NOA Resource update and latest drilling results

Savannah Resources PLC

02 May 2024

 

02 May 2024

Savannah Resources Plc

(AIM: SAV, FWB: SAV and SWB: SAV) ('Savannah', or the 'Company')

NOA JORC Resource Upgrade and Further Broad Lithium Intersections at Reservatório and Grandão

Savannah Resources Plc, the developer of the Barroso Lithium Project (the 'Project') in Portugal, Europe's largest spodumene lithium deposit, is pleased to announce as part of its ongoing work towards a Definitive Feasibility Study ('DFS') on the Project, an upgrade to the JORC 2012 compliant Resource for the NOA orebody together with further results from the current drilling programme.

Highlights:

NOA Resource Upgrade:

·    NOA resource upgrade completed following recent drilling with 93% of the total resource now in the Indicated category (previously 67%), increasing the overall geological confidence in the resource and meeting the requirements for inclusion in the DFS.

·    JORC 2012 Compliant Resource now 661,000 tonnes at 1.03% Li₂O, containing 6,800 tonnes of Li₂O.

·    The size of the resource has increased by 3% due to extending the mineralisation on the western pegmatite.

·    Further exploration potential outlined to the west, as the pegmatite is still open along strike to the west and at depth to the north.

Reservatório and Grandão Significant Drill Results:

·    Assays from 7 diamond drill holes at the Reservatório orebody have now been received, which confirm the lithium mineralisation at depth and the potential for further resource expansions.

·    The best results received, with key lithium intersections include:

o  36.48m @ 1.34% Li₂O from 31.05m in 23RESDD009

o  36m @ 1.28% Li₂O from 151m in 23RESRC039

o  21.8m @ 1.37% Li₂O from 132.3m plus 9.2m @ 1.08% Li₂O from 157m in 23RESRC041

·    Results received from two Reverse Circulation holes drilled at Grandão at the margins of the pegmatite confirm the continuity of the lithium mineralisation to the north. The best result recorded was:

o  18m @ 0.93% Li₂O from 35m in 24GRARC132.

Dale Ferguson, Savannah's Technical Director, said, "We are very pleased to have completed the first of the upgraded JORC Resource estimates for the orebodies at our Project, which are a key part of the work we are doing towards the DFS. There were no expectations to significantly increase the overall tonnage at NOA through this drilling programme, our primary objective being to upgrade as much of the tonnage as we can into the Indicated category, which we have achieved. This is particularly important as only resources in the Indicated and higher, Measured, categories can be used under the relevant guidelines in the Project's maiden JORC Reserve estimate, which will be the extractable tonnage of ore that will underpin all other technical aspects of the DFS. With 93% of the ore now in the Indicated category, the vast majority of the currently defined orebody can be considered in the future reserve estimation work. However, it is equally important to note that this orebody remains open along strike and at depth for the definition of additional ore in the future.

Away from NOA, we have also received further assays from holes previously drilled at the Reservatório and Grandão orebodies. These have demonstrated further lithium mineralisation, above the average grade for the Project at depth at Reservatório, and to the north along strike at Grandão.

Looking ahead we will have further assays to release over the next couple of months from both Reservatório and Pinheiro, where we are targeting further extensions of the high-grade mineralisation noted in our 12 March 2024 RNS as we work towards resource upgrades for the other deposits by the end of Q3 2024".

Further Information

With the completion of resource-related drilling in phase 1 of the current drill programme at the Project, an updated JORC 2012 compliant Mineral Resource Estimation could be made for the NOA deposit (Figure 1). The purpose of the drill programme was to infill the Project's geological database to classify the resources in the Indicated or Measured categories and to fulfill requirements for the DFS.

In addition, further assay results from the recent drilling at Reservatório (7 diamond drill core holes) and Grandão (2 Reverse Circulation ('RC') drill holes) have been received and confirm that the lithium mineralisation is continuing at depth and along strike.

NOA

From the results of the drilling at NOA, Savannah's resource consultant has been able to increase the geological confidence of the resource. Now 93% of the total resource has been classified in the Indicated category (previously 67%). The remaining 7% of the new estimate represents extra tonnes identified in extensions of the pegmatite bodies, particularly at the western end of the deposit area, and is classified in the Inferred category.

