Berkeley Energia - Quarterly Report September 2025
RNS Number : 6640F Berkeley Energia Limited 31 October 2025 NEWS RELEASE | 31 October 2025 Quarterly Report September 2025 Summary: · Conchas Project During the quarter, Berkeley Energia Limited (Berkeley or Company) announced positive results of a preliminary metallurgical test work program completed on representative samples from the Conchas Project (Conchas or the Project), as part of the Company's Critical Minerals Exploration Initiative in Spain. · Conchas hosts shallow, thick zones of lithium (Li) and rubidium (Rb) mineralisation, with accessory tin (Sn), caesium (Cs), beryllium (Be), niobium (Nb) and tantalum (Ta) within a muscovitic leucogranite unit · SLR Consulting Ltd (SLR) was engaged to undertake metallurgical testing on representative samples obtained from three diamond core holes drilled in 2024 · The preliminary metallurgical test work program, designed to assess the potential recovery of Li, Rb, and the other elements of economic interest, comprised head sample characterisation, mineralogical analysis, gravity, flotation and magnetic test work · Flotation test work results demonstrated that very good recoveries of Li (78% overall recovery) and Rb (63% overall recovery) can be achieved at acceptable grades for -150µm grind size material · Magnetic separation testing on -300µm +150µm material showed 77% of the Li and 58% of the Rb (stage recoveries) reporting to the magnetic product. This result may present an opportunity for magnetic separation processing of the coarser fraction followed by flotation of the finer material · Next steps include 3D modelling of the drilling data to refine the geological interpretation of the Li and Rb mineralisation as a precursor to resource estimation, and a second phase of metallurgical test work to optimise the flotation and magnetic separation processes · Rb is a critical raw material for advanced technology and industrial applications used in key sectors including defence and military, aerospace, communications, medical and renewable energy. The U.S. and Japan have both classified Rb as a Critical Mineral due to its strategic importance and growing demand in high-tech applications. · International Arbitration against Spain In May 2024, Berkeley advised that its wholly owned subsidiary, Berkeley Exploration Limited (BEL), had filed a Request for Arbitration (Request) for its investments in Spain through its Spanish subsidiary, Berkeley Minera España SA (BME), initiating arbitration proceedings against the Kingdom of Spain (Spain) before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). As part of its Request, BEL alleges that Spain's actions against BME and the Salamanca project (Salamanca Project) have violated multiple provisions of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), and that BEL is seeking preliminary compensation in the order of US$1 billion (US$1,000,000,000) for these violations. During the quarter, the timetable and arbitration rules were established by the Tribunal, with the Company's Statement of Claim due to be filed in early 2026. Notwithstanding the investment dispute, BEL remains committed to the Salamanca Project and continues to be open to a constructive dialogue with Spain. BEL is ready and open to collaborate with the relevant Spanish authorities to find an amicable resolution to the permitting situation and remains hopeful discussions can take place in the near term. · Spanish Nuclear Power Industry: · Nuclear debate continues post blackout in Spain o Spain is preparing to close its first nuclear power plant in 2027, reigniting a debate over the country's energy future mere months after the April 2025 blackout plunged much of Spain and Portugal into darkness and exposed vulnerabilities in the Iberian grid. o Nuclear power plants generated ~20% of Spain's total net electricity production in 2024 and became its second largest source of electricity production, according to the country's nuclear industry forum ForoNuclear. The blackout that struck the Iberian Peninsula in April highlights nuclear's role in providing inertia and stability to the electricity system, it said. o Iberdrola, ENDESA and Naturgy, the owners of the Almaraz nuclear power plant in Extremadura, have informed the Ministry for Ecological Transition of their intention to submit a formal request to extend the operational life of the Extremadura facility beyond 2027. The formal request, which will be submitted before the end of October, is the first necessary step for the continuity of the facility's operation beyond the planned closure dates to be studied. · Balance Sheet The Company is in a strong financial position with A$71 million in cash reserves and no debt. Classification: 2.2 This announcement contains inside information For further information please contact: Robert Behets Francisco Bellón Acting Managing Director Chief Operations Officer +61 8 9322 6322 +34 923 193 903 info@berkeleyenergia.com Critical Minerals Exploration Initiative During the quarter, the Company continued to advance its exploration initiative targeting Li, Rb, Sn, Ta, Nb, tungsten (W), and