LOTUS RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2020

Apr 1, 2020

2 April 2020

ASX Announcement

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Exploration Review Confirms Significant Exploration Upside at Kayelekera

HIGHLIGHTS

 Review undertaken of a vast exploration dataset

• Including 1,780 drill holes, surface and airborne geophysics, and surface sampling.

• Lotus has defined exploration targets for near-mine and brownfields exploration regions (Figure 2) - Potential further exploration upside on greenfield targets which will need to be drill tested to prove up.

• High-grade, poorly tested unit, below the open pit remains open to the west and north (Figure 4) - Intercepts up to 9.9m @ 2,020ppm eU3O8 (KR0171 from 144.1m).

• Four priority regional targets identified for exploration (Figure 3):

• Mpata – Karoo sediments with intercepts up to 10m @ 690ppm eU3O8 (MP017 from 19m).

• Livingstonia North – strong radiometric anomalies detected in area adjacent to the 6Mlb Livingstonia Resource.

• Chilumba – strong radiometric anomalies north of Livingstonia North – never drill tested.

• Nthalire South – radiometric anomalies coincident with Karoo sediments

• 2020 exploration planning underway targeting both uranium and other commodities.

The Exploration Review indicates targets have potential metal endowments of 7 -14Mlb of U3O8 within an Exploration Target of 6 - 22Mt at a grade of 300 - 600ppm U3O8 . The potential quality and grade is conceptual in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to estimate a mineral resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in an estimation of a mineral resource. Lotus Managing Director Simon Andrew said: “The Exploration Review further reinforces our view that the Kayelekera Uranium mine is a world class uranium asset. In addition to being fully permitted and having significant plant and infrastructure, there is also potential for a significantly larger resource”.

==> picture [398 x 186] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 - Kayelekera uranium project in Malawi was in production from 2009 to 2014

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

The Kayelekera 730km[2 ] tenement package has a 37.5mLb U3O8 resource (27.1Mt @ 630ppm U3O8) at the Kayelekera uranium mine and associated stockpiles ( announcement 26 March 2020 ).

Significant exploration upside is also present in regional tenements with favourable lithology and radiometric signatures, but where no drilling or sampling has yet been undertaken (e.g. Nthalire South and Chilumba).

For further information please contact:

Simon Andrew Managing Director Ph: 08 9278 2441 Email: info@neoncapital.com.au

For more information visit www.lotusresources.com.au

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Kayelekera Project Overview

The Kayelekera Uranium Project is located in northern Malawi, central Africa, 52km west (by road) of the major town of Karonga (Figure 2 below).

Lotus Resources holds the Kayelekera Mining Licence (ML 152) and five Exclusive Prospecting Licences (EPL’s 489, 418, 417, 225, and 502) for a total of 730km[2] that are coincident with Karoo sedimentary basins, sharing similar generic characteristics to that which hosts the Kayelekera deposit. These basins host several defined targets and are considered highly prospective for further Uranium discoveries.

Lotus has identified five key target regions based upon a review and analysis of previous field work including airborne and ground-based geophysics, mapping, drilling and trenching. These five key target regions consist of the Kayelekera, Mpata, Nthalire South, Chilumba, and Livingstonia North Projects ( Figure 2 and Figure 3).

==> picture [362 x 363] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 Exploration Targets

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Exploration Targets Summary

An Exploration Target for Lotus’ Malawian tenements is summarised in Table 1 below. The Exploration Target only focussed on regions which had sufficient drilling and sampling data (either within the project itself to lead to an informed target); or had adjacent drilling information next to the project (e.g. Livingstonia North).

Based upon a review of the significant exploration data from site (some 1,780 drill holes for 120,000m and 98,500 1m composite eU3O8 samples), 3D modelling of available data, and analysis of nearby deposits adjoining Lotus’ tenements; an Exploration Target of between 6 and 21 Mt at a grade of between 300 and 600ppm U3O8 has been derived from the near-mine and brownfields exploration regions. This indicates a potential metal endowment of between 7 and 14Mlb of U3O8 (refer to body of text for additional details). Note that the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature there has been insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource and it is uncertain of further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.

The Nthalire South and Chilumba Prospects, which feature mapped Karoo sediments and strong airborne radiometric anomalies, were not included in the Exploration Target as they had no drilling or sampling data available.

Table 1: Lotus Malawi Exploration Target

==> picture [469 x 113] intentionally omitted <==

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

Tonnage
Grade Range Contained Metal
Range
Tenement Project Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Mt Mt ppm ppm U3O8 Kt U3O8 Kt U3O8 MLb U3O8 MLb
ML 152 Kayelekera 1 5 400 1,200 1.2 2.0 2.6 4.4
EPL417 Mpata 2 9 200 400 0.8 1.8 1.8 4.0
EPL418 Livingstonia North 3 8 300 450 1.4 2.4 3.0 5.3
Total 6 21 300 600 3 6 7 14
----- End of picture text -----

The projects have a combined exploration data set that included 1,788 drill-holes for 118,159m with associated chemical and down-hole gamma eU3O8 analysis (26 of these holes being in ground previously dropped by Paladin). The bulk of the drilling is within the 6km trend of the mine corridor (1,582 drill holes for 88,939m), with the remaining 206 holes for 29,221m targeting regional exploration. Significant drill intercepts are summarised in Appendix 1.

Regional targeting was greatly aided by a 2008 radiometric survey over two broad regions - Kayelekera and Chilumba (Figure 3 below). This survey is guiding exploration with analysis of the radiometric signature (K, U, and Th bands) combined with mapping and interpretation of the sedimentary units allowing for target generation. Additionally, opportunity exists for exploration to be undertaken under areas under surficial cover. Uranium mineralisation is typically targeted in the arkose units of Karoo Member sediments; with higher-grade mineralisation at Kayelekera associated with arkose unites adjacent to fault zones.

