Skip to main content

AI assistant

Sign in to chat with this filing

The assistant answers questions, extracts KPIs, and summarises risk factors directly from the filing text.

Sign up Log in

DEEP YELLOW LIMITED Capital/Financing Update 2024

Sep 10, 2024

64808_rns_2024-09-10_b7138476-c235-430f-ab43-b2ed28b42fd5.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

NEWS RELEASE

==> picture [168 x 43] intentionally omitted <==

11 September 2024

TUMAS 3 DRILLING ACHIEVES MEASURED RESOURCE TARGET

HIGHLIGHTS

  • Tumas 3 Measured Mineral Resource upgraded to 22.5 Mlb at 300 ppm eU3O8

  • At a 100 ppm cut-off, the updated Tumas 3 MRE has a Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource totalling 58.2 Mlb at 320 ppm eU3O8

  • Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Measured Mineral Resource upgraded to 38.5 Mlb at 253 ppm eU3O8 o Remaining Indicated Mineral Resources include 63.6 Mlb at 278 ppm eU3O8

  • Total Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of Tumas 1, 1 East, 2 and 3 at 102.1 Mlb at 268 ppm eU3O8

  • Mineral Resource Estimate upgrade follows 660 hole, 12,727 m RC resource infill drill program completed in June 2024

  • Tumas Project successfully achieves targeted +30-year Life-of-Mine

  • Significant upside potential remains to further increase the resource base associated with this highly prospective target

  • Ongoing resource drilling is planned to the west of Tumas 3 during FY2025, focusing on identifying an additional 30 Mlb to achieve a +35-year Life-of-Mine

  • The Ore Reserve Estimate for the Project, using current pricing points, will now be revised based on this upgraded Mineral Resource Estimate

Deep Yellow Limited ( Deep Yellow or Company ) is pleased to announce an updated Mineral Resource Estimate ( MRE ) for the Tumas 1, 1 East, 2 and 3 Deposits (refer Figure 1), located on Mining Licence 237 ( ML237 ) in the Erongo Region of Namibia. The deposit is held by Deep Yellow through its wholly owned subsidiary Reptile Uranium Namibia (Pty) Ltd ( RUN ).

The Mineral Resource status upgrade is required to enable the definition of sufficient Proven Mineral Reserves for the first six years of operation and to support project financing. The objective of the program was to improve drill spacing in parts of Tumas 3 to 50 m x 50 m to enable the conversion of approximately 20 Mlb U3O8 from the Indicated to Measured JORC Mineral Resource status and collect additional core samples to enhance the density database of the orebodies.

The resource drilling has covered the pit locations which are planned to be mined in the initial six years of operations, as defined in the Tumas Definitive Feasibility Study ( DFS ). By the end of June 2024, 100% of the program, including 660 RC holes for 12,727 m and six diamond core holes for 144.1 m, was completed. After all outstanding data, including density determinations, had been received and validated the drilling program was followed by a mineral resource estimation with the results reported in this announcement.

PO Box 1770 Subiaco WA 6904

Level 1 ASX & NSX (Namibia): DYL @DeepYellowLtd 502 Hay Street OTCQX: DYLLF deep-yellow-limited Subiaco WA 6008 ABN 97 006 391 948

t: +61 8 9286 6999 w: www.deepyellow.com.au e: [email protected]

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

Tables 1, 2 and 3 in Appendix 3 list the RC drill hole locations and intersections greater than 100 ppm U3O8. Diamond core holes were completed for density determinations only.

Based on this work, the drill program has successfully established a measured mineral resource for Tumas 1, 2 and 3, whilst materially maintaining the overall grade and uranium content of the deposits. While the resource status upgrade to Measured Resources at Tumas 3 is based on increased drill density, an upgrade to Measured Resource category was also achieved at Tumas 1 and 2, due to better definition of ore densities.

Overall, at a 100 ppm eU3O8 cut-off grade, the Tumas 1, 1 East, 2 and 3 Mineral Resource now stands at Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 102.1 Mlb grading 268 ppm, and an Inferred Mineral Resource of 16.1 Mlb at 196 ppm eU3O8, totalling 118.2 Mlb at 255 ppm eU3O8.

A reserve update based on the new mineral resource is currently in progress. This reserve update will be based on the DFS metrics, incorporating the DFS review impact (December 2023) and involve a re-optimisation of the Ore Reserve Estimate in preparation for the expected commencement of mining operations in the pre-production phase of project execution next calendar year.

The Company is confident that the reserve update will extend the operating life of Tumas to over 35 years. The detailed engineering for the Project, which is currently underway, will provide a control capital estimate and detailed execution schedule. In parallel, marketing enquiries, funding advancement (announced July 2024) and re-running of the Project financial model will be undertaken.

Deep Yellow Managing Director Mr John Borshoff commented: “ Tumas is a standout, Tier-1, long-life Project and the team continues to tick all the boxes as we progress with project financing and marketing ahead of a final investment decision ( FID ) later this year .

“ Delivery of the Tumas Mineral Resource upgrade across the areas earmarked for the initial six years of mining highlights the potential of the mineralised system identified at Tumas to deliver quality uranium resources .

“ Remarkably, even with the detailed infill drilling on the Tumas 3 deposit to convert resources from Indicated to the more stringent Measured category, the quantity and quality of the Tumas 3 resource has remained well within the acceptable range .”

Page 2 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [449 x 517] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

(65%)
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 1: Namibian Project Location Map.

Page 3 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [452 x 260] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: ML237 Showing Tumas Deposits and Main Prospect Locations Over Palaeochannels.

Table 1 Lists the details of the Mineral Resource estimation results for the Tumas 1, 2 and 3 deposits.

Table 1: Tumas 1, 2 and 3 Resource Upgrade September 2024

JORC U3O8 **U3O8 ** U3O8
Deposit Class Cut-off Tonnes
ppm		 (t) (Mlb) Measured Indicated Inferred
Tumas 3 Measured 100 33.8 300 10,210 22.5 22.5
Indicated 100 48.6 335 16,200 35.7 35.7
Inferred 100 16.1 170 2,770 6.1 6.1
Tumas 3 Total 98.5 295 29,180 64.3
Tumas 1 & 2 Measured 100 35.2 205 7,270 16.0 16.0
Indicated 100 18.9 200 3,760 8.3 8.3
Inferred 100 1.8 190 340 0.7 0.7
Tumas 1 & 2 Total 55.9 205 11,370 25.1
Tumas 1, 2 & 3 Measured 100 69.0 286 17,480 38.5 38.5
Indicated 100 67.5 295 19,960 44.0 44.0
Inferred 100 17.9 174 3,110 6.8 6.8
Tumas 1, 2 & 3 Total 154.4 262 40,550 89.3 38.5 44.0 6.8

Tumas 3 is the largest uranium deposit along the Tumas palaeodrainage. By itself it contains Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 58.2 Mlb U3O8 at 321 ppm U3O8.

Together with Tumas 1, 1 East, Tumas 2 and Tubas deposits, the palaeodrainage contains total surficial Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Mineral Resources at a 100 ppm eU3O8 cut-off (excluding the Aussinanis deposit on MDRL3498) of 137.0 Mlb at 247 ppm eU3O8. (refer Appendix 1).

It is expected that the Ore Reserve will be updated later in September using the Tumas Mineral Resource detailed in this announcement.

Page 4 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

Uranium mineralisation at Tumas occurs in association with calcium carbonate precipitations (calcrete) in sediment-filled palaeovalleys.

The MRE upgrade from this drill program is a notable improvement in the quality of the resource converting one third into the Measured category while close to maintaining the grade and uranium contents of the deposits.

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

The mineralisation at Tumas occurs as discrete mineralised deposits, occurring separately from each other as previously identified within this palaeochannel system (refer Figure 2).

The palaeochannels occurring elsewhere on ML237, west of Tumas 3 and the Tubas Red Sand and Calcrete deposits have, in parts, only been sparsely drilled along widely spaced lines. With the western Tumas and Tubas palaeochannels within ML237 being largely under-drilled, significant upside potential remains to further increase the resource base associated with this highly prospective target. Further infill drilling in these parts of the palaeochannel is expected to increase the current 18.8 Mlb in this zone. Further resource drilling is planned to continue to the west of Tumas 3 and is expected to start during FY2025. The Company is seeking a further 30 Mlb to add to the Tumas resource base.

Tumas 3 Mineral Resource Estimate Summary

The Mineral Resource was estimated by Multi Indicator Kriging ( MIK ). The final MRE was reported at cut-off grades from 100 ppm to 200 ppm eU3O8 and the Mineral Resources derived from these cut-off grades indicate the mineralisation remains robust and consistent (refer Table 2).

The MRE covers the Tumas 3 deposit, between coordinates 498,600E to 513,000E, as shown on Figure 3.

At a 100 ppm cut-off, the updated Tumas 3 MRE has a Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource totalling 58.2 Mlb at 320 ppm eU 3O8 (as shown in Table 1).

The 100 ppm eU3O8 cut-off was selected based on previous mining studies and represents the most continuous mineralisation within the deposit.

Table 2: Tumas 3 – JORC 2012 MRE at Various Cut-off Grades

Measured Indicated Inferred
M Grade M Grade M Grade
Cut-off Tonnes
ppm		 Mlb Tonnes
ppm		 Mlb Tonnes
ppm		 Mlb
100 33.8 300 22.5 48.6 335 35.7 16.1 170 6.1
150 25.8 355 20.3 38.3 390 32.9 7.3 235 3.7
200 18.0 435 17.3 29.2 455 29.4 3.3 305 2.2

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

eU 3O 8 - 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.

Page 5 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

When compared to the previous MRE for the deposit (refer Table 3) the differences relate to the conversion of a portion of the previous Indicated Mineral Resources due to the completion of the recent infill drilling.

Table 3: Tumas 3 – Comparison between Previous and Updated MRE

Previous MRE Updated MRE
Class M tonnes Grade Mlb M tonnes Grade Mlb
Measured 33.8 300 22.5
Indicated 84.0 325 60.6 48.6 335 35.7
Inferred 16.5 170 6.2 16.1 170 6.1
Total 100.5 300 66.8 98.5 295 64.3

Table 4 outlines the combined Mineral Resources of Tumas 1, 1 East, 2 and 3, all of which are the focus of the Tumas DFS. The changes to Tumas 1 and 2 are purely based on mineral resource classification following the application of estimated bulk density values to the previous mineral resource estimates. These estimates were originally classified as Indicated and Inferred only on the basis of an assumed bulk density value; this has now been corrected enabling part of these orebodies to be classified as Measured.

Table 4: Tumas 1, 1 East, 2 and 3 - JORC 2012 MRE - Mineral Resources at 100 ppm eU 3O 8 cut-off

Deposit JORC Class cut-off tonnes U3O8 ppm U3O8 (t) U3O8 (Mlb)
Tumas 3 Measured 100 33.8 300 10,210 22.5
Indicated 100 48.6 335 16,200 35.7
Inferred 100 16.1 170 2,770 6.1
Tumas 3 Total 98.5 295 29,180 64.3
Tumas 1 & 2 Measured 100 35.2 205 7,270 16.0
Indicated 100 18.9 200 3,760 8.3
Inferred 100 1.8 190 340 0.7
Tumas 1 & 2 Total 55.9 205 11,370 25.0
Tumas 1 East Measured 100
Indicated 100 36.3 245 8,870 19.6
Inferred 100 19.4 215 4,190 9.2
Tumas 1 East Total 55.7 235 13,060 28.8
Tumas 1, 2 & 3 Measured 100 69.0 286 17,480 38.5
Indicated 100 103.8 330 28,830 63.6
Inferred 100 37.3 199 7,300 16.0
Tumas 1, 1 East, 2 & 3 Total 210.1 255 53,610 118.1

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

eU 3O 8 - 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.

Page 6 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Additional Information

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 1, 2 and 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 30 km 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 an 80 ppm eU3O8 cut-off. The mineralisation included in this study has a strike length of approximately 15.7 km and ranges in width between 400 m to 1,700 m extending to a maximum depth of 45 m along the main Tumas channel. Within this zone the largest area of detailed infill drilling extends for approximately 12 km strike length and was the main focus of the MRE. Thicknesses vary from 1 m to 18 m. The mineralisation occurs in a reasonably continuous, seam-like horizon, occurring between depths of 2 m to 25 m and extends west beyond the infill drilled areas.

