43 101 Falchani Project 20190418 - Final PDF

MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES FOR THE FALCHANI LITHIUM PROJECT IN THE
PUNO DISTRICT OF PERU

Prepared for Plateau Energy Metals Inc. under the Guidelines of National Instrument 43-101 and accompanying
documents NI 43-101.F1 and NI 43-101.CP
By The Mineral Corporation, Bryanston, South Africa
Effective Date: 01 March 2019
Report No: C-MYI-EXP-1727-1134

[Publish Date]18 April 2019
Signed “Stewart Nupen”

BSc (Hons), FGSSA
Pr Sci Nat, Qualified Person
18 April 2019
© Copyright Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

This document is for the use of Plateau Energy Metals Inc. only and outside of the purposes legislated under provincial and other
securities laws or as otherwise stipulated in the client’s contract may not be transmitted to any other party, in whole or in part, in any form
without the written permission of Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Limited.
Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd Homestead Office Park P O Box 1346 Tel: +27 11 463 4867
Reg. No. 1995/000999/07 65 Homestead Avenue Cramerview Fax: +27 11 706 8616
Trading as: The Mineral Corporation Bryanston 2021 South Africa 2060 South Africa email: business@mineralcorp.co.za
www.mineralcorp.co.za
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 4
RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS ........................................................................................................................ 4
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ...................................................................................................... 5
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 5
Mineral Tenure ......................................................................................................................................... 5
Regulatory mechanism ............................................................................................................................ 5
Property and title ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Environmental regulations ........................................................................................................................ 5
Granting of mining concessions ............................................................................................................... 5
Work programme for mining concessions ................................................................................................ 6
Mining concession description ................................................................................................................. 6
Conclusions and limitations ...................................................................................................................... 6
ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY ..................... 9
Access to site ........................................................................................................................................... 9
Access to land .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Climate ..................................................................................................................................................... 9
Local Resources ...................................................................................................................................... 9
Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................ 9
Physiography ........................................................................................................................................... 9
HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................................. 10
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Previous Regional Exploration ............................................................................................................... 10
Instituto Peruano de Energia Nuclear .................................................................................................... 10
UNDP/IAEA ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Previous Ownership ............................................................................................................................... 10
Uranium price fluctuations ...................................................................................................................... 10
Macusani Yellowcake ............................................................................................................................. 10
The Cameco-Vena Joint Venture ........................................................................................................... 11
Azincourt buys Minergia ......................................................................................................................... 11
Macusani purchases Minergia................................................................................................................ 11
Macusani changes name to Plateau Uranium Inc. ................................................................................. 11
Plateau Uranium Inc. changes name to Plateau Energy Metals Inc....................................................... 11
Previous exploration ............................................................................................................................... 11
GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION .............................................................................................. 13
Regional Geology................................................................................................................................... 13
Local Geology ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Property Geology ................................................................................................................................... 16
Geological description ............................................................................................................................ 16
Mineralization Model .............................................................................................................................. 17
DEPOSIT TYPES ................................................................................................................................................. 18
EXPLORATION .................................................................................................................................................... 18
DRILLING............................................................................................................................................................. 19
Drilling programme ................................................................................................................................. 19
Drilling methodology ............................................................................................................................... 19
Sample recovery and core ..................................................................................................................... 19
SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY................................................................................... 21
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 21
Sampling methods ................................................................................................................................. 21
Sampling recovery ................................................................................................................................. 21
Sample quality........................................................................................................................................ 21
Sample preparation, assaying and analytical procedures ...................................................................... 21
Sample preparation ................................................................................................................................ 21
Sample delivery procedures ................................................................................................................... 21
Sample preparation and analysis ........................................................................................................... 21
Analytical quality assurance and control (QAQC) procedures................................................................ 22
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 22
Standard data......................................................................................................................................... 22
Duplicate data ........................................................................................................................................ 23
Blank data .............................................................................................................................................. 24
Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 25
Sample database ................................................................................................................................... 25
Overall adequacy statement................................................................................................................... 25
DATA VERIFICATION.......................................................................................................................................... 26
Site visit .................................................................................................................................................. 26
© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd
Report No. C-MYI-EXP-1727-1134, 18 April 2019
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES FOR THE FALCHANI LITHIUM PROJECT IN THE PUNO DISTRICT OF PERU
ii
Drillhole locations ................................................................................................................................... 26

Geological observations ......................................................................................................................... 26
Re-sample campaign analyses .............................................................................................................. 26
Limitations or failure to conduct such verification, and the reasons for any such limitations or failure ... 26
MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING ............................................................................. 27
Initial test work on lithium within uranium Mineral Resources (2016) ..................................................... 27
Test work on Lithium-rich Tuff by TECCMINE........................................................................................ 27
Test work on Lithium-rich Tuff by ANSTO .............................................................................................. 27
Baseline sulphuric acid leach and lithium carbonate precipitation.......................................................... 27
Alternative lithium extraction methods .................................................................................................... 27
Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 27
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES ................................................................................................................... 28
Drillhole database .................................................................................................................................. 28
Geological modelling methodology ........................................................................................................ 28
Identification of mineralized zones ......................................................................................................... 28
Structural interpretation of the mineralized zones .................................................................................. 28
Wireframe creation ................................................................................................................................. 31
Surface topography ................................................................................................................................ 31
Grade estimation methodology .............................................................................................................. 34
Compositing strategy ............................................................................................................................. 34
Classical statistics .................................................................................................................................. 34
Variography ............................................................................................................................................ 34
Block model parameters ........................................................................................................................ 37
Search criteria ........................................................................................................................................ 37
Mineral Resource estimates ................................................................................................................... 37
Model constraints ................................................................................................................................... 37
Geological losses ................................................................................................................................... 37
Density determinations ........................................................................................................................... 37
Cut-off grade .......................................................................................................................................... 38
Mineral Resource classification .............................................................................................................. 38
Mineral Resource statement. ................................................................................................................. 38
Reconciliation ......................................................................................................................................... 39
Reasonable Prospect for Economic Extraction ...................................................................................... 39
Mining considerations ............................................................................................................................ 39
Recovery methods ................................................................................................................................. 39
Project infrastructure .............................................................................................................................. 40
Market assessment ................................................................................................................................ 40
Environmental ........................................................................................................................................ 41
Capital Costs .......................................................................................................................................... 41
Operating Costs ..................................................................................................................................... 41
Indicative cost analysis .......................................................................................................................... 41
MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES ...................................................................................................................... 46
MINING METHODS ............................................................................................................................................. 46
RECOVERY METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 46
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................... 46
MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS .............................................................................................................. 46
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY IMPACT .................................. 46
CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS .................................................................................................................. 46
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................................... 46
ADJACENT PROPERTIES .................................................................................................................................. 46
OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 46
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 46
Basis for determination of the target for further exploration at Tres Hermanas ...................................... 46
Delineation of potential target area extent .............................................................................................. 46
Delineation of potential target area volume ............................................................................................ 46
Estimation of potential grades of mineralization ..................................................................................... 46
Potential quantity and grade of the target for further exploration ............................................................ 47
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................... 49
RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 49
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 50

iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Locality Plan ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2: Mineral Tenure Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3: History of ownership of Plateau Energy Metals .............................................................................................. 12
Figure 4: Regional geological setting............................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 5: Local geology ................................................................................................................................................. 15
Figure 6: Illustrative photograph of Upper Rhyolite contact with the Upper Breccia (local stratigraphy as inset) .......... 16
Figure 7: Upper Breccia in core (top) and Lithium-rich Tuff in core (bottom) ................................................................. 17
Figure 8: Drilling configuration ....................................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 9: Locations of drillhole platforms ....................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 10: Error Deviation plot for lithium standards........................................................................................................ 23
Figure 11: Mean Deviation plot for Field and Laboratory Duplicates ............................................................................... 24
Figure 12: Analytical results for Field and Laboratory Blanks .......................................................................................... 24
Figure 13: Geological and analytical log for PCHAC04-TV (left) and Geological and analytical log for PCHAC09-TV (right)
....................................................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 14: Structural plan for the base of LRT1 ............................................................................................................... 30
Figure 15: Isometric view of the geological model (not to scale) ..................................................................................... 31
Figure 16: South to North cross section (A’-A) showing geological model and drill data (Refer to Figure 9 for section line
location) .......................................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 17: South to North cross section (B’-B) showing geological model and drill data (refer to Figure 9 for section line
location) .......................................................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 18: Histograms for mineralized zones .................................................................................................................. 35
Figure 19: Variograms for mineralized zones .................................................................................................................. 36
Figure 20: Preliminary process flow sheet (Source: Plateau Energy Metals) .................................................................. 39
Figure 21: Lithium carbonate price 2015-2018 (Source: Lithium Americas, 2018) .......................................................... 41
Figure 22: Indicative cost per tonne of product at differing grades and stripping ratios ................................................... 42
Figure 23: South to North lithium grade cross section (A’ to A in Figure 24) ................................................................... 43
Figure 24: South to North lithium grade cross section (B’ to B in Figure 24) ................................................................... 44
Figure 25: Mineral Resource classification plan .............................................................................................................. 45
Figure 26: Tres Hermanas target for further exploration.................................................................................................. 48
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Mining concessions .......................................................................................................................................... 6
Table 2: Drilling programme summary ......................................................................................................................... 19
Table 3: Summary of QAQC samples .......................................................................................................................... 22
Table 4: Independent analysis from the Falchani Project ............................................................................................. 26
Table 5: Lithological units and mineralized zones used in geological model and Mineral Resources .......................... 28
Table 6: Variogram modelling results ........................................................................................................................... 37
Table 7: Search criteria (applied to all mineralized zones) ........................................................................................... 37
Table 8: Mineral Resource estimates for the Falchani Project (1 March 2019) ............................................................ 38
Table 9: Mineral Resource estimates for the Falchani Project (September 2018) ....................................................... 39
Table 10: Assumptions used in cash cost analysis ........................................................................................................ 42
Table 11: Statistics for trench samples at Tres Hermanas ............................................................................................. 47
Table 12: Tres Hermanas exploration target potential.................................................................................................... 47
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Drillhole Intersections ............................................................................................................................... 51
Appendix 2: Cross Sections ......................................................................................................................................... 56

1
SUMMARY
This report documents the results of the Mineral Resource estimates for the Falchani Lithium Project (Falchani or
the Project), on behalf of Plateau Energy Metals Inc. (Plateau Energy Metals), by Mineral Corporation Consulting
(Pty) Limited (The Mineral Corporation).
Falchani is an exploration property located on the Macusani Plateau, Puno District of Peru and falls within licenses
held by Macusani Yellowcake S.A.C (Macusani Yellowcake), formerly Global Gold S.A.C, which is controlled and
99.5% owned by Plateau Energy Metals. Plateau Energy Metals has a number of other exploration properties on
the Macusani Plateau, which are primarily uranium exploration properties, and for which Mineral Resources have
been declared. The combination of Plateau Energy Metals’ exploration properties on the Macusani Plateau is
referred to as the Macusani Project Area (MPA).
Mineral Resource estimates have previously been reported for the Project, in September 2018, in The Mineral
Corporation’s Report C-MYI-EXP-1727-1103 (The Mineral Corporation, 2018).
The Mineral Resource estimates herein comply with the CIM Definition Standards (May, 2014) on Mineral
Resources and Reserves (the CIM Definition Standards) as incorporated, by reference, in the National Instrument
43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101). The lead Qualified Person (QP) for this report is
Stewart Nupen, a Director of The Mineral Corporation.
The MPA is located approximately 650km east southeast of Lima and about 220km by the Interoceanica Highway
from Juliaca in the south. The town of Macusani is some 25km to the southeast of the MPA.
The Mineral Corporation has confirmed that Macusani Yellowcake (and hence Plateau Energy Metals) has the
right to explore and exploit “minerals”, which would include lithium, over the Falchani Project. The Project falls
within two concessions, namely Falchani and Ocacasa 4. The Mineral Corporation has relied on information that
has been provided by Plateau Energy Metals and the Peruvian government online mineral concession database in
this regard. The QP has not interrogated the legal aspects of the mineral rights for the properties and concessions
and cannot therefore express a legal opinion as to the ownership status of the mining concessions.
Peruvian law does not vest surface rights with mineral rights and any proposed development requires the
developer to purchase the surface rights or negotiate an appropriate agreement with the surface rights owners to
have access to the property. Plateau Energy Metals has working agreements with a number of communities within
the MPA, which are required to facilitate exploration at the Falchani Project.
The concessions are located in the Carabaya Province, Puno District of south-eastern Peru in the Andes
Mountains. The Andes represents a large anticlinorium deformed by a series of faults and intrusions, with the
flanks of this superstructure made up of the coastal Mesozoic and eastern Palaeozoic Age belts. In the MPA, late
Tertiary tuffs, ignimbrites and associated sediments are preserved in a NW-SE trending graben. The uranium and
lithium occurrences in the Macusani Plateau are associated with Pliocene and Miocene epoch Quenamari
Formation tuffs, ignimbrites and interbedded sediments.
The petrography of the samples indicates that the acid volcanics can have varying composition from rhyolite to
dacite to latite, which supports the likely presence of stratigraphic layering of the volcanic pile. This is further
supported by the marked lithium zonation noted in the near vertical drillhole core and the “mantos”, or zones of
sub-horizontal uranium mineralization are associated with elevated lithium abundance.
At Falchani, the lithium-rich volcanic tuff unit is interpreted to be sub-aerial and the transitional Li-rich breccias are
interpreted to have been deposited in a crater lake volcano-sedimentary environment.
The Mineral Resource estimates are based on some 14 816m of drilling from 51 drillholes. Sampling was carried
out at varying sampling intervals and all samples were composited to create 2.5m downhole composites that were
used throughout the estimation process.
The QP considers the sampling methods, sampling recovery and sample quality to be acceptable. The procedures
undertaken by the laboratory were noted to be of a high standard, and appropriate for the analysis of lithium. The
QAQC results indicate that acceptable levels of accuracy and precision, and no contamination, have been
obtained by the laboratory. Finally, the validation undertaken on the sample database found no deficiencies in the
capture and storage of information.
With respect to data verification, the QP undertook a site visit to the Falchani Project in May 2018, during which,
outcrops of the tuff and breccia units were visited, and the drilling and sampling operations observed. The
procedures undertaken by the geologists on site, were found to be appropriate for the style of mineralization. The
Mineral Corporation visited the CERTIMIN laboratory in Lima, where all of the lithium analyses for the Falchani
Project have been undertaken. An independent set of samples were randomly selected from the storage facility in
Macusani and these were re-analyzed, and the results showed good correlation with the original results. The
database is thus considered sufficiently reliable to be used to inform the Mineral Resource estimates.

