GEO-TECHINICAL

INVESTIGATION
REPORT

2022
Contents
Sign-Off Sheet.............................................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................4

EXPLORATION METHODS AND EQUIPMENT ..................................................................................5

CONSTRUCTION AND EROSION CONTROL......................................................................................7

SITE INVESTIGATIONS.............................................................................................................8

SOIL INVESTIGATION...............................................................................................................9

HISTORICAL REVIEW.........................................................................................................................10

SITE GEOLOGY...................................................................................................................................10

FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................................12

Summarized In-situ soil boreholes profiles: Table 02 ..................................................................16

Boreholes Strata Analyses table.............................................................................................16

Proposed design parameters as from SPT profiles.....................................................................17

SAMPLE TEST RESULTS...................................................................................................................18

BOREHOLES LOCATION MAP ...................................................................................................21

2|Page
Sign-Off Sheet

This document entitled Geotechnical Investigation Report dated December

16th, 2022 Was prepared by ST&T Geo Resources Services (ST&T) for the

account of Zebra Energy Nigeria Limited (the “Client”).

The material in it reflects ST&T’s professional judgment in light of the scope,

schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract

between ST&T and the Client.

Prepared by

(Signature)
Shamsuddeen Tanko

Reviewed by:

Prof. Ademola Adeyanju

Dr. Ibrahim Isah

Engr. Abdulbari Abdulganiyu

Abubakar Mallam Sulaiman

Gambo Gundiri

3|Page
INTRODUCTION

This document is the Geotechnical Investigation Work Plan (Work Plan)

for the proposed 2022/2023 geotechnical investigations at the Dabe Project site

(Bauchi). The purpose of this Work Plan is to present an overview of

the

Project geotechnical investigations, consisting of SPT and Rotosonic borings,

test pits, and geophysical investigations.

This Work Plan was developed to document this phase of the Mine Site and

Plant Site Geotechnical Investigations. The purpose of the geotechnical

investigations is to collect information on the subsurface (i.e., depth to water,

depth to bedrock, stratigraphy of overburden soils).

The findings from the geotechnical investigations will be used in final design of

Project infrastructure. The results of these investigations will inform the need

for and extent of future phases of geotechnical investigation for the Project.

Included in the Work Plan is a brief summary of the Project site infrastructure,

description of the geotechnical investigations planned, and proposed material

test methods and documentation.

4|Page
EXPLORATION METHODS AND EQUIPMENT

Geotechnical exploration methods employed include Rotosonic drilling, hollow-

stem and mud rotary auger borings and with test pits, and electromagnetic

surveys.

The Rotosonic work consists of Rotosonic coring, collection of soil and rock

samples, installation of standpipe piezometers, and slug testing. All work were

performed in accordance with ASTM D6914, Standard Practice for Sonic Drilling

for Site Characterization and Installation of Subsurface Monitoring Devices

D5092.

The SPT geotechnical investigations consist of SPT soil borings using mud

rotary and hollow stem auger drilling methods. Rock cores were collected to

confirm depth to bedrock, typically indicated by SPT results in excess of

50

blows for less than one-half foot of penetration, and to provide qualitative

information, including Rock Quality Designation (RQD) values and fracture

characteristics.

All split spoon sampling and standard penetration testing were completed in

accordance with ASTM D1586, Standard Test Method for SPT and Split-Barrel

Sampling of Soils.

Soft clay and organic soil samples were collectedwith 3-inch thin-wall samplers,

5|Page
when feasible, in accordance with ASTM D1587. Packer testing intervals will be

determined in the field with the intent to obtain the most representative data

possible and providehydraulic conductivity values of the bedrock.

Test pits were performed to determine depth of peat, confirm subsurface

conditions, and log stratigraphy. Soil samples will be collected where deemed

appropriate. Test pits can be up to 15 feet deepand soil will be removed using a

hydraulic excavator. Removed soils will be placed next to one side of the

excavation and will be replaced and compacted upon completion of the soil

profile evaluation and samplecollection.

