DEEP YELLOW LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2020

May 11, 2020

ASX & NSX: DYL / OTCQX: DYLLF

==> picture [379 x 20] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [379 x 20] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [379 x 20] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [379 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement

12 May 2020

EXCEPTIONAL 96.4% CONVERSION OF INFERRED TO INDICATED RESOURCE AT TUMAS 3

HIGHLIGHTS

• Successful infill drilling at Tumas 3 Central has delivered a remarkable almost 100% conversion of the Inferred Resource to an Indicated Resource category

• The Indicated Resource at Tumas 3 has now been increased to 24.1Mlb at 313 ppm eU3O8

• Resource infill drilling increases the overall Resource at the Tumas 3 deposit to 36.8Mlb at 328ppm eU3O8

• Including an Inferred Resource of 12.7Mlb at 358ppm eU3O8

• The total Measured and Indicated Resource at Tumas 1, 2 and 3 now stands at 37.2Mlb at 337ppm eU3O8, well above what is required for completion of the Tumas PFS and likely to improve the outcome.

• A threefold increase in the Tumas resource base since 2017, including 37% reporting to Indicated Resource status, through exploration, translates to a highly effective cost of discovery of only 11.5cents/lb U3O8

Uranium developer Deep Yellow Limited (ASX: DYL) ( Deep Yellow ) is pleased to announce an updated Mineral Resource Estimate ( MRE ) at the Tumas 3 deposit, located on EPL3496 in Namibia. The deposit is held by Deep Yellow through its wholly owned subsidiary Reptile Uranium Namibia (Pty) Ltd ( RUN ). See Figure 1.

In March 2020 the Company completed a 3-month, 246 hole (5,154m), resource infill RC drilling program covering the central zone of the Tumas 3 deposit (see Figure 2) as reported on 2 April 2020. The targeted area contained 25Mlb of Inferred Resources grading 381ppm eU3O8 using a 200ppm cut off.

The primary goal of the drilling program was to convert approximately 50% of the total Inferred Resource at Tumas 3 (33.1Mlb) to Indicated Resource status (about 15Mlb to 17Mlb), an increase considered sufficient to support the Tumas 3 Pre-Feasibility Study ( PFS ) which is currently underway.

Unit 17, Spectrum Building, 100-104 Railway Road, Subiaco Western Australia 6008 / PO Box 1770, Subiaco Western Australia 6904 Tel : 61 8 9286 6999 / ABN 97 006 391 948 Email: info@deepyellow.com.au / Website: www.deepyellow.com.au

Pleasingly, the drilling program at Tumas 3 has successfully converted 96.4% of the Inferred Resource available within the area drilled to an Indicated Resource category, whilst also identifying additional Inferred Resources.

The updated MRE at Tumas 3 has delivered a maiden Indicated Mineral Resource of 24.1Mlb at 313ppm eU3O8 using a 200ppm cut off. Additionally, this work identified a further 3.7Mlb of Inferred Resources in this same area. Overall, the Tumas 3 MRE now stands at an Indicated Resource of 24.1Mlb grading 313ppm, and an Inferred Resource of 12.7Mlb at 358ppm eU3O8, totalling 36.8Mlb. This is a notable improvement both in the resource quality and amount from the Inferred Resource of 33.1Mlb previously announced to the ASX on 27 March 2019.

The 50% conversion estimate was substantially surpassed, with 73% of the overall Tumas 3 MRE now reporting in the Indicated Resource category.

The MRE was undertaken using various cut-off grades using a minimum thickness of 1m and conforms to the 2012 JORC Code of Mineral Resource Reporting.

Importantly the Tumas 3 uranium resource upgrade has tripled the overall Indicated and Measured Resource base associated with the Tumas Channel, from 13.1Mlb to a total of 37.2Mlb eU308.

Total surficial Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Resources in the Tumas palaeochannel are now 96.2Mlb at 292ppm eU308.

The mineralisation at Tumas 3 occurs as a discrete mineralised deposit, occurring separately from other uranium deposits identified previously within this palaeochannel system at Tumas 1 (which now also includes Tumas 1E) & 2 and Tubas Red Sands/Calcrete deposits (see Figure 1).

The palaeochannels occurring west of Tumas 3, Tubas Red Sands and Calcrete deposits have only been sparsely drilled along widely spaced regional lines, with large sections remaining completely untested. With only 60% of the known regional Tumas palaeochannel system drilled, significant upside potential remains to further increase the resource base that is associated with this highly prospective target, with 50km of channels remaining to be tested.

Deep Yellow Managing Director Mr John Borshoff commented: “ the resultant MRE upgrade just completed from infill drilling of the central part of the Tumas 3 deposit has been nothing short of astounding.

“We have achieved an almost 100% conversion rate from Inferred Resource status to Indicated, whilst also growing the resource base with the identification of an additional 3.7Mlb of Inferred Resources.