2
Preliminary metallurgical test work has been completed on material from the Falchani Project, initially by
TECMMINE, in Lima and subsequently by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization (ANSTO).
The ANSTO testwork indicates recoveries of up to 90% of the contained lithium, using a sulphuric acid leach, at
90-95°C. Lithium carbonate of 99.7% purity (battery grade) was precipitated.
More recently, Plateau Energy Metals has initiated the investigation of alternatives to the use of a sulphuric acid
leach, including the use of high temperature sulphation roast.
The Mineral Corporation would consider the test work undertaken to date on the Falchani Project to be preliminary
in nature, and not necessarily representative of the whole Project. However, they are considered to be sufficient
for the purposes of assessing if there are Reasonable Prospects for Economic Extraction of lithium at the Falchani
Project, and the results provide a good indication that a metallurgical process for the extraction of lithium could be
reasonably expected with additional work.
The sub-horizontal lithium mineralization occurs within a lithium-rich tuff (Lithium-rich Tuff), which varies in
thickness from 50m to 140m. The Lithium-rich Tuff has been subdivided into the LRT1, LRT2 and LRT3 zones. In
addition, lithium mineralization has been modelled in an upper (Upper Breccia or UBX) and lower breccia (Lower
Breccia or LBX), which occur in the immediate hangingwall and footwall of the Lithium-rich Tuff, respectively. The
top of the UBX and base of the LBX form a natural lithological cut-off, which occurs at a lithium grade of
approximately 0.1% Li2O.
The mineralized zones are interpreted to broadly take the form of a basin, which dips gently to the north-northeast.
Three north-south trending faults are interpreted, with throws of between 10m and 50m. The upper and lower
bounding surface for each of the zones identified were constructed utilizing Datamine's Strat3DTM modelling
software, applying Inverse Distance (ID) interpolation of the zone thickness.
Classical statistics was undertaken to identify the statistical distribution of the lithium grades, and identify any
outliers. No cutting or capping was deemed necessary. Well-structured variograms, typically with a horizontal
range of between 250m and 500m and a nugget / sill ratio of approximately 30% were obtained for the zones.
Ordinary Kriging was employed for the lithium grade estimates, which were estimated into a 25m X 25m X 5m
block model.
The edges of the Mineral Resource model have been constrained to a maximum horizontal extrapolation distance
of 100m from the last borehole intersection. In addition, the model has been constrained using the surface
topography. An intrusion has been encountered in the drilling on Platform 19 and Platform 19A that defines the
southern extent of the Mineral Resources. The thickness estimates for the mineralized zones thin to the east and
the extent of the Mineral Resources have been extended only to where the thickness of the LRT1 is approximately
greater than 5m. The deposit remains open to the north and west of the current resource model due to the current
extent of drill coverage.
The geological and grade continuity at Falchani is robust. The Mineral Corporation has based its Mineral Resource
classification on the geostatistical confidence associated with the lithium estimates, which have been modified by
the QP into practical geological model polygons.
The QP considers has applied geological losses to the Mineral Resource estimates. The geological losses vary
from 5% to 10%, depending on an assessment of the potential for alternative geological interpretation to result of
lower tonnages estimates, informed by the proximity of data and the surface topography. A block cut-off grade of
1000ppm Li (or approximately 0.2% Li2O) has been applied to the block model.
On the basis of the methodology described, the Mineral Resource estimates are the following:
Metric tonnes Contained
Category Zone Density Li (ppm) Li2O (%) Li2CO3 (%)
(Mt) Li2CO3 (Mt)
UBX 6.23 2.4 1510 0.33 0.80 0.05
LRT1 7.47 2.4 3709 0.80 1.97 0.15
LRT2 22.03 2.4 3300 0.71 1.76 0.39
Indicated
LRT3 13.03 2.4 3690 0.79 1.96 0.26
LBX 12.16 2.4 1816 0.39 0.97 0.12
Total 60.92 2.4 2954 0.64 1.57 0.96
UBX 13.77 2.4 1730 0.37 0.92 0.13
LRT1 24.01 2.4 3346 0.72 1.78 0.43
LRT2 62.30 2.4 3155 0.68 1.68 1.05
Inferred
LRT3 37.24 2.4 3325 0.72 1.77 0.66
LBX 122.75 2.4 2275 0.49 1.21 1.49
Total 260.07 2.4 2706 0.58 1.44 3.75
Minor discrepancies due to rounding may occur.
Li (ppm) grade cut-off of 1000 Li (ppm) was applied
Tonnes are Metric
Li Conversion Factors as follows: Li:Li2O=2.153; Li:Li2CO3=5.323; Li2O:Li2CO3=2.473
Geological losses of 5% or 10% have been applied, based on interpreted geological structure and data density. The average geological loss is 6%.

3
No Mineral Reserves have been estimated for any of the Projects to date.
The QP considers that there are reasonable prospects for the economic extraction of the lithium Mineral
Resources provided in this estimate. This view is based on an assessment of reasonable geological, mining,
processing, marketing, environmental, legal, social and economic parameters. Certain aspects of the assessment
have been assisted by GBM Mining Engineering Consultants Limited’s (GBM) Preliminary Economic Assessment
(PEA) for the exploitation of the uranium Mineral Resources within the MPA, at the Company’s Macusani Uranium
Project undertaken in 2016, particularly infrastructure, power, water and access.
It is considered likely that an open pit mining method would be utilized at the Falchani Project. The completed
uranium PEA provides an open pit mining cost ($2.40/t) for both mineralized material and waste, which is
considered to be a reasonable assumption for the assessment of Reasonable Prospects for Economic Extraction.
The Mineral Corporation has derived an estimated processing cost, based on the preliminary acid leach process
design utilized for the ANSTO test work. In addition, costs for crushing and milling to provide the feed for an acid
leach have been considered.
With respect to Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social Impact, The Mineral Corporation is not aware of any
issues related to the extraction of lithium which would be materially different from those already considered for the
proposed uranium operation. In Peru, lithium is considered a ‘non-metal’ with a substantially more streamlined
permitting process.
A simplistic assessment of the market for lithium carbonate was undertaken. For the purpose of considering
Reasonable Prospects for Economic Extraction, The Mineral Corporation has assumed a long-term lithium
carbonate price of $US12 000/t, in real 2018 terms. This long-term price is aligned with the current and recent spot
and contract prices and is considered a reasonable long-term estimate. The long-term price forecast has been
benchmarked against other public domain long term price estimates and is considered reasonable.
The revenue per tonne provided by the lowest lithium grade in the Mineral Resource, should be able to cover the
estimated cash costs to mine and extract lithium and precipitate lithium carbonate, given the indicative
assumptions provided. The Mineral Corporation is therefore of the opinion that there are Reasonable Prospects for
Economic Extraction of the Mineral Resource.
In addition to the Mineral Resources estimates described above, Plateau Energy Metals has identified the potential
continuation of lithium mineralization to the south-west of the current Mineral Resource area, in an area known as
Tres Hermanas. On the basis described in Section 24 of this report, the QP considers it appropriate to discuss this
area as a target for further exploration. The potential quantity and grade of the target for further exploration has
been estimated as being between 7.5Mt and 12.5Mt, at a Li grade of between 1 250ppm and 3 650ppm. A
potential target for future exploration is not a Mineral Resource estimate, is conceptual in nature, and is used
where there has been insufficient exploration to define the target as a Mineral Resource and where it is uncertain if
further exploration will result in the target being defined as a Mineral Resource.
It is recommended that the preliminary test work programme undertaken continue to be expanded, to incorporate a
greater geographical spread of samples, and to consider the different zones identified in the Mineral Resource
estimates. A PEA for the lithium Mineral Resources for the Falchani Project should be undertaken, to include
refinements to the processing workflow, and to incorporate the mining, processing, infrastructure and
environmental aspects of the Project. Additional density measurements, for the zones within the Mineral Resource,
and for the Upper Rhyolite are required; and are currently being completed.
Given the robust geological continuity demonstrated in the drilling results to date, additional drilling in the areas
identified as Inferred Mineral Resources should be undertaken to upgrade these Mineral Resources to the
Indicated category. The outcrop trench sampling and field mapping undertaken in the Tres Hermanas area to date
indicate that exploration drilling in this area is warranted.

4
INTRODUCTION
This report has been prepared by Mineral Corporation Consulting (Pty) Limited (The Mineral Corporation) on
behalf of Plateau Energy Metals Inc. (Plateau Energy Metals), a company listed on the TSX Venture Exchange.
The report documents the results of lithium Mineral Resource estimates undertaken for the Falchani Project
(Falchani or the Project). Mineral Resource estimates have previously been reported for the Project, in September
2018, in The Mineral Corporation’s Report C-MYI-EXP-1727-1103 (The Mineral Corporation, 2018).
The Falchani Project falls within licenses held by Macusani Yellowcake S.A.C (Macusani Yellowcake). which is
controlled by Plateau Energy Metals. The Project is situated on the Macusani Plateau, a region of Peru which has
been actively explored for uranium since the 1980s, and more recently for lithium. Plateau Energy Metals also
controls several other properties on the Macusani Plateau, as described in Section 4.2. The combination of
Plateau Energy Metals exploration properties on the Macusani Plateau is referred to as the Macusani Project Area
(MPA).
The Mineral Resource estimates herein comply with the CIM Definition Standards (May, 2014) on Mineral
Resources and Reserves (the CIM Definition Standards) as incorporated, by reference, in the National Instrument
43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101). The report is intended to be read in its entirety
along with the appendices referred to throughout.
The Qualified Person (QP) for this report is Stewart Nupen. The QP meets the requirements of the South African
Council for Natural Scientific Professional (SACNASP) in order to allow him to act as a Qualified Person under the
requirements of the SAMREC Code, as recognized by the CIM.
The information used to compile this report was provided by Macusani Yellowcake in Lima and Isivilla (Peru)
during site visits by the QP and in some cases via electronic transfer. A site visit was undertaken by QP in May
2018 to Macusani Yellowcake’s offices in Lima, to the CERTIMIN Laboratory in Lima and to the Falchani Project.
In the preparation of this report, The Mineral Corporation has exercised reasonable skill, care and diligence. The
opinions, findings and estimates contained herein are those of The Mineral Corporation and are based on
information provided to The Mineral Corporation by Plateau Energy Metals and/or its associates, and is described
in Section 3 of this report. The Mineral Corporation’s reasonable enquiries found no reason to doubt the
completeness, accuracy or reliability of the information provided and The Mineral Corporation accepts no liability
for the accuracy or completeness of the information and data provided by Plateau Energy Metals and/or its
associates.
The Mineral Corporation’s opinions, findings and estimates reflect various techno-economic conditions,
assumptions and interpretations (prices, currency exchange rates and other conditions) as at the effective date of
this report that can change significantly over a relatively short period of time, and with respect to new information.
As such, the information and opinions in this report may also be subject to change.
RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

The Mineral Corporation is a South African company with international affiliations which is comprised of
20 professional staff and many associates offering expertise in a wide range of geoscientific and mining
disciplines. The Mineral Corporation has a demonstrated track record in undertaking independent assessments of
exploration projects and in preparing qualified and competent person’s reports and independent studies on behalf
of exploration and mining companies and financial institutions globally.
In addition to the QP, the following employees of The Mineral Corporation contributed to the report:
• Efet Banda (Geological modelling): BSc Geology and Physics, Pr.Sci.Nat, MGSSA
• Lynne Soulsby (Mineral Tenure): BA (Hons) Sociology
• Russell Heins (Processing): BSc (Hons) Minerals Engineering, C.Eng, FSAIMM
With respect to Mineral Tenure (Section 4), The Mineral Corporation has relied on information that has been
provided by Plateau Energy Metals. This information is believed to be correct to the best of the QP’s knowledge
and it would appear that no information has been intentionally withheld that would affect the contents of this report.
It is noted that the QP has not interrogated the legal aspects of title or mineral rights for the properties and
concessions and cannot therefore express a legal opinion as to the ownership status of the mining concessions.
Neither The Mineral Corporation nor any of its agents or consultants employed in the preparation of this report has
any beneficial interest in the assets of Plateau Energy Metals. The Mineral Corporation has been paid professional
fees and will continue to be paid these fees for this work in accordance with normal professional consulting
practices.

5
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Introduction
Peru is divided into 24 “Departments”, each of which is subdivided into provinces and districts or regions. The
Plateau Energy Metals concessions are located in the Carabaya Province which is a province of the Department of
Puno in the south-eastern part of Peru. The Carabaya Province is divided into ten districts or regions. It is bounded
to the north by the Madre de Dios Region, on the east by the Sandia Province, to the south by the provinces of
Azángaro, Melgar and Putina and on the west by the Cusco Region. The capital of the province is Macusani. The
people in the province are mainly indigenous citizens of Quechua descent. Quechua is the language which the
majority of the population (84%) learn to speak from childhood, while 15% of the residents use the Spanish
language and <1% communicate in Aymara.
The locality of the MPA is shown in Figure 1. The portfolio comprises the amalgamation of those rights held by
Plateau Energy Metals, and includes the Falchani Project, along with six uranium Complexes (Figure 2).
The MPA is located approximately 650km east southeast of Lima and about 220km by road from Juliaca in the
south. The town of Macusani is some 25km to the southeast of the Macusani Plateau. The MPA covers a total
area of 93 000 hectares.
The survey reference system utilized for this report is Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 19S, using the WGS
1984 datum, hereafter referred to as WGS84 UTM Zone 19S. The MPA concessions lie between the co-ordinates
320 000 and 340 000 East and 844 4000 and 846 7500 North.
Mineral Tenure
Regulatory mechanism
Mining in Peru is primarily regulated by national laws and regulations enacted by the Peruvian Congress and the
executive branch of government. The principal legal framework on mining is set forth in the 1992 General Mining
Law and its amendments to promote the development of the mineral resources of the nation. The mining sector is
regulated by its Law and Regulations on Organization and Functions, pursuant to which the Ministry of Energy of
Mines (MEM) was created. It is the principal government entity that, together with its various offices, departments
and agencies, is responsible for the mining sector in Peru.
The MEM is a member of the executive branch of government, and is responsible for putting in place specific
policies and rules governing the matters in its jurisdiction, namely energy, hydrocarbon and mining activities.
Investment promotion laws, the Peruvian tax regime and environmental framework are other components of the
Peruvian mining landscape. Concessions are granted for exploration, exploitation, beneficiation, auxiliary services
and transportation by the MEM. No concessions are required for reconnaissance, prospecting or trading.
Property and title

The general mining law defines and regulates different categories of mining activities according to stage of
development (prospecting, exploitation, processing and marketing). The ownership of mineral claims is controlled
by mining concessions which are established using UTM coordinates to define areas of interest and measured in
hectares.
While the holder of a mining concession is protected under the Peruvian Constitution and the Civil Code, it does
not confer ownership of land and the owner of a mining concession must deal with the registered land owner to
obtain the right of access to fulfil the production obligations inherent in the concession grant. It is important to
recognize that all transactions and contracts pertaining to a mining concession must be duly registered with the
Public Mining Registry in the event of subsequent disputes at law.
Environmental regulations
The General Mining Law, administered by the MEM, may require a mining company to prepare an Environmental
Evaluation (EA), an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), a Program for Environmental Management and
Adjustment (PAMA) and a Closure Plan prior to mining construction and operation.
Granting of mining concessions

MEM grants mining concessions to local or foreign individuals or legal entities, through a specialized body called
The Institute of Geology, Mining and Metallurgy (INGEMMET). A mining concession grants its holder the right to
explore and exploit minerals within its area and the key characteristics include:
• Concessions are exclusive, freely transferable and mortgageable;

• Location is in WGS84 UTM Zone 19S;
• The aerial extent of concessions ranges from 100ha to 1 000ha;

6
• Granted on a first-come, first served basis, without preference given to the technical and financial
qualifications of the applicant;
• With the exception of mining concessions granted within urban expansion areas, the term of a mining
concession is indefinite but with restrictions and an objective based criteria including payment of annual
license fees of US$3 per hectare. Failure to pay the applicable license fees for two consecutive years will
result in the termination of the mining concession;
• A single annual fee is payable; and
• Access to the property must be negotiated with surface land owners.
Work programme for mining concessions

A work programme and expenditure schedule have to be presented in Year 7 of the life of a mining concession to
the MEM and penalties are incurred for under expenditure. By Year 12 of the life of a mining concession, it is
expected that exploitation should be ongoing; if this is not the case, then justification has to be presented to the
MEM and an extension of 6 years may be conferred (Henkle, 2014).
The work programme budget and expenditure defined in the “objective based criteria” for Macusani Yellowcake
was approximately US$3.8m against a budget of US$5m.
Mining concession description

The Mineral Resources in this report fall within two mining concessions, as shown in Table 1. As described in
Section 6.3, Macusani Yellowcake is controlled and 99.5% owned by Plateau Energy Metals.
Table 1: Mining concessions

Mining Concession Code Mining Concession Name Date Conferred Area (ha) Owner
010320205 Falchani 13/10/2005 700 Macusani Yellowcake S.A.C.
010215005 Ocacasa 4 11/07/2005 1 000 Macusani Yellowcake S.A.C.
It should be noted, that Plateau Energy Metals also holds the mining concessions in the immediate vicinity of the
Falchani Project, and thus mineral tenure should not represent an impediment to the extension of the Mineral
Resources, should additional exploration take place.
For the purpose of this Mineral Resource estimate, The Mineral Corporation is satisfied that the right to explore
and exploit “mineral substances” includes lithium.
Conclusions and limitations

The Project is within a valid mining concession. Plateau Energy Metals, and its subsidiaries, have a demonstrated
track record of managing the mineral tenure for a number of projects in Peru over several years and The Mineral
Corporation has no reason to believe that the mineral tenure for the Project is not secure.
The Mineral Corporation has restricted its review of the Mining Concession held by Macusani Yellowcake to
checking the individual license boundaries on plans against those depicted on the mining concession outputs from
the MEM. No legal reviews of the validity of the process Macusani Yellowcake went through to obtain the mining
concessions, have been undertaken, nor has an attempt been made to understand the various company
structures and ownerships prior to transfer to Macusani Yellowcake.