Figure 1. Barroso Lithium Project summary map showing deposits and drill hole locations.

The Mineral Resource Estimate at NOA has been classified as Indicated or Inferred in accordance with the JORC code, 2012 edition and is summarised in Table 1 and Appendix 1 and 4.

Table 1 Updated 2024 Resource Estimation Summary for the NOA Deposit at 0.5% Li₂O Cut-off

	Indicated			Inferred			Total
Mineralisation Type	Tonnes (t)	Li2O (%)	Fe2O3 (%)	Tonnes (t)	Li2O (%)	Fe2O3 (%)	Tonnes (t)	Li2O (%)	Fe2O3 (%)	Li2O Tonnes
Transitional	52,000	1.03	0.97	100	0.89	0.85	52,000	1.03	0.97	500
Primary	563,000	1.03	0.83	46,000	0.95	0.45	609,000	1.03	0.80	6,300
Total	614,000	1.03	0.84	46,000	0.95	0.45	661,000	1.03	0.82	6,800

Note: Minor errors occur in final resource figures due to rounding

Reservatório

Preliminary indications are that the dip of the pegmatite is becoming shallower at depth and confirms the extension of the Reservatório mineralisation at least a further 100m down dip, pointing towards a potential extension of the resource. Key lithium intersections returned in the latest batch of assays include:

·    36.5m @ 1.34% Li₂O from 31.05m in 23RESDD009

·    36m @ 1.28% Li₂O from 151m in 23RESRC039

·    26m @ 0.85% Li₂O from 155m in 23RESRC040

·    21.8m @ 1.37% Li₂O from 132.3m plus 9.2m @ 1.08% Li₂O from 157m in 23RESRC041

Drill hole 23RESDD009 was drilled in an area that is representative of the first phase of mining and the samples will also be used for metallurgical testing purposes.

Figure 2. Location of Phase 1 drilling at Reservatório with latest significant intercepts.

Figure 3. A-A' cross section of Reservatório showing latest significant assays.

Figure 4. B-B' cross section showing latest significant assays at Reservatório.

Grandão

At Grandão, the results of two RC drill holes have been received. The holes were planned to test the southern and northern margins of the main pegmatite with only the northern hole (24GRARC132) containing significant lithium mineralisation. The key lithium intersection returned in the latest batch of assays was 18m @ 0.93% Li₂O from 35m in 24GRARC132.

Future Drilling

The second phase of the current drilling programme will target Reservatório, Pinheiro and Grandão to further upgrade the resources at these deposits by the end of Q3 2024. Details for the second phase of the programme will be finalised once all results from the first phase have been received and reviewed.

Figure 5. Map of Grandão drilling showing location of Phase 1 drilling and significant intercepts

Competent Person and Regulatory Information

The information in this release that relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr Shaun Searle who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Searle is an employee of Ashmore Advisory Pty Ltd and an independent consultant to Savannah Resources Plc. Mr Searle has sufficient experience, which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he has undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr Searle consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this announcement that relates to exploration results is based upon information compiled by Mr Dale Ferguson, Technical Director of Savannah Resources Limited. Mr Ferguson is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the December 2012 edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves" (JORC Code). Mr Ferguson consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based upon the information in the form and context in which it appears.

Regulatory Information

This Announcement contains inside information for the purposes of the UK version of the market abuse regulation (EU No. 596/2014) as it forms part of United Kingdom domestic law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 ("UK MAR").

Savannah - Enabling Europe's energy transition.

**ENDS**

Follow @SavannahRes on X (Formerly known as Twitter)

Follow Savannah Resources on LinkedIn

For further information please visit www.savannahresources.com or contact:

Savannah Resources PLC Emanuel Proença, CEO	Tel: [phone]
SP Angel Corporate Finance LLP (Nominated Advisor & Joint Broker) David Hignell/ Charlie Bouverat (Corporate Finance) Grant Barker/Abigail Wayne (Sales & Broking)	Tel: [phone]
SCP Resource Finance (Joint Broker)	Tel: [phone]
Filipe Martins/Chris Tonkin
Camarco (Financial PR) Gordon Poole/ Emily Hall / Nuthara Bandara	Tel: [phone]
LPM (Portugal Media Relations) Herminio Santos/ Jorge Coelho/ Margarida Pinheiro	Tel: [phone]

About Savannah

Savannah Resources is a mineral resource development company and the sole owner of the Barroso Lithium Project in northern Portugal, the largest battery grade spodumene lithium resource outlined to date in Europe.