“The Tumas palaeochannel holds a further 55Mlb of uranium in the Inferred Resource category available for future upgrading to Indicated Resource status. The results, as currently announced, provide great confidence that we will have a resource base much larger than that currently being modelled in the Tumas PFS and augers very well for the broader future of this Project.”

Page 2 of 23

==> picture [388 x 328] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [388 x 110] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: EPLs 3496, 3497 showing Tumas Deposits and main prospect locations over palaeochannels.

Tumas 3 Mineral Resource Estimate Summary

The Mineral Resource was estimated by Ordinary Kriging. Cut off grades used for the expanded MRE included 100, 150, 200, 250 and 300ppm eU3O8 and the Inferred Mineral Resources derived from these cut-off grades indicate the mineralisation remains robust and consistent (see Table 1).

The MRE covers the central portion of the Tumas 3 deposit, between coordinates 504700E to 509100E, as shown on Figure 2.

Prior to commencing the drilling program at Tumas, the total Inferred Resource was 33.1Mlb. The program was completed in the central area within this Inferred Resource and focused on an area containing 25Mlb grading 381ppm eU3O8. At a 200ppm cut off, the updated MRE has an Indicated Mineral Resource of 24.1Mlb at 313ppm eU3O8 (as shown in in Table 1), returning a remarkable 100% conversion to indicated status and is a significant factor should

Page 3 of 23

this high conversion trend persist when infill drilling commences at other deposits in future resource upgrade drill programs.

The drilling also identified a further 3.7Mlb in the Inferred Resource category.

The 200ppm eU3O8 cut-off has consistently been selected as being the most appropriate for headline reporting of the resource estimations.

Table 1. Tumas 3 – JORC 2012 MRE Indicated Resources at various cut-off grades

Cut-off	Tonnes	**U3O8 **	**U3O8 **
**(ppmU3O8) **	(M)	(ppm)	(Mlb)
100	45.9	279	28.3
150	43.8	286	27.6
200	34.9	313	24.1
250	22.2	364	17.8
300	14.0	418	12.9

Notes: Figures have been rounded and totals may reflect small rounding errors. eU3O8 - equivalent uranium grade as determined by downhole gamma logging. Gamma probes were calibrated at the Langer Heinrich uranium mine test pit. During drilling, probes were checked daily against a standard source.

Note: For purposes of clarity, at a 200pm cut off the Tumas 3 deposit, outside the central Tumas 3 infill drilling that now contains 24.1Mlb of Indicated and 3.7Mlb of Inferred Resources, there remains 9Mlb eU3O8 of Inferred Mineral Resources to the east and west of the current resource estimation area. Overall, this totals 36.8Mlb at 327ppm eU3O8 for Tumas 3.

Table 2 outlines the combined Mineral Resources of Tumas 1, 2 and 3, of which Tumas 3 is the current focus of the Tumas PFS.

Table 2. Tumas 1, 2 and 3 ‐ current and previous JORC 2012 MRE - Indicated, Measured and Inferred Resources at 200 ppm eU3O8 cut off

Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resources March 2019 Status	May 2020 Status	May 2020 Status
Tumas 3 Deposit (2017/18 Resource) -JORC 2012									Tumas 3 Deposit
Deposit	Category			Tonnes (M)	Grade (ppm)			U3O8 Mlb	Tonnes (M)	Grade (ppm)	U3O8 Mlb
Tumas 3	Indicated			-	-			-	34.9	313	24.1
Tumas 3	Inferred			39.7	378			33.1	16.1	358	12.7
Sub Total				39.7	378			33.1	51.0	328	36.8
Tumas Project - JORC 2012									Tumas Project
Tumas 1&2 Deposit	Measured			10.8	383			9.1	10.8	383	9.1
Tumas 1&2 Deposit	Indicated			5.5	333			4.0	5.5	333	4.0
Tumas 1&2 Deposit	Inferred			40.9	304			27.5	40.9	304	27.5
Sub Total				57.2	322			40.6	57.2	322	40.6
Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Total				96.9	345			73.7	108.2	324	77.4

Note: Figures have been rounded and totals may reflect small rounding errors. eU3O8 - equivalent uranium grade as determined by downhole gamma logging. Gamma probes were calibrated at the Langer Heinrich uranium mine test pit. During drilling, probes were checked daily against a standard source.

ASX Additional Information

Page 4 of 23

The following is a summary of the material information used to estimate the Mineral Resources as required by Listing rule 5.8.1 and JORC 2012 Reporting Guidelines

Deposit Parameters: The Tumas 3 uranium mineralisation is of the calcrete-type located within an extensive, mainly east-west trending, palaeochannel system. The uranium mineralisation occurs in association with calcium carbonate precipitations (calcrete) in sediment filled palaeovalleys. Uranium is the only economically extractable metal in this type of mineralisation, although vanadium production can be considered if the price for vanadium becomes high enough. Uranium minerals mainly include uranium vanadates. The geology of this type of mineralisation is well understood, having been explored over many years. The Langer Heinrich uranium mine, located 30km to the north-east, mines this type of deposit and has been in operation since 2007.

