Prairie Mining Ltd. — Capital/Financing Update 2018

Feb 20, 2018

==> picture [596 x 113] intentionally omitted <==

NEWS RELEASE | 21 February 2018

DRILL RESULTS AFFIRM JAN KARSKI’S STATUS AS A GLOBALLY SIGNIFICANT SEMI-SOFT (TYPE 34) COKING COAL PROJECT

HIGHLIGHTS

• Prairie’s use of modern exploration techniques continues to transform the Jan Karski Mine with latest drill results re-affirming the capability of the Project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal, known as Type 34 coal in Poland

• Outstanding results from coke oven testing demonstrate superior coal quality specification compared to typical parameters of internationally traded semi-soft coking coals and domestic Type 34 coals, including an exceptionally high Coke Strength after Reaction which is a parameter highly prized by steelmakers

• Historically Poland’s Lublin Coal Basin has been associated with thermal coal production, however Prairie’s exploration program conducted according to international standards has demonstrated beyond doubt that the 391 coal seam at Jan Karski hosts a globally significant deposit of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal

• Washplant flow sheet design conducted as part of the China Coal technical studies anticipates mine production will be up to 75% ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, with outstanding overall saleable coal yield of 82%

• Czech and Polish supply of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal to the European steel industry has dramatically decreased over the last two years due to mine closures and declining production, with regional coke and steelmakers forced to replace the supply deficit with imports

• Benchmarking analysis of Jan Karski’s ultra-low ash product against semi-soft coking coal produced in the Czech Republic and from recently closed Polish mines demonstrates the potential of the Jan Karski Type 34 coal to replace these coals in the regional market

• The Company can now advance discussions with regional steelmakers and coke producers for future coking coal sales and offtake on the basis of selling ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coals from Jan Karski

• Drill results will be incorporated in China Coal’s technical studies for the Jan Karski Mine

Prairie Mining Limited (“Prairie” or “Company”) is pleased to announce the results of enhanced coal quality analysis and test work from a recently completed borehole (Kulik 1) at its 100% owned Jan Karski Mine (“Jan Karski” or “Project”). The coking coal quality results are superior to the drill results announced in May 2017, and further confirm that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft coking coal (“SSCC”) / Type 34 coking coal deposit with the potential to produce a high value ultra-low ash SSCC with an exceptional CSR and a high 75% coking coal product split.

Email: info@pdz.com.au Website: www.pdz.com.au ABN: 23 008 677 852 ASX/LSE/WSE: PDZ

London Office Warsaw Office Registered Office

Unit 3C, 38 Jermyn Street | London | SWY1 6DN Ul. Wspólna 35 lok. 4 | Warsaw | 00-519 Level 9, BGC Centre, 28 Esplanade | Perth | WA | 6000

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Comparison of the latest coking coal quality results to other mines in Poland and the Czech Republic that have historically produced SSCC or Type 34 coking coal show the great potential Jan Karski has to meet European market demand for Type 34 semi-soft coking coal as production from other Czech and Polish mines continues to diminish over the coming years.

Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals

Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals	Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals	Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals	Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals	Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals
Parameter	Jan Karski (Kulik 1)	Typical SSCC Coal (Upper Silesia - Poland)	Darkov (Czech Republic)	Karvina CSA (Czech Republic)
Rank(Ro)	0.85	0.82	1.15	1.00
VM %	35-37	38	27	28
Ash %	3.5	8.4	8.0	8.0
FSI	7.0	6.5	4.5	5
Roga Index	82	70	-	-
Vitrinite %	84	-	43	42
Dilatation	64	59	25	25
Fluidity	268	380	300	500
CSR	54	-	45-48	45-50
Type	34.2	34.2	-	-

These latest results will be incorporated into the non-JORC technical studies currently underway by Prairie’s strategic partner, China Coal.