Through the Barroso Lithium Project (the 'Project'), Savannah will help Portugal to play an important role in providing a long-term, locally sourced, lithium raw material supply for Europe's rapidly developing lithium battery value chain. After the Environmental Licence was granted in May 2023 and the Scoping Study confirmed the economic potential of the Project in June 2023, production is now targeted and on track to begin in 2026. At that stage, Savannah will start producing enough lithium for approximately half a million vehicle battery packs per year, equal to a significant portion of the European Commission's Critical Raw Material Act goal of a minimum 10% of European endogenous lithium production set for 2030. Savannah is focused on the responsible development and operation of the Barroso Lithium Project so that its impact on the environment is minimised and the socio-economic benefits that it can bring to all its stakeholders are maximised.

The Company is listed and regulated on the London Stock Exchange's Alternative Investment Market (AIM) and the Company's ordinary shares are also available on the Quotation Board of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (FWB) under the symbol FWB: SAV, and the Börse Stuttgart (SWB) under the ticker "SAV".

Appendix 1: Key Resource Calculation Information

Geology and Geological Interpretation

At the Barroso Lithium Project, lithium mineralisation occurs predominantly in the form of spodumene-bearing pegmatites which are hosted in metapelitic and mica schists, and occasionally carbonate schists of upper Ordovician to lower Devonian age. Lithium is present in most pegmatite compositions and laboratory test work confirms that the lithium is almost exclusively within spodumene. Distinct lithium grade zonation occurs within the pegmatites, with weakly mineralised zones often evident at the margins of the intrusions. Minor xenoliths and inliers of schist are observed on occasions.

At the NOA deposit, the host pegmatite is a steeply dipping, northwest trending body which is 5m-10m in true width. It has been mapped in outcrop over much of the interpreted 440m strike length of the Mineral Resource.

The weathering profile comprises a shallow, surficial zone of weak to moderate oxidation, particularly of the schistose country rock.

Sampling and Sub-Sampling Techniques

RC drilling by Savannah was carried out using a face sampling hammer (120mm). Savannah reported that drilling conditions were good, samples were generally dry and measured sample recoveries were good other than some recorded sample loss near the hole collar in some holes.

Samples were collected at 1m intervals from pegmatite zones. For the 2017 drilling, composite sampling of typically 4m was conducted in the surrounding schists. For drilling conducted since 2018, schist was only sampled for 5m each side of the pegmatites. The 1m samples were collected through a rig-mounted riffle splitter and were 4-6kg in weight.

Diamond drilling commenced in PQ diameter and reduced to HQ diameter when competent rock was intersected. Core recovery was excellent. For sampling, core was aligned then marked with a centre line. Core was cut with a saw with half-core taken for bulk metallurgical samples. The remaining half core was cut again to produce quarter core samples for analysis. Samples were to geological boundaries then typically at 1m intervals.

Drilling Techniques

RC drilling used a 120mm bit diameter. Diamond core drilling was carried out using PQ core diameter and reduced to HQ triple tube core barrel when competent rock was intersected.

Classification Criteria

Mineral Resource classification was considered on the basis of drill hole spacing, continuity of mineralisation and data quality. At NOA, the continuity of the controlling pegmatite appears to be good. Where the pegmatite is exposed, the interpretation is supported by mapped contacts at surface and within the small pit being mined.

The portion of the NOA pegmatite defined by 20m to 40m spaced drill holes and showing good continuity of pegmatite and Li₂O distribution has been classified as Indicated Mineral Resource. The Indicated portion was extended for the full length of the pegmatite which had been exposed and mapped in the pit and was extrapolated up to 20m past drill hole intersections. Inferred Mineral Resource was assigned to those areas of the NOA deposit defined by a drill hole spacing of greater than 40m.

Sample Analysis Method

The samples were analysed using ALS Laboratories ME-MS89L Super Trace method which combines a sodium peroxide fusion with ICP-MS instrumentation utilising collision/reaction cell technologies to provide the lowest detection limits available.