The mineralisation domains used for the current extended MRE study were interpreted to capture continuous zones of mineralisation above a 100ppm eU3O8 cut off. The mineralisation included in this study has a strike length of approximately 4.9km and ranges in width 700m to 1500m extending to a maximum depth of 45m along the main Tumas channel. Within this zone the area of detailed infill drilling extends for 2.6km strike length and was the focus of the MRE. Thicknesses vary from 1m to 18m. The mineralisation occurs in a reasonably continuous, seam-like horizon, occurring between depths of 2m to 25m and extends west and east beyond the infill drilled area.

Drilling on the project has mostly used RC methods. Drill holes used in the MRE included the recently completed 246 holes for 5154m, 274 holes drilled in 2018 totalling 6781m, 462 holes drilled in 2017 for 12,323m and 338 historical drill holes totalling 8,343m drilled by Deep Yellow between 2011 and 2012. This presents a comprehensive drill data base comprising of 1,320 holes totalling 32,601m. Drilling achieved recoveries of around 90%. All drill chips were geologically logged, and their radioactivity was measured. All the data was added into a wellmaintained database.

The 2020 infill drilling of the previously 100m by 100m spaced holes was carried out along 50m spaced lines using 100m hole spacing achieving an overall spacing of 70m x 70m sufficient for the Indicated Mineral Resource determination.

The 2017 and 2018 drilling programs were carried out on a spacing of 100m x 100m. Pre2017 drilling carried out by the Company was along regional 2km spaced drill lines with drill holes spaced 50m apart.

Methodology: Data used in the MRE is largely based on down-hole radiometric gamma logging taken by a fully calibrated Aus Log gamma logging system which was used in the recent and previous drilling programs. Down-hole gamma readings were taken at 5cm intervals and converted into equivalent uranium values (eU3O8) before being combined to 1m intervals. Geochemical assays were collected from 1m RC-drilling intervals, which were split to 1 to 1.5kg samples by riffle splitters. 120grams were further pulverised for use in XRF or ICP-MS analysis. Selected samples from the historical holes were also assayed for U3O8 by ICP-MS method to confirm the XRF results. For further description of sampling techniques and associated data see Appendix 2 Table 1

The geochemical assays were used to confirm the validity of the eU3O8 values determined by down-hole gamma probing. After validation, the eU3O8 values derived from the down-hole gamma logging were given preference over geochemical assays for the resource estimation.

In house handheld XRF measurements of nearly all the mineralised samples were used to further confirm the equivalent uranium determinations.

Page 5 of 23

All relevant drill-hole details and results were previously reported by Deep Yellow in announcements made to the ASX on 2 April 2020, 21 October 2019, 27 March 2019, 17 April 2018, 5 July 2018, 14 December 2017, 27 September 2017, 11 July 2017, 22 June 2017, 22 May 2017 and 19 April 2017.

Figure 2 shows the Tumas 3 Deposit drill hole locations and grade thickness (GT- eU3O8ppm x metre thickness) contour map outlining extent and nature of the mineralisation over the 10km length of channel tested and outlines the 2.6km long infill drilling area, the focus of this current MRE work. One East-West long-section and two North-South cross-sections through the indicated resource of the Tumas 3 uranium mineralisation are shown in Figures 3, 4 and 5 respectively.

Prospectivity, High Potential and Future Drilling

Ongoing drilling of the Tumas palaeochannel continues to prove highly successful in outcome, fully endorsing the new approach that has been taken in both identifying and testing of what has proven to be a highly prospective regional target. The infill drilling follow-up work for resource upgrade of uranium resources at Tumas 3 shows an extremely high 100% conversion rate from inferred to indicated and has positive implications for the remainder of Tumas 3 and Tumas 1and 2 Inferred Resources.

The 77.4Mlb total resource grading 324ppm eU3O8 at Tumas as shown on Table 2, now includes 37.2Mlb of Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources attributable to Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Central, and 54.9Mlb Inferred Resources. This translates to 2Mlb/km for the 38km over which these deposits occur. The 96.2Mlb of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources, now attained for the overall Reptile Project Tumas palaeochannel (see Appendix 1), represents a remarkable threefold increase in the surficial palaeochannel resource base on this project since the new-focus investigations commenced in 2017.

As has been previously stated, work is clearly confirming that increasing the palaeochannel calcrete resource base toward the range of 100M-150Mlb uranium resources in the 300 to 500ppm U3O8 grade range is considered as a realistic objective, with Tumas 3 remaining open to the immediate west and the Tubas Red Sand and Calcrete Deposit open both at depth and in extension, within the 50km of highly prospective palaeochannel identified still to be tested in detail.

Furthermore, the current infill drilling and resultant high MRE conversion to Indicated Resources shows that a large proportion of the Inferred Resources identified to date have high probability to be upgraded to the Indicated JORC reporting status, and this has important positive implications for this project.

