Atlantic Lithium Regulatory News (ALL)

Hole_ID

DepthFrom_m

DepthTo_m

Interval m

Lithology

Visible estimate Spodumene abundance %

Downhole length vs true width

GRC1017

83

134

51

Pegmatite

25-30

true width not known

GRC1018

154

157

3

Pegmatite

5

true width not known

GRC1018

160

170

10

Pegmatite

5

true width not known

GRC1020

6

38

32

Pegmatite

5-10

true width not known

GRC1020

39

113

74

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1020

116

122

6

Pegmatite

10-15

true width not known

GRC1020

137

178

41

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1021

93

117

24

Pegmatite

15-20

true width not known

GRC1022

130

152

22

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1022

158

187

29

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1023

139

147

8

Pegmatite

5-10

true width not known

Hole_ID

DepthFrom_m

DepthTo_m

Interval m

Lithology

Visible estimate Spodumene abundance %

True width vs downhole length

GRC1017

83

134

51

Pegmatite

25-30

true width not known

GRC1018

27

29

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1018

41

45

4

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1018

50

51

1

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1018

74

76

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1018

85

93

8

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1018

151

153

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1018

154

157

3

Pegmatite

5

true width not known

GRC1018

160

170

10

Pegmatite

5

true width not known

GRC1018

184

187

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

37

38

1

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

81

82

1

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

90

92

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

94

96

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

101

104

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

107

111

4

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

139

142

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

151

156

5

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

157

164

7

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1019

171

173

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1020

6

38

32

Pegmatite

 5-10

true width not known

GRC1020

39

113

74

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1020

116

122

6

Pegmatite

 10-15

true width not known

GRC1020

137

178

41

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1020

183

186

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1020

190

193

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1021

17

30

13

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1021

93

117

24

Pegmatite

15-20

true width not known

GRC1021

124

126

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1021

140

143

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1021

235

237

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1022

81

82

1

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1022

85

86

1

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1022

126

127

1

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1022

130

152

22

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1022

158

187

29

Pegmatite

20-25

true width not known

GRC1022

190

193

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1023

89

91

2

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1023

105

108

3

Pegmatite

not observed

GRC1023

139

147

8

Pegmatite

 5-10

true width not known

Hole_ID

Hole_Type

Hole_Depth m

Orig_Grid_ID

Orig_East

Orig_North

Orig_RL

Azimuth

Dip

Comments

GRC1017

RC

156

WGS84_30N

715788

579761

31

305

-50

GRC1018

RC

206

WGS84_30N

715755

579787

33

306

-50

GRC1019

RC

188

WGS84_30N

715731

579813

32

307

-50

GRC1020

RC

250

WGS84_30N

715768

579733

27

308

-50

GRC1021

RC

241

WGS84_30N

715736

579747

26

309

-50

GRC1022

RC

147

WGS84_30N

715702

579775

27

310

-50

hole abandoned in mineralisation due to water ingress

GRC1023

RC

212

WGS84_30N

715671

579799

28

311

-50

www.atlanticlithium.com.au

IR@atlanticlithium.com.au

Tel: +61 2 8072 0640

SP Angel Corporate Finance LLP

Nominated Adviser

Jeff Keating

Charlie Bouverat

Tel: +44 (0)20 3470 0470

Yellow Jersey PR Limited

Charles Goodwin

Bessie Elliot atlantic@yellowjerseypr.com

Tel: +44 (0)20 3004 9512

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 1m samples from which 3kg was pulverised to produce a 30g 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.

· RC drill holes were routinely sampled at 1m intervals with a nominal 3-6kg sub-sample split off for assay using a rig-mounted cone splitter at 1m intervals.

· For assaying, splits from all prospective ore zones (i.e. logged pegmatites +/- interburden) were sent for assay. Outside of these zones, the splits were composited to 4m using a portable riffle splitter.

· Holes without pegmatite were not assayed.

· Approximately 5% of all samples submitted were standards and coarse blanks. Blanks were typically inserted with the interpreted ore zones after the drilling was completed.

· Approximately 2.5% of samples submitted were duplicate samples collected after logging using a riffle splitter and sent to an umpire laboratory. This ensured zones of interest were duplicated and not missed during alternative routine splitting of the primary sample.

· Although no assays are reported herewith, samples were sent to Intertek Tarkwa for sample preparation (SP02/SP12) and subsequently forwarded to Intertek Perth for analysis (FP6/MS/OES - 21 element combination Na2O2 fusion with combination OES/MS).

