drilling stepped out from the initial holes or infilled the most widely spaced holes to test the continuity of lithium mineralization. Hole TF-2218 was collared approximately 61 m from hole TF-2208 to confirm continuation of a zone of higher-grade lithium mineralization. All the phase two exploration holes were drilled vertically and were collared within the original 305 claims.

Drillholes TF-2217 and TF-2218 were also drilled by Drill Rite NV, Inc. of Dayton, Nevada with an AC truck- mounted rig as described above for holes TF-2207 through TF-2216. Midway through hole TF-2218, the AC bit was exchanged for a rock bit to decrease plugging issues. Holes TF-2219 through TF-2222 were drilled with a track-mounted RC rig. The equipment included a 5 1/2-inch (139.7 mm) center pipe and a 5 3/8-inch (126 mm) rock bit. The drill rig was equipped with a Y-splitter set beneath a cyclone and rotary sample splitter. Samples were collected every 1.5 m in a cloth bag inside a 19-L bucket to assure that representative coarse and fine material was collected. Sample bags were numbered, labeled with pertinent information, and laid out sequentially. A separate line of bags was designated for duplicate samples which were collected every for every 15 m of drilling. The samples were allowed to air dry at the drill site (weather permitting) prior to removal to ABTC’s secure facility in Tonopah, Nevada. Chip samples for logging were collected on a screen below the main outlet of the rotary Y-splitter and placed in plastic chip trays. Separate geological samples were collected for each sample interval in labeled plastic bags for reference. Each drill hole collar location was recorded with a survey grade GPS RTK unit accurate to 10 mm.

Drillhole TF-2217 was drilled to 160 m at a location west of the fault shown in Figure 7-2 and only intersected alluvial gravels. No sample intervals from hole TF-2217 were submitted for laboratory analysis. Lithium mineralization was encountered in all the other 21 drill holes.

ABTC commenced a core drilling program at the Tonopah Flats property in July 2023. A total of 2,046 m were drilled in eight core holes (Table 7-1). The purpose of the program was to infill drill an area of higher-grade mineralization in the southern portion of the property, “twin” one RC drill hole (TF-2219) to confirm assays and lithologic units from earlier drilling and extend exploration to the southern property boundary. All holes were drilled south of US 6/95. Drillhole spacing was generally decreased to less than 610 m for the area south of the highway, except for one hole drilled adjacent to the southern property boundary, which is approximately 838 m from the nearest drill hole. The holes were collared on easily accessible jeep roads that extend across the property to minimize surface disturbance from drilling activities (Figure 7-2).

Drillholes TF-2323 through TF-2330 were drilled by KB Drilling of Mound House, Nevada. The holes were advanced with an Atlas Copco CS-14 truck-mounted rig by conventional wireline core drilling methods. When difficult ground conditions were encountered in drill hole TF-2323, KB Drilling reduced the tooling from PQ to HQ diameter for the remainder of the drilling program. Water was injected continuously during drilling. Each drill hole collar location was recorded with a survey grade GPS RTK unit accurate to 10 mm. All holes were drilled vertically and ranged from 216 m to 436 m in depth. No downhole surveys were collected during this program.

KB Drilling recovered core on 3 m runs unless broken ground or difficult drilling conditions made shorter runs necessary. The drillers stored all recovered core in wax-coated core boxes. The drillers recorded drill-run lengths and recoveries on wooden blocks placed between runs in the core boxes. Redrilled or reamed core was identified by the drillers and that information relayed to the onsite geologists.

Each day, core boxes were transported by the drillers or ABTC staff to the secure core logging facility in Tonopah. ABTC geologists logged the core, recording core recovery, rock quality designation (RQD), lithology, rock alteration, veining, and geological structures. After logging but before splitting, geologists or technicians sprayed the whole core with water and photographed it.

ABTC geologists or technicians saw-split the drill core at a workstation at the core logging facility. One half-core was retained for reference. The other half-core was bagged and labeled for analysis and was prepared for transport to the laboratory.

The 2025 drilling program was initiated to further inform the Mine Plan of Operations and provide geotechnical data for pit slope stability and waste rock storage facilities (WRSF) (Table 7-2). Drillholes TF25-GT1 through TF25-GT8 were drilled by True North Drilling of San Tan Valley, Arizona between January 19 and February 16, 2025. Total footage for this program was 2,056.5 m in eight holes. Additionally, shallow sonic drilling was done on six sites to provide geotechnical data on the alluvial gravels. A map of the sonic drill holes is shown below as Figure 7-3.

The holes were advanced utilizing a Torque Drill TD9000D track-mounted rig by conventional wireline core drilling methods using 3 m, HQ diameter equipment. Water was injected continuously during drilling. Each drill hole collar location was recorded with a survey grade GPS RTK unit accurate to 10 mm. Holes were drilled at angles ranging from –80 to –60 degrees and ranged from 233 m to 300 m in depth. Various downhole surveys were collected during this program. A map of the eight drill holes is shown as Figure 7-4.

True North recovered core on 3 m runs unless broken ground or difficult drilling conditions made shorter runs necessary. The drillers stored all recovered core in wax-coated core boxes. The drillers recorded drill-run lengths and recoveries on wooden blocks placed between runs in the core boxes. Redrilled or reamed core was identified by the drillers and that information relayed to the onsite geologists.

Core boxes were transported daily by the drillers or ABTC staff to the secure core logging facility in Tonopah. ABTC geologists logged the core, recording core recovery, RQD, lithology, rock alteration, veining, and geological structures. The core was also logged by Barr engineers for geotechnical analysis and select samples taken for laboratory analysis, after logging but before splitting, geologists or technicians sprayed the whole core with water and photographed it.

ABTC geologists or technicians saw-split the drill core at a workstation at the core logging facility. One half-core was retained for reference. The other half-core was bagged and labeled for analysis and was prepared for transport to the laboratory.

Lithium mineralization has been encountered in 37 out of 38 holes drilled by ABTC at the Tonopah Flats property. One hole (TF-2217), drilled west of the fault identified by Bonham and Garside (1979) (Figure 6-1) intersected alluvial material to the total depth drilled of 160 m. No samples from this hole were submitted to the analytical laboratory for analysis. As presented in Section 6.3, drilling by ABTC has so far defined an area of generally continuous lithium mineralization 7,925 m north to south by 1,524 m to 4,572 m east to west, with thicknesses up to 436 m at the property. Assays have ranged from 27.6 ppm Li to 1,940 ppm Li in the drilling with an average of just over 584 ppm Li. Notable lithium assay intervals from the drilling programs are presented in Table 7-3 below.

ID = identification

m = meter

ppm = parts per million

The ABTC procedures pertaining to the handling, logging, and security of RC, AC, and core samples generated during ABTC’s drilling programs have been reviewed and found suitable to industry practices. In the opinion of the QP, the samples are representative of the mineralized material at the site and are reliable for use in the estimation of a mineral resource.

Barr’s QP conducted a site visit of the TFLP on September 27, 2024. The visit included stops at the core storage shed and multiple stops at the Tonopah Flats property. A selection of core and bulk samples were reviewed at the core shed. The visit to the mine site included stops at some of the drill hole collars, test pits, lithium resource outcrops, powerline corridors, and general viewing of the property topography.

8    Sample Preparation, Analysis, and Security

This section summarizes the data relating to sample preparation, analysis, and security, and the quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures that pertain to the TFLP. The information has been provided by ABTC. The QP has reviewed this information and believes it is materially accurate. Section 8.1 pertains to procedures carried out for historical surface sampling by NAMC, a previous owner of the original land holdings. Section 8.2 discusses sample preparation, analysis, and security procedures for ABTC’s exploration program. A summary statement regarding the adequacy of the samples for use in resource estimation is presented in Section 8.6.