Exploration Efficiency

Since new management became involved in late 2016 at Deep Yellow, 24.1Mlb of Indicated and 39.9Mlb of Inferred U3O8 Resources have been added to the Reptile Project uranium inventory. This was achieved by concentrating the exploration effort on calcrete-associated uranium mineralisation within the Tumas palaeochannel. Exploration expenditure from November 2016 to April 2020 on the Reptile Project has been close to A$7.3M. This calculates into a discovery cost for delineation of the total Resources that have been identified, including 37% reporting in the Indicated Resource status, at under 11.5cents/lb U3O8, highlighting an abnormally high discovery efficiency. It also shows that delineation of additional uranium resources, when targeting these near-surface targets and working within a highly prospective palaeochannel system, can be done at very low cost.

Page 6 of 23

Yours faithfully

==> picture [132 x 79] intentionally omitted <==

JOHN BORSHOFF

Managing Director/CEO Deep Yellow Limited

This ASX announcement was authorised for release by Mr John Borshoff, Managing Director/CEO, for and on behalf of the Board of Deep Yellow Limited.

Competent Person’s Statement

Mineral Resource Estimate:

The information in this announcement that relates to the Tumas Mineral Resource Estimate is based on work completed by Mr. Martin Hirsch, M.Sc. Geology, who is a member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (UK) and the South African Council for Natural Science Professionals. Mr. Hirsch is the Manager for Resources and Pre-Development for Reptile Mineral Resources (Pty) Ltd and, has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking, to qualify as a Competent Person in terms of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’ (JORC Code 2012 Edition). Mr. Hirsch consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Geophysics Component:

The Tumas 3 deconvolution of the current down-hole gamma data to convert the data to equivalent uranium values (eU3O8) was performed by experienced inhouse personnel and checked by Dr. Doug Barrett, a geophysicist who works as a consultant with over 10 years of relevant experience in the industry. Dr. Barrett has sufficient experience with this type of processes to qualify as a Competent Person in terms of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’ (JORC Code 2012 Edition). Dr. Barrett consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Where the Company refers to the other JORC 2012 resources and JORC 2004 resources in this report, it confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original announcements and all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the resource estimates in those original announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Page 7 of 23

==> picture [427 x 220] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Tumas 3 Deposit, showing area of infill drill hole locations and GT contours over palaeochannel outline

==> picture [429 x 254] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Tumas 3 Deposit, East-West drill hole cross-section, 7465150N

Page 8 of 23

==> picture [426 x 260] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Tumas 3 Deposit, North-South drill hole cross-section, 507100E

==> picture [427 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Tumas 3 Deposit, North-South drill hole cross-section, 507800E

Page 9 of 23

APPENDIX 1

JORC RESOURCES

==> picture [418 x 376] intentionally omitted <==

Notes: Figures have been rounded and totals may reflect small rounding errors.

XRF chemical analysis unless annotated otherwise.

• ♦ eU3O8 - equivalent uranium grade as determined by downhole gamma logging.

# Combined XRF Fusion Chemical Assays and eU3O8 values.

Where eU3O8 values are reported it relates to values attained from radiometrically logging boreholes.

Gamma probes were originally calibrated at Pelindaba, South Africa in 2007. Recent calibrations were carried out at the Langer Heinrich Mine calibration facility in July 2018 and September 2019.

Sensitivity checks are conducted by periodic re-logging of a test hole to confirm operations.

During drilling, probes are checked daily against standard source.

Page 10 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
Sampling	 Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or		The recent (2018-2020) drilling relies on down hole gamma data
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools		from calibrated probes which were converted into equivalent
	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.		uranium values (eU3O8) by experienced DYL personnel and have been confirmed by a competent person (geophysicist). Geochemical assays were used to confirm the conversion results.
	 Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample		Appropriate factors were applied to all downhole gamma counting
	representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement		results to make allowance for drill rod thickness, gamma probe dead
	tools or systems used.		times and incorporating all other applicable calibration factors.
	 Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to	Total gamma eU3O8
	the Public Report.  In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would		33 mm Auslog total gamma probes were used and operated by
	be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to		company personnel.
	obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30		RMR’s gamma probes were calibrated by a qualified technician at
	g charge for fire assay’). In other cases, more explanation may be		Langer Heinrich Mine in July 2018 (T003, T029, T030, T164 and
	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.		T165) and in September 2019 (T029, T030, T161, T162, T164 and T165). Probing at Tumas 3 in 2020 utilised probe T164.
			During drilling, the probe was checked daily using sensitivity checks
			against a standard source.
			Gamma measurements were taken at 5 cm intervals at a logging
			speed of approximately 2 m per minute.
			Probing was done immediately after drilling mainly through the drill
			rods and in some cases in the open holes. Rod factors were
			established to compensate for reduced gamma counts when logging
			through the rods.
			The gamma measurements were recorded in counts per second
			(c/s) and were converted to equivalent eU3O8values over 1m
			intervals using probe-specific K-factors.