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 was completed using a 5.75-inch face sampling hammer.

· Representative RC drill chips were collected on 1m intervals through all pegmatite zones using a rig mounted cone splitter for geological, structural and geotechnical logging by a Company geologist. 

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.

· A semi-quantitative estimate of sample recovery was completed for the vast majority of drilling. This involved weighing both the bulk samples and splits and calculating theoretical recoveries using assumed densities. Where samples were not weighed, qualitative descriptions of the sample size were recorded. Some sample loss was recorded in the collaring of the RC drill holes.

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.

· All drill sample intervals were geologically logged by Company geologists.

· Where appropriate, geological logging recorded the abundance of specific minerals, rock types and weathering using a standardised logging system that captured preliminary metallurgical domains.

· Visual estimates of spodumene modal abundance were logged and estimated using a visual percentage estimation chart as a guide.

· All logging is qualitative, except for the systematic collection of magnetic susceptibility data which could be considered semi quantitative.

· Strip logs have been generated for each drill hole to cross-check geochemical data with geological logging.

· A small sample of washed RC drill material was retained in chip trays for future reference and validation of geological logging, and sample reject materials from the laboratory are stored at the Company's field office.

· All drill holes have been logged and reviewed by Company technical staff.

· A total of 1,400m of RC drilling is reported which was logged in its entirety at 1m intervals.

Criteria

JORC Code Explanation

Commentary

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.

· RC samples were cone split at the drill rig. For interpreted waste zones the 1 or 2m rig splits were later composited using a riffle splitter into 4m composite samples.

· Since December 2018, samples were submitted to Intertek Tarkwa (SP02/SP12) for sample preparation. Samples were weighed, dried and crushed to -2mm in a Boyd crusher with an 800-1,200g rotary split, producing a nominal 1,500g split crushed sample; which was subsequently pulverised in a LM2 ring mill. Samples were pulverised to a nominal 85% passing 75µm. All the preparation equipment was flushed with barren material prior to the commencement of the job. Coarse reject material was kept in the original bag. Lab sizing analysis was undertaken on a nominal 1:25 basis. Final pulverised samples (20g) were airfreighted to Intertek in Perth for assaying.

· The vast majority of samples were drilled dry. Moisture content was logged qualitatively. All intersections of the water table were recorded in the database.

· Field sample duplicates were taken to evaluate whether samples were representative and understand repeatability, with good repeatability.

· Sample sizes and laboratory preparation techniques were appropriate and industry standard.

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.

· No assay results are being reported.

Criteria

JORC Code Explanation

Commentary

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.

· Significant intersections were visually field verified by company geologists and Shaun Searle of Ashmore during the 2019 site visit.

· Drill hole data was compiled and digitally captured by Company geologists in the field. Where hand-written information was recorded, all hardcopy records were kept and archived after digitising.

· Drilling data were captured on paper and locked excel templates and migrated to LogChief which has inbuilt data validation protocols. All analytical results were transferred digitally and loaded into the database by a Datashed consultant.

· The data was audited, and any discrepancies checked by the Company personnel before being updated in the database.

· No assay results are being reported.

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 time of reporting, the collar locations were surveyed in WGS84 Zone 30N using handheld GPS.

· Prior to Resource estimation, the collar locations will be surveyed in WGS84 Zone 30 North using DGPS survey equipment, which is accurate to 0.11mm in both horizontal and vertical directions by qualified surveyors. Once validated, the survey will be uploaded into Datashed.

· RC drill holes were routinely down hole surveyed using a Reflex SPRINT tool.

· LiDAR survey was completed by Southern Mapping to produce rectified colour images and a digital terrain model (DTM) 32km2, Aircraft C206 aircraft-mounted LiDAR Riegl Q780 Camera Hasselblad H5Dc with 50mm Fixfocus lens.

· Coordinate system: WGS84 UTM30N.

· The topographic survey and photo mosaic output from the survey is accurate to 20mm.

· Locational accuracy at collar and down the drill hole is considered appropriate for reporting of exploration results.

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.

· The RC holes were drilled on a nominal 40m x 40m grid at -50 degree inclination towards 305 azimuth.

· Where possible, holes are generally angled perpendicular to interpreted mineralisation orientations at the Project.

· Samples were composited to 1m intervals prior to logging.