NAMC submitted 59 surface samples to ALS, an independent, commercial laboratory in Reno, Nevada, between March and June 2020. The samples were crushed in their entirety to at least 70% at minus 19 mm and riffle-split to obtain 250 gram (g) subsamples. The subsamples were then pulverized to at least 85% at <75 microns. The samples were analyzed for 51 major, minor, trace, and rare-earth elements by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) following a laboratory-preferred 4-acid digestion for lithium analysis. QA/QC samples, such as field duplicates, blanks, and certified reference materials (CRMs), were not included in the surface sample program conducted by NAMC.

The following sections summarize sample preparation, analysis, sample security, and QA/QC procedures by ABTC.

ABTC personnel collected 29 surface samples in June 2021. The samples were placed in cloth bags and labeled with unique numbers. Two QA/QC samples were inserted by ABTC into the sample stream, including one blank pulp and one CRM (MEG Li.10.11) pulp. The samples were transported by ABTC personnel to AAL in Sparks, Nevada, an independent geochemical analytical laboratory that retains ISO/IEC 17025:2017 Laboratory Accreditation.

The samples were dried, weighed, and then jaw-crushed to 85% at <6 mesh (3.4 mm). The crushed samples were then roll-crushed to 90% at <10 mesh (1.7 mm) and riffle split in a Jones splitter to obtain approximately 1.0001-kg subsamples, which were then ring-pulverized to 90% at <150 mesh (0.104 mm). The samples were analyzed for 48 major, minor, trace, and rare-earth elements by ICP-MS following a laboratory-preferred 4-acid digestion for lithium analysis.

ABTC utilized AAL for all samples generated from drill holes TF-2101 through TF-2208 and Paragon Geochemical (Paragon) for all samples generated from drill holes TF-2209 through TF-2222. Both laboratories, located in Sparks, Nevada, are independent of ABTC and hold ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accreditation.

All drill sample bags were labeled with a unique sample number prior to transportation to ABTC’s office in Tonopah. The samples were organized, QA/QC samples were inserted into the sample stream, and a log of drill hole samples, duplicates, blanks, and CRMs was prepared by ABTC personnel. The samples were then transported to ABTC’s secure, fenced yard, approximately 1 km from their office, and placed in storage bins. The bins were picked up by arrangement from the secure yard by AAL or Paragon personnel, and the date and the number of samples transported were recorded on a sample chain-of-custody form.

RC rig-duplicate samples were collected at the drill rig every 15 to 30 m (every 10th to 20th sample). Control blanks or CRMs accompanied each sample batch to the laboratory and were inserted every 20th sample. On average, one coarse blank, one CRM, and one field duplicate were inserted for every 20 drill samples.

The drill samples submitted to AAL were dried, weighed, and then jaw-crushed to 85% at <6 mesh (3.4 mm). The crushed samples were then roll-crushed to 90% at <10 mesh (1.7 mm) and riffle split in a Jones splitter to obtain approximately 1.0001-kg subsamples, which were then ring pulverized to 90% at <150 mesh (0.104 mm). The samples were analyzed for 48 major, minor, trace, and rare-earth elements by ICP-MS following a laboratory-preferred 4-acid digestion for lithium analysis. Two QA/QC samples were inserted by AAL into the sample stream, including one blank and one CRM (MEG Li.10.11).

The drill samples submitted to Paragon were oven dried at 110 °C and then single-stage crushed to a nominal 0.203-cm particle size. Each crushed sample was riffle split and pulverized to >85% at <200 mesh (<75 microns). The samples were analyzed for 48 major, minor, trace, and rare-earth elements by ICP-MS following an aqua-regia digestion process. Two QA/QC samples were inserted by Paragon into the sample stream, including one blank and one CRM (MEG-Li.10.11).

ABTC utilized Paragon for all samples generated from drill holes TF-2323 through TF-2330. After completing core logging, an ABTC geologist or technician photographed each core box with relevant identifying information, including the hole number, core box number, and from–to footages.

Prior to sampling the core, the ABTC technician or geologist labeled cloth sample bags with the sample number and the from–to footages on the tag outside of each sample bag and added in-sequence QA/QC sample bags into the sample stream. Section 8.3 of this report addresses the QA/QC procedures employed by ABTC.

When the sequence of cloth sample bags was prepared, an ABTC technician or geologist then sampled the core. Competent core was cut in half lengthwise with a diamond-bladed core saw. The highly broken core was split by hand directly from the core box using a putty knife and/or chisel. The technician placed half of the split core into its pre-labeled cloth sample bag for analysis, and the other half back into the core box.

When collecting field duplicate samples, one-half of the split core was cut again lengthwise to make a quarter-core. The half core was used as the analytical sample, and one of the quarter cores was used as the field duplicate sample.

The samples were organized, QA/QC samples were inserted into the sample stream, and a log of drill hole samples, duplicates, blanks, and CRMs was prepared by ABTC personnel. The samples were then placed in storage bins. The bins were picked up by arrangement from the secure yard by Paragon personnel and the date and the number of samples transported were recorded on a sample chain-of-custody form.

The drill hole samples submitted to Paragon were oven dried at 110 °C and then single-stage crushed to a nominal 0.203-cm particle size. Each crushed sample was riffle split and pulverized to >85% at <200 mesh (<75 microns). The samples were analyzed for 48 major, minor, trace, and rare-earth elements by ICP-MS following an aqua-regia digestion process. Two QA/QC samples were inserted by Paragon into the sample stream, including one blank and one CRM (MEG Li.10.11). A complete library of all drill core is stored at ABTC’s secured core storage facility in Tonopah.

For the 2025 program, ABTC continued to utilize the Paragon Geochemical Laboratory in Reno, Nevada, for the analysis.

An ABTC geologist or technician photographed each core box with relevant identifying information, including the hole number, core box number, and from–to footages. Core was split and sampled in 1.5 m intervals.

Core was logged and prior to sampling the core, the ABTC technician or geologist labeled cloth sample bags with the sample number and the from–to footages on the tag outside of each sample bag and added in-sequence QA/QC sample bags into the sample stream.

The complete library of all drill core is stored at ABTC’s secured core storage facility in Tonopah.

The analytical portion of the QA/QC program employed by ABTC aimed to provide a means by which the accuracy and precision of the assaying that was performed on the RC drilling samples can be assessed to ensure the highest possible data quality. To achieve this goal, ABTC personnel inserted samples of CRMs (standards), which are commercially available pulverized materials certified to contain a known concentration of an element - in this case, lithium. The ABTC protocol was to use several CRMs of varying lithium concentrations during the drilling campaign and to randomly insert one CRM sample pulp into the stream of actual drill samples at a rate of up to two in fifty, depending on the phase of the drill program. The analytical QA/QC measures employed by ABTC during the latter part of the 2021-2022 drill program and the entire 2023 drill program are sufficient to properly monitor analytical accuracy and precision, and possible in-laboratory contamination. For the 2022 drilling program, ABTC used three CRMs obtained from Moment Exploration Geochemical Laboratory (MEG) of Lamoille, Nevada. An additional CRM obtained from MEG was used in 2023, bringing the total count to four CRMs used in that program.

A typical criterion for accepting the analyses of CRMs in the mineral industry is that they should fall within a range determined by the certified average or expected value ± three standard deviations.

Blanks are samples known or thought to contain little or no values of the target element, lithium. They are inserted into the sample stream, and the results are monitored to be sure that the laboratory does not report significant values when little or no lithium should be present. ABTC used two blanks for their 2021-2022 drilling: two fine (pulp) blanks, both obtained from MEG. The pulp blank does not go through the sample preparation circuit and monitors only potential analytical contamination, which is extremely rare in commercial laboratories. For the drill programs, ABTC inserted blanks at a rate of about one blank for every two CRM samples.