Drilling on the project has mostly used RC methods. Drilling that formed the basis of the MRE included the recently completed infill drilling as well as drilling dating back to 2009 and amounted to 4,522 drill holes for a total of 104,121 m. A number of drill holes were regional in nature and the subsequent dataset used for the final estimates was limited to 91,667 1 m intervals. Drilling achieved recoveries of around 90%. All drill chips were geologically logged, and their radioactivity was measured. All the data was added into a well-maintained database. Figure 3 shows the drill hole locations at Tumas 3 highlighting the 2024 infill drilling holes.

The 2022 and 2023 infill drilling of some of the previously 100 m by 100 m and 200 m x 200 m spaced holes was carried out along 50 m spaced lines using 100 m hole spacing achieving a staggered overall spacing of approximately 70 m x 70 m, this was deemed sufficient for the determination of Indicated Mineral Resources.

Page 7 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [453 x 320] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Tumas 3 Deposit, Showing Area of Infill Drill Hole Locations and GT Contours Over Palaeochannel Outline

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 5 cm intervals and converted into equivalent uranium values (eU3O8) before being composited to 1 m intervals. Geochemical assays were collected from 1 m RC-drilling intervals, which were split to 1 to 1.5 kg samples by riffle splitters and 120 grams were further pulverised for use in XRF or ICP-MS analysis. Selected samples from the historical holes were also assayed for U 3O8 by ICP-MS method to confirm the XRF results. For further description of sampling techniques and associated data see Table 1, Appendix 2.

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

Page 8 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

All relevant prior drill hole details and results were previously reported by Deep Yellow in announcements made to the ASX on 29 November 2023 11 September 2023, 13 July 2021, 8 June 2021, 5 May 2021, 24 September 2020, 12 May 2020, 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 3 shows the Tumas 3 Deposit drill hole locations with the collars of the 2024 drilling program coloured according to grade thickness (GT-eU3O8 ppm x metre thickness) outlining extent and nature of the mineralisation over the 14 km length of channel tested which was the focus of this current MRE work. One East-West long-section and two North-South cross-sections through the resource of the Tumas 3 uranium mineralisation are shown in Figures 4, 5 and 6, respectively.

==> picture [441 x 228] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Tumas 3, Drill Long-section 7,463,000N

==> picture [443 x 230] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Tumas 3, Drill Cross-section 505,250E

Page 9 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [416 x 212] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Tumas 3, Drill Cross-section 509,800E

Mineral Resource Estimate

The Tumas MRE was undertaken in order to define an updated MRE following the completion of infill drilling of Tumas 3. In this instance an MIK estimate was completed using data supplied from the Deep Yellow database in conjunction with updated base of mineralisation profile, base of calcrete palaeochannel and top and bottom mineralisation surfaces.

The estimation dataset was broken into six separate domains, with domains 1 and 3 representing the waste portion and domains 2, 4, 5 and 6 representing the mineralised zones within the Tumas 3 deposit. Indicator variography was undertaken on domains 1 and 3 (as waste domains) and 2, 4, 5 and 6 as the mineralised domains in order to more reasonably represent the mineralisation within the deposits. Individual metal variograms were calculated for all six domains in order to enable the correct assessment of the variance adjustment to be applied to the MIK estimate for each domain. In all cases the short range variography was dominated by the downhole direction as this contained both the best continuity and shortest sample spacing with continuity and ranges in the X and Y directions being dominated by the drill hole spacing and general mineralisation continuity throughout the deposit.

Block sizes used in the estimation of the mineral resource were set at 50 m x 50 m x 3 m as this was deemed appropriate to the sample spacing of the underlying dataset and general thickness of the mineralisation. As an MIK estimate was being undertaken the expected Selected Mining Unit ( SMU ) size was set at 4 m x 4 m x 3 m (similar in X, Y and Z extent to that employed at the nearby Langer Heinrich mine) with an expected grade control spacing of 4 m x 4 m x 1 m being completed prior to actual mining.

A four-pass expanding search process was employed in the estimate with the search distance starting at 55 m x 55 m x 2.0 m, expanding to 100 m x 100 m x 5.2 m. Initial sample requirements for an estimate to be undertaken for a block were set at a minimum of sixteen samples, a maximum of forty-eight samples and samples to be selected for at least four octants. This sample requirement was progressively reduced to a minimum of eight samples from two octants for the final search pass, maximum sample numbers were maintained throughout the search process.

Page 10 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

Prior to final compilation of the model, a variance adjustment was applied to the panel grades based on the individual domain variography in order to estimate potentially recoverable mineral resources. Bulk density values used within the MRE are based on an inverse distance density model created using specific densities for the various logged rock types within the resource dataset. The density values for each lithotype were based on a combination of physical density measurements, complete in-house and at various analytical laboratories, and downhole gammagamma geophysical densities. It is expected that, as additional infill drilling takes place, more bulk density values will be collected. The generation of a bulk density dataset has now allowed for the allocation of measured mineral resource categories to the Tumas 1 and 2 Mineral Resource Estimates, when these resources were previously announced it was stated that the mineral resources were classified as Indicated and Inferred based on the lack of bulk density measurements – this has now been corrected with the underlying estimate unchanged.

==> picture [369 x 414] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Tumas 3 Swath Plot

The swath plot shows a very good correlation between the MRE block grades and the underlying data.

Page 11 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

The updated mineral resources for Tumas 3 compare well with the previous estimates with the main differences being the reduction in total metal content as a result of the application of updated bulk density values. Table 5 details the differences between the estimates.

Table 5: Tumas 3 Resource Comparison September 2024

September 2024 September 2024 September 2024 Previous
Deposit JORC Class cut-off
tonnes		 U3O8 ppm U3O8 Mlb Tonnes U3O8 ppm
U3O8
(Mlb)
Tumas 3 Measured 100 33.8 300 22.5
Indicated 100 48.6 335 35.7 84.0 325.0 60.6
Inferred 100 16.1 170 6.1 16.5 170.0 6.2
Tumas 3 Total 98.5 295 64.3 100.5 300.0 66.8

The Competent Person is satisfied that the applied methodology is appropriate for reporting a Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource and that the resulting block estimates are true reflections of the underlying drilling data.

Mining and Other Material Modifying Factors Considered

Potential mining scenarios have focused on open cast mining using three-metre high flitches; after stripping of unconsolidated sandy grits and screes (expected to be free-digging).

Block support corrections applied to the MRE follow the expected mining process.

More detailed mineralogical characterisation tests were conducted from the lower Tumas areas which has presented the Company with a sound understanding of how calcrete ore from Tumas would respond to beneficiation and further downstream processing.

Two distinct metallurgical testwork programs were conducted to support the Tumas DFS. The first utilised a single 270 kg ore composite which was used to develop those parts of the process where chemical and/or physical performance is directly linked to the ore properties, i.e., beneficiation, leach and CCD. A second testwork program covered the unit operations downstream of pregnant leach solution concentration, i.e., precipitation, causticisation, crystallisation and carbonation (see ASX release 2 February 2023).

Namisun, as independent consultant and leading Environmental Practitioner, completed an Environmental Impact Assessment ( EIA ) for the Tumas Project in 2023.

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.

The process plant has been specifically designed to produce a benign tailings stream that will not have any long-term environmental impacts once final rehabilitation and closure of the project has been completed.

==> picture [114 x 56] intentionally omitted <==

JOHN BORSHOFF Managing Director/CEO Deep Yellow Limited

Page 12 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

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.

Contact

Investors: Media: John Borshoff, Managing Director/CEO Cameron Gilenko +61 8 9286 6999 +61 466 984 953 [email protected] [email protected]

About Deep Yellow Limited

Deep Yellow Limited is successfully progressing a dual-pillar growth strategy to establish a globally diversified, Tier-1 uranium company to produce 10+ Mlb pa.

The Company’s portfolio provides geographic and development diversity with the Company’s two advanced projects – flagship Tumas, Namibia (FID expected in Q4/CY24) and Mulga Rock, Western Australia (advancing through revised Definitive Feasibility Study), both located in Tier-1 uranium jurisdictions.

Deep Yellow is well-positioned for further growth through development of its highly prospective exploration portfolio – Alligator River, Northern Territory and Omahola, Namibia with ongoing M&A focused on high-quality assets should opportunities arise that best fit the Company’s strategy.

Led by a best-in-class team, who are proven uranium mine builders and operators, the Company is advancing its growth strategy at a time when the need for nuclear energy is becoming the only viable option in the mid-to-long term to provide baseload power supply and achieve zero emission targets. Importantly, Deep Yellow is on track to becoming a reliable and long-term uranium producer, able to provide production optionality, security of supply and geographic diversity.

Competent Person’s Statements

Mineral Resource Estimate

The information in this announcement that relates to the Tumas Mineral Resource Estimate is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation relating to work completed by Mr. D Princep, B.Sc. Geology, who is a Fellow and Chartered Professional of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 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. Princep is an independent consultant. Mr. Princep consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Page 13 of 52

==> picture [134 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

The information in this announcement as it relates to Exploration results and other Mineral Resource estimates and Ore Reserves was based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation compiled by Martin Hirsch, a Competent Person who is a Professional Member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (UK) and the South African Council for Natural Science Professionals. Mr Hirsch, who is currently the Manager, Resources & Pre-Development for Reptile Mineral Resources (Pty) Ltd, 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 as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Hirsch consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which it appears. M Hirsch holds shares in the Company.

The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in previous announcements and in particular the announcement released to the market on 2 February 2023 entitled ‘Strong Results from Tumas Definitive Feasibility Study’. All material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimates continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Where the Company refers to JORC 2004 resources in this report, it confirms they have not been updated to comply with JORC 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported, however these are currently being reviewed to bring all resources up to JORC 2012 standard.

Geophysics Component

The deconvolution of the relevant Tumas 3 down-hole gamma data to convert the data to equivalent uranium values (eU3O8) was performed by experienced in-house personnel and over time was checked by various experienced qualified persons. The latest was Jonathon Ross a geophysicist who has 15 years’ experience as a geophysicist. He has applied a full range of geophysical methods for mining and exploration, but with a particular focus on wireline geophysics, including tool calibration, data collection, processing, and interpretation. For 10 years, Jonathan was at Heathgate Resources, South Australia based at an in-situ recovery uranium mining company known for its Beverley and Four Mile operations. He then worked in the Orebody Intelligence group at Orica Digital Solutions before joining Deep Yellow. Jonathan is an active member of both AIG and ASEG.

Page 14 of 52

==> picture [122 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1 JORC Mineral Resources - Namibia

Deposit
Category		 Cut-off
Tonnes
U3O8
U3O8
U3O8		 Cut-off
Tonnes
U3O8
U3O8
U3O8		 Resource Categories(Mlb U3O8)
(ppm U3O8)
(M)
(ppm)
(t)
(Mlb)		 Measured
Indicated
Inferred
BASEMENT MINERALISATION
Omahola Project - JORC 20121
INCA Deposit♦
Indicated
100
21.4
260
5,600
12.3		 -
12.3
-
INCA Deposit♦
Inferred
100
15.2
290
4,400
9.7		 -
-
9.7
Ongolo Deposit #
Measured
100
47.7
185
8,900
19.7		 19.7
-
-
Ongolo Deposit #
Indicated
100
85.4
170
14,300
31.7		 -
31.7
-
Ongolo Deposit #
Inferred
100
94.0
175
16,400
36.3		 -
-
36.3
MS7 Deposit #
Measured
100
18.6
220
4,100
9.1		 9.1
-
-
MS7 Deposit #
Indicated
100
7.2
185
1,300
2.9		 -
2.9
-
MS7 Deposit #
Inferred
100
8.7
190
1,600
3.7		 -
-
3.7
Omahola Project Sub-Total
298.2
190
56,500
125.4		 28.8
46.9
49.7
CALCRETE MINERALISATION
Tumas 3 Deposit - JORC 20122
Tumas 3 Deposit
Measured
100
33.3
300
10,210
22.5		 22.5
-
-
Indicated
100
48.6
335
16,200
35.7		 -
35.7
-
Inferred
100
16.1
170
2,770
6.1		 -
-
6.1
Tumas 3 Deposits Total
98.5
295
29,180
64.3
Tumas 1, 1E & 2 Deposits– JORC 20123
Tumas 1, 1E & 2 Deposit♦ Measured
100		 35.2
205
7,270
16.0		 16.0
-
-
Tumas 1, 1E & 2 Deposit♦ Indicated
100		 55.2
230
12,630
27.9		 -
27.9
-
Tumas 1, 1E & 2 Deposit♦ Inferred
100		 21.2
215
4,530
9.9		 -
-
9.9
Tumas 1, 1E & 2 Deposits Total 111.6
220
24,430
53.8
Sub-Total of Tumas 1, 1E, 2 and 3 210.1
255
53,610
118.1		 38.5
63.6
16.0
Tubas Red Sand Deposit - JORC 20124
Tubas Sand Deposit #
Indicated
100
10.0
185
1,900
4.1		 -
4.1
-
Tubas Sand Deposit #
Inferred
100
24.0
165
3,900
8.6		 -
-
8.6
Tubas Red Sand Deposit Total
34.0
170
5,800
12.7
Tubas Calcrete Deposit- JORC 20045
Tubas Calcrete Deposit
Inferred
100
7.4
375
2,765
6.1		 -
-
6.1
Tubas Calcrete Total
7.4
375
2,765
6.1
Aussinanis Deposit - JORC 2012- DYL 85%6
Aussinanis Deposit♦
Indicated
100		 12.3
170
2,000
4.5		 -
4.5
-
Aussinanis Deposit♦
Inferred
100		 62.1
170
10,700
23.6		 -
-
23.6
Aussinanis Deposit Total 74.4
170
12,700
28.1
Calcrete Projects Sub-Total 325.9
230
74,875
165.0		 38.5
72.2
54.3
GRAND TOTAL NAMIBIAN RESOURCES 624.1
210
131,375
290.4		 67.3
119.1
104.0

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

  • XRF chemical analysis unless annotated otherwise.