6|Page
CONSTRUCTION AND EROSION CONTROL

Construction Storm water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) have been

prepared to outline pollution prevention requirements and procedures

applicable to the geotechnical investigation activities. The SWPPPs are live

documents; they are based on current plans for geotechnical investigation and

will be updated as needed as on-site reconnaissance is performed to confirm

geotechnical investigation locations and vehicle access routes.

Existing gravel and paved roads, trails, and/or forest roads will be used to

access the geotechnical investigation locations to the extent possible.

Temporary access roads will need to be constructed to allow equipment to

reach some of the desired investigation locations. The temporary and

proposed access routes, including those in wetland areas, are shown in the

Geotechnical Investigation SWPPPs figures. Best Management Practices

(BMPs) established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) will

serve as guidelines for developing access roads and avoiding disturbance to

wetland soils. Each geotechnical location and access route will be chosen using

the criteria outlined in the Geotechnical Investigation SWPPPs.

7|Page
Clearing, grubbing, and grinding or chipping of vegetation (trees, snags, logs,

brush, stumps, and shrubs) and pushing large rocks from temporary access

roads will be performed to facilitate geotechnical investigation activities at the

Project site. Trees and other vegetation designated to remain undisturbed in

wetland areas will be protected from damage throughout the duration of the

construction period. The limits of the area(s) to be cleared and grubbed will be

marked by stakes, flags, tree markings, or other suitable methods. Trees to be

left standing and uninjured will be designated by special markings that are

conducive to preventing injury to the tree and will be placed on the trunk

about 6 feet above the ground surface. All trees not marked for preservation

and all snags, logs, brush, stumps, shrubs, and similar materials will be cleared

from within the limits of the designated investigation areas to the extent

neededto conduct the geotechnical investigations.

The Geotechnical Investigation SWPPPs describe the BPMs that will be

implemented during the geotechnical investigations to address erosion

prevention practices and sediment control practices.

SITE INVESTIGATIONS
In the scope of works, three SPT bentonite slurry boreholes were done up to

8|Page
 twenty meters deep each at most. Three trial pits were dug in the project site.

Three samples from the trial pits were collected for foundation indicators

testing.

SOIL INVESTIGATION
For the trial pits and boreholes, soil tests to be carry out were:

1) DCP bentonite slurry for carrying out tests for determine founding depth and

in-situ soil bearing capacity at recommended founding depth for the

proposed structures as per standard procedure (Part N: Materials Testing

Standard Test Procedure (STP. 706) as read with CAS No: A43, part 2 1964).

This test was done in each borehole site before drilling.

2) Field vane shear tests up to seven meters deep. To determine the torque of

the insitu material.

3) Static cone penetrometer up to seven meters deep. To determine whether

there is need to recommend the use of piles.

4) To excavate three test pits for the reasons of

a) soil profiling,

b) soil geological origin identification,

c) sampling of in-situ soil profiles,

d) soil classification,

e) foundation indicators tests including free swell and shrinkage limit

9|Page
HISTORICAL REVIEW

This is a vacant stand; there was no need to search for previous geotechnical

investigations literature before commencement of this field work. This

geotechnical report is the first for this site.

SITE GEOLOGY

Previously unmapped area around Bauchi (Survey sheet number 149)

have been mapped and some areas previously mapped by Basin (1926) and

Oyawoye (1958, 1961, 1962) have been reinvestigated. The area consist of

amphibolite Facies Basement migmatites and biotite gneiss with ancient

metasediments remnants, occasionally of granulite Facies, and older Granite

complexes of acid and intermediate rocks - Bauchite and quartz diorite of

Bauchi and Bununu Dass (hearafter referred to as Dass) are described, and

some new data and interpretations are presented.