In the 2023 and 2025 drill programs, a single coarse blank from MEG Laboratory was used. For both drill programs, ABTC inserted blanks at a rate of about one blank for every two CRM samples. Normally, a blank would be considered evaluated for results greater than five times the detection limit. With an average crustal abundance of around 20 ppm, it may be difficult to find suitable commercial blanks for lithium, and ABTC may need to develop a custom blank for the TFLP. ABTC deliberately chose commercial blanks designed for use with gold and silver that would allow for immediate identification of laboratory contamination during ICP analysis.

Field (rig) duplicates were also inserted into the sample stream at rate of about one duplicate for every drill hole 15 to 20 m of drilling. During the 2023 and 2025 drill programs, field duplicates were used at a regular interval of around one field duplicate per 60 samples. In 2022, over 60 field duplicates were analyzed by Paragon. These cross-laboratory duplicates were used to validate the analytical results from the two laboratories. Table 8-1 summarizes the quantities of QA/QC sample insertions by ABTC.

*Does not include Coarse/Pulp blanks as those were not inserted into the sample stream.

CRM = certified reference material

Three CRMs were used during the 2021-2022 drill program, all from MEG. All three CRMs were certified for lithium. One additional CRM was inserted during the 2023 program, also from MEG. The standard insertion rates for the 2022 and 2023 drill programs were 2.86% and 6.54%, respectively. Table 8-2 describes the CRMs used during the 2022 and 2023 drill programs:

CRM = certified reference material

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

Analyses of the three CRMs used in the 2021-2022 programs had three high failures and six low failures for lithium. Two of the three CRMs had a slight positive bias, with the third CRM having a slight negative bias. ABTC used AAL as the initial laboratory for the 2021-2022 drill programs and finished the programs with Paragon for over half of the final drill hole analyses. AAL also reported in-house laboratory standards, and these were evaluated with no failures, but are not shown or detailed in this document. Both laboratories used a 0.25 g sample aliquot with a 4-acid digestion for all ICP-MS analyses. Detection limits were <0.2 ppm for lithium for both laboratories. Results for the CRM lithium analyses are summarized in Table 8-3. Table 8-4 details the nine lithium failures in the 2021-2022 drilling.

CRM = certified reference material

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

CRM = certified reference material

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

All nine failures were analyses performed by Paragon, spanning seven certificates. The five low failures in the MEG Li.10.14 undoubtedly caused the slight negative bias. While two or three of the failures were very close to the failure limit, none of these could be mislabeled samples, as the values do not match another CRM in use at the time. The two laboratories were charted separately for each of the three CRMs. While the number of samples for both laboratories is low, it does appear that Paragon was failing more consistently for evaluating the CRM for lithium. Note that both laboratories used the same analytical method with the same detection limits. Figure 8-1 presents the control chart for the CRM MEG Li.10.14 and clearly illustrates the five low-side failures associated with Paragon’s certificates. Table 8-5 provides an explanation for Figure 8-1.

avg = average

CRM = certified reference material

The four standards used in this program had three high failures and five low failures for lithium. Two of the four CRMs had a slight positive bias, with a third CRM having a slight negative bias. ABTC used Paragon Laboratory of Sparks, Nevada, for all of the 2023 drill hole analyses. Paragon did not report in-house laboratory standards. The laboratory used a 0.25 gram ICP-MS with a multi-acid digestion for all analyses. Detection limits were <0.2 ppm for lithium. Results for the CRM lithium analyses for 2023 are summarized in Table 8-6. Table 8-7 details the eight lithium failures in the 2023 drilling.

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

All eight failures are from the same laboratory (Paragon) across four certificates. The three high failures in the MEG Li.10.11 CRM could be mislabeled samples, as the values match other CRMs in use at the time. Of the five low failures, three may also have been mislabeled samples. However, as the cut sheets clearly detail the CRM used, it is hard to prove the mislabeling of samples.

Figure 8-2 shows the control chart for the standard MEG Li.10.11, and clearly shows the three high-side failures associated with the Paragon Laboratory certificates. It is not known what actions ABTC took, if any.

Three standards were utilized throughout the sampling process. There were seven failures from the results returned from the laboratory. Failures have been determined to be a result of mislabeling of the CRM at the time of submission; no further action was taken in those batches.

There was a negative bias on one of the CRM and a positive bias on the other two. Similar trends were observed during previous sampling campaigns where these CRMS have been utilized. In Figure 8-3, the majority of assay results fell within the three standard deviation limits.

CRM = certified reference material

ppm = parts per million

Field duplicates were inserted into the sample stream at an insertion rate of 0.3% for the 2021-2022 drill program. For the 2023 drill program, a much more concerted effort was made with respect to duplicates, and field duplicates were inserted with an insertion rate of 1.65%. Duplicate pairs were evaluated by the charting in three distinct methods: a scatterplot showing an reduced major axis (RMA) regression, a quantile/quantile plot, and relative percent and absolute relative percent difference (ARPD) plots using both the maximum of the pair and the mean of the pair. The relative percent difference (RPD) of the maximum of the pair is expressed as follows:

The RPD of the mean of the pair is expressed as follows:

Two types of duplicates were evaluated for the 2021-2022 drill program including field (rig) duplicates and laboratory preparation duplicates.

Before changing analytical laboratories from AAL to Paragon, 63 rig duplicates from AAL were sent to Paragon for analyses. These duplicates were evaluated in total and by the two drill types, AC and RC. In addition, AAL did report laboratory preparation duplicates for 2021 and the first part of 2022. These laboratory preparation duplicates were evaluated both in total and by the two drill types. Although the data is insufficient to be statistically certain, it appears that the AC rig did not gather as good a sample as the RC rig. This is apparent in the field duplicates but is less so in the laboratory preparation duplicates. This may be a function of the sampling methodology used rather than the drilling method. There is also a slight negative bias between the AAL and Paragon coarse duplicate pairs.

All duplicate pairs were analyzed, with some issues found. Outliers were discarded as either a visual outlier on the scatterplot or an outlier with an ARPD of greater than 2,000. Outliers were removed for the purpose of calculating statistics, but they are important. They indicate that pairs of analyses that are expected to be similar are not. Efforts should be made to understand the reasons for outliers, and many outliers with unknown causes would be a concern.

The duplicate pairs were plotted for quality control for lithium only. Table 8-9 shows summary data for these duplicate pairs.

AC = air core

ARPD = absolute relative percent difference

RC = reverse circulation

RPD = relative percent difference

After removing the one outlier found on the scatterplot for the lithium field duplicates, the duplicate pairs showed less correlation between grades of about 400 and 1,200 ppm. An overall negative bias (-11.25) was found, showing that the original AAL values tended towards higher grades than the duplicate Paragon value. Charting only the RC samples removed some of the variation, but a slight negative bias was still observed. The following scatterplot shows some correlation across all grades, with higher variance at the mid-range lithium grades (Figure 8-4).

The relative percent difference chart (based on the mean of the pair) for the duplicates shows all relative differences under 120%, with higher variance between the mid-range grades of 300 to 800 ppm lithium (Figure 8-4). A relative difference based on the mean pair of less than 200% is considered acceptable.

Charting the laboratory preparation duplicates shows a well-behaved distribution of duplicate pairs, with almost no bias and a near-perfect regression line (Figure 8-5).

These laboratory preparation duplicates, while not ideal for evaluation, do show that the duplicate pairs taken are at least capable of a high degree of correlation.

For the 2023 drill program, field (rig) duplicates were inserted at a regular insertion rate of about one in sixty samples. No outliers were found, and all 24 rig duplicate pairs were used with a near-perfect scatterplot as shown below. Note the regression equation with an x-coefficient very near unity. Withstanding the small sample size of only 24 pairs, there appears to be good correlation across all grades. This gives confidence in both the rig sampling and analytical methods used.