Prairie’s CEO Ben Stoikovich commented: “ Prairie’s modern exploration program has demonstrated that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal project, whereas historically the Lublin Coal Basin has been associated with thermal coal production only. This presents an outstanding economic development opportunity for the Lublin region, and Chelm province in particular, to become a leading European supplier of coking coal to the steel industry. Our latest studies anticipate that up to 75% of saleable production will be semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, which is a high value product with the current benchmark FOB Australia price at ~USD135/t. With such a high proportion of saleable product from Jan Karski anticipated to be high value semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, project economics are likely to be significantly enhanced compared to the 2016 Pre-Feasibility Study results. Coal tested from the Kulik 1 borehole demonstrated exceptional coking parameters, including CSR of 54, swelling index of 7.0 and fluidity of 268. With the ongoing closure of coal mines in the Czech Republic and Poland that produce semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, there is a growing regional market opportunity for Jan Karski ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coals. Independent analysis has indicated that due to the superior coal quality of Jan Karski semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, we have the potential to achieve market pricing of some 10% above the standard international SSCC benchmarks. ”

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

Tel: +44 207 478 3900 Email: info@pdz.com.au

• 2 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

RESULTS FROM RECENT DRILLING AND EXPANDED COAL QUALITY ANALYSIS

Prairie has now completed drilling the Kulik 1 borehole at Jan Karski which was a large diameter borehole enabling sufficient quantities of coal from the 391 seam to be collected to meet the requirements for physical coke testing, specifically confirmation of Coke Strength after Reaction (“CSR”) and extended coal washability test work. Coke testing was conducted at Centralne Laboratorium Pomiarowo-Badawcze Sp. z o.o. (“CLPB”) laboratories in Poland which is controlled by Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa (“JSW”) and is internationally accredited as a commercial coal and coke testing laboratory. Washability and other basic coal quality analyses were conducted in the UK. CSR analysis is considered vital in testing for a coal’s coking properties and is important to steelmakers as it is an indicator of the performance / strength of the coke produced from the coal. The full range of standard coking tests were also conducted as shown in Table 2 below :

Table 2: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam

Table 2: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam	Table 2: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam	Table 2: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam	Table 2: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam
	COKING PROPERTIES
	FSI		7.0
	Roga Index		82
	CSR	%	54.0
	CRI	%	36.5
	Ash inCoke	%	5.8
	Sulphur inCoke	%	0.78
	Giesler Plastometer
	Initial Softening	_°C _	404
	Max Fluidity temp	_°C _	440
	Resolidification	°C	463
	Max Fluidity	ddpm	268
	ASTM Dilation
	Softening Temperature	_°C _	380
	Max Contraction Temp	_°C _	420
	Max Dilation Temp	°C	450
	Max Dilation	% D	64
	PROXIMATE ANALYSIS
	Inherent moisture	adb%	1.73
	Ash	adb%	3.45
	Volatile Matter	adb%	35.5
	OTHERCOAL PROPERTIES
	Sulphur	ar%	1.00
	Rank (Ro)		0.85
	Vitrinite	%	84

• 3 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

JAN KARSKI COKING COAL KEY QUALITY ADVANTAGES

Ultra-low Ash

Washability analysis from the Kulik 1 borehole and previous boreholes drilled by Prairie across Jan Karski has demonstrated that due to the low inherent ash and excellent washability characteristics of the 391 seam, Jan Karski SSCC is unique with ash product levels of 3.45% or less (air dried) and far superior to typical ash levels for major coking coal brands (both hard and soft) traded internationally and produced domestically in Europe. Figure 1 shows there is a range of ash specifications for semi-soft coking coals. Coal from the Kulik 1 borehole had ash of 3.45% at a float RD of 1.4, again demonstrating that Jan Karski SSCC is an ultra-low ash product compared to other SSCCs. Low ash provides a number of technical benefits including improved coke strength and caking properties, and reduced fuel rate in the blast furnace.

==> picture [429 x 226] intentionally omitted <==

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

12.0
10.0
8.0
Other Coal Average
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Jan Karski Rio SSCC Blackwater Blackwater Maules Creek Austar NZ SSCC
(Kulik 1) Weak
Ash % (adb)
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 1: Jan Karski SSCC Ash Benchmarking

The ultra-low ash content increases the coal’s value-in-use to steel and coke makers, making the product highly saleable in both the domestic European and international markets. One of the key outcomes of utilising ultra-low ash coking coal to produce low ash coke ash is the resulting decreased fuel rate. This has a key environmental benefit for steel makers as it reduces CO2 emissions per tonne of hot metal produced.