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 469] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 – Key prospect regions overlain on regional radiometric anomalies and 2008 detailed anomalies (U-channel).

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Kayelekera Region

Later-stage drilling at Kayelekera (Figure 4) defined a high-grade unit that is open to the north and west. This unit includes significant grade x thickness (‘U3O8 ppm x m)’) intercepts up to 17,800 gm (29m @ 613ppm eU3O8 in KR0152 from 129m). Intercepts of up to 11m @ 2,000ppm eU3O8 (KR0171 from 144.1m) are also present (refer Appendix 1 for significant intercepts). This high-tenor unit is typically > 120m below surface and has only been sparsely drilled. 3D modelling of the unit indicates that it continues to the south-west and potentially to the north and will form the focus of future near-mine exploration.

The hills to the east of the mine-site are also considered prospective for uranium, rare-earth metals and rutile, associated with granitoids and late-stage pegmatite swarms. Results from exploration undertaken in this region are still being collated and will be announced once finalised.

Based upon the average grade endowment of the basal arkose unit, and the geometry of the open ground along trend of the currently defined mineralisation (Figure 5), an Exploration Target estimated (Table 1) has been estimated of between 1 to 5 Mt at a grade of between 400 to 1,200ppm eU3O8 for a potential endowment range of between 2.5 to 4Mlb of contained U3O8.

==> picture [469 x 291] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 – Kayelekera Section 8896100: Showing Basal zone intercepts (thickness and grade – U3O8 ppm). Note 2 x vertical exaggeration

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [449 x 423] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 – Kayelekera basal Zone: Grade x Thickness intercepts (U3O8 ppm x m) below 120m downhole at Kayelekera – central pit area

Chilumba and Livingstonia North Prospects

The Livingstonia and Chilumba prospects are south-east of Kayelekera between the town of Livingstonia and the western shore of Lake Malawi (Figure 2).

The Chilumba Prospect (Figure 6) is defined by a cluster of six airborne radiometric anomalies in the Chilumba area, with follow-up ground surveys confirming a 3km long anomaly associated with the contact between the Karoo sediments and the basement, none of the anomalies have been

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

drill tested. No drilling has been undertaken over these anomalies; however, the region is considered prospective for uranium mineralisation.

The Livingstonia-North anomaly is directly along-trend of the historical Livingstonia uranium resource, with a JORC 2004 endowment of 6Mlb eU3O8 (8.3Mt @ 325ppm eU3O8 above a 150ppm U3O8 lower cut off - refer Resource Star announcement 22 June 2010). Drilling at the northern end of the deposit supports a continuation of mineralisation onto the Lotus tenements, with a potential 3km trend extent indicated (Figure 7). No drilling has yet been undertaken at Livingstonia North, and this region is considered highly prospective for additional mineralisation.

==> picture [470 x 333] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6 – Livingstonia and Chilumba Regions Showing geological mapping (left) and airborne radiometrics (U channel) (right)

Based upon Livingstonia North being interpreted as a northerly continuation of the existing Livingstonia uranium deposit, the strongly evident airborne uranium anomaly present (refer Figure 7) and historical drilling at Livingstonia being open on the most northern line (e.g. 11.8m @ 517ppm eU3O8 in hole LBPE101- refer Resource Star announcement 28 January 2011) an Exploration Target

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

estimated (Table 1) has been estimated of between 3 to 8Mt at a grade of between 300 to 600ppm eU3O8 for a potential endowment range of between 3 to 5Mlb of contained U3O8 .

As there is currently no drilling or sampling data over the Chilumba Prospects, an Exploration target has not yet been defined for this region.

==> picture [289 x 261] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7 – Historical Livingstonia Region. Showing target regions indicated in airborne radiometrics (Uranium).

Mpata Project

The Mpata Project consists of the three prospective regions, Mpata, Swebe and Mwapu. The Mpata Prospect represents the largest cluster of radiometric anomalies outside Kayelekera (Figure 8) with several high priority anomalies associated with arkose units identified over a 3km strike length of Karoo sediments. A total of 76 drill holes have been undertaken histroically within the prospect area for a total of 9,070m. The drilling has defined several small, narrow bodies of low to medium grade mineralisation with karoo sediments. A total of 23 of the holes encountered grades in excess of 250 ppm eU3O8. Significant intercepts include 10m at 690 ppm (MP017 from 19m) and 5m at 410ppm (MP031 from 23m). Additional summary intercepts are shown in Appendix 1.

Karroo sediments continue to the south of Mpata at the Swebe Prospect with 14 drill holes for 1,553m drilled. Drilling in this area resulted in generally lower tenor results than at the Mpata Prospect (Figure 8).

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

The Mwapu Prospect (Figure 8) covers an outlier of Karoo sediments between the Maylekera and Mpata Prospects. This outlier contains mapped Karoo arkose and has an associated moderate airborne anomaly. No drilling has yet been undertaken on the prospect and follow-up reconnaissance work is required.

Mineralisation appears to be open along strike at Mpata, with approximately 600m of trend untested, and is open at depth. Deeper drilling would target potential high-grade mineralisation suitable for either in-situ-leach or underground style mining. Recent structural re-interpretations with regard to the genesis of uranium mineralisation and late-stage faulting, potentially acting as a focal region for higher-grade mineralised fluids, indicated that both prospect areas are appropriate for assessment in the coming field programs.

Based upon the existing drill data over the Mpata and Swebe Prospects (featuring 50 to 200m drill spacing), along with the intersected mineralisation (refer Appendix 2), a 3D exploration model was constructed (Figure 9). The model was based upon intercepts > 200ppm eU3O8 over > 1m downhole thickness, with grade statistics averaged over the modelled regions used as a guide. The Exploration Target (Table 1) has been estimated between 2 to 9Mt at a grade of between 200 to 400ppm eU3O8 for a potential endowment range of between 2 to 4Mlb of contained U3O8.