other battery and critical metals, within its existing tenements in western Spain. Further analysis of the mineral and metal endowment across the entire mineral rich province and other prospective regions in Spain is also being undertaken, with a view to identifying additional targets and opportunities. Conchas Project The Investigation Permit (IP) Conchas is located in the very western part of the Salamanca province, close to the Portuguese border (Figure 1). The tenement covers an area of ~31km2 in the western part of the Ciudad Rodrigo Basin and is largely covered by Cenozoic aged sediments. Only the north-western part of the tenement is uncovered and dominated by the Guarda Batholith intrusion. The tenement hosts a number of sites where small-scale historical Sn and W mining was undertaken. Figure 1: IP Conchas Location Plans and Geology / Drill Hole Location Plan Berkeley conducted a small drill program comprising five broad spaced reverse circulation (RC) holes for a total of 282m in 2022 to test a Sn-Li soil sampling anomaly. Anomalous results for Li, Sn, Rb, Cs, Nb and Ta obtained from multi-element analysis of drill samples were reported in 2023, demonstrating Conchas' potential for several critical and strategic raw materials included in the European Commission's Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA). The drill results included 25m @ 0.56% Li2O & 0.22% Rb2O from surface (CCR0002). A follow-up RC and diamond core drilling program was completed in 2024. The drilling program comprised 33 RC holes for 1,857m drilled on a 100m by 100m grid, with depths ranging from 16m to a maximum of 169m. In addition, three diamond core holes for 230m were drilled to collect samples for metallurgical test work purposes. All drill holes intersected muscovitic leucogranite hosted mineralisation with select intercepts including 61m @ 0.50% Li2O & 0.21% Rb2O from surface (CCR0012), 56m @ 0.48% Li2O & 0.21% Rb2O from surface (CCR0025), 27m @ 0.44% Li2O & 0.21% Rb2O from surface and 14m @ 0.95% Li2O & 0.39% Rb2O from 40m (CCR0006) and 18m @ 0.55% Li2O & 0.23% Rb2O from surface (CCR0017). The multi-element mineralisation is largely associated with a sub-horizontal muscovitic leucogranite unit that locally outcrops at surface. The muscovitic leucogranite has a mapped extent of ~2km (in a NE-SW orientation) by ~1.2km (on average in a NW-SE orientation) (Figure 1) and varies in thickness from 7m to over 170m in the drill holes (Figure 2). Figure 2: IP Conchas 4,492,225 North Cross Section Preliminary Metallurgical Test Work Program Results The Company engaged SLR to undertake metallurgical testing on representative samples obtained from three diamond core holes drilled in the 2024 program at the Conchas Project. The preliminary metallurgical test work program was designed to assess the potential recovery of Li, Rb and the other elements of economic interest, and comprised: · Head Sample Characterisation; · Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) Mineralogical Analysis; · Gravity Test Work; · Flotation Test Work; and · Magnetic Test Work. Head Sample Characterisation - Head Assay A representative sub-sample was submitted to SLR's in-house analytical laboratory for head assay to determine the levels of target elements present in the composite sample. A sub-sample was also submitted to ALS Global for ICP multi-element analysis. The results of the SLR in-house assay and selected elements of the ALS analysis are given below in Table 1.
| Analyte | SLR | ALS | |
| Li | (%) | 0.22 | 0.23 |
| Li2O | (%) | 0.56 | 0.59 |
| Rb | (ppm) | 2,094 | 1,960 |
| Rb2O | (ppm) | 2,291 | 2,144 |
| Ta | (ppm) | 53.1 | 47.5 |
| Nb | (ppm) | 86.0 | 71.8 |
| Be | (ppm) | 76.1 | 76.5 |
| Cs | (ppm) | 145.5 | |
| Sn | (%) | 0.051 | 0.064 |
| Fe | (%) | 0.77 | 0.86 |
| Fraction µm | Weight % | Assay | |||||||||
| Li % | Li2O % | Rb ppm | Ta ppm | Nb ppm | Be ppm | %Sn | %Fe | Ce ppm | Cs ppm | ||
| +300 | 17.5 | 0.27 | 0.57 | 2,148.8 | 56.6 | 72.1 | 60.2 | 0.044 | 0.69 | 0.50 | 152.00 |
| -300+150 | 32.9 | 0.23 | 0.49 | 1,949.5 | 38.3 | 48.1 | 74.9 | 0.038 | 0.43 | 0.80 | 147.50 |
| -150+53 | 27.9 | 0.23 | 0.49 | 1,847.5 | 108.4 | 44.1 | 74.7 | 0.072 | 0.33 | 0.50 | 169.50 |
| -53+11 | 15.2 | 0.18 | 0.40 | 1,638.1 | 152.0 | 176.6 | 66.4 | 0.113 | 0.63 | 1.00 | 136.00 |
| -11 | 6.5 | 0.17 | 0.37 | 1,491.6 | 86.5 | 47.7 | 64.8 | 0.016 | 0.74 | 2.90 | 105.50 |
| Feed | 100.0 | 0.22 | 0.48 | 1,878.8 | 81.4 | 70.7 | 70.3 | 0.058 | 0.50 | 0.83 | 149.93 |
| Fraction µm | Weight % | Distribution % | |||||||||
| Li | Li2O | Rb | Ta | Nb | Be | Sn | Fe | Ce | Cs | ||
| +300 | 17.5 | 20.7 | 20.7 | 20.0 | 12.2 | 17.9 | 15.0 | 13.2 | 24.4 | 10.5 | 17.7 |
| -300+150 | 32.9 | 33.4 | 33.4 | 34.2 | 15.5 | 22.4 | 35.1 | 21.2 | 28.3 | 31.7 | 32.4 |
| -150+53 | 27.9 | 28.4 | 28.4 | 27.4 | 37.1 | 17.4 | 29.6 | 34.4 | 18.4 | 16.8 | 31.5 |
| -53+11 | 15.2 | 12.5 | 12.5 | 13.3 | 28.4 | 38.0 | 14.4 | 29.4 | 19.3 | 18.3 | 13.8 |
| -11 | 6.5 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.2 | 6.9 | 4.4 | 6.0 | 1.8 | 9.7 | 22.7 | 4.6 |
| Feed | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| Deposit Name | Resource Category | Tonnes (Mt) | U3O8 (ppm) | U3O8 (Mlbs) |