For the 2025 drilling program, field duplicates were taken similar to the 2023 program. The duplicates were taken at approximately one in sixty, together with the rest of the QA/QC.

The results showed a good correlation between duplicate pairs, with a total of three samples plotting outside of a 10% difference. One result returned only an 11% bias. The duplicates showed a correlation coefficient of 0.9 (R2= 0.8127), as shown in Figure 8-8. This results in high confidence in the analytical method used for the 2025 drilling program.

Pulp blanks were used throughout the ABTC 2021-2022 drill program for the TFLP. A second pulp blank was also added during the last few holes drilled in the summer of 2022. Both blanks were obtained from MEG. Neither of the two blanks used had lithium values below the detection limit of 0.2 ppm, so they were evaluated as a low-grade CRM would be. Normally, a blank would be evaluated by setting the warning limit to five times the detection limit. The blanks are both derived from barren silica sand with the average lithium value for the initial pulp blank (MEG Blank 17.11) of 3.42 ppm Li, with a median value of 2.35 ppm and an average lithium value of the second pulp blank (MEG Silica Blank.21.03) of 4.81 ppm Li, with a median value of 4.05 ppm. Table 8-10 shows a summary of the blanks in use during the 2021-2022 and 2023 drill programs.

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

For the 2021-2022 drill program, seven pulp blanks from MEG Blank 21.03 were submitted with no lithium failure. ABTC also submitted 20 pulp blanks from MEG Blank 17.11 with one lithium failure. The single failure was based on a warning limit of the population average plus three times the standard deviation, after removing any outliers. The single failure for this drill program is shown in Table 8-11.

ppm = parts per million

Figure 8-10 shows the lithium values of the MEG Silica Blank 21.03 pulp blanks plotted with the preceding sample values.

In the 2023 drill program, 27 coarse blanks were submitted with no failures. Of these 27 blanks, six were “first blanks”, so they are the first sample in the sample stream. Since the previous value is unknown in the case of a “first blank”, these are plotted without reference to a previous value.

The chart in Figure 8-11 shows the 21 single coarse blanks used in 2023 and are plotted with the preceding sample grades for lithium.

Although low-grade lithium values are inherent in the coarse blank in use, no failures were observed when applying a warning limit of the average blank value plus three times the population standard deviation.

Utilizing a suitable Li blank for the project has been challenging. The silica blank utilized contains unknown quantities of Li (ppm), but it is utilized extensively in the gold mining industry.

It was determined that low-grade lithium values are inherent in the coarse blank in use; failure of the blank material results seemed not applicable since the content of the blank material used was unknown and did not appear on the silica blank certificate.

The results for the blanks were reviewed and determined to be non-indicative of any contamination within the lab. The results show that 53% of the samples returned values less than the previously utilized warning limit (Figure 8-12). This was determined as acceptable for this type of deposit.

The results of the blank material do not skew the results of the rest of the QA/QC program.

For all drilling programs from 2022-2025, the QA/QC measures applied have been sufficient to monitor accuracy and precision, as well as identify any external contamination that may occur during analysis. ABTC’s QA/QC program involved the use of field duplicates, pulp blanks, and CRMs at an overall insertion rate of 5% - 10% during the programs from 2022-2025.

For the 2023 - 2025 drill program, the overall insertion rates were above 10%, with the use of field duplicates, coarse blanks, and CRMs all within accepted industry recommendations.

Any issues observed during this assessment of the QA/QC process done by ABTC are not sufficient to preclude the use of the lithium assays in a mineral resource estimate. It is the QP’s opinion that the data are adequate to use for the resource estimate described herein.

9    Data Verification

The current Tonopah Flats drill hole database, which forms the basis for the Tonopah Flats resource estimation, is comprised of information derived from 38 drill holes. Information from the 2025 diamond core drilling program is included in the current resource estimation. This database, inclusive of the 2025 core holes, was subjected to the data verification procedures discussed in Section 9.2 and below.

Barr’s QP conducted a site visit of the TFLP on September 27, 2024. The visit included a tour of the core storage shed and multiple stops throughout the Tonopah Flats property. A selection of core and bulk samples were reviewed at the core shed. The visit to the mine site included stops at some of the drill hole collars, test pits, lithium resource outcrops, powerline corridors, and general viewing of the property topography.

On June 26, 2025, Barr QPs visited the ABTC pilot plant in Sparks, Nevada. The visit included a thorough tour of the pilot plant operation and viewing of the bulk feed materials being used for the pilot testing. Barr QPs also viewed bulk samples (supersacks) of combined tailings material from the pilot plant operations.

Mr. Jeff Woods, of Woods, the QP for chapters 10 and 14 of this report, has visited the pilot plant multiple times during the course of the project, including observing the pilot plant in operation, as well as ABTC’s research and development (R&D) and analytical laboratories located at the Nevada Center for Applied Research on the University of Nevada’s Reno campus.

Data verification, as defined in Regulation S-K, is the process of confirming that data have been generated with proper procedures, have been accurately transcribed from the original sources, and are suitable to be used. Additional confirmation of the drill data’s reliability is based on the authors’ evaluations of the Tonopah Flats drill project QA/QC procedures and results, as described in Section 8.2, and in general working with the data.

Verification of ABTC’s TFLP Microsoft Excel database was conducted during the geological modeling and mineral resource estimate update phases. A review of the data was conducted to evaluate data integrity.

The initial phase of tests included performing a series of queries, listed below, to validate the database:

The verification process found no significant issues with the dataset, and it was determined to be valid for the estimation process. The database was then used as supplied by ABTC. Comments recorded by previous reviewers of the property were taken into account when conducting the 2025 update of the mineral resource estimate.

The second phase of the data validation was the most comprehensive, comparing raw assay certificates to the database provided by ABTC. Any discrepancies were reported to ABTC and corrected in the database.

In 2025, all assay data was imported directly from Paragon Laboratory certificates with no data integrity issues found in the modeling database.

The QPs have reviewed the QA/QC data supplied by the client and verified the drilling for the previous drilling programs at the Tonopah Flats property. The QP agrees that the data are reliable.

Further verification of the drilling data was also accomplished through the generation of a substantive geological domain model generated from the lithological controls and the lithium assays, in the context of those variables as summarized in Section 11.5 through Section 11.7.

Explicit modeling of the lithium mineralization domains on cross-section was the most critical component to the estimation of the project mineral resources. Modeling of the continuity of geological controls, and the assays in the context of the variables, were carefully evaluated and considered.

No downhole surveys were collected during each of the three previous drill phases. In 2025, ABTC conducted downhole surveys on three geotechnical drill holes. Downhole televiewer surveys were conducted on TF25-GT1 and TF25-GT3, as well as a downhole deviation survey conducted on TF25-GT4 and the results were found to be within industry standards.

The QPs have found no limitations with respect to data verification for the TFLP.

ABTC conducted in-house analytical chemistry to determine the elemental composition of claystone samples. The process involved several steps:

Detection limits for the methods run by analytical instruments are found in Table 9-1.

ICP-OES = inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry

µg/g = micrograms per gram

ABTC used several QA/QC procedures to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its analytical results.

All these procedures were carried out using specific chemical reagents and documented in ABTC's internal standard operating procedures. In the QP’s opinion, the analytical methods and QA/QC procedures follow industry practices and are adequate for the purpose of this report and of the use of plant design, metallurgical performance and accounting, and recovery forecast.

10    Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

The mineral processing and metallurgical testing program has been managed by ABTC and supported by third-party institutions (Hazen Research, Inc. [Hazen], Pocock Industrial Inc. [Pocock], and SGS Canada, Inc. [SGS]). As of the effective date of this report, mineral processing, metallurgical testing, and processing optimization remain on-going for continued process enhancements. ABTC and Woods have prepared this section of the report based on the results of these programs.