==> picture [494 x 241] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8 – Mpata Region Targeting: Showing geological mapping (left) and airborne radiometrics (U channel) (right) with significant U3O8 intercepts (grade x thickness - eU3O8 ppm x metres)

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [448 x 421] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9 – Mpata Prospect: showing drilling and 3D exploration model

Nthalire South

The Nthalire South Prospect is approximately 28km south of the Kayelekera mine site and is hosted in similar Karoo stratigraphy. The area hosts a moderate airborne radiometric anomaly which is interpreted to be related to a combination of basal arkose units and late-stage structures (Figure 10). No drilling or sampling has yet been undertaken on the Prospect; however, the project is interpreted to have favourable stratigraphic and structural setting for uranium mineralisation.

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [474 x 501] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10 - Nthalire South Prospect: showing interpreted geology over airborne radiometrics

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Exploration Activities

Exploration activities planned to test the Exploration Targets will follow a stepwise process at all prospect regions. Initial activities will focus on additional mapping, trenching, surface sampling and surface radiometric surveys. This will be supported by the ongoing review and compilation of historical exploration data as well as additional analysis of the disequilibrium effect around highgrade mineralisation at Mpata. Based upon ground truthing and mapping; it is envisaged that drilling activities would be undertaken at Kayelekera to test the western continuation of the highgrade basal zone (RC and diamond); diamond core follow up drilling at Mpata to test for radioactive disequilibrium; and maiden RC/diamond drilling at Livingstonia North to test for continuation of the Livingstonia uranium deposit. Pending access and permitting, it is envisaged that these activities would commence in Q3 2020.

Competent Persons’ Statements

The information in this document that relates to Exploration Data and Exploration Target is based on information provided by Mr. Neil Inwood, who is a Fellow of the AUSIMM. Mr Inwood is a consulting geologist and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity undertaken to qualify as Competent Persons as defined in the 2012 edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Mr. Inwood has consented to the inclusion of this information in this document in the form and context in which it appears. An entity associated with Mr Inwood has shares in Lotus Resources Ltd.

About Lotus Resources

Lotus Resources Limited (LOT:ASX) is a minerals exploration and development company. The Company recently acquired a 65% interest in the Kayelekera Uranium Project in Malawi. The project is held via a 76.5% holding in Lily resources Pty Ltd. Kayelekera hosts a high-grade resource with an existing open pit mine and demonstrated excellent metallurgical recoveries (87.5%) having historically produced over 10.9MIb of uranium between 2009 and 2014. Lotus’s owned asset is the Hylea Cobalt Project in the Fifield District of NSW. The Project represents a significant cobalt, platinum, nickel and scandium exploration target in both scale and grade potential, as demonstrated by the Company’s 2018 drilling program.

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1: Table of Significant Intercepts

==> picture [496 x 547] intentionally omitted <==

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

PROJECT Drill N E RL EOH Dip Azi mFrom Interval eU3O8
Hole m m ppm
MMG Zone 36s
KAYELEKERA B100 8896090 576337 958.83 110 -90 0 99.9 1.6 266
KAYELEKERA B105 8896142 576337.6 958.59 110 -90 0 100.3 4.7 247
KAYELEKERA B125 8896256 576334.9 935.39 111 -90 0 99.9 5.4 429
KAYELEKERA BB65 8896078 576369.8 951.11 112 -90 0 110 1.5 494
KAYELEKERA BB96 8896103 576273.1 960.33 112 -90 0 100.5 1 265
KAYELEKERA DS15 8896233 576346.7 940.66 123 -90 0 102 2.8 318
KAYELEKERA DS16 8896273 576319.5 934.58 108 -90 0 99.9 1.7 211
KAYELEKERA DS35 8896138 576282.6 957.11 105 -90 0 99.9 3.2 246
KAYELEKERA DS4 8896187 576369.2 951.47 145 -90 0 99.9 1.8 222
103 5.5 294
KAYELEKERA EX019 8895698 575852.5 963.33 126 -90 0 111.63 1.85 246
KAYELEKERA EX078 8896300 575548.2 967.33 132 -90 0 127.19 2.25 344
KAYELEKERA EX088 8896400 575497.4 966.01 126 -90 0 115.88 1.55 499
118.58 1.7 444
KAYELEKERA EX100 8896484 575535.2 962.02 132 -90 0 122.99 3.45 302
KAYELEKERA KA0012 8895850 576075 974.94 111 -90 0 99.99 6.7 1599
KAYELEKERA KA0013 8895848 576125.1 971.83 107 -90 0 99.96 7.05 506
KAYELEKERA KA0023 8895900 575999.9 972.88 105 -90 0 99.95 1.5 1096
KAYELEKERA KA0035 8895951 576025.9 974.52 113 -90 0 99.95 10.35 1327
KAYELEKERA KA0036 8895950 576075.7 972.22 109 -90 0 100.6 6.05 311
KAYELEKERA KA0047 8896000 576000.3 969.4 106 -90 0 99.96 1.9 605
KAYELEKERA KA0048 8895999 576051.4 971.21 110 -90 0 99.97 7.65 468
KAYELEKERA KA0054 8896046 576075.6 966.63 112 -90 0 100.95 1.35 218
KAYELEKERA KR0120 8895870 575824 954.75 150 -90 0 130.02 1.15 387
140.07 2.05 286
142.17 2.5 562
145.67 1 262
KAYELEKERA KR0122 8895941 575990 971.94 180 -90 0 99.99 4.45 855
KAYELEKERA KR0123 8896026 575948.9 955.3 168 -90 0 139.42 1.3 207
143.12 5.4 588
KAYELEKERA KR0125 8896120 575748.1 948.05 162 -90 0 132.19 6.9 1769
KAYELEKERA KR0126 8896073 575794 944 162 -90 0 102.17 1.25 232
107.62 1.05 223
133.37 6.5 1163
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [496 x 561] intentionally omitted <==

