OD6 lodges drill permits and begins FAST-41 engagement for its Nevada fluorspar project
Disclosure: S3 Consortium Pty Ltd (the Company) and Associated Entities own 7,666,571 OD6 Shares and the company’s staff own 175,000 OD6 Shares at the time of publishing this article. The Company has been engaged by OD6 to share our commentary on the progress of our Investment in OD6 over time. This information is general in nature about a speculative investment and does not constitute personal advice. It does not consider your objectives, financial situation, or needs. Any forward-looking statements are uncertain and not a guaranteed outcome.
Remember the US$250M fluorspar contract the US Department of War gave a tiny Canadian listed company in January?
Maybe not... well, here it is again:

(source)
That was the DoW giving a small cap company (Ares Strategic Mining) a supply contract for a niche critical mineral no one had heard of before.
And it was done on a no production = no payment mainly because Ares had the only permitted fluorspar project inside US borders...
A few weeks after that DoW deal we Invested in OD6 Metals (ASX:OD6) - the only company on the ASX with a US fluorspar asset (at the time).
Our thinking was that OD6 had the right asset to bridge the gap to Ares and put itself in a position to receive a similar style supply contract to Ares.
The biggest gap between OD6 and Ares has always been permitting status.
But that could be about to change...
OD6 just lodged permits to drill and bulk sample its project (for the first time in 40+ years).

(source)
AND commenced engagement with the US government for FAST-41 status on its project.

(source)
FAST-41 status is usually given to projects considered “critical” and essential for US national security - the program's whole purpose is to accelerate permitting of projects.
FAST-41 status is what we think would get OD6 to where Ares was when it received that DoW supply contract... quickly.
More on that DoW deal and why we think OD6 could have a shot at it later in today’s note.
We Invested in OD6 back in March.
Our thinking at the time was that 2025 was a small glimpse of what’s to come for the broader US critical minerals macro thematic...
And that the next 2-5 year period could be the window of opportunity for small cap ASX resources companies to take their expertise into the US and develop company making assets.
Since Jan 2025, the US government through equity stakes, loans and federal grants has given ~US$40BN to critical mineral companies. (source)
Then on the 20th of July Trump signed an Executive Order to force defence contractors to explore all avenues before buying critical minerals from China. (source)
And set a deadline for “exploring all avenues” of 1st January 2027.

(Here is the full EO for anyone who hasn’t seen it yet)
No more beating around the bush... by the 1st of Jan 2027 defence contractors need to show they have done everything they can to get domestic supply.
OR risk losing their lucrative defence contracts.
Wait, why are we writing about a defence specific critical minerals Trump Executive Order in an OD6 note?
Because fluorspar is used in the production of missile systems, military electronics, aerospace, AI semiconductor chip production and nuclear power...

Fluorspar was listed as one of the nine materials with the highest shortfall risk for the US military in a major conflict scenario. (source)
(like we are in now)
And the two explicit mentions of fluorspar from US agencies have both come from:
- The Department of War (through that Ares’ supply contract), (source) AND
- The US Defence Logistics Agency (DLA) when it included fluorspar on its list of critical minerals that are a priority for sourcing in Jan this year.(source)

Fluorspar is one of the more niche critical minerals that hasn’t quite received any mainstream attention YET.
But we think that the 1st of January 2027 deadline (and the threat of lost contracts) will mean capital starts flying around for any projects that have any realistic pathway to producing a critical mineral in the US...
Maybe fluorspar does a scandium and the US government hands out loans/grants or even better - direct investments to companies with projects in the US.
(anyone who has followed Sunrise Energy Metals 70x+ re-rate will know what we mean by “doing a scandium”)

(source)
The past performance is not and should not be taken as an indication of future performance. Caution should be exercised in assessing past performance. This product, like all other financial products, is subject to market forces and unpredictable events that may adversely affect future performance.
Why OD6 if the US wants fluorspar?
OD6’s project is in Nevada, USA, and has a history of fluorspar production dating back to the 1950’s.
OD6’s project also has a historic resource - but it can’t be announced because it was estimated in 1956 and has not been verified under current JORC guidelines. (source)
The permits OD6 has applied for today (IF granted) will allow for OD6 to drill and bulk sample its project.
(the first time the project will be explored in 40+ years)
Bulk sampling - sounds boring - BUT it could be the precursor for OD6 producing potential offtake samples for any prospective buyers?
Drilling - more exciting... and we think it could turn that old resource OD6 isn’t allowed to announce into a JORC compliant one that OD6 CAN announce.
A JORC resource would actually put OD6 ahead of even Ares Strategic Mining in terms of understanding how much fluorspar the two companies project’s actually have.
Ares doesn't have a JORC resource right now, the reason they got that big DoW supply deal was because of their projects permitting status.
And as mentioned earlier, OD6 is working on that too:

(source)
Permitting progress could unlock US funding for OD6?
As mentioned earlier, Ares' project in Utah is currently designated as the sole domestic supplier of acid-grade fluorspar to the US government. (source)
The interesting part is the way the contract is structured.
The Department of War orders the product as Ares delivers it.
So no acidspar produced = no payment.
Clearly, the Department of War doesn’t care where supply comes from, as long as it comes in...
We think that means the door is wide open for another company to insert itself into a similar position, landing a deal that resembles something like Ares’.
It’s hard to see the DoW putting all its eggs in one basket (which is one small Canadian listed company) for the supply of a critical mineral that it is 100% reliant on imports for.
Enter OD6...
We already know OD6’s assets produced fluorspar back in the 1950s.
AND we also know OD6 has historic drill results from its project that are right up there with Ares’ project:

The only real difference between the two projects is that Ares’ is fully permitted and OD6’s isn't.
YET...
Today, OD6 submitted its work plan for full approvals on its first ever drill program.
AND confirmed that it is engaging with the US government for FAST-41 status for its project which could “accelerate permitting support” for “an early mining operation”... (source)

(source)
FAST-41 is a special accelerated USA permitting and development framework for projects considered “critical” and essential for US national security.
At a very high level its a program designed to cut red tape and get projects online to reduce US reliance on foreign adversaries for the supply of critical minerals.
(Especially during times of war) - more on Fast-41 status here.
We think Fast-41 status for OD6’s project would be a game changer for the company.
First because of the validation the asset gets internally in the US, and second because it will bring forward the timeline to first production on the project.
IF we see any accelerated permitting framework applied to OD6’s project - then the gap to Ares’ can be closed pretty quickly.
Remember Ares doesn't even have a JORC resource - a big part of why they received that Department of War funding deal was because of the project being permitted...
Ultimately, we think a big funding deal like Ares’ could be what attracts more attention (and capital) into OD6.
Here is everything we know about OD6’s project right now:
Since acquiring the project OD6 secured a big historical dataset covering its project from the project's previous owners - major US chemicals company of the time Union Carbide.
In that data OD6 had results from some old drilling Union Carbide did on the project, sampling results and metallurgical testwork showing saleable product can be produced out of the material at the project.
Now we know OD6’s project has:
- High grade fluorspar that continues below surface (4 holes drilled in the 50’s).
- Historical production plus a historic resource (~26kt at 44.9% fluorspar mined).
- Initial metwork showing that the fluorspar can be upgraded to acidspar (the higher grade tier the Department of War is looking for).
- Impurities that are lower than current producers (eg compared to the world's biggest fluorspar mine, Las Cuevas in Mexico).
- Modern sampling OD6 obtained at project has backed up all of the old data and showed signs of more mineralisation.
Importantly, OD6 has shown its fluorspar can be processed (relatively simply) into a saleable product grade:

In terms of exploration and the upcoming drill program, what we want to see is OD6 verify those old drill results and really test how much of the fluorspar at surface extends into the rock face:

So far we know that OD6's project has fluorspar occurrences and old open pits where fluorspar was mined back in the 1950’s, mapped across roughly 8km of strike.
We have been using icebergs as a way of visualising the exploration upside on OD6’s project.
Sort of like "iceberg tips" sticking out of the ground across ~8km.

OD6’s geological theory is that the tips could form part of one larger iceberg system that is hidden below the surface:

Here is one of OD6’s latest interpretations of it showing a ~1.5km area of its projects where three different targets could be connected to one another:

(source)
Put more simply - we know there is fluorspar at surface, we just don't know how big it is below ground (below the water for the iceberg).
Ultimately, the drill program will tell us if the structures are connected AND/OR how big they are individually.
We think that the drill program, and permitting progress could be what helps OD6 achieve our Big Bet as follows:
Our OD6 Big Bet:
"OD6 re-rates to a +$200M market cap by defining a significant fluorspar resource in Nevada, attracting US government funding or a strategic offtake/supply deal, and/or attracting a takeover bid at multiples of our Initial Entry Price."
NOTE: our “Big Bet” is what we HOPE the ultimate success scenario looks like for this particular Investment over the long term (3+ years). There is no guarantee that our Big Bet will ever come true. There is a lot of work to be done, many risks involved, including development risk, country risk and commodity price risk - just some of which we list in our OD6 Investment Memo.
Success will require a significant amount of luck. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.
What's next for OD6?
🔄 Drill permit application
Today OD6 has officially submitted the paperwork that once approved will allow it to do the first modern drilling (and bulk sampling) at the project since the 50’s.
The “Plan of Operations” submitted is for up to 139 drill pad locations across priority target areas:

(source)
Milestones:
- ✅ Plan of Operations submitted to the US Forest Service
- 🔄 Plan of operations approved
- 🔲 Drill program confirmed and drilling contractor secured
- 🔲 Drill program commenced
🔄 Target generation for US fluorspar project
We want to see OD6 sample in and around the old workings on its project, run some geophysics and generate high priority drill targets ahead of its maiden drilling program.
Milestones:
- ✅ Rock chips
- ✅ Channel sampling
- ✅ Historic drill results
- ✅ Digitisation of scanned paper maps and cross-sections into a 3D geological model
- ✅ Soil/channel sampling
- 🔲 Geophysics
- ✅ Drill targets generated
Strategic / Government Engagement for fluorspar in the US
- 🔄 Engage with US Department of War, Department of Energy, or DLA regarding domestic fluorspar supply
- 🔲 Explore strategic partnerships or offtake discussions
- 🔄 OTC listing - underway (source)
- 🔄 US FAST-41 permitting status - engagement underway (source)
What could go wrong?
The biggest risk for OD6 next will be “Exploration risk”.
At the moment, most of the data we have on OD6’s project is from back in the 1950’s.
OD6 is now progressing permitting to be able to conduct subsurface exploration, with this drilling to test for what actually is in the ground.
While there are some historic hits, there were only 4 holes so there is more drilling required to verify these results and to be able to put out a modern resource.
Maiden drilling programs may fail to replicate these historical grades or confirm the economic scale needed to establish a modern JORC resource.
Plus also show economic scale and grades, so this is the biggest single risk in the short term.
Exploration risk
OD6 is at an early stage. There is no guarantee that drilling will confirm the presence of a significant fluorspar resource at depth, even though historic mining and surface mapping are encouraging. Early-stage exploration is inherently risky and many projects fail to deliver economic mineralisation.
Source: “What could go wrong” - OD6 Investment Memo 04 March 2026
Other risks
Like any early-stage exploration company, OD6 carries significant risk, here we aim to identify a few more risks.
While OD6 has submitted its Plan of Operations and engaged for FAST-41 status, there is no guarantee that US regulators or the US Forest Service will grant approvals in a timely manner.
Delays in receiving land access or environmental permits would directly impact exploration timelines and delay key milestones.
Although initial metallurgical testwork shows potential to produce acidspar, scaling up processing methods can reveal unforeseen technical complexities. Failure to consistently deliver the required purity grades could diminish interest from prospective defense or commercial buyers.
OD6 will require ongoing capital to fund its planned drilling, bulk sampling, and permitting activities. If government grants or direct agency funding fail to materialise, the company will likely need to raise capital through equity markets, which carries the risk of shareholder dilution.
Much of the macro opportunity relies on continued US political focus on critical mineral independence and defence procurement deadlines.
Changes in government policy, regulatory shifts, or broader macroeconomic downturns could reduce capital inflows into the critical minerals sector.
Investors should consider these risks carefully and seek professional advice tailored to their personal circumstances before investing.
Our OD6 Investment Memo
Our Investment Memo provides a short, high-level summary of our reasons for Investing.
We use this memo to track the progress of all our Investments over time.
Click here to read our OD6 Investment Memo where you will find:
- What does OD6 do?
- The macro theme for OD6
- Our OD6 Big Bet
- What we want to see OD6 achieve
- Why we are Invested in OD6
- The key risks to our Investment Thesis
- Our Investment Plan
General Information Only
This material has been prepared by StocksDigital. StocksDigital is an authorised representative (CAR 000433913) of 62 Consulting Pty Limited (ABN 88 664 809 303) (AFSL 548573).
This material is general advice only and is not an offer for the purchase or sale of any financial product or service. The material is not intended to provide you with personal financial or tax advice and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Although we believe that the material is correct, no warranty of accuracy, reliability or completeness is given, except for liability under statute which cannot be excluded. Please note that past performance may not be indicative of future performance and that no guarantee of performance, the return of capital or a particular rate of return is given by 62C, StocksDigital, any of their related body corporates or any other person. To the maximum extent possible, 62C, StocksDigital, their related body corporates or any other person do not accept any liability for any statement in this material.
Conflicts of Interest Notice
S3 and its associated entities may hold investments in companies featured in its articles, including through being paid in the securities of the companies we provide commentary on. We disclose the securities held in relation to a particular company that we provide commentary on. Refer to our Disclosure Policy for information on our self-imposed trading blackouts, hold conditions and de-risking (sell conditions) which seek to mitigate against any potential conflicts of interest.
Publication Notice and Disclaimer
The information contained in this article is current as at the publication date. At the time of publishing, the information contained in this article is based on sources which are available in the public domain that we consider to be reliable, and our own analysis of those sources. The views of the author may not reflect the views of the AFSL holder. Any decision by you to purchase securities in the companies featured in this article should be done so after you have sought your own independent professional advice regarding this information and made your own inquiries as to the validity of any information in this article.
Any forward-looking statements contained in this article are not guarantees or predictions of future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, and which may cause actual results or performance of companies featured to differ materially from those expressed in the statements contained in this article. S3 cannot and does not give any assurance that the results or performance expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements contained in this article will actually occur and readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
This article may include references to our past investing performance. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of our future investing performance.