  • # Combined XRF Fusion Chemical Assays and eU 3O 8 values.

  • ♦ eU 3O 8 - equivalent uranium grade as determined by downhole gamma logging.

  • Where eU 3O 8 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, September 2019, December 2020, January 2022, and February 2023.

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

  • During drilling, probes are checked daily against standard source.

JORC Ore Reserves - Namibia

Deposit
Category		 Cut-off
Tonnes
U3O8
U3O8
U3O8		 Reserve Categories(Mlb U3O8)
(ppm U3O8)
(M)
(ppm)
(t)
(Mlb)		 Proved
Probable
Namibia
Tumas Project - JORC 20121
Tumas 3
Probable
150
44.9
415
18,600
41.0		 -
41.0
Tumas 1E
Probable
150
29.5
265
7,850
17.3		 -
17.3
Tumas 1 and 2
Probable
150
13.9
290
4,090
9.0		 -
9.0
Tumas Project
88.4
345
30,540
67.3
67.3

  • Notes: - Figures may not add due to rounding.

  • 1 ASX Release 2 Feb 2023 ‘Strong Results From Tumas Definitive Feasibility Study’.

Page 15 of 52

==> picture [122 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Sampling • Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or • The recent drilling relies on down hole gamma data from calibrated probes which were converted into
techniques specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate equivalent uranium values (eU3O8) by experienced DYL personnel and have been confirmed by a
to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, competent person (geophysicist). Geochemical assays were used to confirm the conversion results.
or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken • Appropriate factors were applied to all downhole gamma counting results to make allowance for drill
as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. rod thickness, gamma probe dead times and incorporating all other applicable calibration factors.
• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity Total gamma eU3O8
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems • 33 mm Auslog total gamma probes were used and operated by Company personnel.
used. • RMR’s gamma probes (T029, T162, D300) were calibrated by a qualified technician at Langer Heinrich
• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Mine in February 2023.
Public Report. • Probing at Tumas 3 in 2024 utilised probes T029, T162, and D300.
• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be
relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m
samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire		 •
•		 During drilling, the probes were 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.
assay’). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as
where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules)		 • 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.
may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • The gamma measurements were recorded in counts per second (c/s) and were converted to equivalent
eU3O8values over 5 cm intervals using probe-specific K-factors. These intervals were subsequently
composited to 1 m intervals.
• 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 0.5 kg to 1 kg sample and a field duplicate.
• From the 2024 infill drilling program samples from 363 out of 660 holes (55%) were analysed by in-house
portable XRF analysis . The portable XRF instruments (Hitachi X-MET8000 Expert Geo) are calibrated
weekly and RMR applies strict QA/QC protocols.

  • The samples were taken for confirmatory assay to be compared to the equivalent uranium values derived from down-hole gamma logging.

  • • The assay results have confirmed the equivalent uranium grades and are within an acceptable statistical error margin of less than 10%, except for equivalent uranium grades collected with probe D300 (see: Quality of assay data and laboratory tests).

  • In addition, 212 one-metre samples representing approximately 22% of the mineralised intersections were taken for confirmatory external assays using ICP-AES analysis at ALS, Johannesburg.

Page 16 of 52

==> picture [122 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
**Drilling techniques ** • Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air • RC infill drilling was used for the Tumas 3 campaign.
blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or • All holes were drilled vertically, and intersections measured present true thicknesses.
standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type,
whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).
Drill sample • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and • Drill chip recoveries were good, generally greater than 90%.
recovery results assessed. • Drill chip recoveries were assessed by weighing 1 m drill chip samples at the drill site. Weights were
• Measures
taken
to
maximise
sample
recovery
and
ensure		 recorded in sample tag books.
representative nature of the samples. • Sample loss was minimised by placing the sample bags directly underneath the cyclone.
• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and • Drilling air pressures were monitored during the drilling program.
whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of
fine/coarse material.
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 • The logging was qualitative in nature. A dominant (Lith1) and a subordinate lithology type (Lith2) was
Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. determined for every sample representing a 1 m interval with assessment of ratio/percentage.
• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, • Other parameters routinely logged include colour, colour intensity, weathering, oxidation, alteration,
channel, etc) photography. alteration intensity, grain size, hardness, carbonate (CaCO3) content, sample condition (wet, dry) and
• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. a total gamma count was derived from a Rad-Eye scintillometer.
• In the 2024 infill drilling program, 12,727 m were geologically logged, which represents 100% of metres
drilled. The full Tumas 3 dataset contains 95,487 logged intervals.
Sub-sampling • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • Sample splitters used were a 2-tier riffle giving an 87.5% (reject) and a 12.5% sample (assay sample).
techniques and • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether The assay sample was further split using a 2-tier (50%/50%) splitter to obtain a 0.5 kg - 1 kg sample and
sample sampled wet or dry. a 0.5 kg-1 kg field duplicate. All sampling was dry.
preparation • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the • The above sub-sampling techniques are common industry practice and appropriate.
sample preparation technique. • Sample sizes are considered appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.
• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to • Standards, field duplicates and blank samples are inserted at an approximate rate of one each for every
maximise representivity of samples. 20 samples.
• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in • RMR used two different standards to monitor accuracy of the portable XRF instruments (AMIS0087 =
situ material collected, including for instance results for field alaskite, Goanikontes and AMIS0092 = calcrete, Langer Heinrich Uranium Mine). AMIS0087 standards
duplicate/second-half sampling. reported within two standards deviation at an average of 197 ppm U3O8while the expected value is 205
• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material ppm U3O8. AMIS0092 standards also performed within the acceptable limits of the two standard
being sampled. deviations at an expected value of 338 ppm U3O8, against an average derived assay of 336 ppm U3O8.
Quality of • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory • The analytical method employed was ICP-AES (HF-HNO3-HClO4 acid digestion, HCl leach). The
assay data and procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or technique is industry standard and considered appropriate.
laboratory tests total. • In-house portable XRF measurements were taken by a Hitachi X-MET8000 Expert Geo instrument.
• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, • AUSLog downhole gamma tools were used as explained under ‘Sampling techniques’. This is the
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument principal evaluating technique.

Page 17 of 52

==> picture [122 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their • 20 drill holes including 212 m one-metre drill samples (representing 22% of mineralised samples) were
derivation, etc. analysed during the 2024 infill drilling program.
• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, • 16 blanks were randomly inserted following a high-grade sample. They performed reasonably well,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels either below or at below or at detection limit.
of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. • 15 CRMs were analysed, which, except for one outlier, reported within two standard deviation.
• Field duplicates (15) indicate a good precision for uranium.
• Comparison between the ICP assays and equivalent composited gamma data suggested that one
probe, i.e., D300, performed below expectations. As a result, gamma data collected with D300 was
substituted by in-house one-metre portable XRF values for the final mineral resource estimate (MRE)..
The comparison further confirmed that the gamma derived values for probes T162 and T029 are
appropriate for use in the MRE.
Verification of • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or • The lithology of the drill samples was recorded in the field using tablets and MaxGeo’s LogChief
sampling and alternative company personnel. software. Logging codes are derived from pre-defined pulldown menus minimizing mis-logging and
assaying • The use of twinned holes. misspelling. All digital information was validated by the geologist at the end of every drill day and
• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, uploaded to the MaxGeo database.
data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Gamma data was uploaded daily onto a file server.
• Discuss any adjustment to assay data. • Sample tag books were utilized for sample identification.
• Tag books including sample specifications and gamma data were validated by a designated Data
Administrator before dispatching for import into the MaxGeo database.
• Twinning of RC holes was not considered due to the nuggetty nature of the mineralisation.
• Equivalent eU3O8values are calculated from raw gamma files by applying calibration, casing factors
where applicable and deconvolution.
• The factors applied to individual logs are stored in the MaxGeo database.
• Equivalent U3O8data was composited from 5 cm to 1 m 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 except for gamma data
collected by probe D300 (see: Quality of assay data and laboratory tests).
Location of data • Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and • The collars were surveyed by an in-house surveyor using a differential GPS.
points down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used • All drill holes are vertical and shallow; therefore no down-hole surveying was deemed necessary.
in Mineral Resource estimation. • The grid system is World Geodetic System (WGS) 1984, Zone 33.
• Specification of the grid system used.
• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Data spacing and • Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • The data spacing and distribution is optimised along the Tumas palaeochannel direction. The 2024 infill
distribution • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the drilling has resulted in a 50 m by 50 m drill spacing over portions of the deposit deemed to lie within the
degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral first six years of mining with the majority of the remainder having a staggered 50 m by 100 m spacing.
• The drill pattern is considered sufficient to establish Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources.

Page 18 of 52

==> picture [122 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications • The total gamma count data, which is recorded at 5 cm intervals, is converted to equivalent uranium
applied. value (eU3O8) and composited to 1 m intervals.
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation of • Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of • Uranium mineralisation is strata bound and distributed in a fairly continuous horizontal layer. Holes
data in relation possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering were drilled vertically and mineralised intercepts therefore represent the true width.
to geological the deposit type. • All holes were sampled down-hole from surface. Geochemical samples were collected at 1 m intervals.
structure • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of Total-gamma count data was collected at 5 cm intervals.
key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling
bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. • One-metre RC drill chip samples were prepared at the drill site. The assay 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 RMR’s site premises in Swakopmund by Company personnel. Samples
were prepared for shipment to ALS’s sample preparation facility in Okahandja, Namibia, by RMR
personnel. ALS, Okahandja, forwarded the prepared pulps to ALS, Johannesburg, for assaying. The
remainder of the drill chip sample bags for each hole was placed in crates and stored securely at RMR’s
sample storage facility Rocky Point located outside Swakopmund.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • Dr J Corbin from GeoViz Consulting Australia undertook a drilling data review. He concluded his audit
commenting: “Overall, the data available is of reasonably good quality and easily accessible.”

Page 19 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Mineral tenement • Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including • The work to which the exploration results relate was undertaken on Mining Licence (ML) 237 (Tumas 3).
and land tenure agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, • ML237 was granted to Reptile Uranium Namibia (Pty) Ltd (RUN) in September 2023. RUN is a wholly
status partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, owned subsidiary of Reptile Mineral Resources and Exploration (Pty) Ltd (RMR), the latter being the
wilderness or national park and environmental settings. operator. ML237 is in good standing and valid until 21 September 2043.
• The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any • ML237 is located within the Namib-Naukluft National Park in Namibia.
known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. • There are no known impediments to the Tumas Project beyond Namibia’s standard permitting
procedures.
Exploration done • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. • Historically, some work was conducted by Anglo American Prospecting Services (AAPS), General Mining
by other parties Corporation 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. Data from this historical information does not form part of the
Mineral Resource dataset.
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
horizons overlying discordant Damaran age folded sequences of metasediments and granitic suites.
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.
Drill hole • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the • 660 RC holes including 12,727m were drilled in the 2024 infill drilling program.
Information exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for • All relevant drilling on Tumas 3 was carried out between 29 February and 7 June 2024.
all Material drill holes: • All holes were drilled vertically, and intersections measured present true thicknesses.
o
easting and northing of the drill hole collar		 • Refer to Appendix 3 for drill hole data.
o
elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in
metres) of the drill hole collar
o
dip and azimuth of the hole
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 aggregation • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, • 5 cm gamma intervals were composited to 1 m intervals.
methods maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) • 1 m composites of eU3O8were used for the estimate.
and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • No grade truncations were applied.