The unusual fayalite quartz monzonite at Bauchi town was first described as a

coarse grained augite syenite by Falconer (1911). Basin (1926) also described as

syenite from Bauchi, but the distinctive features of the rocks were first

emphasized by Oyawoye (1958, 1961) who named it Bauchite (1965). There are

four main occurrences of Bauchite in the area, at Bauchi, Yelwa, margas and

10 | P a g e
south of Kangere. In earth case biotite hornblende granite forms a large part of

the complex, and quartz diorites are also common. Fresh specimens of

bauchite are dark green due to the green or brown colour of quartz and

feldspar, the most conspicous crystal being twinned alkali feldspar up to 5Cm

long. Bauchites usually are small, approximately circular.

Quartz diorites are found in and near to the intrusions (1 km across) or as dykes

in the bauchite. They are dark green and vary in grain size, but the larger

intrusions, e.g. Inkil Hill, have feldspars up to several centimeters in length and

appear rather similar to bauchite. All diorites are quartz bearing and most

contain at least 10% hypersthene. In bauchite areas diorite forms topography

similar to the bauchite, but elsewhere the only endure diorite may be the

characteristically spherical, deeply weathered boulders scattered over flat, low

- lying ground often adjacent to impressive hill, as at Dass and Kir.

11 | P a g e
FINDINGS
SPT logging sheets: The method allows up to 25mm settlement.

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS - ROTOSONIC

DRILLING
PENETROMETER LOGGING SHEET
CLIENT:- Zebra PROJECT:- Dabe Lithum Site BORER: - Benjamin/Gumo
DRN No:- BOREHOLE No:- 01 North DATE: - 18/11/22

CORE DETAILS STANDARD PENETROMETER REMARKS

TEST
CUMMULATIVE GEOLOGICAL SPECIFICATION
SPLIT BARREL
(m) ORIGIN (kpa)
(Blows)

3 N Value Dabe M.O.

T&I
0
0
00.00^00. 2 <14 SolFt
1 - Easily
30
penetrated several
centimeters by
thumb due to
humus.
2 - Danger of large
<140 settlement
even under small
loading.
00.30^00. Quartz 3 30
60

5 75
00.60^00.
90

12 | P a g e
 7 <14 110
00.90—01.
0
20
01.20—>01.5 5 75
1 - Seasonal water table
0 begins.
01.50—01. 5 <14 75 2- “N” values decline
80 due to
presence of water.
Schist
Low Grade 7 110
01.80—02.1 1 - “N”values continue
Lithium to increase and firm
0
8 14 120 with depth.
02.10—02. 2 - Low Grade Lithium
40
observed
02.40—02. 9 15 130
3 - Good Grade Lithium
70
Ore Observed
Good 12 17 200 160
02.70—03.
Grade
00
Lithium
03.00—03. 13 18 240 170
30

15 240 200
03.30—03. <2
70 2
Refu
Refusal or bouncing
03.70—03.
sa back of 63.5kg hammer
90
l as it reaches rock like
03.90—04. Decompo
material.
20 sed >5
650 > 1 000
Granitic 0
04.20—04.
rock.
50
04.50—04.
80

From zero to 2, its very soft insitu material easily penetrated several
centimeters deep by a fist, e.g. clayey or humus soils.

13 | P a g e
From 2 to 4, it’s soft, easily penetrated several inches deep by thumb
danger of large settlements even under small loads.

From 4 to 8, its medium soft/stiff insitu material can be penetrated several

centimeters by thumb with moderate effort.

From 8 to 16, its stiff soils, readily indented by the thumb but penetrated
only with effort.

From 16 to 30, it’s very stiff insitu soils, readily intended by thumbnail.

From 30 and above, its hard insitu soil, indented only with difficulty by
thumbnail.

14 | P a g e
 *
m
-<

N.G.L
i^i OJ NJ

un
"D
O)
(TO
(D
Summarized In-situ soil boreholes profiles: Table 02
Item Geological Origin “N” Value Kpa Recommended Structure category

0-2 Quartz/Schist/ <16 140 <150kpa (Medium loaded)

Lithium Ore.