Prairie’s analysis predicts increasing global demand for ultra-low ash coking coal for blending with hard coking coal (“HCC”), due to a continuing trend of rising average ash levels in globally traded hard coking coals. Premium HCC resources with low ash are becoming increasingly scarce, forcing consumers to make concessions on HCC ash levels. Ultra-low ash coking coals for blending are becoming increasingly sought after by consumers seeking to “blend-down” the ash levels in their coke blends. This is a particular advantage for European steelmakers where EU regulations focus on reduced CO2 emissions and compliance with other EU emissions directives. The trend of ever more stringent emissions standards for steelmakers imposed by the EU indicates a positive future for marketability of Jan Karski ultralow ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal.

• 4 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Exceptionally High CSR

Figure 2 shows the measured CSR (54) of the 391 seam from Kulik 1 borehole at Jan Karski is at the very top end of the range for globally traded SSCC. A CSR figure of 54 shows the coal has the ability to form a coherent coke mass, a sought after quality by steelmakers.

==> picture [429 x 226] intentionally omitted <==

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

60
50
40
Other Coal Average
30
20
10
0
Jan Karski Rio SSCC Blackwater Blackwater Maules Creek Austar NZ SSCC
(Kulik 1) Weak
Coke Strength Index Number
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 2: Jan Karski Coke Strength Benchmarking

Other Positive Attributes

Other Jan Karski ultra-low ash SSCC quality positives are its high vitrinite content, high-range FSI (7.0), and fluidity of 268. The volatile matter is in the range typical for Australian traded SSCCs.

COMPARISON TO SEMI-SOFT COKING COALS PRODUCED IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND POLAND

SSCC is produced in the Czech Republic by mining company OKD, formerly New World Resources. Two SSCC brands are produced by OKD, Karvina CSA and Darkov. According to Prairie’s estimates, OKD currently produces approximately 1.8Mtpa of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal. Indications are that these mines will cease production by 2022. Furthermore, during 2017 mine closures and production changes in Poland that have resulted in a reduction of availability of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal in the domestic market of almost 2Mtpa.

Jan Karski ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal quality parameters compare favourably with the coals currently and historically produced in the Czech Republic and Poland, with a summary comparison of coal qualities indicated in Table 3. These types of coals find wide acceptance in European coke ovens and particularly in stamp charging coke batteries which are widely used in Poland and across Central Europe.

• 5 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines

Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines	Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines	Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines	Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines	Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines
Parameter	Jan Karski (Kulik 1)	Typical SSCC Coal (Upper Silesia - Poland)	Darkov (Czech Republic)	Karvina CSA (Czech Republic)
Rank (Ro)	0.85	0.82	1.15	1.00
VM %	35-37	38	27	28
Ash %	3.45	8.4	8.0	8.0
FSI	7.0	6.5	4.5	5
Roga Index	82	70	-	-
Vitrinite %	84	-	43	42
Dilatation	64	59	25	25
Fluidity	268	380	300	500
CSR	54	-	45-48	45-50
Type	34.2	34.2	-	-

Increasing Polish Dependence on Hard Coal Imports

According to prominent Polish financial newspaper Parkiet Gazeta Gieldy, 2017 data from the EU’s statistical office Eurostat suggests Poland produced 65.8 million tonnes of hard coal in 2017, approximately 6 million tonnes less than in 2016. The decrease is attributed to the continued closure and restructuring of Polish coal mines. Conversely, Polish demand for hard coal remained strong during 2017, with Poland being forced to import 13.3 million tonnes of hard coal to meet its own needs – an increase of 60% in hard coal imports year on year. This follows a steady trend in Poland over the last few years with domestic production of hard coal declining and increased reliance on imports.

==> picture [362 x 237] intentionally omitted <==

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

13.3Mt
8.2Mt 8.3Mt
2015 2016 2017
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 3: Polish Coal Imports in last 3 years ( Source: Polish Ministry of Energy and Eurostat / Parkiet )

• 6 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Increased European Demand for Type 34 Coal

Declining production of Czech and Polish semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal has resulted in steel makers becoming more aware of the importance of security of supply of the raw material. Over the last 12 months, lack of delivery of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal has forced some Central European steel makers to introduce urgent measures including changes in the coking charge mix and increased imports, thus generating additional costs and disturbing normal production.