A prepared sample (0.2g) is added to sodium peroxide flux, mixed well and then fused in at 670°C. The resulting melt is cooled and then dissolved in 30% hydrochloric acid. This solution is then analysed by ICP-MS and the results are corrected for spectral inter-element interferences.

The final solution is then analysed by ICP-MS, with results corrected for spectral inter-element interferences.

Estimation Methodology

The Mineral Resource was estimated within wireframes prepared using nominal 0.35% Li₂O envelopes within the broader pegmatites. The pegmatites at both the NOA deposit were estimated using ordinary kriging ("OK") grade interpolation with interpolation parameters based on the geometry of each zone. No high-grade cuts were applied to Li₂O due to the uniformly low coefficient of variation ("CV") of the data. A high grade cut of 100ppm was applied to Ta values.

The block dimensions used in the model were based on deposit geometry and drill hole spacing and confirmed with Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis ("KNA"). Parent block sizes used at the NOA deposit were 5m NS by 10m EW by 5m with sub-celling to 1.25m by 2.5m by 1.25m.

Bulk density values applied to the NOA estimate were based on values used at the Grandão deposit which were derived from a substantial number of drill core samples, as well as some samples obtained from NOA. Densities applied were 2.5t/m³ for oxide lithologies, 2.65t/m³ for unoxidised pegmatite and 2.67t/m³ for unoxidised schist.

Cut-off Grade

The Statement of Mineral Resources has been constrained by the mineralisation solids and reported above a cut-off grade of 0.5% Li₂O. The cut-off grade is supported by previous mining studies.

Mining and Metallurgical Methods and Parameters

Previous high-level mining optimisation work indicates the vast majority of the NOA Mineral Resource can be mined using open pit techniques as part of the larger operation at the Project.

Metallurgical test work has been conducted by Savannah on representative mineralisation at the Grandão deposit. The work was completed by Nagrom Metallurgical in Australia and confirmed that high grade lithium, low grade iron concentrate can be generated from the mineralisation using conventional processing technology. Microscopy confirmed that the concentrate was almost entirely spodumene.

This test work indicates that the material can be utilised in the plant feed to generate a spodumene concentrate of >5.5% Li₂O. To achieve this, the composite samples were ground to a particle size of P₈₀ 150µm, which demonstrated an average Li₂O processing recovery of 75.3%.

Additional metallurgical test work is underway and there is no reason to consider that the NOA mineralisation will behave any differently to the Grandão deposit.

APPENDIX 2 - Drill hole locations of Phase 1 RC and Diamond Resource Holes.