Page 20 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade
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, therefore, mineralised intercepts are
between Exploration Results. considered to represent true widths.
mineralisation • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle
widths and is known, its nature should be reported.
intercept lengths • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there
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 of previous releases.
intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being
reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill
hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.
**Balanced reporting ** • Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not • Comprehensive reporting, including previous announcements covering Tumas 3 exploration results and
practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or resource updates was practised throughout the duration of the project including ASX announcements
widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration from 19 April 2017, 22 May 2017, 22 June 2017, 11 July 2017, 27 September 2017, 14 December 2017, 5
Results. July 2018, 17 April 2018, 27 March 2019, 21 October 2019, 2 April 2020, 12 May 2020, 5 May 2021, 8 June
2021, 13 July 2021, 18 August 2021, 11 September 2023, 29 November 2023 and 5 February 2024.
Other substantive • Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported • The wider area of the Tumas palaeochannel was subject to some drilling from the 1970 on by Anglo
exploration data including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical American Prospecting Services, Falconbridge and General Mining Corporation.
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and • Downhole gamma-gamma density logging for bulk density was derived from work at Tumas 1, 2 and 3
method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, and in analogy to Langer Heinrich Uranium Mine mining in the same lithologies and geological settings
groundwater,
geotechnical
and
rock
characteristics;
potential		 East and North-East of Tumas Zone 3.
deleterious or contaminating substances. • Over 500 in house bulk density determinations were carried out on core samples from Tumas 1, 2 and
3. Additionally, 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 1 and 2 and westwards into the
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). Tumas Central and Tubas, where there is additional exploration potential.
• 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 21 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (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 Commentary
**Database integrity ** • Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for A set of SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) was defined that safeguards data integrity covering the
example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and following aspects:
its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. • Capturing of all exploration data; geology and downhole probing;
• Data validation procedures used. • QA/QC of all drilling, geophysical and laboratory data;
• Data storage (database management), security and back-up;
• Reporting and statistical analyses used industry standard software packages including Micromine and
GS3.
Site visits • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and • During all drilling programs regular site visits were conducted by the Company’s Competent Person who
the outcome of those visits. signed off on all exploration data.
• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. • The Competent Person for Mineral Resources has visited the site numerous times with the most recent
being in 2017.
Geological • Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological • Confidence in the geological interpretation and modelling of the sedimentary channel-fill is very high.
interpretation interpretation of the mineral deposit. This type of geology is well known and readily recognised in the RC drill chips.
• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. • The factors affecting grade distribution are channel morphology and bedrock profile, with bedrock
• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource “highs” indicative forming areas of mineralisation traps.
estimation.
• The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource
estimation.
• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.
Dimensions • The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length • The drilled mineralisation in Tumas 3 has a total strike length of approximately 15 km, 400 to 1,700 m
(along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the wide, 2 to 25 m deep. The infilled drilled area of the current resource estimation extends along 12 km
upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. strike length and is 400 to 1,700 m wide. The main mineralised calcrete reaches from a shallow depth
below surface of -2 to -3 m deep down to -20 m/25 m.
Estimation and • The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied • The present estimates are based on grade domains controlling the interpolations into block estimates.
modelling and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, Block sizes used are 50 m East x 50 m West x 3 m elevation.
techniques domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of • Estimation of block values used Multi Indicator Kriging (MIK). Mineralisation surfaces were derived
extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation around a nominal 80 ppm U3O8minimum value.
method was chosen include a description of computer software and • As the estimate was based on MIK no grade capping was applied.
parameters used. • The MIK estimate was based on a total of 14 indicator bin values representing 10% probability
• The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine increments up to 70% then 5% increments to 95% then 97% and 99% in order to more reasonably model
production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes the high-grade component of the dataset.
appropriate account of such data. • Directional variograms based on 14 indicator bins are used in the current estimates.
• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. • A maximum search distance of 100 m x 100 m x 5.2 m was used within the estimate. Panel proportions
• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of were limited by the modelled basement profile as any basement hosted mineralisation is not
economic
significance
(eg
sulphur
for
acid
mine
drainage		 considered for processing.
characterisation).

Page 22 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
• In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the • Block validation was done using qualitative drill hole displays over block estimates. The current block
average sample spacing and the search employed. estimate throughout correlates well with composited eU3O8GT (Grade-Thickness) data.
• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. • No correction for water was made other than any that may have been applied during the calculation of
• Any assumptions about correlation between variables. downhole equivalent uranium values.
• Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the • A block support correction was applied to the MIK estimate to derive final block proportions and grades.
resource estimates. This correction value adjusts the tonnes and grade for each panel based on the likely mining and grade
• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. control parameters. The general progression of this process is to increase overall tonnes and reduce
• The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of overall grades. Final smu sizes were set at 4 m x 4 m x 3 m with a target grade control spacing of 4 m x
model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available. 4 m x 1 m.
• The MIK estimate is considered to be a recoverable Mineral Resource.
• There is potential to recover the vanadium that is a component of the mineralisation (from carnotite)
however this has not been considered as part of this MRE.
• Average drill spacing for the portion of the mineral resource expected to be mined early in the project
life is 50 m x 50 m expanding to a staggered 100 m x 50 m for the majority of the remainder.
• The Mineral Resource panels are centred on drill holes.
Moisture • Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural • A visual assessment of sample material was done during the sampling process and samples were
moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content. classified as either “dry” or “wet”. The drilling program did intersect water at times. As the majority of
grade values applied within the MRE are based on downhole logging whether the sample is wet or dry is
not considered material.
• Tonnages are estimated dry.
Cut-off parameters • The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied. • Composites less than 0.75 m were excluded from the estimation process. This only relates to samples
at the start or end of drill holes.
• The final MRE was reported at a range of cut-off grades starting at 100 ppm U3O8and going up to 900
ppm U3O8.
• Based on previous mining studies a cut-off grade of 100 ppm was selected for the reporting of the MRE.
Mining factors • Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum • Potential mining scenarios will be open cast mining using three-metre high flitches; after stripping of
or assumptions mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining unconsolidated sandy grits and screes (expected to be free-digging).
dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining • The MRE has been limited by the application of a basement profile derived from drill hole logging as it is
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider expected that any basement hosted mineralisation would not be recoverable using the expected
potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining processing flowsheet.
methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not • Block support corrections applied to the MRE follow the expected mining process.
always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with • The MRE was assessed for reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction and the reported
an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made. estimate reflects the outcome.
Metallurgical • The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical • More detailed mineralogical characterisation tests were conducted from the lower Tumas areas which
factors amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining presents the Company with a sound understanding of how a calcrete ore from Tumas would respond to
or assumptions reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider beneficiation and further downstream processing.

Page 23 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding • Two distinct metallurgical testwork programs were conducted to support the Tumas DFS. The first
metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when utilised a single 270 kg ore composite which was used to develop those parts of the process where
reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is chemical and/or physical performance is directly linked to the ore properties, i.e., beneficiation, leach
the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the and CCD. A second testwork program covered the unit operations downstream of pregnant leach
metallurgical assumptions made. solution concentration, i.e., precipitation, causticisation, crystallisation and carbonation (see ASX
release 2 February 2023).
• Also, the nearby Langer Heinrich uranium mine has successfully mined and processed calcrete ore for
almost a decade. Its calcrete grade is higher, however, mineralogical characteristics of the ore are very
similar.
Environmental • Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue • Namisun, as independent consultant and leading Environmental Practitioner, completed an
factors or disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Tumas Project in 2023.
assumptions determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to • With mining progressing along the channel parameter, waste material will be backfilled into mined-out
consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and areas so to provide for ongoing rehabilitation of the mined-out areas progressively throughout the life of
processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential the mine. Any remaining waste rock stockpiles will be shaped and contoured to blend into the
environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not surrounding environment.
always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these • The process plant has been specifically designed to produce a benign tailings stream that will not have
potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these any long-term environmental impacts once final rehabilitation and closure of the project has been
aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an completed.
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-gamma) from drilling at Tumas 1 and 2
assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the in 2014.
frequency
of
the
measurements,
the
nature,
size
and		 • Further borehole density logging (gamma-gamma) from recent drilling at Tumas 1, 2 and 3 was carried
representativeness of the samples. out in 2020-2023.
• The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods • In 2020 bulk density determinations on drill core were carried out in-house and by ALS in Johannesburg.
that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture Additional drill core bulk density determinations were done in 2024.
and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. • At the nearby Langer Heinrich mine bulk density is defined at an SI of 2.40 (after mining geologically
• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation equivalent material for ten years).
process of the different materials. • Evaluation of all data resulted in an average density of 2.30 however the mineral resource estimate
utilises a bulk density model based on logged lithology and associated individual lithology bulk
densities.
Classification • The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying • This MRE reflects a Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource.
confidence categories. • Semi-variography modelling indicates long range grade continuity of greater than 100 m.
• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. • Maximum search ranges used were set to maximum of 100 m.
relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input • A primary horizontal search of 55 m (4 sectors and 16 samples) was used to assign a first eU3O8block
estimate; 75 m (4 sectors and 16 samples) was used for the second search pass and these broadly

Page 24 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Table 1 (continued)

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources (continued)

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

Criteria JORC Code Explanation JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, equate to Indicated Mineral Resources. A final search of 100 m (2 sectors and 8 samples) was used to
quantity and distribution of the data). allocate Inferred Mineral Resources. Vertical search components were 3 m, 4.1 m and 5.2 m
• Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view respectively.
of the deposit. • The average mineralised thickness is in the order of 2 m to 10 m.
• The Competent Person is satisfied that the applied methodology is appropriate for reporting a Measured
and Indicated Mineral Resource and that the resulting block estimates are true reflections of the
underlying drilling data.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. • No additional reviews were conducted beyond those carried out by the various Competent Persons over
time.
Discussion of • Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence • The applied geostatistical approach applied to arrive at the current Measured and Indicated Mineral
relative accuracy/ level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure Resource is considered sound and is appropriate to the style of mineralisation contained within the
confidence deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the deposit. The same estimation methodology has been successfully applied at the nearby Langer
application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the Heinrich mine for a period of over 15 years.
relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if • The presented block model is considered to be a reasonable representation of the underlying sample
such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of data.
the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the • It is this Competent Person’s opinion that the classification of portions of this Indicated Mineral
estimate. Resource could be improved to measured status by confirming the validity of the currently available
• The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local bulk density information and further infill drilling.
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 with production data, where available.

Page 25 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1488 504,550 7,466,200 375.14 25
T3I1489 504,550 7,466,149 375.39 25
T3I1490 504,600 7,466,249 375.41 19
T3I1491 504,600 7,466,150 375.92 25
T3I1492 504,600 7,466,049 376.02 19
T3I1493 504,650 7,466,200 376.09 25
T3I1494 504,650 7,466,100 376.17 25
T3I1495 504,650 7,466,001 376.93 25
T3I1496 504,700 7,465,951 377.24 25
T3I1497 504,700 7,466,050 377.00 25
T3I1498 504,700 7,466,150 376.73 25
T3I1499 504,700 7,466,250 376.17 25
T3I1500 504,750 7,466,200 376.96 25
T3I1501 504,750 7,466,100 377.52 25
T3I1502 504,750 7,466,000 377.68 31
T3I1503 504,750 7,465,900 378.12 25
T3I1504 504,900 7,465,650 380.84 37
T3I1505 504,950 7,465,700 380.92 31
T3I1506 504,950 7,465,750 381.00 31
T3I1507 504,950 7,465,800 380.42 31
T3I1508 504,950 7,465,850 380.25 31
T3I1509 504,950 7,465,900 380.01 31
T3I1510 504,950 7,465,950 379.79 31
T3I1511 504,950 7,466,000 379.61 31
T3I1512 504,950 7,466,051 378.97 25
T3I1513 504,950 7,466,100 378.77 25
T3I1514 504,950 7,466,151 378.77 19
T3I1515 504,951 7,466,199 378.20 19
T3I1516 505,050 7,466,150 379.60 19
T3I1517 505,050 7,466,100 379.69 19
T3I1518 505,050 7,466,000 380.11 25
T3I1519 505,050 7,465,900 380.72 31
T3I1520 505,050 7,465,800 381.20 31
T3I1521 505,050 7,465,700 381.83 31
T3I1522 505,050 7,465,601 382.29 31
T3I1523 505,300 7,465,750 383.67 31
T3I1524 505,300 7,465,851 382.95 31
T3I1525 505,300 7,465,950 382.09 19
T3I1526 505,300 7,466,050 381.96 19
T3I1527 505,300 7,466,150 381.72 13
T3I1528 505,300 7,466,251 381.51 13
T3I1529 505,350 7,466,200 382.09 13
T3I1530 505,350 7,466,101 382.49 19
T3I1531 505,350 7,465,900 382.76 25
T3I1532 505,350 7,465,800 383.56 25