The mineral processing and metallurgical testing campaign for the manufacturing of high purity lithium hydroxide product from this lithium bearing claystone material initiated in Spring 2022, where conventional mineral acid leaching of run of mine (ROM) materials was first explored.

In this initial program it was demonstrated that high lithium extractions could be achieved (>80%) with conventional processing when using mineral acids, such as HCl or H2SO4. In these trials leaching times greater than two hours were required at temperatures greater than 60 °C and with acid compositions of 450-1,000 kg acid per tonne of claystone. However, while high extraction efficiencies were achieved, this type of conventional mineral acid leaching was non-selective and resulted in a pregnant leach solution (PLS) with high concentrations of deleterious elemental species compared to the lithium content (Deleterious: Li > 500 mol/mol), thus requiring chemical intensive downstream purification. Due to the presence of carbonate minerals in the claystone feed, much of the acid consumption is due to carbonates and not efficiently utilized in leaching lithium within the claystone.

To improve the selectivity of the leaching (reduce the amount of non-lithium elements leached into the PLS), trials were next performed with various types of pretreatments on the claystone prior to leaching. Several of these pretreatment operations were able to selectively convert lithium to forms that could be readily leached, while deleterious elements (i.e., Mg, Fe, Al) were unaffected and remained within the solid claystone matrix during subsequent leaching. Also, the generated PLS was demonstrated to have a basic pH (i.e., pH ≥ 9), thus reducing the need for process pH adjustment for a final lithium product (i.e., hydroxide).

Initial pretreatment trials were carried out with claystone feed materials in batch using bench scale systems. A wide range of conditions were examined, and it was demonstrated that with pretreatment and subsequent leaching lithium extraction of 70% to 85% was achieved, with significant improvements in selectivity to lithium extraction observed (Deleterious: Li < 20 mol/mol).

With these significant reductions in deleterious elements leached into the PLS with the implementation of these pretreatment operations and improved lithium selectivity, simplified downstream purification methods and operations were tested and evaluated using conventional lithium processing techniques. Demonstration of a battery grade LHM product, as defined in the specifications shown in Figure 10-10, was demonstrated at the bench scale.

After demonstration of these processes at the bench scale, a pilot-scale processing plant (~5 t claystone per day capacity) was designed, constructed, commissioned, and operated demonstrating the extraction, purification, and conversion of lithium from the claystone resource to a battery-grade LHM product. Large scale samples of products from this system have been analyzed internally by ABTC, and also provided to prospective customers for their evaluation.

While the pilot-scale processing plant confirmed that battery-grade lithium hydroxide could be produced with the existing process flow sheet, additional mineral deportment studies along with laboratory trials carried out using various beneficiation methods showed that the lithium clay minerals consist of fine particles compared to most gangue minerals and can be concentrated. Beneficiation was examined as a method to upgrade and concentrate the lithium bearing constituents of the claystone while rejecting the low or non-lithium bearing constituents.

This beneficiated material could then exhibit significantly increased grade at the entrance of the conversion plant, allowing for the same amount of product to be manufactured from significantly smaller equipment and with lower energy, chemical agent, and labor costs. Bench and pilot-scale beneficiation trials were carried out on the claystone material and demonstrated an initial upgrading ratio of the non-beneficiated to beneficiated material of 2.85x, and the subsequently produced beneficiated products were subjected to similar pretreatment and lithium extraction trials.

Generated laboratory process data was analyzed with process simulations (METSIM and Aspen) used to optimize and improve process parameters and associated economics.

The focus of the experimental campaigns in this report is on the ABTC pilot plant demonstration trials, and associated studies regarding beneficiation of the claystone feed materials, interim product dewatering, pretreatment studies of beneficiated materials, and subsequent downstream lithium processing and purification. At the time of writing, work continues on optimization of the process to improve reagent utilization, lithium product purity, and process economics.

The samples used for this test campaign were obtained from two sample sets collected from ABTC’s Tonopah Flats claystone deposit and prepared for mineral processing and metallurgical testing. The first sample consisted of reverse circulation drill cuttings from the 2021-2022 drill hole program that were collected from TF-2218 (316 kg, referred to as sample DC-TF-2218). This sample was pulverized (Bico Braun Type UA disk pulverizer) to 100 mesh (75% passing) and homogenized to obtain a statistically representative sample of the entire drill hole depth (30 m to 213 m). Mineral processing of these materials was carried out at the University of Nevada, Reno’s Ore Dressing Laboratory. The homogenized bulk sample was analyzed in-house at ABTC’s analytical laboratories. The head grade data was compared with third-party assay data (Paragon) for validation and found to be statistically consistent and representative. This material, DC-TF-2218, was used for beneficiation test work as well as downstream extraction test work. The head grade of the beneficiated materials used for further downstream testing is referred to as sample DC-TF-2218-BC2 and was compared with third-party assay data (SGS Canada, Inc., 2025) for validation and found to be statistically consistent and representative.

A second bulk sample, consisting of approximately 100 t was excavated from the TF-2219 site and used for pilot plant campaigns, characterization, and mineral processing and metallurgical test work. This bulk sample was used in parallel to determine the characteristics of ROM material and can be considered part of the “upper zone” of the deposit. This sample is referred to as BS-TF-2219. This material was then crushed using a jaw crusher attachment on a skid steer (MB-HDS214) and is referred to as sample JC-BS-TF-2219. Samples BS-TF-2219 and JC-BS-TF-2219 were subject to deportment analysis. The head grade of each sieve size was averaged to obtain the overall composition. Assaying was determined by methods outlined in Section 10.2 and the average values are reported as shown in Table 10-1.

Table 10-1 outlines the feed materials used for mineral processing and metallurgical test work and is based on ABTC’s in-house head grade assay data for samples used in this test work campaign. Units are in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) or ppm and are on a dry basis. “NQ” denotes elements not quantified and “ND” denotes a non-detect or below the detection limit of the machine.

ID = identification

ppm = parts per million

All analytical chemistry was carried out in-house by ABTC unless otherwise stated or studies carried out by third-party laboratories. Analysis of the elemental composition of claystone samples was carried out by an internally developed process which consisted of microwave digestion (three acids) and analysis of the leachate solution by ICP-OES multi-element analysis with the use of an Agilent 5800 ICP-OES instrument. The foundational method used for analysis was EPA 200.7 Rev. 4.4 for both total and dissolved metals. The digestion method was validated with the use of two CRMs, MEG Li.10.14 and MEG Li.10.15 from MEG. These CRMs were lithium and boron containing claystone material from Central Nevada, USA. MEG Li.10.14 had a certified lithium value of 814 ppm and boron value of 0.17% while MEG Li.10.15 had a certified lithium value of 1,606.4 ppm and boron value of 1.6 ppm. The instrument used for digestion was an Anton Parr Multiwave 5000 Microwave Reaction System. All claystone samples were ground with mortar and pestle prior to microwave digestion. The digestion method entailed a 10-minute ramp up to 180 °C followed by a 20-minute hold time. Analysis of the leachate by ICP-OES was subject to 25-element analysis, with both single and multi-element standards purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, Agilent, and Inorganic Ventures.

In addition to elemental analysis, a Thermo Scientific Dionex ICS-6000 ion chromatograph (IC) system was used to determine inorganic anions, namely fluoride, sulfate, and chloride, by an analysis method similar to EPA 300.0. Total carbon, inorganic carbon, and organic carbon by high-temperature combustion oxidation was also employed by operation of a Shimadzu TOC-L CSH system. Method SM 5310B was used for the determination of total carbon, inorganic carbon, and organic carbon. Detection limits for the methods run by analytical instruments are found in Table 10-2.