Hole_ID	Prospect	Hole Type	Total Depth	East (mE)	North (mN)	Elevation (mASL)	Dip	Azimuth
23NOARC026	NOA	RC	111	599104	4609510	677	-60	198
23NOARC027	NOA	RC	40	599015	4609572	689	-60	198
23NOARC028	NOA	RC	40	599047	4609565	692	-60	198
23NOARC029	NOA	RC	42	599025	4609498	693	-60	200
23NOARC030	NOA	RC	35	598992	4609575	686	-60	200
23NOARC031	NOA	RC	30	598988	4609559	687	-60	200
23NOARC032	NOA	RC	123	599086	4609555	691	-60	200
23NOARC033	NOA	RC	20	598985	4609540	688	-60	200
23NOARC034	NOA	RC	40	598894	4609584	687	-60	200
23NOARC035	NOA	RC	43	598900	4609610	683	-60	200
23NOARC036	NOA	RC	35	598916	4609606	679	-60	200
23NOARC037	NOA	RC	67	598916	4609589	678	-60	200
23NOARC038	NOA	RC	35	599205	4609406	691	-60	200
23NOARC039	NOA	RC	61	599238	4609389	687	-60	200
23NOARC040	NOA	RC	45	599174	4609436	687	-60	200
23NOARC041	NOA	RC	60	599135	4609470	681	-60	200
23NOARC042	NOA	RC	85	599190	4609491	673	-60	200
23NOARC043	NOA	RC	130	599074	4609531	689	-60	200
23NOARC044	NOA	RC	35	599100	4609457	674	-60	200
23NOARC045	NOA	RC	35	599112	4609440	674	-60	200
23NOARC046	NOA	RC	35	598943	4609589	678	-60	200
23NOARC047	NOA	RC	25	598938	4609573	679	-60	200
23NOARC048	NOA	RC	105	599157	4609520	666	-60	200
23RESRC038	Reservatório	RC	207	599510	4609249	655	-90	0
23RESRC039	Reservatório	RCDD	135	599511	4609246	655	-70	150
23RESRC040	Reservatório	RCDD	120	599557	4609245	649	-90	0
23RESRC041	Reservatório	RCDD	120	599559	4609241	649	-70	150
23RESRC042	Reservatório	RC	12	599650	4609094	594	-60	150
23RESRC043	Reservatório	RC	9	599687	4609109	591	-60	150
23RESRC044	Reservatório	RC	18	599618	4609011	599	-60	150
23RESRC045	Reservatório	RC	130	599679	4609231	619	-90	0
23RESDD009	Reservatório	DD	90.5	599764	4609176	611	-60	150
24RESDD010	Reservatório	DD	40	599688	4609110	590	-60	150
24RESDD011	Reservatório	DD	50	599617	4609016	599	-60	150
24RESDD012	Reservatório	DD	50	599661	4609070	590	-60	150
24PNRRC020	Pinheiro	RC	110	601380	4606960	542	-60	270
24PNRRC021	Pinheiro	RC	113	601402	4606933	543	-60	220
24PNRRC022	Pinheiro	RC	100	601401	4606936	543	-60	265
24PNRRC023	Pinheiro	RC	138	601408	4606892	547	-60	190
24PNRRC024	Pinheiro	RC	144	601406	4606893	547	-65	220
24PNRRC025	Pinheiro	RC	100	601402	4606931	543	-55	290
24GRARC132	Grandão	RC	90	601743	4608177	521	-90	0
24GRARC133	Grandão	RC	39	601919	4607864	563	-90	0

APPENDIX 3 - Summary of Recent Significant Intercepts using a 0.5% Li₂O Cutoff.

Hole_ID	Prospect	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	Grade Li2O%
24PNRRC025	Pinheiro	No Significant Assays
24GRARC132	Grandão	35	53	18	0.93
24GRARC133	Grandão	No Significant Assays
23RESRC039	Reservatório	151	187	36	1.28
23RESRC040	Reservatório	155	181	26	0.85
23RESRC040	Reservatório	184	186.25	2.25	0.6
23RESRC041	Reservatório	132.3	154.1	21.8	1.37
23RESRC041	Reservatório	157	166.2	9.2	1.08
23RESDD009	Reservatório	31.05	67.53	36.48	1.34
24RESDD010	Reservatório	8.2	12.7	4.5	0.41
24RESDD010	Reservatório	15.85	23.6	7.75	0.83
24RESDD010	Reservatório	26.9	31.24	4.34	0.83
24RESDD011	Reservatório	No Significant Assays
24RESDD012	Reservatório	No Significant Assays