Page 26 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1533 505,350 7,465,700 384.07 13
T3I1534 505,400 7,465,751 384.13 13
T3I1535 505,400 7,465,850 383.49 25
T3I1536 505,400 7,465,950 383.43 19
T3I1537 505,400 7,466,050 383.01 13
T3I1538 505,402 7,466,150 382.68 13
T3I1539 505,400 7,466,250 382.57 7
T3I1540 505,450 7,466,100 383.47 13
T3I1541 505,450 7,465,900 384.04 19
T3I1542 505,450 7,465,800 384.00 19
T3I1543 505,450 7,465,700 384.69 13
T3I1544 505,450 7,465,600 385.40 19
T3I1545 505,650 7,465,500 387.39 19
T3I1546 505,650 7,465,700 386.41 19
T3I1547 505,650 7,465,800 386.37 19
T3I1548 505,650 7,465,900 385.74 19
T3I1549 505,650 7,466,000 385.34 13
T3I1550 505,700 7,466,050 385.68 7
T3I1551 505,700 7,465,950 386.05 19
T3I1552 505,701 7,465,849 386.28 19
T3I1553 505,700 7,465,750 387.04 19
T3I1554 505,700 7,465,650 387.07 25
T3I1555 505,700 7,465,550 387.42 19
T3I1556 505,750 7,465,400 388.92 13
T3I1557 505,750 7,465,500 388.25 13
T3I1558 505,750 7,465,600 387.73 19
T3I1559 505,750 7,465,700 387.65 25
T3I1560 505,753 7,465,801 386.81 19
T3I1561 505,750 7,465,900 386.72 13
T3I1562 505,750 7,466,000 386.16 13
T3I1563 505,800 7,465,950 386.98 13
T3I1564 505,798 7,465,850 387.47 19
T3I1565 505,800 7,465,750 387.50 25
T3I1566 505,800 7,465,650 388.24 19
T3I1567 505,800 7,465,550 388.11 19
T3I1568 505,800 7,465,450 388.95 19
T3I1569 505,800 7,465,350 389.56 19
T3I1570 505,803 7,465,149 390.81 25
T3I1571 506,000 7,464,850 393.49 31
T3I1572 506,000 7,464,950 392.68 31
T3I1573 506,000 7,465,051 392.66 25
T3I1574 506,000 7,465,150 392.37 25
T3I1575 506,000 7,465,251 391.64 25
T3I1576 506,000 7,465,351 391.10 25

Page 27 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1577 506,000 7,465,451 390.22 25
T3I1578 506,000 7,465,551 390.26 25
T3I1579 506,000 7,465,651 389.81 19
T3I1580 506,001 7,465,751 389.63 19
T3I1581 506,000 7,465,850 389.27 19
T3I1582 505,950 7,465,900 388.81 19
T3I1583 505,950 7,465,800 388.96 19
T3I1584 505,950 7,465,700 389.21 19
T3I1585 505,950 7,465,601 389.73 25
T3I1586 505,950 7,465,500 389.73 25
T3I1587 505,953 7,465,455 389.81 25
T3I1588 505,950 7,465,400 390.30 25
T3I1589 505,950 7,465,300 390.83 25
T3I1590 505,950 7,465,200 391.70 25
T3I1591 505,950 7,465,100 391.99 25
T3I1592 505,950 7,465,000 392.38 25
T3I1593 505,900 7,464,950 392.05 25
T3I1594 505,900 7,465,051 391.89 25
T3I1595 505,900 7,465,151 391.48 25
T3I1596 505,900 7,465,250 390.98 25
T3I1597 505,900 7,465,351 390.16 19
T3I1598 505,900 7,465,450 389.35 19
T3I1599 505,900 7,465,550 389.31 25
T3I1600 505,900 7,465,650 389.30 25
T3I1601 504,900 7,466,150 378.00 19
T3I1602 504,900 7,466,050 379.00 25
T3I1603 504,900 7,465,950 379.00 31
T3I1604 504,900 7,465,850 379.00 31
T3I1605 505,100 7,465,649 382.00 31
T3I1606 505,100 7,465,750 382.00 31
T3I1607 505,100 7,465,850 382.00 25
T3I1608 505,100 7,465,950 382.00 25
T3I1609 505,100 7,466,049 382.00 25
T3I1610 505,150 7,466,100 380.74 19
T3I1611 505,150 7,466,050 380.50 25
T3I1612 505,150 7,466,001 380.78 31
T3I1613 505,150 7,465,900 381.44 31
T3I1614 505,150 7,465,802 382.10 25
T3I1615 505,151 7,465,701 382.87 31
T3I1616 505,150 7,465,600 383.18 31
T3I1617 505,200 7,465,650 383.34 25
T3I1618 505,200 7,465,750 382.67 31
T3I1619 505,199 7,465,850 382.36 31
T3I1620 505,200 7,465,949 381.73 31

Page 28 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1621 505,196 7,466,050 380.95 25
T3I1622 505,200 7,466,150 381.00 19
T3I1623 505,250 7,466,200 381.01 19
T3I1624 505,250 7,466,100 381.58 25
T3I1625 505,250 7,466,000 381.80 25
T3I1626 505,250 7,465,901 382.31 31
T3I1627 505,250 7,465,800 382.85 31
T3I1628 505,250 7,465,700 383.66 25
T3I1629 505,250 7,465,600 384.16 13
T3I1630 505,500 7,465,551 385.98 25
T3I1631 505,500 7,465,650 385.32 13
T3I1632 505,497 7,465,750 384.75 19
T3I1633 505,500 7,465,850 384.98 13
T3I1634 505,500 7,465,950 384.01 19
T3I1635 505,500 7,466,050 383.84 13
T3I1636 505,551 7,466,000 384.50 13
T3I1637 505,551 7,465,900 384.98 13
T3I1638 505,550 7,465,850 385.03 19
T3I1639 505,551 7,465,800 385.47 19
T3I1640 505,550 7,465,700 385.59 19
T3I1641 505,550 7,465,600 386.10 25
T3I1642 505,550 7,465,502 386.74 25
T3I1643 505,600 7,465,548 386.79 25
T3I1644 505,600 7,465,650 386.16 25
T3I1645 505,600 7,465,750 382.00 19
T3I1646 505,600 7,465,850 382.00 19
T3I1647 505,600 7,465,950 382.00 19
T3I1648 505,600 7,466,050 382.00 13
T3I1649 505,350 7,466,000 382.00 19
T3I1650 505,850 7,465,900 387.71 13
T3I1651 505,850 7,465,800 388.04 19
T3I1652 505,850 7,465,700 388.59 19
T3I1653 505,850 7,465,601 388.83 19
T3I1654 505,850 7,465,500 388.66 19
T3I1655 505,850 7,465,400 389.47 19
T3I1656 505,850 7,465,300 390.27 25
T3I1657 505,851 7,465,201 390.65 25
T3I1658 505,850 7,465,100 391.39 19
T3I1659 505,853 7,465,004 391.30 13
T3I1660 506,099 7,464,950 393.49 31
T3I1661 506,099 7,465,050 393.39 31
T3I1662 506,099 7,465,151 393.02 31
T3I1663 506,100 7,465,251 392.40 31
T3I1664 506,101 7,465,452 391.83 25

Page 29 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1665 506,100 7,465,551 391.43 19
T3I1666 506,100 7,465,651 390.86 19
T3I1667 506,100 7,465,750 390.42 13
T3I1668 506,100 7,465,850 390.37 13
T3I1669 506,150 7,465,900 390.37 13
T3I1670 506,150 7,465,801 390.77 13
T3I1671 506,150 7,465,700 391.11 13
T3I1672 506,150 7,465,600 391.77 13
T3I1673 506,150 7,465,500 391.86 13
T3I1674 506,150 7,465,400 392.40 19
T3I1675 506,150 7,465,301 392.25 25
T3I1676 506,150 7,465,200 393.17 25
T3I1677 506,150 7,465,100 393.62 25
T3I1678 506,154 7,465,003 394.06 25
T3I1679 506,154 7,464,857 394.27 25
T3I1680 506,199 7,465,150 393.56 25
T3I1681 506,200 7,465,250 392.95 25
T3I1682 506,199 7,465,351 392.90 13
T3I1683 506,200 7,465,551 392.17 13
T3I1684 506,200 7,465,650 391.73 13
T3I1685 506,200 7,465,750 391.33 13
T3I1686 506,201 7,465,851 391.44 7
T3I1687 506,255 7,465,905 391.66 7
T3I1688 506,250 7,465,801 391.99 13
T3I1689 506,250 7,465,700 391.94 13
T3I1690 506,250 7,465,601 392.75 19
T3I1691 506,250 7,465,200 393.57 25
T3I1692 506,300 7,465,250 394.13 25
T3I1693 506,300 7,465,350 394.13 19
T3I1694 506,300 7,465,451 393.48 19
T3I1695 506,300 7,465,550 393.16 19
T3I1696 506,300 7,465,650 392.83 13
T3I1697 506,301 7,465,751 392.66 13
T3I1698 506,100 7,465,350 391.60 25
T3I1699 506,350 7,465,700 392.98 13
T3I1700 504,750 7,466,300 376.37 19
T3I1701 504,847 7,466,295 377.06 19
T3I1702 504,800 7,466,250 377.11 20
T3I1703 504,800 7,466,150 377.52 25
T3I1704 504,800 7,466,050 378.00 31
T3I1705 504,800 7,465,950 378.30 31
T3I1706 504,799 7,465,850 378.94 31
T3I1707 504,850 7,465,900 379.00 31
T3I1708 504,850 7,466,000 378.62 31

Page 30 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1709 504,851 7,466,099 378.36 25
T3I1710 504,850 7,466,200 377.81 19
T3I1711 506,350 7,465,600 393.66 13
T3I1712 506,351 7,465,501 393.86 13
T3I1713 506,351 7,465,400 394.30 19
T3I1714 505,150 7,465,501 383.43 31
T3I1715 505,150 7,465,400 383.96 31
T3I1716 505,149 7,465,302 384.40 31
T3I1717 505,150 7,465,200 384.54 25
T3I1718 505,200 7,465,450 384.12 31
T3I1719 505,201 7,465,250 385.11 37
T3I1720 505,200 7,465,150 385.41 25
T3I1721 505,250 7,465,000 386.55 37
T3I1722 505,250 7,465,098 386.04 37
T3I1723 505,253 7,465,202 385.59 37
T3I1724 505,250 7,465,301 385.39 37
T3I1725 505,250 7,465,400 384.94 37
T3I1726 505,400 7,464,849 391.99 37
T3I1727 505,400 7,464,951 388.15 37
T3I1728 505,403 7,465,050 387.60 31
T3I1729 505,450 7,464,950 388.75 37
T3I1730 505,449 7,465,001 388.16 37
T3I1731 505,500 7,464,951 389.04 37
T3I1732 505,498 7,464,849 391.40 37
T3I1733 505,550 7,464,800 393.16 37
T3I1734 505,550 7,464,948 389.53 37
T3I1735 505,600 7,464,954 389.52 37
T3I1736 505,600 7,464,851 391.71 37
T3I1737 505,600 7,464,751 394.47 37
T3I1738 505,650 7,464,700 395.57 37
T3I1739 505,650 7,464,801 392.63 37
T3I1740 505,653 7,465,000 389.90 31
T3I1741 505,899 7,464,850 392.67 31
T3I1742 505,900 7,464,750 393.00 31
T3I1743 505,900 7,464,650 395.58 31
T3I1744 505,900 7,464,600 397.45 7
T3I1745 505,950 7,464,600 396.83 7
T3I1746 505,949 7,464,700 393.79 31
T3I1747 505,949 7,464,800 393.38 25
T3I1748 507,050 7,463,601 408.83 7
T3I1749 507,050 7,463,500 409.91 25
T3I1750 507,050 7,463,400 410.73 19
T3I1751 507,050 7,463,300 411.55 13
T3I1752 507,050 7,463,201 412.46 13