Page 11 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
			Disequilibrium studies done in 2008 on 22 samples derived from the
			nearby Tumas 1 and 2 zones by ANSTO Minerals indicated that the
			U238decay chains of the wider Tumas deposit of which Tumas 3 is
			part, are within an analytical error of ± 12% and considered to be in
			secular equilibrium.
		Chemical assay data
			Geochemical samples were derived from Reverse Circulation (RC)
			drilling at intervals of 1 m. Samples were split at the drill site using
			a riffle splitter to obtain a 1kg sample from which 120g was
			pulverized to produce a subset for XRF-analysis.
			Prior to 2020 drill samples were dispatched to ALS in Johannesburg,
			South Africa for uranium and sulphur analysis using pressed powder
			pellet XRF and Leco Furnace and Infrared Spectroscopy,
			respectively. 15% of all uranium mineralised intersections were
			analysed.
			For the 2020 drilling program close to 100% of uranium mineralised
			intersections were analysed by handheld XRF in-house in the RMR
			lab. The instrument was regularly checked by analysing standards.
			The samples were taken for confirmatory assay to be compared to
			the equivalent uranium values derived from down-hole gamma
			logging.
			The assay results confirm equivalent uranium grades correlate and
			are within an acceptable statistically error margin of 10%.
Drilling	 Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air		RC infill drilling was used for the Tumas 3 campaign.
techniques	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). _		All holes were drilled vertically, and intersections measured present true thicknesses.
Drill sample	 Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries		Drill chip recoveries were good, generally greater than 90%.
recovery	and results assessed.
	 Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure
	representative nature of the samples.

Page 12 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	 Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade		Drill chip recoveries were assessed by weighing 1 m drill chip
	and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential		samples at the drill site. Weights were recorded in sample tag
	loss/gain of fine/coarse material.		books.
			Sample loss was minimized by placing the sample bags directly
			underneath the cyclone.
Logging	 Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and		All drill holes were geologically logged.
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.  Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.  The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	 	The logging was qualitative in nature. A dominant (Lith1) and a subordinate lithology type (Lith2) was determined for every sample representing a 1m interval with assessment of ratio/percentage. Other parameters routinely logged include colour, colour intensity, weathering, oxidation, alteration, alteration intensity, grain size,
			hardness, carbonate (CaCO3) content, sample condition (wet, dry)
			and a total gamma count was derived from a Rad-Eye scintillometer.
			6,281m were geologically logged, which represents 100% of meters
			drilled.
			Lithology Codes for palaeochannel lithologies used are:
			AL=Alluvion, AG=Gravel, AGS=Gravel silty sandy, SAT=Silty sand,
			SR=Red sand, CA=Calcrete un-differentiated, CAW=Calcrete
			whitish, CAB=Calcrete brownish, CAF=Calcrete pale red _Fine
			grained, SS=Sandstone, SC=Conglomerate, SA=Sand,
			SSF=Sandstone fine_CaCO3 cement, GY=Gypsum, CH=Chert,
			SSD=Dolomitic sandstone, QCO=Quartzitic conglomerate,
			CY=Clay, SH=Shale, REW=Reworked bedrock & calcrete.
			Lithology Codes for the channel floor or basement lithologies used
			are: SD=Dolomite, ST=Siltstone, SM=Mudstone, GG=Granite,
			ALAS=Alaskite, PQM=Micaceous quartzite, MS=Micaschis,
			MB=Marble, PSAM=Psammite, MPEL=Metapelite, HQ=Vein quartz,
			GZ=Pegmatite, PZ=Biotite gneiss, PQ=Quartzite, PG=Gneiss
			undifferentiated, PR=Magnetite gneiss, PT=Granitised gneiss,
			OD=Dolerite, HS=Skarn, PA=Amphibolite, BU=Mafic extrusive,
			MM=Massive magnetite, GD=Granodiorite, BI=Massive biotite,

Page 13 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
			SB=Breccia, BR=Bedrock, PX=Calc-silicate, PK=Calc-silicate
			gneiss
Sub-sampling	 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core		Sample splitters used were a 2-tier riffle splitter mounted on the rig
techniques and sample preparation	taken.  If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.  For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.  Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to	 	giving an 87.5% (reject) and a 12.5% sample (assay sample) and a portable 2-tier (75%/25%) splitter for any oversize assay samples. All sampling was dry. The sampling techniques are common industry practice. Sample sizes are considered appropriate to the grain size of the
	maximise representivity of samples.		material being sampled.
	 Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the		Standards were inserted after each 23rdprimary sample, followed by
	in situ material collected, including for instance results for field		a duplicate of the 22ndprimary sample.
	duplicate/second-half sampling.  Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	 	Blanks were inserted randomly, but commonly following a high- grade primary sample. RMR used two different standards, (AMIS0087 = alaskite,
			Goanikontes) and (AMIS0092 = calcrete, Langer Heinrich Uranium
			Mine). AMIS0087 standards reported within two standards
			deviation at an average of 207ppm U3O8while the expected value
			is 205ppm U3O8; AMIS0092 standards also performed within the
			acceptable limits of the two standard deviations at an expected
			value of 338ppm U3O8, against an average derived assay of
			339ppm U3O8.
Quality of	 The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and		The analytical method employed was ICP-MS (Lithium Borate
assay data and laboratory tests	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.  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.	 	Fusion). The technique is industry standard and considered appropriate. In-house XRF measurements were taken by a Hitachi X-MET8000 Expert Geo instrument. AUSLog downhole gamma tools were used as explained under
	 Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,		‘Sampling techniques. This is the principal evaluating technique.
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable		50 drill holes for 1,372m were analysed.
	levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been		Standard AMIS0092:32 standards at a ratio of 1:20
	established.