APPENDIX 4 - JORC 2012 Table 1 -DFS Infill Drilling

JORC Table 1 Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code Explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	·    Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. ·    Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. ·    Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	·      The majority of holes were reverse circulation, sampled at 1m intervals. RC samples were collected in large plastic bags from an onboard rig splitter and a 4-6kg representative sample taken for analysis. ·      A small number of diamond holes were also completed. Core was HQ size, sampled at 1m intervals in the pegmatite, with boundaries sampled to geological boundaries. Half core samples were collected for analysis. ·      Drilling was predominantly on a nominal 25m by 20m spacing, out to 40m by 40m. ·      Collar surveys are carried using differential GPS with an accuracy to within 0.2m. ·      A down hole survey for each hole was completed using gyro equipment. ·      The lithium mineralisation is predominantly in the form of Spodumene-bearing pegmatites, the pegmatites are unzoned and vary in thickness from 10m-20m.
Drilling techniques	·    Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	·      RC drilling used a 120mm bit diameter. ·      Core drilling was carried out using an HQ triple tube core barrel.
Drill sample recovery	·    Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. ·    Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. ·    Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	·      RC drilling sample weights were monitored to ensure samples were maximised. Samples were carefully loaded into a splitter and split in the same manner ensuring that the sample split to be sent to the assay laboratories were in the range of 4-6kg. ·      Core recovery was measured and was found to be generally excellent. ·      No obvious relationships between sample recovery and grade.
Logging	·    Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. ·    Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. ·    The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	·      RC holes were logged in the field at the time of sampling. Core was logged in detail in a logging yard. ·      Each 1m sample interval was carefully homogenised and assessed for lithology, colour, grainsize, structure and mineralisation. ·      A representative chip sample produced from RC drilling was washed and taken for each 1m sample and stored in a chip tray which was photographed. ·      Core was photographed.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	·    If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. ·    If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. ·    For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. ·    Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. ·    Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. ·    Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	·      1m RC samples were split by the riffle splitter on the drill rig and sampled dry. ·      The 4m composites were collected using a spear with the spear inserted into the bag at a high angle and pushed across the sample to maximise representivity of the sample. ·      Core was cut in half using a diamond saw with 1m half core samples submitted for analysis. ·      The sampling was conducted using industry standard techniques and were considered appropriate. ·      Field duplicates were used to test repeatability of the sub-sampling and were found to be satisfactory. ·      Every effort was made to ensure that the samples were representative and not biased in any way.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	·    The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. ·    For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. ·    Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.	·      Samples were received, sorted, labelled and dried. ·      Samples were crushed to 70% less than 2mm, riffle split off 250g, pulverise split to better than 85% passing 75 microns and 5g was split of for assaying. ·      The samples were analysed using ALS Laboratories ME-MS89L Super Trace method which combines a sodium peroxide fusion with ICP-MS instrumentation utilising collision/reaction cell technologies to provide the lowest detection limits available. ·      A prepared sample (0.2g) is added to sodium peroxide flux, mixed well and then fused in at 670°C. The resulting melt is cooled and then dissolved in 30% hydrochloric acid. This solution is then analysed by ICP-MS and the results are corrected for spectral inter-element interferences. ·      The final solution is then analysed by ICP-MS, with results corrected for spectral inter-element interferences. ·      Standards/blanks and duplicates were inserted on a 1:20 ratio for both to samples taken. ·      Duplicate sample regime is used to monitor sampling methodology and homogeneity. ·      Routine QA/QC controls for the method ME-MS89L include blanks, certified reference standards of Lithium and duplicate samples. Samples are assayed within runs or batches up to 40 samples. At the fusion stage that quality control samples are included together with the samples so all samples follow the same procedure until the end. Fused and diluted samples are prepared for ICP-MS analysis. ICP instrument is calibrated through appropriate certified standards solutions and interference corrections to achieve strict calibration fitting parameters. Each 40 sample run is assayed with two blanks, two certified standards and one duplicate sample and results are evaluated accordingly. ·      A QA/QC review of all information indicated that all assays were satisfactory.
Verification of sampling and assaying	·    The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. ·    The use of twinned holes. ·    Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. ·    Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	·      All information was internally audited by company personnel. ·      Savannah's experienced project geologists supervised all processes. ·      All field data is entered into a custom log sheet and then into excel spreadsheets (supported by look-up tables) at site and subsequently validated as it is imported into the centralised Access database. ·      Hard copies of logs, survey and sampling data are stored in the local office and electronic data is stored on the main server. ·      Results were reported as Li (ppm) and were converted to a percentage by dividing by 10,000 and then to Li2O% by multiplying by 2.153.
Location of data points	·    Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. ·    Specification of the grid system used. ·    Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	·      The coordinate of each drill hole was taken at the time of collecting using a handheld GPS with an accuracy of 5m. All collars were subsequently surveyed using DGPS with an accuracy of 0.2m. ·      The grid system used is WSG84. ·      An accurate, aerial topographic survey was obtained with accuracy of +/- 0.5m.
Data spacing and distribution	·    Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. ·    Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. ·    Whether sample compositing has been applied.	·      Drilling was predominantly on a nominal 25m by 20m spacing, out to 40m by 40m. ·      Drill data is at sufficient spacing to define Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource. ·      Compositing to 1m has been applied prior to resource estimation.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	·    Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. ·    If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	·      At NOA, drilling was generally angled to the SW and intersected the moderately dipping deposit at close to orthogonal to the known dip of the main pegmatite. At Reservatório the holes were generally drilled at an azimuth of 150° with a dip that varied from -60° to vertical. At Grandão the drill holes were vertical. ·      Intersections were close to true width for the NOA pegmatite. ·      No orientation-based sampling bias has been identified in the data.
Sample security	·    The measures taken to ensure sample security.	·      Samples were delivered to a courier and chain of custody is managed by Savannah.
Audits or reviews	·    The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	·      Internal company auditing and a review by Ashmore during the April 2018 site visit found that all data collection and QA/QC procedures were conducted to industry standards.