7
Figure 1: Locality Plan

8
Figure 2: Mineral Tenure Plan

9
ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY
Access to site
The MPA is located approximately 650km east south-east of Lima and about 220km by road from Juliaca to the
south. The nearest towns to the MPA are Macusani (25km to the south-east) and Corani (14km to the north-west).
The Interoceanica Highway (IH) is a system of tarred/sealed roads that link the ports of San Juan and Ilo on the
west coast of Peru over the Andes Mountains to the west side of Brazil (Figure 1). The IH passes within 10km to
15km to the east of the MPA. Two unpaved roads connect the Project to the IH and other unpaved roads,
generally in good condition, connect the various sites within the MPA to one another. These roads are accessible
during the dry season in two wheel drive vehicles.
The closest airport to the MPA is located at Juliaca. The facility is in good condition and services daily flights from
Lima and Cusco.
Access to land
The issue of land tenure is of increasing significance in Peru, particularly as the national cadastral system for
agricultural land ownership is not always accurate. Peruvian law does not vest surface rights with mineral rights
and any proposed development requires the developer to purchase the surface rights or negotiate an appropriate
agreement with the surface rights owners to have access to the property.
At present the company has working agreements ("convenios") with the following communities within the MPA:
Chaccaconiza, Isivilla, an independent Cooperative (Imagina), Quelccaya and various independent small land
holders. The agreement with the community of Chaccaconiza was renewed and will expire in December 2019 and
can be renegotiated. The agreement with the community of Isivilla expires in June 2019 and can also be
negotiated. Until sanctioned otherwise the agreement with the Cooperative and the small land holders is open
ended and based on the progress achieved by exploration.
Climate
The climate on the Macusani Plateau is characterized by two distinct seasons – the wet season (which starts in
September but peaks from January to April) and the dry season (May to September). The rainy season is
controlled by tropical air-masses and the dry winters by subtropical high pressure.
While the exposed eastern slopes of the Andes receive more than 2 500mm of rain annually, the average rainfall
for the Carabaya Province varies between 600mm to 1 000mm. The period between May and August is
characterized by very dry conditions and cold nights. Significant electrical storm activity is common in the wet
season and moisture falls in the form of rain, hail and, occasionally snow.
Temperatures range from 19°C in November to -10°C in July. While temperatures are mild, high ultraviolet
readings are common in the middle of the day. These climatic conditions and the altitude dictate that the area is
vegetated by coarse scrub and grasses.
Local Resources
Peru has a robust mining economy with many operations exploiting copper, gold, iron ore, lead, molybdenum,
rhenium, silver, tin and zinc, as well as industrial minerals and mineral fuels (coal, natural gas and crude oil).
Founded on this mining culture, it is thus reasonable to assume that a workforce consisting of skilled and semi-
skilled people could be sourced for the Project.
Infrastructure
While there are currently no electricity supplies to the Project, there are non-industrial transmission lines servicing
the local communities, and a 138KV transmission line is located some 20km to the east of the MPA.
At this time, the supply of water is derived from local river courses and wells. In its 2014 Preliminary Economic
Assessment (PEA) for Plateau Energy Metals’ uranium projects, GBM Mining Engineering Consultants Limited
(GBM) was of the view that the area has access to sufficient water resources for the purposes of mining
operations (Short et al, 2014).
Physiography
The Macusani Plateau is part of the relatively flat Altiplano of the Eastern Cordillera of the Andes Mountain Range,
except where incised narrow canyons exist with a relief of up to 250m. The canyon walls are steep with slope
angles up to 60°, with some sections being vertical. The elevation of the Plateau ranges between 4 330m and
4 580m above mean sea level.

10
HISTORY
Introduction
While the Mineral Resources for the Falchani Project are lithium Mineral Resources, the MPA as a whole contains
both lithium and uranium potential, as described in previous technical reports for the other Complexes being
developed by Plateau Energy Metals. Furthermore, the geological understanding and exploration history of the
Macusani Plateau is founded on exploration for uranium, and as such, a description of both lithium and uranium
exploration efforts are appropriate here.
Previous Regional Exploration
Instituto Peruano de Energia Nuclear

In 1975, the uranium and nuclear activities in Peru were placed under the control of the Instituto Peruano de
Energia Nuclear (IPEN). A five-year exploration plan (1976-1981) was initiated with the aim of identifying and
developing resources in the country. The Macusani East area was the most studied area in southern Peru by
IPEN. After IPEN discovered the first 60 uranium showings in 1978, systematic radiometric prospecting and
trenching were carried out over an area of approximately 600km 2, culminating in the discovery of numerous
additional uranium showings (Young, 2013).
UNDP/IAEA
From mid-1977, a long-term United Nation Development Programme/International Atomic Energy Agency
(UNDP/IAEA) project was initiated consisting of regional reconnaissance over selected areas. The results of most
of the work were negative except for those from a car-borne radiometric survey of the Puno Basin where a
significant discovery was made near Macusani in the southern Cordillera Oriental, north of Lake Titicaca.
Anomalies were found in the volcanic and interbedded sediments of the Upper Tertiary age Macusani volcanics
and the Permian age Mitu Group (Young, 2013).
In the same exploration phase, additional anomalies were located to the south-southwest near Santa Rosa in
Tertiary age porphyritic rhyolites and andesites.
These (and other discoveries in the Lake Titicaca region) concentrated the exploration in the area. A helicopter
spectrometric survey of selected areas was completed in 1980 in Muñani, Lagunaillas and Rio Blanca as an
IAEA/IPEN Project and a fixed wing survey was completed in an adjacent area by IPEN. Numerous uranium
anomalies were discovered.
In 1984, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency and the IAEA
sponsored an International Uranium Resources Evaluation Project Mission (IUREP, 1984) to Peru. The mission
estimated that the Speculative Resources of the country fell within the range of 6 000 to 11 000t of uranium.
Previous Ownership
Uranium price fluctuations

To a large extent, the cyclical nature of uranium exploration on the Macusani Plateau has been driven by the
fluctuating price of the commodity since the mid-1980s. During the collapse of prices in the 1980s and in the wake
of the Three Mile Island accident, there was little incentive for exploration and mining companies to explore for
uranium. However, the uranium prices experienced a spectacular rise between 2001 and 2008 during which time
junior mining companies mobilized their campaigns by staking properties over prospective ground. Amongst these
early explorers was Vena Resources Inc (Vena) who acquired seven concessions in the Macusani Plateau as well
as additional concessions elsewhere in Peru (Henkle, 2011). In 2006, Vena commenced scintillometer
prospecting, radon and surface outcrop mapping over various IPEN uranium showings.
Global interest in uranium declined in the wake of the Global Economic Crisis of 2008/2009 and, more so, in the
aftermath of the Fukushima Dailchi nuclear disaster in March 2011.
Macusani Yellowcake
Macusani Yellowcake Inc. was a Canadian uranium exploration and development company focused on the
exploration of its properties on the Macusani Plateau. The Company was incorporated in November 2006 and was
created through the amalgamation of privately held Macusani Yellowcake Inc. and Silver Net Equities Group, a
TSX Venture Capital pool company. The Company owns a 99.5% interest in the Peruvian concessions through
Macusani Yellowcake. Macusani has been actively exploring in the Macusani area since 2007.

11
The Cameco-Vena Joint Venture

In 2007, Cameco Corporation (and its wholly owned subsidiary Cameco Global Exploration Limited (Cameco))
entered into a joint venture with Vena with the objective of jointly exploring for uranium in Peru. Minergia S.A.C
was formed as the joint venture vehicle, with Cameco providing the funding and Vena undertaking the exploration
management. The ownership was founded on 50% shareholding in favor of each party. The combined portfolio
covered an area of 14 700ha. The details of this transaction are summarized by Henkle (2014).
Azincourt buys Minergia

During November 2013, Azincourt Uranium announced that it had entered into a definitive share-purchase
agreement with joint-venture partners Cameco and Vena to acquire full ownership of the resource-stage Macusani
and other exploration projects. In January, 2014, Azincourt announced that the acquisition of Minergia S.A.C. had
been completed.
Macusani purchases Minergia

Macusani Yellowcake Inc. and Azincourt Uranium Inc. announced in September 2014 that they had completed the
acquisition by Macusani of Azincourt’s adjacent uranium properties located on the Macusani Plateau. Under the
terms of the transaction, Macusani acquired 100% of Azincourt’s Peruvian subsidiary, Minergia S.A.C.
Arising from this transaction, there was a consolidation of mining concessions within the MPA.
Macusani changes name to Plateau Uranium Inc.

On April 30, 2015, Macusani Yellowcake Inc. changed its name to Plateau Uranium Inc. Young (2015) reported
consolidated uranium Mineral Resources estimates for six mineral Complexes that fell under the Plateau Uranium
umbrella. In May 2016, the Mineral Resources for two of the Complexes (Kihitian and Isivilla) were updated to
include lithium and potassium (The Mineral Corporation, 2016). Subsequently, the name of the Peruvian operating
company was changed from Global Gold S.A.C. to Macusani Yellowcake S.A.C., which holds all the MPA mineral
concessions.
Plateau Uranium Inc. changes name to Plateau Energy Metals Inc.

In March 2018, Plateau Uranium Inc. changed its name to Plateau Energy Metals. A summary of the transactions
which form the history to Plateau Energy Metals is provided in Figure 3.
Previous exploration
No meaningful exploration, apart from the regional exploration described in Section 6.2, was undertaken prior to
2017 on the Falchani Project. All of the exploration initiatives which inform these Mineral Resource estimates are
described in Section 9 and Section 10 of this report.

12
Figure 3: History of ownership of Plateau Energy Metals

13
GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION

The Macusani concessions are located in the Carabaya Province, Puno Department of south-eastern Peru in the
Andes. The Andes are a geographical feature formed by active mountain building processes driven by plate
tectonics.
Regional Geology
A common geological feature of orogenic belts is that they are usually structurally and stratigraphically complex. In
the Puno region of Peru, mainly Paleozoic sediments (520-250Ma old) that were formed on the western Brazilian
Craton (Figure 4) have been highly deformed by thrusting and folding due to the westwards movement of the
South American tectonic plate (Brazilian Craton) over-riding the Pacific tectonic plate (Nazca Plate) along the
western margin of the Americas over the last ±150Ma. This occurred when the breakup of the Americas from the
African and European continents occurred, with the development of the Atlantic Ocean. The main geological units
are shown in Figure 4 with the Oceanic Trench forming the western margin of the South American plate.
The tectonic history has led to the older sediments being bounded by westward dipping thrusts, intense folding
and intrusions of dykes, batholiths and being affected by volcanic activity at various times (Henkle, 2014). The
Andes represents a large anticlinorium complicated by a series of faults and intrusions, with the flanks of this
superstructure made up of the coastal Mesozoic and eastern Palaeozoic belts. The Andes represent the Late
Tertiary and Quaternary rejuvenation by block faulting of an eroded, early Tertiary folded mountain range which
occupied the axis of Palaeozoic and Mesozoic geosynclines. Topographically the mountains consist of a central
dissected plateau, the Intermontane Depressions and Altiplano enclosed by narrow ranges, the Western Cordillera
and the Eastern Cordillera as depicted in Figure 4.
Local Geology
In the MPA, late Tertiary tuffs, ignimbrites and associated sediments are preserved in a NW-SE trending graben.
Much of the Early Tertiary and Mesozoic cover was eroded prior to deposition of the pyroclastics so they were
deposited in part directly on the Palaeozoic rocks including Late Palaeozoic intrusives (Hercynian granites) and
extrusives (Mitu volcanics).
The known uranium occurrences in the MPA identified by IUREP are associated with these Pliocene and Miocene
epoch Quenamari Formation tuffs, ignimbrites and interbedded sediments. Other uranium mineralization was
indicated by IUREP (1984) to be hosted in acidic volcanic rocks of rhyolite composition that covers large areas of
the Macusani Plateau in horizontally bedded formations from surface to a depth of about 100m but these appeared
to be lenticular or confined to fracture zones (Young, 2013).
The geological map of the area (Figure 5) indicates that all of the uranium Complexes are underlain by rocks of the
Neogene Period, Quenamari Formation (dated between 22.5Ma to 1.8Ma). The youngest rocks (Pliocene Epoch)
are known as the Yapamayo Member and these outcrop over most of the MPA. The older Sapanuta and
Chacacuniza Members (Miocene Epoch) underlie the Yapamayo Member.
The outcropping rocks within the Falchani Project are interpreted to be mostly of the Sapanuta Member (Figure 5).
A description of the structural interpretation which supports the Mineral Resource estimates is provided in
Section 14.2.2.