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

PROJECT Drill N E RL EOH Dip Azi mFrom Interval eU3O8
Hole m m ppm
150.32 1.8 202
KAYELEKERA KR0127 8896224 575822.9 943.45 168 -90 0 144.53 1.5 307
KAYELEKERA KR0128 8896375 575675.9 958.2 168 -90 0 145.65 2.55 410
KAYELEKERA KR0132 8896256 575485.4 960.42 114 -90 0 102.14 1.5 445
KAYELEKERA KR0143 8895896 576005.9 973.27 198 -90 0 100.02 3.15 743
170.02 3.1 384
KAYELEKERA KR0144 8895900 576050.9 975.89 114 -90 0 99.99 9.85 992
109.89 2.15 236
KAYELEKERA KR0145 8896081 576031.5 962.3 198 -90 0 100 3.3 557
107.25 1.1 252
148.7 1.75 261
150.9 1.5 211
152.65 1.1 204
155.95 2.35 208
158.35 1.65 226
166 4 343
170.6 1.85 303
173.75 1.85 211
KAYELEKERA KR0146 8895850 576149.6 968.01 198 -90 0 99.95 4.1 745
171.8 3.05 375
KAYELEKERA KR0150 8895725 576124.9 962.13 192 -90 0 134.47 3.65 656
8895900 576121.1 971.61 198 -90 0 102.9 3.4 446
106.35 2.25 252
109 1.05 202
137.95 1.9 267
152.8 1.4 203
156.1 3.2 343
161.45 3.25 405
191.8 1.65 241
KAYELEKERA KR0152 8896017 575832.1 949.8 192 -90 0 108.98 2.2 229
111.28 1.2 205
115.83 2.85 332
118.93 1.15 231
120.38 1 216
133.53 3 273
140.33 8.5 1691
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [496 x 560] intentionally omitted <==

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

PROJECT Drill N E RL EOH Dip Azi mFrom Interval eU3O8
Hole m m ppm
189.28 1.8 212
KAYELEKERA KR0153 8895947 576099.7 970.9 204 -90 0 102.4 1 210
103.45 1.6 211
157.45 4.15 878
164.45 1.85 276
176.9 1.7 253
179.8 2.55 257
KAYELEKERA KR0154 8895975 576025.8 973.13 204 -90 0 99.95 5.8 686
155.65 3.15 661
KAYELEKERA KR0154 159.8 1.2 460
171.9 1.1 219
KAYELEKERA KR0155 8896125 576000 950.25 198 -90 0 134.67 1 340
156.97 6.8 800
168.82 1.8 211
181.27 1.35 200
KAYELEKERA KR0157 8895857 576192 964.01 198 -90 0 99.96 3.2 532
149.51 3.5 345
170.96 2.65 308
KAYELEKERA KR0158 8895934 576172.1 954.45 192 -90 0 143.02 2.35 267
145.42 1.75 393
KAYELEKERA KR0159 8895896 576162 965.14 198 -90 0 151.13 3.95 365
172.98 1.95 220
KAYELEKERA KR0165 8896034 576026.6 967.38 192 -90 0 99.98 2.05 627
161.08 1.4 335
168.88 4.15 479
173.18 4.3 615
KAYELEKERA KR0166 8896576 576007.4 918.51 162 -90 0 122 1.3 335
KAYELEKERA KR0171 8896076 575951.2 949.9 198 -90 0 118.99 1.45 284
138.54 1.85 264
143.79 10.65 1888
KAYELEKERA KR0174 8896292 576081.2 921.82 186 -90 0 127.52 1 295
KAYELEKERA KR0175 8895778 576226.5 951.2 192 -90 0 150.43 4.45 413
KAYELEKERA KR0176 8895775 576120.6 960.21 180 -90 0 137.4 2.6 716
141.95 3.15 360
156.7 2.85 254
KAYELEKERA RD0006 8896199 575649.4 958.31 138 -90 0 130.92 4.85 921
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [496 x 560] intentionally omitted <==

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

PROJECT Drill N E RL EOH Dip Azi mFrom Interval eU3O8
Hole m m ppm
KAYELEKERA RD0007 8896250 575649.6 960.06 144 -90 0 135.68 4.1 490
KAYELEKERA RD0014 8896151 575699.7 952.7 181 -90 0 131.04 6.95 867
138.09 1.9 205
141.04 1 200
KAYELEKERA RD0035 8896152 575799.3 944.86 152 -90 0 140.01 3.7 546
KAYELEKERA RD0043 8896100 575849 944.48 156 -90 0 142 4.5 1416
KAYELEKERA RD0045 8896446 575848.2 958.59 180 -90 0 157.2 2.15 263
KAYELEKERA RD0060 8896207 575942.7 933.15 180 -90 0 142.36 3.9 377
KAYELEKERA RD0067 8896643 575948.2 907.02 114 -90 0 101.94 1.9 238
KAYELEKERA RD0075 8895848 576055.6 975.61 126 -90 0 100.85 6.45 1069
KAYELEKERA RD0102 8896350 575549.1 968.41 144 -90 0 130.97 2.95 386
KAYELEKERA RD0104 8896451 575548.7 964.58 150 -90 0 130.53 1.35 303
KAYELEKERA RD0105 8896250 575599.8 963.61 150 -90 0 129.45 5.2 756
KAYELEKERA RD0106 8896151 575649.4 954.69 132 -90 0 124.33 2.65 422
JUMA JM010 8892329 578306 875.85 120 -60 42.52 56.73 1.45 240
60.83 3.7 317
JUMA JM027 8891052 578787 866.94 204 -70 267.52 193.21 1.1 366
KM_SOUTH SKA008 8893701 577562 862 138 -55 42.52 61.8 1.2 234
66.3 1.65 396
KM_SOUTH SKA011 8893444 577653 843 126 -65 217.52 32.4 1.25 267
MPATA MP016 8902817 588208 592 71 -70 227.52 23.92 1.8 417
32.52 1.25 439
34.77 1.4 248
36.22 1.05 337
MPATA MP017 8903274 587716.1 619 61 -65 267.52 18.52 9.85 699
MPATA MP022 8900837 588149 540.69 101 -90 0 31.93 1.25 259
35.98 1.15 203
MPATA MP025 8902098 588588.2 568 120 -70 257.52 65.72 1.1 243
67.07 1 241
MPATA MP031 8903326 587661.9 615.5 126 -55 227.52 22.95 1.5 246
24.55 4.3 447
29.85 1.85 252
MPATA MP032 8903401 587771.2 624 156 -60 227.52 108.6 1.4 259
127.1 1.3 208
MPATA MP034 8902868 588071.6 605 54 -65 247.52 23.69 1 259
MPATA MP035 8902786 588168.6 597 84 -65 247.52 17.07 1.45 1115
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [496 x 307] intentionally omitted <==