| Retortillo | Measured | 4.1 | 498 | 4.5 |
| Indicated | 11.3 | 395 | 9.8 | |
| Inferred | 0.2 | 368 | 0.2 | |
| Total | 15.6 | 422 | 14.5 | |
| Zona 7 | Measured Indicated | 5.2 10.5 | 674 761 | 7.8 17.6 |
| Inferred | 6.0 | 364 | 4.8 | |
| Total | 21.7 | 631 | 30.2 | |
| Alameda | Indicated | 20.0 | 455 | 20.1 |
| Inferred | 0.7 | 657 | 1.0 | |
| Total | 20.7 | 462 | 21.1 | |
| Las Carbas | Inferred | 0.6 | 443 | 0.6 |
| Cristina | Inferred | 0.8 | 460 | 0.8 |
| Caridad | Inferred | 0.4 | 382 | 0.4 |
| Villares | Inferred | 0.7 | 672 | 1.1 |
| Villares North | Inferred | 0.3 | 388 | 0.2 |
| Total Retortillo Satellites | Total | 2.8 | 492 | 3.0 |
| Villar | Inferred | 5.0 | 446 | 4.9 |
| Alameda Nth Zone 2 | Inferred | 1.2 | 472 | 1.3 |
| Alameda Nth Zone 19 | Inferred | 1.1 | 492 | 1.2 |
| Alameda Nth Zone 21 | Inferred | 1.8 | 531 | 2.1 |
| Total Alameda Satellites | Total | 9.1 | 472 | 9.5 |
| Gambuta | Inferred | 12.7 | 394 | 11.1 |
| Salamanca Project Total | Measured | 9.3 | 597 | 12.3 |
| Indicated | 41.8 | 516 | 47.5 | |
| Inferred | 31.5 | 395 | 29.6 | |
| Total (*) | 82.6 | 514 | 89.3 |
| Location | Tenement Name | Percentage Interest | Status |
| Spain | |||
| Salamanca | D.S.R Salamanca 28 (Alameda) | 100% | Granted |
| D.S.R Salamanca 29 (Villar) | 100% | Granted | |
| E.C. Retortillo-Santidad | 100% | Granted | |
| E.C. Lucero | 100% | Pending | |
| I.P. Abedules | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Abetos | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Alcornoques | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Alisos | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Bardal | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Barquilla | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Berzosa | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Campillo | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Castaños 2 | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Ciervo | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Conchas | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Dehesa | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. ElÁguila | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. El Vaqueril | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Espinera | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Horcajada | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Lis | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Mailleras | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Mimbre | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Pedreras | 100% | Granted | |
| E.P. Herradura | 100% | Granted* | |
| Cáceres | I.P. Almendro | 100% | Granted^ |
| E.C. Gambuta | 100% | Pending | |
| I.P. Ibor | 100% | Granted | |
| I.P. Olmos | 100% | Granted | |
| Badajoz | I.P. Los Bélicos | 100% | Granted** |
| I.P.A. Ampliación Los Bélicos | 100% | Pending** | |
| Ciudad Real | I.P.A. La Majada | 100% | Pending** |
| I.P. Anchuras | 100% | Pending# | |
| Zaragoza | I.P. Moros-Ateca | 100% | Pending# |
| I.P. Alvón | 100% | Pending# | |
| Portugal | I.P Conchas Portugal | 100% | PendingV |
| Activity | A$000 |
| Permitting related expenditure (including legal costs) | 200 |
| Assay costs, radiological protection and monitoring | 3 |
| Consultants and other expenditure | 198 |
| Payment/(return) of VAT and other social taxes in Spain | 23 |
| Total as reported in the Appendix 5B | 424 |
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
| Sampling techniques | Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. | A trial of Electrical Resistivity Tomography ("ERT") was conducted at the Conchas Project in July 2025. The trial survey was carried out by Análisis y Gestión del Subsuelo ("AGS"). The trial survey was supervised and coordinated by Berkeley Minera España ("BME"). The measurements were taken using a Syscal Pro 72 geophysical unit manufactured by IRIS Instruments (Orleans, France). This fully digital resistivity and induced polarisation system is designed for environmental, civil engineering, and mineral exploration applications. It features an internal 250 W transmitter with a maximum output of 800-1000 V and 2.5 A, ten simultaneous acquisition channels providing up to 1,000 readings per minute, and automatic switching for up to 72 electrodes. The equipment ensures high-quality data acquisition and depth penetration suitable for subsurface investigations. The six multi-electrode cable reels used in the measurements were either manufactured by IRIS Instruments itself or by Beijing Harvest Technology Co, a Chinese company certified by IRIS Instruments as an approved supplier. This ensures compatibility and quality standards for the geophysical equipment used during surveys. |
| Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representation and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. | The measurement procedure involved placing 72 electrodes along two profiles, each 710m long, with a 10m spacing between electrodes. All electrodes were connected to the measurement equipment, and a specific sequential program was used to select which quadrupoles operated at each time and in what configuration. The final output is a terrain section displaying resistivity values in different colours, representing variations in this parameter. The measurement profiles were referenced at various points with Global Positioning System ("GPS") to precisely determine their location and to obtain the terrain topography, which will allow for reprocessing of the data considering the surface relief. | |
| Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. | The lithium (Li) and rubidium (Rb) mineralisation is associated with a fine-grained, sub-horizontal muscovite leucogranite, overlaying a regional granite. Intercalations of the regional granite within the leucogranite are also present. In various zones of the orebody, limits are not well defined, and the selected geophysical method can assist in delineating these boundaries. | |
| In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. | The ERTsystem was applied along two profiles, each 710m long, oriented NE-SW and NW-SE, over the Conchas deposit. These profiles followed two tracks nearly perpendicular to each other. • A maximum electric load of 400 V was applied for both sequences. • Two measurement sequences were used: o The dipole-dipole sequence, optimised for detecting horizontal resistivity changes, with 2,921 data points. This method provides high lateral resolution and is sensitive to horizontal variations in resistivity, making it ideal for identifying geological boundaries and mineralised zones distributed horizontally. o The Schlumberger reciprocal sequence, used for detecting vertical resistivity changes, with 2,195 data points. This method is more sensitive to vertical variations and is commonly used for investigating stratified structures. • Both sequences utilised a pulse duration of 500ms and a measurement stack of 2-4, meaning each reading was averaged from 2 to 4 repeated measurements to ensure data reliability. • The measurements were taken using a Syscal Pro 72 geophysical unit manufactured by Iris Instruments. This fully digital resistivity and induced polarisation system is designed for environmental, civil engineering, and mineral exploration applications. It features an internal 250 W transmitter with a maximum output of 800-1000 V and 2.5 A, ten simultaneous acquisition channels providing up to 1,000 readings per minute, and automatic switching for up to 72 electrodes. GPS points were recorded with a Garmin eTrex 32x device at the start and end of each profile, as well as at the end of each cable segment along the profile. This ensures precise geolocation for the entire geophysical survey line using a robust, colour-display handheld GPS capable of tracking both GPS and GLONASS satellites. | |
| Drilling techniques | Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). | No drilling was completed. |
| Drill sample recovery | Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. | No drilling was completed. |
| Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. | The distribution of the electrodes and the sub-horizontaldisposition of the mineralisation result in the generated section being perpendicular to the contacts. | |
| Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. | No drilling was completed. | |
| Logging | Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. | No drilling was completed. |
| Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. | The trial survey is treated as qualitative. The is no expected relationship between the resistivity or ERT anomalies and the grade of mineralisation. | |
| The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged | No drilling was completed. | |
| Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation | If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. | No drilling was completed. |
| If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. | No drilling was completed. | |
| For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. | The forward modelling and the detection of two types of rocks with different resistivity in the surveyed area demonstrate the suitability and effectiveness of the ERT method for the study. This approach validates the identification of lithological contrasts and supports further interpretation of subsurface geological structures. | |
| Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- sampling stages to maximise representation of samples. | AGS had an onsite representative during the survey assessing the data quality. The measurement equipment is inspected and calibrated by the manufacturer according to its technical specifications, ensuring measurement reliability, accuracy, and traceability for all data collected during the geophysical survey. After placing all measurement electrodes for each profile, the equipment checks each electrode for proper connection and acceptable resistivity reading. Once all electrode resistivity values fall within the instrument's tolerance limits, measurements can begin. For each profile, about 5,000 to 8,000 resistivity readings are collected, with each reading performed in stacks of 2-4 repetitions. If successive readings deviate beyond tolerance, the instrument repeats the measurement up to four times, averages the result, and-if within tolerance-moves to the next reading. This process ensures accurate, reliable data for geophysical analysis. | |
| Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. | The 10m distance between electrodes and the 710m length of the survey lines ensure a penetration depth of over 150m into the ground. | |
| Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. | This spacing and length allow for effective subsurface electrical resistivity measurements to study geological features at significant depths. | |
| Quality of assay data and laboratory tests | The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. | No assaying is conducted. The ERT technique is appropriate for the purpose used. |
| For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. | An industry standard ERT survey was carried out by EGS along 710 m lines. The main system parameters included: • A maximum electric load of 400 V was applied for both sequences. • Two measurement sequences were used: o The dipole-dipole sequence, optimised for detecting horizontal resistivity changes, with 2,921 data points. This method provides high lateral resolution and is sensitive to horizontal variations in resistivity, making it ideal for identifying geological boundaries and mineralised zones distributed horizontally. o The Schlumberger reciprocal sequence, used for detecting vertical resistivity changes, with 2,195 data points. This method is more sensitive to vertical variations and is commonly used for investigating stratified structures. • Both sequences utilised a pulse duration of 500ms and a measurement stack of 2-4, meaning each reading was averaged from 2 to 4 repeated measurements to ensure data reliability. • The measurements were taken using a Syscal Pro 72 geophysical unit manufactured by Iris Instruments. This fully digital resistivity and induced polarisation system is designed for environmental, civil engineering, and mineral exploration applications. It features an internal 250 W transmitter with a maximum output of 800-1000 V and 2.5 A, ten simultaneous acquisition channels providing up to 1,000 readings per minute, and automatic switching for up to 72 electrodes. GPS points were recorded with a Garmin eTrex 32x device at the start and end of each profile, as well as at the end of each cable segment along the profile. This ensures precise geolocation for the entire geophysical survey line using a robust, colour-display handheld GPS capable of tracking both GPS and GLONASS satellites. | |
| Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. | AGS has an onsite representative during the survey assessing the data quality. After placing all measurement electrodes for each profile, the equipment checks each electrode for proper connection and acceptable resistivity reading. Once all electrode resistivity values fall within the instrument's tolerance limits, measurements can begin. For each profile, about 5,000 to 8,000 resistivity readings are collected, with each reading performed in stacks of 2-4 repetitions. If successive readings deviate beyond tolerance, the instrument repeats the measurement up to four times, averages the result, and-if within tolerance-moves to the next reading. This process ensures accurate, reliable data for geophysical analysis. | |
| Verification of sampling and assaying | The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. | The anomalies identified during the study carried out by AGS have been confirmed by their technicians. The detected anomalies appear to correspond well with the two main types of rocks present in the study area when compared with surface mapping and drillholes near the profiles. |
| The use of twinned holes. | No drilling was completed. | |
| Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. | The measurement sequences are generated in advance on a computer using ELECTRE Pro software and uploaded to the field instrument with PROSYS. The instrument stores all measurement data in its memory, which are then downloaded to a computer via USB with PROSYS. This software is used for initial data analysis and filtering, creating *.bin files. These files are exported as *.INV files to RES2dINV, which allows further analysis and filtering. The final interpreted profiles, with colour-coded resistivity variations, are saved as *.DAT files. | |
| Discuss any adjustment to assay data. | Data may be levelled and is treated as qualitative. | |
| Location of data points | Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. | GPS points were recorded with a Garmin eTrex 32x device at the start and end of each profile, as well as at the end of each cable segment along the profile. This ensures precise geolocation for the entire geophysical survey line using a robust, colour-display handheld GPS capable of tracking both GPS and GLONASS satellites. The Garmin eTrex 32x offers typical location accuracy within ±3.65m under good conditions. |
| Specification of the grid system used. | The project currently uses the UTM Datum ETRS89 Zone 29 North grid system. | |