ICP-OES = inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry

µg/g = micrograms per gram

QA/QC procedures for all analyses entailed the use of certified calibration standards, chemical reagents, calibration checks, duplicates, and CRMs which are described in the individual standard operating procedures for each method used (internal ABTC documentation). Calibration standards and reagents include, but are not limited to, Multielement Standard Solution 6 for ICP (Sigma Aldrich; P/N 43843-100ML), sodium carbonate 99.99% (Chem-Impex; P/N 15134), sodium bicarbonate 99.5-100.5% (Sigma-Aldrich; S6297-250G), potassium hydrogen phthalate >99.95% (Sigma-Aldrich;P1088-100G) for total carbon, inorganic carbon, and organic carbon, multi-element anion standard (Inorganic Ventures; P/N IC-FAS-1A), and Dionex seven anion standard (Thermo Scientific Dionex; P/N 056933) for IC.

For all major analytical methods, calibration standards were prepared to generate multi-point calibration curves across the analytical range, with r2 value ≥ 0.995. Blanks were used to monitor and account for contamination, and calibration check standards from first and second sources were prepared to ensure accuracy and validity. If calibration checks deviated ± 15% from known value, troubleshooting/rerunning of calibration standards was performed until deviation was within the acceptable limit. For ICP-OES analysis, most digestions and total metals analysis were performed in duplicate and CRMs digested periodically to ensure accuracy and precision throughout the analysis. Control charts for MEG Li.10.14 and MEG Li.10.15 reference materials are shown in Figure 10-2.

In the QP’s opinion, the analytical methods and QA/QC procedures follow industry practices and is adequate for the purpose of this report and of the use of plant design, metallurgical performance, and recovery forecast.

A series of advanced mineral characterization campaigns were conducted by ABTC, Hazen, and SGS to understand the minerology, particle properties, and thermal behavior of claystone materials. The mineral phases were identified using powder X-ray diffraction (XRD) and quantitative evaluation of minerals by scanning electron microscopy (QEMSCAN), while particle morphology and elemental mapping were carried out by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). Particle size distribution (PSD) measurements (laser scattering) were carried out along with sieve analysis (wet and dry) for size and mass deportment. Hazen conducted mineralogy and size deportment analysis on “upper zone” materials (BS-TF-2219), whereas SGS conducted PSD and minerology of homogenized samples DC-TF-2218 and DC-TF-2218-BC2.

A detailed particle size and mineralogy of BS-TF-2219 was conducted by Hazen Research, Inc. (2024). The size deportation of BS-TF-2219 (“upper zone” material) was conducted via wet screening (shown in Table 10-3). The wet screening studies showed that the majority of the upper zone material is smaller than 20 μm (~60 wt%). Figure 10-2 shows a bimodal particle size distribution of BS-TF-2219 clay material smaller than 20 μm. A bimodal distribution indicates that the finer material is associated with lithium enriched clay, whereas, the relatively coarse fraction is associated with the gangue. The mean size of the -20 μm particles is approximately 5 μm, with a D90 of 10 μm and a D20 <1 μm in size. In the overall head material, approximately 50% of the sample is <10 μm, with approximately 10% of the sample <1 μm. Assay analysis showed that about 90% of total lithium reports to the -20 μm size fraction, whereas, 50% of Si is rejected in the coarser size fractions indicating that the lithium enriched clay is concentrated in the finer size fraction (Figure 10-3). The head sample (BS-TF-2219) is mainly characterized by K-feldspar (orthoclase, approximately 38 wt%), plagioclase (approximately 19 wt%), mica (illite) (approximately 17 wt%), and calcite (approximately 11 wt%). Minor amounts of quartz (approximately 6 wt%), analcime zeolite (approximately 3 wt%), goethite (approximately 3 wt%), clinoamphibole (approximately 1 wt%), and smectite clay (approximately 1 wt%) make up the rest. The mica (illite) and calcite are concentrated in the - 20 μm fraction (approximately 22 wt% and 15 wt%, respectively), while the quartz is concentrated in the +75 μm fractions (≥8 up to 22 wt%).

Table 10-3 reflects the PSD determined by wet screening of BS-TF-2219 shows that about 59% of the upper zone material is smaller than 20 µm and about 90% of lithium mass reports to the -20 μm size fraction.

% = percent

µm = micron

Particle size distribution of -20 µm fraction, as shown in Figure 10-2, reflects a bimodal distribution of the head material BS-TF-2219. Bi-modal particle size distribution indicates that the upper material contains finer fraction concentrated in clays and coarser size fraction rich in gangue (Hazen Research, Inc., 2024).

The size deportation of the homogenized DC-TF-2218 is shown in Figure 10-4. Similar to the “upper zone” materials, about 90% of the total lithium mass reports into <10 µm fraction whereas only 60% of the total silicon reported into <10 µm size fraction. This observation is consistent with the BS-TF-2219 sample. Internal results corroborate with the findings of third-party analysis carried out by SGS Canada, Inc. (2025).

Figure 10-4 shows that most of the lithium is present in the finer size fractions of the head material, whereas silicon is present in the coarser size fractions of the head material (SGS Canada, Inc., 2025). Several mineral phases were identified in the homogenized samples (DC-TF-2218) using XRD analysis such as, quartz, calcite, orthoclase (feldspar), and clay fractions such as illite (mica) and montmorillonite (smectite). A semi-quantitative mineral composition for DC-TF-2218 homogenized clay is shown in Table 10-4 where an estimate amount of 4.5 wt% can be attributed to the clay fractions. To determine the average stoichiometry of the illite/smectite clay fraction, a procedure developed by the USGS was followed (U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-041). In short, the clay fraction was isolated from the silt fraction followed by a series of XRD measurements and elemental balances to determine the average stoichiometry. An average illite/smectite formulation was found to be K0.83Na0.47Ca0.29Li0.38Ti0.10[Al0.73Mg2.50Fe0.99][Si6.65P0.27Al1.08]O20(OH,F)4.nH2O. These findings are consistent with other illite/smectite clays found in Nevada (Morissette, 2012).

ND=Not Detected

A detailed QEMSCAN® analysis conducted by Hazen showed that the quartz and granitoid particles in the 80% -600 µm head sample are the coarsest grained, with a D50 of 40 µm and 50 µm respectively and approximately 21% and 27% greater than 190 µm in size (Figure 10-5). However, approximately 21% and 33% of quartz and granitoid particles are less than 10 µm in size. This reflects a bimodal size distribution. The distinct K-feldspar-volcanic glass and plagioclase-analcime grains are substantially finer grained than the quartz and granitoid particles, with a D50 of 15 µm and 20 µm respectively. The K-feldspar-volcanic glass and plagioclase-analcime also exhibit a bimodal size distribution. The calcite and calcite-illite intergrowths exhibit a much finer PSD than the silicate gangue, with a 65% and 44% respectively, less than 10 µm size distribution. QEMSCAN of the -300 µm fraction exhibited similar mineralogical characteristics.

The specific gravity of claystone rocks in the range of 12.7 mm to 25.4 mm (BS-TF-2219 and JC-BS-TF- 2219 samples) was estimated using water displacement with parafilm coated samples (Scorgins, 2015) and found to be 1.81 ± 0.10. The specific gravity was also measured on various sized fractions using helium gas pycnometery (BELPYCNO manufactured by Microtrac MRB, USA). The specific gravity was measured on size fractions from 38.1 mm down to -400 mesh. The range observed was from 1.80-2.34, with an average of 2.13 ± 0.18. Helium gas pycnometery of larger, single rock samples (i.e., 25.4 mm to 38.1 mm claystone rocks, seven samples in total) yielded an average specific gravity of 1.83 ± 0.03, similar to water displacement method results. Bulk density of the claystone was estimated to be 1.026 g/mL for 106 µm particle size and 1.023 g/mL for 75 µm particle size.