14
Figure 4: Regional geological setting

15
Figure 5: Local geology

16
Property Geology
Geological description
The uranium mineralization at the other Complexes within the MPA are interpreted to be hosted in shallowly
dipping acidic tuffs, with pyroclasts from sub-macroscopic to 60mm in size. The main minerals constituting the tuff
are quartz, orthoclase and plagioclase in a groundmass of amorphous glass. Crude bedding is evident in some
outcrops, and is based on strata containing larger and smaller pyroclasts.
The petrography of the samples analyzed by Thatcher (2011) indicated that the acid volcanics (crystal lapilli tuffs)
can have varying composition from rhyolite to dacite to latite which supports the likely presence of stratigraphic
layering of the volcanic pile as noted in Section 7.2 and by Cheilletz et al (1992).
Limited mineralogical work has been undertaken on samples from the Falchani Project to date, but the
understanding of the stratigraphy has evolved through exploration mapping and drilling programmes. However, in
the immediate vicinity of the boreholes drilled at Falchani, the youngest rocks would appear to be these described
in the field by the Plateau Energy Metals as the Upper Rhyolite. The Upper Rhyolite forms prominent outcrops
(Figure 6), and demonstrates a crude bedding, and appears to have a shallow dip to the north-northeast. Outcrops
of the Upper Rhyolite have a similar appearance to the acidic tuffs of the Yapamayo and Sapanuta Members of
the Quenamari Formation, which host the uranium mineralization. This together with the fact that the Falchani
Project is mapped as being underlain by the Sapanuta Member of the Quenamari Formation, support the
interpretation.
Figure 6: Illustrative photograph of Upper Rhyolite contact with the Upper Breccia (local stratigraphy as inset)
Below the Upper Rhyolite is the Upper Breccia, which separates the Upper Rhyolite from the Lithium-rich Tuff. The
Upper Breccia is not well defined in outcrop but is very distinctive in core. The Upper Breccia contains angular
clasts of volcanic material, in a very fine groundmass (Figure 7 - top). The Lithium-rich Tuff is a light grey to white,
very fine grained rock, with prominent layering (Figure 7 - bottom).
Although the Lithium-rich Tuff has been further sub-divided, on the basis of its chemistry (Section 14.2.1), these
subdivisions are not immediately recognizable in outcrop or in core, and the term Lithium-rich Tuff is used to
describe the whole unit, between Upper Breccia and Lower Breccia. The contact between the Lithium-rich Tuff and
the Lower Breccia is less marked than the Upper Breccia. The Lower Breccia has been identified in outcrop in the
Tres Hermanas trenches, and has been interpreted from drilling.
The thickness of the Upper Breccia varies from 10m to 20m, while the thickness of the Lithium-rich Tuff varies in
drilling from 50m to 140m. The Lower Breccia unit is variable in thickness, but recent drilling has indicated that the
Lower Breccia unit can reach thicknesses of up to 175m and contains large (up to 20m) blocks of Lithium-rich Tuff.

17
Figure 7: Upper Breccia in core (top) and Lithium-rich Tuff in core (bottom)
Mineralization Model
7.3.2.1 Mineralization model in the Uranium Complexes

Li et al (2012) suggests that the uranium mineralization was formed by leaching of volcanic glass, apatite and
monazite, transported as uranyl phosphate complexes and precipitated as autunite (Ca(UO 2)2(PO4)2.6-8H2O) and
subordinate weeksite (K2(UO2)(Si2O5)3 4H2O) in fractures formed in response to tectonic uplift. U-Pb ages of the
meta-autunite indicate initiation of the uranium mineralization at circa 1Ma, long after the cooling of the last
volcanic eruptions and promote a genetic model that relies on an inter-play of the geomorphology, groundwater
movement and its evaporation.
Elevated levels of lithium have previously been identified in the uranium host rocks, as described in The Mineral
Corporation (2016), in which the lithium Mineral Resources for the uranium Complexes were estimated. Thatcher
(2008 and 2011) did not to recognize any of the typical lithium minerals (spodumene, lepidolite or hectorite) from
limited hand specimens, but did identify significant clay alteration in the ground mass of the crystal lapilli tuffs of
rhyodacitic composition. In the case of the uranium Complexes, the lithium is interpreted to be a primary
component of the acidic tuffs and the majority of the Li mineralization was interpreted to be located in the
groundmass of remaining volcanic glass and secondary clay. It is reasonable to assume that the alteration
producing the uranium mineralization, via leaching of the volcanic glass, apatite and monazite, would also have
had, to a certain extent, some impact on the original lithium mineralization.
7.3.2.2 Mineralization model at the Falchani Project

Limited mineralogical or petrological studies have been undertaken to date, however, additional mineralogical work
has commenced. The interpretation of the geological environment and lithium deportment at the Project is based
on observations in drill core and outcrop, and the analysis of lithium and other element distributions in the
exploration results to date.

18
The Upper Breccia, Lithium-rich Tuff and Lower Breccia show remarkably consistent vertical zonation of lithium,
strontium, cesium and other elements. The highest concentration of lithium is at the top and bottom of the Lithium-
rich Tuff.
The Lithium-rich Tuff, and the transitional Upper and Lower Breccias are interpreted to have been deposited in a
technically active, crater-lake environment, where the breccias represent the transition from the rhyolitic ash-flows
above and below, and the Lithium-rich Tuff, represents a period of sub-aerial deposition. This is supported by the
regular layering observed in the tuff, and the angular clasts of the breccia.
The lithium mineralization is thought to be primary, although alteration and enrichment by groundwater or
hydrothermal fluids in the interim has not been ruled out. The reason for the elevated lithium concentration, relative
to the surrounding acidic tuffs will be further investigated by Plateau Energy Metals.
As with the lithium in the uranium Complexes, typical lithium minerals are not visible in hand specimen, and it is
interpreted that the majority of the lithium is located in the glassy, siliceous groundmass of the tuffs.
The relatively early-stage understanding of the lithium deportment means that an assessment of the potential
extractability of lithium needs to be based on metallurgical tests at this stage. This is described in Section 13.
DEPOSIT TYPES
Lithium minerals are commercially exploited from three principal sources – brines, pegmatites and the clay mineral
hectorite.
Lithium rich brines are formed through the chemical weathering of volcanic lithium bearing rocks by hydrothermal
fluids usually restricted to basins in areas of high evaporation, forming lithium carbonate minerals such as
zabuyelite. Close to 70% of the world’s lithium brine deposits are situated in the borders of Chile, Bolivia and
Argentina (Lithium Triangle) area. The Lithium Triangle contains the largest brine source lithium deposits such as
Salar de Atacama, Sala de Uyuni and Salar de Homebre Muerto.
Lithium minerals such as spodumene, petalite and lepodolite are found in coarse crystalline hydrothermal
pegmatites, formed by the crystallization of post magmatic fluids. Lithium containing pegmatites are rare and are
generally associated with tin and tantalite.
The style of lithium mineralization for the Macusani region is very different to these types of deposits, as it is
interpreted to be inherent within the glass-rich acidic volcanic tuffs.
At Falchani, the lithium-rich volcanic tuff unit is interpreted to be sub-aerial and the transitional Li-rich breccias are
interpreted to have been deposited in a crater lake volcano-sedimentary environment.
EXPLORATION
Uranium exploration activities in Peru were initiated on the back of the work of IPEN in the 1970s and 1980s.
Uranium anomalies were found near Macusani in the Upper Tertiary volcanics and the Permian Mitu Group by the
UNDP/IAEA project.
The typical exploration rationale for the Macusani region involves the delineation of potential uranium anomalies
through a combination of regional geological interpretation and surface radiometric techniques in order to delineate
targets for further investigation through drilling. Macusani Yellowcake has conducted ground-based radiometric
surveys from a hand-held scintilometer over large portions of its properties as a guide for its drilling programmes.
Exploration was initiated at the Falchani Project as a result of a radiometric anomaly. In addition to the radiometric
information, Plateau Energy Metals have undertaken surface sampling and at the end of April 2018, had collected
some 180 samples, which were analyzed for lithium. The surface samples were not used in the Mineral Resource
estimate, but provide additional confidence, combined with recent drilling, that the Lithium-Rich Tuff extends to
surface, as has been modelled in the geological model.
The total number of boreholes drilled at the Falchani Project, at the end of January 2019, was 51.

19
DRILLING
Drilling programme
Two diamond drilling programmes have been undertaken at the Falchani Project. The first campaign was initiated
in 2017, and the second programme continued to the end of December 2018. In total, 51 drillholes have been
drilled by Macusani Yellowcake, as shown in Table 2 from 15 platforms.
Table 2: Drilling programme summary

Number of Length of Drilling No. of Samples(excluding
Deposit
Drillholes (m) QA/QC)
Total 51 14 816 9 102
Drilling methodology
Due to drill access limitations, the drilling was mainly undertaken from a series of platforms, with anything from two
to nine drillholes being drilled radially from each platform (Figure 8).
Figure 8: Drilling configuration
The platform spacing resulted in mineralized zone intersection separation distances ranging from 50m to up to
200m.
The platform and drillhole locations are shown in Figure 9, which also shows the drillhole platforms which informed
the September 2018 Mineral Resource estimates, and those which have been added to inform the current Mineral
Resource estimates.
Additional representative logs, drill plans and cross sections are provided in Figure 13 to Figure 18.
A summary of the drillholes intersections used in the Mineral Resources estimate is provided in Appendix 1 and a
set of cross-sections is provided in Appendix 2.
Sample recovery and core

The drilling conditions in the Lithium-rich Tuff were good, however, within the Upper and Lower Breccias, more
difficult conditions were encountered. The core recovery over the length of the drillholes ranged from 85% to
100%, with an average of 97%, indicating that the overall core recovery is acceptable.

20
Figure 9: Locations of drillhole platforms

21
SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY
Introduction
The data which informs these lithium Mineral Resource estimates are derived from the exploration efforts of
Macusani Yellowcake, which is controlled by Plateau Energy Metals.
Sampling methods
Whole core (over the entire length of the drillhole) was sampled. Individual samples varied from a minimum of
0.5m to a maximum of 1.0m, with a mean of 0.9m. Selection of the length to sample was based on visual
observation of the mineralization and assisted by radiometric measurements.
Sampling recovery
Core from these deposits was scrutinized by the QP during the May 2018 site visit and, although the overall quality
of the core recovered was good, there are zones, particularly within the Upper and Lower Breccia, where drilling
conditions are difficult, and the core recovery is relatively poor. The perception gained by scrutiny of the core
available on site was that, although the core could in some cases be somewhat blocky, the core recovery in the
Lithium-rich Tuff was good, and the core pieces fitted together well in the core boxes prior to sampling. In the
Upper and Lower Breccias, the core recovered was often broken, and an assessment of core recovery was
difficult. The overall core recovery was 97%.
Given the overall thickness of the mineralized zones, the consistent lithium grade within the zones and the
relatively good core recovery, it is considered unlikely that any bias related to core recovery could be introduced.
Sample quality
As the entire core was sampled, the sample taken from the core box is considered representative. Whole core was
sampled in order to minimize the risk of sample loss. Thus, the method of sampling the whole core is sound, even
though no intact library sample was retained. A comprehensive photo archive has been retained however, along
with the sample reject material.
Sample preparation, assaying and analytical procedures
Sample preparation
Sample preparation occurred on site at a mobile field station which was located close to the drill rigs and
periodically re-located. Once logged and photographed, the entire core identified for sampling was placed into a
sampling bag. The pre-marked aluminium tag was stapled to the sample bag.
Sample depths were recorded together with a basic geological description on a sampling reconciliation log. This
log was later captured into an Excel spreadsheet.
Quality control samples in the form of standards were inserted at the permanent field office located in the village of
Isivilla. These standards were prepared by Macusani Yellowcake and certified by ALEPH Group & Asociados
S.A.C. Metrologia de las Radiaciones (Radioactivity Measuring Techniques) by having check analyses of the
standards completed at CERTIMIN SA (CERTIMIN), which was previously known as the Centro de Investigación
Minera y Metalủrgica (CIMM), laboratory in Lima.
Sample delivery procedures

The complete sample batch, accompanied by a senior representative of the Macusani Yellowcake exploration
team, was sent by road to the town of Juliaca. The samples entered the CERTIMIN LIMS system at this point.
From the preparatory laboratory in Juliaca, the pulverized samples were transported by CERTIMIN, to the main
CERTIMIN Laboratory in MiraFlores, Lima, by either road or as air freight.
The Mineral Corporation examined the sample receiving facilities at all three laboratories and found them to be
well organized. It would appear that the chain of custody of the Macusani Yellowcake samples from site to final
analysis is reasonably secure.
Sample preparation and analysis

Sample preparation and analysis was carried out through the CERTIMIN Laboratory.

22
11.5.3.1 Preparation Laboratory (CERTIMIN - Juliaca)

The samples were weighed on delivery and entered into the LIMS system. Drying was completed over a 12 hour
period at 100˚C. Crushing was done by two jaw crushers; the first to 6mm and the second to 2.5mm. Crushing was
completed when the sample was 100% <2.5mm. Laboratory standards were entered into the stream after the first
jaw crusher. The jaw crushers were flushed with quartz, some of which were sent to the Lima offices for analysis
on a regular basis.
One certified reference material, one blank sample and two duplicate samples were incorporated into each batch
of 50 samples delivered to CERTIMIN for laboratory analytical quality assurance and control (QAQC). These
results were given to Macusani Yellowcake on the analysis certificates.
After homogenization, the crushed sample was riffle split to an approximate 250g sample that was pulverized by a
ring mill. The ring mill was flushed with quartz after approximately every five samples or if there was a marked
color change in the crushed material. The preparation facility strives to have the pulverized material at 85% <200
mesh grain size.
The jaw crushers, riffles and ring mills are all cleaned with compressed air and are located within sub-housings to
keep contamination to a minimum. The reject material is kept on site but will eventually be transported to the
Macusani Yellowcake warehouse in Lima.
11.5.3.2 Acid Digestion and final analysis (CERTIMIN - MiraFlores)

The pulverized material was manually homogenized. Wet samples were dried before an approximate 0.20g
aliquot (±0.02g) sample was spooned out and digested with a mixture of HCl+HNO3+HF+HClO4 acid over a period
of 8hrs.
The concentration of lithium was determined from the acid digested liquid by inductively coupled plasma - mass
spectrometry (ICP-MS) for abundances of 0.05ppm to 10 000ppm (1%). Any results greater than 10 000ppm were
re-analyzed via inductively coupled plasma - optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). The latter instrument
would require a new acid digest to be completed on an aliquot of 0.25g. The ICP-MS and ICP-OES equipment is
calibrated daily with three appropriate standards.
The methods undertaken by CERTIMIN to prepare and analyze the samples for lithium are considered acceptable
by The Mineral Corporation. As described in Section 12.1, the QP undertook a site visit to the CERTIMIN
Laboratory in Lima, and walked through the acid digestion and ICP-MS sections. The laboratory was well
organized and professional.
Analytical quality assurance and control (QAQC) procedures
Introduction
The data which informs these lithium Mineral Resource estimates was generated by Plateau Energy Metals, or its
subsidiaries, since the initiation of exploration on the Falchani Project in 2017. Plateau Energy Metals inserted
standards, blanks and duplicate (Field) samples into the sampling streams, in addition to those inserted by the
laboratory, in order to assess the accuracy and precision of the lithium analytical results.
A summary of the overall statistics for the QAQC samples is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Summary of QAQC samples

Duplicates Standards Blanks
No of samples % QAQC
Field Laboratory Field Laboratory Field Laboratory
10 517 264 307 54 148 54 232 10%
Standard data
The results for the Field and Laboratory Standards have been analyzed using Error Deviation plots, where Error
Deviation is calculated as follows:
𝑋𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑠 − 𝑋𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 𝐷𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑥100
𝑋 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑
The Error Deviation results are portrayed in Figure 10. Positive results indicate an over-estimation, while negative
results indicate an under-estimation of grade. With this technique, an Error Deviation within the ±10% range is
considered to signify acceptable levels of accuracy by the laboratory.

23
20
FIELD LAB
15
10
Error Deviation (%)
0
- 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000 8 000 9 000 10 000
-5
-10
-15
-20
Expected value of standard (Li ppm)
Figure 10: Error Deviation plot for lithium standards
The bulk of the results for both the Field and Laboratory Standards fill within the ±10% range and all of those
which fall outside are for the very low concentration lithium standard. The results for the standards inserted for
lithium are considered acceptable.
Duplicate data
The results for Field and Laboratory Duplicates have been analyzed using the Mean Deviation method, where
Mean Deviation as calculated as follows (where Xa and Xb are duplicate pairs):
0.5 ∗ (𝑋𝑎 − 𝑋𝑏)

𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝐷𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑥100
𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛(𝑋𝑎, 𝑋𝑏)
The result of the lithium Mean Deviation analysis is shown in Figure 11.

