NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT MINERAL RESOURCE …

GM 66007NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATION, WHABOUCHI LITHIUM DEPOSIT

http://gq.mines.gouv.qc.ca/documents/examine/GM66007

http://gq.mines.gouv.qc.ca/documents/sigeom/Licence.pdf

http://gq.mines.gouv.qc.ca/documents/sigeom/license.pdf

SGT

NI 43-101 Technical Report Mineral Resource Estimation Whabouchi Lithium Deposit

Nemaska Exploration Inc.

IFIEçU AU afiRPdF

2 8 OCT. 2011

DIRECTION DES TITRES MINIERS

Respectfully submitted to: Nemaska Exploration Inc.

Date: July 14, 2010

SGS Canada Inc.

Geostat 10 boul. de la Seigneurie Est, Suite 203, Blainville, Québec Canada t (450) 433 1050 f (450) 433 1048 www.geostat.com www.met.sgs.com

Member of SGS Group (SGS SA)

Ressources naturelles et Faune

10 JAN. 2012

Ils"i 3 'W Dir information géologique

Ni 43-101 Technical Report — Mineral Resource Estimate — Whabouchi Lithium Deposit Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ii List of Tables iv List of Figures iv 1- Executive Summary 5 2- Introduction and Terms of Reference 8

2.1 General 8 2.2 Terms of Reference 8 2.3 Units and Currency 8 2.4 Disclaimer 9

3- Reliance on Other Experts 9 4- Property Description and Location 10

4.1 Location 10 4.2 Property Ownership and Agreements 11 4.3 Royalties Obligations 12 4.4 Permits and Environmental Liabilities 13

5- Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography 13 5.1 Accessibility 13 5.2 Physiography 13 5.3 Climate 13 5.4 Local Resources and Infrastructures 14

6- History 14 6.1 Regional Government Surveys 14 6.2 Mineral Exploration Work 14

7- Geological Setting 17 7.1 Regional Geology 17 7.2 Property Geology 17

8- Deposit Model 21 9- Mineralisation 22 10- Exploration and Drilling 22 11- Sampling Method and Approach 22 12- Sample Preparation, Analysis and Security 24

12.1 Sample Preparation and Analyses 24 12.2 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Procedure 24

12.2.1 Analytical Standards 25 12.2.2 Analytical Blanks 27 12.2.3 Core Duplicates 28 12.2.4 Laboratory Pulp Duplicates 29 12.2.5 Nemaska Pulp Re-analysis 30 12.2.6 QA/QC Conclusion 32

12.3 Specific Gravity 32 12.4 Conclusions 32

13- Data Verification 33 14- Adjacent Properties 35 15- Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing 36 16- Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates 38

16.1 Introduction 38 16.2 Exploratory Data Analysis 39

SGS Canada Inc. - Geostat

SGS

Ni 43-101 Technical Report — Mineral Resource Estimate — Whabouchi Lithium Deposit Page iii

16.2.1 Analytical Data 39 16.2.2 Composite Data 39 16.2.3 Specific Gravity 42

16.3 Geological Interpretation 42 16.4 Spatial Analysis 44 16.5 Resource Block Modeling 45 16.6 Grade Interpolation Methodology 47 16.7 Mineral Resource Classification 48 16.8 Mineral Resource Estimation 50 16.9 Block model validation 52 16.10 Interpretation and Conclusion 53 16.11 Recommendation 53

17- Other Relevant Data and Information 55 18- Interpretation and Conclusions 55 19- Recommendations 57 20- References 58

21.1 Property Description and Location 58 21.2 History 58 21.3 Geological Settings 59 21.2 Deposit Model 59

21- Signature Page 60 22- Certificate of Qualification 61 Appendix A: Pictures from Site Visit 63 Appendix B: List of Claims 67 Appendix C: Sample Preparation Protocol 69 Appendix D: Analytical Protocols 71 Appendix E: Mineralogical Report 76


SGS

Ni 43-101 Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate - Whabouchi Lithium Deposit Page iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 - List of Abbreviations 9 Table 4.1 - Cantore Purchase Agreement Possible Additional Consideration Conditions 12 Table 6.1 - Summary of Historical Exploration Work 15 Table 7.1 - Summary of the Different Lithologies Occurring in the Area 19 Table 12.1 - Sets values for the Li-LG and Li-HG standards 26 Table 12.2 - Summary Statistics of Li-LG and Li-HG Standards 27 Table 12.3 - Pulps Re-analysis Comparison by Drill Hole Mineralised Intervals 31 Table 12.4 - SG Measurements Statistical Parameters 32 Table 13.1 - Final Drill Hole Database 34 Table 14.1 - Nisk-1 Ni43-101 Compliant Mineral Resources (June 2008) 36 Table 16.1 - Range of Li20 and BeO Analytical Data for Mineral Resource Estimation 39 Table 16.2 - Statistics for the 1.5 metre Composites for Li20 and BeO 40 Table 16.3 - Resource Block Model Parameters 46 Table 16.4 - Whabouchi Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate 51 Table 16.5 - Whabouchi Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate by Sector 51 Table 16.6 - Comparative Statistics for Composites and Blocks 52 Table 16.7 - Work Proposal Targets for Recommendation 1 and 2 54 Table 18.1 - Initial Mineral Resources for the Whabouchi Deposit at 0.5% Li20 Cut-off Grade 56

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 - General Location Map 10 Figure 4.2 - Map of the Property Mineral Titles 11 Figure 7.1 - Regional Geology Map 17 Figure 7.2 - Local Geological Map 18 Figure 7.3 - Map of the Property Geology with 2009-2010 Drill Holes Location 20 Figure 8.1- Schematic Representation of Regional Zonation of Pegmatites (from Sinclair 1996) 21 Figure 12.1 - Plots of the Variation of the Li-LG and Li-HG Standards with Time 27 Figure 12.2 - Plot of Variance of Analytical Blanks with Time 28 Figure 12.3 - Correlation Plots for Core Duplicates for SGS ICP90Q and ICM90A 29 Figure 12.4 - Correlation Plots for the Pulp Duplicates for SGS ICP90Q and ICM90A 30 Figure 12.5 - Correlation Plot of the Pulps Re-analysis 31 Figure 13.1 - Correlation plot of independent check samples 33 Figure 14.1 - Location Map Showing Adjacent Mineral Properties. 35 Figure 16.1 - Histogram of 1.5 metre Composites for Li20 40 Figure 16.2 - Histogram of 1.5 metre Composites for BeO 41 Figure 16.3 - Plan View Showing the Spatial Distribution of the Composites 41 Figure 16.4 - Longitudinal View Showing the Spatial Distribution of the Composites 42 Figure 16.5 - Modeled Envelopes with Mineralised Intervals in Section Views (Looking West) 43 Figure 16.6 - Modeled Envelopes with Mineralised Intervals in Plan Level Views 43 Figure 16.7 - Correlograms of Li20 Grade of 3 metre Composite in Mineralised 45 Figure 16.8 - Block Model vs. Mineralised Envelopes in Section Views (Looking West) 46 Figure 16.9 - Block Model vs. Mineralised Envelopes in Plan Level Views 47 Figure 16.10 -View of the Search Ellipsoids Used for the Different Interpolation Passes 48 Figure 16.11 - Block Model Classification in Section Views (Looking West) 49 Figure 16.12 - Block Model Classification in Plan Level Views 50 Figure 16.13 - Vertical Distribution of Mineral Resources by Sector (0.5% Li20 cut-off) 52 Figure 16.14 -Long Section of Sector West with Work Proposal for Recommendation 2 55


SGS,

Ni 43-101 Technical Report — Mineral Resource Estimate — Whabouchi Lithium Deposit Page 5

1- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SGS Canada Inc. — Geostat ("SGS Geostat") was commissioned by Nemaska Exploration Inc. ("Nemaska" or "Company") to prepare an independent estimate of the mineral resources of the

Whabouchi deposit based on data available from channels and drill holes completed in fall 2009 and spring 2010, in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 Standards and Disclosure for Mineral

Projects.

The Whabouchi property ("Property") is located in the James Bay area of the Province of Quebec,

approximately 40 km east of the community of Nemaska and 250 km north-northwest of the town of Chibougamau. The Property is accessible by the Route du Nord road, the main gravel road linking

Chibougamau and Nemaska, and crossing the Property near its center. The Nemiscau airport is 18 km west of the Property.

The Whabouchi property comprises one block containing 61 map-designated claims covering a total of 3,258 ha. The claims are 100% owned by Nemaska and were acquired via a purchase agreement with Victor Cantore Group, an option agreement with Golden Goose Resources Inc., and directly by map

designation. The property is subject to a 2% NSR royalty to Golden Goose Resources Inc and a 3% NSR royalty to Victor Cantore Group.

The Whabouchi property has been subject to numerous surveys conducted by the Quebec Government in

the area and by mineral exploration work completed by various mining companies since the 1960's. The initial exploration work conducted on the Wahbouchi spodumene-bearing pegmatite was done in 1962 by Canico where 1.44% Li20 over 83.2 m was intersected by drilling. Prior to Nemaska's 2009 and 2010

exploration program, the spodumene-bearing pegmatite has been explored in 2002 by Inco where Li20 grade ranging from 0.3% to 3.72% were returned from grab and channel samples.

The Whabouchi property is located in the northeast part of the Superior Province of the Canadian Shield craton, more specifically in the Lac des Montagnes volcano-sedimentary formation which is principally

composed of metasediments and mafic-ultramafic amphibolites. The Whabouchi spodumene-bearing

pegmatite swarm occurs in the center of the Property and is composed of a series of sub-parallel and generally sub-vertical pegmatites up to 130 m wide in total. The mineralised pegmatite swarm have a

general NE-SW orientation, extend to more than 1.3 km in strike and reaches a depth of more than 300 m below surface. The lithium mineralisation occurs in the spodumene-bearing pegmatite phase which composes most of the pegmatite swarm material. The mineralisation observed at Whabouchi is principally

lithium and beryllium with some trace amount of nobium and tantale. The lithium mineralisation occurs

mainly in medium to large spodumene minerals but is also observed in smaller petalite minerals.

Nemaska recently completed two exploration programs in the fall 2009 and spring 2010 on the Property.

A total of 37 surface channels and 67 drill holes for 12,755 m were completed as part of the exploration

programs. From these channels and drill holes, 5,161 samples were collected and sent for analysis. In addition to the channel sampling and drilling, 14 line-km of ground magnetic surveying covering the main mineralised pegmatites occurrence and 670 line-km of helicopter-borne magnetic surveying covering the Property were completed.

The author of the Technical Report visited the site from March 10 to 12, 2010 to conduct independent

analytical checks of drill core duplicate samples taken from Nemaska recent diamond drilling programs.

As part of the data verification program, the author completed a review of the QA/QC analytical protocol



and data implemented by the Company, conducted verification of the laboratories analytical certificates

and validated of the project digital database supplied by Nemaska for errors or discrepancies. The data verification outlined a potential small analytical bias from the results of the re-analysis of pulps from

samples selected from mineralised drill core intervals and recommendation was made to investigate the

issue potentially caused in part by the utilisation of different analytical methodologies. The author considers that the samples quality is good, that the samples are generally representative and that the final

drill hole database is adequate to support a Ni43-101 compliant mineral resources estimate.

A high definition mineralogical study was performed on six composite drill core samples. X-ray diffraction ("XRD") analysis indicates that all samples consist mainly of quartz, albite and microcline,

and muscovite with two samples containing only spodumene in proportion ranging between —14% and —16%, and three samples that contain both spodumene and petalite in proportion ranging between 10%

and 20% and between 3% and 13% respectively. A composite sample was prepared from five of the six

samples and mineral liberation analysis was carried out on five size fractions grinded to +4241m, -425/+212µm, -212/+106µm, -106/+38µm and -38µm. The liberation of Li minerals was characterised as

good for the 425 µm grind target (up to 86% liberation). The Li minerals liberation increases by —17%

from the coarse to the fine fraction (79% to 95%) but shows a very small increase in the liberation (-2-3%) below the 212 µm. Therefore, recovery of Li Minerals can be obtained a relatively coarse size (-200 µm). From the high definition mineralogical study, it is expected that a 6% to 6.5% Li20 spodumene

concentrate can be produced from heavy dense media separation followed by floatation.

Mineral resources were estimated using a computerised resource block model. Three-dimensional wireframe solids of the mineralisation were defined using channel and drill hole Li20 analytical data.

Composite data of 1.5 m in length was use to interpolate, using a inverse distance to the power square

methodology, the grade of 5 m by 2 m by 5 m blocks regularly spaced on a defined grid that fills the 3D wireframe solids. The interpolated blocks located below the bedrock/overburden interface comprise the mineral resources. The blocks were classified based on confidence level using proximity to composites,

composite grade variance and mineralised solids geometry.

Mineral resource estimate was calculated based on the interpolated blocks and using a bulk density of 2.68 t/m3. The initial Ni43-101 compliant mineral resources for the Whabouchi deposit are as follow:

Mineral Resource Estimate - Whabouchi Project

Cut-off Grade

Li20 (%)

Resource

Categories Tonnes* Li20 Grade (%) Be() Grade (ppm)

Li Metal**

(tonne)

Be Metal**

(tonne)

0.5%

Measured 1,885,000 1.60 458 14,000 300

Indicated 7,889,000 1.64 446 59,900 1,300

Measured +

Indicated 9,774,000 1.63 449 74,000 1,600

Inferred 15,396,000 1.57 420 112,100 2,300

Inferred mineral resources are exclusive of the measured and indicated resources. Bulk density of 2.68t/m3 used.

Effective date May 28, 2010. * Rounded to the nearest thousand **Rounded to the nearest hundred.

The author considers that there is potential to increase the mineral resources of the Whabouchi deposit

and to define mineral reserves for a potential open pit mining operation. The author recommends that


I~


Nemaska carry out all necessary work and property acquisition payments to secure the mining rights. The

proposed work program is as follows:

• Additional infill channels sampling at surface or shallow drilling focused on the western side of the deposit between sections 175 mE and 725 mE. The objective is to convert additional

resources to the Measured category between surface and the core of the mineral resources where the pegmatites are the thickest and thus more prospective for a potential open pit mining operation. A total of 1,200 m of channel or shallow drilling is proposed ($150,000 budget).

• Additional selective intermediate depth infill drilling in the same western thick area of the

pegmatite swarm with the objective of 1) increasing the Measured mineral resources by expanding core of the current Measured mineral resources and 2) extending the Indicated

resources categories at depth. A total of 3,000 m of intermediate depth drilling is proposed ($375,000 budget).

• Systematic infill drilling at 50 m drill spacing in the eastern side of the deposit between sections 725 mE and 1400 mE with the objective of converting the defined mineral resources to the Indicated category, first near surface then at depth. Drilling work for a total of 12 drill holes of

shallow and intermediate depth for 2,400 m is proposed ($300,000 budget).

• Additional deep drilling to test the down-dip extend of the deposit as demonstrated by the results from hole WHA-10-67 completed at the end of the spring 2010 drilling program. A100 m drill

spacing is recommended to define additional Inferred mineral resources. A total of 14 relatively deep drill holes for 4,000 m is proposed ($500,000 budget).

• Initial metallurgical study of the spodumene-bearing pegmatite mineralisation which includes grinding, floatation, pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical test work ($150,000 budget).

• A Preliminary Economic Assessment study (PEA) is recommended using an updated mineral

resource estimate and results from a metallurgical study in order to evaluation the economics of a potential open pit mining operation ($125,000 budget).


SGS


2- INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

2.1 General

This technical report was prepared by SGS Canada Inc. — Geostat ("SGS Geostat") for Nemaska Exploration Inc. ("Nemaska" or "Company") to support the disclosure of initial mineral resources. The

report describes the basis and methodology used for modeling and estimation of the Whabouchi lithium deposit from recent channels and drill holes conducted by Nemaska during the 2009 and 2010 exploration

programs. The report also presents a full review of the history, geology, sample preparation and analysis, data verification, and mineralogical study of the Whabouchi property ("Property") and provides

recommendations for future work.

SGS Geostat was commissioned by Nemaska on February 17, 2010 to prepare an independent estimate of the mineral resources of the Whabouchi deposit for an open pit mining perspective. Nemaska supplied

electronic format data from which SGS Geostat generate and validated a final database.

2.2 Terms of Reference

This report on the Whabouchi lithium deposit mineral resources was prepared by André Laferrière M.Sc.

P.Geo (with assistance from Lyne Maître M.Sc. Env.). The author is responsible for all sections of the report.

This technical report was prepared according to the guidelines set under "Form 43-101F1 Technical Report" of National Instrument 43-101 Standards and Disclosure for Mineral Projects. The certificate of

qualification for the Qualified Person responsible for this technical report can be found in section 22.

The author visited the Property from March 10 to 12, 2010, for a review of exploration methodology, sampling procedures and to conduct an independent check sampling of selected mineralised drill intervals.

Information in this report is in part based on the Qualifying Ni 43-101 Technical Report completed by

Solumines for Nemaska, dated October 2, 2009, and available publically on the Sedar website. The report

is based on critical review of the documents and information provided by Nemaska management and personnel. A complete list of the reports available to the author is found in the References section of this

report.

2.3 Units and Currency

All measurements in this report are presented in Système International d'Unités (SI) metric units, including metric tonnes (tonnes) or grams (g) for weight, metres (m) or kilometres (km) for distance,

hectare (ha) for area, and cubic metres (m3) for volume. All currency amounts are Canadian Dollars (C$) unless otherwise stated. Abbreviations used in this report are listed in Table 2.1.


scut


Table 2.1— List of Abbreviations

tonnes or t Metric tonnes

kg Kilograms

g Grams

km Kilometres

m Metres µm Micrometres

ha Hectares

m3 Cubic metres

% Percent sign

$ Dollar sign

° Degree

°C Degree Celcius

NSR Net smelter return

ppm Parts per million

NQ Drill core size (4.8 cm in diameter)

SG Specific Gravity

UTM Universal Transverse Mercator

2.4 Disclaimer

It should be understood that the mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have

demonstrated economic viability. The mineral resources presented in this Technical Report are estimates based on available sampling and on assumptions and parameters available to the author. The comments in

this Technical Report reflect SGS Canada Inc. — Geostat best judgement in light of the information available.

3- RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

The author of this Technical Report, Mr. André Laferrière, M.Sc. P.Geo, is not qualified to comment on

issues related legal agreements, royalties, permitting, and environmental matters. The author has relied upon the representations and documentations supplied by the Company management. The author has reviewed the mining titles, their status, the legal agreement and technical data supplied by Nemaska, and

any public sources of relevant technical information.

The author relies on the expertise of Dr. Tassos Grammatikopoulos, Ph.D. P.Geo, Senior Process

Mineralogist at SGS Canada Inc. — Advanced Mineralogy Network, Lakefield Facilities for the technical information contains in section 15 of this Technical Report.


SGT

80 160 km PREPARED BY : SGS CANADA INC.- GEOSTAT DATE : 07/07/2010

SOURCE Transports Québec

Laf Lafo

Réservo BAI ir

~pinaca -JAMES ET

ISTC

Riviè

RÉS DES

MI

FAU ASS

La Mistassi

IQ NICA

Chibou ama

E

istissini taga

Lac Manouane

Chapais

Réservoir Pipmuacan

Lac Saint-Jean

WHABOUCHI PROPERTY N E M A S ~CA exploration

Location Map WHABOUCHI PROPERTY


4- PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

4.1 Location

The Whabouchi property is located in the James Bay area of the Province of Quebec, approximately 40

km east of the community of Nemaska and 250 km north-northwest of the town of Chibougamau. The center of the Property is situated at about UTM 5,725,750 mN, 441,000 mE, NAD83 Zone 18. The

Property is accessible by the Route du Nord road, the main all-season gravel road linking Chibougamau

and Nemaska, and crossing the Property near its center. The Nemiscau airport is 18 km west of the Property. Figure 4.1 shows the general location of the Property.

Figure 4.1— General Location Map



4.2 Property Ownership and Agreements

The Property is composed of one block containing 61 map-designated claims covering a total of 3,258 ha. Sixteen (16) claims were acquired via a purchase agreement for 100% ownership from Victor Cantore

Group ("Cantore") on September 17, 2009, 43 claims were acquired through an option agreement for 100% ownership from Golden Goose Resources Inc. ("Golden Goose") on August 12, 2009, and 7 claims were acquired by map designation directly by the Nemaska. Since then, the titles from the Cantore

and the Golden Goose claims have been transferred to the Company name and 5 claims originally from the Golden Goose claim group were abandoned. As of July 8, 2010, all 61 claims are in good standing. The expiry dates for the claims range from April 15, 2011 to January 24, 2012. The mining titles are listed

in Appendix B and are shown in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 — Map of the Property Mineral Titles

439000 mE 440006 mE

000 mE 443000 mE 444600 mE

27;i ai,lpr V i. ~ . +~. l.

t. ,41' l' !

Li,~B ~~

sm

~

r~ ,~ }~, 1,--1( Tc ~ ~ /-• ~` fi ` d

t~ g

.

,

~

!

~.

~

a ~ ~

f S K ~ r

_f'~~ a 11.i

~ k

£ F S~

ryryT ~gy ~ eV . ~]T,, •

{,-

~R a < ~ ~

,~ 1

~

'• o/

r T '

p ~ ° ^`

~--~ ~ ,

$

~r '

~ n . ~ ~ hr

_

1::,-,e a I- I I 4

4~

~ ~F - --

,Fr

~

`

. ; • ,-.9

/

I- 1

~ .~ ~7p. J##Y

ry 1-

n ~ /,_ ~O ~

f

~ c

. r

~ pp A. . / ~

~

-,4- ~ ~j

~

` ~v~ 44 ,

~ . ~~ .~ I n

~ ~. . yj A'e p ~N

2.

gx ~ . ~

i.- 1,,- I' ~ ~ 1 f

_•.i .

E

$1.'r ~ . ~

~~ v+

,p~p M1' '

~~è ü ~ f ~ ~ g~~he A ~ ,p

p 4 ~` ~ ~ ,- 1'

~x

e s~~* ~~

fi ` :~.

%

g ~~ P5 r ~• 4

,h~

} ~'`

~

8`

~ ~ HemaskaE~loratlonInc.

Whabouchi Project Mineral Titles Map

r

Jg~

,

y • A

:

r

~

.

J $

' .01.1,. , .... . ,_,._

um... n


SG$


The Golden Goose claims were acquired as part of the Lac Levac Option Agreement signed on August

12, 2009 and amended on November 11, 2009. The purchase option agreement covers a total of 594 claims held by Golden Goose in the Nemiscau area as part of the Lac Levac and Lac des Montagnes

properties which include the Nisk-1 Ni-Cu deposit. Nemaska has exercised its purchase option and completed the acquisition on January 15, 2010. The Company has paid a non-refundable initial amount of

$150,000 to obtain the option and a non-refundable amount of $50,000 in consideration of the amendment of the agreement. Nemaska has acquired 100% ownership based on the following general terms: 1) pay an amount of $450,000, 2) complete an initial public offering of a minimum of $5 million, 3) issue $1.5

million in common shares of the Company accompanied by a warrant for each common share, and 4) issue $1 million in the form of a convertible debenture at 8% interest with various conditions attached.

Pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement, Golden Goose retains a 2% NSR, of which 1% can be

repurchased by Nemaska for an amount of $1 million within the first 3 years (Nemaska IPO, 2009).

The Cantore claims were acquired through a purchase and sale agreement signed on September 17, 2009. The agreement covers 16 claims purchase for an amount of $10,000, 2.1 million common shares of the

Company, and a commitment to pay the fees and fund the exploration work needed for renewal. Furthermore, a maximum of $1.4 million and 1.4 million common shares of the Company might have to

be paid and issue to Cantore according to exploration investments and results attained on the claims, see Table 4.1 below. Cantore retains a 3% NSR, of which 1% can be repurchased by Nemaska for an amount of $1 million (Nemaska IPO, 2009).

As per discussion with the Company management, all payments and obligations of Nemaska to Cantore and Golden Goose are in good standing.

Table 4.1— Cantore Purchase Agreement Possible Additional Consideration Conditions

Exploration Work and Results Cash Shares of the Company

$2.5 million $100,000 100,000

$5.0 million $100,000 100,000

$7.5 million $100,000 100,000

$10.0 million $100,000 100,000

$12.5 million $100,000 100,000

$15.0 million $100,000 100,000

Pre-feasibility $300,000 300,000

Feasibility study confirming production $500,000 500,000

Total $1.4 million 1.4 million shares

4.3 Royalties Obligations

As described in Section 4.2, the property is subject to two separate royalties. The first concerns the 38 claims acquired from Golden Goose where a 2% NSR is retained by Golden Goose, of which 1% can be

repurchased by Nemaska for $1 million within the first 3 years. The second relates to the 16 claims


GS


acquired from the Cantore. Cantore retains a 3% NSR, of which 1% can be repurchased by Nemaska for $1 million.

4.4 Permits and Environmental Liabilities

The main permit required to conduct exploration work on the Property is the forest intervention permit delivered by the provincial Ministère des Ressources Naturelles et de la Faune ("MRNF"). A certificate

of authorisation from the Ministère du Developpement Durable de l'Environnement et des Parcs ("MDDEP") is also necessary to conduct mechanical stripping covering more than 1,000 m3 of

overburden. On July 12, 2010, the Company management confirmed having valid work permits and

authorisations.

To the knowledge of the author, there are no environmental liabilities pertaining to the Property.

5- ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

5.1 Accessibility

The Property is easily accessible via the Route du Nord road that crosses the Property near its center. This

road is linking the town of Chibougamau, located approximately 250 km to the SSE, and leads to the

community of Nemaska and the Route de la Baie-James road.

5.2 Physiography

The Property is characterised by a relatively flat topography with the exception of the local ridge where

the more competent pegmatites occur. The elevation above sea level ranges from 275 m at the lowest

point on the Property to 325 m at the top of the pegmatite ridge, with an average elevation of 300 m. Lakes and rivers cover approximately 15% of the Property area. The fauna in the area is typical of the taiga environment observed in the region with a mix of black spruce forest and peat moss-covered

swamps. A portion of the Property was devastated by forest fires several years ago. There is no permafrost at this latitude and the overburden cover ranges in depth from 0 m near the ridge to 25 m in

the south part of the Property.

5.3 Climate

The climate of the area is sub-arctic. This climate zone is characterized by long, cold winters and short, cool summers. Daily average temperature ranges from -20,C in January to +17,C in July. Break-up

usually occurs early in June, and freeze-up in early November.


scut


5.4 Local Resources and Infrastructures

The nearest infrastructure with general services is the Relais Routier Nemiscau Camp, located 12 km west of the Property, where the Company has setup its field office and core logging facilities. The community

of Nemaska located 30 km west also has accommodation and general services. The area is deserved by the Nemiscau airport serviced by regular Air Creebec flights and charters flights. The Property is deserved by cellular network from the principal Canadian services provider. There is no mining

infrastructure on the Property

Hydro-Québec possesses several infrastructures and facilities in the area including the Poste Albanel and Poste de la Nemiscau electrical stations located approximately 20 km east and 12 km west from the

property respectively. Electrical transmission lines connecting both stations mn alongside the Route du

Nord road and crosses the Property near its center.

6- HISTORY

This section is modified from Théberge (2009) and includes property evaluation work conducted in 2009.

6.1 Regional Government Surveys

Numerous geological surveys and geoscientific studies have been conducted by the Quebec Government

in the James Bay area. Geological surveys in the 1960s (Valiquette 1964, 1965 and 1975) cover the entire Property area. In 1998, the MRNF released the results of a regional bottom lake sediment survey completed in 1997.

6.2 Mineral Exploration Work

The first exploration reported in the area dates back to 1962, with work by Canico over a lithium-bearing

pegmatite found by the geologists of the Quebec Bureau of Mines. That same year, Canico drilled 2

packsack drill holes on the pegmatite, followed in 1963 by 3 diamond drill holes on the same pegmatite ridge. A total of 463.11 m were drilled. The best result obtained was 1.44% Li20 over 83.2 m (Elgring

1962).

No exploration is reported for the next 10 years. In 1973, James Bay Nickel Ventures (Canex Placer) did a large-scale geological reconnaissance that covered the property (Burns 1973). From 1974 to 1982,

exploration work is exclusively reported by the Société de Développement de la Baie James ("SDBJ"). They mainly did large scale geochemical surveys, followed by geological reconnaissance of the anomalies (Pride 1974, Gleeson 1975 and 1976). Two exploration programs, one in 1978, the other in

1980, were aimed at lithium exploration, with the evaluation of the Whabouchi spodumene-bearing pegmatite (Goyer et al. 1978, Bertrand 1978, Otis 1980, Fortin 1981, and Charbonneau 1982). No channel

sampling or drill holes are reported. No work was conducted from 1982 to 1987.

In 1987, Westmin Resources completed an airborne Dighem III survey. A part of this survey was located immediately east of the property (McConnell 1987). In 1987-1988, Muscocho Exploration also completed

ground Mag and VLF surveys that covered a major part of the property. The spodumene-bearing


SGT


pegmatite gave a weak Mag and VLF response. The Muscocho Exploration efforts were oriented toward

the search for massive sulphides; a program of 14 holes was completed, 11 of them on the southern part of the Whabouchi property. Several arsenic anomalies were obtained, with a maximum of 3,750 ppm As in Hole ML-88-8 (Brunelle 1987, Gillian 1987 and Zuiderveen 1988).

In 2002, while exploring for tantalum, Inco re-sampled the spodumene-bearing pegmatite, taking 11

channel and 7 grab samples. Inco obtained a best value of 0.026% Ta, and Li20 values ranging from 0.3%

to 3.72% (Babineau 2002).

In 2008, Golden Goose Resources visited and sampled the Valiquette (Ni) and chromite showings south of the Whabouchi property (Beaupre 2008).

The last work in the area was conducted by Nemaska as part of the Qualifying NI43-101 Technical Report. During the site visit, several outcrops of spodumene-bearing pegmatite were observed and 9

samples were collected and analyzed for Li20 and BeO. The highest and the lowest results obtained during the site visit are the grab sample # 946511 with a value of 6.3% Li20 and grab sample # 946508 at 1.18% Li2O (Théberge 2009).

Table 6.1 summarizes the historical work conducted on or nearby the Property.

Table 6.1— Summary of Historical Exploration Work

Year Company Exploration Results

1962- 1963

Canico GM 57880

5 holes totalling 463.11 m drilled on the

spodumene-bearing

pegmatite

Best assay result of 1.44% Li20 over 83.2 m.

1973 James Bay Nickel Ventures GM 34021

Summary report geological

reconnaissance July-

August 1973

Large-scale geological reconnaissance survey

1974 SDBJ GM 34044

Lake sediment geochemistry

Large scale geochemical survey

1975 SDBJ GM 34046

Geochemical report on a lake sediment survey, Bereziuk Lake, Eastmain River and

Rupert River areas


1976 SDBJ GM 34047

126 maps from a

geochmical survey (lake

sediment), Bereziuk Lake, Eastmain River and Rupert River areas


1978 SDBJ GM 34175

Verification of

geochemical anomalies Exploration oriented toward the search for U3O8 bearing pegmatites

1978 SDBJ Report on a spodumene- Examination of the pegmatite Channel


SGS,

Ni 43-101 Technical Report — Mineral Resource Estimate — Whabouchi Lithium Deposit

Page 16

GM 38134 bearing pegmatite. sampling recommended. Gold prospection

along the south shore of Lac des Montagnes.

1980 SDBJ GM 37998

Lien Project. Regional Lithium Exploration.

Li prospection oriented by a large-scale

geochemical survey. The Whabouchi spodumene-bearing pegmatite was

examined. (large-scale prospecting)

1981 SDBJ GM 38445

Regional magnetic and airborne Input survey.

Covered part of the Whabouchi property

1982 SDBJ GM 39991

Geology and geophysics (Mag + MaxMin) targeted on Input

anomalies.

Three grids surveyed: Grid 6 was south of Lac du Spodumène. Other grids were located several km to the east.

1987 Westmin

Resources GM 45242

Dighem III survey,

Nemiscau project

Small airborne survey immediately east of

the property.

1987 Muscocho

Explorations Ltd. GM 44641

Geophysical survey

(Mag) over the Lac des

Montagnes property

Covered the pegmatite area. A weak

magnetic anomaly was observed over the

Libearing pegmatite. 1987 Muscocho


VLF survey over the

Lac des Montagnes

property

Covered the pegmatite area, which is

represented by a weakly-conductive area

due to the pegmatite or its contacts.

1988 Muscocho


14-hole drilling program, with 11 holes

drilled on the property. The remaining 3 holes

were drilled just south

of the property.

Several arsenic anomalies observed, up to 3,750 ppm in Hole ML-88-8. Traces of

spodumene were also observed in a small pegmatite in Hole ML-88-04.