Thermogravimetric analysis coupled with differential scanning calorimetry (TGA-DSC) was performed on DC-TF-2218 samples and the beneficiated clay DC-TF-2218-BC2, scanning from 25 °C to 1,000 °C at a rate of 20 °C per minute under air atmosphere (Figure 10-6). The overall mass loss in the DC-TF-2218 and DC-TF-2218-BC2 is about 10-12 wt%. An initial sharp mass loss of about 3-4% below 150 °C takes place due to moisture removal and loss of freely bound water. This is evident in the endothermic peak observed at low temperatures associated with moisture evaporation. Between 150 and 550 °C with little mass loss (~2%) takes place due to exothermic events such as phase changes in some of the minerals and/or the oxidation of iron sulfide and/or iron-oxyhydroxide minerals in DC-TF-2218 and DC-TF-2218-BC2. A sharp exothermic event at 500 °C can be associated with the structural collapse of layered structures present in the DC-TF-2218 clay. However, no such sharp exothermic event is observed in the beneficiated clay DC-TF-2218-BC2. A significant mass loss occurs at around 600 to 800 °C which corresponds to a very strong endothermic peak. This event is due to the thermal decomposition of carbonate minerals (calcite) and the dehydroxylation of clay minerals (i.e., loss of structurally bound water). Thermal decomposition of calcite generally takes place between 650 and 800 °C (Karunadasa, Manoratne, Pitawala, & Rajapakse, 2019). It should be noted that mass loss in this region for DC-TF-2218 (~5 wt%) is significantly higher than DC-TF-2218-BC2 (~3 wt%). This is due to the removal of calcite phases after the beneficiation of the clay. From about 800 °C mass loss remains stable; however, a continuous endotherm is observed. This is likely a result of mineral phase changes.

Figure 10-6 demonstrates thermogravimetric analysis of DC-TF-2218 homogenized clay and DC-TF-2218-BC2 beneficiated clay and shows a significant mass loss due to the decomposition of calcite in the region of 600 to 850 °C. The dashed lines correspond to the DSC profile which represents the heat flow during the endothermic and exothermic events.

Bond ball work index experiments were conducted (sample BS-TF-2219) to ascertain the hardness of the claystone material to closing screen sizes of 106 µm and 75 µm. Five cycles of milling test were conducted on a constant feed mass of 718.3 g using 106 µm test screen, and 715.9 g using the 75 µm test screen. A summary of the data is given in Table 10-5. These initial studies show that the material under investigation is relatively soft.

µm = micrometer

kWh = kilowatt-hour

t = tonne

Sedimentary lithium-bearing claystone can contain several gangue minerals (e.g., calcite, quartz, gypsum, feldspars). These gangue minerals can be separated from the lithium bearing clay minerals by either particle size, gravitational methods, or a combination thereof (RESPEC Company, LLC, & Woods Process Services, 2024; Tita, Mends, Hussaini, Thella, Smith, & Chu, 2024; Arthur, Mends, Tita, & Chu, 2025). Various beneficiation strategies/flowsheet configurations utilizing well established technologies and unit operations have been examined with the objective to i) decrease the deportment of gangue minerals in downstream processing and, ii) increase the lithium grade and lithium mass pull in the system. Beneficiation unit operations examined included attrition scrubbing, wet screening, Falcon concentrators, hydrocyclone circuits, and various combinations and configurations of these unit operations.

Of the systems tested, a combination of attrition scrubbing and screening, followed by a series of hydrocyclones demonstrates the highest rejection of gangue materials and achieves the highest lithium grade. A test program was developed and carried out by SGS. Five bench-scale beneficiation tests (HC1-HC5) were conducted to determine the most efficient beneficiation configuration using DC-TF-2218 material. The results of these tests indicated the HC3 configuration to produce the highest lithium grade with the most satisfactory weight percentage and lithium distribution (Figure 10-7).

Two bulk beneficiation tests campaigns (BC1 and BC2) were conducted, with the system configuration of HC3 being taken into consideration and using DC-TF-2218 materials. The products of the initial bulk test (BC1) were utilized for assaying and solid-liquid separation tests. The primary objectives of the second bulk test (BC2) were twofold: firstly, to obtain the requisite data for process mass balances, and secondly, to produce materials (~20 kg) further testing and validation work. The BC2 test produced a concentrate stream with a lithium grade of 2090 mg/kg, a lithium distribution of 80.2%, a weight percentage of 28.2%, and an enrichment ratio of 2.85 (SGS Canada, Inc., 2025). Bilmat software was utilized for data reconciliation to minimize mass balance error.

The beneficiation studies show that significant gangue materials can be rejected and a resulting high lithium grade (>1600 ppm), fine particle size distribution concentrate is obtained. Analysis of the fine fraction, i.e., -20 micron, for DC-TF-2218 and DC-TF-2218-BC2 shows to be similar in PSD and geochemically (Figure 10-8). Therefore, the application of a beneficiation circuit can be used to reduce the variability in the geochemistry and mineralogy of feed into the plant, thereby making the “upper, middle, lower zones” of the deposit geochemically and mineralogically similar.

Dewatering flocculation trials were carried out by Pocock, SGS, and ABTC on the gangue tailings from beneficiation, the beneficiated concentrate, and the post-leach concentrate tailings. A variety of tests were performed to evaluate their capacity for flocculation, dewatering, and the slurry rheology evaluated. The following parameters were evaluated for the flocculation of gangue tailings from beneficiation, the beneficiated concentrate, and the post-leach concentrate tailings:

Two third-party laboratories were consulted by ABTC to develop flocculation, filtration, and dewatering strategies. Initial testing found that significant dosages of cationic and anionic polyacrylamide (PAM) flocculants in excess of 1,000 g/t were necessary for the concentrate to respond to flocculation. The best responses were to be dosing the concentrate slurry with 200 mg/L of Al2(SO4)3 and 1,000 g/t Magnafloc 1011 flocculant when sample was diluted to 0.5% w/w solids (from 2% w/w solids). Overall, even with the help of salt/pH adjustment, the concentrate failed to achieve a good settling response with reagents at a practical range of dosages.

Further testing had success but still observed challenges with flocculation with cationic/anionic PAM dosages ranging from 200 to 800 g/t, outside of practical addition values. In addition to PAM flocculation, the addition of a PolyDADMAC coagulant dosed at 500 g/t was found to have positive responses during pressure filtration. The addition of Ca(OH)2 to adjust the pH up to 11.8, was found to help form a more robust floccule structure with some flocculants, but not all. At pH 11.8, the concentrate material flocculated and settled well at approximately 1-2% solids. Settling performance was observed to decrease in conditions tested at higher solids concentrations. During dynamic thickening tests, underflow density reached a maximum of 10%, provided 400 g/t of anionic PAM flocculant were dosed into the feed (solids at 1.5-2.5%) with pH of 11.8.

In-house trials by ABTC observed a positive effect with the addition of Ca(OH)2 to the concentrate slurry. Although no significant settling occurred, coagulation did occur which allowed filtration of the slurry to be feasible by both vacuum filtration and pressure filtration. While pressure filtration was observed to be feasible, the filter cake moisture content remained high (~70% moisture). To reduce the capillary action formed between fine particle filter cakes, the addition of a recoverable filter agent was explored. Preliminary testing has shown that the use of a recoverable filter agent, filter cake moisture contents of ~40 wt% are achievable. Further studies are currently underway.

It was observed by ABTC and Pocock that the gangue tailings responded well to flocculation when feed solids were 10% (w/w). ABTC used a cationic PAM flocculant dosage of 150 g/t and after flocculation, thickened to an underflow density of 60% prior to pressure filtration. No pH adjustment was necessary. Pressure filtration carried out at 4.86 bar (70 psi) yielded a filter cake with an average moisture content of 25%.

Studies carried out by ABTC and Pocock were consistent in observation. In a single batch leaching system, filter cake moisture contents between 17 and 25% with a clear filtrate and a fast filtration time, less than one minute were observed. In this scenario, no flocculant is used, and the average filter size was 11 µm.