Page 31 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1753 507,052 7,463,101 413.66 13
T3I1754 507,050 7,463,002 415.23 13
T3I1755 507,099 7,463,050 414.73 19
T3I1756 507,101 7,463,150 413.49 19
T3I1757 507,100 7,463,250 412.56 13
T3I1758 507,099 7,463,351 411.72 19
T3I1759 507,100 7,463,451 410.78 25
T3I1760 507,100 7,463,551 409.44 25
T3I1761 507,100 7,463,651 408.59 25
T3I1762 507,102 7,463,751 407.48 25
T3I1763 507,148 7,463,799 407.29 19
T3I1764 507,150 7,463,600 409.33 25
T3I1765 507,150 7,463,500 410.42 25
T3I1766 507,150 7,463,400 411.47 19
T3I1767 507,149 7,463,300 412.57 19
T3I1768 507,154 7,463,203 413.38 19
T3I1769 507,150 7,463,101 414.51 19
T3I1770 507,150 7,463,001 415.77 13
T3I1771 507,197 7,462,951 416.52 13
T3I1772 507,200 7,463,050 415.51 13
T3I1773 507,200 7,463,149 413.93 13
T3I1774 507,200 7,463,250 413.38 19
T3I1775 507,200 7,463,351 412.44 19
T3I1776 507,200 7,463,450 411.30 19
T3I1777 507,202 7,463,549 410.26 19
T3I1778 507,200 7,463,650 408.97 25
T3I1779 507,200 7,463,750 407.88 25
T3I1780 507,500 7,463,850 410.68 25
T3I1781 507,499 7,463,749 410.93 25
T3I1782 507,500 7,463,650 410.77 13
T3I1783 507,500 7,463,349 413.88 13
T3I1784 507,500 7,463,249 415.15 7
T3I1785 507,500 7,463,150 416.26 13
T3I1786 507,500 7,463,050 417.49 7
T3I1787 507,500 7,462,950 418.35 7
T3I1788 507,551 7,463,000 418.41 13
T3I1789 507,550 7,463,100 417.06 7
T3I1790 507,550 7,463,200 415.82 7
T3I1791 507,449 7,463,900 410.30 31
T3I1792 507,450 7,463,799 410.46 31
T3I1793 507,450 7,463,600 410.95 7
T3I1794 507,450 7,463,500 411.89 7
T3I1795 507,450 7,463,400 413.15 13
T3I1796 507,450 7,463,300 414.27 13

Page 32 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1797 507,450 7,463,201 415.47 13
T3I1798 507,450 7,463,100 416.46 13
T3I1799 507,450 7,463,000 417.63 7
T3I1800 508,849 7,463,850 423.70 13
T3I1801 505,900 7,465,750 388.59 19
T3I1802 505,900 7,465,850 388.49 19
T3I1803 506,050 7,465,300 391.67 25
T3I1804 506,050 7,465,400 390.86 25
T3I1805 506,050 7,465,500 391.00 25
T3I1806 506,050 7,465,600 390.62 19
T3I1807 506,050 7,465,700 390.14 13
T3I1808 506,051 7,465,801 389.95 13
T3I1809 506,050 7,465,900 389.70 13
T3I1810 506,399 7,465,651 393.78 13
T3I1811 506,400 7,465,550 394.30 13
T3I1812 506,400 7,465,450 394.57 19
T3I1813 506,450 7,465,501 394.87 13
T3I1814 506,450 7,465,600 394.23 13
T3I1815 506,450 7,465,700 393.96 13
T3I1816 506,499 7,465,650 394.67 13
T3I1817 506,500 7,465,550 395.36 19
T3I1818 506,550 7,465,600 395.09 13
T3I1819 504,950 7,465,501 381.83 31
T3I1820 504,950 7,465,450 381.99 31
T3I1821 504,950 7,465,400 382.48 31
T3I1822 504,950 7,465,350 382.40 25
T3I1823 505,050 7,465,301 383.58 19
T3I1824 505,050 7,465,400 383.09 31
T3I1825 505,050 7,465,503 382.48 31
T3I1826 505,097 7,465,452 383.25 31
T3I1827 505,100 7,465,350 383.64 31
T3I1828 505,100 7,465,250 383.89 25
T3I1829 505,300 7,464,850 392.82 37
T3I1830 505,300 7,464,950 387.52 37
T3I1831 505,300 7,465,050 386.72 37
T3I1832 505,300 7,465,150 386.01 37
T3I1833 505,297 7,465,252 385.85 37
T3I1834 505,350 7,465,300 386.13 37
T3I1835 505,350 7,465,200 386.44 37
T3I1836 505,350 7,465,100 386.88 37
T3I1837 505,350 7,465,001 387.69 37
T3I1838 505,350 7,464,800 396.12 31
T3I1839 505,700 7,464,950 390.47 31
T3I1840 505,700 7,464,850 391.49 25

Page 33 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1841 505,700 7,464,750 393.83 37
T3I1842 505,700 7,464,651 397.16 37
T3I1843 505,750 7,464,599 399.32 31
T3I1844 505,750 7,464,700 395.56 37
T3I1845 505,750 7,464,801 392.26 37
T3I1846 505,750 7,464,950 390.73 19
T3I1847 505,800 7,464,850 391.56 25
T3I1848 505,800 7,464,750 393.44 31
T3I1849 505,800 7,464,650 397.17 31
T3I1850 505,850 7,464,600 398.49 13
T3I1851 505,850 7,464,701 394.69 31
T3I1852 505,850 7,464,801 392.23 31
T3I1853 506,000 7,464,750 393.89 31
T3I1854 506,000 7,464,650 394.90 31
T3I1855 507,250 7,463,900 408.19 7
T3I1856 507,250 7,463,800 408.48 25
T3I1857 507,250 7,463,601 409.49 25
T3I1858 507,250 7,463,500 410.79 19
T3I1859 507,250 7,463,400 411.82 19
T3I1860 507,250 7,463,300 412.97 19
T3I1861 507,250 7,463,201 414.04 13
T3I1862 507,249 7,463,101 414.96 13
T3I1863 507,250 7,463,000 416.32 13
T3I1864 507,250 7,462,901 417.46 7
T3I1865 507,300 7,462,950 417.04 13
T3I1866 507,299 7,463,050 415.65 13
T3I1867 507,304 7,462,857 418.30 13
T3I1868 507,300 7,463,150 414.98 13
T3I1869 507,300 7,463,250 413.94 13
T3I1870 507,300 7,463,351 412.73 13
T3I1871 507,300 7,463,451 411.43 13
T3I1872 507,300 7,463,550 410.44 19
T3I1873 507,300 7,463,650 409.39 19
T3I1874 507,300 7,463,751 409.07 25
T3I1875 507,300 7,463,850 408.84 25
T3I1876 507,300 7,463,951 408.60 19
T3I1877 507,350 7,463,900 409.33 31
T3I1878 507,350 7,463,800 409.49 31
T3I1879 507,350 7,463,600 410.05 13
T3I1880 507,350 7,463,500 411.16 19
T3I1881 507,350 7,463,400 412.28 13
T3I1882 507,350 7,463,300 413.65 13
T3I1883 507,350 7,463,201 414.78 13
T3I1884 507,350 7,463,100 415.89 13

Page 34 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1885 507,348 7,463,000 416.63 13
T3I1886 507,350 7,462,900 417.82 13
T3I1887 507,400 7,462,948 417.68 13
T3I1888 507,400 7,463,050 416.81 13
T3I1889 507,398 7,463,150 415.55 13
T3I1890 507,400 7,463,250 414.50 13
T3I1891 507,400 7,463,350 413.11 13
T3I1892 507,400 7,463,450 412.10 19
T3I1893 507,400 7,463,550 410.93 7
T3I1894 507,400 7,463,650 410.03 19
T3I1895 507,401 7,463,750 410.04 31
T3I1896 507,400 7,463,850 409.62 31
T3I1897 509,050 7,464,000 424.61 13
T3I1898 509,043 7,463,896 424.34 13
T3I1899 509,051 7,463,848 424.83 13
T3I1900 509,049 7,463,751 425.00 13
T3I1901 508,850 7,463,900 422.48 13
T3I1902 508,897 7,463,949 422.93 13
T3I1903 508,899 7,463,901 423.05 13
T3I1904 508,900 7,463,800 423.29 13
T3I1905 508,950 7,463,749 423.95 13
T3I1906 508,950 7,463,850 423.83 13
T3I1907 508,951 7,463,900 423.66 13
T3I1908 508,950 7,464,000 423.60 13
T3I1909 508,951 7,464,100 423.93 13
T3I1910 509,451 7,464,201 429.83 13
T3I1911 509,449 7,464,100 429.69 13
T3I1912 509,450 7,464,000 429.30 13
T3I1913 509,450 7,463,901 429.18 13
T3I1914 509,499 7,463,850 429.68 7
T3I1915 509,500 7,463,950 430.06 13
T3I1916 509,499 7,464,050 430.10 13
T3I1917 509,500 7,464,151 430.43 13
T3I1918 509,548 7,464,200 431.19 13
T3I1919 509,550 7,464,100 430.96 13
T3I1920 509,550 7,464,001 430.65 13
T3I1921 509,550 7,463,900 430.75 13
T3I1922 509,550 7,463,800 429.97 7
T3I1923 509,599 7,463,751 430.88 13
T3I1924 509,601 7,463,851 431.25 13
T3I1925 509,600 7,463,950 430.83 13
T3I1926 509,600 7,464,051 431.05 13
T3I1927 509,599 7,464,150 431.68 19
T3I1928 509,650 7,464,200 432.31 19

Page 35 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1929 509,650 7,464,100 432.00 19
T3I1930 509,650 7,464,000 431.80 13
T3I1931 509,649 7,463,900 431.85 13
T3I1932 509,650 7,463,800 431.54 7
T3I1933 509,650 7,463,750 431.56 7
T3I1934 509,700 7,463,650 431.78 7
T3I1935 509,700 7,463,750 432.30 7
T3I1936 509,700 7,463,849 432.32 13
T3I1937 509,700 7,463,950 432.03 13
T3I1938 509,700 7,464,050 432.47 13
T3I1939 509,700 7,464,148 432.82 19
T3I1940 509,750 7,464,099 433.24 19
T3I1941 509,751 7,464,000 432.86 13
T3I1942 509,750 7,463,899 432.57 13
T3I1943 509,750 7,463,800 432.85 13
T3I1944 509,800 7,463,750 433.56 19
T3I1945 509,800 7,463,850 433.43 19
T3I1946 509,800 7,463,950 433.26 13
T3I1947 509,800 7,464,050 433.65 19
T3I1948 509,800 7,464,150 434.10 13
T3I1949 509,849 7,464,100 434.47 13
T3I1950 509,850 7,463,999 434.13 13
T3I1951 509,850 7,463,900 433.80 13
T3I1952 509,850 7,463,799 433.99 13
T3I1953 509,900 7,463,849 434.62 13
T3I1954 509,900 7,463,950 434.70 19
T3I1955 509,900 7,464,050 434.88 19
T3I1956 509,900 7,464,150 435.30 13
T3I1957 509,950 7,464,100 435.78 19
T3I1958 509,950 7,463,999 435.60 19
T3I1959 509,950 7,463,799 435.37 19
T3I1960 509,950 7,463,599 435.05 19
T3I1961 509,951 7,463,499 434.63 19
T3I1962 509,951 7,463,400 433.74 13
T3I1963 509,950 7,463,297 434.17 13
T3I1964 509,999 7,463,251 434.69 13
T3I1965 510,000 7,463,350 434.26 19
T3I1966 510,000 7,463,450 434.81 19
T3I1967 510,000 7,463,550 435.71 19
T3I1968 510,000 7,463,649 435.77 19
T3I1969 510,001 7,463,750 436.11 19
T3I1970 510,050 7,463,599 436.32 19
T3I1971 510,050 7,463,500 435.34 19
T3I1972 510,049 7,463,299 434.75 13