| Quality and adequacy of topographic control. | Topographic control is based on a digital terrain model with sub metric accuracy sourced from the Spanish Geographical Institute (Instituto Geográfico Nacional). | |
| Data spacing and distribution | Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. | A total of 72 electrodes were spaced every 10m along each of two 710m survey lines. |
| Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. | In ERT surveys, the spacing between electrodes critically affects the spatial resolution and depth of investigation. A 10m electrode spacing, as used in this study, provides a suitable balance to demonstrate continuity of lithology and resolve significant resistivity contrasts at depths beyond 150m. This spacing is adequate to detect and delineate subsurface features where mineralisation is oriented perpendicular to the survey lines, ensuring reliable geophysical imaging of the area. | |
| Whether sample compositing has been applied. | No composites reported. | |
| Orientation of data in relation to geological structure | Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. | Lithologies that are oriented perpendicular to the survey lines will be more prominent and apparent in the ERT results, making it easier to identify distinct resistivity contrasts and geological boundaries at the scale of interest during the geophysical survey. |
| If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. | No relevant bias is expected. | |
| Sample security | The measures taken to ensure sample security. | During the survey conducted by AGS, the data was kept under their custody. Berkeley received the interpreted data from AGS after the survey was completed. |
| Audits or reviews | The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. | Berkeley evaluated the data and determined that its quality is adequate for further analysis. The Company notes that there appears to be sufficient contrast between different lithologies and that the results correlate well with the existing data, supporting the decision to undertake a broader geophysical campaign aimed at covering most of the deposit area. |
| Criteria | Explanation | Commentary |
| Mineral tenement & land tenure status | Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environment settings. | The Conchas Prospect lies on the Conchas I IP 6930 which is 100% owned by Berkeley Minera España, S. L., a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkeley Energia Limited under the General Regulations for the Mining Regime established under Royal Decree 2857/1978 of 25 August in Spain. The Conchas I IP was originally granted in October 2020 for an initial three-year term. An extension of the Investigation Permit for a second three-year term (from October 2023) was granted in June 2024. There are no historical sites, reserves or specially protected areas in the zone, which is primarily used for livestock grazing and agriculture. The Conchas Prospect is located adjacent to the village of Fuentes de Oñoro and close to the border with Portugal. |
| The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. | Tenure in the form of a granted IP and is considered secure. There are no known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in this area. | |
| Exploration done by other parties | Acknowledgement and appraisal of exploration by other parties. | Mining in the area dates back to the WWII years when, in an artisanal manner, tin and tungsten were obtained by means of surface excavations and washed by hand. Modern exploration at Conchas I was carried out by Billiton PLC between 1981 and 1983. The investigation was focused on tin and tantalum, with lithium, rubidium etc. not taken into account. Billiton carried out several exploration work programs which resulted in a regional geological map and another detailed geological map, a leucogranite bottom isopach map, geochemistry with 85 test pits, trenches and 20 percussion drill holes, and sectional interpretations of the different magmatic facies. SIEMCALSA (Mining Investigation and Exploration Society of Castilla y León, S.A.) within the European Union project POCTEP, summarized the Billiton data, making a review of the land and a chip sampling (14 samples) of the types of rocks existing in the area. Mineralogical and metallogenetic studies of samples were carried out at the Universities of León (Spain) and Porto (Portugal) however, Berkeley has not yet obtained access to these reports/results. Only public domain historical data has been obtained by Berkeley. |
