Ann: Response to Section 249D Notice, page-31

I'll be sending mine through. They will be along the lines of:
- Who was accountable for the relationships with government and EPA in relation to our refinery location at Middle Arm
- What was the mechanism of accountability (i.e. was this the chair's role?) and how was this enforced?
- Who was accountable for the risk that the Middle Arm location became unsuitable? And what actions were taken to prepare a contingency plan?
- Who is responsible and who is accountable for the delivery of updated capex by Clough?
- Why is this so delayed and how is the accountability being held?
- Do the board think they have the right experience required to deliver a $1B+ capital project? Please point to relevant experience if so. If not when do they intend to add this, in light of the fact that that the feasibility study was completed in 2015 with production at one point suggested for 2016?
- Why do the board believe major shareholders have taken action to remove 2 directors?
- Have the board met with the aggrieved shareholders to find a mutually acceptable outcome?
- What are the 'sticking points' as to why a mutual solution could not be found? What are the board's, and the activists' conflicting 'deal breakers'?