According to an article by Dziennik Gazeta Prawna, in February 2018 Lakshmi Mittal (Chairman and CEO of ArcelorMittal S.A. (“ArcelorMittal”)) met with Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki during the World Economic Forum in Davos and informed the Prime Minister of the company’s concerns regarding the low availability of regionally produced semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal. ArcelorMittal is reportedly considering further investment into steelmaking capacity in Poland following on from the completion of important modernisation investment projects at its Krakow unit in May 2017 totalling PLN 500 million including relining of the blast furnace for a new plant life of 20 years. However, security of supply of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal remains an important consideration.

International and Polish Steel Sector Update

Global steel markets continued to strengthen in 2017 with groups such as Europe’s ArcelorMittal, Nucor Corporation of the US and South Korea’s POSCO all recently reporting higher profits. The recent rebound in the steel prices and increased demand have provided an ideal situation for steel makers. At the same time, North American and European steel makers have benefited from trade actions against dumping from China, which is responsible for half of global output, and continue to close underutilised and old-technology steel mills.

In December 2017, the President of the Board of Polish Steel Association estimated 2017 Polish steel product consumption to be approximately 13.5 million tonnes, up from 13.1 million tonnes in 2016 and forecast consumption rates to grow by over 11% over the next three years to reach 15 million tonnes. The increase was attributed to developments in the automobiles industry and household appliances sector, noting that Poland is Europe’s largest producer of such household appliances.

In 2016, Poland also imported 7.2 million tonnes of steel – an increase of 12% year on year and mainly from Ukraine, Russia and China – and exported 5.2 million tonnes of steel – a 6% increase year on year especially driven by exports to countries outside of the EU which increased by 16% from 2015 to 2016. This high level of demand for Polish steel from countries outside of the EU and particularly Ukraine, Russia and Turkey resulted in a negative trade balance of 4.5 million tonnes as Poland was unable to meet the demand.

PRICE BENCHMARKING

In 2017 independent coal market specialists CRL Energy Ltd (“CRL”) were appointed by Prairie to analyse the potential value of Jan Karski ultra-low ash SSCC in the market based on the results of the Cycow 9 borehole. CRL took two approaches to price benchmarking. The first approach applied the method used by the S&P Global Platts (“Platts”) publication of international benchmark coal prices. The second was a proprietary approach adopted by CRL based on value in use assessment incorporating assumptions regarding a typical Western European coking coal blend used by steel makers and proportions of Jan Karski ultra-low ash SSCC included in the blend.

• 7 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

The Platts coal market publication shows a number of penalty/premium factors that can be used to calculate relative values of coking coals against a stated benchmark (Figure 4). The limit of this method is that it assumes all markets would derive the same value from a particular coal; this is not strictly applicable in all cases, since value is also a function of the other coals in the blend, coke versus PCI rate and plant configuration. The “benchmark” coal used in this evaluation is the Rio Tinto Hunter Valley semi-soft, hence this coal is calibrated at 100% of the benchmark. The Platts benchmarking shows the Jan Karski coal specification is valued at 112.7% of the Rio Tinto semi-soft specification. The only comparable coal is the Blackwater coking coal (which is more of a semi-hard type specification) and the NZ SSCC (a low ash SSCC product).

==> picture [435 x 217] intentionally omitted <==

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

120
115 112.7
108.6
110
104.3
105
100 100.7 99.6
100
95.8
95
90
85
80
Jan Karski Rio SSCC Blackwater Blackwater Maules Creek Austar NZ SSCC
Weak
% of Benchmark SSCC Price
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 4: Platts Price Benchmarking Assessment

Both Platts benchmarking and value in use modelling show Jan Karski is a high value SSCC, driven substantially by the ultra-low ash. The Platts specification benchmarking suggests Jan Karski should be priced at a 10% premium above the benchmark Rio Tinto Hunter Valley SSCC.