| Geology | Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation | Around the 70% of the permit area is filled by the Cenozoic cover and, only in the NW, the Fuentes de Oñoro granite can be found. Cenozoic materials have Oligocene age. Granites make up the Vilar Formoso-Fuentes de Oñoro area, which in turn belongs to the Guarda Batholith whose origin is associated with the Hercynian orogeny. Regionally, coarse to very coarse-grained granodiorites and porphyritic granites are found, porphyritic and with a considerable amount of biotite, arranged subparallel to the edge of the batholith and commonly considered as edge facies. The monzogranite facies is the one with the greatest superficial development and constitutes approximately 50% of the outcropping granites. They are two-mica granites, with a predominance of biotite, fine to coarse grain size and sometimes porphyry, although the potassium feldspar megacrystals do not reach the size of those of the previous edge facies. Aplogranites constitute the mineralised facies of aplo-pegmatitic leucogranites. This occurs in the vicinity of Fuentes de Oñoro and in front of the Portuguese town of Poço Velho. Preliminary mineralogy studies indicate the lithium, rubidium and caesium occurs in micas classified as intermediate between muscovite and zinnwaldite. It also presents a millimeter mineralisation of cassiterite, and columbo-tantalite distributed homogeneously throughout its surface. Cassiterite normally occurs in angular and heterometric crystals of between 10μm and 1mm. Tantalum and niobium occur in the form of columbo-tantalite, both in isolated crystals and in inclusions within the cassiterite. |
| Drill hole information | A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: easting and northings of the drill hole collar; elevation or RL (Reduced Level-elevation above sea level in metres of the drill hole collar); dip and azimuth of the hole; down hole length and interception depth; and hole length | No drilling results reported. |
| If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case | No drilling results reported. | |
| Data aggregation methods | In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high-grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. | No drilling results reported. |
| Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. | No drilling results reported. | |
| The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. | No drilling results reported. | |
| Relationship between mineralisation widths & intercept lengths | These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. | No drilling results reported. |
| If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'down hole length, true width not known'. | No drilling results reported. | |
| Diagrams | Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported. These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of the drill collar locations and appropriate sectional views. | Appropriate diagrams, including a map and ERT profiles are included in the main body of this announcement. |
| Balanced reporting | Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high-grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of exploration results. | Reporting of the ERT data is considered to be balanced. |
| Other substantive exploration data | Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to: geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. | All substantive results are reported |
| Further work | The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. test for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). | The findings of this initial trial ERT survey provided encouragement to plan a more comprehensive ERT survey covering most of the surface area mapped as muscovite leucogranite. This survey was conducted in late October, with the results pending. Additional work at Conchas includes 3D modelling of the drilling data to refine the geological interpretation of the Li and Rb mineralisation as a precursor to resource estimation, preliminary pit optimisation, and a second phase of metallurgical test work to optimise the flotation and magnetic separation processes. |
| Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. | These diagrams are included in the main body of this release. |
| Name of entity | ||
| Berkeley Energia Limited | ||
| ABN | Quarter ended ("current quarter") | |
| 40 052 468 569 | 30 September 2025 | |
| Consolidated statement of cash flows | Current quarter $A'000 | Year to date (3 months) $A'000 | |
| 1. | Cash flows from operating activities | - | - |
| 1.1 | Receipts from customers | ||
| 1.2 | Payments for | (424) | (424) |
| (a) exploration & evaluation | |||
| (b) development | - | - | |
| (c) production | - | - | |
| (d) staff costs | (265) | (265) | |
| (e) administration and corporate costs | (334) | (334) | |
| 1.3 | Dividends received (see note 3) | - | - |
| 1.4 | Interest received | 652 | 652 |
| 1.5 | Interest and other costs of finance paid | - | - |
| 1.6 | Income taxes paid | - | - |
| 1.7 | Government grants and tax incentives | - | - |
| 1.8 | Other (provide details if material) (a) Business Development (b) Arbitration related expenses | (95) (1,371) | (95) (1,371) |
| 1.9 | Net cash from / (used in) operating activities | (1,837) | (1,837) |
| 2. | Cash flows from investing activities | - | - |
| 2.1 | Payments to acquire or for: | ||
| (a) entities | |||
| (b) tenements | - | - | |
| (c) property, plant and equipment | - | - | |
| (d) exploration & evaluation | - | - | |
| (e) investments | - | - | |
| (f) other non-current assets | - | - | |
| 2.2 | Proceeds from the disposal of: | - | - |
| (a) entities | |||