2-4 <24 230 <250kpa Heavily loaded)

>50 >750 kpa (Very heavily loaded)

4-6
> 1 000
6-8

Boreholes Strata Analyses table

Boreholes strata analyses

Material Type Layer Thickness (m)
Depth from Natural ground
level (m)

Max Avg Min Max Min Avg

Granitic Sand - Overburden 00.35 0.25 00.45 00.25 00.30
00.3
0

Granitic sand - Seam 00.45 00.4 00.3 00.70 00.25 00.60

0 5
Quartz 00.30 00.3 00.2 01.00 00.60 00.70

0 0
Lithium ore 04.30 4.26 4.21 01.50 01.24 01.37

Schist 02.80 02.0 01.5 03.70 00.90 02.60

3 0
Decomposed Granitic Sand - - - - - -

Boreholes water table: No permanent water table was encountered

except for seasonal perched water table.

16 | P a g e
Proposed design parameters as from SPT profiles:

Table No: 2 - Design parameters

Material Type Allowable Bearing Capacity (Kpa) TR 14 Classification

Colluvium Granitic Sand 100 (subject to precautions) G8

Residual Granitic Sand 150: G6
Processed hardcore
Quartz >250
gravel meeting G5 or
>1 000
Soft Rock better classification.
Parent rock

17 | P a g e
SAMPLE TEST RESULTS
Lab. Number: 1273 Sample Depth: 1m
04th December, 2022

Client: Zebra Energy Nigeria Limited

Equipment Used : FLAME PHOTOMETER

Laboratory Analysis Results
I, the undersigned Laboratory Technologist, registered with Nigerian
Institute of Science
Laboratory Technology (NISLT A11215), do hereby certify that on
04th/12/2022; you submitted a
rock sample for Lithium Content. The said samples while in the
same condition as received by
me were analyzed by me and/or under my direction. The findings of
one of the sample are stated
hereunder:

Concentrations
Sample
mg/Kg % %

Zebra sample 6589.00 0.74 Li2O 0.81

6587.00 0.74 0.81

6589.00 0.74 0.81

Mean 6589.33 0.74 Mean 0.81

SEM 0.54 0.00 SEM 0.00

Analysis by: Musa Muktari

18 | P a g e
Lab. Number: 1231 Sample Depth: 2.3m
05th December, 2022

Client: Zebra Energy Nigeria Limited

Equipment Used : FLAME PHOTOMETER

Laboratory Analysis Results
I, the undersigned Laboratory Technologist, registered with Nigerian
Institute of Science
Laboratory Technology (NISLT A11215), do hereby certify that on
05th/12/2022; you submitted a
rock sample for Lithium Content. The said samples while in the same
condition as received by
me were analyzed by me and/or under my direction. The findings of
one of the sample are stated
hereunder:

Concentrations
Sample
mg/Kg % %

Zebra sample 7489.00 0.74 Li2O 1.61

7487.00 0.74 1.61

7489.00 0.74 1.61

Mean 7488.33 0.74 Mean 1.61

SEM 0.54 0.00 SEM 0.00

Analysis by: Musa Muktari

19 | P a g e
Lab. No: 1298 Sample Depth: 2.8m
14th DECEMBER, 2022

Client: Zebra Energy Nigeria Limited

Institution:
Equipment Used : FLAME PHOTOMETER

Laboratory
Analysis Results

I, the undersigned Laboratory Technologist, registered with Nigerian Institute of Science

Laboratory Technology (NISLT A11215), do hereby certify that on 14th/12/2022; you submitted a
rock sample for Lithium Content. The said samples while in the same condition as received by
me were analyzed by me and/or under my direction. The findings of one of the sample are stated
hereunder:

Concentrations
Sample
mg/Kg % %

White Sample 14953.00 1.49 Li2O 3.21

14950.00 1.49 3.21

14952.00 1.49 3.21

Mean 14951.67 1.49 Mean 3.21

SEM 0.72 0.00 SEM 0.00

Analysis by: Musa Muktari

20 | P a g e
BOREHOLES LOCATION MAP
Widibida
Reri
Deb« Mai Kasuwa Deben Kasa

Sonin I

21 | P a g e