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

PROJECT Drill N E RL EOH Dip Azi mFrom Interval eU3O8
Hole m m ppm
23.32 1.4 261
24.77 2.7 1061
MPATA MP038 8902765 588295.8 584 138 -60 247.52 56.16 4.9 391
MPATA MP039 8902876 588253.3 582 138 -60 257.52 48.26 1.8 432
MPATA MP040 8902928 588223.4 585 102 -65 247.52 47.2 1.9 349
MPATA MP042 8902888 588126.9 594 96 -65 247.52 24.51 1.1 286
MPATA MP046 8903288 587679.2 617 102 -55 227.52 8.86 1 268
14.01 2.75 355
MPATA MP049 8902722 588105.3 610 96 -60 247.52 14.3 2.75 650
17.5 1.05 227
20.9 1.4 400
MPATA MP055 8903419 587693 620 127 -90 0 89.58 1.05 905
MPATA MP067 8902306 588580 567 109 -90 0 76.02 1.3 277
MPATA MP068 8901941 588532 561 121 -90 0 48.4 1.2 338
50.85 1.8 349
MPATA MP074 8902343 588656 572 115 -90 0 101.83 1.3 485
MPATA MP075 8900185 587455 529 67 -90 0 33.68 1.2 234
MPATA MP083 8902889 588292 583 117 -65 247.52 59.25 1.15 261
71.7 1.7 248
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: JORC Code, 2012 Edition

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

==> picture [533 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

Sampling		Nature and quality of		The drilling is a combination of diamond core (“DD”) and
techniques		sampling (eg cut		percussion (“P”) drill holes.
		channels, random		Samples were split to 3cm long pieces of 100g to maximum
		chips, or specific		300g weight. Each of these core pieces was numbered and
		specialised industry		weighed. The gamma radiation of each piece was measured
		standard		by a SPP2 scintillometer over a 30 second period in a lead
		measurement tools		castle and measurements recorded in the database.
		appropriate to the		Drillholes were downhole gamma logged by a Geotron R3000
		minerals under		logger and a R300 probe from Geotron Systems (Pty) Ltd in
		investigation, such as		South Africa
		down hole gamma		For 2005 drilling: all holes were geologically logged, and down
		sondes, or handheld		hole gamma logged. Equivalent uranium values were
		XRF instruments, etc).		calculated for each 5cm interval. Samples were collected
		These examples should		over a sample length of 40cm, each sample weighing approx.
		not be taken as		2.5-3kg. Samples were packed and sealed in airtight bags. Ten
		limiting the broad		samples were combined into larger bags and all samples were
		meaning of sampling.		frozen on site and later transferred into a freezer at PDN’s
		Include reference to		office in Karonga. Five 500 litre chest freezers were acquired,
		measures taken to		and these were filled with a total of 854 individual samples.
		ensure sample		For later 2005 to 2013 drilling: RC samples were collected via a
		representivity and the		cone splitter at 1m intervals. All samples were collected and
		appropriate calibration		contained in poly-weave or plastic bags.
		of any measurement		The nominal drill diameter was 5 inches and all drill samples
		tools or systems used.		were bagged from the cyclone and weighed to provide some
		Aspects of the		assessment of the average drill sample recoveries. Majority of
		determination of		drill intervals weighed achieved a better than 80% recovery
		mineralisation that are		which was considered to be good.
		Material to the Public		All sampling was carried out under PDN’s sampling protocols
		Report.		and QA/QC procedures as per industry best practice.
		In cases where		All samples were riffle split into 80/20 proportions. Larger rejects
		‘industry standard’		(>20kg) were stored on site if they appeared mineralised or
		work has been done		gave a count value of larger than 750cps on the
		this would be relatively		scintillometer. All smaller (approx. <5kg) samples were bagged
		simple (eg ‘reverse		and stored in the Karonga office of PDN for future reference.
		circulation drilling was		A further 200-500g sub-sample was precision riffle split from the
		used to obtain 1 m		5kg sample for assay of U3O8. Certified standards, duplicates
		samples from which 3		and blanks were also inserted in the sample batches.
		kg waspulverised to