COAL PROCESSING UPDATE AND COKING COAL YIELD

Dargo Associates, specialist coal handling and preparation consultants were appointed to re-evaluate the potential yields of ultra-low ash coking coal from Jan Karski and to develop a washplant flow sheet as part of the Chinese technical studies currently underway. To evaluate the yield of ultra-low ash coal, the washability tests were extended to give more information on separation in the lower density ranges. Separating at low density increases the quantities of near density material and the extended washability test work was used to identify the most efficient wash plant process. The washability results from the recently drilled Kulik 1 borehole were consistent with the results from washability analysis conducted for all of the nine boreholes Prairie has drilled across Jan Karski, demonstrating exceptionally high yields of ultra-low ash (<3.5%) product coal at RD1.40 float.

• 8 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [373 x 373] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Drill Hole Locations at Jan Karski including Kulik 1

Preliminary analysis has shown that the production of ultra-low ash SSCC (2.5 - 3.5%) results in an overall yield of saleable coal of 82%, which is similar overall yield as indicated in the original Jan Karski Pre-Feasibility Study (“PFS”) published in March 2016. Overall mine yields are hardly impacted by the ultra-low ash beneficiation as any coal lost due to the lowering of ash on the ultra-low ash SSCC product reports to the thermal product.

The predicted ratio of ultra-low ash SSCC to thermal coal is 75% coking coal to 25% thermal coal. The thermal coal product is anticipated to have 13% ash and will be in line with typical API2 specification export quality thermal coal. Should Prairie decide to sell a typically higher ash Polish domestic thermal coal of up to 25% ash, the overall yield will increase further.

• 9 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

BACKGROUND ON JAN KARSKI

In March 2016, Prairie announced the results of a PFS for Jan Karski confirming the technical viability and robust economics of the Project and highlighting its potential to become one of the lowest cost, large scale strategic coal suppliers to be developed in Europe.

The Study utilised an updated Coal Resource Estimate (“CRE”) for the Project which comprises a Global CRE of 728Mt including an Indicated Resource of 181Mt from two coal seams, the 391 and 389 seams. The PFS incorporated a mine plan based on an initial Marketable Ore Reserve Estimate generated from the indicated resources within the 391 and 389 seams.

Table 4: Jan Karski Mine Resource JORC Coal Resource and Reserve Estimate - 389 & 391 Seams	Table 4: Jan Karski Mine Resource JORC Coal Resource and Reserve Estimate - 389 & 391 Seams
Coal Seam	Indicated Coal Resource In-Situ (Mt)
389	17
391	164
Total	181
Probable Recoverable Coal Reserves (Mt)	170
Probable Marketable Coal Product (Mt)	139

==> picture [342 x 296] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Seam 389 & 391 Resource Areas

• 10 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [482 x 279] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Geological Cross Section of Coal Seams at Jan Karski

Note: Average in-situ seam quality reported at LW Bogdanka S.A concession: Seam 382 (Ash: 13.12%, CV: 26,427kJ/kg, S: .1.40%, Seam 385/2 (Ash: 8.37%%, CV: 25,972kJ/kg, S: 1.11%), Seam 391 (Ash: 8.17%, CV: 28,746kJ/kg, S:1.24%)

Source: “Expert’s Report on Valuation of LW Bogdanka S.A. Geological-Mining Assets for the Prospectus Needs” – English Translation – 15.05.2009

• 11 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Forward Looking Statements

This release may include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on Prairie’s expectations and beliefs concerning future events. Forward looking statements are necessarily subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Prairie, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Prairie makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forwardlooking statements made in this release, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of that release.

Competent Person Statements

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents information compiled or reviewed by Mr Jonathan O’Dell, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr O’Dell is a part time consultant of the Company. Mr O’Dell has sufficient experience that 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 O’Dell consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this announcement that relates to the Coal Resources and Coal Reserves was extracted from Prairie’s announcement dated 8 March 2016 entitled “Pre-feasibility Study Confirms LCP As One of The Lowest Cost Global Coal Suppliers Into Europe” which is available to view on the Company’s website at www.pdz.com.au.

The information in the original announcement that relates to Coal Resources is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled or reviewed by, Mr Samuel Moorhouse, a Competent Person who is a Chartered Geologist and is employed by independent consultants Royal HaskoningDHV UK Limited. Mr Moorhouse has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken 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’.