Criteria

JORC Code Explanation

Commentary

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.

· As a guiding rule, the drill line and drill hole orientation are oriented as close as practicable to perpendicular to the orientation of the general mineralised orientation.

· As this is a new area of drilling, the general mineralised orientation is not well constrained and some reported intervals may be oblique to mineralisation.

· Orientation based sampling bias is identified in the data.

Sample security

· The measures taken to ensure sample security.

· Samples were stored on site prior to road transportation by Company personnel to the SGS preparation laboratory.

· With the change of laboratory to Intertek, samples were picked up by the contractor and transported to the sample preparation facility in Tarkwa.

Audits or reviews

· The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.

· Prior to the drilling programme, a third-party Project review was completed by an independent consultant experienced with the style of mineralisation.

· In addition, Shaun Searle of Ashmore reviewed drilling and sampling procedures during the 2019 site visit and found that all procedures and practices conform to industry standards.

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 licence to operate in the area.

· The Project covers two contiguous licences the Mankessim (RL 3/55) and Mankessim South (PL3/109) licence.

· The Mankessim is a joint-venture, with the licence in the name of the joint-venture party (Barari DV Ghana Limited). Document number: 0853652-18.

· The Project occurs within a Mineral Prospecting licence and was renewed on the 27 July 2021 for a further three-year period, valid until 27 July 2024.

· The Mankessim South licence is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Green Metals Resources. The Mineral Prospecting licence renewal was submitted in Nov 2022 for a further three-year period.

· The tenement is in good standing with no known impediments.

· Mining Lease granted in respect of the Project for a period of 15 years, effective 20 October 2023 until 19 October 2038, file number ML 3/239.

Exploration done by other parties

· Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.

· Historical trenching and mapping were completed by the Ghana Geological survey during the 1960s. But for some poorly referenced historical maps, none of the technical data from this work was located. Many of the historical trenches were located, cleaned and re-logged. No historical drilling was completed. 

Geology

· Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.

· Pegmatite-hosted lithium deposits are the target for exploration. This style of mineralisation typically forms as dykes and sills intruding or in proximity to granite source rocks.

· Surface geology within the Project area typically consists of sequences of staurolite and garnet-bearing pelitic schist and granite with lesser pegmatite and mafic intrusives. Outcrops are typically sparse and confined to ridge tops with colluvium and mottled laterite blanketing much of the undulating terrain making geological mapping challenging. The hills are often separated by broad, sandy drainages.

Drillhole Information

· A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:

· easting and northing of the drill hole collar

· elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar

· dip and azimuth of the hole

· downhole 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.

· All information is included in the body of the announcement and appendices. No drill hole information was excluded.

Criteria

JORC Code Explanation

Commentary

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.

· Visual estimates of modal spodumene abundance are being reported within all intersected pegmatite intervals within the reported drill holes of this announcement.

· Average ranges with 5% visual estimation variance were composited for summary reporting into larger intervals dependent on spodumene modal abundance within logged 1m drill sample intervals.

· For assay, the samples have not been composited as per the visual estimate spodumene logs, and have been submitted at 1m intervals within all pegmatite intervals for reporting once received.

· No metal equivalent values are being reported.

· Visual estimates of mineral abundance should never be considered a proxy or substitute for laboratory analyses where concentrations or grades are the factor of principal economic interest. Visual estimates also potentially provide no information regarding impurities or deleterious physical properties relevant to valuations

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 downhole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'downhole length, true width not known').

· The drill line and drill hole orientation are oriented as close to 90° degrees to the orientation of the anticipated mineralised orientation as practicable.

· The majority of the drilling is interpreted to intersect the mineralisation at 45°, however this is uncertain without further drilling.

· Downhole lengths are reported and true widths are uncertain at this stage.

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.

· Relevant diagrams have been included within the body of the announcement.

Balanced reporting

· 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 hole collars were surveyed WGS84 Zone 30 North grid using a handheld GPS. All RC holes were down-hole surveyed with a north-seeking gyroscopic tool.

· All pegmatite intervals have been reported whether observed with visual spodumene or not.

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.

· Results were visually estimated from drill hole chips, with geological logging used to aid interpretation of mineralised contact positions.

· Geological observations are included in the announcement.

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.

· Follow up RC and DD drilling may be undertaken. 

· Further metallurgical test work may be required as the Project progresses through the study stages. 

· Drill spacing is currently considered adequate for the current level of interrogation of the Project.