2002 Inco Ltd. GM 59815

Spodumene Lake Project, Rock Sampling

and Assaying,

Assessment report

Exploration oriented toward tantalum

potential.11 channel and 7 grab samples returned values up to 0.026% Ta over 1.0

m. Li20 assays varied from 0.3% to 3.72%.

2008 Golden Goose

Resources GM 63939

Property visit on the

Valiquette and chromite

showings

Property visit just south of the Whabouchi

property. The Li-bearing pegmatite was not

visited.

2009 Nemaska Exploration

Property visit, historical review, grab sampling

and assaying, Ni 43-101

technical report.

Several outcrops of spodumene-bearing pegmatites sampled. Nine grab samples

returned Li20 values from 1.18% to 6.3%.


SGS,

111MI Couvenwo a.kaecqu.

PROVING! DU 60►IRKYR [ARCNESNN

- Soue-p.we.pnnwque - P.Aa+Vu. ® Sq4111.0veK•.W40r4i.

- Soulp.wner tlIrlidfalltillif •• 50r.4A+ntr+vlorwP4b1i9i+

_ 8anpe rekar.puP

Obeo-dre.CMaeien

Falk Pent *mangos

%UM. deepurpa..ea

UFO elf WW1

FOSSE OE L UMOAVA

i1n 11Iy..a

* Anroolemn

or

m mq


7- GEOLOGICAL SETTING

7.1 Regional Geology

The Whabouchi property is located in the northeast part of the Superior Province of the Canadian Shield

craton. The Superior Province extends from Manitoba to Quebec, and is mainly made up of Archean-age

rocks. The general metamorphism is at the greenschist facies, except in the vicinity of intrusive bodies, where it reaches the amphibolite-to-granulite facies. In Quebec, the eastern extremity of the Superior

Province has been classified into the following sub-provinces, from south to north: Pontiac, Abitibi, Opatica, Nemiscau, Opinaca, La Grande, Ashuanipi, Bienville and Minto (Hocq 1994). According to Card

and Ciesielski (1986), the area covered by the Property is located in the Opinaca or Nemiscau sub-province. Figure 7.1 shows the position of the Property in the Superior Province.

Figure 7.1— Regional Geology Map

7.2 Property Geology

The Whabouchi property is located in the Lac des Montagnes volcano-sedimentary formation and sits

between the Champion Lake granotoïds and orthogneiss and the Opatica NE, which is made of orthogneiss and undifferentiated granitoïds. From the northwest to the southeast, the property is underlain by the Champion Lake granitoïds, a grey oligoclase gneiss and then by the Lac des Montagnes formation.

The Lac des Montagnes belt is approximately 7 km wide in the area, oriented northeast, and is principally


SGT

SI

D w.........

.r.r.w..~rs« clm

..R«I. ~ •.w...-n...o.ow «.. L1 u wur.•un...+wwe.. ~....~..~w..o....

Nemaska Exploration Inc. Vocal Geology

WHABOUCHIPROPERTY

Ive~ec m:50{(MDAES 2004022,10

NULamL./

r ~.... rNw

NEYISCAIFI

IN-1)

0A16CAUd

BANDS DV LAC DES NONrADNE$ MED

OpATICA BYO lOe-II

BYTE.] MOTET-EVANS

Iwlry

DPATIGA NF

(ONE)

OVATICA SUD

IOGII

•


composed of metasediments (quartz-rich paragneiss, biotite-sillimanite-staurotide schist and garnet-

bearing schist) and amphibolites (mafic and ultramafic metavolcanics). These rocks are strongly deformed and cut by late granitoïds (leucogranites and biotite-bearing white pegmatites) (Valiquette

1975). Figure 7.2 shows the location of the property relative to the Lac des Montagnes, the Champion

Lake and Opatica NE formations. Table 7.1 summarises the different lithologies occurring in the area.

Figure 7.2 — Local Geological Map


SGS


Page 19

Table 7.1— Summary of the Different Lithologies Occurring in the Area

Pleistocene and

Holocene

Moraines, eskers, alluvial deposits, reticulated peat bogs, morainic belts P

RE

CA

MB

RIA

N

11: Diabase 10: Pegmatites a) White with muscovite, tourmaline, garnet and magnetite b) Pink, with microcline 9: White and pink granite 8: Grey hornblende-oligoclase granite with phenocrist of pink microcline 7: Ultramafic rocks: Serpentinites, trémolite rocks 6: Hornblende-plagioclase gneiss 5: Metasomatic anthophyllite-cordierite rocks (mineralization susceptible) 4: Paragneiss or biotite schists; garnet-biotite schists; porphyroblastic schist:

Garnet, sillimanite, biotite Garnet, cordierite, biotite Garnet, andalousite, biotite Staurotide, sillimanite, andalousite, biotite Sillimanite, cordierite, andalousite, biotite Amphibole paragneiss

3: Quartz-rich paragneiss; sillimanite, sericite and quartz schist; impure quartzite 2: Pillowed metavolcanic amphibolites 1: Oligoclase gneiss

The Whabouchi spodumene-bearing pegmatite swarm occurs in the center of the Property, between Lac

du Spodumene and Lac des Montagnes, and is located on the claims purchased from Cantore. The

pegmatite swarm is composed of a series of sub-parallel and generally sub-vertical pegmatites having a

general NE-SW orientation. The pegmatites are hosted by oligoclase gneiss. The known extend of the

Whabouchi pegmatites is approximately 1.3 km long, up to 130 m wide, and reaches a depth of more than

300 m below surface. The spodumene minerals are light green and can be up 30 cm in length. Figure 7.3

shows the Property geology with location of drill holes from the 2009-2010 exploration campaign.


SGS

436000 mE 437000 mE 438000 mE 439000 mE 440000 mE 441000 mE 442000 mE 443000 mE 444000 mE

8

z E

z

z E

z

8

z

z E

z

8 a

Map Legend

A.9® MN,. qula

z ~wynm ~ anlePmoeawm..myna,.

gE .epco,e Wren m.neltimelen

aô ~o.e..h~..n.ew.~wpeK=~.w+ve,... . ..o,~

~bM.r O mamma o-eaae..cx.r.

Whabouchi Project Property Geology Map

Nemaska Exploration Inc.

eeethiabli

as


Figure 7.3 — Map of the Property Geology with 2009-2010 Drill Holes Location


SGS

Ni 43-101 Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate - Whabouchi Lithium Deposit Page 21

8- DEPOSIT MODEL

The deposit model for the lithium and beryllium mineralisation occurring on the Whabouchi property is a granitic pegmatites type, more specifically the rare-element pegmatites sub-type due to the presence of

spodumene. Rare-element pegmatites typically occur in metamorphic terranes and are commonly peripheral to larger granitic plutons, which in many cases represent the parental granite from which the pegmatite was derived. The Late Archean pegmatites of the Superior Province are typically localised

along deep fault systems which in many areas coincide with major metamorphic and tectonic boundaries.

Most pegmatites range in size from a few metres to hundreds of metres long and from centimetric-scale to several hundred metres wide and even more for a few known cases. Rare-element pegmatites can have

complex internal structures where the internal units in complex pegmatites consist of a sequence of zones, mainly concentric, which conform roughly to the shape of the pegmatite, and differ in mineral

assemblages and textures. From the margin inward, these zones consist of a border zone, a wall zone, intermediate zones, and a core zone. The border zone is generally thin and typically aplitic (fine grained) in texture. The wall zone, composed mainly of quartz-feldspar-muscovite, is wider and coarser grained

than the border zone and marks the beginning of coarse crystallisation characteristic of pegmatites. Intermediate zones, where present, are more complex mineralogically and contain a variety of

economically important minerals such as sheet mica, beryl and spodumene. In the intermediate zones of

some pegmatites, individual crystals size can reaches metres to tens of metres. The core zone consists mainly of quartz, either as solid masses or as euhedral crystals. Rare-element pegmatites typically

associated with granitic intrusions are distributed in zonal patterns around such intrusions. In general, the pegmatites most enriched in rare metals and volatile components are located farthest from intrusions (see Figure 8.1). Rare-element pegmatites are generally considered to form by primary crystallisation from

volatile-rich siliceous melt related to highly differenciated granitic magmas. The lithology of the source rocks for these melts is a major control on the ultimate composition of subsequently formed rare-element

pegmatites (Sinclair 1996).

Figure 8.1— Schematic Representation of Regional Zonation of Pegmatites (from Sinclair 1996)

~- -_,,,/

1

E Li, CS `,` -', ., s Be, Ta, Nb

' r 01101 % o ; I Li Increasing albitization,

'.Ta, Nb volatile enrichment,

' Be Nb, Ta complexity of zoning, Be extent of replacement

Barren 0 -1 zone

km


SGS


9- MINERALISATION

The mineralisation observed in the Whabouchi pegmatites is principally lithium and beryllium with some

trace amount of nobium and tantale. Rubidium is also present in microcline (feldspar) and muscovite

(mica). Two distinct phases are observed in the Whabouchi pegmatites. The mineralised spodumene-bearing phase composes most of the pegmatite material. A second less abundant phase occurring on the Property is a non-mineralised white pegmatite composed mainly of quartz and feldspar. The lithium

mineralisation occurs mainly in medium to large spodumene minerals (up to 30 cm in size) but is also observed in smaller petalite minerals. The beryllium mineralisation occurs in beryl. The lithium mineralisation sampled from recent drill holes averages 1.62% Li20 and ranges up to 4.24% Li20. The beryllium mineralisation averages 158 ppm BeO and ranges up to 6383 ppm BeO.

10- EXPLORATION AND DRILLING

The Company began working on the Property in October of 2009 with a first exploration program that

lasted 25 days. During the fall 2009 exploration program, mechanical stripping successfully exposed the

spodume-bearing pegmatites in 16 trenches spaced between 50 and 100 m apart and covering 1,000 m in

strike length. From these trenches, 37 channels were cut and a total of 281 samples were collected for

analysis. In addition to the trenching work, 7 diamond drill holes were completed including one hole abandoned for technical reasons. All successful drill holes have intersected pegmatites zones. A second exploration program was conducted from January 15 to April 30, 2010. During that program, 59 drill holes totalling 11,630 m were completed. In addition to drilling, 14 line-km of ground magnetic

surveying covering the main mineralised occurrence and 670 line-km of helicopter-borne magnetic

surveying covering the Property were completed. Later in May 2010, the Company completed mechanical

stripping of the south contact of the main mineralised zone over more than 750 m and a 1.2 km access road from the Route du Nord main road.

The drilling conducted at Whabouchi during the 2009 and 2010 exploration programs totals 67 NQ size holes for 12,755 m including one hole abandoned for technical reasons. From these drill holes, 4,980

samples for analysis were collected representing approximately 40% of the drill core material.

11- SAMPLING METHOD AND APPROACH

This section is based on information supplied by Nemaska and observations made during the independent

verification program conducted at the project site by SGS Geostat form March 10 to 12, 2010.

The Whabouchi project is located less than 16 km east of the Nemiscau Camp where the project office,

core logging and storage facilities are located. The evaluation of the geological setting and Spodumene mineralisation on the Property is based on observations and sampling from surface (through mapping,

grab and channel samples) and diamond drilling. The channel and drill core logging and sampling was conducted at the Property or at the nearby project facilities. All samples collected by Nemaska during the

course of the 2009 and 2010 exploration programs were sent to the Table Jamesienne de Concertation Minière ("TJCM") preparation laboratory located in Chibougamau, Québec and then shipped to SGS


SGT


Canada Inc. - Mineral Services ("SGS Minerals") laboratory in Don Mills, Ontario for analysis. The

remaining drill core is stored on site nearby the Nemiscau camp.

All channel samples and drill core handling was done on site with logging and sampling processes

conducted by employees and contractors of Nemaska. The observations of lithology, structure,

mineralisation, sample number and location were noted by the geologists and geotechnicians on hardcopy then recorded in a Microsoft Access digital database. Copies of the database are stored on external hard

drive for security.

Channel samples were collected from two diamond saw cuts (typically 4 cm in width and 4 cm in depth). Each sample is generally 1 m long and broken directly from the outcrop, identified and numbered then

placed in a new plastic bag. Drill core of NQ size was placed in a wooden core boxes and delivered twice a day by the drill contractor to the project core logging facilities at Nemiscau camp. The drill core was

first aligned and measured by a technician for core recovery. The core recovery measurements were

followed by the RQD measurements. After a summary review of the core, it was logged and sampling intervals were defined by a geologist. Before sampling, the core was photographed using a digital camera

and the core boxes were identified with Box Number, Hole ID, From and To using aluminum tags. Due to the hardness of the pegmatite units, the recovery of the channel material and the drill core is generally very good.

Sampling intervals were determined by the geologist, marked and tagged based on observations of the lithology and mineralisation. The typical sampling length is 1 m but can vary according to lithological

contact between the mineralised pegmatite and the host rock. In general, one host rock sample was

collected each side from the contacts with the pegmatite. The drill core samples were split in two halves with one half placed in a new plastic bag along with the sample tag; the other half was replaced in the

core box with the second sample tag for reference. The third sample tag were archived on site. The samples were then catalogued and placed in a rice bags for shipping. The sample shipment forms were prepared on site with one copy inserted in one of the shipment bags, one copy sent by email to TJCM, and

one copy kept for reference. The samples were transported on a regular basis by Nemaska's employees or contractors by pick-up truck directly to the TJCM facilities in Chibougamau. At the TJCM laboratory, the

samples shipment is verified and a confirmation of shipment reception and content is emailed to Nemaska's project manager. The remaining core samples kept for reference are stored in covered metal

racks in a controlled storage facilities located less than 3 km from the Nemiscau camp.

SGS Geostat validated the exploration processes and core sampling procedures used by Nemaska as part of an independent verification program. SGS Geostat concluded that the drill core handling, logging and sampling protocols are at conventional industry standard and conform to generally accepted best

practices. SGS Geostat considers that the samples quality is good and that the samples are generally representative. Finally, SGS Geostat is confident that the system is appropriate for the collection of data

suitable for the estimation of a NI 43-101 compliant mineral resource estimate.


SGS


12- SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS AND SECURITY

12.1 Sample Preparation and Analyses

Channels and drill core samples collected during the 2009 and 2010 exploration programs are transported

directly by Nemaska representatives to the TJCM laboratory facilities in Chibougamau, Quebec for

sample preparation. The submitted samples are pulverized there to respect the specifications of the analytical protocol and then shipped to SGS Minerals for analysis. The author visited the TJCM facilities on March 10, 2010.

All samples received at TJCM are inventoried and weighted prior to being processed. Drying is done to

samples having excess humidity. Sample material is crushed to 80-85% passing 2 mm using jaw crushers. Ground material is split using a split riffle to obtain a 275-300 g sub-sample. Sub-samples are finally pulverized using a two components ring mill (ring and puck mill) or a single component ring mill (flying

disk mill) to 85-90% passing 200 meshes (75 µm). The balance of the crushed sample (reject) is placed

into the original plastic bag. A preparation protocol summary for TJCM is included in Appendix C. The pulverized samples are finally sent to SGS Minerals using a Canada Post secured delivery services.

The analyses are conducted at the SGS Minerals laboratory located in Don Mills, Ontario which is an

ISO/IEC 17025 laboratory accredited by the Standards Council of Canada. There are two analytical methods used for the pulverised samples from the Whabouchi Project. The first analytical method used by SGS Minerals is the 55 elements analysis using sodium peroxide fusion followed by both Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry ("ICP-OES") and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass

Spectrometry ("ICP-MS") finish (SGS code ICM90A). This method uses 10 g of the pulp material and

returns different detection limit for each element and includes 10 ppm lower limit detection for Li. The ICM90A analytical method was conducted at the beginning of exploration program to verify the content

of other element in the mineralisation. The second method processes 20 g of pulp material and used the ore grade sodium peroxide fusion with ICP-OES finish methodology with a lower detection limit of

0.01% Li (SGS code ICP90Q). The ICP90Q analytical method was used at the beginning of the exploration program on samples analysed by ICM90A returning values greater than 0.3% Li and 500 ppm Be. The ICP90Q method for Li and Be was later used on a more systematic basis. Analytical results are

sent electronically to Nemaska and results are compiled in a MS Excel spreadsheet by the project manager.

The analytical protocol used at ALS Canada Inc. — Chemex laboratory ("ALS Chemex") is the ore grade

lithium four-acid digestion with Inductively Coupled Plasma — Atomic Emission Spectrometry ("ICP-AES") (ALS code Li-OG63). The Li-OG63 analytical method uses 4 g of pulp material and returns a lower detection limit of 0.01% Li.

The analytical protocols are detailed in Appendix D.

12.2 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Procedure

Above the laboratory quality assurance quality control ("QA/QC") routinely implemented by SGS

Minerals and ALS Chemex using pulp duplicate analysis, Nemaska developed an internal QA/QC protocol consisting in the insertion of analytical standards, blanks and core duplicates on a systematic basis with the samples shipped to SGS Minerals. The company also sent pulps from selected mineralised


SGT


intersection to ALS Chemex for re-analysis. SGS Geostat did not visit the SGS Minerals or ALS Chemex

facilities or conduct an audit of the laboratories.

12.2.1 Analytical Standards

Two different standards were used by Nemaska for the internal QA/QC program: one low grade lithium ("Li-LG") and one high grade lithium ("Li-HG") standards. Both standards are custom made reference

materials coming from historical drill core from the Whabouchi deposit itself The preparation for the standards material has been conducted by TJCM using the same sample preparation protocol used for the

regular Whabouchi samples. Each standard inserted in the sample series weight between 90 and 120g. In

order to evaluate their expected values, Li-HG and Li-LG standards have been analysed 6 times each at the SGS Mineral Services laboratory in Don Mills, Ontario and 5 times each at the ALS Chemex

laboratory in North Vancouver, British-Colombia. Both facilities are accredited ISO 17025 laboratory.

The analytical protocol used at SGS Mineral Services is the ore grade sodium peroxide fusion with ICP-OES finish described in section 12.1. The analytical protocol used at ALS Chemex is the ore grade

lithium four-acid digestion with Inductively Coupled Plasma — Atomic Emission Spectrometry ("ICP-AES") finish described in section 12.1.

For the Li-LG standard, the analytical results returned from SGS Minerals for the 6 samples average

0.46% Li versus an average of 0.45% Li for the 5 samples submitted to ALS Chemex. For the Li-HG standards, the average of the 6 samples returned 0.72% Li versus an average of 0.71% Li for the 5

samples processed at ALS Chemex. Each laboratory shows relatively consistent analytical results from one sample to another for each standard analysed. The averages for each standard also show a good correlation between SGS Minerals and ALS Chemex. The number of data is not statistically significant

to calculate standard deviation ("Std.Dev.") parameters which can be used to determine the success/failure of standards. Table 12.1 shows the results for each standard using both analytical

protocols.


SGS


Table 12.1- Sets Values for the Li-LG and Li-HG Standards

SGS Minerals - ICP90Q Analytical Method

Low Grade Standard (Li-LG) Low Grade Standard (Li-LG)

Sample Li (%) Sample Li (%)

Li-LG 1 0.47 Li-HG 1 0.72

Li-LG 2 0.46 Li-HG 2 0.72

Li-LG 3 0.46 Li-HG 3 0.72

Li-LG 4 0.46 Li-HG 4 0.71

Li-LG 5 0.46 Li-HG 5 0.71

Li-LG 6 0.46 Li-HG 6 0.72

Average 0.46 Average 0.72

ALS Chemex - Li-OG63 Analytical Method

Low Grade Standard (Li-LG) Low Grade Standard (Li-LG)

Sample Li (%) Sample Li (%)

Li-LG 1 0.44 Li-HG 1 0.72

Li-LG 2 0.44 Li-HG 2 0.69

Li-LG 3 0.45 Li-HG 3 0.71

Li-LG 4 0.47 Li-HG 4 0.72

Li-LG 5 0.44 Li-HG 5 0.72

Average 0.45 Average 0.71

Averages for Both SGS Minerals and ALS Chemex Methods

Standard Li (%) Standard Li (%)

Li-LG 0.46 Li-HG 0.71

The insertion of the analytical standards Li-LG and Li-HG did not begin until drill hole WHA-09-15.

After that, one standard was inserted in the sample series at a rate of one every 25 regular samples,

alternating between the Li-LG and Li-HG standards. A total of 98 Li-LG and 99 Li-HG standards were analysed by the ICP90Q method in the samples series during the 2010 exploration campaign, representing

3.8% of the samples analysed. In order to determine the QC warning (±2x Std.Dev.) and QC failure (±3x

Std.Dev.) intervals for the Li-LG and Li-HG standards, the Std.Dev. parameters returned from the 98 Li-LG and 99 Li-HG analytical results are considered.

From the 98 Li-LG standard analysed, 21 falls outside the QC Warning interval and 1 is considered a failure as it fall outside the QC Failure interval. After reviewing the only failure, it is considered

acceptable as it returned 13% of the expected value for Li-LG. From the 99 Li-HG standards analysed, 13

falls outside the QC Warning interval and 6 returned values outside the QC Failure interval. After reviewing the 6 failures, they are considered acceptable as the falls within 10-13% of the expected value

for Li-HG. Expected values for both standards calculated from the initial analytical results returned from SGS Minerals and ALS Chemex seems relatively low compare to the averages returned from the SGS

Minerals analytical results for the standards inserted during the regular samples series. SGS Geostat recommends conducting additional analysis of the material for both standards in order to better define statistically reliable data.


SGT

0.9

0.85

0.8

J 0.75

0.7

0.65

0.6

Resultsfor Li-LG Standard

rA r g ~ ~ Date (dd/mm/yy) ~

Resultsfor Li-HG Standard

r Date (dd/mm/yy) ~ ~

~M • • e• • • ~ •~ : 4 • •

-3 Ste' _ ❑nv

0.6

0.55

0.5

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

• +3 Std. Dolt.

•

•

3 Std. Dolt.


Page 27

Table 12.2 reports the statistics of the Li-LG and Li-HG standards. Figure 12.1 shows plots of the

variation of both standards with time.

Table 12.2 - Summary Statistics of Li-LG and Li-HG Standards

Standard Count Expected Li (%) Observed Li (%)

% of Expected QC Warning QC Failure Average Average Std. Dev.

Li-LG

Li-HG

98

99

0.46

0.71

0.47 0.014

0.74 0.021

102%

104%

21

13

1

6

Figure 12.1— Plots of the Variation of the Li-LG and Li-HG Standards with Time

12.2.2 Analytical Blanks

Nemaska implemented the insertion of analytical blanks in the sample series as part of their internal QA/QC protocol. The analytical blanks are made of pure crystalline silica powder pre-pulverized to 200 meshes. The silica material is bought in 25 kg bags from the industrial minerals supplier Unimin. The

blank samples weight between 90 g and 120 g and are inserted at every 20 samples in the sample series at the end of the sample preparation procedure by TJCM before shipping to SGS Minerals. Unfortunately,

because the analytical blanks are inserted after the crushing, splitting and pulverising stage, they cannot be utilised to determine if there has been contamination in the sample preparation. As part of their internal QA/QC protocol, TJCM has inserted coarse crystalline silica at the beginning of the sample preparation

stage at a rate of one coarse silica sample for every 75 regular samples. These internal silica blanks were sent to SGS Minerals for analysis using the same analytical methodology as the one used for Nemaska's

samples. Results for the TJCM internal blanks were still pending at the time of writing the report.

A total of 58 analytical blanks were analysed by the ICM90A method and 197 were analysed by the ICP90Q method for a total of 255 analytical blanks corresponding to 4.9% of the samples analysed during the 2009 and 2010 exploration programs. From the 58 blanks analysed by the ICM90A method only, 100% of them returned less than 50 ppm, which is five times the method detection limit. From the 197


scut


blanks analysed by the ICP90Q method, 100% of them retuned less than 500 ppm, which is the five times

the method detection limit. Figure 12.2 shows a plot of the variation of the analytical blanks with time.

Figure 12.2 — Plot of Variance of Analytical Blanks with Time

Results for Blanks 250

• Li_ICP90Qppm

• Li_ICM90A_ppm

200

150

a a n 100

50

0 o ti o

ti o ti o

ti o ti o

ti o ti L.r1

o ti L.r1

o ti L.r1

o ti t.o

m m m N N N N N N c-I O c-I N O c-I N O c-I N O

Date (dd/mm/yy)

12.2.3 Core Duplicates

Sample duplicates were inserted at every 20 samples in the sample series as part of Nemaska internal

QA/QC protocol. The sample duplicates correspond to a quarter NQ core from the sample left behind for

reference or a representative channel sample from the secondary channel cut parallel to the main channel

Figure 12.3 shows correlation plots for the core duplicates for each analytical method. For the 216 core duplicates analysed with ICP90Q, 91% of assay pairs with grade higher than 0.05% Li (5 times the

method detection limit) reproduced within ±10% and 94% of assay pairs with grade higher than 0.1% Li reproduced within ±10%. The sign test for the duplicates analysed by ICP90Q does not show any bias

(31% original > duplicate, 30% original < duplicate, and 39% original = duplicates). For the 38 core duplicates analysed with ICM90A, 97% of assay pairs with grade higher than 50 ppm Li (5 times the

method detection limit) reproduced within ±10% and 88% of assay pairs with grade higher than 1000

ppm Li reproduced within ±10%. The sign test for the duplicates analysed by ICM90A does not highlight any analytical bias (50% original > duplicate, 50% original < duplicate).


S$

0 05 1

Duplicate Li (%)

5000

4000

Ê 3000

p' 2000

1000

0

0 1000 5000 4000 2000 3000

Duplicate Li (ppm)

•

•

• •

15

Core Duplicates - Method ICP90Q Core Duplicates - Method ICM90A

•

2

1.5

0.5

0


Page 29

Figure 12.3 — Correlation Plots for Core Duplicates for ICP90Q and ICM90A

12.2.4 Laboratory Pulp Duplicates

SGS Minerals routinely analyse a duplicate of the pulp material for every 10 samples as part of their internal QA/QC protocol. A total of 349 laboratory pulp duplicates were analysed with ICP90Q method and 124 pulp duplicates were analysed with ICM90A method. Figure 12.4 shows correlation plots for the

pulp duplicates for each analytical method. For the 349 pulp duplicates analysed with ICP90Q, 97% of

assay pairs with grade higher than 0.05% Li (5 times the method detection limit) reproduced within ±10% and 100% of assay pairs with grade higher than 0.1% Li reproduced within ±10%. The sign test for the

duplicates analysed by ICP90Q does not outline any bias (20% original > duplicate, 20% original <

duplicate, and 60% original = duplicates). For the 124 pulp duplicates analysed with ICM90A, 99% of assay pairs with grade higher than 50 ppm Li (5 times the method detection limit) reproduced within ±10% and 100% of assay pairs with grade higher than 1000 ppm Li reproduced within ±10%. The sign test for the duplicates analysed by ICM90A does not show any analytical bias (37% original > duplicate, 43% original < duplicate, and 20% original = duplicate).


_SGS,

Laboratory Duplicate - SGS Method ICP90Q

2

• 1.5

0.5

0

0

05 1

15

Duplicate Li(%)

Laboratory Duplicate - SGS Method ICM90A

5000

4000

Ê 3000

.m

' 2000

1000

0

1000

2000 3000

4000

5000

Duplicate Li (ppm)

Origi

na

l Li (

%)

0


Page 30

Figure 12.4 — Correlation Plots for the Pulp Duplicates for SGS ICP90Q and ICM90A

12.2.5 Nemaska Pulp Re-analysis

As part of Nemaska's QA/QC protocol, pulps from 192 mineralised core samples were sent for re-analysis to ALS Chemex. The re-analysed samples represent continuous mineralised intervals of different length selected from 8 drill holes (WHA-10-08, 11, 15, 21, 22, 28, 38 and 44). Figure 12.5 shows a

correlation plot of the re-analysed pulps for SGS Minerals vs. ALS Chemex. Table 12.3 contains a

comparison of the weighted average grade for each mineralised intervals by hole. The pulps re-analysis returned a higher Li values for SGS Minerals for 145 samples (or 76% of the samples re-analysed) compare to 23 samples (or 12%) returning lower Li value for SGS Minerals and 24 samples (or 13%)

shows identical values for both laboratories. The SGS Minerals Li grades show a relative difference averaging 5.3% higher that ALS Chemex. As observed in Table 12.3, 7 mineralised intervals shows a

higher weighted average grade for the SGS Minerals analysis vs. one mineralised interval returning

higher weighted average grade for ALS Chemex. The relative difference of the weighted average grades for the different holes range from -1.4% to +8.9%. The results of the pulps re-analysis program conducted

by the Company shows a potential positive small analytical bias toward SGS Minerals analytical data, which could be explained in part by the differences in analytical methodologies from one laboratory to

another. Although SGS Geostat considers that the potential analytical bias observed in the pulps re-

analysis results is significant enough to be investigated in more details, the grade differences observed between the two laboratories can be considered acceptable for a mineral resource estimate. SGS Geostat recommends to complete a in depth comparison of the different analytical methods used by each laboratories and to conduct additional pulps re-analysis of mineralised samples in order to verify the

grade differences outline therein.


Pulp Re-analysis - SGS Minerals vs. ALS Chemex

• •

• •• • ••

•

•

• • •

•


Figure 12.5 - Correlation Plot of the Pulps Re-analysis

Table 12.3 - Pulps Re-analysis Comparison by Drill Hole Mineralised Intervals

Hole ID From (m) To (m) Length (m)

Weighted Average Relative Grade

Difference (%) SGS ICP90Q Li2O

(%)

ALS Li-OG63

Li2O (%)

WHA-10-08 53.9 70 16.1 1.67 1.65 1.2%

WHA-10-11 119 134.5 15.5 1.19 1.20 -1.4%

WHA-10-15 111 198.5 87.5 1.44 1.38 3.8%

WHA-10-21 191.8 209.8 18 1.71 1.58 7.2%

WHA-10-22 32.9 47 14.1 1.82 1.72 5.4%

WHA-10-28 120.2 126 5.8 1.29 1.25 3.0%

WHA-10-38 214.6 230.7 16.1 2.20 2.00 8.9%

WHA-10-44 93.4 116.2 22.8 1.91 1.81 5.2%


SGS

Whabouchi - SG Measurements (t/m3) Mean 2.68 Count 34

Standard Deviation 0.08 Rel Std Deviation (%) 2.88

Minimum 2.55 Median 2.67

Maximum 2.87


12.2.6 QA/QC Conclusion

Nemaska implemented an internal QA/QC protocol by regularly inserting reference materials (standards and blank) and core duplicates in the samples stream. The Company also conducted re-analysis of

selected pulps in a second laboratory as part of their QA/QC protocol.

Results for the standards, blanks and core duplicates did not highlight any analytical issues, although SGS Geostat recommend to modify the Company QA/QC protocol to include coarse silica as analytical blank

upstream from the sample preparation (instead of after the preparation process) in order to validate the sample preparation quality. The re-analysis of the pulps outlined a potential small analytical bias with the

SGS Minerals analytical data returning on average 5.3% higher Li grade than the ALS Chemex results.

SGS Geostat recommends investigating this potential analytical bias which could be cause in part by the

different analytical methodologies used in the two laboratories.

It is SGS Geostat's opinion the Nemaska is operating according to an industry standard QA/QC program for the insertion of control samples into the stream of samples for the Project. The data are of quality sufficient to be used for mineral resource estimation.

12.3 Specific Gravity

As part of the independent data verification program, SGS Geostat conducted specific gravity ("SG") measurements on the 34 mineralised core samples collected from drill holes WHA-09-07 and WHA-10-

25. The measurements were performed using the water displacement method on representative half core pieces weighting between 0.42 kg and 0.74 kg with an average of 0.53 kg. The resulting measurements

reported an average SG value of 2.68 t/m3 (Table 12.4).

Table 12.4 — SG Measurements Statistical Parameters

12.4 Conclusions

SGS Geostat completed a review of the sample preparation and analysis including the QA/QC analytical protocol implemented by Nemaska for the Project. The author visited the sample preparation facilities at TJCM on March 10, 2010 and visited the Whabouchi property from March 10 to 12, 2010 to review the

Company sample preparation procedures. SG measurements were completed on mineralised core samples

to estimate an average bulk density values for the Whabouchi deposit. A review of the QA/QC analytical


SGS_

Whabouchi Project 2010 Check Samples (BeO %)

Whabouchi Project 2010 Check Samples (Li20 %)

0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

Original -BeO (%)

• WHA-09-07

_ ♦ WHA-10-25

I

• • • • • •

• • • • • • • &

• • ••

3.00

4.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50

Original -1120 (%)

4.00

• WHA 09-07

3.50- ♦ WHA 1025

• 2.50

o 2.00

U 1.50

f• •

1.00

• •

• •

•

•

N

A 0.50

0.00

0.07

0.06

0.05

0.04 a

s ▪ 0.03

u

0.02

0.01

0.00


protocol outlined a potential small analytical bias from the results of the re-analysis of pulps from samples

selected selected form mineralised drill core intervals. SGS Geostat recommends investigating this potential analytical bias which could be cause in part by the different analytical methodologies used in the

two laboratories.

