Cal, I read you note and share your concern about the Timeline "modification".  They have done this before, as you well know.

I sent the following Email out this morning.  I would encourage anyone else with the same concerns to follow up with their own inquiry Email:

_______________________________________________________________________________

2 October 2020

Mr. Alex Zawadski, CEO, Lithium Nevada Corporation

Dear Sir,

As a long time investor in LAC ( starting many years ago when I started my investment with Western Lithium ), I  find it a little disconcerting that the LAC webpage information about the Thacker Pass facility seems to have been recently altered and with no explanation as to the reason for the alteration.  I am hoping you can and will shine some light on this situation.

As you know, the Timeline for 2020 has been “modified”, to put it in the kindest way.  Only a few short days ago the Timeline showed that the Definitive Feasibility Study for Thacker Pass would be revealed in the 4th Quarter of 2020.

As you also know, the Timeline today on the LAC web site for Thacker Pass shows no mention of the DFS for Thacker Pass and there is no explanation for this “modification”. 

I am one of the Share Owner members of the Agoracom.com Lithium Americas Hub and, of course, all of those individuals are intensely interested in every detail that pertains to Lithium Americas and to the completion and successful operation of Thacker Pass.  I particularly follow all of your pronouncements in the media, especially those being reported by The Elko Daily Free Press and I don’t recall any mention by you that the Timeline for the DFS was going to be extended.

Please address this matter in your reply.  Be advised that I will, of course, share your reply with the other concerned LAC investors via the Agoracom.com Lithium Americas Hub.  Most of our members have, like myself, been invested with LAC for many years and have been loyal supporters of LAC. 

In addition, I would also like to add one more “concern” regarding Lithium Nevada Corporation and LAC.  I know that the laboratory in Reno is critical to discovering the most efficient and cost effective method for finalizing the extraction of lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide from the lithium clay that is proposed to be mined at Thacker Pass.  It has been reported that they have developed already a way to improve efficiency by 25%,  but that is about all that has been reported.

 My sincere hope is that you will pull back the curtain, at least a little bit more, on the further developments at the Reno lab.  My suspicion is that the importance of what is occurring at that facility is on par to that of the arch keystone to an arch, the arch would fail to be an integral structure without it.  Please shine some more light on events and progress at the Reno lab.  My hope is that this progress will immediately start to be displayed more prominently in the public statements of you and LAC and prominently mentioned on the company website.  “Inquiring investors want to know”, and equally important:  inquiring potential investors want to know.  The fact that no one has successfully turned lithium clay into a feed stock for an existing lithium producing mine in the past makes this “detail” all the more important.

I have watched you reply to some sensitive issues in the past, particularly some of the local concerns in Huboldt County, Nevada over water issues, sulfur contamination issues, restoration issues of the land post mining and over all the other EIS issues.  It is because of your past forthright willingness to address each of those local concerns that I am hopeful you will address this investor concern with that same willingness to give a direct and forthright response without any attempt to deflect the issue with technical jargon or subterfuge.  That would seem to be totally out of character, considering your directness and openness exhibited in all of your previous interviews and in your presentations to various governmental and citizen organizations there in the Elko and Huboldt areas.

Thank you for your time and I anticipate your response sometime next week. The sooner investors learn why the Timeline was “modified” without any explanation up to now, the more likely investors will conclude that the company is committed to keeping investors informed of salient events with their investment.  That same situation applies, of course, to information coming from the company about the essential role of the Reno lab. 

_____________________________________________________________________________

And I closed the email with my own signature block and contact information.  You don't need to copy my not, but you can if you want to.  I am more interested that you express your concern to Mr. Zawadski and to LAC.      Okiedo