24
20
FIELD LAB
15
10
Mean Deviation (%)
0
- 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000
-5
-10
-15
-20
Result of primary analysis (Li ppm)
Figure 11: Mean Deviation plot for Field and Laboratory Duplicates
The Mean Deviation results show good reproducibility of lithium analysis, for both Field and Laboratory duplicates,
and The Mineral Corporation would consider the analytical precision to be acceptable for lithium.
Blank data
The analytical results for blanks submitted are shown in Figure 12. As would be expected, the Laboratory Blanks
return values below the detection limit of >0.1 Li ppm. The Field Blanks show low levels of lithium. The levels of
lithium returned are not considered material, when compared with the anticipated lithium grades within the Project.
FIELD LAB
7
5
Li (ppm )
0
107
121
135
149
163
170
184
198
212
226
235
249
263
277
100
114
128
142
156
177
191
205
219
242
256
270
284
23
30
44
58
72
86
93
16
37
51
65
79
9
1
Num ber of blank samples
Figure 12: Analytical results for Field and Laboratory Blanks

25
Conclusions
The Mean Deviation results show good precision and the Error Deviation for the lithium standard was generally
below 5% which signifies acceptable levels of accuracy by the laboratory. The blank control sample results
reported negligible Li concentrations.
The Mineral Corporation concludes that the results of the inserted QAQC samples are acceptable for lithium
Mineral Resource estimation.
Sample database
The Mineral Corporation received the drillhole logging results as a series of Microsoft Excel files. The same data
was also provided in the form of a Microsoft Access database. The data from the database was imported in
Datamine Studio™ for further analysis. A check on the accuracy of the transposition of approximately 5% of the
sample results from assay certificate to database was completed by The Mineral Corporation, and no transcription
errors were identified.
Overall adequacy statement

The QP considers the sampling methods, sampling recovery and sample quality to be acceptable. The procedures
undertaken by the laboratory were noted to be of a high standard, and appropriate for the analysis of lithium. The
QAQC results indicate that acceptable levels of accuracy and precision, and no contamination, have been
obtained by the laboratory. Finally, the validation undertaken on the sample database found no deficiencies in the
capture and storage of information. The database is thus considered sufficiently reliable to be used to inform the
Mineral Resource estimates.

26
DATA VERIFICATION
Site visit
The QP visited the Falchani Project in May 2018, during which, outcrops of the tuff and breccia units were visited,
and the drilling and sampling operations observed. In addition, the QP also visited the CERTIMIN laboratory in
Lima, where all of the Lithium analyses for the Falchani Project have been undertaken. An independent set of
samples were randomly selected from the storage facility in Macusani.
Drillhole locations
In addition to validating collar positions, the drilling, logging and sampling procedures were scrutinised for two
drillholes in progress during the site visit. The procedures undertaken by the geologists on site, were found to align
with the description of the geological logging and sampling procedures described in Section 11.
Geological observations
The core from five drillholes, selected by the QP, was viewed in the Macusani coreyard, together with
representatives of Plateau Energy Metals. The geological units identified in the logs were found to be readily
recognizable in core, and no discrepancies between the core viewed, and the geological logs provided, were
found. A noticeable, and consistent pattern in lithium, cesium and rubidium concentrations was evident, when the
analytical logs and the lithological logs were viewed together - this prompted the subdivision of the Lithium-rich
Tuff into the three units described further in Section 14.2.1.
While on site, outcrops of the Lithium-rich Tuff, the Upper Breccia and the overlying rhyolites were observed.
Although a cover of scree prevents the direct observation of the contacts between the units, the occurrence of the
tuff is clearly identifiable on the basis of the color of the scree. In outcrop, the tuff appears to be consistent in
thickness and dip / dip direction.
Re-sample campaign analyses

Twenty-one samples from three boreholes were randomly selected by the QP. The sample rejects from these
samples were re-submitted to CERTIMIN, and to the ALS laboratory in Lima. The samples selected were a
mixture of high, medium and low lithium grades. The results are shown in Table 4, that show a reasonably good
correlation between the original result and the re-sampling.
Table 4: Independent analysis from the Falchani Project
From To Original Re-analysis - CERTIMIN Re-analysis - ALS
Borehole Number & Sample
(m) (m) (Li ppm) (Li ppm) (Li ppm)
PCHAC-03-TV-42 36.00 37.00 345 325 363
PCHAC-03-TV-43 37.00 38.00 358 343 360
PCHAC-03-TV-44 38.00 39.00 338 348 351
PCHAC-03-TV-45 39.00 40.00 345 356 354
PCHAC-03-TV-46 40.00 41.00 351 362 351
PCHAC-03-TV-47 41.00 42.00 344 359 351
PCHAC-03-TV-48 42.00 43.00 344 342 355
PCHAC-08-TNE-110 81.00 82.00 1 822 1 719 1 710
PCHAC-08-TNE-111 82.00 83.00 1 980 2 203 2 160
PCHAC-08-TNE-112 83.00 84.00 2 517 2 752 2 810
PCHAC-08-TNE-113 84.00 85.00 2 919 3 145 3 360
PCHAC-08-TNE-114 85.00 86.00 3 245 3 565 3 650
PCHAC-08-TNE-115 86.00 87.00 4 126 3 714 3 570
PCHAC-09-TV-84 76.00 77.00 448 462 460
PCHAC-09-TV-85 77.00 78.00 471 447 470
PCHAC-09-TV-86 78.00 79.00 442 494 480
PCHAC-09-TV-87 79.00 80.00 455 460 470
PCHAC-09-TV-88 80.00 81.00 454 447 470
PCHAC-09-TV-89 81.00 82.00 430 423 425
PCHAC-09-TV-90 82.00 83.00 422 421 430
PCHAC-09-TV-91 83.00 84.00 387 397 410
Average 1 073 1 099 1 112
Limitations or failure to conduct such verification, and the reasons for any such limitations or
failure
None.
Overall adequacy statement

The procedures in place at the CERTIMIN laboratory meet current industry standards and requirements and in the
opinion of the QP, the results are adequate for the purposes used with regards to data verification in this report.

27
MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING
Initial test work on lithium within uranium Mineral Resources (2016)

Plateau Energy Metals (then Plateau Uranium Inc) first undertook test work to investigate the extraction of lithium
within the uranium Mineral Resources at the Colibri and Corachapi Complexes, on the Macusani Plateau. The
results of that test work were described by The Mineral Corporation (2016), the 43-101 Technical Report
supporting the inclusion of lithium within the uranium Mineral Resources.
The initial indications from the leach test work, which were undertaken at an in-house laboratory in Lima, and
subsequently by K-UTEC AG Salt Technologies (K-UTEC) in Germany, reported recoveries of up to 86% and 73%
respectively, utilizing a sulphuric acid lixiviant heated to 250°C.
The test work undertaken on the nearby uranium Mineral Resources does not have a direct bearing on the
Falchani Project, however the proximity and nature of the lithium in the Colibri Complex, which is hosted in acidic
volcanics, prompted Plateau Energy Metals to undertake similar tests on material from the Falchani Project.
Test work on Lithium-rich Tuff by TECMMINE

Plateau Energy Metals reported the results of test work undertaken by TECMMINE, a Peruvian metallurgical
consulting company based in Lima, in April 2018. The initial test work was undertaken on a 7.4kg sample of the
outcrop of the Lithium-rich Tuff from the Falchani Project with an average grade of 3846 ppm Li. Leach results of
75-79% of the contained lithium were reported, using sulfuric acid at 88°C.
Atmospheric leaching using hydrochloric acid was also undertaken by TECMMINE in Peru and reported in October
2018. The results showed that comparable extraction of lithium of 88% is achievable at 92°C for 12 hours using
material milled to 150 micron (µ).
Since the initial test work, additional samples were provided by Plateau Energy Metals to TECMMINE, from
various outcrops identified on Falchani East and Falchani West. The metallurgical test work focused on sulfate
leaching, chloride leaching, sulfation baking and roasting, and informs the continuing test work described in 13.3.2.
Test work on Lithium-rich Tuff by ANSTO
Baseline sulphuric acid leach and lithium carbonate precipitation

Leach test work was undertaken on a sample taken from outcrop samples of the Lithium-rich Tuff, as reported by
Plateau Energy Metals in May 2018. The work was undertaken in Sydney by the Australian Nuclear Science and
Technology Organization (ANSTO), in an effort to demonstrate 'proof of concept' for the extraction of lithium and
the precipitation of a lithium carbonate product, utilizing atmospheric leaching.
The sampled was milled to a P80 150 micron (µ) and leached with a 48 hour residence time at 90-95°C in sulfuric
acid. The recovery of lithium to the leach solution was 90%. Plateau Energy Metals subsequently announced (19
July 2018) that ANSTO had progressed the leach solution to a lithium carbonate product, with a lithium carbonate
purity of 99.7%. The specifications of the lithium carbonate produced were reported to compare favorably with
typical industry specifications.
Alternative lithium extraction methods

Plateau Energy Metals announced in October 2018 that it has initiated further test work to investigate alternatives
to the baseline sulfuric acid leach, utilizing outcrop samples from various areas of Falchani East and Falchani
West.
Extraction of up to 71% lithium was achieved utilizing a high temperature sulfation roast, at 900-1000°C for two
hours, followed by a water leach at 50°C for 18 hours. Extraction of up to 74% lithium was achieved by baking at
150°C for 4 hours, followed by a water leach at 30°C for 24 hours. Plateau Energy Metals have indicated that
since these results were published, additional test work has taken place at both TECMMINE and ANSTO,
exploring different methods, experiment conditions and parameters and that these results will be incorporated into
the PEA for the Falchani Project.
Conclusions
The Mineral Corporation would consider the test work undertaken to date on the Falchani Project to be preliminary
in nature and not necessarily representative of the Project as a whole. However, the average grade of the outcrop
sample compares well with the lithium grades in the Mineral Resource, and for the purposes of assessing
Reasonable Prospects for Economic Extraction of lithium at the Falchani Project, the baseline sulfuric acid leach
and lithium carbonate results provide a good indication that a metallurgical process for the extraction of lithium
could be reasonably expected with additional work.

28
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES
Drillhole database
The drillhole database described in Section 11.8 was the primary source of data for the Mineral Resource
estimates.
Geological modelling methodology
Identification of mineralized zones

The local geology of the Project has been described in Section 7.3.
The subhorizontal lithium mineralization occurs within the Lithium-rich Tuff, which varies in thickness from 50m to
140m, and the Upper Breccia and Lower Breccia, which occur in the immediate hangingwall and footwall of the
Lithium-rich Tuff, respectively. The breccias and tuff are found within a sequence of rhyolites. The rhyolites above
the tuff and breccia units are described as the Upper Rhyolites, and the rhyolites below the tuff and breccia are
described as the Lower Rhyolites.
Table 5 contains the main lithologies, their sub-units, and the codes assigned to them for geological modelling
and, where applicable, for the Mineral Resource estimates.
Table 5: Lithological units and mineralized zones used in geological model and Mineral Resources
Lithological Sub- Zone
Description
units units code
Non-mineralized unit overlying the Upper Breccia - not included in Mineral
Upper Rhyolite n/a URH
Resource estimate
Upper Breccia Mineralized zone - included in Mineral Resource estimates n/a UBX
Upper LRT1
Mineralized zone - included in Mineral Resource estimates. Subdivided into
Lithium-rich Tuff Middle LRT2
three sub-units.
Lower LRT3
Lower Breccia Mineralized zone - included in Mineral Resource estimates n/a LBX
Non-mineralized unit below the Lower Breccia - not included in Mineral
Lower Rhyolite n/a LRH
Resource estimate
The Upper Rhyolites, Upper and Lower Breccia and Lithium-rich Tuff are readily identifiable in core. As shown in,
Table 5 the Lithium-rich Tuff has been sub-divided into the LRT1, LRT2 and LRT3. This sub-division is based on
the patterns of lithium, cesium and rubidium concentrations visible in the analytical results, and these sub-divisions
are not readily identifiable in core.
Figure 13 shows two typical geological logs from the Falchani Project. The lithological control of the lithium
abundance, as well as the cesium, rubidium and other trace elements, is noticeable.
Structural interpretation of the mineralized zones

The mineralized zones are interpreted to form a broad basin, dipping gently to the north-north east. The zones are
thinnest on the edge of the basin and are thicker towards the centre. Three north-south striking faults have been
interpreted, with throws of between 10m and 50m. The position and orientation of one of the faults is informed by
the north-south oriented valley, which is in the central part of the Falchani Project. The position and throw of the
other two faults are informed by drilling, and it is interpreted that they have the same north-south orientation.
A structural plan of the base of the LRT1 is shown in Figure 14.
The QP considers the structural interpretation to be a reasonable basis on which to build the Mineral Resource
estimates. The occurrence of other structures, particularly east-west or near east-west structures cannot be ruled
out. The relative confidence in the structural interpretation has been considered in the application of geological
losses (Section 14.4.2) and the Mineral Resource classification (Section 14.4.5).

29
Figure 13: Geological and analytical log for PCHAC04-TV (left) and Geological and analytical log for PCHAC09-TV (right)

30
Figure 14: Structural plan for the base of LRT1

31
Wireframe creation
The Mineral Corporation imported the drillhole data contained in Plateau Energy Metals Microsoft Access database
into Datamine Studio™. Modelling codes (Table 5) were assigned to each borehole, on the basis of the lithological
description provided by Plateau Energy Metals, and the analytical patterns described above.
The upper and lower bounding surface for each of the zones identified were constructed utilizing Datamine Strat3D™
modelling software, applying Inverse Distance (ID) interpolation of the zone thickness.
For those boreholes where analytical results were not yet available, only the Upper and Lower Breccia intersections
(and hence the thickness of the Lithium-rich Tuff) was utilized for modelling, and the position of the sub-units of the
Lithium-rich Tuff was estimated from the thickness of these units in nearby boreholes.
The result of the geological modelling is shown in cross section in Figure 16 and Figure 17.
The QP is satisfied that the geological model is a robust representation of the volumes and geometry of the
mineralized zones. As is common when estimating zone thicknesses into blocks, there are occasions where the
contact between two zones in a borehole is not absolutely honored in the geological model; however, these instances
are not considered to materially influence the volumetric estimates.
Surface topography
The surface topography used to constrain the Mineral Resource model was generated using Google Earth™ by
Plateau Energy Metals. A mesh of co-ordinated elevation points was digitized, and the points exported to Datamine
Studio. Although a high-resolution topography should be sourced for detailed mine planning in the future, the QP is
satisfied that the topographic surface generated by Plateau Energy Metals is sufficiently detailed to allow robust
estimates of Mineral Resource tonnages.
An isometric view of the geological model is provided in Figure 15.
Figure 15: Isometric view of the geological model (not to scale)

32
Figure 16: South to North cross section (A’-A) showing geological model and drill data (Refer to Figure 9 for section line location)

33
Figure 17: South to North cross section (B’-B) showing geological model and drill data (refer to Figure 9 for section line location)

34
Grade estimation methodology
Compositing strategy
Downhole, length-weighted composites of 2.5m in length were generated within each of the mineralized zones.
The dip of the mineralized zones is relatively shallow, and the drillholes are drilled in a variety of different
directions. The intersection angle between the drillhole and mineralized zone is therefore variable. As a result of
the shallow dip, and variable intersection angle, the 2.5m downhole composites are considered appropriate, and
the risk of introducing a bias to the Mineral Resource tonnages by using high-angle intersections is negligible.
Classical statistics
The nature of the lithium grade distribution was analyzed through histograms. The histograms for all of the
mineralized zones are shown in Figure 18.
It can be noted that the lithium grade distribution in the majority of the zones approximate a normal distribution,
and that no outliers or anomalous intersections are shown on the histograms. As a result, no cutting or capping of
the 2.5m bench composites was deemed necessary. Furthermore, as a result of the normal distribution, it was
appropriate to undertake geostatistical analysis in normal space (as described in Section 14.3.3).
Variography
Variography was undertaken on the 2.5m composites, in normal space. As the composites were of equal-length, it
was appropriate to utilize the lithium grade directly in the variography, as opposed to utilizing an accumulation of
lithium over a length of the sample.
Omni-directional variograms were investigated, within 5m layers of each mineralized zone, with the average
variogram for all of the layers being modelled. Well-structured variograms, with a horizontal range of between
250m and 500m and a nugget / sill ratio of approximately 30% were obtained for the zones.
The modelled variograms are provided in Figure 19 and summarized in Table 6. It can be noted that second-order
stationarity is achieved for these variograms, and hence it was considered appropriate to utilize Ordinary Kriging
for the estimation of grade.