In a counter current decantation system, flocculation studies and dewatering results were investigated by Pocock. Here it was observed that with the use of SNF 920 SH flocculant at a dose of 40-45 g/t with a high-rate thickener, an underflow density in the range of 57 to 65% can be achieved. Pressure filtration of this slurry yields a filter cake with a moisture content of 16 to 17 wt%.

Rheology testing was carried out by Pocock. In all cases of materials (i.e., gangue tailings, concentrate, and post-leach concentrate tailings), a decrease in apparent viscosity with an increasing shear rate was observed (i.e., shear thinning). This behavior is an example of the pseudoplastic class of non-Newtonian fluids. This data demonstrates the need to maintain a specific velocity gradient or shear rate to initiate and maintain flow.

Previous studies on lithium extraction from claystone using mineral acids have shown relatively high acid consumption (450-1000 kg acid/tonne of clay) namely due to the presence of acid consuming minerals such as carbonates. Removal of these gangue minerals by beneficiation processes did show some improvement in acid utilization, i.e., down to 250-400 kg acid/tonne of clay; however, selectivity remained poor compared to pretreated material and would result in more downstream processing equipment (increased CAPEX) and reagent use (increased OPEX). Therefore, testing campaigns continued with the pretreated extraction methods using beneficiated materials as the use of beneficiated materials would decrease the OPEX while increasing the mass pull of lithium in the system. Figure 10-9 shows a block flow diagram of the process of study.

Countercurrent decantation (CCD) leach testing was performed by Pocock to determine the soluble value recovery in the leached claystone material. The CCD testing utilized an eight-stage system to determine optimal parameters for the recovery of soluble values. A solute removal efficiency above 99.5% can be achieved in three stages with an initial solid/liquid wash ratio above three and an underflow wash ratio above 4.5. The feed parameters for the CCD system are an underflow density of 60% in CCD stage 1 with a feed solids concentration of 10%. The initial solid to liquid wash ratio can be defined as the ratio of wash solution relative to the dry weight of solids entering the CCD at stage 1. The underflow wash ratio is defined as the ratio of wash solution relative to the weight of underflow liquor exiting each CCD stage.

Bench-scale precipitation trials were performed in batch-reactor mode to identify operational conditions for the removal of alkaline-earth-metal removal applied to the PLS using carbonate minerals.

The primary goal was to optimize conditions for maximum removal of alkaline earth metals (i.e., Ca, Mg, and Sr) and minimize loss of Li. Trials were performed with both unfiltered leach slurry (slurry PLS) and filtered PLS (clear PLS). Various operational parameters and modes were tested, including type of PLS (slurry, clear, process-derived, mimic), types of pH-adjustors (NaOH and LiOH), PLS pre-precipitation pH, mode of precipitant addition (solid or in aqueous form, one-batch or stepwise), time of PLS/precipitant mixing, and precipitate settling time.

Conditions to remove over 95% of Ca (400-700 mg/L) were identified, although less Ca removal (~75%) was found to be beneficial in downstream pilot-scale processing (e.g., to avoid reverse osmosis [RO] fouling and to minimize acid consumption in carbonate removal). The feed concentration of Mg (0-150 mg/L) and Sr (0-50 mg/L) is significantly lower than the Ca concentration. Removal of Mg decreases from 33% to 23% while decreasing the feed pH from 11.5 to 9.5. Removal of Sr is independent of the basic feed pH and shows a removal of 81%. Under optimized conditions, lithium loss was negligible, <5% or below detection.

In pilot plant operations, ~90% removal of calcium is obtainable and satisfactorily avoids complications with ion transfer downstream, especially in the RO process. Lithium loss was observed to be negligible, <5% or below detection.

Ion exchange (IX) resins are used commercially to remove multi-valent metal cations and oxo-metal anions from solutions. Batch and continuous metal stripping applications were tested with multiple process feeds. In resin screening campaigns, multiple resins with excellent operating capacities were identified. Their efficiency of removing targeted metals (i.e., multivalent cations) to a combined value below 5 ppm was demonstrated.

Laboratory bench-scale column breakthrough testing was carried out using selected resins. It was shown that divalent metal cations (Mg2+ and Ca2+) and oxo-anions of Mo, V, and Si can be removed from aqueous brines down to concentrations well below 5 ppm. An optimal feed pH between 5 and 6 was established.

In pilot plant testing campaigns, IX optimization was based on bench trial results. Engineering work was done on resin preconditioning as well as testing different solution feed flow rates and residence times.

Pilot plant studies confirmed laboratory-scale findings and were able to remove Mo/V/Si/Ca/Mg down to manageable levels (i.e., single digit ppm) to move forward to downstream processing. A >95% removal of Si, Mo, V, Ca, Mg was observed depending on the performance of resin and flowrates. Lithium loss was negligible at <5%. Numerous IX resins were used to remove multivalent metals ions down to a total sum of multivalent species to 5 ppm or less.

The lithium sulfate solution generated from the PLS and subsequent purification processes was used as feed into a membrane electrodialysis unit. The lithium sulfate solution was converted to lithium hydroxide with sulfuric acid formed as a by-product. Laboratory-scale testing, as well as pilot plant testing using this technology have been carried out by ABTC, demonstrating its efficacy. Parameters such as sulfate carryover, feed composition, operating temperature, current, and voltage have been examined. Current efficiencies in the range of 69-85% have been demonstrated. Continued efforts for further optimization of these parameters are currently underway at laboratory and pilot scale.

A lithium hydroxide solution product from electrodialysis conversion process was used as feed for crystallization to produce a battery grade LHM product. Two crystallization steps were used with a washing step after each crystallization. With this method, the remaining impurities (i.e., Na, K, Ca) were reduced to below 50-100 ppm. After the second crystallization and washing step, the crystals were dried to obtain a LiOH concentration of ≥56% resulting in a battery-grade LHM product (Figure 10-10). This process has been demonstrated on both laboratory-scale and pilot-scale, being some of the first reports on the extraction and production of battery grade LHM from a domestic lithium claystone resource.

Recent work includes a pilot plant demonstration (Figure 10-11) with a nominal capacity of producing multiple kg/day of LHM product was designed, installed, commissioned, and operated under several testing campaigns. Results from these pilot runs were used to inform the design of the commercial refinery process. The pilot plant was designed in the first half of 2023, installed during the fourth quarter of 2023 and the first quarter of 2024, then commissioned and initially operated throughout the remaining year of 2024. In early 2025, the pilot line was operated during a continuous two week demonstration to prove the robustness of the process/equipment, and repeatability of the individual processing steps. Materials used for the pilot plant were from a bulk excavated sample, BS-TF-2219. Continuous improvement and process optimization campaigns remain ongoing.

Located at the ABTC Processing Facility in Reno, Nevada.

Pilot plant operations have proven that downstream purification and hydroxide conversion, as well as crystallization, are achievable with claystone materials from ABTC’s resource.

During laboratory-based studies in this campaign, processing efficiencies and improvements were realized through the beneficiation of claystone materials. The lithium content in a homogenized sample representing the whole depth of a drill hole (DC-TF-2218) can be enriched by a factor > 2.85x. The beneficiated material demonstrated improvements in operational parameters for lithium extraction to non-beneficiated materials (i.e., kinetics, selectivity, and lithium mass pull). Although high lithium extraction (>80%) with excellent selectivity (Deleterious: Li < 20 mol/mol) have been demonstrated through various conditions, OPEX optimization of these parameters is gated by side stream recovery/recycling, energy use, and reagent consumption. Continued efforts on the optimization of the pretreatment, beneficiation, dewatering circuits, and downstream processing remain ongoing.

In the QP’s opinion, the metallurgical test work follows industry practices and is adequate for the purpose of this report and suitable for the use for plant design, metallurgical performance, and production forecasting.