Page 36 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I1973 510,050 7,463,199 435.47 13
T3I1974 510,350 7,463,200 438.39 19
T3I1975 510,350 7,463,300 438.72 19
T3I1976 510,350 7,463,400 438.67 13
T3I1977 510,399 7,463,350 439.27 13
T3I1978 510,400 7,463,249 439.00 19
T3I1979 510,400 7,463,149 438.74 19
T3I1980 510,450 7,463,199 439.69 19
T3I1981 510,450 7,463,299 440.09 19
T3I1982 510,500 7,463,349 440.60 13
T3I1983 510,499 7,463,250 440.41 19
T3I1984 510,499 7,463,150 440.03 19
T3I1985 510,500 7,463,049 440.47 19
T3I1986 510,551 7,463,201 440.69 19
T3I1987 510,600 7,463,248 441.50 19
T3I1988 510,455 7,463,109 439.67 19
T3I1989 510,455 7,463,004 440.54 19
T3I1990 510,600 7,463,151 441.33 19
T3I1991 510,600 7,463,051 441.40 19
T3I1992 510,600 7,462,950 441.23 19
T3I1993 510,650 7,463,001 442.15 19
T3I1994 510,648 7,463,201 441.73 13
T3I1995 510,950 7,462,950 445.37 19
T3I1996 510,950 7,462,901 445.58 13
T3I1997 510,951 7,462,851 445.73 13
T3I1998 510,850 7,463,247 444.62 13
T3I1999 510,851 7,463,350 445.00 13
T3I2000 510,849 7,463,401 445.12 13
T3I2001 509,100 7,463,750 425.46 13
T3I2002 509,100 7,463,800 425.02 13
T3I2003 509,100 7,463,950 425.18 7
T3I2004 509,100 7,464,150 425.52 13
T3I2005 509,050 7,464,200 425.34 19
T3I2006 509,100 7,464,249 425.93 13
T3I2007 509,100 7,464,350 425.86 13
T3I2008 509,150 7,464,200 426.33 13
T3I2009 509,150 7,464,100 426.22 19
T3I2010 509,150 7,464,051 426.14 19
T3I2011 509,150 7,464,000 425.73 13
T3I2012 509,150 7,463,900 425.76 13
T3I2013 509,150 7,463,800 425.68 13
T3I2014 509,200 7,463,650 426.45 13
T3I2015 509,200 7,463,751 426.07 13
T3I2016 509,198 7,463,851 425.96 13

Page 37 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I2017 509,200 7,463,950 426.48 13
T3I2018 509,198 7,464,050 426.48 19
T3I2019 509,198 7,464,150 426.49 19
T3I2020 509,200 7,464,250 427.01 19
T3I2021 509,200 7,464,350 427.00 13
T3I2022 509,253 7,464,201 427.39 13
T3I2023 509,254 7,464,099 427.39 13
T3I2024 509,250 7,464,000 426.99 13
T3I2025 509,249 7,463,899 426.94 13
T3I2026 509,250 7,463,800 426.51 13
T3I2027 509,300 7,463,650 427.33 13
T3I2028 509,300 7,463,750 427.04 13
T3I2029 509,299 7,463,850 426.61 13
T3I2030 509,300 7,464,050 427.73 13
T3I2031 509,300 7,464,150 427.87 13
T3I2032 509,300 7,464,250 428.22 13
T3I2033 509,350 7,464,200 428.44 13
T3I2034 509,350 7,464,099 428.50 13
T3I2035 509,350 7,464,000 427.93 13
T3I2036 509,350 7,463,900 428.04 13
T3I2037 509,350 7,463,800 427.44 13
T3I2038 509,400 7,463,649 428.23 19
T3I2039 509,400 7,463,749 428.02 19
T3I2040 509,400 7,463,850 428.54 13
T3I2041 509,400 7,463,950 428.79 13
T3I2042 509,400 7,464,050 428.92 13
T3I2043 509,400 7,464,151 429.25 13
T3I2044 509,450 7,463,600 428.60 13
T3I2045 509,500 7,463,650 429.31 19
T3I2046 509,500 7,463,750 428.85 19
T3I2047 509,549 7,463,599 429.63 13
T3I2048 509,600 7,463,650 429.93 13
T3I2049 509,600 7,463,550 430.38 13
T3I2050 509,649 7,463,600 430.55 13
T3I2051 509,701 7,463,548 431.05 13
T3I2052 509,750 7,463,600 432.22 13
T3I2053 509,750 7,463,497 431.54 13
T3I2054 509,750 7,463,399 432.39 13
T3I2055 509,800 7,463,350 432.82 13
T3I2056 509,800 7,463,450 432.09 13
T3I2057 509,800 7,463,650 432.98 13
T3I2058 509,850 7,463,600 433.64 19
T3I2059 509,849 7,463,500 433.25 13
T3I2060 509,850 7,463,400 432.69 13

Page 38 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I2061 509,900 7,463,350 433.41 13
T3I2062 509,900 7,463,450 433.49 13
T3I2063 509,900 7,463,550 434.51 19
T3I2064 509,900 7,463,650 434.45 19
T3I2065 509,899 7,463,750 434.83 13
T3I2066 510,100 7,463,649 437.03 19
T3I2067 510,100 7,463,549 436.59 13
T3I2068 510,099 7,463,450 435.62 13
T3I2069 510,100 7,463,250 435.21 13
T3I2070 510,100 7,463,149 436.08 13
T3I2071 510,150 7,463,200 435.90 13
T3I2072 510,150 7,463,300 436.49 13
T3I2073 510,150 7,463,500 436.56 13
T3I2074 510,150 7,463,601 437.35 13
T3I2075 510,200 7,463,450 436.86 13
T3I2076 510,198 7,463,250 436.44 13
T3I2077 510,200 7,463,150 436.73 13
T3I2078 510,250 7,463,200 436.82 13
T3I2079 510,250 7,463,300 437.51 19
T3I2080 510,250 7,463,400 437.57 19
T3I2081 510,300 7,463,350 438.03 19
T3I2082 510,300 7,463,249 437.73 19
T3I2083 510,300 7,463,150 437.97 13
T3I2084 510,700 7,463,150 442.56 13
T3I2085 510,700 7,463,050 442.52 19
T3I2086 510,700 7,462,951 442.48 19
T3I2087 510,700 7,462,850 442.47 19
T3I2088 510,750 7,462,799 443.12 19
T3I2089 510,750 7,462,900 443.17 19
T3I2090 510,750 7,463,000 443.21 19
T3I2091 510,800 7,463,050 443.68 13
T3I2092 510,800 7,462,950 443.87 19
T3I2093 510,850 7,462,900 444.23 19
T3I2094 510,849 7,462,801 444.33 19
T3I2095 510,900 7,462,650 445.14 19
T3I2096 510,900 7,462,850 445.10 19
T3I2097 510,901 7,462,950 445.07 19
T3I2098 511,100 7,463,400 448.12 13
T3I2099 511,199 7,463,399 449.31 19
T3I2100 511,149 7,463,350 448.44 19
T3I2101 511,150 7,463,250 448.33 13
T3I2102 511,149 7,463,200 448.33 7
T3I2103 511,250 7,463,250 449.77 13
T3I2104 511,299 7,463,350 450.35 19

Page 39 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3I2105 511,600 7,461,550 458.68 7
T3I2106 511,596 7,461,451 459.10 19
T3I2107 511,701 7,461,450 460.28 19
T3I2108 511,700 7,461,550 459.79 25
T3I2109 511,650 7,461,600 459.00 7
T3I2110 511,700 7,461,649 459.49 7
T3I2111 511,750 7,461,600 460.25 19
T3I2112 511,750 7,461,401 461.13 7
T3I2113 511,800 7,461,451 461.45 25
T3I2114 511,800 7,461,550 461.11 19
T3I2115 511,800 7,461,650 460.74 13
T3I2116 511,850 7,461,600 461.49 7
T3I2117 511,849 7,461,400 462.28 25
T3I2118 511,900 7,461,350 463.17 13
T3I2119 511,900 7,461,449 462.89 25
T3I2120 511,900 7,461,550 462.57 7
T3I2121 511,900 7,461,651 462.13 13
T3I2151 510,900 7,463,300 445.36 13
T3I2152 510,950 7,463,351 446.15 19
T3I2153 510,948 7,463,254 445.77 13
T3I2154 511,050 7,463,249 447.20 19
T3I2155 511,050 7,463,350 447.39 19
T3I2156 511,500 7,463,549 453.26 13
T3I2157 511,500 7,463,650 452.90 7
T3I2158 511,550 7,463,599 453.76 13
T3I2159 511,549 7,463,500 453.72 7
T3I2160 511,600 7,463,550 454.47 13
T3I2161 511,600 7,463,649 454.38 13
T3I2162 511,650 7,463,600 454.97 7
T3I2163 511,950 7,461,599 462.97 7
T3I2164 511,950 7,461,299 464.29 7
T3I2165 512,000 7,461,350 464.43 13
T3I2166 512,004 7,461,454 464.18 25
T3I2167 512,000 7,461,550 463.92 7
T3I2168 512,050 7,461,600 464.53 13
T3I2169 512,050 7,461,400 464.96 7
T3I2170 512,100 7,461,351 465.97 13
T3I2171 512,100 7,461,451 465.67 19
T3I2172 512,100 7,461,550 465.30 19
T3I2173 512,150 7,461,400 466.38 19
T3I2174 509,405 7,463,555 428.44 13
T3I2175 509,505 7,463,554 429.38 13
T3I2176 511,255 7,463,354 449.76 19

Page 40 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 1: Drill Hole Collar Table (continued)

Diamond Drill Holes Diamond Drill Holes
Hole ID Easting Northing RL (m) EOH (m)
T3DD01 507,550 7,465,101 406.67 22
T3DD02 511,387 7,462,599 452.12 18
T3DD03 512,000 7,461,450 464.12 20.37
T2DD01 511,625 7,457,000 495 29.39
T2DD02 511,815 7,456,500 496 39.42
T2DD03 512,325 7,455,450 505 25

Page 41 of 52

==> picture [122 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole Locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 2: U3O8 values are determined by XRF

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
13 14 1 123
T3I1488
17 24 7 112
9 10 1 100
T3I1489
17 18 1 164
T3I1490 13 17 4 194
T3I1491 9 22 13 211
T3I1499 13 14 1 117
T3I1500 17 19 2 124
T3I1501 18 19 1 165
8 9 1 138
T3I1502
18 19 1 123
11 13 2 123
T3I1507
19 20 1 105
T3I1510 19 25 6 481
T3I1511 9 10 1 121
T3I1512 16 17 1 261
9 10 1 130
T3I1513
16 18 2 105
T3I1514 8 9 1 100
T3I1516 6 8 2 151
T3I1517 7 16 9 124
8 9 1 116
T3I1518
20 21 1 134
T3I1522 22 26 4 121
T3I1523 8 12 4 147
T3I1523 24 25 1 210
9 10 1 125
T3I1524
21 22 1 139
T3I1526 7 13 6 134
T3I1527 6 10 4 141
6 8 2 143
T3I1528
12 13 1 180
T3I1529 6 10 4 218
T3I1530 6 9 3 224
7 8 1 138
T3I1531 12 13 1 133
16 18 2 154
T3I1532 8 10 2 147
T3I1533 9 10 1 117
T3I1534 8 11 3 180
T3I1542 8 17 9 201
T3I1543 9 10 1 165
T3I1544 9 10 1 147
T3I1549 7 10 3 197
T3I1550 4 5 1 108

Page 42 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 2: U3O8 values are determined by XRF (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I1551 7 11 4 160
T3I1552 8 13 5 120
8 14 6 150
T3I1553
17 18 1 134
T3I1554 8 9 1 113
8 9 1 136
T3I1555
18 19 1 104
8 10 2 173
T3I1559
13 21 8 318
T3I1560 8 15 7 278
T3I1561 8 9 1 186
T3I1562 6 8 2 136
T3I1563 6 7 1 111
T3I1564 8 13 5 145
T3I1565 9 16 7 506
T3I1566 8 14 6 122
T3I1567 8 12 4 113
T3I1568 9 10 1 134
T3I1572 15 17 2 272
5 6 1 149
T3I1574 8 9 1 103
14 19 5 365
T3I1575 14 18 4 144
T3I1576 13 14 1 165
8 12 4 109
T3I1577
16 17 1 134
T3I1578 8 18 10 379
T3I1579 8 14 6 213
T3I1580 8 12 4 116
T3I1581 7 11 4 213
T3I1582 8 10 2 131
T3I1583 7 13 6 191
T3I1584 8 14 6 278
T3I1585 9 18 9 187
8 9 1 140
T3I1586
14 16 2 137
T3I1587 16 17 1 166
T3I1588 8 18 10 154
8 9 1 101
T3I1589
14 15 1 108
T3I1590 12 17 5 389
T3I1591 15 16 1 126
T3I1592 19 20 1 154
T3I1594 18 19 1 134