Page 14 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
			o Seven (7) outliers, all plotting below the lower limit (-1st STD).
			Standard AMIS0087: 32 standards at a ratio of 1:20
			o Seven (7) outliers, one (1) plotting above upper limit (+1st
			STD), the rest plots below lower limit (-1st STD).
			Blanks performed well, 100% pass rate, all below the detection limit.
Verification of	 The verification of significant intersections by either independent or		The geology logs were recorded in the field using tablets and
sampling and assaying	alternative company personnel.  The use of twinned holes.		secured excel logging spreadsheets. Logging codes are derived from pre-defined pulldown menus minimizing mis-logging and
	 Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.  Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		misspelling. All digital information was downloaded to a server and validated by the geologist at the end of every drill day. Sample tag books were utilized for sample identification.
			The field drill data of those logs and tag books (lithology, sample
			specifications etc.) is QA-ed and validated by the relevant project
			geologist before dispatching for import into a geological database.
			Twinning of RC holes was not considered; the nuggetty nature of the
			mineralisation discourages this.
			Data was uploaded onto a file server following a strict validation
			protocol.
			Equivalent eU3O8values are calculated from raw gamma files by
			applying calibration and casing factors where applicable.
			The adjustment factors are stored in a database on a file server.
			Equivalent U3O8data is composited from 5cm to 1m intervals.
			The ratio of eU3O8versus assayed U3O8for matching composites is
			used to quantify the statistical error. It was found that they all lie
			within statistically acceptable margins.
Location of	 Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and		The collars were surveyed by an in-house surveyor using a
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations		differential GPS.
	used in Mineral Resource estimation.  Specification of the grid system used.  Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	 	All drill holes are vertical and shallow; therefore no down-hole surveying was required. Thegrid system is World Geodetic System(WGS)1984, Zone 33.

Page 15 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
Data spacing	 Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.		The data spacing and distribution is optimized along the Tumas
and distribution	 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.  Whether sample compositing has been applied.		palaeochannel direction. North-South drill line spacing is 50m with 100m hole spacings offset by 50m on alternate drill lines achieving an overall 70m by 70m hole spacing. The drill pattern is considered sufficient to establish an Indicated Mineral Resource.
			The total gamma count data, which is recorded at 5 cm intervals, is
			converted to equivalent uranium value (eU3O8) and composited to
			1 m intervals.
Orientation of	 Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of		Uranium mineralisation is strata bound and distributed in a fairly
data in relation to geological structure	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.  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.		continuous horizontal layer. Holes were drilled vertically and mineralised intercepts represent the true width. All holes were sampled down-hole from surface. Geochemical samples were collected at 1 m intervals. Total-gamma count data was collected at 5 cm intervals.
Sample	 The measures taken to ensure sample security.		1m RC drill chip samples were prepared at the drill site. The assay
security			samples were stored in plastic bags. Sample tags were placed
			inside the bags. The samples were placed into plastic crates and
			transported from the drill site to RUN’s site premises in Swakopmund
			by company personnel. Sample preparation for dispatch to ALS
			laboratories in South Africa was done at RUN’s own prep-lab facility.
			Upon completion of the preparation work the remainder of the drill
			chip sample bags for each hole was packed back into crates and
			then stored in designated containers in chronological order, locked
			up and kept safe at RUN’s sample storage yard at Rocky Point
			located outside Swakopmund.
Audits or	 The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and		Dr J Corbin from GeoViz Consulting Australia undertook a drilling
reviews	data.		data review. He concluded his audit commenting: “Overall, the data
			available is of reasonably good quality and easily accessible.”

Page 16 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Mineral	 Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including		The work to which the Exploration Results relate was undertaken on
tenement and land tenure status	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.  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.	 	exclusive prospecting grant EPL3496, (Tumas 3). The EPL was originally granted to Reptile Uranium Namibia (Pty) Ltd (RUN) in June 2006. The EPL is in good standing and is valid until 4 August 2021. The EPL is located within the Namib-Naukluft National Park in
			Namibia.
			There are no known impediments to the Project beyond Namibia’s
			standard permitting procedures.
Exploration	 Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.		Prior to RUN’s ownership of these EPLs, some work was conducted
done by other parties			by Anglo American Prospecting Services (AAPS), General Mining and Falconbridge in the 1970s.
			Assay results from the historical drilling are incomplete and available
			on paper logs only. There are no digital records available from this
			period.
Geology	 Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.		Tumas mineralisation occurs as secondary carnotite enrichment of
			variably calcretised palaeochannel and sheet wash sediments and
			adjacent weathered bedrock.
			Uranium mineralisation at Tumas is surficial and stratabound in
			Cenozoic sediments, which include from top to bottom scree, sand,
			gravel, gypcrete, various intercalated calcareous sand and calcrete
			horizonts overlying discordant Damaran age folded sequences of
			meta-volcanics and meta-sediments. Predominant basement
			stratigraphy is Nosib-Swakop Group with Chuos Fm being the
			highest lithostratigraphic level in the project area exposed. East of
			Tumas 3 is Kuiseb Fm exposed formingthe highest lithostratigraphic