35
Figure 18: Histograms for mineralized zones

36
Figure 19: Variograms for mineralized zones

37
Table 6: Variogram modelling results

No. Zone Nugget X and Y Range (m) Sill
1 UBX 628 571 240 1 010 421
2 LRT1 26 933 700 269 334
3 LRT2 30 000 250 90 000
4 LRT3 220 645 500 428 587
5 LBX 104 326 370 1 043 264
Block model parameters

Ordinary Kriging was undertaken for lithium grades, into a block model of 25m X 25m X 5m (X:Y:Z).
Search criteria
The search criteria in Table 7 were applied for the estimates. A 3-stage search strategy was applied. The first
search range approximated the range of the variogram in X and Y. If insufficient samples were found in this
search, a second and / or third search was employed. The range in Z was kept relatively short, in order to honour
the grade zonation identified in the boreholes.
Table 7: Search criteria (applied to all mineralized zones)

Search X and Y Range (m) Z Range (m) Min Samples Max Samples Search Angle 1 Search Angle 2
1st Search 250 20 5 20 Dip Direction Dip
2nd Search 500 40 5 20 Dip Direction Dip
3rd Search 1250 100 5 20 Dip Direction Dip
Mineral Resource estimates
Model constraints
The edges of the Mineral Resource model have been constrained using the following criteria (Figure 25):
• A maximum horizontal extrapolation distance of 100m from the last borehole intersection;
• The location where the surface topography cuts the mineralized zones;
• An unmineralized intrusion has been encountered in the drilling on Platform 19 and Platform 19A. This
intrusion defines the interpreted southern extent of the Mineral Resources;
• A thin (5cm) intersection of tuff was encountered in Platform 5 and no tuff was encountered in Platform 7.
The thickness estimates for the mineralized zones take into account this apparent thinning to the east,
which is interpreted to represent the approaching edge of the crater lake. The eastern extent of the Mineral
Resources has been constrained to where the thickness of the LRT1 is approximately 5m, to take into
account a practical mining limit; and
• A control drillhole was created to the north of PCHAC 14, in order to constrain the northern flank and honor
the geological interpretation that the zones thin towards the north.
The Mineral Resources have been extended across the valley between the Falchani East and Falchani West.
Evidence for the continuity of the mineralization is provided by the outcrop of the Upper Breccia on the east- and
west- facing slopes of the valley. Platform 25 and Platform 10 were drilled on the edge of the valley and provide
further evidence of the continuity of mineralization in the valley area.
Geological losses
The continuity of the lithology and grade within the Mineral Resource area constrained by the features described in
Section 14.4.1 is noteworthy. Nonetheless, the QP has considered it appropriate to apply geological losses to the
tonnages within the Mineral Resource constraints. In general, a 5% geological loss has been applied, to take into
account potential losses due to faulting. Two areas have been identified where the risk to the tonnage estimates is
considered higher than normal, due to a combination of limited drilling data and the close proximity of the
mineralized zones to the surface topography. In these two areas, which include the valley area between Falchani
East and Falchani West, a geological loss of 10% has been applied.
The average volume-weighted geological loss applied in the Mineral Resource estimate is 6%.
Density determinations
A uniform density of 2.4t/m3 has been applied to derive the tonnage estimates from the modelled volume. The
density is based on 8 field samples collected by Plateau Energy Metals, which were analyzed by means of a
pycnometer, at the CERTIMIN laboratory in Lima.

38
The density database which supports the Mineral Resource estimates is not extensive. It should be noted
however, that uniform density estimates have typically been employed for Mineral Resource estimates in other
Projects on the Macusani Plateau, and dataset is considered sufficient for the Indicated Mineral Resource
category. Additional density measurements would improve the confidence in the tonnage estimates and would be
required for Measured Mineral Resources.
Cut-off grade
Two types of cut-offs have been applied.
The application of a lithological cut-off determined the top of the UBX, and to the base of the LBX. This is a natural
lithological boundary, which corresponds with a lithium grade of around 0.1% Li2O (460ppm Li), and this boundary
was applied during the definition of the geological wireframes.
The lithium grade within the five mineralized zones constrained by the top of the UBX and the base of the LBX is
consistently and significantly above 0.1% Li2O. A block cut-off grade of 1000 ppm Li was applied, informed by the
discussion in Section 14.7.8.
Mineral Resource classification

Mineral Resource classification was informed by geostatistical confidence, as expressed in the block Kriging
Efficiency (KE), after giving consideration to the confidence in the supporting database (Section 11.8).
KE is defined as follows:
Block Variance − Kriging Variance

KE =
Block Variance
Using the criteria for utilizing KE for Mineral Resource classification provided by Mwasinga (2001), blocks with:
• KE < 0.3 can be classified as Inferred;

• KE >0.3 but <0.5 can be classified as Indicated and;
• KE > 0.5 can be classified as Measured.
KE plots for each zone were used as a guideline and a final set of Mineral Resource classification polygons was
determined by the QP, which took the following into account:
• The need for practical and contiguous polygons for planning;
• The proximity to surface geological mapping;
The resulting Mineral Resource classification is shown in Figure 25.
Mineral Resource statement.

The Mineral Resource estimates are shown in Table 8.
Table 8: Mineral Resource estimates for the Falchani Project (March 1, 2019)
Category Zone Density Li (ppm) Li2O (%) Li2CO3 (%)
(Mt) Li2CO3 (Mt)
UBX 6.23 2.4 1 510 0.33 0.80 0.05
LRT1 7.47 2.4 3 709 0.80 1.97 0.15
LRT2 22.03 2.4 3 300 0.71 1.76 0.39
Indicated
LRT3 13.03 2.4 3 690 0.79 1.96 0.26
LBX 12.16 2.4 1 816 0.39 0.97 0.12
Total 60.92 2.4 2 954 0.64 1.57 0.96
UBX 13.77 2.4 1 730 0.37 0.92 0.13
LRT1 24.01 2.4 3 346 0.72 1.78 0.43
LRT2 62.30 2.4 3 155 0.68 1.68 1.05
Inferred
LRT3 37.24 2.4 3 325 0.72 1.77 0.66
LBX 122.75 2.4 2 275 0.49 1.21 1.49
Total 260.07 2.4 2 706 0.58 1.44 3.75
Li (ppm) grade cut-off of 1000 Li (ppm) was applied
Tonnes are Metric

39
Reconciliation
The prior Mineral Resource estimate (September 2018) for the Falchani Project (The Mineral Corporation, 2018) is
provided in Table 9.
Table 9: Mineral Resource estimates for the Falchani Project (September 2018)
Zone Density Li (ppm) Li2O (%) Li2CO3 (%)
(Mt) Li2CO3 (Mt)
UBX 5.77 2.4 1 259 0.27 0.67 0.04
LRT1 6.89 2.4 3 667 0.79 1.95 0.13
Indicated LRT2 19.75 2.4 3 236 0.70 1.72 0.34
LRT3 8.18 2.4 3 611 0.78 1.92 0.16
Total 40.58 2.4 3 104 0.67 1.65 0.67
UBX 9.44 2.4 1 589 0.34 0.85 0.08
LRT1 14.17 2.4 3 681 0.79 1.96 0.28
LRT2 43.18 2.4 3 254 0.70 1.73 0.75
Inferred
LRT3 20.45 2.4 3 551 0.76 1.89 0.39
LBX 34.46 2.4 1 486 0.32 0.79 0.27
Total 121.70 2.4 2 724 0.59 1.45 1.76
A lithological boundary cut-off was applied, at or around 0.1% Li2O
Tonnes are Metric
Reasonable Prospect for Economic Extraction

The QP considers that there are reasonable prospects for the economic extraction of the lithium Mineral
Resources provided in this estimate. This view is based on an assessment of reasonable geological, mining,
processing, marketing, environmental, legal, social and economic parameters, which are discussed herein. The
assessment of some of these factors has been assisted by the completed GBM PEA of the uranium Mineral
Resources within Plateau Energy Metals mining concessions.
Mining considerations
No mining studies have been undertaken at the Falchani Project, however, given the fact that the Mineral
Resources outcrop at surface, are relatively thick, and have a shallow dip, it is likely that mining would be initiated
in an open pit.
Both surface and underground mining were considered in GBM's PEA, and the PEA utilized an open pit mining
cost of US$2.40/t for mineralized material and US$2.40/t of waste mined for its open pit optimization.
The Mineral Corporation has reviewed a set of geological cross-sections of the Mineral Resource model, and on
the basis of an overall slope angle of 55°, it would appear that the stripping ratio in an open pit could vary from as
little as 1:1 (Mineral Resource tonne / waste tonne) to a maximum of 6:1.
The above broad assumptions are considered sufficient for the purpose of assessing Reasonable Prospects for
Economic Extraction of the Mineral Resource.
Recovery methods
The test work undertaken by ANSTO and described in Section 13, utilized a preliminary acid leach flowsheet to
produce lithium carbonate has as shown in Figure 20.
Figure 20: Preliminary process flow sheet (Source: Plateau Energy Metals)

40
Should the process flow provided be utilized, the overall processing route would need to include both crushing and
milling.
Notwithstanding that these were preliminary in nature, and that the process flow is likely to be investigated further
in a future PEA for lithium, the test work indicates that battery grade lithium carbonate can be produced from
material from the Falchani Project, utilizing conventional lithium processing steps and provides the following
assumptions:
• An indicative lithium recovery of range of 85-90%;

• Indicative acid consumption of 153kg/t of material processed; and
• An indicative acid cost of US$15/t processed.
The services required for the processing plant would include power, water and reagents. The supply of power and
water were assessed in the GBM PEA for uranium and are not considered to be material impediments. Sulphuric
acid would be the main reagent required, and it is likely to be procured from within Peru. The cost of these
services has been included in the processing cost assumption.
A high-level estimate of the cost of processing has been made, to inform the assessment of Reasonable
Prospects for Economic Extraction. This estimated cost is US$35/t treated, which includes the cost of crushing and
milling, acid leach at or around 90°C, and the precipitation of lithium carbonate.
Project infrastructure
The project infrastructure to support the Falchani Project is anticipated to be essentially the same as for the
proposed uranium operation.
Water is likely to be pumped from a local water source in the valley up to a raw water dam. Water treatment
facilities would be required on site. The raw water supply is assumed to be of good quality such that no expensive
treatment will be required.
The 138kV San Gaban power line runs near the MPA and it has been assumed that the power line is at 138kV. An
extension of the power line will be required to reach the project site and any connection will be subject to
negotiation with the supply authority.
It is likely that most equipment and materials will arrive containerized at Callao (Peru’s main port, located near
Lima) or a more southern port such as Ilo with suitable handling facilities (Figure 1). Containers would be driven to
site. The route is likely to include access via the Interoceanico Highway, from the city of Juliaca to the town of
Macusani.
The connecting roads between the highway and the MPA would require significant upgrade and even rerouting to
handle the proposed project generated traffic. In addition, access roads to various facilities such as the tailings
dam and sulphuric acid storage would have been considered.
It is reasonable to assume that a workforce consisting of skilled and semi-skilled people could be locally sourced
for the Project.
Market assessment
An assessment of the market for lithium was undertaken in order to support the assumptions for Reasonable
Prospects of Economic Extraction thereof.
Lithium is an extremely light energy metal, which can be used in application where size and weight are important,
such as in car batteries. Approximately 50% of the world consumption is of lithium in the form of lithium carbonate,
with the rest being made of up of lithium hydroxide, lithium chloride and lithium bromide.
According to the United States Geological Survey, 87% of lithium reserves are hosted by brine deposits, with the
balance attributed to hard rock deposits, mainly from pegmatites, but also from petalite and lepidolite. Major brine
lake deposits occur in South America in the so-called “Lithium Triangle” Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, and
additionally, lithium from brines is sourced from China and the US (Nevada). Global production of lithium in 2014
was estimated to be 36kt.
According to Meyer et al (2015), the lithium carbonate market is the most useful form for gauging the state of the
lithium market, as there is no exchange-based price for lithium metal, and supplier’s contract directly with
consumers. Between 2005 and 2015, lithium carbonate prices averaged in the region of $5 000/t. More recently, a
significant increase in the lithium carbonate price has been widely reported (Figure 21), as a result of an increase
in the market acceptance of electrical and hybrid vehicles.

41
30 000 Historical price
Li2CO3 US$/t (>99.5%, China) (US$) Long term price assumption ($12 000/tonne)
20 000
10 000
2018/07
2015/07
2015/09
2015/11
2016/01
2016/03
2016/05
2016/07
2016/09
2016/11
2017/01
2017/03
2017/05
2017/07
2017/09
2017/11
2018/01
2018/03
2018/05
2018/09
Figure 21: Lithium carbonate price 2015-2018 (Source: Lithium Americas, 2018)
For the purpose of considering Reasonable Prospects for Economic Extraction, The Mineral Corporation has
assumed a lithium carbonate price of $12 000/t, in real, 2018 terms. While higher than the 2005 – 2015 average,
this is aligned with current market price. This price is the same as the lithium carbonate price assumption made by
Lithium Americas, in its recently published Pre-feasibility study for the Thacker Pass Project (Lithium Americas,
2018).
Environmental
With respect to Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social Impact, The Mineral Corporation is not aware of any
issues related to the extraction of lithium which would be materially different from those already considered for the
proposed uranium operation.
Capital Costs
Capital costs have not been explicitly considered in the assessment of Reasonable Prospects for Economic
Extraction. However, while the Macusani Plateau is at a high altitude, the regional and local infrastructure is well-
developed and there are other significant mining operations at similar altitudes within Peru, including Minsur's San
Rafael tin mine. The GBM PEA on the uranium project had an initial direct capital estimate of US$250m in 2016
terms.
Given the regional and local infrastructure, the QP is of the view that the Falchani Project should be able to
support the capital required to access the necessary power and water, and construct the roads and processing
plant.
Operating Costs
The operating costs which have been considered in the assessment of Reasonable Prospects for Economic
Extraction are those included in Table 10.
Indicative cost analysis

The analysis presented herein is provided in order to support The QP’s assessment of Reasonable Prospects for
Economic Extraction, such that these estimates could be justifiably included as Mineral Resources. Caution should
be used when interpreting the results presented in this section, as the results have not been the subject of a pre-
feasibility or feasibility study and thus should not be interpreted as having demonstrated economic viability.
The Mineral Corporation has estimated the cost per tonne of product for a range of lithium grades from the cut-off
grade (1 000ppm Li) to the anticipated average of the Lithium-rich Tuff (3 400ppm Li), at the maximum anticipated
stripping ratio (6:1) and at an average stripping ratio (1:1). The other assumptions utilized to estimate the cash
cost for producing Li2CO3 are shown in Table 10, and the results of the analysis are shown in Figure 22.