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	produce a 30 g charge for fire 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) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	 	All samples analysed using pressed powder XRF methods in either Setpoint Laboratory in Johannesburg or ALS Chemex Laboratory in Brisbane Samples were driven by PDN personnel to Lilongwe and air freighted by South African Airways to Johannesburg
Drilling techniques	 Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	  	The drilling using combination of DD, P (historical) and RC drilling. All RC drilling has utilised Warman 250 RC rig mounted on a Unimog truck supported by separate truck mounted Atlas Copco 3000 psi compressor to provide additional air capacity and a 9 ton Mercedes Benz flatbed support ruck with drill bit size of 5 inches. Diamond drilling has utilised conventional wireline drill rig with core size of HQ.
Drill sample	 Method of recording		No core recovery information was available.
recovery	and assessing core and		For RC drilling, the nominal drill hole size was 5 inches and all
	chip sample recoveries		drill samples were bagged from the cyclone and weighed to
	and results assessed.		provide some assessment of the average drilling sample
	 Measures taken to		recoveries. The average weight of the 1,978 metres checked
	maximise sample		was 25.04kg per sample against an expected 29kg for 100%
	recovery and ensure		recovery. The majority of poor recovery samples were within
	representative nature		the first metre of the drill hole, with these removed, the
	of the samples.		average weight was 25.25kg for an average recovery of 87%.
	 Whether a relationship		The vast majority of drill intervals weighed achieved a better
	exists between sample		then 80% recovery and this is considered to be a very good
	recovery and grade		result.
	and whether sample		All RC drilling is conducted to industry best practice and PDN
	bias may have		QA/QC protocols whereby the hole is cleaned at the end of
	occurred due to		everymetre interval byraisingthe bit slightlyand blowingout

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.		the hole before drilling the next metre, and ensuring water ingress into the hole whilst drilling is minimised. No relationship between sample recovery and grade has been observed; studies to date show no correlation exists.
Logging	 Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.  Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.  The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	   	All holes have been geologically logged (RC on 1m intervals, and DD on 1m intervals or to geological contacts) with recording of lithology, grain size and distribution, sorting, roundness, alteration, oxidation state, and colour, and stored in the database. All holes were logged to a level of detail sufficient to support Mineral Resource estimation, and metallurgical investigations. No routine geotechnical or structural data has been logged or recorded. A limited number of geotechnical holes were drilled by CEGB and these were structurally logged in full. Oxidation, colour, alteration, roundness, sorting, sphericity, alteration and mineralisation are logged qualitatively. All other values are logged quantitatively. All holes (core and chips) have been photographed and stored in a database. All photographs are of wet samples only. All holes have been logged over their entire length (100%) including any mineralised intersections.
Sub-sampling	 If core, whether cut or		All sampling was carried out using PDN’s sampling protocols
techniques and	sawn and whether		and QA/QC procedures as per industry best practice.
sample	quarter, half or all core		All RC samples were riffle split into 80/20 proportions. Larger
preparation	taken.  If non-core, whether		rejects (>20kg) samples were stored on site if they appeared mineralised or gave a count value of larger than 750cps on
	riffled, tube sampled,		the scintillometer. All smaller (approx. <5kg) samples were
	rotary split, etc and		bagged and stored in the Karonga office of PDN for future
	whether sampled wet		reference.
	or dry.		A further 200-500g sample was precision riffle split from the 5kg
	 For all sample types,		sample for assay of U3O8. Certified standards, duplicates and
	the nature, quality and		blanks were also inserted within the sample batches.
	appropriateness of the		All samples went through pressed powder XRF analysis in either
	sample preparation		Setpoint Lab in Johannesburg or ALS Chemex Lab in Brisbane.
	technique.		Samples were driven by PDN personnel to Lilongwe and air
	 Quality control		freighted by South African Airways to Johannesburg.
	procedures adopted		Core samples were split to 3cm long pieces of 100g to
	for all sub-sampling		maximum 300g weight. Each of these core pieces was
	stages to maximise		numbered and weighed. Thegamma radiation of eachpiece

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation			Commentary
	representivity of samples.  Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.  Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	 	was measured by a SPP2 scintillometer over a 30 second period in a lead castle and measured data is used stored in the database. In 2005, equivalent uranium values were calculated for each 5cm interval from gamma log. Samples were collected over a sample length of 40cm, each sample weighing approx. 2.5- 3km. Samples were packed and sealed in airtight bags. Ten samples were combined into larger bags and all samples were frozen on site and later transferred into freezer at PDN’s office in Karonga. Five 500 litre chest freezers were acquired and these were filled with total of 854 individual samples. From 2006 all drill holes have been routinely logged using calibrated downhole radiometric logging equipment – from 2008 this equipment was owned and calibrated by the company. Due to the disequilibrium identified in Oxidised Arkose material, all Oxidised Arkose samples (along with representative Reduces Arkose and Mudstone) were sent for laboratory analysis.
Quality of assay	 The nature, quality		It is known that CEGB drill core was assayed by X-ray
data and	and appropriateness		fluorescence methods, historical reports available indicate
laboratory tests	of the assaying and		that the sampling and analysis of this core was carried out in a
	laboratory procedures		manner comparable to modern standards.
	used and whether the		The XRF data was used for comparison with the down-hole
	technique is		logging of radiometric values, particularly in an effort to
	considered partial or		determine the disequilibrium characteristics of the different
	total.		arkose units. This	information covers casing attenuation factors,
	 For geophysical tools,		as the holes were logged inside rods where practicable,
	spectrometers,		instrument dead	time and deconvolution. In all cases the
	handheld XRF		factors applied by the CEGB were found to be appropriate by
	instruments, etc, the		Wrights (Wrights,	1989). However there is no mention of either
	parameters used in		Water Factor (Hole Size) or Formation Factors being applied to
	determining the		the logged values, this may be because they have been
	analysis including		considered as not being significant or may have been
	instrument make and		accounted for when subsequently applying disequilibrium
	model, reading times,		factor (Barrett, 2005).
	calibrations factors		Deconvolution and disequilibrium factors for the more recent
	applied and their		PDN drilling were determined by Barrett Geophysical from XRF
	derivation, etc.		analysis of RC drill samples and radiometric down hole logging
	 Nature of quality		undertaken by PDN. It is the opinion of author that these
	control procedures		factors are acceptable and are able to be applied to the
	adopted (eg		current and historical radiometrically derived U3O8grades to
	standards, blanks,		produce a unified dataset with XRF derivedgrades.