JORC Table 1 Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	·    Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. ·   The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a license to operate in the area.	·      All work was completed inside the Barroso Lithium Project C-100. ·      Savannah has received written confirmation from the DGEG that under article 24 of Decree-Law no. 88/90 of March 16 being relevant justification based on the resources allocated exploited and intended, Savannah has been approved an expansion up to 250m of C100 mining concession in specific areas where a resource has been defined and the requirement for the expansion can be justified.
Exploration done by other parties	·    Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	·      Limited exploration work has been carried out by previous operators. ·      No historic information has been included in the Mineral Resource estimates.
Geology	·    Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	·    The lithium mineralisation is predominantly in the form of Spodumene-bearing pegmatites which are hosted in meta-pelitic and mica schists, and occasionally carbonate schists of upper Ordovician to lower Devonian age. The pegmatites vary in thickness from 5m-20m.
Drill hole information	·   A summary of all information material to the under-standing of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: ·   easting and northing of the drill hole collar ·   elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar ·   dip and azimuth of the hole ·   down hole length and interception depth ·   hole length ·   If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	·    Grid used WSG84. ·    No material data has been excluded from the release. ·    Drill hole intersections used in the resource have been previously reported.
Data aggregation methods	·   In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. ·   Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. ·    The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	·    Length weighted average grades have been reported. ·    No high-grade cuts have been applied to reported grades for lithium. A high grade cut of 100ppm was applied to the tantalum data. ·    Metal equivalent values are not being reported.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	·   These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. ·    If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. ·   If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'down hole length, true width not known').	·    The majority of holes have been drilled at angles to intersect the mineralisation approximately perpendicular to the orientation of the mineralised trend.
Diagrams	·   Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported. These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	·      A relevant plan showing the drilling is included within this release.
Balanced Reporting	·    Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. ·   Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	·      All relevant results available have been previously reported.
Other substantive exploration data	·   Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	·      Geological mapping and rock chip sampling has been conducted over the project area.
Further work	·    The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large- scale step-out drilling). ·    Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	·    Further RC and DD drilling to test for further extensions and to increase confidence. ·    Economic evaluation of the defined Mineral Resources.