42
Table 10: Assumptions used in cash cost analysis

Unit Assumption Source
Mining Cost US$/t (Rock) 2.4 GBM PEA 2016
Stripping ratio Waste tonnes:Mineralized tonnes 1:1 to 6:1 QP estimate
Mining recovery US$/t (ROM) after loss 0.95 GBM PEA 2016
Processing cost US$/t (Treated) 35 QP estimate
Recovery Li2CO3 85% TECMMINE and ANSTO test work
Environmental, admin etc US$/t (Li2CO3) 10 GBM PEA 2016
Port and product transport
US$/t (Li2CO3) 50 GBM PEA 2016
(road)
Shipping US$/t (Li2CO3) 10 Market analysis
Figure 22: Indicative cost per tonne of product at differing grades and stripping ratios
This high-level analysis would indicate that all of the material above the Mineral Resource cut-off grade has
Reasonable Prospects for Economic Extraction, under the long-term forecast price of US$12 000/t of lithium
carbonate, and hence their inclusion in the Mineral Resource estimate is justified. The indicative cost at the lowest
grade and highest stripping ratio (“A” in Figure 22), can be interpreted as a worst-case scenario. As can be
expected, the indicative project economics improve at higher grades and lower stripping ratios.

43
Figure 23: South to North lithium grade cross section (A’ to A in Figure 24)

44
Figure 24: South to North lithium grade cross section (B’ to B in Figure 24)

45
Figure 25: Mineral Resource classification plan

46
MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

No Mineral Reserve estimates have been undertaken for the Falchani Project. As such, Sections 16 through to
Section 22 are not applicable.
MINING METHODS
Not applicable as only Mineral Resources have been estimated. Refer to Section 14.7.1.
RECOVERY METHODS
Not applicable here as only Mineral Resources have been estimated. Refer to Section 14.7.2.
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE
MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY IMPACT

CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

Not applicable here as only Mineral Resources have been estimated. Refer to Section 14.7.6 and 14.7.7.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
The only other explorer of significance within the region is Fission Energy Corporation (Fission), whose portfolio of
properties in the Macusani area resulted from a spin-out from Strathmore Minerals in 2007 (Fission Energy
Corporation, 2010). In April 2013, Fission announced the arrangement whereby Denison Mines Corporation
acquired all the outstanding common shares of Fission and the spin-out of certain assets into a new exploration
company, Fission Uranium Corporation. Nine claim blocks encompassing 51km 2 are held in the Macusani area
(Fission Uranium Corporation, 2014).
OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION
Introduction
Plateau Energy Metals has identified the potential continuation of lithium mineralization, in the MPA, to the south-
west of the current Mineral Resource area, in an area known as Tres Hermanas. On the basis of its proximity to
the current Mineral Resource area, and the apparent similarity in style of mineralization, the QP considers it
appropriate to discuss this area as a target for further exploration, as described in the NI43-101.
As required by the NI43-101, the potential quantity and grade of the target for further exploration has been
expressed as a range.
Basis for determination of the target for further exploration at Tres Hermanas
Delineation of potential target area extent

The Tres Hermanas area has three prominent ridges, which are interpreted to be outcropping Lithium-rich Tuff.
Based on a combination of field mapping and review of satellite imagery, the potential extent of the outcropping
Lithium-rich Tuff has been defined. This extent is shown in Figure 26.
Delineation of potential target area volume

The potential volume of the exploration target was derived by modelling a floor of the target, based on the
elevation of the outcrop extents, and by modelling a topographic surface, based on 0.5m surface contours. The
resulting approximate thickness of the exploration target area is shown in Figure 26, and ranges from 10m to 60m.
Estimation of potential grades of mineralization

No exploration drilling has been carried out within the exploration target, however, two approximately 120m long
trenches have been sampled within the area, with each trench sample being 2.5m in length. The statistics for the
trench samples which were logged as either breccia or tuff are provided in Table 11.

47
Table 11: Statistics for trench samples at Tres Hermanas

Lowest grade in Highest grade in Average grade of
Number of Total sampled length in
breccia or tuff breccia or tuff breccia and tuff (Li
samples breccia or tuff (m)
(Li ppm) (Li ppm) ppm)
Trench 1 27 68 660 4 411 3 174
Trench 3 23 95 649 4 686 3 303
It should be noted that the representivity of the trench samples is not clear at this stage, and neither is the
relationship between the orientation of mineralization and the orientation of sampling. However, the range of
grades and average grades align well with those of the Mineral Resource estimates, and hence it is reasonable to
use the lowest and highest grades of the Mineral Resource estimates as defining the lower and upper grade
ranges for the exploration target.
Potential quantity and grade of the target for further exploration

The potential target for future exploration at Tres Hermanas is provided in Table 12. It is noted that a potential
target for future exploration is not a Mineral Resource estimate, is conceptual in nature, and relates to an area
where there has been insufficient exploration to define the target as a Mineral Resource and where it is uncertain if
further exploration will result in the target being defined as a Mineral Resource.
Table 12: Tres Hermanas exploration target potential

Category Tonnes (Mt) Grade (Li ppm)
Exploration Target 7.5 – 12.5 1 250 – 3 650
The QP is of the opinion that there is sufficient information available to describe the Tres Hermanas area as a
potential target for future exploration. This is supported by:
• the local geology in the exploration target area being similar to the Mineral Resources area
• the close proximity to, and interpretation of, the area as a possible southwest extension of the Mineral
Resource area
• analyses from trench samples indicating the presence of lithium in grade ranges similar to the Mineral
Resource area
It is recommended that detailed geological mapping be carried out within the exploration target area to increase
geoscientific confidence, in particular an understanding of the structural complexity of the exploration target area. It
is recommended that Plateau Energy Metals commission a drilling campaign to further test the extents of this
lithium occurrence hence determining any constraints on the potential within the exploration target area.

48
Figure 26: Tres Hermanas target for further exploration

49
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

A geological model has been built and lithium grade estimates have been undertaken in order to update the
Mineral Resources for the Falchani Project. The lithium mineralization is found within a Lithium-rich Tuff and
transitional Li-rich breccias, which are interpreted to have been deposited in a crater lake volcano-sedimentary
environment.
Appropriate exploration and QAQC protocols have been found to be in place, and no concerns with the results of
the QAQC programme have been identified. The QP has validated the exploration data by means of a site visit,
and by independent sampling.
The estimation approach adopted by The Mineral Corporation has been informed by the vertical zonation apparent
in the lithium grade distribution in drillholes, and The Mineral Corporation has estimated lithium grades into a block
model, by Ordinary Kriging.
The geological and grade continuity at the Falchani Project is robust, and the Mineral Resource classification has
been determined based on the geostatistical confidence in the lithium estimates, which was subsequently modified
by the QP into practical polygons. The structural model which supports the estimates is considered appropriate for
the Mineral Resource classification selected, however, the existence of additional geological structures cannot be
discounted.
Geological losses of 5% or 10% have been applied to the Mineral Resource estimate, based on an assessment of
the risk posed to the estimates, by the combination of data density, interpreted faulting and the proximity of surface
topography.
The prospects for economic extraction of the Mineral Resource estimates have been assessed and are considered
reasonable.
The QP has included an assessment of the potential quantity and grade of target for future exploration in an area
to the southwest of the current Mineral Resources, known as Tres Hermanas. This assessment is not a Mineral
Resource estimate.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Mineral Corporation makes the following recommendations:
• It is recommended that the preliminary test work programme undertaken continue to be expanded, to
incorporate a greater geographical spread of samples, and to consider the different zones identified in the
Mineral Resource estimates;
• A PEA for the Falchani Project should be undertaken, to include refinements to the processing workflow,
and to incorporate the mining, processing, infrastructure and environmental aspects of the Project;
• Additional density measurements, for the zones within the Mineral Resource, and for the Upper Rhyolite
are required;
• Given the robust geological continuity demonstrated in the drilling results to date, additional drilling in the
areas identified as Inferred Mineral Resources should be undertaken to upgrade these Mineral Resources
to the Indicated category;
• The trench sampling and field mapping undertaken in the Tres Hermanas area to date indicate that
exploration drilling in this area is warranted, to test the exploration target identified.
Plateau Energy Metals have indicated that budgets of US$0.45m for the PEA and US$1.0m for the additional
exploration, have been provided.

50
REFERENCES
Cheilletz, A., Clark, A.H., Farrar, E, Pauca, G.A., Pichavant, M., Sandeman, H.A., 1992. Volcano-Stratigraphy and
40Ar/39AR Geochronology of the Macusani Ignimbrite Field: Monitor of the Miocene Geodynamic Evolution of the
Andes of Southeast Peru. Tectonphysics, 205 (1992) 307-327, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam.
Henkle W.R. Jr, 2011. Updated Technical Report of the Macusani Uranium Exploration Project Department of
Puno, Peru, Prepared for Minergia S.A.C, October 2011.
Henkle W.R. Jr, 2014. Updated Technical Report of the Macusani and Muñani Uranium Exploration Projects
Department of Puno, Peru, Prepared for Azincourt Uranium, May 2014.
International Uranium Resources Evaluation Project, 1984. Orientation Phase Mission, Summary Report, Peru.
OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and International Atomic Energy Agency, Paris, 1984.
Li, V., Clark, A.H., Kurtis Keyser, T., Stefan, L., Cuba, W., Brisbin, D., O’Connor, T., 2012. The uranium deposits of
the Macusani district, Puno, southeastern Peru: a new ore-genetic model. Poster presentation, Soc., Econ., Geol.,
Lima, Sept 23-26 2012, Unpublished.
Lithium Americas, 2018. Investor Presentation, August 2018. Downloaded from:

http://lithiumamericas.com/_resources/presentations/corporate-presentation.pdf
Meyer, J., Sergey, R., Ferguson C., Beardsmore, S., Lithium Market Overview. SP Angel Corporate Finance LLP,
December 2015.
Short, M., Apelt, T., Young, D.R., Mounde, M., 2014. Macusani Yellowcake Project, Preliminary Economic
Assessment. GBM Project Number: 0501. Report Number 0501-RPT-001.
Short, M., Apelt, T., Young, D., Mounde, M., 2016. Macusani Yellowcake Project, Preliminary Economic
Assessment. GBM Project Number: 0501. Report Number 0501-RPT-001. 2014.
Thatcher, E.C., 2008. A petrographic and Mineralogical Investigation of a Sample of Tuff from Peru with Particular
Reference to the Uranium Mineralisation Present. Unpublished report by Microsearch cc, Johannesburg, October
2008.
Thatcher, E.C., 2011. Petrographic Investigation of Four Outcrop Samples of Uranium Mineralised Rock from the
Altiplano of Peru, and the detailed Mineralogical Investigation of one of these. Unpublished Report by Microsearch
cc, Johannesburg, March 2011.
Young, D.R., 2010. Update to Mineral Resource Estimates of the Colibri Project held by Global Gold S.A.C. in the
Puno District of Peru, The Mineral Corporation Report No. C-MYI-COL-731-592, April 2010.
Young, D.R., 2011. Update of the Mineral Resources of the Colibri Project held by Global Gold S.A.C. in the Puno
District of Peru, The Mineral Corporation Report No C-MYI-COL-731-686, 20 September 2010 as amended March
4, 2011.
Young, 2015. Consolidated Mineral Resource estimates for the Kihitian, Isivilla and Corani Uranium Complexes
controlled by Plateau Uranium Inc, in the Puno District of Peru. Prepared for Plateau Uranium Inc and published
under the Guidelines of the National Instrument 43-101 of the TSX. Report No: C-MYI-MRU-1568-960, June 2015.
The Mineral Corporation, 2016. Mineral Resource estimates for the Chilcuno Chico, Quebrada Blanca, Tantamaco
and Isivilla deposits in the Puno District of Peru, updated to include lithium and potassium. Prepared for Plateau
Uranium Inc and published under the Guidelines of the National Instrument 43-101 of the TSX. Report No: C-MYI-
MRU-1647-990, May 2016.
The Mineral Corporation, 2018. Mineral Resource estimates for the Falchani Lithium Project in the Puno District of
Peru. Prepared for Plateau Energy Metals Inc and published under the Guidelines of the National Instrument 43-
101 of the TSX. Report No: C-MYI-EXP-1727-1103, September 2018.