SGS Geostat is in the opinion that the sample preparation, analysis and QA/QC protocol used by Nemaska for the Whabouchi project follow generally accepted industry standards and that the project data

is of quality sufficient to be used for mineral resource estimation.

13- DATA VERIFICATION

As part of the data verification program, SGS Geostat completed independent analytical checks of drill

core duplicate samples taken from Nemaska 2009 and 2010 diamond drilling programs. SGS Geostat

also conducted verification of the laboratories analytical certificates and validation of the project digital database supplied by Nemaska for errors or discrepancies.

During a site visit conducted from March 10 to 12, 2010, a total of 35 mineralised core duplicates were

collected from holes WHA-09-07 and WHA-10-25 by the author and submitted for Li and Be analysis at the SGS Minerals laboratory in Toronto. The core duplicates were processed using the same analytical

protocol used by Nemaska during the 2009 and 2010 drilling programs (code ICP90Q) except that the

sample preparation has been done directly at the SGS Mineral Services and not at the TJCM laboratory. A comparison of the original and duplicate analytical values did not outline any analytical bias. Figure

13.1 shows the correlation plots between the original and the duplicate analytical results for Li20 (%) and BeO (%).

Figure 13.1- Correlation Plot of Independent Check Samples


SGS


The digital drill hole database supplied by Nemaska has been validated for the following data field: collar

location, azimuth, dip, hole length, survey data, lithology and analytical values. The validation returned only minor discrepancies located in survey data, lithology and analytical values which were

communicated to Nemaska and corrected in the final drill hole database.

As part of the data verification of the project, the analytical data from the database has been validated with the values from the laboratories analytical certificates. No errors were noted during the validation.

The final database includes the channel samples collected in 2009 from surface trenches and the drilling data from the 2009 and 2010 drill programs except for the last hole drilled in the program (WHA-10-66).

The few historical drill hole and channel analytical data were not considered for the current mineral

resource estimate. Table 13.1 lists the data contained in the final drill hole database. SGS Geostat is in the opinion that the final drill hole database is adequate to support a mineral resource estimate.

Table 13.1— Final Drill Hole Database

Type Number

of Holes

Metres

Drilled

Number of

Survey

Records

Number of

Lithology

Records

Number of

Assay

Records

% Assayed

Metres

Channel 37 281 - 72 295 97

Drill Hole 66 12,242 231 1,148 4,866 41

Total All 103 12,523 231 1,220 5,161 42


SGS

Campament de i'Eastmaln

Centrale de l'Easlma~n 7

Rata Icuaue- enmulml

Poo*

Réservou',dc I'Eastman l 1

Von agrandrssemont

a Rupert

Ratais routier km 257


14- ADJACENT PROPERTIES

Other adjacent properties surrounding the Whabouchi property include three properties owned by Nemaska: The advanced stage Lac Levac property which hosts the Nisk-1 Ni-Cu-Co-PGE deposit, and the early stage Lac Arques and Lac des Montagnes properties which show potential for hosting magmatic and volcanogenic sulfides mineralisation as well as spodumene-bearing pegmatites. Other adjacent claims are mainly owned by individuals. Figure 14.1 shows the location of Nemaska adjacent properties.

Figure 14.1— Location Map Showing Adjacent Mineral Properties

Claims

Lac Argue-5 PropCrty

Lac Levac Property -

Lac des Montagnes Property

WnabdoCI , Property -

WHABOUCXI PROPERTY

2 4 km

Scale

Nemaska Exploration Inc. Hydro Quebec Facilities

in the Nemaska area

PREPARED Sr SOLUMINES DATE: 09/25/2009

Ho,: Nen nka_Mydro.15,e ec_c

The Lac Levac property consists of 228 claims covering a total area of approximately 10,500 ha and is located east of the Whabouchi property about 6 km north of the Albanel transmission station. The Nemiscau airport lies about 55 km by road to the west of the Lac Levac Property. The property contains the Nisk-1 deposit hosted in an elongated body of serpentinized ultramafic rocks that intrude paragneiss and amphibolite sequences. The ultramafic rock intrusion is interpreted as a sill composed of at least two distinct ultramafic lithological units: a grey serpentinized peridotite with magnetite veinlets, and a black


SGT


serpentinized peridotite with chrysotile veinlets hosting the Ni-Cu-Co-PGE sulphide mineralisation. The Nisk-1 deposit hosts Ni43-101 compliant mineral resources shown in Table 14.1.

Table 14.1— Nisk-1 Ni43-101 Compliant Mineral Resources (June 2008)

Ni Cu Co Pd Pt Resource Category Tonnage (t)

(%) (%) (%) (glt) (glt)

Measured 1,255,000 1.09 0.56 0.07 1.11 0.20

Indicated 783,000 1.00 0.53 0.06 0.91 0.29

Total M+I 2,038,000 1.06 0.55 0.07 1.03 0.23

Inferred 1,053,000 0.81 0.32 0.06 1.06 0.50

The Lac Arques property is composed of one block totaling 649 map-designated claims covering an area

of 32 491 ha. The property is located east of the Whabouchi property and covers portion of NTS sheets 32011, 32012, 32013 and 32014. The property hosts similar geological units as Whabouchi which are

part of the Lac des Montagnes Formation and the adjacent Champion Lake granitoïds and include paragneiss, amphibolites and granitic intrusives. Recent geophysical surveys outline the signatures of

ultramafic intrusions, some of confirmed by drilling. No significant mineralisation has been outlined on

the property.

The Lac des Montagnes property is located west of the Whabouchi property and covers more than 16,000

ha in several claims blocks. The property hosts similar geological units as Whabouchi which are part of

the Lac des Montagnes Formation and the adjacent Champion Lake granitoïds. No significant mineralisation has been located on the property.

15- MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

A high definition mineralogical study was performed on six composite drill core samples (MW, SE, ME, SW, PP and WP) stage crushed at -10 mesh.

XRD analysis indicates that the samples consist mainly of quartz, albite and microcline, and muscovite. Samples MW and SE contain only spodumene at —14% and —16%, respectively, while samples ME, SW and PP contain both spodumene and petalite at 20%, 13% and 10%, and —3%, —13% and 8%,

respectively. The WP sample does not have a significant content (nil to <2%) of the Li-Minerals (either

petalite or spodumene).

A portion of each sample was stage crushed to K80 -212 µm. Both the as received samples and K80 -212

um samples were analyzed with the QEMSCANTM. The analysis yields similar results and in agreement

with the XRD data. Note that Li and other light elements (B, Be, etc) cannot be distinguished by the QEMSCANTM. However, the identification of spodumene and petalite was based on the Al:Si ratios of their chemistry. Then, the two minerals were grouped together and referred to as Li Minerals. The MW, ME, SW, SE and PP samples contain mainly varied amounts of Na-feldspars, microcline, quartz,

muscovite and Li minerals. A liberation analysis shows that the Li Minerals, based on the K80 -212 µm, is



very good and ranges from —96% in the ME, 86% in the MW, 90% for PP, 98% for SE, 88% in the SW, and 58% for WP.

Subsequently, a composite sample was prepared from similar proportions from samples MW, SE, ME,

SW, PP, while WP was excluded because it was considered a waste product. The analysis was carried out on five size fractions +425µm, -425/+212µm, -212/+106µm, -106/+38µm and -38µm. The composite sample consists mainly of Na-feldspar (25.3%) and microcline (15.9%), quartz

(31.4%), Li minerals (22.4%) and muscovite (3.4%).

Liberation of Li Minerals is good for this grind target (K80 of 425 µm) at —86%. The remainder of Li

Minerals mass is associated with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (6%) and quartz (-5%).

Liberation increases by —17% from, the coarse to the fine fraction (79% to 95%). However, there is a very small increase in the liberation (-2-3%) below the 212 µm. Therefore, recovery of Li Minerals can

be obtained a relatively coarse size (-200 µm).

Liberation of microcline is also very good in the sample —89%. The remainder of microcline occurs in

quaternary middling particles with Li Minerals/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (-5%) and binary middling

particles with Na-feldspars (5%). Liberation increases by —18% with decreasing particle size (78% to 95%). Similarly to Li Minerals, there is a minor increase in liberation below the 212 um fraction (-3%).

Liberation of muscovite is good at 78%, but lower than that of Li Minerals and microcline. The

remainder of the mass occurs in quaternary middling particles with Li Minerals/microcline/quartz/Na-feldspars (-12%). Liberation increases by —17% (61% to 88%). Liberation of muscovite increases by 5-

8% below the 212 µm that is higher than the increase displayed by Li Minerals and microcline.

Li grades between 3.4% and 3.2% for recoveries of 86% to —99%, respectively are projected. Grades and recoveries increase weakly (<0.1% Li and —3% recovery) below the -212 µm size indicating that grinding

and flotation below that size might not increase the Li grades and recoveries significantly. However, metallurgical tests must be conducted to determine the exact difference in grade and recovery below this size.

Rb is accounted primarily by microcline (-83%) and muscovite (17%). Rb grades between 1.1% and 1% for recoveries of 88% to 98%, respectively, are projected. Microcline carries most of the Rb in the

sample and adjustments in mineral processing might be needed to recover Rb from both microcline and muscovite.

A mass balance calculation, assuming blending proportions of 70% MW, 15% ME, 8% SW, 5% SE and

2% PP, indicates that a composite sample would approximately contain 36% quartz, 26% albite, 15%

spodumene, 11% muscovite, —10% microcline, <2% petalite and <0.5% beryl.

The Li content that was used for the Li Mineral formula was calculated at —3.5% and it was based on

equal proportions of blending material and the XRD data. However, for a weighted composite sample, as shown above, the Li content in the Li Minerals would be higher by —0.1-0.2% Li (reflecting the higher

spodumene to petalite ratio). The Rb distribution would also be affected and would be different between the microcline and muscovite reflecting their mass% in the weighted composite sample based on the

above proportions. Thus, although the total Rb in a whole rock analysis might not change, microcline and

muscovite would account for approximate equal proportions of Rb because of the change in the mass of the two minerals. Thus, lower recovery and grade of Rb might be expected due to the lower liberation of muscovite than microcline.


GS


Based on the past and current operations, it is expected that flotation will be used to produce a high grade

spodumene concentrate. In addition, based on the liberation of spodumene, heavy dense media may be used to upgrade the flotation feed. Depending on the mineralogy of the deposit, it may even be possible to

produce a moderate grade concentrate (6% Li20) with just dense media separation. In flotation, a fatty

acid will be used to float spodumene selectively from the quartz, K- and Na- feldspars and muscovite. Flotation of muscovite might be required prior to spodumene flotation. The tailings from the muscovite

flotation will be scrubbed, conditioned and deslimed, followed by spodumene flotation. The tailings from the spodumene flotation can also be further processed to produce feldspar and quartz concentrates. A moderate grade spodumene concentrate (6.5% Li20) with low iron content can be used in the ceramic

industry. Furthermore, the concentrate can further be processed through pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical test work to produce lithium carbonate. In the pyrometallurgical process, spodumene

(referred to as alpha spodumene with monoclinic structure) will be roasted at 1050 °C with the objective to induce phase transformation to produce beta spodumene with tetragonal or hexagonal structure. Beta

spodumene will be subjected to acid roasting to extract lithium as lithium sulfate. Water leaching will be

then performed to separate lithium sulfate as a soluble species. After several cleaning steps, lithium carbonate with high purity (>99.5%) can be precipitated.

The complete mineralogical report can be found in Appendix E

16- MINERAL RESOURCE AND MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

16.1 Introduction

No previous mineral resource estimate was reported for the Whabouchi project. SGS Geostat conducted an initial mineral resource estimate using channel sampling and diamond drilling data compiled from the

2009 and 2010 exploration programs conducted by Nemaska. No historical data prior to Nemaska recent exploration work has been used in the current mineral resource estimate. The database used to produce

the mineral resource estimate is derived from a total of 37 channels and 66 diamond drill holes and contains the collar, survey, lithology and analytical results information. The database contains drill hole data up to hole WHA-10-65, the last drill hole of the 2010 exploration program (WHA-10-66) was not

included in the database because analytical results were not available at the time of the mineral resource estimate. Please refer to Table 13.1 for a summary of the records in the database used for the initial

mineral resources estimate.

The mineral resource estimate is derived from a computerised resource block model. The construction of the block model starts with the modeling of 3D wireframe envelopes or solids of the mineralisation using channel and drill hole Li20 analytical data. For the current mineral resource estimate, BeO was estimated in parallel as a co-product. Once the modeling is complete, the analytical data contains within the wireframe solids is normalised to generate fixed length composites. The composite data is use to interpolate the grade of blocks regularly spaced on a defined grid that fills the 3D wireframe solids. The

interpolated blocks located below the bedrock/overburden interface comprise the mineral resources. The

blocks are then classified based on confidence level using proximity to composites, composite grade

variance and mineralised solids geometry. The 3D wireframe modeling, block model and mineral resource estimation were conducted by SGS Geostat based on information provided by Nemaska.


SGT


16.2 Exploratory Data Analysis

Exploratory data analysis for lithium and beryllium was completed on original analytical data and composite data contained within the modelised mineralised envelopes.

16.2.1 Analytical Data

There are a total of 5,161 assay intervals in the database used for the current mineral resource estimate.

Most of the drill hole intervals defining the mineralised envelopes have been sampled continuously. The

few gaps with no analytical data located within the mineralised intervals were considered having zero grade for the purpose of the mineral resource estimate. These gaps generally correspond to local xenolites of adjacent lithologies floating inside the pegmatite intrusions. Table 16.1 shows the range of Li20 and BeO values from the analytical data.

Table 16.1— Range of Li2O and BeO Analytical Data for Mineral Resource Estimation

1120 (%) BeO (ppm)

Records Length (m) Mean Min Max Mean Min Max

5161 0.1 - 4.5 0.97 0 4.24 294 0 6383

The channel samples collected at Whabouchi are mostly located where the topography is elevated where the outcrop exposure is best. The channels azimuth ranges from N105° to N178° with an average of

N145° which is generally perpendicular to the orientation of the pegmatite intrusions. The channels average 7.6 m in length and the sampling interval is typically one metre.

The core holes drilled on the project are generally oriented N330°, perpendicular to the general

orientation of the pegmatite intrusions, and have a weak to moderate deviation toward the east. Their spacing is typically 100 m with tighter 25 to 50 m spacing between sections 150 mE and 725 mE. The

drill holes dips range from 45° to 58° with an average of 50° and the drill hole intercepts range from

approximately 70% of true width to near true width of the mineralisation.

16.2.2 Composite Data

Block model grade interpolation is conducted on composited analytical data. A composite length of 1.5 m

has been selected based on the N-S thickness of the 5 m by 2 m by 5 m block size defined for the resource block model. The minimum length of composite kept for the interpolation process is 0.75 m. Compositing

is conducted at the start of the bedrock-overburden contact in the case of drill holes. Table 16.2 shows the

statistics of the composites used for the interpolation of the resource block model and Figure 16.1 and 16.2 shows the related histograms for Li20 and BeO. Figure 16.3 and 16.4 displays the spatial distribution

of the composites in plan and longitudinal view respectively.


SGS,

Relative Freq


Table 16.2 — Statistics for the 1.5 metre Composites for Li2O and BeO

1120 (%) BeO (ppm)

Count 1879 1879

Min 0 0

Median 1.62 453

Max 3.72 3637

Mean 1.62 441

Std.Dev. 0.586 188

Figure 16.1— Histogram of 1.5 metre Composites for Li2O

Whabouchi Project - 1.5m Composite Li20 (%)

0.000 0.372 0.744 1.116 1.488 1.860 2.232 2.604 2.976 3.348 3.720

4.58

4.12

3.66

3.20

2.75

2.29

1.83

1.37

0.92

0.46

0.00


SGS

Relative Fre 4

BeOppm

d d

c7' x x X x 1DU

X x Y'$Oa d d d • d d d d d d d d d d

~ o

-Y'= TO 0.

Y==2DD

T==3D11

T==9DD

Y==200.

Y•-300.

Y Y=-400.


Figure 16.2 — Histogram of 1.5 metre Composites for BeO

Whabouchi Project - 1.5m Composite BeO(ppm)

0.000 363.710 727.4201091.1301454.8401818.5502182.2602545.9702909.6803273.3903637.100

Figure 16.3 - Plan View Showing the Spatial Distribution of the Composites


SGS

21.87

19.69

17.50

15.31

13.12

10.94

8.75

6.56

4.37

2.19

0.00

Z== 7011

g_ d

i

▪ d

X

CO

d d d o d

-~

•

d

Z={50

Z=ioO

Z=750

Z=taO

Z5Œ

~=Œ

Z=-50

Z=-jaŒ

Z=-j50

z=-Zao

Z=?$60

mny


Page 42

Figure 16.4 — Longitudinal View Showing the Spatial Distribution of the Composites

16.2.3 Specific Gravity

Section 12.3 summarises the SG determination in details. The results of the SG measurements conducted

on selected mineralised core samples confirmed the SG value of 2.68 Um3. This value was used for the calculation of the tonnages from the volumetric estimates of the resource block model.

16.3 Geological Interpretation

SGS Geostat conducted the interpretation and modeling of the 3D wireframe envelopes of the mineralisation based on the channel and drill hole data in collaboration with Nemaska personnel. The modeling was first completed on sections to define mineralised prisms using the lithologies and analytical data for lithium. A minimum grade of 0.5% Li20 over a minimum drill hole interval length of 2 m was

generally used as guideline to define the width of mineralised prisms, corresponding to the N-S width of

the individual blocks. The final 3D wireframe model was constructed on a bench by bench basis by

connecting the defined mineralised prisms based on the geological interpretation. A bench height of 5 m

was used for the wireframe model which corresponds to the thickness of the blocks in the resource block model.

A bedrock-overburden interface 3D surface has been generated by triangulating the lower intercept of the overburden-coded lithology from the drill hole dataset. Figures 16.5 and 16.6 show the contour of the

mineralised envelopes in sections and in levels views respectively.


Plan level 250 m

d d d d

7.1

Y=X0Cf

Y=11 v

Y.-3110

Li20 [table 4)

1=1

»M


Figure 16.5 - Modeled Envelopes with Mineralised Intervals in Section Views (Looking West)

d d

Sectio>i 1100 rrrÉ 71.3-011-

7,7511

7.•211-0-

1511-

Li20 [table 4) JJ J 050 <= Li20_ICP900 < 1.25 1.25 <= Li20 ICP9012 < 1.50

11 50 <= Li20_ICP9012 < 1.75 1.75 <=Li20_ICP900 < 3.80

Figure 16.6 - Modeled Envelopes with Mineralised Intervals in Plan Level Views


SG$

1,-21:00 --

7

d d %,35U

Section 700 mL i317

u20 (table 4)

0.50 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 1.25 I A125 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 1.50

11.50 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 1.75 -1.75 <= Li20_ICP30Q < 3.80

7=351

- 7=3-01

751

7=701

1350

Section 225 mV. 73v ----

T-25-0-

7,21-0C

1511-

U20 (table 4)

0.50 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 1.25 1 11 25 <= Li20_ICP30Q < 1.50 I 11 50 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 1.75

1.75 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 3.80

Z°350

7.20

7=15

ea

7=351

7=3U1

7=251

7=701

7=151

T=1 û1

z 7=51

7~Q

0.50 <=Li20_ICP90Q < 1.25 1.25 <=Li20_ICP90Q < 1.50

~ 11 50 <= Li20_ICP9011 < 1.75 1.75 <=Li20_ICP90Q < 3.80

4'

•

/ t

~

AA LA

7 N 525 mA

3511

Section 7=351

7=251

7=2171

7=151

T=1û1

Z=30

25-0

7' 150

Li20 [table 4)

Z 7=51

0.50 <= Li20_ICP900 < 1.25 1.25 <= Li20_ICP904 < 1.50

11.50 <• Li20_ICP900 < 1.75 1.75 <= Li20_ICP9013 < 3.80

Li20 (table 4) JJ J 0.50 <= Li20_ICP900 < 1.25 1.25 <= LQ0_ICP90Q < 1.50 11.50 <= Li20_IC090Q < 1.75

1.75 <= Li20_ICP90Q < 3.00 Y- O

N n lev61 150 Y=l Qu

Q

r• u


Page 44

16.4 Spatial Analysis

The spatial continuity of the Li20 grade of composites was assessed by variography. Experimental correlograms, which is the calculated correlation coefficient of grade from composites pairs separated by

a given distance for a given direction, has been generated for 3 m composite and are presented in Figure 16.7. Composites of 3 m length (compare to 1.5 m composite length used for the grade interpolation)

were used for the correlograms to lower the data variability in order to better analyse the spatial

continuity. The spatial continuity of the Li20 grade outlined by the correlograms can be characterised as more or less isotropic with a relatively poor continuity in all directions.


SGS

0 0 15.0 30.0 45.0 60.0 75.0 90.0 105.0 120.0 135.0 150.0

Distance

Ni 43-101 Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate - Whabouchi Lithium Deposit

Page 45

Figure 16.7 - Correlograms of Li20 Grade of 3 metre Composite in Mineralised

Whabouchi Deposit - June 2010 - 3m Composite (Li20%)

Variable : Li20% Date : 06-07-2010

Variogram : Absolute File : Whabouchi v riogram.gsd

Direction : DH strike dip average NS

Azimuth : 0.00 80.00 180.00 0.00 0.00

Dip 495.00 0.00 -80.00 -45.00 0.00

Tolerance :30.00 30.00 30.00 180.00 30.00

Lag Dist : 3.10 30.00 50.00 30.00 30.00

Gamma = N(0.3000) + S(0.5500, 10.0/10.0/6.0, 180.0/-80.0/0.0) + S(0.1500, 100.0/60.0/40.0, 180.0/-80.0/0.0)

16.5 Resource Block Modeling

A block size of 5 m (E-W) by 2 m (N-S) by 5 m (vertical) was selected for the resource block model of

the project based on drill hole spacing, width and general geometry of mineralisation. The 5 m vertical

dimension corresponds to an approximation for the bench height of a potential small open pit mining operation. The 5 m E-W dimension corresponds to about a quarter to a fifth of the minimum spacing

between the drill holes and accounts for the variable geometry of the mineralisation in that direction. The 2 m N-S dimension accounts for the average minimum width of the mineralisation modelled at Whabouchi. The drill hole spacing averages 25 m in the shallow depth of the western half of the deposit,

increases to 50 m at mid-depth of the same western half of the deposit then averages 100 m for the eastern


SGT

1.145

1.031

0.916

0.802

0.687

0.573

0.458

0.344

0.229

0.115

0.000

T 3-0û

r-25v

T=21-01-

Z=15

z=10

- Z=5 Z==511

Section 525 mt _ ' 2,21]-0- ~~

Fi"

li

rlr T=25û

I r / +frl

l

r ri

~

/ ~

,jIf rlr

~' ~ +i rl

if

Z=30

Z=25

Z==2-07f Z=20

Z=50

SecAon 1100 Ili 2==3-0û T~

Z2&F

T=2-0-0-

Z=1-1:11J

z=f

Z=300

Z=250

Z=200

Z=150

Z=100

T==511

r==n

SPc'ilnn 225 mE Z=300

Z=250

Z=200

Z=150

z=1o0

Z=50 T=511

~ ~ 2=11 1

d d d d d d


half of the deposit and at depth. The minimum thickness of mineralisation averages 2 to 3 m and the

general orientation of the deposit averages N75° azimuth for the western half of the deposit and N90° azimuth for the eastern portion. The resource block model contains 95,287 blocks located below the

overburden/bedrock surface for a total of 9,398,659 m3. Table 16.3 summarizes the parameters of the

block model limits. Figure 16.8 and 16.9 displays the block model compare to the mineralised envelopes for section and level plan views respectively.

Table 16.3 — Resource Block Model Parameters

Coordinates Number of Blocks Minimum (m) Maximum (m) Easting 161 0 1600

Northing 351 -500 200

Elevation 141 -350 350

Figure 16.8 — Block Model vs. Mineralised Envelopes in Section Views (Looking West)


SG$

Y=o

P12 ~~~~~ Olgt — ~

Y=-I00

'f=-200

Y-= = A ➢➢

Y==S➢➢-a

N

Y7U° Plan level 250 m

e e â ~ K Y=f0 0

-400

00

0 y. ci

d d

Y7 ➢1] -- Plan level 150 m

f-0 r=0

'Y. -1 00

't-200 =-200 €4Zt

OW' l'=-300

Y-51111 al

300


Page 47

Figure 16.9 — Block Model vs. Mineralised Envelopes in Plan Level Views

16.6 Grade Interpolation Methodology

The grade interpolation for the Whabouchi resource block model was completed using the inverse

distance to the power square ("ID2") methodology. Isotropic search ellispoids were selected for the grade interpolation process based on the analysis of the spatial continuity of Li20 grade using variography. Limits are set for the minimum and maximum number of composites used per interpolation step and

restriction are applied on the maximum number of composites used from each hole.

The interpolation process was conducted using 3 successive passes with relaxed search conditions from

one pass to the next until all blocks are interpolated. In the first pass, the search ellipsoid distance was 75


_ SGS

~! 5~ ~r 51 ~! 1 ~ 5~ ~ r ~! i~ = !

� '

S5 ~ _ _ _ _ 4~ _ _ _ _ -‘"Z7. ,

S~

TiSy ~_ _ _ z

_

4b-C:

~.

~}~~

5

y~} ~ ~~

e - - -4 - ---

t

~ ~ ,iL,, 7_ ! 5 ! 5

ffyy~~1'~~~,,

~~ ~ 5 FS _--

~-~tr 55 11 1 Ÿ' S5 r' ; 1 'S C~~

___~ ---1--- T --- Y -- J ---S --- Y ---S----l ---r --- __ -fYrSrrYi

! 5 1 5 1 5 - 1 5 1 5 1 5 ! 5 ! 5 1 5 ! h ! f - 1• - - - - Y _ Y _ _ _ _ ~~- Y 5 ! y _ r y _ r S _ Y ;

'• ~ - L

5! 1 5 1 5111 5 1 . 5! 5! 7=25051 ir •~ 5• 5r

f ~5

t

5 1 5 1 5 ! 5 f 5 411) ~

5 ! 5 ! 5 1 5 oy ,2

5 1 5 ! 5 1 5

-

5. 5 ➢

-20 ➢

- } 5 ; I1` 51 5 1 51 5 1 ~=- ~~1

. -14 N r5 YI Y5▪ - Y z-

1 5 1 5 1 5 ! 5 ! I 1 } fY

1_ _ }ç _ _ _ _ T . _ _ _ _ _ T _ Z _ _ _ _ 7 _ -5----- T _ }5_ _ _ _ _1 _ _~ _ S

1 5 !'

T Oil .'€~ ~ •'C{ ~

K 1 ~

CAl`

~of >,` I

✓ 1l5i ! 5

~-lb0 .2=200

'~â-25➢ 1 ; Z_=,3a


m (long axis) by 75 m (intermediate axis) by 25 m (short axis) with an orientation was 0° azimuth, 75°

dip and 0° spin which represents the general orientation of the pegmatites in the deposit. Search conditions were defined with a minimum of 7 composites and a maximum of 30 composites with a

minimum of 3 holes required to estimate the block. For the second pass, the search distance was twice the

search distance of the first pass and composites selection criteria were kept the same as the first pass. Finally, the search distance of the third pass was increased to 500 m (long axis) by 500 m (intermediate

axis) by 100 m (short axis) and again the same composites selection criteria was applied. Figure 16.10 shows the three search ellipsoids used for the different interpolation passes.

Figure 16.10 —View of the Search Ellipsoids Used for the Different Interpolation Passes

16.7 Mineral Resource Classification

The mineral resources at Whabouchi are classified into Measured, Indicated and Inferred categories. The

factors used to determine the mineral resource classification are the CIM requirements and guidelines, and the grade variability and spatial continuity of mineralisation. The mineral resources were classified in

two successive stages: automated classification followed by manual editing of final classification results.

The first classification stage is conducted by applying an automated classification process which select

around each block a minimum number of composite from a minimum number of holes located within a

search ellipsoid of a given size and orientation. For the Measured resource category, the search ellipsoid


- --

"

SGS,

2=300

Z=250

Z=200

- 2.150

2=100

z=50

• .. T=3~û 7 -

r f +r

I r

Z=300

2=250

Z=200

Z=150

Z.100

Z=50

71,

~

Section 700 mt.'' 2.300 1~

z-~ d rv

Section 1100 2=3no

Z=250

2=200


is 35 m (strike) by 35 m (dip) by 5 m with a minimum of 7 composites in at least 4 different drill holes.

For the indicated category, the search ellipsoid is twice the size of the Measured category ellipsoid using the same composites selection criteria. The second classification stage involves the delineation of

coherent zones for the Measured and Indicated categories based on the results of the automated

classification. The objective is to homogenise or "smooth" the results of the automated process by removing the "Swiss cheese" or "spotted dog" patterns typical of the automated process results. The

second stage is conducted by defining 3D solids on a bench by bench basis for the Measured and Indicated categories. Figures 16.11 and 16.12 shows the block model classification for section and level plan views respectively (Categories: Measured — Red, Indicated — Blue, and Inferred — Grey).