Page 17 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
			levels. All sequences are highly metamorphosed and characterized
			by isoclinal folding in partly over thrusted sheets lying staggered on
			top of each other. Strike is generally NE-SW to NNE-SSW, mostly
			steep dipping. Three different folding events are observed.
			The majority of the mineralisation in the project area is hosted in
			calcrete. Locally, the underlying Proterozoic bedrock shows traces
			of mineralisation in weathered contact zones of more schistose
			basement types; this however seldomly occurs.
Drill hole	 A summary of all information material to the understanding of the		246RC holes were drilled over 5,154m in the 2020 infill drilling
Information	exploration results including a tabulation of the following information		program.
	for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar	 	All relevant drilling on Tumas 3 was carried out between January 2020 and March 2020. All holes were drilled vertically, and intersections measured present
	o dip and azimuth of the hole		true thicknesses.
	o down hole length and interception depth
	o hole length.
	 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. _
Data	 In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,		5cm gamma intervals were composited to 1m intervals.
aggregation methods	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.  Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade	 	1m composites of eU3O8were used for the estimate. No grade truncations were applied.
	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.
	 The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values
	_should be clearly stated. _
Relationship	 These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of		The mineralisation is sub-horizontal and all drilling vertical,
between mineralisation	Exploration Results.  If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole		therefore, mineralised intercepts are considered to represent true widths.
widths and	angle is known, its nature should be reported.

Page 18 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
intercept	 If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there
lengths	should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true
	width not known’).
Diagrams	 Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	All relevant intercepts were included within the text and appendices
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being	of previous releases.
	reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of
	_drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. _
Balanced	 Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	Comprehensive reporting, including one 1 previous announcement
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades	of Exploration Results of the 2020 program covering the Tumas 3
	and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of _Exploration Results. _	project area was practised throughout the drilling program.
Other	 Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported	The wider area of the Tumas palaeochannel was subject to some
substantive exploration data	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.	drilling from the 1970s on by Anglo American Prospecting Services, Falconbridge and General Mining. Downhole gamma-gamma density logging for bulk density was derived from recent work at Tumas 1, 2 and 3 and in analogy to Langer Heinrich Uranium Mine mining in the same lithologies and
		geological settings East and North-East of Tumas Zone 3.
		500 in house bulk density determinations were carried out on core
		samples from Tumas 1, 2 and 3. 50 samples were sent to ALS in
		Johannesburg for verification of the results.
Further work	 The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	The palaeochannel mineralisation continues eastwards into Tumas
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	1 and 2 and westwards into the Tubas Red Sand/Calcrete areas.
	 Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

Page 19 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database		Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for	A set of SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) was defined that
integrity		example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection	safeguard data integrity which covers the following aspects:
		and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. Data validation procedures used.	 Capturing of all exploration data; geology and probing;  QA/QC of all drilling, geophysical and laboratory data;
			 Data storage (database management), security and back-up;
			 Reporting and statistical analyses used Micromine (MM) software
			and Minestis.
Site visits		Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and	During all drilling programs regular site visits were conducted by the
		the outcome of those visits.	Company’s Competent Person who signed off on all exploration data.
		If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.	More recently, the Company’s current Competent Person has
			undertaken regular visits since with the most recent visit being in
			March 2020.
Geological		Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) the geological	Confidence in the geological interpretation and modelling of the
interpretation		interpretation of the mineral deposit.	sedimentary channel-fill is very high. This type of geology is well
		Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.	known and readily recognised in the RC drill chips.
		The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource	The factors affecting grade distribution are channel morphology and
		estimation.	bedrock profile, with bedrock “highs” indicative forming areas of
		The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource	mineralisation traps.
		estimation.
		_The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology. _
Dimensions		The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as	The drilled orebody in Tumas 3 has a total strike length of 7.5km, 200
		length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface	to 1500m wide, 3 to 25m deep. The infilled drilled area of the current
		to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	resource estimation extends along 2.6km strike length and is 400 to
			1400m wide. The main mineralised calcrete reaches from a shallow
			depth below surface of -2 to -3m deep down to -20m/25m
Estimation		The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s)	The present estimates are based on grade thickness/grade/lithology
and modelling techniques		applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance	domains controlling the interpolations into block estimates. Block sizes used are 50m East x 50m West x 3m elevation.