51
Appendix 1: Drillhole Intersections

52
Downhole
Drillhole From To Azimuth Dip Zone Li (ppm)
length (m)
PCHAC 01-TNE 104.39 125.13 20.74 55 55 UBX 965
PCHAC 01-TNE 125.13 152.78 27.65 55 55 LRT1 3796
PCHAC 01-TNE 152.78 182.95 30.17 55 55 LRT2 3396
PCHAC 01-TNW 96.14 111.86 15.72 355 55 UBX 1375
PCHAC 01-TNW 111.86 123.09 11.23 355 55 LRT1 3425
PCHAC 01-TNW 123.09 143.55 20.46 355 55 LRT2 3248
PCHAC 01-TSE 72.20 83.78 11.58 130 60 UBX 1004
PCHAC 01-TSE 83.78 99.03 15.25 130 60 LRT1 3865
PCHAC 01-TSE 99.03 117.93 18.90 130 60 LRT2 3312
PCHAC 01-TSW 78.14 82.24 4.10 265 55 UBX 870
PCHAC 01-TV 73.46 88.23 14.77 180 90 UBX 1034
PCHAC 01-TV 88.23 107.32 19.09 0 90 LRT1 3846
PCHAC 01-TV 107.32 127.77 20.45 0 90 LRT2 3230
PCHAC 02-TSE 95.50 104.00 8.50 135 60 UBX 1518
PCHAC 02-TSE 104.00 116.00 12.00 135 60 LRT1 3685
PCHAC 02-TSE 116.00 126.00 10.00 135 60 LRT2 3621
PCHAC 02-TSE 126.00 138.00 12.00 135 60 LRT3 3634
PCHAC 02-TSE 138.00 149.60 11.60 135 60 LBX 1323
PCHAC 02-TV 83.30 95.00 11.70 0 90 UBX 1717
PCHAC 02-TV 95.00 113.00 18.00 270 90 LRT1 3962
PCHAC 02-TV 113.00 145.00 32.00 0 90 LRT2 3392
PCHAC 02-TV 145.00 168.00 23.00 180 90 LRT3 3890
PCHAC 02-TV 168.00 193.00 25.00 0 90 LBX 810
PCHAC 03-TE 71.38 85.89 14.51 90 60 UBX 1782
PCHAC 03-TE 85.89 97.61 11.72 90 60 LRT1 3758
PCHAC 03-TE 97.61 115.44 17.83 90 60 LRT2 3701
PCHAC 03-TE 115.44 127.92 12.48 90 60 LRT3 4059
PCHAC 03-TE 127.92 142.00 14.08 90 60 LBX 1892
PCHAC 03-TSW 54.00 67.00 13.00 230 55 UBX 810
PCHAC 03-TSW 67.00 87.00 20.00 230 55 LRT1 3316
PCHAC 03-TSW 87.00 116.00 29.00 230 55 LRT2 3338
PCHAC 03-TSW 116.00 141.00 25.00 230 55 LRT3 3794
PCHAC 03-TSW 141.00 154.00 13.00 230 55 LBX 1463
PCHAC 03-TV 52.90 67.73 14.83 0 90 UBX 1563
PCHAC 03-TV 67.73 84.48 16.75 180 90 LRT1 3656
PCHAC 03-TV 84.48 100.13 15.65 0 90 LRT2 3415
PCHAC 03-TV 100.13 119.36 19.23 180 90 LRT3 3656
PCHAC 03-TV 119.36 131.99 12.63 90 90 LBX 1139
PCHAC 04-TV 119.69 130.38 10.69 90 90 UBX 1604
PCHAC 04-TV 130.38 143.85 13.47 0 90 LRT1 3759
PCHAC 04-TV 143.85 195.43 51.58 270 90 LRT2 3199
PCHAC 04-TV 195.43 214.48 19.05 0 90 LRT3 3769
PCHAC 04-TV 214.48 231.67 17.19 182 90 LBX 1685
PCHAC 05-TV 160.00 160.05 0.05 0 90 LRT3 -
PCHAC 06-TE 76.00 87.00 11.00 90 60 UBX 3322
PCHAC 06-TE 87.00 94.50 7.50 90 60 LRT1 3257
PCHAC 06-TE 94.50 102.00 7.50 90 60 LRT2 3303
PCHAC 06-TE 102.00 117.00 15.00 90 60 LRT3 3532
PCHAC 06-TE 117.00 123.50 6.50 90 60 LBX 1731
PCHAC 06-TN 60.50 63.00 2.50 0 60 UBX 2727
PCHAC 06-TN 63.00 71.75 8.75 0 60 LRT1 3315
PCHAC 06-TN 71.75 87.75 16.00 0 60 LRT2 3380
PCHAC 06-TN 87.75 98.00 10.25 360 60 LRT3 3477
PCHAC 06-TN 98.00 107.00 9.00 0 60 LBX 771
PCHAC 06-TV 60.30 66.10 5.80 4 90 UBX 3388
PCHAC 06-TV 66.10 76.10 10.00 0 90 LRT1 3582
PCHAC 06-TV 76.10 97.00 20.90 182 90 LRT2 3545
PCHAC 06-TV 97.00 104.00 7.00 0 90 LRT3 3928
PCHAC 07-TV 167.74 169.20 1.46 0 90 LRT3 1451

53
Downhole
length (m)
PCHAC 08-TNE 63.20 85.09 21.89 55 70 UBX 1375
PCHAC 08-TNE 85.09 102.42 17.33 55 70 LRT1 3515
PCHAC 08-TNE 102.42 175.83 73.41 55 70 LRT2 3143
PCHAC 08-TNE 175.83 207.76 31.93 55 70 LRT3 3608
PCHAC 08-TNE 207.76 236.03 28.27 55 70 LBX 2829
PCHAC 08-TV 52.99 83.07 30.08 0 90 UBX 1252
PCHAC 08-TV 83.07 87.45 4.38 90 90 LRT1 3869
PCHAC 09-TNW 120.50 130.50 10.00 325 55 UBX 1477
PCHAC 09-TNW 130.50 148.00 17.50 325 55 LRT1 3611
PCHAC 09-TNW 148.00 225.00 77.00 325 55 LRT2 3313
PCHAC 09-TNW 225.00 257.00 32.00 325 55 LRT3 3563
PCHAC 09-TNW 257.00 309.00 52.00 325 55 LBX 1183
PCHAC 09-TV 96.19 108.96 12.77 0 90 UBX 1453
PCHAC 09-TV 108.96 131.01 22.05 0 90 LRT1 3731
PCHAC 09-TV 131.01 204.14 73.13 0 90 LRT2 3177
PCHAC 09-TV 204.14 223.87 19.73 0 90 LRT3 3716
PCHAC 10-TV 33.50 42.00 8.50 0 90 UBX 1203
PCHAC 10-TV 42.00 57.00 15.00 0 90 LRT1 3736
PCHAC 10-TV 57.00 109.00 52.00 0 90 LRT2 3202
PCHAC 10-TV 109.00 121.70 12.70 0 90 LRT3 3495
PCHAC 10-TV 121.70 140.00 18.30 90 90 LBX 1125
PCHAC 12-TV 21.00 33.40 12.40 0 90 UBX 1829
PCHAC 12-TV 33.40 52.00 18.60 0 90 LRT1 3277
PCHAC 12-TV 52.00 70.00 18.00 0 90 LRT2 1368
PCHAC 12-TV 70.00 73.00 3.00 0 90 LRT3 3589
PCHAC 12-TV 73.00 83.00 10.00 270 90 LBX 1140
PCHAC 12-TW 19.00 25.00 6.00 270 55 UBX 1307
PCHAC 12-TW 25.00 32.00 7.00 270 55 LRT1 2659
PCHAC 12-TW 32.00 36.00 4.00 270 55 LRT2 1053
PCHAC 12-TW 36.00 48.00 12.00 270 55 LRT3 2517
PCHAC 12-TW 48.00 59.00 11.00 270 55 LBX 1796
PCHAC 13-TV 36.50 42.50 6.00 0 90 UBX 1350
PCHAC 13-TV 42.50 67.00 24.50 0 90 LRT1 3051
PCHAC 13-TV 67.00 118.00 51.00 0 90 LRT2 2811
PCHAC 13-TV 118.00 135.00 17.00 0 90 LRT3 2628
PCHAC 13-TV 135.00 143.00 8.00 0 90 LBX 1839
PCHAC 13-TW 58.70 84.00 25.30 270 55 UBX 1114
PCHAC 13-TW 84.00 120.00 36.00 270 55 LRT1 3158
PCHAC 13-TW 120.00 150.00 30.00 270 55 LRT2 2558
PCHAC 13-TW 150.00 174.00 24.00 270 55 LRT3 3410
PCHAC 14-TV 8.00 9.00 1.00 0 90 UBX 3136
PCHAC 14-TV 9.00 23.00 14.00 270 90 LRT1 3370
PCHAC 14-TV 23.00 49.00 26.00 0 90 LRT2 3119
PCHAC 14-TV 49.00 74.00 25.00 90 90 LRT3 3640
PCHAC 14-TV 74.00 179.00 105.00 90 90 LBX 2620
PCHAC 14-TW 8.00 12.00 4.00 270 55 UBX 3240
PCHAC 14-TW 12.00 49.00 37.00 270 55 LRT1 2795
PCHAC 14-TW 49.00 67.00 18.00 270 55 LRT2 3207
PCHAC 14-TW 67.00 90.00 23.00 270 55 LRT3 2922
PCHAC 14-TW 90.00 344.80 254.80 270 55 LBX 2884
PCHAC 16-TNE 151.00 155.00 4.00 45 60 UBX 2139
PCHAC 16-TNE 155.00 160.00 5.00 45 60 LRT1 3344
PCHAC 16-TNE 160.00 167.00 7.00 45 60 LRT2 3525
PCHAC 16-TNE 167.00 174.00 7.00 45 60 LRT3 3307
PCHAC 16-TNE 174.00 182.50 8.50 45 60 LBX 1035
PCHAC 16-TV 130.00 141.00 11.00 90 90 UBX 2930
PCHAC 16-TV 141.00 151.00 10.00 0 90 LRT1 3447
PCHAC 16-TV 151.00 164.00 13.00 270 90 LRT2 3541
PCHAC 16-TV 164.00 174.00 10.00 0 90 LRT3 3897

54
Downhole
length (m)
PCHAC 16-TV 174.00 205.00 31.00 0 90 LBX 1172
PCHAC 17-TV 99.50 105.50 6.00 0 90 UBX 2147
PCHAC 17-TV 105.50 122.00 16.50 270 90 LRT1 3710
PCHAC 17-TV 122.00 140.00 18.00 270 90 LRT2 3545
PCHAC 17-TV 140.00 158.00 18.00 0 90 LRT3 3893
PCHAC 17-TV 158.00 171.00 13.00 90 90 LBX 1607
PCHAC 19A-TS 0.00 12.00 12.00 245 55 LRT3 3375
PCHAC 19A-TS 12.00 27.20 15.20 245 55 LBX 1035
PCHAC 19A-TV 0.00 12.00 12.00 0 90 LRT3 3085
PCHAC 19A-TV 12.00 31.00 19.00 0 90 LBX 1657
PCHAC 1-TSW1 58.50 78.00 19.50 215 55 UBX 1718
PCHAC 1-TSW1 78.00 97.00 19.00 215 55 LRT1 4020
PCHAC 1-TSW1 97.00 142.00 45.00 215 55 LRT2 3595
PCHAC 1-TSW1 142.00 187.00 45.00 215 55 LRT3 3945
PCHAC 1-TSW1 187.00 212.00 25.00 215 55 LBX 1523
PCHAC 23-TV 0.00 12.00 12.00 0 90 LRT3 2368
PCHAC 23-TV 12.00 25.00 13.00 0 90 LBX 818
PCHAC 25-TV 0.00 6.00 6.00 0 90 LRT2 3494
PCHAC 25-TV 6.00 32.30 26.30 270 90 LRT3 3424
PCHAC 25-TV 32.30 42.00 9.70 0 90 LBX 407
PCHAC 29-TN 23.00 28.00 5.00 360 60 UBX 806
PCHAC 29-TN 28.00 40.00 12.00 360 60 LRT1 3558
PCHAC 29-TN 40.00 58.00 18.00 0 60 LRT2 3393
PCHAC 29-TN 58.00 79.50 21.50 0 60 LRT3 3532
PCHAC 29-TN 79.50 90.00 10.50 0 60 LBX 809
PCHAC 29-TV 22.15 30.00 7.85 0 90 UBX 3730
PCHAC 29-TV 30.00 40.00 10.00 0 90 LRT1 3376
PCHAC 29-TV 40.00 55.00 15.00 0 90 LRT2 3351
PCHAC 29-TV 55.00 73.00 18.00 180 90 LRT3 3766
PCHAC 29-TV 73.00 80.50 7.50 180 90 LBX 825
PCHAC 30-TSW 128.70 130.00 1.30 250 55 UBX 3760
PCHAC 30-TSW 130.00 133.00 3.00 250 55 LRT1 4121
PCHAC 30-TSW 133.00 138.00 5.00 250 55 LRT2 4072
PCHAC 30-TSW 138.00 143.00 5.00 250 55 LRT3 3720
PCHAC 30-TSW 143.00 174.00 31.00 250 55 LBX 1319
PCHAC 32-TNW 28.50 49.50 21.00 315 55 UBX 1536
PCHAC 32-TNW 49.50 50.50 1.00 315 55 LRT1 3237
PCHAC 32-TNW 50.50 51.50 1.00 315 55 LRT2 3190
PCHAC 32-TNW 51.50 52.50 1.00 315 55 LRT3 2981
PCHAC 32-TNW 52.50 117.50 65.00 315 55 LBX 3126
PCHAC 32-TV 15.50 24.00 8.50 0 90 UBX 1555
PCHAC 32-TV 24.00 27.00 3.00 0 90 LRT1 2316
PCHAC 32-TV 27.00 33.00 6.00 0 90 LRT2 2704
PCHAC 32-TV 33.00 38.00 5.00 2 90 LRT3 2885
PCHAC 32-TV 38.00 68.00 30.00 0 90 LBX 2736
PCHAC 32-TW 21.00 23.00 2.00 270 55 UBX 2761
PCHAC 32-TW 23.00 27.00 4.00 270 55 LRT1 3680
PCHAC 32-TW 27.00 31.00 4.00 270 55 LRT2 3167
PCHAC 32-TW 31.00 35.00 4.00 270 55 LRT3 3602
PCHAC 32-TW 35.00 41.00 6.00 270 55 LBX 2183
PCHAC 33-TV 103.50 121.50 18.00 0 90 UBX 824
PCHAC 33-TV 121.50 131.00 9.50 0 90 LRT1 2747
PCHAC 33-TV 131.00 145.00 14.00 0 90 LRT2 2331
PCHAC 33-TV 145.00 160.50 15.50 0 90 LRT3 1805
PCHAC 33-TV 160.50 317.00 156.50 2 90 LBX 2619
PCHAC 33-TW 125.60 129.00 3.40 270 55 UBX 2513
PCHAC 33-TW 129.00 134.00 5.00 270 55 LRT1 3816
PCHAC 33-TW 134.00 139.00 5.00 270 55 LRT2 3680
PCHAC 33-TW 139.00 145.50 6.50 270 55 LRT3 3511

55
Downhole
length (m)
PCHAC 33-TW 145.50 246.00 100.50 270 55 LBX 1938
PCHAC 36-TV 18.00 26.00 8.00 270 90 UBX 1050
PCHAC 36-TV 26.00 31.00 5.00 0 90 LRT1 2581
PCHAC 36-TV 31.00 39.00 8.00 270 90 LRT2 3699
PCHAC 36-TV 39.00 45.00 6.00 0 90 LRT3 3815
PCHAC 36-TV 45.00 73.50 28.50 0 90 LBX 2105
PCHAC 36-TW 15.20 25.00 9.80 270 55 UBX 1151
PCHAC 36-TW 25.00 31.00 6.00 270 55 LRT1 3416
PCHAC 36-TW 31.00 35.00 4.00 270 55 LRT2 3512
PCHAC 36-TW 35.00 48.00 13.00 270 55 LRT3 3290
PCHAC 36-TW 48.00 174.00 126.00 270 55 LBX 2345
PCHAC 41-TV 75.50 78.50 3.00 90 90 UBX 679
PCHAC 43-TV 104.50 114.50 10.00 0 90 UBX 1586

56
Appendix 2: Cross Sections

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72


43 101 Falchani Project 20190418 - Final PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

43 101 Falchani Project 20190418 - Final PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES FOR THE FALCHANI LITHIUM PROJECT IN THE

PUNO DISTRICT OF PERU

By The Mineral Corporation, Bryanston, South Africa

Effective Date: 01 March 2019

Report No: C-MYI-EXP-1727-1134

Signed “Stewart Nupen”

© Copyright Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Drillhole locations ................................................................................................................................... 26

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

Property and title

Granting of mining concessions

• Concessions are exclusive, freely transferable and mortgageable;

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Work programme for mining concessions

Mining concession description

Table 1: Mining concessions

Conclusions and limitations

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Figure 1: Locality Plan

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Figure 2: Mineral Tenure Plan

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Previous Regional Exploration

Instituto Peruano de Energia Nuclear

Uranium price fluctuations

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

The Cameco-Vena Joint Venture

Azincourt buys Minergia

Macusani purchases Minergia

Macusani changes name to Plateau Uranium Inc.

Plateau Uranium Inc. changes name to Plateau Energy Metals Inc.

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Figure 3: History of ownership of Plateau Energy Metals

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Figure 4: Regional geological setting

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Figure 5: Local geology

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

7.3.2.1 Mineralization model in the Uranium Complexes

7.3.2.2 Mineralization model at the Falchani Project

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Table 2: Drilling programme summary

Figure 8: Drilling configuration

Sample recovery and core

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

Figure 9: Locations of drillhole platforms

© Mineral Corporation Consultancy (Pty) Ltd

SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY

Sample preparation, assaying and analytical procedures

Sample delivery procedures