Figure 16.11— Block Model Classification in Section Views (Looking West)


SGS

Y=%

Y ➢

Plan le~el 250 1~~ ▪ Y=100

Y=0

Y=-300

4

x

G

Y=-9D0

100

X

d d

lan 111150 rŸn d d

d d

d d d d d

~ ~t 4 Y=1Dü

Y= ➢

Y== -1DD

Y=û

~~t~~

rtttIkt

zt

Wm€" . *'~

~f*44a xti,t,"*~

tt~

k$ %%ki

t

tt

~~

~~~~~ ~~ ' 1 D 0

tRI.

Y==~➢D ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~1~ :~

1014E1

T' ]G

a a a a a

x x x ~s tP Q] ~l - a a q O o q q

~ > ]G 44

q Q q q q

Y==ëDû

Y==3Dû

Y==9Dû

— X


Page 50

Figure 16.12 - Block Model Classification in Plan Level Views

16.8 Mineral Resource Estimation

The mineral resource estimation for Whabouchi deposit is tabulated in Table 16.4 for the Measured,

Indicated and Inferred resources using 0%, 0.5% and 1.0% cut-off grade for Li20. Table 16.5 shows for

the western and eastern sectors the mineral resources using a cut-off grade of 0.5% Li20 for each resource category. The limit defining the western and eastern sectors of the deposit is defined by section 775 mE. Figure 16.13 shows the vertical distribution of the mineral resources for each sector using a 0.5% Li2O cut-off.


SGT


Page 51

Table 16.4 - Whabouchi Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate


Cut-off Grade

Li20 (%)

Resource

Categories Tonnes* Li20 Grade (%) BeO Grade (ppm)

Li Metal**

(tonne)

Be Metal**

(tonne)

0%

Measured 1,887,000 1.60 458 14,000 300

Indicated 7,898,000 1.63 446 60,000 1,300

Measured +

Indicated 9,785,000 1.63 449 74,000 1,600

Inferred 15,403,000 1.57 420 112,100 2,300

0.5%

Measured 1,885,000 1.60 458 14,000 300

Indicated 7,889,000 1.64 446 59,900 1,300

Measured +

Indicated 9,774,000 1.63 449 74,000 1,600

Inferred 15,396,000 1.57 420 112,100 2,300

1.0%

Measured 1,857,000 1.61 459 13,900 300

Indicated 7,775,000 1.65 448 59,500 1,300

Measured +

Indicated 9,632,000 1.64 450 73,400 1,600

Inferred 14,888,000 1.59 424 110,100 2,300


Effective date May 28, 2010. * Rounded to the nearest thousand. **Rounded to the nearest hundred.

Table 16.5 - Whabouchi Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate by Sector

Mineral Resource Estimate - Whabouchi Project - Sector West

Cut-off Grade

Li20 (%)

Resource


Li Metal**

(tonne)

Be Metal**

(tonne)

0.5%

Measured 1,885,000 1.60 458 14,000 300

Indicated 7,805,000 1.64 445 59,300 1,300

Measured +

Indicated 9,690,000 1.63 448 73,300 1,600

Inferred 7,891,000 1.50 412 55,000 1,200

Mineral Resource Estimate - Whabouch' Project - Sector East

Cut-off Grade

Li20 (%)

Resource


Li Metal**

(tonne)

Be Metal**

(tonne)

0.5%

Measured 0 0 0 - -

Indicated 84,000 1.65 560 600 -

Measured +

Indicated 84,000 1.65 560 600 -

Inferred 7,505,000 1.64 429 57,000 1,200


Effective date May 28, 2010. * Rounded to the nearest thousand. **Rounded to the nearest hundred.


To nes

Tonnes

16.9 Block model validation

The Whabouchi mineral resource model grades were validated by 1) by a visual comparison of the colour-coded block grades and drill hole composites values, and 2) a comparison of the grade average and

Std.Dev. for the composites vs. the blocks. The mean Li20 and BeO grades for the composites is slightly less than the blocks mean grades and the variance of Li20 and BeO is significantly less for the blocks compare to the composites which correspond to the expected. Table 16.6 shows the comparative Li20 and

BeO mean grades and standard deviation for the composites and the blocks.

Table 16.6 — Comparative Statistics for Composites and Blocks

Mean Li20 Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.

Count (%) Li20 (%) BeO (ppm) BeO (ppm)

Composites 1879 1.62 0.59 441 188

Blocks 95287 1.59 0.28 431 81


scut

Whabouchi Deposit - Sector West Resources by Bench - 0.5% Li20 Cut-off

320 315 310 305

290 MN 285 280 275 A. 270 265 260 255 250 245 240 235 230 ~ 225 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 180

E 175 c 170 ° 165 160 â 155

145 140 m 135

130

115 110 105 100

95

P

âs -114

30 sr • M asured

■ Indicated

o lnferred

15 0 10 0 ôr -5 .

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 500000

Whabouchi Deposit - Sector East Resources by Bench - 0.5% Li20 Cut-off

325

320 ~ 315 310 12 300 295 290 285 280 275 270 265 260 255 250 245 240 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 195 190

~ 185 180 175 170

o 165 w 160 c 155 C' 150

135 130 125 120 115 110

95 90 85 80 75 70 ~ 65 ~ 60 ss ^ so ~ 45 40 35 30 25 20 r-1 15 . lo 0

5

50000

■ Indicated

Y Inferred

100000 150000 200000 250000


Figure 16.13 — Vertical Distribution of Mineral Resources by Sector (0.5% Li20 cut-off)


16.10 Interpretation and Conclusion

Nemaska has been conducting surface channel sampling and core drilling since the fall of 2009, which

have delineated a lithium-beryllium mineral deposit at Whabouchi. SGS Geostat completed an initial NI

43-101 compliant mineral resource estimate of the deposit. The mineral resource estimate for the Whabouchi deposit using a 0.5% Li20 cut-off totals 9.8 million tonnes grading 1.63% Li20 and 449 ppm BeO in the Measured and Indicated resources categories with an additional 15.4 million tonnes grading 1.57% Li20 and 420 ppm BeO in the Inferred resources category.

The resource model contains 95,287 blocks, 5 m (X) by 2 m (Y) by 5 m (elevation) in size, located below

the bedrock/overburden interface. The block grade was estimated using 1,879 lithium and beryllium

analytical values from up to 1.5 m long channels and drill holes composites. Interpolation was performed using ID2 in 3 successive passes. Isotropic search ellipsoids were used starting with a dimension of 75 m (long axis) by 75 m (intermediate axis) by 5 m (short axis) oriented in the general direction of the pegmatites, doubling in size for the second pass, and ending with a dimension of 500 m (long axis) by 500 m (intermediate axis) by 100 m (short axis). Search conditions were set for a minimum of 7

composites and a maximum of 30 composites with composites selected from a minimum of 3 holes

required to estimate each block. Resource classification was completed using a two-step approach starting with an automated classification of each block follow by a manual smoothing.

Geological interpretation and modelling of the mineralised pegmatites was first conducted on sections by defining prisms based on guidelines defined as 0.5% Li2O grade over a minimum of 2 m mineralised

intervals. The final 3D solids were then modeled using 5 m thick benches by connecting together the defined mineralised prisms.

Data verification of the channels and drill holes database suggests that the information is reliable and is

believed to be accurate. The bulk density of the pegmatitic material was estimated by SG measurements on mineralised drill core sample and appears to be consistent with expected values from the rock type.

The exploration programs completed to date by the Nemaska successfully outlined the Whabouchi

mineralised pegmatite swarm over a strike length of 1,300 m to a depth of more than 300 m below surface, which remains open at depth and to the east. The west portion of the Whabouchi deposit is

characterized by a series of sub-vertical, relatively thick, spodumene-bearing pegmatite dykes which become thinner and more elongated in the east side. The majority of the delineated mineral resources classified in the Measured and Indicated categories occur in the thicker west side of the deposit between sections 200 mE and 750 mE.

16.11 Recommendation

Based on the completed analyses, interpolation and block model resources estimate by SGS Geostat, the following are recommendations for further development of the Whabouchi deposit mineral resources:

1. Infill channels sampling at surface or shallow drilling focused on the western side of the deposit

between sections 175 mE and 725 mE. The objective is to convert additional resources to the Measured category between surface and the core of the mineral resources where the pegmatites are the thickest and thus more prospective for a potential open pit mining operation.


SGT


2. Selective intermediate depth infill drilling in the same western thick area of the pegamtite swarm

with the objective of 1) increasing the Measured mineral resources by expanding core of the current Measured mineral resources and 2) extending the Indicated resources categories at depth.

3. Systematic infill drilling at 50 m drill spacing in the eastern side of the deposit between sections

725 mE and 1400 mE with the objective of converting the defined mineral resources to the Indicated category, first near surface then at depth.

4. Additional deep drilling to test the down-dip extend of the deposit as demonstrated by the results from hole WHA-10-67 completed at the end of the spring 2010 drilling program. A 100 m drill spacing is recommended to define additional Inferred mineral resources.

A detailed proposal of the channels and drill holes location for recommendations 1 and 2 is described in Table 16.7. Figure 16.14 shows the location of targets drill intercepts, for recommendation 2, positioned on an inclined long section (azimuth 345°N and dip -20°) centered on the plane of the main pegmatite

intrusion sector west (priority 1 in red and priority 2 in green).

Table 16.7 — Work Proposal Targets for Recommendation 1 and 2

Whabouchi Deposit - Work Proposal - Recommendation 1

Target No Priority Type Intercept Section

Intercept Depth (Z) Comments (Grid E)

1A 2 Channel 175 mE Surface Between -200 m and -180 m (grid N)

1B 2 Channel 300 mE Surface Between -150 m and -100 m (grid N)

1C 2 Drill hole 350 mE 275 m Infill between WHA-10-17 and WHA-09-04

1D 2 Channel 375 mE Surface Between -150 m and -100 m (grid N)

1E 2 Channel 400 mE Surface Between -150 m and -50 m (grid N)

1F 1 Channel 425 mE Surface Between -150 m and -50 m (grid N)

1G 1 Drill hole 460 mE 275 m Infill between WHA-10-16 and WHA-09-03

1H 1 Channel 490 mE Surface Between -150 m and -50 m (grid N)

11 1 Drill hole 525 mE 275 m infill between R-22 and WHA-10-33

1J 1 Channel 550 mE Surface Between -125 m and -50 m (grid N)

1K 2 Channel 575 mE Surface Between -125 m and -50 m (grid N)

1L 2 Drill hole 600 mE 280-290 m Infill between WHA-10-14 and WHA-09-06

1M 2 Channel 650 mE Surface Between -100 m and 0 m (grid N)

1N 2 Channel 725 mE Surface Between -100 m and 0 m (grid N)

Whabouchi Deposit - Work Proposal - Recommendation 2

Intercept Section Approx. Intercept Target No Priority Type Comments

(Grid E) Depth (Z)

2A 2 Drill hole 200 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-53

2B 1 Drill hole 275 mE 200 m Infill below WHA-10-55

2C 2 Drill hole 300 mE 150 m Infill below WHA-10-50

2D 1 Drill hole 325 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-56

2E 1 Drill hole 375 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-57

2F 2 Drill hole 375 mE 150 m Infill 25 m east of WHA-10-22

2G 1 Drill hole 425 mE 215 m Infill below WHA-10-58

2H 1 Drill hole 490 mE 200 m Infill between WHA-10-15 and WHA-10-59

21 2 Drill hole 490 mE 150 m Infill between WHA-10-28 and WHA-10-31

2J 1 Drill hole 550 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-47

2K 2 Drill hole 575 mE 175 m Infill below WHA-10-60

2L 1 Drill hole 625 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-61

2M 2 Drill hole 650 mE 175 m Infill below WHA-10-65

2N 1 Drill hole 675 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-63

20 2 Drill hole 725 mE 225 m Infill below WHA-10-64


SGT


Page 55

Figure 16.14 —Long Section of Sector West with Work Proposal for Recommendation 2

17- OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

There is no other relevant data or information for the Whabouchi project at this stage.

18- INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

SGS Geostat validated the exploration processes and core sampling procedures used by Nemaska as part of an independent verification program. SGS Geostat concluded that the drill core handling, logging and sampling protocols are at conventional industry standard and conform to generally accepted best

practices.

SGS Geostat completed a review of the sample preparation and analysis including the QA/QC analytical protocol implemented by Nemaska for the Project. The author visited the sample preparation facilities at TJCM on March 10, 2010 and visited the Whabouchi property from March 10 to 12, 2010 to review the

Company sample preparation procedures. A review of the QA/QC analytical protocol outlined a potential small analytical bias from the results of the re-analysis of pulps from samples selected from mineralised drill core intervals. SGS Geostat recommends investigating this potential analytical bias which could be

cause in part by the different analytical methodologies used in the two laboratories. SGS Geostat considers that the samples quality is good and that the samples are generally representative. Finally, SGS

Geostat is confident that the system is appropriate for the collection of data suitable for the estimation of a NI 43-101 compliant mineral resource estimate.

As part of the data verification program, SGS Geostat completed independent analytical checks of drill

core duplicate samples taken from Nemaska recent diamond drilling program. SGS Geostat also


SGT


conducted verification of the laboratories analytical certificates and validation of the project digital

database supplied by Nemaska for errors or discrepancies. SGS Geostat is in the opinion that the final drill hole database is adequate to support a mineral resource estimate.

A high definition mineralogical study was performed on six composite drill core samples stage crushed at -10 mesh. Overall liberation of Li Minerals is good for the grinding target K80 of 425 µm at —86%. Based

on the past and current operations, it is expected that flotation will be used to produce a high grade spodumene concentrate. In addition, based on the liberation of spodumene, heavy dense media may be used to upgrade the flotation feed. Depending on the mineralogy of the deposit, it may even be possible to

produce a moderate grade concentrate (6% Li20) with just dense media separation. In flotation, a fatty acid will be used to float spodumene selectively from the quartz, K- and Na- feldspars and muscovite.

Flotation of muscovite might be required prior to spodumene flotation. The tailings from the muscovite flotation will be scrubbed, conditioned and deslimed, followed by spodumene flotation. The tailings from

the spodumene flotation can also be further processed to produce feldspar and quartz concentrates. A

moderate grade spodumene concentrate (6.5% Li20) with low iron content can be used in the ceramic industry. Furthermore, the concentrate can further be processed through pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical test work to produce lithium carbonate. In the pyrometallurgical process, spodumene (referred to as alpha spodumene with monoclinic structure) will be roasted at 1050 °C with the objective

to induce phase transformation to produce beta spodumene with tetragonal or hexagonal structure. Beta

spodumene will be subjected to acid roasting to extract lithium as lithium sulfate. Water leaching will be

then performed to separate lithium sulfate as a soluble species. After several cleaning steps, lithium carbonate with high purity (>99.5%) can be precipitated.

The exploration programs completed to date by the Nemaska successfully delineated the Whabouchi mineralised pegmatite swarm over a strike length of 1,300 m to a depth of more than 300 m below surface, which remains open at depth and to the east. The west portion of the Whabouchi deposit is

characterized by a series of sub-vertical, relatively thick, spodumene-bearing pegmatite dykes which become thinner and more elongated in the east side. The majority of the delineated mineral resources

classified in the Measured and Indicated categories occur in the thicker west side of the deposit between sections 200 mE and 750 mE. SGS Geostat completed an initial NI 43-101 compliant mineral resource

estimate of the deposit. The initial NI43-101 compliant mineral resources are presented in Table 18.1.

Table 18.1— Initial Mineral Resources for the Whabouchi Deposit at 0.5% Li20 Cut-off Grade


Cut-off Grade

Li20 (%)

Resource


Li Metal**

(tonne)

Be Metal**

(tonne)

0.5%

Measured 1,885,000 1.60 458 14,000 300

Indicated 7,889,000 1.64 446 59,900 1,300

Measured +

Indicated 9,774,000 1.63 449 74,000 1,600

Inferred 15,396,000 1.57 420 112,100 2,300


Effective date May 28, 2010. * Rounded to the nearest thousand **Rounded to the nearest hundred.


SGS


SGS Geostat is in the opinion that the Company successfully highlighted the mineral resource potential at

the Whabouchi project based on the 2009 and 2010 exploration programs and considers the project to be sufficiently robust to warrant conducting 1) additional definition drilling to increase the mineral

resources, 2) metallurgical testing to characterise the spodumene mineralisation grinding and

concentration parameters, and 3) a preliminary economical evaluation of the Project for a potential open pit mining operation.

19- RECOMMENDATIONS

The author considers that there is potential to increase the mineral resources of the Whabouchi deposit and to define mineral reserves for a potential open pit mining operation. The author recommends that Nemaska carry out all necessary work and property acquisition payments to secure the mining rights. The

proposed work program is as follows:

• Additional infill channels sampling at surface or shallow drilling focused on the western side of the deposit between sections 175 mE and 725 mE. The objective is to convert additional

resources to the Measured category between surface and the core of the mineral resources where

the pegmatites are the thickest and thus more prospective for a potential open pit mining operation. Please refer to section 16.11 for the proposed work program details. A total of 1,200 m

of channel or shallow drilling is proposed ($150,000 budget).

• Additional selective intermediate depth infill drilling in the same western thick area of the pegmatite swarm with the objective of 1) increasing the Measured mineral resources by

expanding core of the current Measured mineral resources and 2) extending the Indicated

resources categories at depth. Please refer to section 16.11 for the proposed work program details. A total of 3,000 m of intermediate depth drilling is proposed ($375,000 budget).

• Systematic infill drilling at 50 m drill spacing in the eastern side of the deposit between sections

725 mE and 1400 mE with the objective of converting the defined mineral resources to the Indicated category, first near surface then at depth. Drilling work for a total of 12 drill holes of

shallow and intermediate depth for 2,400 m is proposed ($300,000 budget).

• Additional deep drilling to test the down-dip extend of the deposit as demonstrated by the results from hole WHA-10-67 completed at the end of the spring 2010 drilling program. A 100 m drill

spacing is recommended to define additional mineral resources. A total of 14 relatively deep drill

holes for 4,000 m is proposed ($500,000 budget).

• Initial metallurgical study of the spodumene-bearing pegmatite mineralisation which includes grinding, floatation, pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical test work ($150,000 budget).

• A Preliminary Economic Assessment study (PEA) is recommended using an updated mineral resource estimate and results from a metallurgical study in order to evaluation the economics of a potential open pit mining operation ($125,000 budget).

In addition to the work recommendation listed above, the author recommends to carry out a baseline environmental study of the property and to conduct discussions with the communities neighbouring the

Whabouchi project and Hydro-Quebec about the impact of a potential open pit mining operation.


SGS,


20- REFERENCES

21.1 Property Description and Location

Nemaska Exploration Inc., 2009: Initial Public Offering Prospectus document dated December 18, 2009.

21.2 History

Elgring, F.H., 1962-63: Diamond Drilling, Lithium Occurrence, Township 1917, Quebec. Canico GM

57880.

Burns, J.G 1973: Summary Report, Geological Reconnaissance, July-August 1973. James Bay Nickel Ventures. Canex Placer ltd. GM 34021.

Pride, C., 1974 : Lake Sediment Geochemistry. SDBJ. GM 34044. Gleeson, C.F., 1975: Geochemical

Report on a Lake Sediment Survey, Bereziuk Lake, Eastmain River and Rupert River areas. GM 34046.

Gleeson, C.F., 1976: 126 plans d'un levé géochimique (sediments de lac), region du lac Bereziuk, rivière Eastmain et rivière Rupert, SDBJ. GM 34047.

Goyer, M., Picard, M., Lavoie, L., Larose, P.Y., 1978: Projet vérification d'anomalies géochimiques, permis SDBJ 3. SDBJ. GM 34175.

Bertrand, C., 1978: Rapport sur une pegmatite à spodumène, lac des Montagnes. Projet 402-1378-31. SDBJ, GM 38134.

Otis, M., 1980: Projet Lien (402-1379-31) S.D.B.J. GM 37998.

Fortin, R., 1981: Rapport final, levé géophysique aéroporté, régions de Elmer Eastmain, Lac des

Montagnes, Lac du Glas, projet S80-5117 par Questor Surveys Ltd et Les Relevés Géophysiques inc.,

S.D.B.J. GM 38445.

Charbonneau, R., 1982: Relevés géophysiques, électromagnétiques et magnétiques au sol, secteur de la bande sédimentaire de Nemiscau, comté d'Ungava, province de Québec. S.D.B.J. Programme Lac des Montagnes. GM 39991.

McConnell, T.J., 1987: Dighem III Survey, for Westmin Resources Ltd., Nemiscau Project Quebec by Dighem Surveys and Processing inc., GM 45242.

Brunelle, S., 1987: Report on Geophysical Surveys, Lac des Montagnes Property, Quebec. Muscocho Explorations Ltd., GM 44641.

Gillian, S., 1987: Report on VLF-EM Survey, Over the Lac des Montagnes Claim Group. Muscocho Explorations Ltd., GM 46065.

Zuiderveen, J., 1988: Diamond Drill Record, Lac des Montagnes Property. Muscocho Explorations Ltd. GM 47429.

Babineau, J., 2002: Spodumene Lake Project, Quebec, June 12-15, 2001. Rock Sampling and Assaying,

Assessment Report NTS 320/12. Inco Ltd., GM 59815.


scut


Beaupré, M.A., 2008: Examen de la propriété et échantillonnage, visite de terrain, propriété du lac Levac

situé sur le territoire de la Baie James. Golden Goose Resources, GM 63939.

Théberge, D., 2009: NI 43-101 Qualifying Report, Whabouchi Property, James Bay area, NTS sheet

320/12, prepared by Solumines for Nemaska Exploration Inc.

21.3 Geological Settings

Valiquette, G., 1964: Preliminary Report, Geology of Lemare Lake Area, Mistassini Lake Territory. Department of Natural Resources, Quebec, RP 518.

Valiquette, G., 1965: Preliminary Report, Geology of Cramoisy Lake Area. Mistassini Territory.

Department of Natural Resources, Quebec, RP 534.

Valiquette, G., 1975: Région de la rivière Nemiscau. Ministère des Richesses Naturelles du Québec RG 158.

Marcotte, R., 1980: Gîtes et indices de chromite au Québec. Ministère de l'Énergie et des Ressources du Québec. DPV 724.

Card, K.D., and Ciesielski, A., 1986: DNAG #1. Subdivisions of the Superior Province of the Canadian Shield. Geoscience Canada.

Hocq, M., 1994: La Province du Supérieur; in Geologie du Québec, (ed.) M. Hocq, P. Verpaelst, T. Clark,

D. Lamothe, D. Brisebois, J. Brun, G. Martineau, Les publications du Québec, p. 7-20. MM94-01.

MRNFQ 1998: Résultats d'analyse de sédiments de fond de lacs, grand nord du Québec. MRNFQ, DP

98-01.

Moukhsil.L.A., Legault, M., Boily, M., Doyon, J., Sawyer, E., Davis, D.W., 2002: Synthèse géologique et métallogénique de la ceinture de roches vertes de la moyenne et de la basse Eastmain (Baie James).

Ministère des Ressources Naturelles du Québec., ET 2002-06, ET 2007-01.

21.2 Deposit Model

Sinclair, W.D., 1996: Granitic pegmatites; in Geology of Canadian Mineral Deposit Types, (ed.) O.R. Eckstrand, W.D. Sinclair, and R.I. Thorpe; Geological Survey of Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 8,

p.503-512 (also Geological society of America, The Geology of North America, v. P-1).



21- SIGNATURE PAGE

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimation Whabouchi Property, James Bay, Quebec

(According to National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1)

Prepared for

Nemaska Exploration Inc. 450 rue de la Gare du Palais

C.P. 10

Québec (Québec) G1K 3X2

Tel: (418) 704-6038 Fax: (418) 948-9106

Signed in Blainville, Québec, on July 14, 2010

André Laferrière, M.Sc. P.Geo

Senior Geologist — SGS Canada Inc. (Geostat)



22- CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFICATION

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR

André Laferrière M.Sc. P.Geo

To Accompany the Report entitled

"NI 43-101 Technical Report Mineral Resource Estimation Whabouchi Lithium Deposit.

Nemaska Exploration Inc." dated July 14, 2010

I, André Laferrière, M.Sc. P.Geo., do hereby certify that:

1) I am senior geologist with SGS Canada Inc. - Geostat with an office at 10 Blvd Seigneurie East, Suite 203, Blainville, Quebec, Canada, J7C 3V5;

2) I am a graduate from Université de Montréal in 1995 and 1999;

3) I am a registered member of the Ordre Géologue du Quebec (#557);

4) I have worked as a geologist continuously since my graduation from university;

5) I have read the definition of "Qualified Person" set out in the National Instrument 43-101 and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be an independent qualified person for the purposes of NI 43-101;

6) I have participated in the preparation of all sections of this technical report;

7) I have visited the site from March 10 to 12, 2010;

8) I have no personal knowledge as of the date of this certificate of any material fact or change, which is not reflected in this report;

9) Neither I, nor any affiliated entity of mine, is at present, under an agreement, arrangement or understanding or expects to become, an insider, associate, affiliated entity or employee of Nemaska Exploration Inc., or any associated or affiliated entities;

10) Neither I, nor any affiliated entity of mine, own, directly or indirectly, nor expect to receive, any interest in the properties or securities of Nemaska Exploration Inc., or any associated or affiliated companies;

11) Neither I, nor any affiliated entity of mine, have earned the majority of our income during the preceding three years from Nemaska Exploration Inc., or any associated or affiliated companies

12) I have read NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and have prepared the technical report in compliance with NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1; and have prepared the report in conformity with generally accepted Canadian mining industry practice, and as of the date of the certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not misleading.


SGS


Signed at Blainville, Quebec this 14th day of July 2010

André Laferrière, M.Sc. P.Geo, Senior geologist SGS Canada Inc. - Geostat


SGS


APPENDIX A: PICTURES FROM SITE VISIT


SGS

Outside Nemaska's core logging facilities at the Nemiscau camp

Core logging facilities at the Nemiscau camp



SGS


Core splitting and sample preparation station adjacent to the logging facilities

Core storage facilities nearby Nemiscau camp



Drill setup for WHA-10-44 at the Whabouchi Property

Large spodumene (center) with smaller beryl (dark blue) minerals in NQ drill core


SGS


APPENDIX B: LIST OF CLAIMS


SGS


Page 68

SNRC sheet Row Column Title type Title number Title status Inscription date Expiry date Area (Ha)

Accrued

work

Required

work

Mining

duties Title Holder

32012 21 17 CDC 101251 Actif 03/11/2005 02/11/2011 53.41 0 1200 52 Exploration Nemaska inc.






























































SGS,_


APPENDIX C: SAMPLE PREPARATION PROTOCOL


SGS

SAMPLE PREPARATION PROTOCOLS AT THE

CENTRE D'ÉTUDE APPLIQUÉE DU QUATERNAIRE

of reject Duplicate

BEGGINING OF EACH

>- cc

tn CL LU 2 ~ W

cc d

1. Log sample and weigh 18. Place the ring, puck and sub-sample Into the grinding barrel (add 2 ml of ethanol If needed)

SET

2. Dry off sample

19. Place cover on the grinding barrel and put the bowl on the pulverizer. Close the door of the pulverizer

3. Make a mecanical verifica-tion of equipments

4. Make sure that equipements and accesories are clean

20. Start the pulverizer, make sure that the timer is set

5. Start ventilation

BATCH OF SAMPLES

or

AFTER TIMER IS CORRECTLY

~ z_ _ tn ~ ~ U

~

6. Start jaw crusher a. Pulverized during 3 minutes

b. Make granulometric test on the pulp

C. Increase or decrease time of pulveriza-tion if needed

d. Make granulometric test at each 10 samples

If material change rapidly. make granuiometre test mare often

7. Place sample on the crusher receptacle

8. Wait until the sample is completely crushed (= 80% passing 9 mesh) 21. When pulverization Is complete*, place

grinding barrel on the finishing station

9. Clean crusher with compressed air

22. Remove the barrel cover, ring and puck and pour the sample on a sheet of paper

z I— I— CL Cr)

10. Pour sample Into a riffle splitter

23. Homogenese sample by rolling-up 40 times on itself. Place the pulp Into Its enveloppe. Throw the sheet of paper in the garbage and clean the brush

11. Repeat step 10 until to have a 250 to 500 gram sub-sample

24. Place the enveloppe containing the pulp in a clean tray following the numerical order

12. Replace the sub-sample into its pan with the enveioppe that will contain the pulp 25. Replace grinding elements in the barrel

and clean out with 100 g of silica sand (pulverized 1.0-15 seconds)

OU 13. Place reject in a plastic bag

and foward to storage

Repeat steps 10 to 12 to do another sub-sample with the same material 26. Remove barrel from the pulverizer, open

the cover and throw the cleaning material

14. Clean splitter, pan and reject station with vacuum cleaner and compressed air

27. Clean barrel, ring and puck thoroughly with the vacuum cleaner and compressed air

15. Proceed with the next

sample by repeating steps 7 to 14

28. When the tray containing pulp enveloppes is full, foward to the expedition station

End of work shift

Clean work station, equipments and tools

thoroughly at the end of each shift

*:The sub-sample is pulverized to the granulometry required by the laboratory that will analysed the pulp.

NO

ldz1

a3

nln

d

Cry TJCM.

W" ,,,„ ENTRE D'ÉTUDE APPLIQUÉE

DU

QUATERNAIRE


Page 70



APPENDIX D: ANALYTICAL PROTOCOLS


SGS


SGT Minerals Services METHOD SUMMARY

ICM90A Determination of Fifty-five (55) Elements in Geological Samples using Sodium Peroxide Fusion and a Combination of Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS)

1. Parameter(s) measured, unit(s): Silver (Ag); Aluminum (Al); Arsenic (As): Boron (B); Barium (Bal; Beryllium (Be); Bismuth (Bi); Calcium (Ca); Cadmium (Cd); Cerium (Ce); Chromium (Cr); Cobalt (Co); Cesium (Cs); Copper (Cu); Dysprosium (Dy); Erbium (Er); Europium (Eu): Iron (Fe): Gallium (Ga): Gadolinium (Gd); Germanium (Ge); Hafnium (Hf); Holmium (Ho); Indium (In); Potassium (K): Lanthanum (La); Lithium (Li); Lutetium (Lu); Magnesium (Mg); Manganese (Mn); Molybdenum (Mo); Niobium (Nb); Neodymium (Nd); Nickel (Ni); Phosphorus (P); Lead (Pb); Praseodymium (Pr); Rubidium (Rb); Scandium (Sc); Samarium (Sm); Tin(Sn); Strontium (Sr); Tantalum (Ta); Terbium (Tb); Thallium (TI); Thorium (Th); Titanium (Ti); Thulium (Tm); Uranium (U);Vanadium(V);Tungsten(W);Yttrium (Y); Ytterbium (Yb); Zinc (Zn); Zirconium (Zr) : ppm and %

2. Typical sample size: 0.10 g

3. Type of sample applicable (media): Crushed and Pulverized rocks, soils and sediments

4. Sample preparation technique used: Crushed and pulverized rock, soil and /or sediment samples are fused by Sodium peroxide in graphite crucibles and dissolved using dilute HNO,. During digestion the sample is split into 2 and half is given to ICP-OES and the other half is given to ICP-MS.

5. Method of analysis used: The digested sample solution is aspirated into the inductively coupled plasma Mass Spectrometer (ICP-MS) where the ions are measured and quantified according to their unique mass and the other half aspirated into the inductively coupled plasma Optical Emission Spectrometer (ICP-OES) where the atoms in the plasma emit light (photons) with characteristic wavelengths for each element. This light is recorded by optical spectrometers and when calibrated against standards the technique provides a quantitative analysis of the original sample.

6. Data reduction by: The results are exported via computer, on line. data fed to the SGS Laboratory Information Management System (SLIM) with secure audit trail.

7. Figures of Merit: This method has been fully validated for the range of samples typically analyzed. Method validation includes the use of certified reference materials, replicates and blanks to calculate accuracy, precision, linearity, range. limit of detection, limit of quantification, specificity and measurement uncertainty.

SGS Minerals Services wiw. SC's. co IT

Member of SGS Group (Société Générale de Surveillance )



SGS Minerals Services METHOD SUMMARY

Element Reporting Limit (ppm)




Ag 1.00 Er 0.05 Mn 10 Tb 0.05 Al 0.01(%) Eu 0.05 Mo 2.00 Th 0.10 As 30 Fe 0.01(%) Nb 1.00 Ti 0.01(%) Ba 0.50 Ga 1.00 Nd 0.10 TI 0.50 Be 5.00 Gd 0.05 Ni 5.00 Tm 0.05 Bi 0.10 Ge 1.00 P 0.01(%) U 0.05 Ca 0.01(%) Hf 1.00 Pb 5.00 V 5.00 Cd 0.20 Ho 0.05 Pr 0.05 W 1.00 Ce 0.10 In 0.20 Rb 0.20 Y 0.50 Co 0.50 K 0.01(%) Sc 5.00 Yb 0.10 Cr 10 La 0.10 Sm 0.10 Zn 5.00 Cs 0.10 Li 10 Sn 1.00 Zr 0.50 Cu 5.00 Lu 0.05 Sr 0.10 Dy 0.05 Mg 0.01(%) Ta 0.50

8. Qua ity control: The ICP-OES and ICP-MS are calibrated with each work order. An instrument blank and calibration check is analyzed with each run. Method blanks, reference material and replicates are randomly placed within the batch. All QC samples are verified using SLIM. The acceptance criteria are statistically controlled and control charts are used to monitor accuracy and precision. Data that falls outside the control limits is investigated and repeated as necessary.

9. Accreditation: The Standards Council of Canada has accredited this test in conformance with the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025. See www.scc.ca for scope of accreditation

SGS Minerals Services wWw.sas.com

Member of SGS Group (Société Générale de Surveillance)


SGS


SGS Minerals Services METHOD SUMMARY

ICP90Q : Ore Grade Analysis of Base Metals by Sodium peroxide Fusion and ICP-OES.

1. Parameter(s) measured, unit(s): Cobalt (Co); Copper (Cu); Nickel (Ni); Lead (Pb); Zinc (Zn); Lithium (Li): %

2. Typical sample size: 0.20 g

3. Type of sample applicable (media): Crushed and Pulverized rocks, soils and sediments

4. Sample preparation technique used: Crushed and pulverized rock, soil and /or sediment samples are fused by Sodium peroxide in zirconium crucibles and dissolved using dilute HNO3.

5. Method of analysis used: The digested sample solution is analyzed by inductively coupled plasma Optical Emission Spectrometer (ICP-OES). Samples are analyzed against known calibration materials to provide quantitative analysis of the original sample.

6. Data reduction by: The results are exported via computer, on line, data fed to the SGS Laboratory Information Management System (SLIM) with secure audit trail.

7. Figures of Merit: This method has been fully validated for the range of samples typically analyzed. Method validation includes the use of certified reference materials, replicates and blanks to calculate accuracy, precision, linearity, range, and limit of detection, limit of quantification, specificity and measurement uncertainty.

Element Reporting Limit % Element Reporting Limit % Co 0.01 Pb 0.01 Cu 0.01 Zn 0.01 Ni 0.01 Li 0.01

8. Quality control: Instrument calibration is performed for each batch or work order and calibration checks are analyzed within each analytical run. Quality control materials include method blanks, replicates and reference materials and are randomly inserted with the frequency set according to method protocols at —14%. Quality assurance measures of precision and accuracy are verified statistically using SLIM control charts with set criteria for data acceptance. Data that fails is subject to investigation and repeated as necessary.

9. Accreditation: The Standards Council of Canada has accredited this test in conformance with the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025. See www.scc.ca for scope of accreditation

SGS Minerals Services www.s s com

Member of SGS Group (Société Générale de Surveillance)


SGS


ALS Chemex ALS

Assay Procedure — Li-OG63

Ore Grade Lithium by Four Acid Digestion - ICPAES finish

Sample Decomposition:

HNO3-HCIO4-HF-HCI Digestion (ASY-4A02o) Analytical Method:

Inductively Coupled Plasma - Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP - AES)