The information in the original announcement that relates to Coal Reserves is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled or reviewed by Mr Maarten Velzeboer, a Competent Person, Member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (MIMMM). Mr Velzeboer has worked in deep coal mines in New South Wales and Queensland in Australia and the Karaganda Coalfield in Kazakhstan. Mr Velzeboer has been engaged in a senior capacity in the design and development of proposed mines in Queensland, Australia, Botswana and Venezuela. Mr Velzeboer is employed by independent consultants Royal HaskoningDHV. Mr Velzeboer has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken 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’.

Prairie confirms that: a) it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original announcements; b) all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Coal Resource and Coal Reserve included in the original announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed; and c) the form and context in which the relevant Competent Persons’ findings are presented in this presentation have not been materially modified from the original announcements.

• 12 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

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

	Criteria	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	Sampling		•	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut	•	Coal cores were taken from continuous cores in the
	techniques			channels, random chips, or specific specialised		Carboniferous sections of the boreholes.
				industry standard measurement tools	•	Assessment of coal quality and type is based on the
				appropriate to the minerals under investigation,		results of laboratory tests of the coal samples taken
				such as down hole gamma sondes, or		from the borehole cores.
				handheld XRF instruments, etc). These	•	All seams equal to or thicker than 0.60 m were
				examples should not be taken as limiting the		analysed.
				broad meaning of sampling.	•	Dirt (rock) partings in-seam less than 0.05 m were
			•	Include reference to measures taken to ensure		included in the coal sample and analysed with the
				sample representivity and the appropriate		coal.
				calibration of any measurement tools or	•	Dirt partings equal to, or thicker than 0.05 m were
				systems used.		analysed separately.
			•	Aspects of the determination of mineralisation	•	Average core yield was 100%. Core yield for the
				that are Material to the Public Report.		target seam 391 was 100%, confirmed by core
						measurement and geophysics.
	Drilling		•	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-	•	The borehole was drilled open hole to 16 m below the
	techniques			hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka,		base of the Jurassic, approximately 707 m, and
				sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple		cased. Continuous coring was used in the in the coal
				or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-		measure strata below. Core diameter was 85 mm
				sampling bit or other type, whether core is		(PQ).
				_oriented and if so, by what method, etc). _
	Drill	sample	•	Method of recording and assessing core and	•	During the drilling of the borehole, coal samples were
	recovery			chip sample recoveries and results assessed.		collected from the drill core using methods that were
			•	Measures taken to maximise sample recovery		standard for the coal industry in Poland (according to
				and ensure representative nature of the		GWP and international standard ISO 14180:1998(E) –
				samples.		Solid mineral fuels – Guidance on the sampling of
			•	Whether a relationship exists between sample		coal seams)
				recovery and grade and whether sample bias	•	Core recovery was determined for the coal samples
				may have occurred due to preferential		by measuring the lengths of recovered core and
				loss/gain of fine/coarse material.		weighing broken/fragmentary core and calculating
						length to provide an overall recovery length and
						percentage as compared to the drilling depths. Final
						checks are provided by comparison with thicknesses
						determined from the suite of geophysical logs.
					•	Core recoveries were recorded for each core run and
						for individual seams.
					•	There is no known relationship between recovery and
						quality.
					•	All cores were photographed.
	Logging		•	Whether core and chip samples have been	•	The cores have been logged and analysed in
				geologically and geotechnically logged to a		sufficient detail to support this announcement. Cores
				level of detail to support appropriate Mineral		were analysed by Centralne Laboratorium
				Resource estimation, mining studies and		Pomiarowo- – Badawcze Sp. z o.o. laboratories
				metallurgical studies.		certified to Polish national standards and at
			•	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in		Infrastructure and Energy, Socotec House Bretby who
				nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc)		are certified to international standards. The results are
				photography.		considered fit for purpose.
			•	The total length and percentage of the relevant	•	Detailed borehole records are presented in the
				intersections logged.		“Borehole Documentation” which contains the written
						description, graphic log (borehole card) and details of
						analyses and interpretations, including the final
						accepted seam thicknesses.
					•	The Carboniferous section was fully cored and logged
						throughout.
	Sub-		•	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether	•	Cores were not split but sampled as whole core as is
	sampling			quarter, half or all core taken.		standardpractice with coal core. Detailed core