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [533 x 567] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
duplicates, external  Field QAQC procedures include the insertion of both field
laboratory checks) and duplicates and certified reference ‘standards’. Assay results
whether acceptable have been satisfactory and demonstrate an acceptable level
levels of accuracy (ie of accuracy and precision. Laboratory QAQC involves the use
lack of bias) and of internal certified reference standards, blanks, splits and
precision have been replicates. Analysis of these results also demonstrates an
established. acceptable level of precision and accuracy.
Verification of  The verification of  Significant intersections were visually field verified by company
sampling and significant and consultant geologists.
assaying intersections by either  Assay values that were below detection limit were adjusted to
independent or equal half of the detection limit value.
alternative company
personnel.
 The use of twinned
holes.
 Documentation of
primary data, data
entry procedures, data
verification, data
storage (physical and
electronic) protocols.
 Discuss any
adjustment to assay
data.
Location of data  Accuracy and quality  All drill hole collars were surveyed with DGPS equipment in the
points of surveys used to MMG Zone 36 South grid. Historical collars were also surveyed
locate drill holes (collar where collar identity is recognisable. All holes were drilled
and down-hole vertical. Down-hole probe surveys have been undertaken on
surveys), trenches, most of the holes to validate the down-hole measurements.
mine workings and  Topographic surveys have been carried out several times.
other locations used in
Mineral Resource
estimation.
 Specification of the
grid system used.
 Quality and adequacy
of topographic control.
Data spacing and  Data spacing for  Initial exploration by various operators prior to 1990 was mostly
distribution reporting of designed for regional exploration designed for coal and
Exploration Results. limestone exploration.
 Whether the data
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [533 x 556] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
spacing and  CEGB holes targeted uranium mineralisation and were mostly
distribution is sufficient drilled on nominal 50m by 50m spacing.
to establish the degree
of geological and
grade continuity
appropriate for the
Mineral Resource and
Ore Reserve
estimation
procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
 Whether sample
compositing has been
applied.
Orientation of  Whether the  Drilling sections are orientated perpendicular to the strike of
data in relation to orientation of the mineralised host rocks at Kayelekera. All holes are drilled
geological sampling achieves vertical, which is approximately perpendicular to the flat dip
structure unbiased sampling of of the stratigraphy.
possible structures and  No orientation-based sampling bias has been identified in the
the extent to which data.
this is known,
considering the deposit
type.
 If the relationship
between the drilling
orientation and the
orientation of key
mineralised structures
is considered to have
introduced a sampling
bias, this should be
assessed and reported
if material.
Sample security  The measures taken to  Chain of custody was managed by PDN.
ensure sample  Samples were driven by PDN personnel to Lilongwe and air
security. freighted by South African Airways to Johannesburg and
samples analysed at Setpoint Lab.
Audits or reviews  The results of any  Data was validated by PDN whilst loading into database. Any
audits or reviews of errors within the data are returned to site geologist for
sampling techniques validation.
and data.
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status  Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.  The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.   	The Project is located in Malawi, in East Africa. The Kayelekera deposit is covered by a single licence, Mining Licence (ML) 152, of 55.5 square kilometres granted on 9th April 2007 for an initial term of fifteen years renewable for further 10-year periods. The current term expires on 9th April 2022. The tenements are in good standing and no known impediments exist. Name License Area (km2) Kayelekera ML 152 55.5 Nthalire EPL 489 137.04 Uliwa EPL 418 348.8 Rukuru EPL 417 146.3 Mapambo EPL 225 14 Juma-Miwanga EPL 502 28.65 Total 6 730.3
	Name	License
	Kayelekera	ML 152	55.5
	Nthalire	EPL 489	137.04
	Uliwa	EPL 418	348.8
	Rukuru	EPL 417	146.3
	Mapambo	EPL 225	14
	Juma-Miwanga	EPL 502	28.65
	Total	6	730.3
Exploration done by other parties  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.     	The ML152 has been previously explored by numerous companies. In 1983 The Central Electricity Generating Board (“CEGB”) were granted two Reconnaissance Licences, RL004 and RL005. In April 1984 RL004 was converted to and Exclusive Prospecting Licence, EPL002, which was renewed in April 1987 as EPL 002 R1, and again in 1990 for two years as EPL 002/90 R2, covering a reduced area. RL 005 was renewed in both 1984 and 1985 before being dropped due to poor results. In 1983 regional gamma-ray spectrometry was carried out and identified 12 anomalies for ground follow-up. Surface investigations, including geological mapping and scintillometer surveys, of the known mineralisation at Kayelekera were carried out. In 1984 further ground surveys were completed delineating targets for more detailed investigation. A limited drill program (510m) was undertaken at Kayelekera to investigate mineralisation at depth, whilst trenches were dug to study near surface occurrences. In 1985 a total of 3,994m of drilling was completed outlininga deposit containing7,500t of U3O8. Heliborne