This method is suitable for analyzing lithium in geological samples. A -0.4g sample is first digested with HCIO4, HF, and HNO3 until dryness. The residue is subsequently re-digested in concentrated HCI, cooled and topped up to volume. The samples are analyzed for Li by ICPAES spectroscopy.

Element Symbol Units Lower Limit

Upper Limit

Lithium Li % 0.01 10


SGS


APPENDIX E: MINERALOGICAL REPORT


SGS

An Investigation by High Definition Mineralogy into

THE MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SIX COMPOSITE SAMPLES FROM THE WACHOUBI PEGMATITE DEPOSIT

prepared for

NEMASKA EXPLORATION Project 12440-001, M15011-MAY Final Report

July 19, 2010

NOTE: The practice of this Company in issuing reports of this nature is to require the recipient not to publish the report or any part thereof without the written consent of SGS Minerals Services. This document is issued by the Company under its General Conditions of Service accessible at http://www.sgs.com/terms_and_conditions.htm. Attention is drawn to the limitation of liability, indemnification and jurisdiction issues defined therein. WARNING: The sample(s) to which the findings recorded herein (the 'Findings') relate was (were) drawn and / or provided by the Client or by a third party acting at the Client's direction. The Findings constitute no warranty of the sample's representativity of the goods and strictly relate to the sample(s). The Company accepts no liability with regard to the origin or source from which the sample(s) is/are said to be extracted. The findings report on the samples provided by the client and are not intended for commercial or contractual settlement purposes. Any unauthorized alteration, forgery or falsification of the content or appearance of this document is unlawful and offenders may be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Test method information available upon

SGS Canada Inc. P.O. Box 4300, 185 Concession Street, Lakefield, Ontario, Canada KOL 2H0 Tel: (705) 652-2000 Fax: (705) 652-6365 www.met.sgs.com www.ca.sgs.com

Member of the SGS Group (SGS SA)

Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - M15011-MAY10

Table of Contents

Executive Summary iv Introduction viii Testwork Summary 1

1.Sample Receipt and Preparation 1 2.Operational Modes and Quality Control 2

2.1.Operational Modes 2 2.2.X-ray Diffraction Analysis 2 2.3.QEMSCANTM Operational Statistics and Assay Reconciliation 4

3.Mineralogical Analyses of the -10 Mesh and -212 µm Samples 8 3.1.-10 Mesh Samples 8 3.2.K80 -212 µm Samples 23

3.2.1.Modal Mineralogy 23 3.2.2.Liberation and Association of the Li Minerals 26

3.3.Comparison of Modal Abundance of the -10 Mesh and K80 -212 .im Analyses 29 4.Mineralogical Analyses of the Composite Sample 29

4.1.Modal Mineralogy 29 4.2.Grain Size Distribution 32 4.3.Electron Microprobe Analyses 33 4.4.Elemental Deportment of Rubidium 33

5.Liberation and Association 34 5.1.Li Minerals Liberation and Association 34

5.1.1.Li Minerals Liberation 34 5.1.2.Microcline Liberation 39 5.1.3.Muscovite Liberation 42

6.Determinative Mineralogy 45 6.1.Mineral Release Curves 45 6.2.Grade — Recovery Curves 46

Conclusions and Recommendations 47 Appendix A — Certificate of Analysis 50 Appendix B — XRD Analysis 53 Appendix C — EMPA 65 Appendix D —QEMSCANTM Modes of Operation 69

SGS Minerals Services

Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - M115011 -MAY10 ii

List of Tables Table 1: Summary of XRD Analysis 3 Table 2: Summary of Semi-Quantitative XRD Analysis 3 Table 3: Mineral List and Formulas 4 Table 4: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the -10 Mesh Samples 5 Table 5: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the K80 of 212 µm Samples 6 Table 6: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the Composite 7 Table 7: Modal Analysis of the -10 Mesh Samples 9 Table 8: Bulk Modal Analysis of the K80 -212 µm Samples 25 Table 9: Normalized Mass of Li Minerals in the K80 -212 µm Samples 26 Table 10: Bulk Modal Analysis of the Composite 31 Table 11: Minimum (Min), Maximum (Max) and Average (Ave) EMPA 33 Table 12: Normalized Liberation Mass of Li Minerals of the Composite 36 Table 13: Normalized Liberation Mass of Microcline of the Composite Sample 39 Table 14: Normalized Liberation Mass of Muscovite of the Composite 42

List of Figures Figure 1: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the -10 Mesh Samples 6 Figure 2: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the K80 of 212 µm Samples 7 Figure 3: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the Composite 8 Figure 4: Graphical Summary of Mineral Distribution of the -10 Mesh Samples 10 Figure 5: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the MW -10 Mesh Sample (PTS) 11 Figure 6: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the MW -10 Mesh Sample (PS) 12 Figure 7: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the ME -10 Mesh Sample (PTS) 13 Figure 8: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the ME -10 Mesh Sample (PS) 14 Figure 9: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the SW -10 Mesh Sample (PTS) 15 Figure 10: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the SW -10 Mesh Sample (PS) 16 Figure 11: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the SE -10 Mesh Sample (PTS) 17 Figure 12: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the SE -10 Mesh Sample (PS) 18 Figure 13: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the PP -10 Mesh Sample (PTS) 19 Figure 14: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the PP -10 Mesh Sample (PS) 20 Figure 15: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the WW -10 Mesh Sample (PTS) 21 Figure 16: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the WW -10 Mesh Sample (PS) 22 Figure 17: Summary of Mineral Distribution of the -212 µm Samples 25 Figure 18: Li Mineral Liberation and Association of the K80 -212 µm Samples 27 Figure 19: Image Grid Illustrating a Visual Representation of the Liberation/Association of Li Minerals

in the K80 -212 µm Samples 28 Figure 20: Comparison of Mineral Distributions Between the -10 Mesh and the K80 -212 µm Samples 29 Figure 21: Mineral Distribution by Size Fraction and Calculated for the Head of the Composite 31 Figure 22: Cumulative Average Grain Size Distribution of Major Minerals of the Composite 32 Figure 23: Elemental Deportment of Rubidium in the Composite 34 Figure 24: Li Minerals Liberation and Association Profile of the Composite 36 Figure 25: Image Grids Based on Liberation and Association of Li Minerals of the Composite 37 Figure 26: Li Minerals Liberation by Size Characteristics of the Composite 38 Figure 27: Microcline Liberation and Association of the Composite Sample 39 Figure 28: Image Grid Based on Liberation and Association of Microcline of the Composite Sample 40 Figure 29: Microcline Liberation by Size Characteristics of the Composite 41 Figure 30: Muscovite Liberation and Association of the Composite Sample 42 Figure 31: Image Grids Based on Liberation and Association of Muscovite of the Composite Sample 43



111

Figure 32: Muscovite Liberation by Size Characteristics of the Composite Sample 44 Figure 33: Mineral Release Curves for Li Minerals, Microcline and Muscovite for the Composite Sample45 Figure 34: Grade-Recovery Curves for Li Minerals of the Composite 46 Figure 35: Grade-Recovery Curves for Rb of the Composite 47


Nemaska Exploration - 92440-009 - M115011 -MAY10 iv

Executive Summary The mineralogical examination of the samples was carried out with X-ray diffraction (XRD), QEMSCAN,

electron microprobe and chemical analysis. A summary of the results is presented below.

Modal Mineralogy

• The results from the XRD and QEMSCAN` are in close agreement.

XRD Analysis

• Semi-quantitative XRD analysis was performed on a sub-sample of the -10 mesh material for QEMSCANTM set up and quality control purposes. These results are summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, and the complete XRD report is presented in Appendix B. The XRD results are consistent with QEMSCANTM data.

• Sample MW (-10 mesh) consists (in wt%) of quartz (36.9%), albite (26.7%), spodumene (14.4%), muscovite (11.7%), microcline (9.8%), trace amounts of beryl (0.5%). Note: that this sample does not contain petalite.

• Sample ME (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (36.2%), albite (25.1%), spodumene 20.2%, muscovite 9.1%, microcline 6.0%, and petalite 3.4%

• Sample SW (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (32.6%), albite (21.9%), spodumene (12.8%), muscovite (10.0%), microcline (9.9%) and petalite (12.8%).

• Sample SE (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (33.8%), albite (28.8%), spodumene (15.5%), muscovite (7.6%), microcline (14.3%). Note: that there was no petalite identified in this sample.

• Sample PP (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (35.3%), albite (25.5%), spodumene (10.4%), muscovite (9.6%), microcline (11.6%) and petalite (7.5%).

• Sample WP (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (29.8%), albite (37.3%), muscovite (5.5%), microcline (26.3%), kaolinite (1.0%). Note: that neither petalite or spodumene were identified in this sample

QEMSCAN Analysis of the -10 mesh Samples

• An effort was made to distinguish between spodumene and petalite. However, due to the close chemical composition of the two minerals it was difficult. Thus, the two minerals were combined and reported together for simplicity reasons as Li Minerals. The Li content used for reconciliation purposes for the Li minerals was calculated based on a simple mass balance between the spodumene and petalite using the semi-quantitative XRD analyses.


Nemaska Exploration - 92440-009 - M15019-MAY10 v

• The MW consists of Na-feldspar (24.2%) and microcline (17.9%), quartz (32.9%), Li minerals (19.1%), muscovite (5.1%) and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet and other minerals.

• The ME consists of Na-feldspar (24.4%) and microcline (10.4%), quartz (34.1%), Li minerals (25.6%), muscovite (4.5%) and trace amounts (<0.5%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet, apatite and other minerals.

• The SW consists of Na-feldspar (20.7%) and microcline (15.2%), quartz (36.1%), Li minerals (19.5%), muscovite (6.4%) and trace amounts (<1%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet, apatite and other minerals.

• The SE consists of Na-feldspar (26.0%) and microcline (16.8%), quartz (30.5%), Li minerals (22.2%), muscovite (3.2%) and trace amounts (<1%) of garnet, apatite and other minerals.

• The PP consists of Na-feldspar (23.0%) and microcline (15.6%), quartz (32.0%), Li minerals (24.7%), muscovite (3.6%) and trace amounts (<1%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet, apatite and other minerals.

• The WP consists of Na-feldspar (39.1%) and microcline (29.3%), quartz (25.1%), Li minerals (1.8%), muscovite (2.9%) and trace amounts (<1%) of garnet, biotite and other minerals.

QEMSCANTm Analysis of the K80 -212 /MI Samples

• The MW sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (25.5%) and microcline (14.0%), quartz (38.0%), Li minerals (17.7%), muscovite (4.0%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet and other minerals.

• The ME sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (24.9%) and microcline (8.5%), quartz (36.6%), Li minerals (26.9%), muscovite (2.5%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet, apatite and other minerals.

• The SW sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (19.2%) and microcline (13.6%), quartz (38.8%), Li minerals (22.6%), muscovite (3.1%), and trace amounts (<1.5%) of garnet, apatite and other minerals.

• The SE sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (27.4%) and microcline (18.2%), quartz (23.8%), Li minerals (27.8%), muscovite (2.5%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet and other minerals.

• The PP sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (24.6%) and microcline (13.9%), quartz (28.7%), Li minerals (28.3%), muscovite (4.2%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of other minerals.


Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - M115011 -MAY10 vi

• The WP sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (38.9%) and microcline (28.6%), quartz (28.1%), Li minerals (2.2%), muscovite (1.9%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet, biotite and other minerals.

Liberation of Li Minerals in the K80 -212 !MI Samples

• Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 95.6% for ME and trace amounts (<2%) of middling particles.

• Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 86.2% for MW, along with moderate amounts of quaternary particles with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (11.4%).

• Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 89.9% for PP, minor amounts with microcline (4.5%) and traces (<2%) with other minerals.

• Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 97.9% for SE, and trace (<2%) with other minerals.

• Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 87.9% for SW, moderate amounts of quaternary with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (6.6%) and quartz (3.2%), and trace (<2%) with other minerals

• Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 58.2% for WP, significant amounts of quaternary with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (21.1 %), microcline (9.1%), quartz (7.0%), and Na-feldspars (3.9%).

Comparison of Modal Abundance of the -10 Mesh and K80 -212 pm Analyses

• A comparison of the mineral abundances of the -10 mesh and the K80 -212 µm samples yields a good reconciliation with a R2 of —0.97. This is acceptable given the size difference in the samples between the two analyses.

Composite Sample

Modal Mineralogy

• The Composite sample consists mainly of Na-feldspar (25.3%) and microcline (15.9%), quartz (31.4%), Li minerals (22.4%), muscovite (3.4%), and trace amounts of garnet (1.1%), apatite and other phases. Ta-Nb minerals are rare.

• Most of the Li minerals occur in the two coarse fractions (6.3% in the +425 pm, and 8.6% in the -425/+212 pm fraction) and decreases to 3.4% to 2.4% to 1.6% in the finer fractions.

Cumulative Grain Size Distribution

• The d50 (mid point in the size distribution) is for Li Minerals is 143 pm, Na-feldspars is 112 pm, microcline is 114 pm, muscovite is 70 pm, and quartz 140 pm. The Particle curve includes all the mineral phases and about 50% of all particles are more than 155 pm. Li Minerals and quartz


Nemaska Exploration - 12440-001 - M115011 -MAY10 vii

show the coarsest grain size distribution, followed by feldspars and muscovite.

Electron Microprobe Analyses

• Electron microprobe analyses were carried out on Li minerals, feldspars and muscovite to determine their major and trace element content. Spodumene consists of (all average wt% values) Si02 63.29%, A1203 26.81%, MnO 0.13% and FeO 0.92%. Petalite consists of (all average wt% values) Si02 77.23%, A1203 16.60%, while all other elements are close to below the detection limit.

• The Rb20 content in microcline averages 1.20 wt% (or Rb=1.1%) and that in muscovite 1.13 wt% (or Rb=1.03).

Elemental Deportment of Rubidium

• The distribution of Rb is calculated based on the mineral mass and average Rb values from the electron microprobe analyses. Microcline accounts for 83.2% and muscovite 16.8% of the total Rb content in the sample.

Liberation and Association of Li Minerals

• Free and liberated Li Minerals account for 86.4% (69.4% is free). Quaternary middling particles of Li Minerals with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars account for 6.4%, binary middling particles with quartz for 4.8%, and with Na-feldspars for 1.6%.

• Liberation increases by -17% from, the coarse to the fine fraction, 78.9% to 85.4% to 92.5% to 95.5% to 94.8%. Values of the quaternary middling particles of Li Minerals decrease, in the same order, by -13% (12.4% to 1.3%) and middlings with Na-feldspars by -5% (5.8% to 0.9%).

• Liberation based on size class of Li Minerals indicates that liberated particles occur between -5 to >600 pm, while middling particles generally decrease with decreasing particle size and are minor below -70 pm.

Microcline Liberation and Association

• Free and liberated microcline account for 88.5% (78.4% is free). Quaternary middling particles of microcline with Li Minerals/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars account for 4.7%, and binary middling particles with Na-feldspars for 4.7%, and quartz for 1.2%.

• Liberation increases by -18% from, the coarse to the fine fraction, 77.6% to 95.4%. Values of the quaternary middling particles of microcline decrease, in the same order, by -12% (13.9% to 1.3%) and middlings with Na-feldspars by -5% (7.2% to 1.6%).

• Liberation based on size class for microcline indicates that liberated particles occur throughout all the size classes from -5 to >600 pm. Middling particles occur mainly in the >225 pm size classes, and generally decrease with decreasing particle size and are minor below -210 pm.

• Muscovite Liberation and Association

• Free and liberated muscovite account for 78.4% (74.4% is free). Quaternary middling particles of muscovite with Li Minerals/microcline/quartz/Na-feldspars account for 12.2%, binary middling particles with microcline for 2.3%, with Na-feldspars for 2.1%, and quartz for 1.8%.

• Liberation increases by -17% from, the coarse to the fine fraction, 61.3% to 88.1%. Values of the quaternary middling particles of muscovite decrease, in the same order, by -29% (31.0% to 1 .9%).

• Liberation based on size class for muscovite occurs throughout all the size classes from -5 to <480 pm. Middling particles occur mainly in the >240 pm size classes, but smaller amounts are observed in the finer size classes.

Mineral Release for Li Minerals, Microcline and Muscovite


Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - M15011-MAY10 viii

• Liberation of Li Minerals ranges from 79% to 85% to 92% to 96% to 95% for sizes at 691 pm, 300 pm, 150 pm, 63 pm and 11 pm; that for microcline from 78% to 85% to 92% and 95% in the last two fractions; and that for muscovite from 61% to 81% to 80% to 86% to 88% for the same sizes respectively.

• Note: that liberation of Li minerals and microcline is higher than that of muscovite. Overall liberation for the three minerals is very good at >92% for Li minerals and microcline, and >80% for muscovite, respectively. Liberation does not increase significantly below the 63 pm.

Grade Recovery of Li and Rb

• Grades and recoveries of Li Minerals increase from the coarse to the fine fraction as expected from the liberation values. Overall, the grade recovery curve representing the whole sample indicates Li grades between 3.4% and 3.2% for recoveries of 86% to -99%, respectively. The best Li grades are projected for the fine fraction between 3.5% and 3.4% for recoveries of 95% to -99%, respectively.

• The grades and recoveries for Rb include both microcline and muscovite. They increase from the coarse to the fine fraction. Overall, the grade recovery curve representing the whole sample indicates grades between 1.1% and 1% Rb for recoveries of 88% to 98%, respectively. The best grades are projected for the fine fraction between 1.1% and 1% Rb for recoveries of 97% to -99%, respectively.

Introduction This summary report describes a mineralogical test program using High Definition Mineralogy, including QEMSCANTM technology (Quantitative Evaluation of Materials by Scanning Electron Microscopy), X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), Electron Microprobe Analysis (EMPA) and chemical analysis conducted on six composite samples, referred to as MW, ME, SW, SE, PP and WP, submitted by Nemaska Exploration. The purpose of this test program was to determine the overall mineral assemblage and textural characteristics in each sample, and the liberation/association of the Li minerals.

Sarah Prout, Ph.D Project Mineralogist Advanced Mineralogy Facility


NAL og °e+

/}\ ~

/41514$L$5AAIMI'x:PCI.CS a T6IN0 MEMtltR 1811 okTAQ,o

Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - M115011 -MAY10 ix

Tassos Grammatikopoulos, Ph.D., P.Geo. Senior Process Mineralogist Advanced Mineralogy Facility

Sample Preparation by: A. Brock, QEMSCAN M Operation by: N. Morton Data Processing by: S. Prout, N. Morton Report preparation by: Tassos Grammatikopoulos Report reviewed by: Chris Gunning and Sarah Prout


Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - M115011 -MAY10 1

Testwork Summary

Sample Receipt and Preparation

Six drill core composite samples, named MW, ME, SW, SE, PP and WP, were received as -10 mesh

material and were submitted to the mineralogy department at SGS Canada Inc., Lakefield site, by

Nemaska Exploration. The project number 12440-001 and the LIMS number MI5011-MAY10 was

assigned to the test work.

From each of the -10 mesh samples, approximately 100 grams was riffled then further micro-riffled for:

• chemical analysis including whole rock analyses (WRA) by XRF for major elements, and Rb and Be by XRF and Li by ICP;

• polished thin section and polished section preparation for QEMSCANTh` analysis; and

• XRD analysis for quality control and calibration for the QEMSCANTh` (and discriminate between the spodumene and petalite). Note: the XRD analyses are referred to as -10 mesh samples.

Another portion of the -10 mesh material was also riffled and stage crushed at K80 of 212 µm. One

graphite impregnated polished grain mount was made form each sample and submitted for

QEMSCANTh`. These are referred to as K80 -212 µm samples.

Further to this, an additional 300 grams form each sample were riffled with the exception of the WP

sample which is considered waste. Each sample was screened at 212 µm to temporarily remove the

fine particles. Subsequently the oversized material was blended and stage crushed to K80 425 µm.

Then, the -212 µm material and the staged crushed oversized material were blended to create a

master composite. Five size fractions were generated based on the mass distribution and included:

+425µm (19.8 wt%), -425/+212µm (34.0%), -212/+106µm (17.4 wt%), -106/+38µm (14.4 wt%)

and -38µm (14.3 wt%). A micro-riffled sub-sample of each size fraction was submitted for whole

rock analyses by XRF (including SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3, MgO and CaO), Rb and Be by XRF and Li by

ICP for data validation and reconciliation purposes. The results are presented in the assay

reconciliation portion of this report, and the Certificate of Chemical Analysis is appended. A total

of eight graphite-impregnated polished epoxy grain mounts were prepared, which included two from

each of the first three coarse fractions and one from the finer two fractions. The graphite



impregnated polished grain mounts were submitted for mineralogical analyses using QEMSCANTM

technology.

The chemical certificate of analysis is presented in Appendix A, the XRD results in Appendix B, the

electron microprobe data in Appendix C and the modes of QEMSCANTm operation in Appendix D.

Operational Modes and Quality Control

Operational Modes

Two modes of QEMSCANTM analysis were used for this project which included Particle Mineral Analysis (PMA) and Specific Mineral Search (SMS). A full description of these and other methods is appended.

The PMA scans the entire polished section and provides a statistically robust population of mineral identifications based on X-ray chemistry of minerals. It should be noted that the energy dispersive X-ray characteristics for magnetite and hematite are nearly identical and that these two minerals cannot reliably be distinguished by QEMSCANTM Light elements such as Li, B, Be, O and H cannot be discriminated by the QEMSCANTM

analysis. The identification of the Li Minerals and the distinction from other minerals in the samples is based on the calibrated Al:Si ratios.

Particle Mineral Analysis (PMA) is a two-dimensional mapping analysis aimed at resolving liberation

and locking characteristics of a generic set of particles. A pre-defined number of particles are

mapped at a point spacing selected in order to spatially resolve and describe mineral textures and

associations. This mode is often selected to characterize concentrate products, as both gangue and

value minerals report in statistically abundant quantities to be resolved.

An SMS is a modified Particle Mineral Analysis (PMA) routine. However, in an SMS routine a phase (e.g. sulphides) that reports as a low-grade constituent can be located by thresholding of the back-scattered electron intensity. Any accompanying phases of similar and higher brightness are also mapped. The SMS analysis was performed in order to identify the presence of sulphides and Nb-Ta minerals. Neither was present in sufficient amounts in order to extract meaningful data.

X-ray Diffraction Analysis

Semi-quantitative XRD analysis was performed on a sub-sample of the -10 mesh material for QEMSCANTM set up and quality control purposes. These results are summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, and the complete XRD report with the summary and the patterns are presented in Appendix B. Overall, the XRD results are consistent with QEMSCANTM data.


Nemaska Exploration - 92440-009 - M15019-MAY10 3

Sample MW (-10 mesh) consists (in wt%) of quartz (36.9%), albite (26.7%), spodumene (14.4%), muscovite (11.7%), microcline (9.8%), trace amounts of beryl (0.5%). Note: that this sample does not contain petalite.

Sample ME (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (36.2%), albite (25.1 %), spodumene 20.2%, muscovite 9.1%, microcline 6.0%, and petalite 3.4%.

Sample SW (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (32.6%), albite (21.9%), spodumene (12.8%), muscovite (10.0%), microcline (9.9%) and petalite (12.8%).

Sample SE (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (33.8%), albite (28.8%), spodumene (15.5%), muscovite (7.6%), microcline (14.3%). Note: that there was no petalite identified in this sample.

Sample PP (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (35.3%), albite (25.5%), spodumene (10.4%), muscovite (9.6%), microcline (11.6%) and petalite (7.5%).

Sample WP (-10 mesh) consists of quartz (29.8%), albite (37.3%), muscovite (5.5%), microcline (26.3%), kaolinite (1.0%). Note: that neither petalite or spodumene were identified in this sample

Table 1: Summary of XRD Analysis

Crystalline Mineral Assemblage (relative proportions based on peak height Sample Major

(>30% Wt) Moderate

(10% -30% Wt) Minor

(2% -10% Wt) Trace

(<2% Wt)

(1) MW -10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, mica

potassium feldspar *beryl

(2) ME-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene mica, petalite, potassium feldspar

-

(3) SW -10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, petalite

potassium feldspar, mica

-

(4) SE-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, potassium feldspar

mica -

(5) PP-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, potassium feldspar

mica, petalite -

(6) WP -10m plagioclase quartz, potassium feldspar

mica *kaolinite

* tentative identification due to low concentrations, diffraction line overlap or poor crystallinity

Table 2: Summary of Semi-Quantitative XRD Analysis


Nemaska Exploration - 92440-009 - M115011 -MAY10 4

Semi-Quantitative X-ray Diffraction Results

Mineral (1) MW -10m

(wt %)

(2) ME -10m

(wt %)

(3) SW -10m

(wt %) Quartz 36.9 36.2 32.6 Albite 26.7 25.1 21.9 Spodumene 14.4 20.2 12.8

Muscovite 11.7 9.1 10.0 Microcline 9.8 6.0 9.9 Beryl 0.5 - - Petalite - 3.4 12.8 Kaolinite - - - TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0

Mineral (4) SE -10m

(wt %)

(5) PP -10m

(wt %)

(6) WP -10m

(wt %) Quartz 33.8 35.3 29.8 Albite 28.8 25.5 37.3 Spodumene 15.5 10.4 -

Muscovite 7.6 9.6 5.5 Microcline 14.3 11.6 26.3 Beryl - - -

Petalite - 7.5 - Kaolinite - - 1.0 TOTAL 100.0 99.9 99.9

QEMSCANTM Operational Statistics and Assay Reconciliation

Each polished section for the -10 mesh, the K80 of 212 µm sample and the composite sample were

submitted for mineralogical analyses with QEMSCANn4 PMA and SMS. All data were processed

with the iExplorer software version 4.2 SR1. A mineral list developed for the analyzed samples is

shown in

Table 3.

Table 3: Mineral List and Formulas

Mineral Mineral Formula

Apatite Cas (P 04)3 (OH,F,C1)

Beryl Be3Al2(Si6010

Garnet Almandine: Fe3Al2(SiO4)3 Spessartine: Mn3Al2(SiO4)3

Kaolinite Al2Si205 (OH)4

Mica K(Mg,Fe)Al2Si3A1010 (OH)2

Petalite Li(A1Si4O10)

Plagioclase (NaSi,CaA1)A1Si20s

Potassium Feldspar KA1Si3Os

Quartz Si02

Spodumene LiA1Si206



Key QEMSCANTM mineralogical assays have been regressed with the chemical assays for the;

• -10 mesh samples, as presented in Table 4 and Figure 1, which has an overall correlation, as measured by R-squared criteria is 0.99, with a slope of 1.01

• each of the samples that were crushed to K80 of 212 pm as presented in Table 5 and Figure 2, respectively with an overall correlation, as measured by R-squared criteria is 0.99, with a slope of 0.99.

• the Composite sample as presented in Table 6 and Figure 3, respectively with an overall correlation as measured by R-squared criteria is 0.99, with a slope of 1

R-squared values above 0.98 and slopes between 0.97 and 1.03 are considered acceptable.

Table 4: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the -10 Mesh Samples MW -10m ME -10m SW -10m SE -10m PP -10m WP -10m -1700um -1700um -1700um -1700um -1700um -1700um

Al (QEMSCAN) 8.22 8.31 7.94 8.42 8.37 8.12 Al (Chemical) 8.26 8.26 8.04 8.36 8.26 7.99

Ca (QEMSCAN) 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.31 0.26 0.36 Ca (Chemical) 0.18 0.14 0.19 0.18 0.14 0.29

Fe (QEMSCAN) 0.26 0.26 0.51 0.32 0.26 0.35 Fe (Chemical) 0.46 0.42 0.44 0.36 0.29 0.27 K (QEMSCAN) 2.61 1.65 2.40 2.30 2.19 3.79 K (Chemical) 2.60 1.76 2.41 2.82 2.54 4.32

Li (QEMSCAN) 0.76 1.00 0.78 0.86 0.95 0.09 Li (Chemical) 0.66 0.89 0.73 0.61 0.71 0.06

Mn (QEMSCAN) 0.04 0.06 0.28 0.09 0.07 0.08 Mn (Chemical) 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.06 0.05 0.04

Na (QEMSCAN) 2.10 2.08 1.80 2.24 1.99 3.40 Na (Chemical) 2.34 2.28 1.86 2.60 2.29 3.26 P (QEMSCAN) 0.01 0.02 0.11 0.05 0.04 0.01 P (Chemical) 0.03 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.04

Rb (QEMSCAN) 0.09 0.08 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.04 Rb (Chemical) 0.11 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 Si (QEMSCAN) 35.32 35.54 35.37 35.01 35.24 34.36 Si (Chemical) 35.34 35.90 35.85 35.15 35.62 34.87



Figure 1: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the -10 Mesh Samples

Table 5: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the lc, of 212 µm Samples

MW 212um ME 212um SW 212um SE 212um PP 212um WP 212um -212um -212um -212um -212um -212um -212um

Al (QEMSCAN) 7.57 7.96 7.51 9.32 8.97 7.78 Al (Chemical) 8.26 8.26 8.04 8.36 8.26 7.99









Figure 2: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the 180 of 212 µm Samples

Table 6: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the Composite Composite

Combined +425um -425/+212unr212/+106um -106/+38um -38um Al (QEMSCAN) 7.90 8.20 8.22 7.63 7.53 7.43 Al (Chemical) 8.19 8.94 8.20 7.83 7.73 8.04








Assay Reconciliation

100

10 C

he

mic

al A

ssa

y (%

)

0.1

01 100

• Al

■ ca

Fe

K

* Li

• MI

+ Na

- P

Rb

1 10

QEMSCAN Assay (%)

Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - M15019-MAY10 8

Figure 3: QEMSCANTM and Direct Assay Reconciliation of the Composite

Mineralogical Analyses of the -10 Mesh and -212 pm Samples

An effort was made to distinguish between spodumene, petalite and beryl. However, due to the similar chemical composition of these three minerals, they have been referred to as Li-Minerals and reported together. The Li content used for reconciliation purposes for the Li minerals was calculated based on a simple mass balance between the spodumene and petalite using the semi-quantitative XRD analyses.

-10 Mesh Samples

The mineral distributions of the -10 mesh samples are presented in Table 7 and are graphically shown in Figure 4. QEMSCANTM pseudo images of the particles of are presented in Figure 5 through Figure 16 from both the polished thin sections (PTS - which displays the entire section) and polished sections (PS - which displays selected particles from the analysis).

The MW consists of Na-Feldspar (24.2%) and microcline (17.9%), quartz (32.9%), Li minerals (19.1%), muscovite (5.1%) and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet and other minerals.

The ME consists of Na-Feldspar (24.4%) and microcline (10.4%), quartz (34.1%), Li minerals (25.6%), muscovite (4.5%) and trace amounts (<0.5%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet, apatite and other minerals.

The SW consists of Na-Feldspar (20.7%) and microcline (15.2%), quartz (36.1%), Li minerals (19.5%), muscovite (6.4%) and trace amounts (<1%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet, apatite and other minerals.

The SE consists of Na-Feldspar (26.0%) and microcline (16.8%), quartz (30.5%), Li minerals (22.2%), muscovite (3.2%) and trace amounts (<1%) of garnet, apatite and other minerals.



The PP consists of Na-Feldspar (23.0%) and microcline (15.6%), quartz (32.0%), Li minerals (24.7%), muscovite (3.6%) and trace amounts (<1%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet, apatite and other minerals.

The WP consists of Na-Feldspar (39.1%) and microcline (29.3%), quartz (25.1%), Li minerals (1.8%), muscovite (2.9%) and trace amounts (<1%) of garnet, biotite and other minerals.

Table 7: Modal Analysis of the -10 Mesh Samples

Survey Nemaska Exploration Project 12440-001 / M15011-MAY10 Sample MW -10m ME -10m SW -10m SE -10m PP -10m WP -10m Fraction -1700um -1700um -1700um -1700um -1700um -1700um Mass Size Distribu ion (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Particle Size 171 144 173 258 127 128

Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Na-Feldspar 24.2 24.4 20.7 26.0 23.0 39.1 Quartz 32.9 34.1 36.1 30.5 32.0 25.1 Microcline 17.9 10.4 15.2 16.8 15.6 29.3 Li Minerals 19.1 25.6 19.5 22.2 24.7 1.8 Muscovite 5.1 4.5 6.4 3.2 3.6 2.9

Mineral Mass (%) Ta-Nb-minerals 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 Garnet 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.8 0.3 0.8 Biotite 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Apatite 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 Other 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.9 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Na-Feldspar 133 117 131 178 112 129 Quartz 156 138 156 199 115 132 Microcline 127 105 139 159 95 97

Mean Grain Size Li Minerals 146 141 132 231 104 54

by Frequency Muscovite 105 95 127 93 80 57

(pm) Ta-Nb-minerals Garnet

29 60

148 76

129 80

26 78

101 55

26 109

Biotite 28 31 24 35 24 44 Apatite 27 45 41 85 42 28 Other 25 27 52 25 26 27

Note: The size of the minerals as shown in the tab es is calculated statistically from the length of all the horizontal intercepts through each particle. It uses an assumption of random sectioning of spherical particles having uniform size, to obtain an estimate of the stereologically-corrected grain size in microns. The size calculation is a statistical property, which means that it is only valid when applied to a population of particles, and its accuracy increases as the population size increases. The accuracy of the size calculation is extremely low if applied to just a single cross-section.


Modals

Min

era

l Abund

an

ce (w

t % )

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

• Other

• Apatite

• Ta-Nb-minerals

• Garnet

• Biotite

• Muscovite

• Microcline

D Na-Feldspar

D Quartz

• Li Minerals

MW -10m

ME-10m

SW-10m SE-10m

PP-10m

WP-10m

Sam Me


Figure 4: Graphical Summary of Mineral Distribution of the -10 Mesh Samples


W7—I1

r• ,;}~ ~; +t' ..-.7....---.-,,,., -, • : , ~ ~ _r"'.i#

1~ • ~C*l4 . ~ ~ i 'x'f

~~{~ •

r,. •

~. '''''•:..-:.••'• -4 ~ ,~ , Yr . :

~ ♦ ~ ' . . _ ' - ,. : . \ r ~ ♦"~ . + ~ - +~t~~' ~~ ' 1+ . '

7~.Ÿr

'~~ .1 ,~ i~ .{ P... r► . ' r~

F.

r~

~y ~. ~ -

` .... 711..... in..:, l . y~ ' ~f .i. .

:~ F _ •. .

**%'-A:,.•$.7-1 7 r.y s, ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~• ~

-~~.• .'.--7.;••••••t ~ `.,i :~~~

~ ~.;~.~ $- ~ • ; "~~C ,; ~. ~

=i , ~. .i.• ~y~ ~~ * ç '*: `¢ _ fir; - .~ '~ ,~~ ~~~'., # ,- ..q~ };~:

~ ~

•

~ '.%•-4- t'~~'.; ~: ~` =:~: `''~ ~~ •' a~ ~.~ .A

,~' ; ! •~• ~; ~,

~~..,•'1'!..17.'1,i; r~~ Î~~ i f • .~ ~.

~ ~ ~ _ __~

A •

- 011„f'~ ~

fi' • . ,,-( gs e

❑ Background

n Li Minerals

❑ Quartz

❑ Na -Feldspar

❑ Microcline

n Muscovite

n Biotite

0 Garnet

Ta-Nb-minerals

❑ Apatite

❑ Other

15.0 pm

3.0 Pm 2500.0 pm

~ •~ ~ ~. .