Page 20 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
		of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation		Estimation of block values used Ordinary Kriging (OK). 100ppm U3O8
		method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used. The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate		is the lower limit; no grade capping was applied. Search ranges were restricted to a max distance of 1.5 drill hole spaces. Omnidirectional variograms are used in the current estimates.
		takes appropriate account of such data.		Block validation was done using qualitative drill hole displays over
		The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.		block estimates. The current block estimate throughout correlates
		Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation).		nicely with composited eU3O8GT (Grade-Thickness) data. No correction for water was made.
		In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to
		the average sample spacing and the search employed.
		Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.
		Any assumptions about correlation between variables.
		Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control
		the resource estimates.
		Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.
		The process of validation, the checking process used, the
		comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of
		reconciliation data if available.
Moisture		Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural	An optical assessment of sample material was done during the
		moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.		sampling process and samples were classified as either “dry” or
				“wet”. The current drilling program did intersect water at times.
			Tonnages are estimated dry.
Cut-off		The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters	Composites below 1m and composites below 1m eU3O8100ppm
parameters		applied.		were excluded from the estimation process.
			The range of cut-off grades were chosen based on “potentially
				economic” criteria (100ppm U3O8, 150ppm U3O8, 200ppm U3O8,
				250ppm U3O8and 300ppm U3O8).
Mining factors		Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum	Potential mining scenarios will be open cast mining using one, two or
or		mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining		three-metre high benches; after stripping of unconsolidated sandy
assumptions		dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining		grits and screes (free-digging).
		_reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider _

Page 21 of 23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining
	methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not
	always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported
	_with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made. _
Metallurgical	 The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical	More detailed mineralogical characterisation tests were conducted
factors or	amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of	from the lower Tumas areas which presents the Company with a
assumptions	determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to	sound understanding of how a calcrete ore from Tumas would respond
	consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions	to beneficiation and further downstream processing.
	regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made	Currently metallurgical test work is underway in Perth, Australia using
	when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where	drill core drilled in 2019 and 2020.
	this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the	Also, the nearby Langer Heinrich uranium mine has successfully
	basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	mined and processed calcrete ore for almost a decade. Although it is
		under care and maintenance and its calcrete grade is higher; the
		mineralogical characteristics remain very similar.
Environmen-	 Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue	SoftChem, as independent consultant, completed a scoping level
tal factors or assumptions	disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these	Environmental Impact Assessment for the Tumas Project in 2013. With mining progressing along the channel parameter, waste material will be backfilled into mined-out areas so to provide for ongoing rehabilitation of the mined-out areas progressively throughout the life of the mine. Any remaining waste rock stockpiles will be shaped and
	potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these	contoured to blend into the surrounding environment.
	aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an
	_explanation of the environmental assumptions made. _
Bulk density	 Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the	Bulk density was derived from borehole density logging (gamma-
	assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the	gamma) from drilling at Tumas 1 and 2 in 2014.
	frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples.  The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the	Further borehole density logging (gamma-gamma) from recent drilling at Tumas 1, 2 and 3 was carried out in 2020. In 2020 bulk density determinations were carried out in-house and by ALS in Johannesburg.
	deposit.	At the Langer Heinrich mine bulk density is defined at an SI of 2.35
	 Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation	(after mining geologically equivalent material for 10 years).
	process of the different materials.	Evaluation of all data resulted in an average density of 2.3.
		The current estimate is usingan SI of 2.3.
		Page22of23

APPENDIX 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report (continued)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
Classification	 The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying		This MRE reflects an indicated Mineral Resource.
	confidence categories.  Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (ie relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality,	 	Semi-variography modelling indicates grade continuity up to 155m. Search ranges were used accordingly to max of 1.5 drill hole positions along sections.
	quantity and distribution of the data).		A search of 75m (4 sectors) (4 holes) was used to assign a first eU3O8
	 Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view		block estimate; 85m (4 sectors) with data point above cut-off from 2
	of the deposit.		holes minimum was used to qualify for an Indicated flag.
			The average mineralised seam thickness is in the order of 2m to 10m.
			The Competent Person is satisfied that the applied methodology is
			appropriate for reporting an Inferred Mineral Resource and that the
			resultingblock estimates are true reflections of the drillingdata.
Audits or	 The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.		No additional reviews were conducted beyond those carried out by
reviews			the various Competent Persons over time.
Discussion of	 Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and		The applied geostatistical approach applied to arrive at the current
relative	confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach		Indicated Mineral Resource is considered sound and does reflect an
accuracy/ confidence	or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative		industry standard approach as is applied across the globe and the industry. The presented block model is a true representation of the drilling data.
	discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and		It is this Competent Person’s opinion that the classification of this
	confidence of the estimate.		Indicated Mineral Resource can improve to measured status by
	 The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local		adding infill drilling aiding an improved definition of grade continuity.
	estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be
	relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should
	include assumptions made and the procedures used.
	 These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate
	should be compared withproduction data, where available.

Page 23 of 23