• 13 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	Criteria		JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
techniques			•	If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled,		recovery measurements were made allowing
and	sample			rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or		assessment of the representative nature of the core
preparation				dry.		analysed. Cores were wrapped in plastic to prevent
			•	For all sample types, the nature, quality and		moisture loss prior to analysis. The target seam was
				appropriateness of the sample preparation		sampled as soon as practicable, double packed in
				technique.		plastic bags which were purged with nitrogen gas and
			•	Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-		kept refrigerated during transport and prior to
				sampling stages to maximise representivity of		analysis. (In accordance with Australian best practice
				samples.		for the sampling of coking coals)
			•	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.
Quality		of	•	The nature, quality and appropriateness of the	•	Laboratory procedures were to the standard industry
assay		data		assaying and laboratory procedures used and		practices.
and				whether the technique is considered partial or	•	Geophysical logs used in the boreholes include
laboratory				total.		natural gamma, density (gamma gamma), acoustic
tests			•	For geophysical tools, spectrometers,		scanner, dual laterolog and caliper logs. These are of
				handheld XRF instruments, etc, the		sufficient quality to be used for quantitative (i.e. seam
				parameters used in determining the analysis		thickness) determinations.
				including instrument make and model, reading	•	The laboratories used are accredited to national and
				times, calibrations factors applied and their		international standards and have adequate quality
				derivation, etc.		control practices including analysis of standards and
			•	Nature of quality control procedures adopted		participation in “round robin” exercises.
				(eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external
				laboratory checks) and whether acceptable
				levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and
				precision have been established.
Verification			•	The verification of significant intersections by	•	Geological supervision over all drilling works was
of sampling				either independent or alternative company		performed by geological staff contracted to PDCo,
and assaying				personnel.		the Company’s 100% owned Polish subsidiary, who
			•	The use of twinned holes.		are qualified and licensed according to Polish
			•	Documentation of primary data, data entry		Geological and Mining Law
				procedures, data verification, data storage	•	These geological staff also performed detailed core
				(physical and electronic) protocols.		logging.
			•	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	•	Twinned boreholes were not used.
					•	Primary data is held as hard copy (laboratory
						certificates etc.) and this has been transferred to
						electronic spreadsheets.
					•	No adjustments have been made to assay data.
Location		of	•	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate	•	The borehole location has been accurately
data points				drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys),		determined and surveyed in the Poland CS2000,
				trenches, mine workings and other locations		zone 8 grid system.
				used in Mineral Resource estimation.	•	Detailed topographic maps are available.
			•	Specification of the grid system used.
			•	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Data spacing			•	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration	•	This announcement of exploration results relates to a
and				Results.		single borehole, Kulik 1.
distribution			•	Whether the data spacing and distribution is	•	Sample compositing has not been used.
				sufficient to establish the degree of geological
				and grade continuity appropriate for the
				Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation
				procedure(s) and classifications applied.
			•	Whether sample compositing has been
				applied.
Orientation of			•	Whether the orientation of sampling achieves	•	The borehole was nominally vertical and the coal
data		in		unbiased sampling of possible structures and		seams have low to moderate dip and relatively simple
relation		to		the extent to which this is known, considering		structure and so there is no structural or orientation
				the deposit type.		bias to the sampling.
			•	If the relationship between the drilling	•	The borehole has been surveyed for verticalitywith

• 14 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria		JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
geological			orientation and the orientation of key		maximum deviation of approximately 29 m at a depth
structure			mineralised structures is considered to have		of 1037.50 m.
			introduced a sampling bias, this should be
			assessed and reported if material.
Sample		•	The measures taken to ensure sample	•	All core samples were handled by staff contracted to
security			security.		PDCo under supervision of a licenced geologist. Core
					samples were marked for way up orientation placed in
					plastic in fully labelled wooden core boxes. These
					staff also undertook core sampling and in the case of
					the target seams this was supervised by consultants
					contracted to Prairie Mining.
Audits	or	•	The results of any audits or reviews of	•	The data and techniques have been reviewed by the
reviews			sampling techniques and data.		Competent Person and are considered adequate and
					appropriate.