~~~?r~f ~` ~

41%4&;

IL 1.,

_ • ~- ~~5#~•

.. ~_ r

Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - MI509 9-MAY90 11

Figure 5: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the MW -10 Mesh Sample (PTS)


MW -10m

• • 4% iv.,_ ., / },-. .1,. s .....y ..~~... . 4'• tt .• jy . .~..'/,.

itp .~.#..r*-• .' " • • .. ~•~~

VP...-`. .

• .. .. ..sLJ ..e ...............,.I

~ •.•e ',♦

•~

❑ Background ▪ Minerals

Quartz ▪ Na-Feldspar ▪ MGrodine ▪ Muscovite ▪ Gotta ▪ Garnet ▪ Ta-Nb-minerals

Apat, Other

411..541 , -

`

% 4111bi._ . '4,,..'11 ~..y_ ..,V/0,4..1 r ,A . .

40641 ' 4111.

1 6.3ym 3.0ym 17SOO.O ym

C..*

"._..~

d. f

Apt.- _ ..

~ . ._.. , ....

%I

~,.., el"

_ . .1y .,,..

.114, —Ares .


Figure 6: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the MW -10 Mesh Sample (PS)


I ME -10m

•~

- 0%14

" •X .- .

}' ▪ # *1.

r , .Fd

• •;•,..•..

~ ti . ~ 9 .li~lytf.~** ••

-t :,7 -.,t.. , ~=. • ~: •• - ''~- . . aF -iv •

. t . k

ti

. . ,i~ f ..~(,-: -r,,,•' y i•:,.., ~

~ : } '•

~+ ~ . .~ ..• •+` • P • . .1.: ' -

' -~~ .~~~ • .` . - / ih$`'- ~~ Ky

~ ,~., ..1~~:, z,. ~ ~. ~,~. ~ ~~,

- . ; *.. x ' ,~ • ~ yii. ~~• •~ * .

~ ~• F • ~+ . ~, X .

•

i ~

• i

~~~~r"'"'

a 4L

~_ ,,~ "" ;. f. sY '~. - ~~.,~. :e-- : -~

+ i _ , . }' re„ .

', •i•--~r,~~— # ' t ~ 'k' `~. • .

,~•. " `

F• . fi'

-•

•~.• ' '~ ;•~ .

:':

!., ': •.w ~. ' . ' , ÿy ~ :

• 1

Y' •^ • 1-

F 'r•l+ i+. . F . f

a .~- 'i• ~=`F~~~.~~ ~ 1.1:°. i;

~ r~ 4_-'~'*;+~`+` ~

• •

1 ~h i.~4 ,~ ~t~¥.'~~\•yr~+4. . r

~~ ~,

•

- . 4 1•

~.~ .-~

#} .

k - 1tai- ..} ' II,* !!~ ' Iyt^ :s_ r . '• I/

e• +: '

*.~ 'h • '...-.i. . . ~. Y; +i'~

+ ~

4r +

•• - • /. ~ ~

• ~~ * " + * ct . I . . '

"VA .•...'•= 1e

F

•

• :•

:~ .~~

• ~~-" `_' ,~~ ,~~. ~4,~ ., ~ ~ . f '+'~ .6. * - • t -

1101.111.7k

~ .

y~r~~.,-

-, .1w ~~ * ". ~ •~- .0-1

4111° ~• ; ' ~

▪ ~ ` ■ ~

-~'" :..''► ipp

11, I ♦ r

• -4• ~ - ~_ .4 i •-:

. , •

'It

~,_

Y

~

) 1%~ { *_i.~ .,.~ ' _-â 4 ~':~~~~r

❑ Background E Li Minerals E Quartz

Na -Feldspar Microcline Muscovite Biotite Garnet Ta-Nb-minerals

❑ Apatite ❑ Other

15_0

j +..•• yy ,

~,u

11~~n

yy d-~.1

2500.0 pm

Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - M115011 -MAY10

13

Figure 7: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the ME -10 Mesh Sample (PTS)


+.~`.... ~ S. .. ........ ....t ....... •.~1~~ • ~• .♦• iiks, .... • .....~

...' . L ...,~ *.... .. Nrt

w .. ...... , . . , .-.••,s

i .. • 1 8.3 pm

30ym .25000ym

ME -10m

❑ Background ▪ Minerals ▪ Qua ▪ Na-Feldspar ▪ Microdine ▪ Muscov 2

-. .Biotte ▪ Garnet ▪ Ta-Nb-minerals . Apao2 ■ Omer

t • ♦

. ".,./..>..... ~~~. .....

• ~ )11P..• ..—.M'...,..~I~.~..~~._•

•

• N••••• •

r • ,%+r _ 1 r. ~

...~ .,♦. .

Sir

•

i.ya.. ..... .

t •.. ...••"♦/...•. •Ie •


Figure 8: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the ME -10 Mesh Sample (PS)


SW -10m

~.~* '

~f;~+~ ri~_

~~~~ i~,~..,.=f.w-

i

til

~~ ~~' ..1, ~~~_c.

/~~~ R r +h #~~.

•

~+ J~h " ~ ~ 4

~

cs w ~▪ • ~,; ▪ ~ ~+J!,

7• - ~.

• ~~, ~.

~• .