JORC Table 1 Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database integrity	·    Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. ·    Data validation procedures used.	·      The assay data was captured electronically to prevent transcription errors. ·      Validation included visual review of results.
Site visits	·    Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. ·    If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	·      Numerous site visits were undertaken by Dale Ferguson in 2017 which included an inspection of the drilling process, outcrop area and confirmation that no obvious impediments to future exploration or development were present. ·      A site visit by an Ashmore associate was undertaken in April 2018 to confirm geological interpretations, drilling and sampling procedures and general site layout.
Geological interpretation	·    Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. ·    Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. ·    The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation. ·    The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation. ·    The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.	·      The pegmatite dykes hosting the NOA mineralisation are defined in outcrop and in drilling and boundaries are generally very sharp and distinct. ·      The shape and extent of the >0.5% Li2O mineralisation is clearly controlled by the general geometry of the pegmatites. ·      Zonation of lithium within the pegmatite is evident, and typically the margins are weakly mineralised.
Dimensions	·    The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	·      The pegmatite at Noa has a drilled extent of 440m east-west and a maximum vertical depth of 145m. The thickness of the mineralisation ranges from 10m to 20m.
Estimation and modelling techniques	·    The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used. ·    The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data. ·    The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. ·    Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). ·    In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed. ·    Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. ·    Any assumptions about correlation between variables. ·    Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates. ·    Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. ·    The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	·      Inverse distance squared interpolation was used to estimate block grades within the resource. ·      Surpac software was used for the estimation. ·      Samples were composited to 1m intervals to match the sample lengths. Due to the extremely low CV of the data no high-grade cuts were applied to Li2O in the estimate. A cut of 100ppm was applied to Ta values. ·      At NOA the parent block dimensions were 10m EW by 5m NS by 5m vertical with sub-cells of 5m by 1.25m by 1.25m. ·      The previous resource estimate for NOA was reported in March 2019. ·      No assumptions have been made regarding recovery of by-products. ·      The grade of Fe2O3 was estimated for the deposit, using factored Fe data to eliminate Fe introduced in the sample preparation stage. The mean grade of Fe2O3 was determined to be 0.82% at NOA. ·      An orientated ellipsoid search was used to select data and was based on drill hole spacing and the geometry of the pegmatite dyke. ·      A search of 40m was used with a minimum of 6 samples and a maximum of 16 samples which resulted in 91% of blocks being estimated. The remaining blocks were estimated with search radii of 80m. ·      Selective mining units were not modelled in the Mineral Resource model. The block size used in the model was based on drill sample spacing and deposit geometry. ·      The deposit mineralisation was constrained by wireframes prepared using a nominal 0.35% Li2O grade envelope. ·      For validation, quantitative comparison of block grades to assay grades was carried out for each estimated body. ·      Global comparisons of drill hole and block model grades were also carried out.
Moisture	·    Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	·      Tonnages and grades were estimated on a dry in situ basis. No moisture values were reviewed.
Cut-off parameters	·    The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	·      The shallow, outcropping nature of both deposit suggests good potential for open pit mining if sufficient resources can be delineated to consider a mining operation. As such, the Mineral Resource has been reported at a 0.5% Li2O lower cut-off grade to reflect assumed exploitation by open pit mining.
Mining factors or assumptions	·    Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	·      Based on comparison with other similar deposits, the Mineral Resource is considered to have sufficient grade and metallurgical characteristics for economic treatment if an operation is established at the site. ·      No mining parameters or modifying factors have been applied to the Mineral Resource. ·      Previous high-level mining optimisation work indicates the vast majority of the Mineral Resource can be mined using open pit techniques.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	·    The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	·      Metallurgical test work has been conducted by Savannah on representative mineralisation at the Grandão deposit. The work was completed by Nagrom Metallurgical in Australia and confirmed that high grade lithium, low grade iron concentrate can be generated from the mineralisation using conventional processing technology. Microscopy confirmed that the concentrate was almost entirely spodumene. ·      Additional metallurgical test work is underway and there is no reason to consider that the NOA mineralisation will behave any differently to the Grandão deposit.
Environmental factors or assumptions	·    Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.	·      The area is not known to be environmentally sensitive and there is no reason to think that proposals for development including the dumping of waste would not be approved if planning and permitting guidelines are followed.
Bulk density	·    Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples. ·    The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. ·    Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.	·      Bulk density values from the Grandão deposit were applied to the NOA deposit. ·      The Grandão densities were based on determinations using 3,370 core samples, as well as 160 samples obtained from NOA. ·      Bulk density values applied to the estimate were 2.5t/m3 for transitional lithologies, 2.65t/m3 for unoxidised pegmatite and 2.67t/m3 for unoxidised schist.
Classification	·    The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories. ·    Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data). ·    Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person's view of the deposit.	·      The Mineral Resource was classified in accordance with the Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC, 2012). ·      The portion of the NOA pegmatite defined by 20m to 40m spaced drill holes and showing good continuity of pegmatite and Li2O distribution has been classified as Indicated Mineral Resource. The Indicated portion was extended for the full length of the pegmatite which had been exposed and mapped in the pit and was extrapolated up to 20m past drill hole intersections. ·      The remainder of the Mineral Resource at NOA was classified as Inferred due the broader spaced drilling. ·      The results reflect the view of the Competent Person.
Audits or reviews	·    The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	·      The Mineral Resource estimate has been checked by an internal audit procedure.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence	·    Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. ·    The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used. ·    These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	·      The estimate utilised good estimation practices, high quality drilling, sampling and assay data. The extent and dimensions of the mineralisation are sufficiently defined by outcrop and the detailed drilling. The deposit is considered to have been estimated with level of accuracy reflected in the resource classification. ·      The Mineral Resource statement relates to global estimates of tonnes and grade. ·      The has been small scale mining conducted at NOA, with approximately 22,000t mined at an average Li2O grade of 1.24%.

 

END