Page 43 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 2: U3O8 values are determined by XRF (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
12 13 1 125
T3I1595
19 20 1 113
T3I1596 17 18 1 169
T3I1598 8 13 5 139
8 10 2 129
T3I1599
13 17 4 350
4 5 1 159
T3I1600
9 19 10 245
T3I1674 7 13 6 136
T3I1689 7 10 3 160
T3I1690 8 12 4 299
T3I1780 15 23 8 226
T3I1782 4 5 1 126
T3I1783 2 3 1 160
T3I1785 1 4 3 133
T3I1786 1 5 4 170
T3I1801 12 13 1 125
T3I1802 8 11 3 315
T3I1803 13 16 3 105
7 9 2 191
T3I1804
12 13 1 113
T3I1805 8 16 8 141
T3I1806 8 14 6 155
T3I1808 7 11 4 238
T3I1809 7 8 1 117
T3I1810 7 10 3 174
T3I1812 8 13 5 235
T3I1813 8 10 2 147
T3I1814 7 11 4 169
T3I1815 7 8 1 177
T3I1816 8 10 2 125
T3I1817 8 12 4 124
T3I1818 6 8 2 185
T3I1820 20 28 8 148
T3I1826 10 11 1 103
19 20 1 124
T3I1827
23 25 2 357
20 21 1 166
T3I1831
27 28 1 324
16 18 2 111
T3I1832
22 31 9 148
T3I1833 20 21 1 100
26 27 1 106
T3I1836
31 36 5 319

Page 44 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 2: U3O8 values are determined by XRF (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
17 20 3 151
T3I1837
23 25 2 578
T3I1841 28 30 2 516
T3I1844 27 30 3 179
T3I1845 7 8 1 101
14 15 1 123
T3I1847
21 24 3 767
T3I1851 22 24 2 170
T3I1856 16 19 3 235
T3I1857 12 16 4 535
2 3 1 203
T3I1858
13 15 2 167
T3I1861 5 10 5 180
T3I1863 2 9 7 392
T3I1864 1 5 4 494
T3I1865 0 7 7 554
T3I1866 1 5 4 135
T3I1868 4 9 5 489
T3I1870 8 9 1 104
T3I1872 12 15 3 375
T3I1875 12 23 11 751
T3I1876 3 4 1 789
2 3 1 123
T3I1877
14 24 10 521
T3I1878 13 14 1 149
T3I1879 10 11 1 165
T3I1880 8 11 3 182
T3I1881 6 9 3 106
T3I1883 3 5 2 150
T3I1885 1 6 5 671
T3I1886 1 2 1 139
T3I1887 1 7 6 144
T3I1888 2 7 5 151
T3I1889 3 6 3 1068
T3I1890 3 6 3 420
T3I1891 6 7 1 216
T3I1892 5 9 4 215
17 24 7 655
T3I1895
27 28 1 182
T3I1896 12 21 9 308
T3I1897 5 7 2 162
T3I1898 4 5 1 101
T3I1899 4 8 4 236
T3I1900 4 7 3 169

Page 45 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 2: U3O8 values are determined by XRF (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I2001 3 5 2 108
T3I2002 4 7 3 233
T3I2003 5 6 1 124
T3I2004 7 9 2 487
T3I2005 8 14 6 224
T3I2006 7 10 3 195
T3I2007 8 10 2 231
T3I2010 6 14 8 281
T3I2011 5 8 3 197
T3I2012 5 7 2 227
T3I2013 4 5 1 108
T3I2014 3 6 3 153
T3I2015 4 6 2 107
T3I2016 4 7 3 186
T3I2017 6 8 2 172
6 12 6 459
T3I2018
15 16 1 119
6 7 1 110
T3I2020
10 11 1 132
T3I2022 6 7 1 114
T3I2023 6 7 1 147
T3I2118 7 11 4 167

Page 46 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 3: eU3O8 values are determined by gamma logging

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I1509 26 28 2 183
T3I1520 20 23 3 106
8 9 1 106
T3I1525
12 17 5 175
T3I1535 17 19 2 137
T3I1536 8 9 1 112
T3I1537 7 9 2 131
13 14 1 112
T3I1547
17 18 1 101
T3I1548 7 8 1 122
19 20 1 113
T3I1603
24 27 3 177
T3I1604 25 26 1 284
T3I1608 19 20 1 112
T3I1609 13 16 3 116
T3I1612 15 16 1 103
T3I1615 25 26 1 101
T3I1620 18 20 2 129
T3I1621 16 17 1 284
T3I1626 18 22 4 177
9 10 1 127
T3I1627
18 19 1 212
T3I1632 8 9 1 112
T3I1636 7 9 2 150
T3I1641 14 17 3 121
8 9 1 110
T3I1644
12 18 6 282
T3I1648 6 9 3 163
T3I1653 10 16 6 248
T3I1654 8 9 1 109
T3I1660 14 18 4 287
T3I1661 12 17 5 415
T3I1663 15 17 2 244
T3I1664 13 15 2 140
T3I1667 8 11 3 135
T3I1669 6 9 3 135
T3I1673 8 9 1 205
8 9 1 101
T3I1675
14 15 1 116
T3I1676 13 16 3 162
T3I1677 18 19 1 185
T3I1678 15 19 4 944
T3I1679 18 19 1 280
T3I1680 19 21 2 192
T3I1681 15 16 1 144

Page 47 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 3: eU3O8 values are determined by gamma logging (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I1683 9 10 1 184
T3I1684 9 11 2 115
T3I1685 7 9 2 114
T3I1688 7 8 1 215
T3I1692 9 17 8 240
T3I1693 9 15 6 137
T3I1694 8 11 3 137
T3I1695 9 10 1 155
T3I1696 8 10 2 111
T3I1697 7 8 1 114
T3I1704 20 21 1 165
T3I1707 24 25 1 139
T3I1708 18 22 4 317
T3I1712 8 10 2 167
T3I1713 9 11 2 148
T3I1716 21 23 2 115
21 27 6 358
T3I1719
30 31 1 212
T3I1721 27 28 1 103
T3I1722 17 24 7 720
T3I1723 19 28 9 543
T3I1724 25 27 2 157
T3I1725 24 27 3 117
20 25 5 257
T3I1726
28 34 6 750
T3I1730 21 26 5 487
T3I1733 31 33 2 281
20 21 1 102
T3I1737 26 27 1 224
32 33 1 117
T3I1738 25 28 3 127
T3I1739 27 30 3 428
T3I1741 18 19 1 175
T3I1743 22 23 1 260
T3I1746 19 21 2 692
T3I1749 12 15 3 721
T3I1751 5 8 3 112
T3I1752 4 5 1 185
T3I1754 3 10 7 215
T3I1755 6 10 4 354
T3I1756 6 10 4 164
T3I1757 5 10 5 144
T3I1758 8 12 4 1094
T3I1759 13 16 3 969

Page 48 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 3: eU3O8 values are determined by gamma logging (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I1761 13 17 4 1495
T3I1765 13 15 2 265
T3I1767 9 11 2 295
T3I1768 6 11 5 598
T3I1770 6 10 4 582
T3I1771 8 9 1 112
T3I1772 4 9 5 686
T3I1773 8 10 2 225
T3I1774 8 9 1 136
T3I1775 10 11 1 151
T3I1777 13 15 2 390
T3I1779 15 20 5 147
T3I1790 2 4 2 145
T3I1791 22 23 1 116
18 19 1 316
T3I1792
22 23 1 175
T3I1795 4 6 2 176
T3I1796 3 4 1 104
T3I1798 3 4 1 146
T3I1874 15 17 2 172
T3I1903 3 4 1 135
T3I1907 5 8 3 112
T3I1908 5 6 1 137
T3I1909 6 7 1 130
T3I1911 7 9 2 158
T3I1912 7 8 1 172
T3I1913 7 8 1 235
T3I1916 7 9 2 199
T3I1917 7 8 1 127
T3I1919 7 9 2 241
T3I1920 7 8 1 137
T3I1925 6 8 2 108
T3I1926 7 10 3 143
T3I1927 7 8 1 103
T3I1929 8 12 4 407
T3I1930 10 11 1 223
T3I1931 8 10 2 804
T3I1936 7 8 1 127
T3I1937 7 8 1 112
T3I1938 8 10 2 242
T3I1940 9 11 2 190
T3I1941 8 11 3 90
T3I1942 7 11 4 539
T3I1943 8 12 4 179

Page 49 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 3: eU3O8 values are determined by gamma logging (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I1944 7 12 5 354
T3I1945 6 13 7 838
T3I1946 6 11 5 685
T3I1947 9 12 3 118
T3I1950 9 10 1 125
T3I1951 9 10 1 687
T3I1952 7 11 4 90
T3I1954 10 11 1 381
T3I1957 9 10 1 104
T3I1959 7 10 3 183
T3I1960 6 7 1 106
T3I1961 4 6 2 114
T3I1962 3 9 6 157
T3I1963 6 7 1 460
T3I1966 4 7 3 167
T3I1967 6 8 2 285
T3I1968 10 13 3 173
T3I1969 6 11 5 157
T3I1970 7 12 5 953
T3I1971 7 8 1 363
T3I1972 3 4 1 279
T3I1974 4 10 6 145
T3I1975 6 8 2 115
T3I1976 5 7 2 128
T3I1978 5 6 1 112
T3I1980 6 9 3 125
T3I1981 6 10 4 177
T3I1983 6 7 1 136
T3I1985 9 12 3 654
T3I1986 5 7 2 116
T3I1987 6 8 2 166
T3I1988 8 13 5 373
T3I1990 4 6 2 183
T3I1991 6 7 1 108
T3I1992 5 9 4 89
T3I1995 6 10 4 341
T3I1999 7 8 1 126
T3I2008 7 8 1 212
T3I2009 7 9 2 351
T3I2024 6 8 2 148
T3I2025 5 6 1 115
T3I2029 4 7 3 163
T3I2030 6 8 2 219
T3I2031 6 8 2 219

Page 50 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 3: eU3O8 values are determined by gamma logging (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I2034 7 8 1 203
T3I2035 6 8 2 234
T3I2036 6 8 2 124
T3I2037 4 5 1 106
T3I2039 5 9 4 328
T3I2040 6 7 1 106
T3I2041 6 8 2 194
T3I2042 7 8 1 207
T3I2043 7 8 1 227
T3I2045 4 7 3 295
T3I2045 11 12 1 120
T3I2046 4 5 1 120
T3I2047 4 6 2 102
T3I2048 4 6 2 405
T3I2052 6 8 2 204
T3I2053 4 5 1 488
T3I2058 5 12 7 1116
T3I2062 3 5 2 130
T3I2063 7 8 1 268
T3I2064 6 10 4 570
T3I2065 7 11 4 282
T3I2066 7 12 5 166
T3I2067 6 7 1 226
T3I2068 4 5 1 115
T3I2073 5 6 1 123
T3I2075 4 7 3 116
T3I2076 5 6 1 115
T3I2079 7 10 3 251
T3I2080 4 16 12 277
T3I2081 4 11 7 229
T3I2082 7 8 1 218
T3I2084 6 7 1 103
T3I2085 4 7 3 137
T3I2085 12 13 1 145
T3I2086 4 12 8 254
0 1 1 373
T3I2089
4 14 10 4142
3 6 3 664
T3I2091
9 10 1 120
T3I2097 7 8 1 133
T3I2099 9 11 2 181
T3I2100 7 11 4 202
T3I2104 10 12 2 119
T3I2108 5 16 11 261

Page 51 of 52

==> picture [123 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Drill Hole locations and >100 ppm eU3O8 and U3O8 Intersections (continued) Table 3: eU3O8 values are determined by gamma logging (continued)

Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3I2111 3 13 10 111
T3I2113 8 17 9 190
T3I2114 7 9 2 166
T3I2115 10 11 1 125
T3I2117 12 14 2 113
T3I2119 6 7 1 114
T3I2121 8 10 2 117
T3I2152 6 9 3 170
T3I2153 6 9 3 161
T3I2155 8 13 5 111
T3I2156 3 4 1 198
T3I2158 3 6 3 344
T3I2161 4 8 4 142
T3I2165 7 8 1 162
T3I2166 6 13 7 133
T3I2171 10 12 2 115
T3I2173 6 7 1 113
T3I2175 4 7 3 128
T3I2176 9 15 6 239
Diamond Drill Holes
Hole ID Depth From (m) Depth To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (ppm)
T3DD01 8 17 9 163
4 6 2 140
T3DD02
11 14 3 590
T3DD03 6 13 7 137
T2DD01 19 23 4 225
T2DD02 16 24 8 885
T2DD03 11 23 12 323

Page 52 of 52

More from DEEP YELLOW LIMITED

Investor Presentation 2026
May 27
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
May 12
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 6
Regulatory Filings 2026
May 6
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 6
Transaction in Own Shares 2026
May 6
Transaction in Own Shares 2026
May 6
Director's Dealing 2026
May 4
Board/Management Information 2026
Apr 30
Interim / Quarterly Report 2026
Apr 27
View all filings →