:~71~~ t ~

14. +a~ , a~ .,

'r, — ~ . .• ~ .~; • i

:▪ :.~. ` ~ ~ ~

.. Ali . <

y ; ~ ~ { '• •

~ + .A ' ~ ~ ~~.. ''•:16;;;-4 : ~~ ~ ~ l:l~ . • . . ' ~ y[ • k.ÿ

l4~«~Ÿ:' . T' ' •~J ~~ l s ~ ••• ' p}Af 4 ~ ~ ■1 F ~ ,

•, ~ ~ f r A ~ ~ ► i : ~; ~'' „-~!,,~

: • ~-1 ti ~~- `~.. ` ~ * ~ -

~~~

4 4 f s~ t•,«~ti~•;r. {« ~ •~~• ftY•

•

• ~ • ~ - s +f .~

~~•

1~

'~~ fir :~' s

44110 .

/ ~,:~+ ~ S' - "• 7►. . - ~ . , .

al • `*y

ariP •

, :

F tiJ! s 4

~*

#~~.i ~+ . t~'~~ __ 1, .~

, ...-Z ,l~y#I~

_ :*r'r

- - .Y-~3~ + ~~~~. ~

••••l°

. ~ 1• ~~~~ ~ .i y a _ ~'. .

~~+~

.

#~ !~ } . ~.;-; ~'•?+~~ ~ ~~~.

~ ▪ ~ ~.~

❑ Background

❑ Li Minerals

❑ Quartz

❑ Na -Feldspar

8 Microcline

❑ Muscovite

❑ Biotite

❑ Garnet

❑ Ta-Nb-minerals

❑ Apatite

❑ Other

15.o µm 30 pnl

251]0_0 pin

' ~ ~ ..0~

~ ~-

~ {'~ ~

~f _x. 3,00 - ~ * • 0 t 2.


15

Figure 9: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the SW -10 Mesh Sample (PTS)


'.4O.•..~. .•

~~•— • ••,,. ,. .

i• .,•/-.••/

~ '~-11"1— . .. ,R ... ... t•• .. .~••

.i, • ♦ • 0 g•

~•.

• sr .46.•frAhr ,..~..~a . „ ,~*..• '"11116.'"•1.1111.1 ..... .•. . • •

SW •70m ... ~ • ..• " • • . . -. .•' Nip .•.• •.• • •••

I.......

..,. . OOP ...10,.• — • — • • -.1

r .i. .111.•`.. .) t \• •.• • . • • •,~• P

.,•... ..

"dik

❑ Background E LI Mnerals ▪ Quar. • Na-Feldspar ▪ Mcrodine ▪ Muscovite

Biotte ▪ Garnet • Ta-Nb-minerals ▪ Apatite ▪ Other

. •.1

~..., ...... •1.••,• , i ... •~„~

• ~•—. •..406

w

✓

As

.• , .._ ~~• .• . ..

figi•••,.*..... * .r.- ••.•\ ►

• Orr - • '

• . . • ...•.•••••('• , ~...

.•_- ,~.....• ~.....-... ..•, t ._.•....'. •.,..*.t , - .....,. ~

•••~}+

~~... r . • •. 41,4,,•- •.. ' \ ♦ •••,

.•_.,.,.•,/1441/4 44•41*

~.,•.-•. .4. a ~ •

63ym 30urn 25000ym

Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - MI509 9 MAY90

Figure 10: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the SW -10 Mesh Sample (PS)

16


0 Background

p Li Minerals

Quartz

• Na -Feldspar • Microcline

0 Muscovite

• Biotite

• Garnet

• Ta-Nb-minera Is

J Apatite

0 Other

15.0 pm 3.0 pm

2500.0 pm

IS7-11 Om

4/41P);11111,441V(i • f *it 4

• '&41t2. -11r 1P. 1, • a

• w ‘-"; • .11 • •

1110".. ' f • sr - 1 Pir 4

V t • 04 •

• • it. • A': • 4. 441p •

eV4;1•

ii$112.. -v _ '•

ea: 7 • • ,

7.111- • -4

.111

!..• , IR.. 1... - r li•

,..... _i..-- ' ..-i •:':111h_AV d:- 614:4 ...

Ap- ,. . •,. • .... -aim • '..

II , ,i4-.11* • ' . •tfar-. • . -A, 47:44t; J

... • .....4

-, - L . ' k.‘: .' ••••P. At -:

• '

des • , .•• Mk; 11

•

•

•

Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - MI5011-IVIAY10

Figure 11: QEMSCANTm Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the SE -10 Mesh Sample (PTS)

17


SE •70m

❑ Background ❑ Li Mnerels

o N.-Feldspar 0 ❑ Mcrocline CI muscovite ■ BIOE[e • Garnet • Ta-Nb-minerals ~ApeUR ~ Oiher

....*..A40

'-.- '..".

A.

.,*.,_. w., e ...,e -.•..-_..

►

....

'

w..

,....~. ..

• . .1.. .. 410. .

• ..

.,~. #

... 01.11_ ~

i

eiP_ .

f' • 4 -/ 4111..4..,40..,...,.

-• , ,e• - ••-•••^ - • 1,• ..n. .. . -,.i

_._.,6,. %

. . . . . -'y •--_• :;_ `

..a • ' '

,•.. •4 ..r . •••

* ,.-..4. '.

11. ,....,...~+.,.._...~~~ ,,. ft• _. ..

6,3 p• 3.0Wn 2500 0 Am

p.. ... ,

.14 ". -

r

* A.. lax . ,...

Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - MI509 9 MAY90

Figure 12: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the SE -10 Mesh Sample (PS)

18


I PP -10m

R t7 ~

~s — ti ' !~ ~', y~ 1707,-.116,

{ ~;.~ +.,,

74 . • .

, i •

ra~~c' ~ ~_~:~~

. ?r 1-

c~ _ ~ • ♦ 11;•444.:r. F ~.>:-.`' ..'~. T •~ + ~~` . , ~~. 4 ~ "jay ~ ' d ' _ . ~iy.~~ 1rt ~ ..-1-111.

~ Z • *R .~' ~ ' ~~.~.#~ _ • ~ ~' Y,

?::-.14 • _~ r

1L'► ~ ~ ~ :i ÉXw ' . ~, ~,~' ~ .. :~F . -

~ ~~ 4. s • _ ~~

~.. ,.t' _ ,,...• 3

'T ►; ~ i.- s•` ' 'r •~

. , {

*~~.L•iy.~ ~ .__ .4.1.."*.--::.:;,,,,

,~.' .x.~. •

......

:ro. . , Y _1.

.çr •F. • ~„ ~ • ti i r ,l ► '~

. - i'..41h-:-..' + `.. ~ ~~:~~ , ~ ~~~: :!il ,i:4- ~ },3h ' 7 .

r

~. +

. r *•

r- ' -.Al.~ -~r+ ~

41.,.4~ ,~ t,

,.:~ _ .

' J F • t e

•r

. ▪ •~ ~:•~'•~~. F if . } #

~

. ~ ~ 1' +ri, f~~ ~--~ +I . t . .

� ,. lG

~

:

t

'

_

- r :. ~. - : # i , ,~' .

# ,~

'i~~.a+' :

_

a .e.,, .

.`ti

~U' + .4.

. .

*

- 4-l

T4.-~

~~-• : • ~. •

~` ~`~~ .~

~~ ;

t~

.

~"?+ ~r

~r

r; i' ~ ~ ~ +

.

, 1-..1~-. "~;"~~ti~~" 4i t

'# •

• -„:,(11w...'•

•-•,.z.:$1;.,...

~

.

'~

;

~`r j

:~

.

~ .

. -°

ìf , ÿ'

•

i I 4 ~ ,,

. ~

'r ~b~Art- ~ -`

:~' ~! ~~.

7 T , ' ; q*~

{ rF }

+

~~;~~:~~~'y~ ~

~

-~~`

•

`

,

*

~ : --. .7~`#k

• I+'~- ~ . c~.~.- ^,,•• 4 : ;l~~ ,.{._ ~~ . . •~#.~

a ~141.'

~+~ --

❑ Background ❑ Li Minerals E Quartz

Na -Feldspar • Microcline n Muscovite ❑ Biotite En Garnet ❑ Ta-Nb-minerals ❑ Apatite ❑ Other

'au IAN 3.0 pm

2500.0 pm

Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - MI509 9 MAY90 19

Figure 13: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the PP -10 Mesh

Sample (PTS)


., • bk , . .` . .•..4 ...~..

4 410 .

. ,• 'RS - • M ~

...... . * ' t. .... ,• •••

.- ► - - '.. ...,.

~~• -.... ,. w A..• ,

PP -10m

.

vt

ip

i.. .., ,4,.... ... . ., ,...... ...10R ,. . 4,

. .~. • ... ! ~

t

• -l1'• .

~ ' • .... i • ••• ..

. ~ . . • .

,.• . ..` ~ ..~... At

QBackground ELI Minerals EQuartz .Na-Feldspar • Microdine M Musmv 2 -Blot@ .Garnet ETa-Nb-minerals

pads

MOt er

_._ ,.~.. , _.. ... de froap

0. ...,..

AO ._.~...

1 5.3ym IOW

115000Wn


20

Figure 14: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the PP -10 Mesh Sample (PS)


WP -10m

11 ....7:

111175`.- .

4.....po.: ... ... •••,,, -... ..1.4:, 4.r, ;:ifi;.. ir,..11.- ..414:;-2.:.:1;Pieliddli:'. : .

.... ,,.. . . . ... .1.. . .1...-it -14%,,--....-,Y+, 4.:.•

si..4,1w:_•.,▪ ;,,_. 4 • .....?

f-....,-,....'i.' ' ..• :J.. - - : • • , ..... i-d k- • ""

i'.... -.-. 'Zoe!, ! ••• . i .eS-.1;;:..: . .` ;:- • i•-• t..1

d :OA 76' 4:Pt inihri.

tpÌ.Z• )9- 4"41- • 7.--t,1.4 ..... 4

• _ 4 •

- • • ...y•

sr. _ ▪ - •

.7•P • JR :

'- —..:...4... ,1,-.: • 7:e.,:::.....!;.....•-•,-,..-:,-.:-.&—,,.-!. ;.,....!.:•1.4.,....,_ ..;;,..,e1-4,,,-..,_,.

.4.3' • '' - ' • •.'...., / .. - ::::•.:;e72". '...4.:;•'1.1....Z.;;Z;Z":4Kr! f.4.'-i9.•:. -..rSkr•-4

T.og

U Background

ID Li Minerals

L:] Quartz

Na -Feldspar

Microcline

P Muscovite

• Biotite

• Garnet

Ta-Nb-minerals

• Apatite

• Other

15113.m 10 pm

2510010 p.m

‘; 1,„ ; •-i0P•t• • • '•:•ç • ti •.,.• • •

71: , • /„ •Vr. :43•;.•• ' b • . • • % s7

•

re, ;

$ •AiSink ,••:.•ktrut, 4$

N.- • '•7

:...,,....- ...,,4,......,..--r -- . .., 7, ,,..,:-.,..:._ i.

I. , :fflas,::•.. . ::-..,, „;-, -.- -1.-= -

, :•71',:

AA

Nemaska Exploration — 12440-001 - M1501 1 -MAY10

21

Figure 15: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Minerals within the WW -10 Mesh Sample (PTS)


~

r ... -.

%Ai%

;.... , .• .. - ,

❑ Background ▪ Minerals ❑ Quartz ▪ Na-Feldspar . Microdlne . NIuscoote ▪ Biotte ▪ Garnet

Ta-Nb-m metals .Apadte

Other

~. y ....F• a..•••.... 5.." t•-- .- '4• .l.- ft

I

~.~.,. .• •. • •

~ • f ••

~ .0.. ,

,•1......

I

ar

L ..__._.SIP ,_.,.

• ..•*► '.. •,..y . .. ,•

.-•.•

~

d"

~•.

/, ..~~

*MA.

1116

WP -10m

3oüm 2500 0 on


22

Figure 16: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of Selected Particles in the WW -10 Mesh Sample (PS)



K80 -212 pm Samples

Modal Mineralogy

The mineral abundances of each samples for the K80 -212 pm samples are presented in



Table 8 and are graphically shown in Figure 17.

The MW sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (25.5%) and microcline (14.0%), quartz (38.0%), Li minerals (17.7%), muscovite (4.0%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of Ta-Nb minerals, garnet and other minerals.

The ME sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (24.9%) and microcline (8.5%), quartz (36.6%), Li minerals (26.9%), muscovite (2.5%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet, apatite and other minerals.

The SW sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (19.2%) and microcline (13.6%), quartz (38.8%), Li minerals (22.6%), muscovite (3.1%), garnet (1.6%), and trace amounts (<1.5%) of apatite and other minerals.

The SE sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (27.4%) and microcline (18.2%), quartz (23.8%), Li minerals (27.8%), muscovite (2.5%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet and other minerals.

The PP sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (24.6%) and microcline (13.9%), quartz (28.7%), Li minerals (28.3%), muscovite (4.2%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of other minerals.

The WP sample (in wt%) is primarily composed of Na-feldspar (38.9%) and microcline (28.6%), quartz (28.1%), Li minerals (2.2%), muscovite (1.9%), and trace amounts (<0.5%) of garnet, biotite and other minerals.


Modals

100% ~ ~

80% • Other

• Apatite

• Biotite 60% • Garnet

❑ Ta-Nb-minerals

• Muscovite

40% • Li Minerals

❑ Microcline

ID Quartz

ID Na-Feldspar 20%

0%

MW 212um ME 212um SW 212um SE 212um PP 212um WP 212um

Sample ID

Min

era

l Abund

ance

(w

t %)


Table 8: Bulk Modal Analysis of the Ibo -212 gm Samples Survey Nemaska Exploration Project 12440-001 / M15011-MAY10 Sample MW 212um ME 212um SW 212um SE 212um PP 212um WP 212um Fraction -212um -212um -212um -212um -212um -212um Mass Size Distribution (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Particle Size 67 74 80 67 51 69

Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Na-Feldspar 25.5 24.9 19.2 27.4 24.6 38.9 Quartz 38.0 36.6 38.8 23.8 28.7 28.1 Microcline 14.0 8.5 13.6 18.2 13.9 28.6 Li Minerals 17.7 26.9 22.6 27.8 28.3 2.2 Muscovite 4.0 2.5 3.1 2.5 4.2 1.9

Mineral Mass (%) Ta-Nb-minerals 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Garnet 0.4 0.2 1.6 0.2 0.0 0.1 Biotite 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Apatite 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.3 0.1 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Na-Feldspar 54 62 58 56 43 58 Quartz 75 82 76 64 53 70 Microcline 44 50 59 54 36 55 Li Minerals 48 58 53 59 53 28

Mean Grain Size by Muscovite 22 23 21 18 19 17 Frequency (pm) Ta-Nb-minerals 37 10 19 0 6 5

Garnet 38 37 24 13 5 6 Biotite 7 15 6 5 7 14 Apatite 9 99 16 9 11 9 Other 11 7 22 6 8 7

Note: The size of the minerals as shown in the tab es is calculated statistically from the length of all the horizontal intercepts through each particle. It uses an assumption of random sectioning of spherical particles having uniform size, to obtain an estimate of the stereologically-corrected grain size in microns. The size calculation is a statistical property, which means that it is only valid when applied to a population of particles, and its accuracy increases as the population size increases. The accuracy of the size calculation is extremely low if applied to just a single cross-section.

Figure 17: Summary of Mineral Distribution of the -212 gm Samples



Liberation and Association of the Li Minerals

For the purposes of this analysis, particle liberation is defined based on 2D particle area percent. Particles are classified in the following groups (in descending order) based on mineral-of-interest area percent: free (=95% surface exposure) and liberated (>_80%). The non-liberated grains have been classified according to association characteristics, where binary association groups refer to particle area percent greater than or equal to 95% of the two minerals or mineral groups. The complex groups refer to particles with ternary, quaternary and greater mineral associations including the mineral of interest.

The liberation and association data generated from the PMA results for each of these samples is presented in Table 9 and are graphically shown in Figure 18. An image grid that visually displays liberation/association characteristics are given in Figure 19.

Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 95.6% for ME and trace amounts (<2%) of middling particles.

Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 86.2% for MW, moderate amounts of quaternary with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (11.4%).

Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 89.9% for PP, minor amounts with microcline (4.5%) and traces (<2%) with other minerals.

Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 97.9% for SE, and trace (<2%) with other minerals.

Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 87.9% for SW, moderate amounts of quaternary with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (6.6%) and quartz (3.2%), and trace (<2%) with other minerals

Free and liberated values of Li minerals are 58.2% for WP, significant amounts of quaternary with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (21.1 %), microcline (9.1 %), quartz (7.0%), Na-feldspars (3.9%). Note: that the total Li Mineral content for this sample is only 2.2%, which is comparatively much lower than the other samples.

Table 9: Normalized Mass of Li Minerals in the Igo -212 pm Samples

Mineral Name ME 212um MW 212um PP 212um SE 212um SW 212um WP 212um Free Li Min 83.3 80.8 70.0 77.0 66.9 6.5 Lib Li Min 12.3 5.4 19.9 20.9 20.9 51.7 Li Min:Micr 0.1 0.1 4.5 0.0 0.2 9.1 Li Min:Musc 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0

Li Min:Na-Felds 1.9 0.6 1.8 0.3 1.7 3.9 Li Min:Qtz 1.2 0.6 1.9 1.3 3.2 7.0

Li Min:Ta-Nb minerals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Li Min:Micr.Musc.Qtz.Flds 1.3 11.4 1.7 0.4 6.6 21.1

Li Min:Other 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Li Min Complex 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.6

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Li Min: Li Minerals (including both spodumene and petalite), Micr: microcline, Musc: muscovite, Na-Felds: Na-feldspars, Qtz: quartz.



100

Li Mineral Association

T

80 -I____I_I_

w - W

70

60 - - -

-1- -

- c -a

N 50 - - - -

° 40

- - - -

to to

30 ~

20 = = = =

10 - - - -

0 ME 212um MJV212um PP212um SE 212um SW 212um WP212um

• Li Min Complex 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.6 • Li Min:Other 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 • Li Min:Micr.Musc.Qtz.Flds 1.3 11.4 1.7 0.4 6.6 21.1 • Li Min:Ta-Nb minerals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 • Li Min:Qtz 1.2 0.6 1.9 1.3 3.2 7.0 • Li Min:Na-Felds 1.9 0.6 1.8 0.3 1.7 3.9 • Li Min:Musc 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 • Li Min:Micr 0.1 0.1 4.5 0.0 0.2 9.1 • Lib Li Mn 12.3 5.4 19.9 20.9 20.9 51.7 • Free Li Min 83.3 80.8 70.0 77.0 66.9 6.5

Figure 18: Li Mineral Liberation and Association of the Ibo -212 µm Samples


Complex

Li Minerals:Other

Li Minerals: Micr. Musc.Otz.

Li Minerals: Musc

Li Minerals: Qtz

Li Minerals:Na-Felds

Li Minerals:Micr

Lib Li Minerals

Free Li Minerals

Barren

Li M

iner

als

Ass

oc

iati

on


Product MW 212um ME 212um SW 212um SE 212um

PP 212um

WP 212um `~. —IA

At

• ._ s~•~

m. ~ ,. 1

~*'0 '. . 'A g.

>#It + Ail ~40.•• 4111`6A '—'41%....

~i/

~v .

SALS ` ~:

• r.,ji illr4p.

•"-1'\

~r~r i

J, ,

/ • ..m\‘

"r-~~.~. ~

,.."k,f'aP

.~ '~-. â . ~~., •

„--_..\.. --.....e.,,,....

`~

yl.k`,•'

# ~

.

~~ ~~ /1

~

41111 ,.,,,

'It*

vagollik

t',m,`-~

4,.. s

..

. ~~ • '

. .. Id .• i1

s~,r iiii. ~~

~ 1~o~' ,,Ir.

.t1'•1i1~ ,,.,,,~ '' t~ 1 ~

..~ .

'••` •~s or ~.~\" ~.. .

-~- !

41,*'

,~....~ t~ ....

I. •♦

.se .

t....

b4/

a~

-'~ •

A +t -imii,. .--_ Yr % •

4.

. ..... . ..0"àa ~, !

N~ -.NOrot-

'44/6:"4: r Ait

. -lc::

+.

•

•.

. •••1•••11.-••••

.r..

~~

s~., .. .. ~ S

~ ~ '~ Iv -_. ,,~ . .

.~- , . A.

• u

t i1• ..

• t .+:

❑ Background O u Minerais

M.-Feldspar - ~Microcline pmuscov. Meow IN Garnet INre-Nb.mnerais Onpenre Oomer

30 mm z.0um 1 SOH pro

14,11V , , . • . . . ' ~ j ~

. . . i ~ ~ i s / 1 ~ ~ i ~ ,

~

~

401e4W4IefelOsilliii.411 10411.4

Aftioqpi4400p-ii

*404 Figure 19: Image Grid Illustrating a Visual Representation of the Liberation/Association of Li Minerals in the K80 -212 hum Samples

....r,p,4 k~~

I 10µm I 20µm

5000 yin

30µm î 04m 6000 yin


-10 mesh vs. 212um

0 0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0

40.0 45.0

-212 um (Mineral Mass %)

• MW

■ ME

SW

SE

* PP • WP

R

— Linear (R) -10

mes

h (M

inera

l Mas

s %

)

45.0

40.0

35.0

30.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0

R2 = 0.966

•


Comparison of Modal Abundance of the -10 Mesh and K80 -212 pm Analyses

The results of the bulk modal analysis of the -10 mesh and the K80 -212 pm samples are presented in Figure 21. Reconciliation is very good with a R2 of -0.97. This is acceptable given the size difference in the samples between the two analyses.

Figure 20: Comparison of Mineral Distributions Between the -10 Mesh and the Ibo -212 µm Samples

Mineralogical Analyses of the Composite Sample

Modal Mineralogy

The modal mineralogy of the minerals in the Composite sample expressed as wt% is given in



Table 10, as well as the average particle size of each mineral. A graphical presentation of the mineral

distributions is also displayed in Figure 21. Details of the nature of the Composite sample are given in the

"Sample Receipt and Preparation" section.

The Composite sample consists mainly of Na-feldspar (25.3%) and microcline (15.9%), quartz (31.4%), Li minerals (22.4%), muscovite (3.4%), and trace amounts of garnet (1.1%), apatite and other phases. Ta-Nb minerals are rare.

Most of the Li minerals occur in the two coarse fractions (6.3% in the +425 pm, and 8.6% in the -425/+212 pm fraction) and decreases to 3.4% to 2.4% to 1.6% in the finer fractions. Proportionally, the both Feldspar (Na-Feldspar and microcline), increase in abundance with decreasing size fraction.


Modals-Composite

• Other

■ Apatite

• Ta-Nb-minerals

• Gamet

• Biotite

e Muscovite

• Microcline

• Na-Feldspar

❑ Quartz

■ Li Minerals

100

90

80

70

60

Min

era

l A

bu

ndance (

wt%

)

50

40

30

20

10

Combined +425um -425/+212um -2 2/+106um -106/+38um -38um

Sample:Fraction

Nemaska Exploration - 92440-009 - 011MI5 9-MAY90

31

Table 10: Bulk Modal Analysis of the Composite Survey Nemaska Exploration Project 12440-001 / MI5019-JUN10 Sample Composite Fraction Combined +425um 4251+212um -2121+106um -1061+38um -38um

Mass Size Distribution (%) 19.8 34.0 17.4 14.4 14.3 Particle Size 54 425 193 92 44 14

Sample Sample Fraction Sample Fraction Sample Fraction Sample Fraction Sample Fraction Li Minerals 22.4 6.3 32.0

co

r- c

o V

O M

O O

0

00

00

25.2 3.4 19.3

V I~

M N

V O

N— 0 0

0

N V

V N

O 0

0 0

0 0

16.8 1.6 11.4 Quartz 31.4 6.1 30.6 29.7 5.7 32.7 32.9 4.8 33.2 Na-Feldspar 25.3 3.3 16.9 25.5 5.1 29.4 29.6 3.9 27.4 Microcline 15.9 2.7 13.8 14.1 2.7 15.3 17.3 3.3 22.7

Mineral Mass Muscovite 3.4 0.6 3.1 4.2 0.5 2.6 2.5 0.6 4.0 Biotite Garnet

0.0 1.1

0.0 0.6

0.1 3.2 WO

0.0 0.9

0.0 0.1

0.0 0.4

0.0 0.4

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.3

Ta-Nb-minerals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Apatite 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Other 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.7 Total 100.0 19.8 100.0 34.0 100.0 17.4 100.0 14.4 100.0 14.3 100.0 Li Minerals 243 126 75 38 14 Quartz 247 152 86 44 16 Na-Feldspar 191 132 83 40 13

Mean Grain Microcline 244 140 84 42 12 Size by Muscovite 102 64 44 26 9

Frequency Biotite 26 13 12 12 5

(pm) Garnet 209 92 68 30 10 Ta-Nb-minerals 16 8 38 28 6 Apatite 29 67 25 21 9 Other 28 23 30 24 11

Note: The size of the minerals as shown in the tables is calculated statistically from the length of all the horizontal intercepts through each particle. It uses an assumption of random sectioning of spherical particles having uniform size, to obtain an estimate of the stereologically-corrected grain size in microns. The size calculation is a statistical property, which means that it is only valid when applied to a population of particles, and its accuracy increases as the population size increases. The accuracy of the size calculation is extremely low if applied to just a single cross-section.

Figure 21: Mineral Distribution by Size Fraction and Calculated for the Head of the Composite


Composite Grain Size

—*—Li Minerals

—N— Na-Feldspar

—A—Microcline

—xF Muscovite

— Quartz

-F Particle

10 10.0 100.0 1000.0

0.0

Cu

mu

lative

% M

ine

ral M

ass

100.0

90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

Grain Size (pm)


Grain Size Distribution

Figure 22 illustrates the cumulative grain size distribution of the main mineral phases for the Composite

sample. The curve referred to as "Particle" reflects all the measured minerals in the sample.

The diagram illustrates that the d50 (mid point in the size distribution) is for:

• Li minerals is 143 pm,

• Na feldspar is 112 pm

• microcline is 114 pm,

• muscovite is 70 pm,

• quartz 140 pm, and

• the particle curve includes all the mineral phases and follows a similar trend. About 50% of all particles are more than 155 pm.

In this sample, Li Minerals and quartz show the coarsest grain size distribution, followed by feldspars and muscovite.

Figure 22: Cumulative Average Grain Size Distribution of Major Minerals of the Composite



Electron Microprobe Analyses

Electron microprobe analyses were carried out on Li minerals, feldspars and muscovite to determine their

major and trace element content. The minimum, maximum and average values are presented in

Table 11.

Spodumene consists of (all average wt% values) Si02 63.29%, A1203 26.81 %, MnO 0.13% and FeO 0.92%.

Petalite consists of (all average wt% values) Si02 77.23%, A1203 16.60%, while all other elements are close to below the detection limit.

The Rb20 content in microcline averages 1.20 wt% (or Rb=1.1%) and that in muscovite 1.13 wt% (or Rb=1.03). These values have been used to calculate the Rb deportment and Rb grades and recoveries for the Composite sample.

Table 11: Minimum (Min), Maximum (Max) and Average (Ave) EMPA

Spodumene Si02 A1203 MnO Fe0 K20 CaO Mg0 Na20 Min 62.94 26.15 0.08 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 Max 63.68 27.25 0.23 1.71 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.20 Ave 63.29 26.81 0.13 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 Petalite Min 76 76 16 57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 Max 77 54 16 63 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 Ave 77.23 16.60 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03

Na-Feldspars Si02 TiO2 A1203 MgO CaO MnO FeO BaO Na20 K20 Rb20 Cs20 Total Min 67.05 0.00 19.86 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.91 0.03 0.00 0.00 98.64 Max 69.34 0.03 20.85 0.01 0.50 0.02 0.01 0.04 11.75 0.27 0.00 0.00 99.83 Ave 67.75 0.00 20.15 0.00 0.31 0.01 0.00 0.01 10.80 0.09 0.00 0.00 99.12 Microcline Min 62.05 0.00 18.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 14.14 0.75 0.00 97.74 Max 63.35 0.04 18.59 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.03 1.26 15.86 1.63 0.03 98.70 Ave 62.81 0.01 18.37 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.45 15.31 1.20 0.01 98.21

Muscovite Si02 TiO2 A1203 V203 Cr203 MgO CaO MnO FeO NiO Na20 K20 Rb20 Cs20 Total Min 43.40 0.00 33.69 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.03 1.10 0.00 0.38 9.56 0.84 0.00 96.72 Max 45.38 0.12 37.20 0.09 0.03 0.63 0.01 0.14 2.90 0.02 0.58 10.37 1.43 0.19 99.01 Ave 44.32 0.06 35.33 0.03 0.01 0.32 0.00 0.07 2.14 0.01 0.44 9.99 1.13 0.03 98.25

Elemental Deportment of Rubidium

The elemental rubidium distribution in the Composite sample is graphically presented in Figure 23. This is calculated based on the mineral mass per size fraction and average Rb values from the electron microprobe analyses.

Microcline accounts for 83.2% and muscovite 16.8% of the total Rb content in the sample. The Rb content accounted by microcline ranges from -78% in the - 425/+212pm to 88% in the -38pm.


■ Muscovite 14.1 16.8 17.2 21.9 13.9 12.0

85.9 88.0 86.1 78.1 82.8 83.2 ■ Microcline

Elemental Deportment (Mass % Rb) Composite

100.0

90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

° 50.0 to m • 40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0 Combined +425um -425/+212um 212/+106um 106/+38um 38um

•


Figure 23: Elemental Deportment of Rubidium in the Composite

Liberation and Association

The liberation and association characteristics of Li Minerals, microcline and muscovite were examined. The data for the last two minerals are presented due to the interest in the Rb recovery. For the purposes of this analysis, particle liberation is defined based on 2D particle area percent. Particles are classified in the following groups (in descending order) based on mineral-of-interest area percent: free (=95% surface exposure) and liberated (>_80%). The non-liberated grains have been classified according to association characteristics, where binary association groups refer to particle area percent greater than or equal to 95% of the two minerals or mineral groups. The complex groups refer to particles with ternary, quaternary and greater mineral associations including the mineral of interest.

Li Minerals Liberation and Association

Li Minerals Liberation

Liberation data for Li Minerals are given in



Table 12 and graphically presented in Figure 24. An image grid of the association and additional particle

maps of Li Minerals are given in Figure 25.

Free and liberated Li Minerals account for 86.4% (69.4% is free). Quaternary middling particles of Li

Minerals with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars account for 6.4%, binary middling particles with

quartz for 4.8%, with Na-Feldspars for 1.6%, while other associations are minor (<1%).

Liberation increases by -17% from, the coarse to the fine fraction, 78.9% to 85.4% to 92.5% to 95.5% to

94.8%. Values of the quaternary middling particles of Li Minerals decrease, in the same order, by -13%

(12.4% to 1.3%) and middlings with Na-feldspars by -5% (5.8% to 0.9%).



Table 12: Normalized Liberation Mass of Li Minerals of the Composite

Mineral Name Combined +425um -425/+212um -212/+106um -106/+38um -38um Free Li Minerals 69.4 55.9 67.4 81.0 81.4 90.9 Lib Li Minerals 17.0 23.0 18.0 11.5 14.2 3.9

Li Minerals:Micr 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 1.1 Li Minerals:Na-Felds 1.6 1.9 1.8 1.1 1.0 1.8

Li Minerals:Qtz 4.8 5.8 6.4 2.7 1.7 0.9 Li Minerals:Musc 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0

Li Minerals:Micr.Musc.Qtz.Flds 6.4 12.4 5.7 3.0 1.2 1.3 Li Minerals:Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0

Complex 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Li Min: Li Minerals (including both spodumene and petalite), Micr: microcline, Musc: muscovite, Na-Felds: Na-feldspars, Qtz: quartz.

Li Minerals Association -Composite

Inn

Mas

s (%

Li M

iner

als

)

O N

W

A

O O

J W

O

v Combined +425um -425/+212um -212/+106um -106/+38um -38um

■ Complex 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1

D Li Minerals:Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0

D Li Minerals:Micr.Musc.Qtz.Flds 6.4 12.4 5.7 3.0 1.2 1.3

0 Li Minerals:Musc 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0

D Li Minerals:Qtz 4.8 5.8 6.4 2.7 1.7 0.9

■ Li Minerals:Na-Felds 1.6 1.9 1.8 1.1 1.0 1.8

■ Li Minerals:Micr 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 1.1

D Lib Li Mnerals 17.0 23.0 18.0 11.5 14.2 3.9

■ Free Li Minerals 69.4 55.9 67.4 81.0 81.4 90.9

Figure 24: Li Minerals Liberation and Association Profile of the Composite


Complex

Li Minerals:Other

U Minerals: Micr.Musc.Qtz.FI

Li Minerals:Musc

Li Minerals:Qtz

Li Minerals:Na-Felds

Li Minerals:Micr

Lib Li Minerals

Free Li Minerals

Barren

Li M

iner

als

Ass

ocia

tion

ilk•4 if

1 6.3 pm ~ 300.0 pm 3000.0 pm


Fraction +425um -4251+212um -2121+106um -1061+38um

lip 11,4g *4..pts41 ..-i.LR

....li--., ,yy,.®

• 11,9,..,111"

~• .-•~ra'~1 i'

at~4 ~ 4 ~ ' '~I-4

7~' ,$ -1-..,,,„. ~

.•r.+-

►1sr

••.~-'w~ -' N ~ ~e x

_411,..,.1.,

.de :it .... ,.•..

r'**

.10--

b-♦•i\'i, ten.-

-.,••••4 .-

' ..,...-.

tot . A"'me' i

B • If►.

.a.,

'I. 11,

~-► 1 A:.

_ ,f/~r~.

fi /41,

...8. r

Y+♦ a•,

at .t

WI~x` a

a•...11/"N~

"r l••i•S,

• „l. Ili -4.n..

Y .r•.

.. “1,41....-••

al

~~

Irv,*

OW. *NW

.1111: ,.. 4.t. Y•.r

"~ 11,'" UV

ii .... * r .a,

e '•ara•4r f~~.~~~~

~ '{•r•-

4 lit

•

ilk AP.-.0*aa••!r

• .1r

~ .~

,1

'

:

y .,-_

:v

_/.

'

_•

~ I -.•--

_ .. .. • . •

AO ifl•f ~ ây1l.

Ililr-.t 'AlOM!'

,f.)' '1

.,. -•i ~ ~ jAt 11 • ■+

..-,-..:-.:!..-•....

~ ~

'

. .

.. .. ,.•...

• . •.1 ti • • . _ «,'_ ~ ' ~ ~

'7,....:1"1-•-•:e•

.' t,'.. . .:

-38um

❑ Background

Li Minerals ❑ Quartz

Na -Feldspar Microcline

Muscovite

Biotite Garnet

• Ta-Nb-minera Is Apatite Other

e 2.5 pm x 3.0 pm

1060 pm

~attitlrfri fo' 10- A.dili'l' Ittf.•o'• 4

A-9 •r`'i►ÿi rLfp •i - ~ :~ ~ ~ ~!` .il111 11° 40 el. 4' ,•, 11,- ~ 1 5.9 pm

H 53.0 pm t 425.0 pm

Figure 25: Image Grids Based on Liberation and Association of Li Minerals of the Composite


Nemaska Exploration —12440-001 - M15019-MAY10

38

The liberation and association (by size class) of Li Minerals is presented in Figure 26. Free and liberated Li Minerals occur throughout all the size

classes from -5 to >600 pm. Middling particles significantly decrease with finer particle size and are minor below -70 pm.

Normalized Association by Size Class -Li Minerals

soci

atio

n D

istr

ibut

ion

-

o e — e

— — o — =

_

• Cormsle 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

• Ls ner Is Other 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

CI Ls nerals u 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

Figure 26: Li Minerals Liberation by Size Characteristics of the Composite



Microcline Liberation

Liberation data for microcline are given in Table 13 and graphically presented in

Figure 27. An image grid of the association and additional particle maps of microcline are given in Figure

28.

Free and liberated microcline account for 88.5% (78.4% is free). Quaternary middling particles of

microcline with Li Minerals/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars account for 4.7%, and binary middling particles

with Na-feldspars for 4.7%, and quartz for 1.2%, with while other associations are minor (<1%).

Liberation increases by -18% from the coarse to the fine fraction from 77.6% to 95.5%. Values of the

quaternary middling particles of microcline decrease, in the same order, by -12% (13.9% to 1.3%) and

middlings with Na-feldspars by -5% (7.2% to 1.6%).

Table 13: Normalized Liberation Mass of Microcline of the Composite Sample Mineral Name Combined +425um -425/+212um -212/+106um -106/+38um -38um

Free Microcline 78.4 62.6 69.3 85.5 89.7 90.7 Lib Microcline 10.1 15.0 15.3 6.7 5.3 4.8

Microcline:Li Minerals 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.4 Microcline:Na-Felds 4.7 7.2 6.9 3.7 2.8 1.6

Microcline:Qtz 1.2 0.1 2.4 1.0 0.8 0.5 Microcline:Musc 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.7

Microcline:Li Min.Musc.Qtz.Flds 4.7 13.9 5.2 2.2 0.8 1.3 Microcline:Other 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Complex 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Microcline Association - Composite

Mas

s ( %

Mic

rocl

ine)

Corrbined +425um -425/+212um -212/+106um -106/+38um 38um

0 Complex 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0

0 Mcrocline:Other 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 Mcrocline:Li Mn.M1sc.Qtz.Flds 4.7 13.9 5.2 2.2 0.8 1.3

0 Mcrocline:Misc 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.7

0 Mcrocline:Qtz 1.2 0.1 2.4 1.0 0.8 0.5

■ Mcrocline:Na-Felds 4.7 7.2 6.9 3.7 2.8 1.6

■ Mcrocline:Li Mnerals 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.4

0 Lib Mcrocline 10.1 15.0 15.3 6.7 5.3 4.8

■ Free Mcrocline 78.4 62.6 69.3 85.5 89.7 90.7

Figure 27: Microcline Liberation and Association of the Composite Sample


Complex

Microcline:Otther

Microcline: Li Min. M usc.Qtz. Fld

M icrodine: M use

Microdine:Qtz

M icrodine: N a-Felds

Microcline: Li Minerals

Lib Microcline

Free Microcline

Barren

Mic

rocl

ine

Ass

ocia

ion


Fraction +425um -4251.212um -2121+106um -1061+38um

if. %

g ~

.:.,..

1

o..

0~~• ~ ~s .

~,

~, `,- .

11. *ilk gip l 111'

ù is

iiip' 4

*...,. ;,41,+~~w`+• '0•111414".'0•111414"._ ~

♦•i,'~i. 4.o•.,,, ,

'~s AO ' re.**

.,. ., •.

ilitilk

r A i-

! 'i;•!

~, . 4.

4 `

=ï-6.-111-4.-"'

t r

, a ..-_ l'{

..

4%

f

1

~

/

t* _

• '`

44,

ID NI

* •,,r -ot

~~.

.rr• ►:ra

4Ç' . .. ..

011 i ~a :l

f 1. •...~

- w ••+

.,••~'

`!.r.% ;.- •

. -. . .

*MP I A

~6r

L .r—

= ~...-j +y ~4

^r'-!

..♦.~.r y

...... +,~ O-"fJ•••

l

.:...y l- ..~..

~, : .•e,. ..-..

-1.~._... :.',:'ï: ~r•.1•••

,.. =`::: ~; ' t ~1

.

.' ..

lb' ~ ~~ J•

•r~ .•..•

-38um

❑ Background MU Minerals ❑ Quartz • Na -Feldspar ~ Missocrine ❑ Musmv [e ~ Blv¢ t ~ Garnet ■ Ta-NS-minerals ■ Apa¢B 1.omer

tit i \ 4ryO. `.•.i: • •11\t \ + I• 6 ~t • + re Q ~ • • 25um

, 30um 106 0 ,vo

l,,.1'a!" r- ' ~ *1.4r4.,.rr► 59um

53 Om 1 425 04M

4If‘

.~. .r-

1:41V 4 11* ~~~_

~~

6.3um .—~ 000w 300001un

Figure 28: Image Grid Based on Liberation and Association of Microcline of the Composite Sample



41

The liberation and association (by size class) of microcline is presented in Figure 29. Free and liberated microcline occur throughout all the size

classes from -5 to >600 pm. Middling particles occur mainly in the >225 pm size classes and are negligible with the finer particle sizes.

Normalized Association by Size Class - Microcline

8

8

7 B ~

6

ô 5

3 B

_ 4

~ — — _ â

2 ~ e _

e o —

. 1 — — — —

0 I1

• Carnple 00 00 0 00 00 0 00 00 . . . 0 00 00 . . . .0 00 0 00

13 mane 00 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 0 00 00 00 00

• rochners ner Is 00 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 0 00 00 00 00

• Free IvIcrochne 02 73 72 3 35 20 25 33 3 24 29 25 28 28

Figure 29: Microcline Liberation by Size Characteristics of the Composite



Muscovite Liberation

Liberation data for muscovite are given in Table 14 and graphically presented in

Figure 30. An image grid of the association and additional particle maps of muscovite are given in Figure

31.

Free and liberated muscovite account for 78.4% (74.4% is free). Quaternary middling particles of

muscovite with Li Minerals/microcline/quartz/Na-feldspars account for 12.2%, binary middling particles

with microcline for 2.3%, with Na-feldspars for 2.1%, and quartz for 1.8%, while other associations are

minor (<1.5%).

Liberation increases by -17% from, the coarse to the fine fraction, 61.3% to 88.1%. Values of the

quaternary middling particles of muscovite decrease, in the same order, by -29% (31.0% to 1.9%).

Table 14: Normalized Liberation Mass of Muscovite of the Composite Mineral Name Combined +425um -425/+212um -212/+106um -106/+38um -38um

Free Muscovite 74.4 55.6 79.4 78.1 80.0 76.4 Lib Muscovite 4.0 5.6 1.5 2.0 5.9 11.7

Muscovite:Li Minerals 0.9 0.6 0.9 2.3 1.0 0.0 Muscovite:Na-Felds 2.1 1.0 2.6 2.9 2.8 0.4

Muscovite:Qtz 1.8 3.0 1.5 2.7 1.6 0.1 Muscovite:Microcline 2.3 0.8 1.3 1.8 1.7 9.3

Mus:Li Min.Micro.Qtz.Flds 12.2 31.0 10.0 7.5 5.3 1.9 Muscovite:Other 1.1 1.8 0.9 1.4 1.3 0.1

Complex 1.2 0.6 1.9 1.4 0.5 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Muscovite Association -Composite

inn

Mass

(%

Musc

ov

ite)

N

W A

(T

O

J W

C

O

O O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

I !

db dli Combined +425um -425/+212um -212/+106um -106/+38um -38um

• Complex 1.2 0.6 1.9 1.4 0.5 0.0

O Muscovite:Other 1.1 1.8 0.9 1.4 1.3 0.1

O Mus:Li Min.Micro.Qtz.Flds 12.2 31.0 10.0 7.5 5.3 1.9

• Muscovite:Microcline 2.3 0.8 1.3 1.8 1.7 9.3

O Muscovite:Qtz 1.8 3.0 1.5 2.7 1.6 0.1

• Muscovite:Na-Felds 2.1 1.0 2.6 2.9 2.8 0.4

• Muscovite:Li Mnerals 0.9 0.6 0.9 2.3 1.0 0.0

• Lib Muscovite 4.0 5.6 1.5 2.0 5.9 11.7

• Free Muscovite 74.4 55.6 79.4 78.1 80.0 76.4

Figure 30: Muscovite Liberation and Association of the Composite Sample


Complex

Muscovite:Other

Mus. Li Min. Micro.Otz. Fld

Muscovite: Microcline

Muscovite:Qtz

Muscovite: Na-Felds

Muscovite: Li Minerals

Lib Muscovite

Free Muscovit

Barren

Mus

cov i

te A

ssoc

iatio

n


Fraction +425um -4251+212um -2121+106um -1061+38um

datill Oft Bit

~ "...,,,,%•• 4 • 4.yi,,. "•

!.-+• f.~l •- , f .r t\•

-.4..,",. tip r 4

111,.* -1.-.4-,,,, • '`

.,......

I ,,,-, ~ ►

'_r- T,. r -sf•4• , *••• _, .~..~~~, •s. ,..~,. 0~4,.. .

-

,.

I Ili 4' "i

=MI 4.6,,

4,+4. 41004, .~—rrÿ1 'tik.

‘,.f.

♦1*/ • ~`~•~" ••*#•/•• .•'.`11.

.6

~ ~~y ..-

J~~

Qr-i.Y• ._r 414%. ~r••fi r'

aa.>~aiS• + ty,• ,w,«

,,~..,•e

...

I44111. ......i

f r4iii,

~ ! Al

tc-n.Sa alo.k•le•♦ .*g•a•= s

~ .all

-*04-,s~4 19.8P'►iev ..b.•-'0 4.6` i... .......•

.•. ,

IA

it i 0 4/ I+l,i.}.,s

it•~ \

..r.•.

$pS a t 11

.44' .V

_

.

Ill

N ._ -, A

~

,•^•01,.. 1. • Air. ---

.l;.,...

.`"~ •, : =:.

1•11,,,,,...•

1.4.~~

y _ 1 ' lC~~.1 l - ~~

---.--).-t

~~ . ~

'~i ,~..., ' I •, ,.;-.•- -- .

. i- • . -. . _ a-

7r:,V; ti' #• f 1•'•-4.1... '.

-38um

❑ Background • Li Minerals • Guars

Na-Feldspar Microcline Musees i2

Nete Garnet

ETa-Nb-minerals pat!,

Omer

........ -... -.• '\'". .. ~ - ~~, .~•, ._..1~- ---

. 2.5 pal

. 3.0 µn 1--1106.0üm

~f~~1,r~i®~~~•~♦~~i4 \iiaJ~V.t,a~~/v

. 5.9ym 53.0um

.--, 4250 pm

♦

~

iiippiwArw *al

Figure 31: Image Grids Based on Liberation and Association of Muscovite of the Composite Sample


6.3µn 300.0 en

000,0 mn

Normalized Association by Size Class - Muscovite

%A

sso

cia

tio

n D

istr

ibutio

n

8

7

6

5

4

2

0 +12 +21 +30 +52

• Complex

▪ Merochne

• Free Musc mote

Nemaska Exploration —12440-001 - M15019-MAY10

44

The liberation and association (by size class) of muscovite is presented in Figure 32. Free and liberated muscovite occur throughout all the size

classes from -5 to <480 pm. Middling particles occur mainly in the >225 pm size classes, whereas lesser amounts are observed in the finer size

classes.

Figure 32: Muscovite Liberation by Size Characteristics of the Composite Sample


t Li Minerals

—0— Microcline

—A— Muscovite

t~

Composite

1 0 10.0

100.0 1000.0

Particle Size (pm)

Lib

era

ted

in

fra

cti

on

100.0

95.0

90.0

85.0

80.0

75.0

70.0

65.0

60.0

55.0

50.0


Determinative Mineralogy

Mineral Release Curves

Mineral release curves are used to predict the amount of liberated mineral of interest at varying size

distributions. This can be an indicator of optimum grind targets for metallurgical processes in order to

achieve the most liberation for the least amount of grind energy. The variation between value and

gangue mineral release curves may sometimes be used to enhance separation.

Note: The size used for the mineral release is the mid-point screen size, which is calculated by the

following: Midpoint = square root (top size) x square root (bottom size). For the top size, (e.g., +200 pm)

the top size particle (e.g., 340 pm) is identified, then 340 pm will be the top size and 200 the bottom size.

Thus, the point for the mineral release at this liberation would be calculated as: square root (340) x