| (b) tenements | - | - | |
| (c) property, plant and equipment | - | - | |
| (d) investments | - | - | |
| (e) other non-current assets | - | - | |
| 2.3 | Cash flows from loans to other entities | - | - |
| 2.4 | Dividends received (see note 3) | - | - |
| 2.5 | Other (provide details if material) | - | - |
| 2.6 | Net cash from / (used in) investing activities | - | - |
| 3. | Cash flows from financing activities | - | - |
| 3.1 | Proceeds from issues of equity securities (excluding convertible debt securities) | ||
| 3.2 | Proceeds from issue of convertible debt securities | - | - |
| 3.3 | Proceeds from exercise of options | - | - |
| 3.4 | Transaction costs related to issues of equity securities or convertible debt securities | - | - |
| 3.5 | Proceeds from borrowings | - | - |
| 3.6 | Repayment of borrowings | - | - |
| 3.7 | Transaction costs related to loans and borrowings | - | - |
| 3.8 | Dividends paid | - | - |
| 3.9 | Other (provide details if material) | - | - |
| 3.10 | Net cash from / (used in) financing activities | - | - |
| 4. | Net increase / (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents for the period | ||
| 4.1 | Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period | 73,594 | 73,594 |
| 4.2 | Net cash from / (used in) operating activities (item 1.9 above) | (1,837) | (1,837) |
| 4.3 | Net cash from / (used in) investing activities (item 2.6 above) | - | - |
| 4.4 | Net cash from / (used in) financing activities (item 3.10 above) | - | - |
| 4.5 | Effect of movement in exchange rates on cash held | (563) | (563) |
| 4.6 | Cash and cash equivalents at end of period | 71,194 | 71,194 |
| 5. | Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalentsat the end of the quarter (as shown in the consolidated statement of cash flows) to the related items in the accounts | Current quarter $A'000 | Previous quarter $A'000 |
| 5.1 | Bank balances | 71,144 | 73,544 |
| 5.2 | Call deposits | 50 | 50 |
| 5.3 | Bank overdrafts | - | - |
| 5.4 | Other (provide details) | - | - |
| 5.5 | Cash and cash equivalents at end of quarter (should equal item 4.6 above) | 71,194 | 73,594 |
| 6. | Payments to related parties of the entity and their associates | Current quarter $A'000 |
| 6.1 | Aggregate amount of payments to related parties and their associates included in item 1 | (81) |
| 6.2 | Aggregate amount of payments to related parties and their associates included in item 2 | - |
| Note: if any amounts are shown in items 6.1 or 6.2, your quarterly activity report must include a description of, and an explanation for, such payments. | ||
| 7. | FinancingfacilitiesNote: the term "facility' includes all forms of financing arrangements available to the entity. Add notes as necessary for an understanding of the sources of finance available to the entity. | Total facility amount at quarter end $A'000 | Amount drawn at quarter end $A'000 |
| 7.1 | Loan facilities | - | - |
| 7.2 | Credit standby arrangements | - | - |
| 7.3 | Other (please specify) | - | - |
| 7.4 | Total financing facilities | - | - |
| 7.5 | Unused financing facilities available at quarter end | - | |
| 7.6 | Include in the box below a description of each facility above, including the lender, interest rate, maturity date and whether it is secured or unsecured. If any additional financing facilities have been entered into or are proposed to be entered into after quarter end, include a note providing details of those facilities as well. | ||
| Not applicable | |||
| 8. | Estimated cash available for future operating activities | $A'000 |
| 8.1 | Net cash from / (used in) operating activities (item 1.9) | (1,837) |
| 8.2 | (Payments forexploration & evaluation classified as investing activities)(item 2.1(d)) | - |
| 8.3 | Total relevant outgoings (item 8.1 + item 8.2) | (1,837) |
| 8.4 | Cash and cash equivalents at quarter end (item 4.6) | 71,194 |
| 8.5 | Unused finance facilities available at quarter end (item 7.5) | - |
| 8.6 | Total available funding (item 8.4 + item 8.5) | 71,194 |
| 8.7 | Estimated quarters of funding available (item 8.6 divided by item 8.3) | >10 |
| Note: if the entity has reported positive relevant outgoings (ie a net cash inflow) in item 8.3, answer item 8.7 as "N/A". Otherwise, a figure for the estimated quarters of funding available must be included in item 8.7. | ||
| 8.8 | If item 8.7 is less than 2 quarters, please provide answers to the following questions: | |
| 8.8.1 Does the entity expect that it will continue to have the current level of net operating cash flows for the time being and, if not, why not? | ||
| Answer: Not applicable | ||
| 8.8.2 Has the entity taken any steps, or does it propose to take any steps, to raise further cash to fund its operations and, if so, what are those steps and how likely does it believe that they will be successful? | ||
| Answer: Not applicable | ||
| 8.8.3 Does the entity expect to be able to continue its operations and to meet its business objectives and, if so, on what basis? | ||
| Answer: Not applicable | ||
| Note: where item 8.7 is less than 2 quarters, all of questions 8.8.1, 8.8.2 and 8.8.3 above must be answered. | ||