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

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

Criteria	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Mineral		•	Type, reference name/number, location and	•	Prairie has held the exploration licences to five
tenement and			ownership including agreements or material		exploration concession areas that constitute the Jan
land	tenure		issues with third parties such as joint ventures,		Karski Mine: Cycow (K-6-7), Syczyn (K-8), Kulik (K-4-
status			partnerships, overriding royalties, native title		5), Kopina (K-9) and Sawin-Zachód.
			interests, historical sites, wilderness or national	•	On 1 July 2015, Prairie announced that it had secured
			park and environmental settings.		the Exclusive Right to apply for, and consequently be
		•	The security of the tenure held at the time of		granted, a mining concession for the Jan Karski Mine.
			reporting along with any known impediments to	•	As a result of its geological documentation for the Jan
			obtaining a licence to operate in the area.		Karski Mine deposit being approved, Prairie is now
					the only entity that can lodge a mining concession
					application over the Jan Karski Mine within a three (3)
					year period up and until April 2018. In addition, Prairie
					has the right to apply for and be granted a mining
					usufruct agreement for an additional 12 month period
					that precludes any other parties being granted a
					licence over all or part of the Jan Karski concessions.
					Prairie applied for a mining usufruct agreement in
					December 2017.
				•	The approved geological documentation covers an
					area comprising all four of the original exploration
					concessions granted to Prairie (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and
					K-9) and includes the full extent of the targeted
					resources within the mine plan for the Jan Karski
					Mine. In this regard, no beneficial title interest has
					been surrendered by the Company when the K-6-7
					exploration concession expired last year. The
					Company intends to submit a mining concession
					application, over the mine plan area at Jan Karski
					(which includes K-6-7) prior to April 2018. Under
					Polish mining law, and owing to the Exclusive Right
					the Company has secured, Prairie is currently the
					only entity that may apply for and be granted a mining
					concession with respect to the K-6-7 area (the
					Exclusive Right also applies to the K-4-5, K-8 and K-9
					areas of Jan Karski). There is no requirement for the
					Company to hold an exploration concession in order
					exercise the Exclusive Right and apply for a mining
					concession.
				•	Prairie’s approved geological documentation did not
					include the Sawin-Zachód concession.

• 15 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria		JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Exploration		•	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration	•	Not applicable.
done by other			by other parties.
parties
Geology		•	Deposit type, geological setting and style of	•	The deposit is a Carboniferous hard coal consisting of
			mineralisation.		coal seams separated by units of mudstone and
					sandstone.
Drill	hole	•	A summary of all information material to the	•	X: 5678988 Y: 8444070 (Polish CS2000 zone 8)
Information			understanding of the exploration results	•	H: 187.8 m a.s.l
			including a tabulation of the following	•	Nominally vertical, deviation approximately 29 m at
			information for all Material drill holes:		113oat base of hole.
			o easting and northing of the drill hole collar	•	Hole length/depth – 1,037.50 m (drilling)
			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 Results, weighting	•	Coal seams have normally been sampled as one
aggregation			averaging techniques, maximum and/or		continuous sample. Dirt partings of 5 cm in thickness
methods			minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high		or less have been sampled with the coal.
			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 particularly important	•	The boreholes are nominally vertical and the coal
between			in the reporting of Exploration Results.		seams form part of a stratiform deposit dipping at
mineralisatio		•	If the geometry of the mineralisation with		approximately 0 – 5 degrees.
n widths	and		respect to the drill hole angle is known, its	•	Intercept lengths used in the model are drill intercept
intercept			nature should be reported.		lengths which will be modelled in 3D removing the
lengths		•	If it is not known and only the down hole		need to calculate the true thickness. Because of the
			lengths are reported, there should be a clear		very low dip the difference between intercept
			statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length,		thickness and true thickness is not significant.
			_true width not known’). _
Diagrams		•	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales)	•	Not applicable
			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 reporting of all	•	Not applicable.
reporting			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 meaningful and	•	Not applicable.
substantive			material, should be reported including (but not
			limited to): geological observations;
			geophysical survey results; geochemical

• 16 -

==> picture [596 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
exploration		survey results; bulk samples – size and
data		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 planned further work	•	Prairie Mining may drill further boreholes if deemed
		(eg tests for lateral extensions or depth		appropriate.
		extensions or large-scale step-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.

• 17 -