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [525 x 566] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
surveys (magnetics, gamma-ray spectrometry for U, Th
and K were completed and identified some new targets
and better defined existing target areas for ground
follow-up and drilling in 1986.
 During 1986, a further 3,821m of drilling was completed
on Kayelekera, increasing the resource to 9,300t of U3O8.
Seven other targets were drilled (2,503m) although no
significant mineralisation was discovered.
 In 1987, 7,665m of drilling was carried out to infill the
existing drilling to 50m by 50m. A number of pits were
dug and some preliminary geotechnical holes drilled.
Scout drilling on other targets failed to intersect any
radiometrically anomalous strata but a two metre thick
coal seam was intersected 1km north of the Kayelekera
village at Nhkachira.
 In 1988 no drilling was completed on the uranium
deposit at Kayelekera but a total of 1,180m were drilled
on various scout targets. One hundred and seventeen
metres were drilled to evaluate limestone deposits in the
Mwesia basin, for lime that will be needed in the uranium
extraction process. In addition 289m were drilled to test
the coal seams previously identified. During the latter
part of 1988, the British Civil Uranium Procurement
Organisation (“BCUPO”) received competitive tenders
for the execution of a detailed feasibility study for the
Kayelekera project. Wright Engineers Limited (“Wright”)
of Vancouver, Canada was selected to produce the
feasibility study which commenced in March 1989 and
was completed by June 1990.
 In 1989, a further 2,017m of drilling was drilled into the
deposit and its margins for structural, hydrogeological,
geotechnical and metallurgical purposes. An
independent evaluation confirmed an in-situ resource of
>9,000t of contained U3O8. A further 1,805m of drilling
was completed to evaluate the Nhkachira coal deposit,
which was shown to comprise several thousand tonnes
of coal in a single 2m thick seam.
 Since 2002, PDN conducted extensive drilling programs
in 2004, 2005, 2008-2011. Mining at the project was
commenced in 2008.
Geology  Deposit type, geological setting  Kayelekera is situated close to a major tectonic
and style of mineralisation. boundary between the Ubendian and the Irumide
domains. The Ubendian domain consists of medium to
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [525 x 566] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
high-grade metamorphic rocks and intrusions cut by
major NW-SE dextral shear zones and post-tectonic
granitoid intrusions dated at 1.86Ga (Lenoir et al., 1995).
These shear zones may well have been reactivated
during and after deposition of the Karoo sequence,
since many major brittle faults that offset the Karoo-
aged rocks have the same orientation.
 Mineralisation at Kayelekera is hosted in several arkose
units where they are adjacent to the Eastern Boundary
Fault zone. The mineralisation forms more or less tabular
bodies restricted to the arkoses, except adjacent to the
NS strand of the Eastern Boundary fault at the eastern
extremity of the pit. Here, mineralisation also occurs in
mudstones in the immediate vicinity of the fault.
 Secondary mineralisation tends to be concentrated in
vertical fractures and along the contacts between
mudstone and arkose and is restricted to the upper parts
of the orebody Primary reduced (i.e. carbon and pyrite-
bearing) arkose ore accounts for 40% of the total ore.
About 30% of the mineralisation is hosted in oxidised
arkose (i.e. lacking carbon and pyrite) and is called
oxidised ore. 10% of mineralisation is termed “Mixed
Arkose” and exhibits characteristics of both primary and
secondary arkose mineralisation types.
 Uranium in primary ore is present as coffinite, minor
uraninite and a U-Ti mineral, tentatively referred to as
brannerite. Modes of occurrence include disseminated
in matrix clay, included in detrital mica grains and
intimately intergrown with carbonaceous matter.
Individual grains are extremely fine, typically <10μm.
Coffinite and uraninite also show an association with a
TiO2 phase, possibly rutile after detrital ilmenite. It is
possible that uranium deposition was accompanied by
leaching of Fe from detrital ilmenite and precipitation of
a TiO2 polymorph.
Drill hole  A summary of all information
Information material to the understanding  Information on previous drilling can be found in the 2005 and 2009
of the exploration results NI43-101 Technical reports submitted by PDN.
including a tabulation of the
following information for all
Material drill holes:
o easting and northing of the
drill hole collar
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [525 x 569] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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  In reporting Exploration  Mineralised intervals were chosen based upon a
aggregation Results, weighting averaging nominal 200ppm U3O8 cut off and over 1m for reporting.
methods techniques, maximum and/or  No top cut was applied.
minimum grade truncations  Metal equivalent values have not been used.
(eg cutting of high grades) and
cut-off grades are usually
Material and should be stated.
 Where aggregate intercepts
incorporate short lengths of
high grade 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  Downhole widths are reported.
between particularly important in the  The majority of the drilling is vertical and the horizontal, layered nature
mineralisation reporting of Exploration of the deposit all drill intercepts can be considered to represent the true
Results. width of the mineralisation.
widths and
 If the geometry of the
intercept
mineralisation with respect to
lengths
the drill hole angle is known, its
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [525 x 561] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
nature should be reported.
 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  See included plans and section.
(with scales) and tabulations of
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  Where comprehensive  Balanced reporting has been adhered to.
reporting reporting of all Exploration
Results is not practicable,
representative reporting of
both low and high grades
and/or widths should be
practiced to avoid misleading
reporting of Exploration
Results.
Other  Other exploration data, if  Regional targeting has been greatly aided by a 2008
substantive meaningful and material, company-flown Radiometric survey over 2 broad regions -
exploration should be reported including Kayelekera and Chilumba. This survey has been a major aid
data (but not limited to): geological in guiding exploration with analysis of the radiometric
observations; geophysical signature (K, U, and Th bands) combined with mapping and
survey results; geochemical interpretation of the sedimentary units allowing for target
survey results; bulk samples – generation.
size and method of treatment;
metallurgical test results; bulk
density, groundwater,
geotechnical and rock
characteristics; potential
deleterious or contaminating
substances.
Further work  The nature and scale of  Additional exploration work is being planned and will be announced
planned further work (eg tests when appropriate.
for lateral extensions or depth
extensions or large-scale step-
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [468 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [525 x 24] intentionally omitted <==

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

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
----- End of picture text -----

out drilling).  Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

==> picture [468 x 72] intentionally omitted <==