square root (200) = 18.4390 x 14.1421 = 260.76. For any midsize, the size fraction pm is used for this

calculation. However, for the bottom size, 3 pm is used because that is approximately the beam diameter

limitation for the QEMSCANTM

Figure 33 illustrates that liberation of Li Minerals, microcline and muscovite. Liberation of Li Minerals

ranges from 79% to 85% to 92% to 96% to 95% for sizes at 691 pm, 300 pm, 150 pm, 63 pm and 11 pm;

that for microcline from 78% to 85% to 92% and 95% in the last two fractions; and that for muscovite from

61% to 81% to 80% to 86% to 88% for the same sizes respectively.

Note: that liberation of Li minerals and microcline is higher than that of muscovite. Overall liberation for

the three minerals is very good at >92% for Li minerals and microcline, and >80% for muscovite,

respectively. Liberation does not increase significantly below the 63 pm.

Figure 33: Mineral Release Curves for Li Minerals, Microcline and Muscovite for the Composite Sample


Composite Grade vs. Recovery

0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4 0

Li Grade %

� +425um

—N— -425/+212um

-212/+106um

—x -106/+38um

~F 38um

—6—Sample Li

Min

era

l R

eco

very

100.0 -3K- -e-

95.0

90.0

85.0

80.0

75.0

70.0


Grade — Recovery Curves

Another, more functional, method of presenting liberation is the mineralogically limiting grade-recovery

curves, as are shown below. They are based on the calculated mass of minerals and the total mass in

each liberation category. Thus, the highest grade (>80% Li Minerals) is contained in the >80% liberated

Li Minerals particles. Then the next category (60-80% liberation) is added and the combined grade is

calculated. This is repeated until all Li Minerals are accounted for. Mineralogically limited grade-recovery

analyses provide an indication of the theoretical maximum achievable elemental or mineral grade by

recovery, based on individual particle liberation and grade. These results, of course, do not reflect any

other recovery factors that could occur in the actual metallurgical process.

Figure 34 illustrates the grade-recovery curves for the sample based on the liberation of Li Minerals in the

Composite. Grades and recoveries increase from the coarse to the fine fraction as expected from the

liberation values. Overall, the grade recovery curve representing the whole sample indicates grades

between 3.4% and 3.2% for recoveries of 86% to -99%, respectively. The best grades are projected for

the fine fraction between 3.5% and 3.4% for recoveries of 95% to -99%, respectively.

Figure 35 illustrates the grade-recovery curves for the sample based on the liberation of microcline and

muscovite that contain Rb. Grades and recoveries increase from the coarse to the fine fraction. Overall,

the grade recovery curve representing the whole sample indicates grades between 1.1% and 1% for

recoveries of 88% to 98%, respectively. The best grades are projected for the fine fraction between 1.1%

and 1% for recoveries of 97% to -99%, respectively.

Figure 34: Grade-Recovery Curves for Li Minerals of the Composite


Composite Grade vs. Recovery

t +425um

—4— -425/+212um

-212/+106um

� -106/+38um

~F 38um

—6—Sample

100.0

95.0

90.0

85.0

80.0

75.0

Rb M

inera

ls R

ecovery

70.0

0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1 2

Rb Minerals Grade %


Figure 35: Grade-Recovery Curves for Rb of the Composite

Conclusions and Recommendations The high definition mineralogical study of the samples identified the following sample characteristics:

• XRD analysis indicates that the samples consist mainly of quartz, albite and microcline, and muscovite;

o samples MW and SE contain only spodumene at -14% and -16%, respectively; and

o samples ME, SW and PP contain both spodumene and petalite at 20%, 13% and 10%, and -3%, -13% and 8%, respectively.

• XRD along with the Li chemical analysis indicates that WP sample does not contain significant abundances of the Li-Minerals (either petalite or spodumene However, trace amounts (-2%) are tentatively identified with the QEMSCAN analysis.

• QEMSCANTM analysis of the -10 mesh and the K80 -212 pm samples yield similar results and in agreement with the XRD data. The MW, ME, SW, SE and PP samples contain mainly varied amounts of Na-feldspars, microcline, quartz, muscovite and Li minerals. Reconciliation between the two set of samples is very good with a R2 of -0.97.



• Liberation of Li Minerals, based on the K80 -212 pm, is very good and ranges from -96% in the ME, 86% in the MW, 90% for PP, 98% for SE, 88% in the SW, and 58% for WP.

• Note that differences in the modal abundance of the minerals are expected because of the differences in the size of the analyzed material (-10 mesh and K80 of 212 pm).

Composite Sample

• The Composite sample consists mainly of Na-feldspar (25.3%) and microcline (15.9%), quartz (31.4%), Li minerals (22.4%) and muscovite (3.4%).

• Rb is accounted primarily by microcline (-83%) and muscovite (17%). Therefore, for optimum grade and recovery of Rb both these minerals must be recovered.

• Liberation of Li Minerals is good for this grind target (K80 of 425 pm) at -86%. The remainder of Li Minerals mass is associated with microcline/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (6%) and quartz (-5%). Liberation increases by -17% from, the coarse to the fine fraction (79% to 95%). However, there is a very small increase in the liberation (-2-3%) below the 212 pm. Therefore, recovery of Li Minerals can be obtained at a relatively coarse size (-200 pm).

• Liberation of microcline is also very good in the sample -89%. The remainder of microcline occurs in quaternary middling particles with Li Minerals/muscovite/quartz/Na-feldspars (-5%) and binary middling particles with Na-feldspars (5%). Liberation increases by -18% with decreasing particle size (78% to 95%). Similar to Li Minerals there is a minor increase in liberation below the 212 pm fraction (-3%).

• Liberation of muscovite is good at 78%, but lower than that of Li Minerals and microcline. The remainder of the mass occurs as quaternary middling particles with Li Minerals/microcline/quartz/Na-feldspars (-12%). Liberation increases by -17% (61% to 88%) with decreasing particle size. Liberation of muscovite increases by 5-8% below the 212 pm which is higher than the increases displayed by Li Minerals and microcline.

• Mineral release calculations also show that liberation of Li Minerals ranges from 79% to 85% to 92% to 96% to 95% for sizes at 691 pm, 300 pm, 150 pm, 63 pm and 11 pm; that for microcline from 78% to 85% to 92% and 95% in the last two fractions; and that for muscovite from 61 % to 81 % to 80% to 86% to 88% for the same sizes respectively. Note: that liberation of Li minerals and microcline is higher than that of muscovite.

• Li grades between 3.4% and 3.2% for recoveries of 86% to -99%, respectively are projected. Grades and recoveries increase weakly (<0.1% Li and -3%



recovery) below the -212 pm size indicating that grinding and flotation below that size might not increase the Li grades and recoveries significantly. However, metallurgical tests must be carried to determine the exact difference in grade and recovery below this size.

• Rb grades between 1.1°A and 1°A for recoveries of 88% to 98%, respectively, are projected. Microcline carries most of the Rb in the sample and adjustments might be needed to recover Rb from both microcline and muscovite.

• The above mineralogical results are based on a composite sample that is made of equal portions of each of the five individuals (MW, ME, SW, SE, and PP).

• A mass balance calculation, assuming blending proportions of 70% MW, 15% ME, 8% SW, 5% SE and 2% PP, indicates that a composite sample would contain approximately quartz 36%, albite 26%, spodumene 15%, muscovite 11 %, microcline -10%, petalite <2% and beryl (<0.5%).

• The Li content that was used for the Li Mineral formula was calculated at -3.5% and it was based on equal proportions of blending material and the XRD data. However, for a weighted composite sample, as shown above, the Li content in the Li Minerals would be higher by -0.1-0.2% Li (reflecting the higher spodumene to petalite ratio).

• The Rb distribution would also be affected and would be different between the microcline and muscovite reflecting their mass% in the weighted composite sample based on the above proportions. Thus, although the total Rb in a whole rock analysis might not changed, microcline and muscovite would account for approximate equal proportions of Rb because of the change in the mass of the two minerals. Thus, lower recovery and grade of Rb might be expected due to the lower liberation of muscovite than microcline.

• Note that the findings in this report are based on what is mineralogically possible, under ideal separation conditions. For instance, it assumes that it is possible to separate a spodumene (or petalite) grain with a minute attachment of another mineral, from a particle that contains no inclusions or attachments. Practically, this separation might be more complex. Thus, the findings in this report should not be considered as a prediction of recovery performance. Rather, this provides insight into the limitations with respect to mineralogical characteristics.

• It must be noted, that due to the difference in grain size, all size fractions contain particles that are close to the measurement area (-3 pm) and the spacing of the measurement points and therefore can encounter less precision in the measurements. In addition, the X-ray beam can scatter at the edges of particles and can lead to inaccurate analytical results. As the particles become smaller, the edges constitute a larger percentage of the total particle mass. Therefore, some biased might be introduced, especially in the fine fraction, and caution is advised in interpreting the results in this particular fraction.



Appendix A — Certificate of Analysis



SG$ MI Canada~ P.O. Bac 4300 -145 Concession SL Latelleltl - Wan() - KOL 2H0 Plgne: 705-452-21190 FAX: 705-652-6365

LR Internal Dept 14 June 29, 2010 Attn = Tassos

Date Rec. : 13 May 2010 LR Report: CA02480-MAY10 Project: CALR-12440-001

Phone: -, Fax:- Client Ref : M15011-May10

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Final Report

Sample ID Si02 A1203 Fe203 MgO CaO Na20 K20 Tî02 % % % % % %

1: MW-10m 75.6 15.6 0.66 0.06 0.25 3.15 3.13 <0.01

2: ME-10m 76.8 15.6 0_60 0.03 020 3118 2.12 <0_01

3: SW-10m 76.7 15.2 0.63 0.06 027 2.51 2.90 <0.01

4: SE-10m 752 15.8 0.52 0.03 025 3.50 3.40 <0.01

5: PP-10m 762 15.6 0.42 0.05 0_20 3119 3.06 <0.01

6: WP-10m 741) 15.1 0.39 0.04 0.41 4.40 520 <0.01

Sample ID P205 MnO Cr203 V205 LOI Sum Rh Li Be % % % % % % % % glt

1: MW-10m 0.08 0.09 0.01 <101 0.54 99.2 111 0.66 180

2: ME-10m 0.14 0119 0.03 < 0.01 0.38 99.0 0.091 0.89 170

3: SW-10m 0.19 0.14 0.02 < 101 0.62 90.2 0.15 0.73 190

4: SE-10m 0.15 0.08 0.02 < 0.01 0.39 90.4 0.15 0.61 190

5: PP-10m 0.14 0.06 0.02 <101 0.48 90.3 0.14 0.71 170

6: WP-10m 0.09 0.05 0.01 < 0.01 0.35 100.7 0.13 0.055 42

r (4,...4(17r Tam Watt Project Coordinator

1 Pipi l of 1

ar+q u. bs. b 4r..y c..ywr. a Web*. t amnv 1.r.nb.b x b.~v. .wr..d...... ).rd.yn IMARRING: ...ht..... • n.e PM'.eM y s 0.r.e..a.. -11. ti/Y

~i..mrp yur u..a ropriathrb.xur pod mad d.y., nrr m ur awb.4.T.Cnr..r...h n. 11.11,1•111..1 m u..r.y..rr..o flan mt. u...ra`d: M... .1.. btn].C.'.n.11y.rb.rta. tl..

ibtJ=n~ Ÿ~I.af..1~r. wo tiuN.M1 [ .i e~F ~rh..~rw+.'"MbunNtlreaya.~..a



SGT SOS Comb lnt P.O. Bal 430:1- 185 Ca1ce56mx1 St. LateIleltl - Crawl() - KOL 2HD Phone: 7N-552-2000 FAX: 705f52-EO65

LR Internal Dept 14 June 29, 2010 Attn : TassoslSarah

Date Rec_ : 18 June 2010 -. - LR Report : CA02724JUNt O - Project : CALR-12440-061

Phone: -. Fax:- Client Ref : M15019-JUN16 Nemaska Exploradon Inc.

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Final Report

Sample ID Be Rb Li Si02 AI203 Fe203 MgO CaO gl1 % % % % % % %

1: Composite +425un 300 0.12 1.01 74.3 18.9 0.70 0.04 0.19

2: Composite -4251212um 190 0.12 0.73 76.1 15.5 0.55 0.04 0.20

3: Composite -2121+106un 160 1111 0.82 78.7 14.8 0.37 0.03 0.23

4: Composite -1061+38um 160 0.12 0.58 76.4 14.0 0.60 0.03 0.26

5: Composite-38um 150 0.14 0.48 74.9 15.2 0.59 0.05 0.42

Sample 13 Na2C K20 1-102 P205 IMO Cr203 1205 LOI Sum

1: Composite +425um 2.20 3.00 < 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.02 <1101 0.75 98.4

2: Composite-425t212un 3.02 3.01 <0.01 0.12 0.09 0.02 <0.01 0.71 99A

3: Composite -2121+106un 3.52 2.80 < 0.01 0.15 0.09 0.02 < 0.01 0.53 99.2

4: Composite -1061+36um 3.58 2.99 < 0.01 0.17 0.0E 0.03 <13.01 0.60 99A

5: Composite -38un 3.68 3.65 < 0.01 0.23 0.09 0.03 < 0.01 1.01 99.9

( r % % C V'r L l Torn Watt Project Coordinator

Papa 1of 1 ileeNn•nt Is lowed N'v.0 ra asonelco 'J.rw.+payvrr..wlm.a.uib......e`wn>,u• N.Mmarav. ..d nice..

Tb...a'en a...1...+.s...e.1 ti.. 11.1..1 .0 r... w. tin s....e 1. rm... boa.. er lay .,... ep no SUM, ma rm.,+u. w... roprlat.a<u. goofs .1 a.u.Irrm It. c.rwr.opd ro..ea..n nord m...r10.r..o1v..l.ai u. o...pf *..Sn . d,

...W.,........roped ... ==: ...end rmy

for Ÿ:~..~ ÿ.r7

.'~.wa~°.'.~ p..~~.... ...e...a.~.s

$ â



Appendix B — XRD Analysis



Semi-Quantitative X-Ray Diffraction

Report Prepared for: Nemaska Exploration

Project Number/ LIMS No. 12440-001/M15011-MAY10

Reporting Date: June 15, 2010

Instrument: BRUKER AXS D8 Advance Diffractometer

Test Conditions:

Interpretations :

Detection Limit:

Co radiation, 40 kV, 35 mA Regular Scanning: Step: 0.02°, Step time:0.2s, 28 range: 3-70°

PDF2/PDF4 powder diffraction databases issued by the International Center for Diffraction Data (ICDD). DiffracPlus Eva software.

0.5-2%. Strongly dependent on crystallinity.

Contents: 1) Method Summary 2) Summary of Mineral Asemblages 3) Semi-Quantitative XRD Results 4) Chemical Balance(s) 5) XRD Pattern(s)

Anita Coppaway Huyun Zhou, Ph.D.

Mineralogical Technologist Senior Mineralogist

SGS Minerals P.O. Box 4300, 185 Concession Street, Lakefield, Ontario, Canada KOL 2H0

a division of SGS Canada Inc. Tel: (705) 652-2000 Fax: (705) 652-6365 www.sgs.com www.sgs.com/met


Method Summary

Mineral Identification and Interpretation:

Mineral identification and interpretation involve matching the diffraction pattern of an unknown material to patterns of single-phase reference materials. The reference patterns are compiled by the Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards - International Center for Diffraction Data (JCPDS-ICDD) database and released on software as Powder Diffraction Files (PDF).

Interpretations do not reflect the presence of non-crystalline and/or amorphous compounds. Mineral proportions are based on relative peak heights and may be strongly influenced by crystallinity, structural group or preferred orientations. Interpretations and relative proportions should be accompanied by supporting petrographic and geochemical data (Whole Rock Analysis, Inductively Coupled Plasma - Optical Emission Spectroscopy, etc.).

Semi-Quantitative Analysis:

The Semi-Quantitative analysis (RIR method) is performed based on each mineral's relative peak heights and of their respective I/Icor values, which are available from the PDF database. Mineral abundances for the bulk sample (in weight %) are generated by Bruker-EVA Software. These data are reconciled with a bulk chemistry (e.g. whole rock analysis including 5102, Al2O3, Na2O, K2O, CaO, MgO, Fe2O3, Cr2O3, MnO, Ti02, P205, V205 or other chemical data). A chemical balance table shows the difference between the assay results and elemental concentrations determined by XRD.

SGS Minerals P.O. Box 4300, 185 Concession Street, Lakefield, Ontario, Canada KOL 2H0

a division of SGS Canada Inc. Tel: (705) 652-2000 Fax: (705) 652-6365 www.sgs.com www.sgs.com/met




Summary of Semi-Quantitative X-ray Diffraction Results

Crystalline Mineral Assemblage (relative proportions based on peak height Sample Major

(>30% Wt) Moderate

(10% -30% Wt) Minor

(2% -10% Wt) Trace

(<2% Wt)

(1) MW-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, mica

potassium feldspar *beryl

(2) ME-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene mica, petalite, potassium feldspar

-

(3) SW-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, petal ite

potassium feldspar, mica

-

(4) SE-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, potassium feldspar

mica -

(5) PP-10m quartz plagioclase, spodumene, potassium feldspar

mica, petalite -

(6) WP-10m plagioclase quartz, potassium feldspar

mica *kaolinite

* tentative identification due to low concentrations, diffraction line overlap or poor crystallinity

Mineral Composition

Beryl Be3AI2(Si6018)

Kaolinite AI2Si205(OH)4

Mica K(Mg, Fe)AIZSi3AI010(OH)2

Petalite Li(AISi4O10)

Plagioclase (NaSi,CaAI)AISi208

Potassium Feldspar KAISi3O8

Quartz Si02

Spodumene LiAISi206



Semi-Quantitative X-ray Diffraction Results

Mineral (1) MW -10m (wt %)

(2) ME -10m (wt %)

(3) SW -10m (wt %)

Quartz 36.9 36.2 32.6 Albite 26.7 25.1 21.9 Spodumene 14.4 20.2 12.8 Muscovite 11.7 9.1 10.0 Microcline 9.8 6.0 9.9 Beryl 0.5 - - Petalite - 3.4 12.8 Kaolinite - - - TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0

Mineral (4) SE -10m (wt %)

(5) PP -10m (wt %)

(6) WP -10m (wt %)

Quartz 33.8 35.3 29.8 Albite 28.8 25.5 37.3 Spodumene 15.5 10.4 - Muscovite 7.6 9.6 5.5 Microcline 14.3 11.6 26.3 Beryl - - - Petalite - 7.5 - Kaolinite - - 1.0 TOTAL 100.0 99.9 99.9



Chemical Balance

1) MW -10m Name Assay SQDZ Delta Status Si02 75.6 76.5 -0.91 Both A1203 15.6 15.5 0.11 Both Na20 3.15 3.17 -0.02 Both K20 3.13 3.05 0.08 Both Li20 1.42 1.16 0.26 Both Fe203 0.66 0.02 0.64 Both CaO 0.25 - 0.25 XRF Rb20 0.12 - 0.12 XRF MnO 0.09 - 0.09 XRF P205 0.08 - 0.08 XRF MgO 0.06 0.01 0.05 Both H2O - 0.53 0.53 SQD BeO - 0.06 0.06 SQD Cs20 - 0.00 0.00 SQD

2) ME -10m

Name Assay SQDZ Delta Status 5i02 76.8 77.2 -0.37 Both A1203 15.6 15.6 0.03 Both Na20 3.08 2.97 0.11 Both K20 2.12 2.09 0.03 Both Li20 1.92 1.78 0.13 Both Fe203 0.60 - 0.60 XRF CaO 0.20 - 0.20 XRF P205 0.14 - 0.14 XRF Rb20 0.10 - 0.10 XRF MnO 0.09 - 0.09 XRF MgO 0.03 - 0.03 XRF Cr203 0.03 - 0.03 XRF H2O - 0.41 0.41 SQD

3) SW-10m Name Assay SQDZ Delta Status 5i02 76.7 76.9 -0.20 Both A1203 15.2 15.5 -0.35 Both K20 2.90 2.86 0.04 Both Na20 2.51 2.59 -0.08 Both Li20 1.57 1.65 -0.08 Both Fe203 0.63 - 0.63 XRF CaO 0.27 - 0.27 XRF P205 0.19 - 0.19 XRF Rb20 0.16 - 0.16 XRF MnO 0.14 - 0.14 XRF MgO 0.06 - 0.06 XRF Cr203 0.02 - 0.02 XRF H2O - 0.45 0.45 SQD

1. Values measured by chemical assay.

2. Values calculated based on mineral/compound formulas and quantites identified by semi-quantitative XRD.



4) SE -10m Name Assay' SQD` Delta Status Si02 75.2 76.3 -1.11 Both A1203 15.8 15.4 0.42 Both Na20 3.50 3.40 0.10 Both K20 3.40 3.31 0.09 Both Li20 1.31 1.25 0.07 Both Fe203 0.52 - 0.52 XRF CaO 0.25 - 0.25 XRF Rb20 0.16 - 0.16 XRF P205 0.15 - 0.15 XRF MnO 0.08 - 0.08 XRF MgO 0.03 - 0.03 XRF Cr203 0.02 - 0.02 XRF H2O - 0.34 0.34 SQD

5) PP -10m Name Assay' SQD` Delta Status Si02 76.2 77.4 -1.16 Both A1203 15.6 14.9 0.72 Both Na20 3.09 3.01 0.08 Both K20 3.06 3.11 -0.05 Both Li20 1.53 1.20 0.33 Both Fe203 0.42 - 0.42 XRF CaO 0.20 - 0.20 XRF Rb20 0.15 - 0.15 XRF P205 0.14 - 0.14 XRF MnO 0.06 - 0.06 XRF MgO 0.05 - 0.05 XRF Cr203 0.02 - 0.02 XRF H2O - 0.44 0.44 SQD

6) WP -10m Name Assay' SQD` Delta Status Si02 74.6 75.4 -0.81 Both A1203 15.1 14.6 0.51 Both K20 5.20 5.08 0.12 Both Na20 4.40 4.41 -0.01 Both CaO 0.41 - 0.41 XRF Fe203 0.39 - 0.39 XRF Rb20 0.14 - 0.14 XRF Li20 0.13 - 0.13 XRF P205 0.09 - 0.09 XRF MnO 0.05 - 0.05 XRF MgO 0.04 - 0.04 XRF H2O - 0.37 0.37 SQD Fluorine - 0.07 0.07 SQD


Nemaska Exploration —12440-001 - M15019-MAY10 59

MW -10m

I i i i I i i i I I i i i i I i i i i

0 U

J

7

10

20

30

39 40

50

60

70

2-Theta - Scale

®MW -10m - File: May5011-1.raw

Operations: X Offset 0.008 1 X Offset 0.016 1 Background 1.000,1.000 I Import

E01-079-1910 (C) - Quartz - SiO2

E 01-084-0752 (C) -Albite low- Na(AISi3O8)

❑~ 01-076-0637 (C) - Muscovite - KAI2(Si3AI)O10(OH)2

g 01-084-0709 (C) - Microcline - KAISi3O8

❑~ 00-033-0786 (*) - Spodumene - LiAISi2O6

O 01-078-2224 (C) - Beryl - All.31 Fe.37Mq.33Be2.86Li.03Si6.11 Na.41 Cs.01O18


' I ' I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~

39 40 50 60 70

1000

900

800

to .-+

O U

700

600

500

`-' 400

J 300

200

100

0

Nemaska Exploration —12440-001 - M115011 -MAY10 60

ME -10m

1000

900

800

(./)+ 700

3 • 600

Û 500

400

J • 300

200

100

0

•

~

11

6 10

20

30

2-Theta - Scale ®ME -10m - File: May5011-3.raw

Operations: Background 1.000,1.0001 Import

g01-079-1910 (C) - Quartz - Si02

E~ 01-084-0752 (C) -Albite low- Na(AISi3O8)

E~ 01-084-0709 (C) - Microcline - KAISi3O8

g01-076-0637 (C) - Muscovite - KAI2(Si3AI)010(OH)2

E~ 01-075-1091 (C) - Spodumene - LiAISi2O6

E00-012-0451 (D) - Petalite - LiAISi4O10



SW -10m

1000 —

o

6 10 20 30

O U

J

i I i I i i i i I i i I i i I

39 40 50 60 70

2-Theta - Scale ®SW -10m - File: May5011-5.raw


❑~ 01-079-1910 (C) - Quartz - Si02

❑~ 01-084-0752 (C) -Albite low- Na(AISi3O8)

g01-076-0637 (C) - Muscovite - KAI2(Si3AI)O10(OH)2

g01-084-0709 (C) - Microcline - KAISi3O8

❑~ 01-071-1508 (C) - Spodumene - LiAISi2O6



Û 500

400

J 300

200 —

100 P4,1„ 0

1000

900 —

800 — ~ — .4 700 — C — 3 600 —

6 10 20 30

1000

900

800

~

O U

700

600

500

`-' 400

J 300

200

100

0

I~irJ- _ I RyJI

I►I I~11

J1JI~~ ~,lltr t

■

IIRLII~IN~IN .~i► l~~tNR, s.~:zi~~i 3L1! •lhxNereeë~

vv •

' I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~

I

' I


SE -10m

39 40 50 60 70

2-Theta - Scale ESE -10m - File: May5011-7.raw


❑~ 01-079-1910 (C) - Quartz - Si02


g01-076-0637 (C) - Muscovite - KAI2(Si3AI)010(OH)2




1000 — ~ V) .-+

W •

1 I • .. ~ " i I i

O U

J

0 i I


PP -10m

1000 —

jithr

7 10 20 30

39 40 50 60 70

2-Theta - Scale EPP -10m - File: May5011-9.raw


❑~ 01-079-1910 (C) - Quartz - Si02


g01-076-0637 (C) - Muscovite - KAI2(Si3AI)O10(OH)2





0

0


WP -10m

1000 —

i 0 J1144

~u"'"~

7 10 20 30

1000 —

39 40 50 60 70

2-Theta - Scale

®WP -10m - File: May5011-11.raw


E01-079-1910 (C) - Quartz - Si02

E 01-084-0752 (C) - Albite low - Na(AISi3O8)

❑~ 01-086-1386 (C) - Muscovite 2M1 - K0.94AI1.96(AI0.95Si2.85010)((OH)1.744F0.256)


H00-003-0059 (D) - Kaolinite - AI2Si205(OH)4



Appendix C — EMPA


Nemaska Exploration - 12440-001 - M15011-MAY10

66

Spodumene Si02 A1203 MnO FeO K20 CaO MgO Na20 Li20* Total Composite 63.20 26.78 0.18 0.73 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.16 8.92 100.00 Composite 63.52 26.79 0.08 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.13 8.39 100.00 Composite 63.45 27.19 0.10 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 8.54 100.00 Composite 63.26 26.71 0.11 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.14 9.00 100.00 Composite 63.18 26.58 0.13 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.20 8.91 100.00 Composite 63.07 26.41 0.18 1.21 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.14 8.97 100.00 Composite 63.05 27.02 0.23 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.16 8.64 100.00 Composite 62.94 26.15 0.14 1.71 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.13 8.89 100.00 Composite 63.29 26.97 0.09 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.15 8.81 100.00 Composite 63.17 26.87 0.23 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.12 8.84 100.00 Composite 63.33 27.04 0.17 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.15 8.62 100.00 Composite 63.11 26.53 0.09 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.14 9.15 100.00 Composite 63.38 27.17 0.22 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.12 8.36 100.00 Composite 63.61 26.93 0.14 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.15 8.20 100.00 Composite 63.30 27.25 0.18 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.13 8.47 100.00 Composite 63.48 26.88 0.12 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.13 8.52 100.00 Composite 63.43 27.05 0.14 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.17 8.59 100.00 Composite 63.46 26.92 0.12 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.14 8.48 100.00 Composite 63.22 26.54 0.09 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.10 8.94 100.00 Composite 63.20 26.57 0.15 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.15 8.87 100.00 Composite 63.10 26.60 0.14 1.19 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.14 8.79 100.00 Composite 63.56 26.91 0.10 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.13 8.71 100.00 Composite 62.94 26.79 0.13 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.18 9.05 100.00 Composite 63.50 26.97 0.12 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.13 8.62 100.00 Composite 63.26 26.77 0.08 1.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.13 8.68 100.00 Composite 63.20 26.69 0.09 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.12 8.89 100.00 Composite 63.29 26.55 0.08 1.43 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.12 8.50 100.00 Composite 63.68 27.00 0.11 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.14 7.95 100.00 Min 62.94 26.15 0.08 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 Max 63.68 27.25 0.23 1.71 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.20 Ave 63.29 26.81 0.13 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 Median 63.28 26.83 0.13 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.14 Stdev 0.19 0.25 0.04 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02

Petalite Si02 A1203 MnO FeO K20 CaO MgO Na20 Li20* Total Composite 77.54 16.57 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 5.84 100.00 Composite 77.30 16.61 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 6.02 100.00 Composite 77.30 16.60 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 6.04 100.00 Composite 76.76 16.63 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 6.56 100.00 Min 76.76 16.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 Max 77.54 16.63 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 Ave 77.23 16.60 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 Median 77.30 16.61 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 Stdev 0.33 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

Method detection limits (%) MnO 0.017 Na20 0.008 FeO 0.019 MgO 0.008 K20 0.005 A1203 0.012 CaO 0.007 Si02 0.016

Note: Li20 is calculated by difference and is not the actual concentration in the Li minerals



67

Na-Feldspars Si02 TiO2 A1203 MgO CaO MnO FeO BaO Na20 K20 Rb20 Cs20 Total Composite 67.60 0.00 19.97 0.01 0.28 0.02 0.01 0.00 11.40 0.05 0.00 0.00 99.33 Composite 69.34 0.00 20.85 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.91 0.04 0.00 0.00 98.64 Composite 67.54 0.01 20.31 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.49 0.12 0.00 0.00 98.94 Composite 68.11 0.03 19.86 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 11.75 0.04 0.00 0.00 99.83 Composite 67.34 0.00 19.97 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.40 0.03 0.00 0.00 99.06 Composite 67.29 0.00 20.06 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.04 11.35 0.27 0.00 0.00 99.08 Composite 67.05 0.00 20.03 0.01 0.49 0.01 0.00 0.01 11.31 0.06 0.00 0.00 98.98 Min 67.05 0.00 19.86 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.91 0.03 0.00 0.00 98.64 Max 69.34 0.03 20.85 0.01 0.50 0.02 0.01 0.04 11.75 0.27 0.00 0.00 99.83 Ave 67.75 0.00 20.15 0.00 0.31 0.01 0.00 0.01 10.80 0.09 0.00 0.00 99.12 Median 67.54 0.00 20.03 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.35 0.05 0.00 0.00 99.06 Stdev 0.77 0.01 0.34 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.00 0.01 1.33 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.37

Microcline Si02 TiO2 A1203 MgO CaO MnO FeO BaO Na20 K20 Rb20 Cs20 Total Composite 63.22 0.00 18.45 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.01 0.00 1.26 14.14 0.80 0.01 97.99 Composite 63.00 0.00 18.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.40 15.07 1.08 0.00 98.11 Composite 62.60 0.00 18.47 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.26 15.16 1.57 0.02 98.13 Composite 63.14 0.00 18.41 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 15.31 0.75 0.00 98.05 Composite 62.64 0.01 18.32 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.22 15.21 1.48 0.01 98.05 Composite 62.59 0.01 18.37 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 15.21 1.46 0.01 97.94 Composite 63.35 0.00 18.36 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.57 15.14 0.97 0.00 98.42 Composite 62.96 0.00 18.33 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.57 15.22 1.41 0.01 98.53 Composite 62.83 0.00 18.26 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.46 15.33 1.44 0.03 98.40 Composite 63.00 0.00 18.29 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.34 15.76 1.01 0.01 98.43 Composite 62.56 0.00 18.59 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.61 15.34 0.92 0.01 98.07 Composite 62.86 0.00 18.25 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.47 15.47 1.20 0.01 98.27 Composite 62.74 0.04 18.46 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.30 15.75 1.21 0.02 98.54 Composite 62.31 0.00 18.48 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.37 15.36 1.63 0.01 98.20 Composite 62.05 0.00 18.40 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 15.51 1.30 0.00 97.74 Composite 62.97 0.00 18.18 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 15.48 0.87 0.03 97.91 Composite 62.99 0.03 18.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 15.86 1.34 0.02 98.70 Min 62.05 0.00 18.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 14.14 0.75 0.00 97.74 Max 63.35 0.04 18.59 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.03 1.26 15.86 1.63 0.03 98.70 Ave 62.81 0.01 18.37 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.45 15.31 1.20 0.01 98.21 Median 62.86 0.00 18.37 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 15.33 1.21 0.01 98.13 Stdev 0.33 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.38 0.28 0.01 0.26

Method detection limits (%) Si02 0.017 FeO 0.017 TiO2 0.056 BaO 0.052 A1203 0.011 Na20 0.012 MgO 0.009 K20 0.009 CaO 0.011 Rb20 0.043 MnO 0.033 Cs20 0.015



68

Muscovite Si02 TiO2 A1203 V203 Cr203 MgO CaO MnO FeO NiO Na20 K20 Rb20 Cs20 H2O Total Composite 44.45 0.07 34.92 0.08 0.01 0.31 0.00 0.12 2.77 0.00 0.38 10.14 1.00 0.00 4.39 98.63 Composite 44.66 0.07 34.47 0.09 0.00 0.62 0.01 0.03 2.49 0.00 0.38 9.56 1.19 0.19 4.37 98.12 Composite 44.11 0.06 34.15 0.01 0.00 0.63 0.01 0.05 2.90 0.00 0.42 9.70 1.19 0.06 4.34 97.62 Composite 44.82 0.07 35.61 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.10 2.10 0.00 0.49 10.09 0.89 0.01 4.42 98.83 Composite 43.58 0.11 36.77 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.04 1.34 0.01 0.39 9.61 1.43 0.02 4.38 97.79 Composite 43.40 0.09 37.20 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.03 1.10 0.01 0.44 9.76 1.43 0.01 4.39 98.00 Composite 44.83 0.04 34.72 0.00 0.01 0.31 0.00 0.09 2.68 0.01 0.44 9.88 1.13 0.02 4.39 98.56 Composite 43.75 0.12 33.69 0.00 0.03 0.58 0.00 0.06 2.87 0.00 0.41 9.92 0.96 0.03 4.30 96.72 Composite 44.52 0.11 35.64 0.06 0.00 0.60 0.01 0.07 1.78 0.00 0.46 9.96 0.98 0.03 4.41 98.63 Composite 45.38 0.03 35.09 0.09 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.04 1.78 0.00 0.43 10.11 1.34 0.02 4.42 98.86 Composite 44.48 0.06 34.59 0.08 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.14 2.85 0.02 0.49 10.04 1.02 0.02 4.38 98.50 Composite 44.07 0.08 35.26 0.01 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.04 2.27 0.00 0.46 10.37 0.84 0.00 4.37 98.04 Composite 44.94 0.04 35.54 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.08 1.58 0.01 0.43 10.03 1.29 0.00 4.41 98.50 Composite 43.75 0.00 35.01 0.00 0.02 0.25 0.00 0.10 2.12 0.00 0.42 10.29 1.20 0.02 4.33 97.51 Composite 43.70 0.00 36.64 0.02 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.06 1.76 0.02 0.58 9.78 1.25 0.04 4.39 98.32 Composite 44.79 0.03 36.33 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.04 1.58 0.01 0.46 10.03 1.18 0.01 4.43 99.01 Composite 44.49 0.10 34.64 0.00 0.02 0.61 0.01 0.06 2.53 0.02 0.40 10.27 0.89 0.04 4.38 98.45 Composite 44.07 0.08 35.65 0.05 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.05 2.04 0.00 0.41 10.28 1.10 0.01 4.38 98.39 Min 43.40 0.00 33.69 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.03 1.10 0.00 0.38 9.56 0.84 0.00 4.30 96.72 Max 45.38 0.12 37.20 0.09 0.03 0.63 0.01 0.14 2.90 0.02 0.58 10.37 1.43 0.19 4.43 99.01 Ave 44.32 0.06 35.33 0.03 0.01 0.32 0.00 0.07 2.14 0.01 0.44 9.99 1.13 0.03 4.38 98.25 Median 44.47 0.07 35.17 0.01 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.06 2.11 0.00 0.43 10.03 1.15 0.02 4.38 98.42 Stdev 0.55 0.03 0.94 0.04 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.03 0.56 0.01 0.05 0.24 0.18 0.04 0.03 0.57

Method detection lirn ts (%) Si02 0.018 MnO 0.017 TiO2 0.048 FeO 0.045 A1203 0.013 NiO 0.022 V203 0.109 Na20 0.009 Cr203 0.051 K20 0.010 MgO 0.002 Rb20 0.043 CaO 0.007 Cs20 0.016



Appendix D —QEMSCANT" Modes of Operation



QEMSCANTM Operational Modes

QEMSCANTT'` is an acronym for Quantitative Evaluation of Materials by Scanning Electron

Microscopy, a system which differs from image analysis systems in that it is configured to measure

mineralogical variability based on chemistry at the micrometer-scale. QEMSCANTT' utilizes both

the back-scattered electron (BSE) signal intensity as well as an Energy Dispersive X-ray Signal

(EDS) at each measurement point. It thus makes no simplifications or assumptions of homogeneity

based on the BSE intensity, as many mineral phases show BSE overlap. EDS signals are used to

assign mineral identities to each measurement point by comparing the EDS spectrum against a

mineral species identification program (SIP) or database.

There are three general types of measurement: those using the linear intercept and those based on

particle mapping. Bulk mineral analysis (BMA) is performed using the linear intercept method, and

is used to provide statistically abundant data for speciation and mineral distribution. Particle

mapping modes, including Particle Mineral Analysis (PMA), Specific Mineral Search (SMS) analysis

and Trace Mineral Search (TMS) analysis provide information on spatial relationships of minerals,

including liberation and association data and provide a visual representation of mineral textures.

The particle mapping modes of measurement also allow for advanced analysis of the minerals of

interest, including grade vs. recovery relationships and mineral release curves. Specific details of the

measurement modes are presented below, while visual examples of these two measurement classes

are presented in Figures A and B. The Field Stitch (FS) mode of measurement maps a core sample

that has been mounted in the polished section. It collects a chemical spectrum at a set interval

within the field of view. Each field of view is then processed offline and a pseudo image of the core

sample is produced. This is presented in Figure C.

Bulk Mineral Analysis, or BMA, is performed by the linear intercept method, in which the electron

beam is rastered at a pre-defined point spacing (nominally 3 micrometers, but variable with particle

size) along several lines per field, and covering the entire polished section at any given magnification.

An example of a BMA measurement image is shown in Figure A. This measurement provides a

robust data set for determination of the bulk mineralogy, with mineral identities and proportions,

along with grain size measurements.

Particle Mineral Analysis (PMA) is a two-dimensional mapping analysis aimed at resolving liberation

and locking characteristics of a generic set of particles. A pre-defined number of particles are


Nemaska Exploration — 92440-009 - MI5O19-MAY1O 71

mapped at a point spacing selected in order to spatially resolve and describe mineral textures and

associations. This mode is often selected to characterize concentrate products, as both gangue and

value minerals report in statistically abundant quantities to be resolved.

❑ Background ❑ Chalcopyrite

Sphalerite • Pyrite ❑ Pyrrhotite

Molybdenite ❑ Galena II Other Sulphides ❑ Quartz ❑ Feldspars ❑ Amphiboles

Phyllosilicates

12.7 µm H 38.0 µm El Fe/Mn Oxides

150.0 µm — — — El Ti Oxides _ _ _ _ _ • Other

El Carbonates ❑ Phosphates

0

4

Figure A. BMA Measurement Mode

lb,

ti IF \

V' 11"11

i 3.4µm ~ ~ ■ '~ H 38.0µm ~ 150.0 µm

❑ Background

n Chalcopyrite

Sphalerite

MI Pyrite

Pyrrhotite

Molybdenite

Galena

Other Sulphides

❑ Quartz

❑ Feldspars

Amphiboles

Phyllosilicates

El Carbonates

❑ Phosphates

rÎ Fe/Mn Oxides

❑ Ti Oxides

Other

Figure B. Particle Mapping (PMA, SMS or TMS) Measurement Mode



❑ Background ❑ Chalcopyrite

Chalcocile • Covellib,

Bomile • Tetrahedrite/Enargite .Other Cu-Minerals ❑ Pyrite ▪ Other_Sulphides ❑ Quartz ❑ Plagioclase ▪ K-Feldspar

Epldote Wollastonite

El Micas/Clays Mg-Chlorite Diopside/Salibe

• Amphibole • Titanite/sphene ❑ Apatite ❑ Calcite

Zircon Other Silicates

0 Other Oxides Other

Figure C. Field Stitch Mode of Measurement Mode; Image 1: Selected Core Sample. Image 2: Polished Section. Image 3: QEMSCANTM Pseudo Image of the Polished Section with Legend/Mineral List.

Specific Mineral Search, or SMS, is a modified Particle Mineral Analysis (PMA) routine. However,

in an SMS routine, a phase reports as a low-grade constituent and can be located by thresholding of

the back-scattered electron intensity. Any accompanying phases of similar and higher brightness are

also mapped. For example, this mode of measurement would be selected in ores of low sulphide

grade, searching specifically for particles containing sulphide minerals.

Trace Mineral Search (TMS) is an additional mapping routine, where a phase reports as a trace

constituent and can be located by thresholding of the back-scattered electron intensity. The

objective of this routine is to reject barren fields and increase analysis efficiency. The outputs are

otherwise identical to the SMS routine. This mode of measurement is often used for advanced

studies of PGE ore types, or trace minerals of interest such as molybdenite.

It is important to note that with regards to SMS and TMS modes, results pertain only to the target

minerals. PMA must be selected if quantitative gangue characterization is required. For example, in

some sulphide ores, it may be more efficient to reject barren pyrites in favour of copper-bearing

minerals. However, it must be noted that data captured in this manner will not reflect the true

characteristics of pyrite, as only the pyrite associated with the copper-bearing minerals will be

represented.

The Field Stitch (FS) mode of measurement maps a core sample that has been mounted in the

polished section. It collects a chemical spectrum at a set interval within the field of view. Each field

of view is then processed offline and a pseudo image of the core sample is produced.




Documents

NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT MINERAL RESOURCE …