Ranger 3 Deeps ProjectDr Greg Sinclair – General Manager Technical & Major Studies

1

Ranger production forecast ERA expects to produce between 3,200 to 3,700 tonnes of uranium oxide in 2012

2

Notes:

1. A decision to proceed with the development of the proposed Ranger 3 Deeps mine is expected to have a favourable impact on the ability to

economically process this low grade ore.

Conceptual mine layout – to be validated by the PFS

3

• Large high grade uranium resource (34,000t U3O8)

• Amenable to underground mining methods with low environmental footprint

• A 2 kilometre exploration decline is being developed to define the full extent of the deposit and support the Pre Feasibility Study (PFS), resource drilling and bulk metallurgical sampling programme

Regulatory overview

Regulatory Environment

– The Ranger mine operates under the s.41

Authority of the Atomic Energy Act 1953

– Stringent “Environmental Requirements” are

prescribed

– Any changes to operating authorisation,

such as the expansion of Pit 3, water

management, rehabilitation planning etc, are

4

management, rehabilitation planning etc, are

managed through the Minesite Technical

Committee (MTC)

• Chaired by NT Department of Resources

(DoR)

• Membership includes ERA, DoR, Northern

Land Council (NLC), Gundjeihmi Aboriginal

Corporation (GAC), (recently granted full

membership) and Supervising Scientist

Division (SSD)

Body of knowledge development (basic data – for Technical and functional evaluation)

E.g. Ore Body, Geotechnical, Quality, Social,

Community & Environmental baseline assessment,

stakeholder & legal requirements etc.

Potential

Value

Project

Context

Comparative

AdvantageStakeholder

Alignment

Informing the ‘Shaping Process”

Active Engagement to capture the project Context,

Vision, Objectives & key assumptions that relate to

the strategic issues & requirements to shape the

strategic intent and scope deliverables of the

Partner

Issues

Involving stakeholders in project development – a stage gate process

5 5

Evaluation Phases Implementation Phases Operations Phase

Execution / Construction

Ramp up, Transition

StabilisationOperational Excellence / Improvement

FS –Define

PFS 1 –Select Scope

Value Context Advantage Alignment

Opportunity & Strategy Phase

OoM

Process Leadership of Capital Development Framework & Delivery through Partnership

Steering the Business Case &

Stakeholder Engagement

strategic intent and scope deliverables of the

project

Project Sponsorship, Program

Governance & integration

PFS 2 – Detail Scope

Issues

PFS – the most important phase of the project life cycle

1. Phase in which the most value is added or destroyed

2. Transforms the business opportunity into a tangible project scope

3. PFS is the last real opportunity to optimise/modify or “kill” a project without substantial economic damage

4. Commencing FS/Execution prior to completing PFS is a major cause of project failures – results in poor stakeholder alignment and incomplete scope

6

PFS1 – Scope Selection

1. Basis of design

2. Options analysis

3. Shaping/ decision process –stakeholder and business driven

PFS2 – Scope Completion

1. Confirm best option

2. Confirm business case

3. Secure approvals

4. Define PEP for FS/Exec

Prefeasibility study scope

• Prefeasibility study amount of $57 million approved

• Study will include:

• Drilling of additional 16,000 metres for resource definition of the known Ranger 3

Deeps resource

• Additional 1,100 metres of underground development

• Constructing a ventilation shaft 3-4m in diameter

• Selection of mining method and production rate

7

• Selection of mining method and production rate

• Determining processing flow sheet/preferred treatment method

• Addressing all business and stakeholder issues/risks

• Identifying necessary statutory and social/community approvals to proceed

• Defining the project execution plan and organisation necessary to implement the

project

Schematic overview of project phases

Phase 1:

Exp. Decline Development

8

Phase 2:

PFS

Phase 3:

FS

Underground mining affords significant environmental benefits• Underground mining offers very significant advantages for developing the Ranger 3 Deeps resource

– Very small surface footprint compared to open pit, with minimal new infrastructure

located within and immediately adjacent to the existing mine and plant

– Whole range of potential environment impacts are reduced

• No new surface catchment generating “pond” or “process” water

• Surface disturbance is very small (negligible impact on fauna)

9

• Surface disturbance is very small (negligible impact on fauna)

• Low waste : ore ratio and high grade - smaller waste streams

• Air emissions significantly below criteria across the full range of contaminant species

• Incremental noise at sensitive receptors is negligible (max 1 dB)

– All known archaeological sites remain protected

– Radiation dose to underground workers will remain well below annual dose limits

• Closure of Pit 1 and Pit 3, along with progressive rehabilitation, can occur simultaneously

Stakeholder engagement and cultural heritage are critical aspects of this project

• Increasingly positive relationship with Traditional Owners and other

stakeholders

• ERA has a Communication and Engagement Plan which is progressively

updated

• Communication and engagement relating to the Ranger 3 Deeps underground

mine has commenced

10

mine has commenced

– Tools have included the ERA website, information sheets, media releases,

regional quarterly business updates meetings, and one on one meetings with key

stakeholders including indigenous stakeholders

• There is no incremental impact at surface on cultural heritage associated with

this project

Fully integrated project schedule (indicative timeline)Activity

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

Exploration decline

Boxcut

Decline (phase 1)

Exploration drilling

Resource def drilling

Decline (phase 2)

Bulk sample

Engineering & technical studies

Main study components OoM Prefeasibility Study

Environmental and social studies

Preliminary for Referral

Detailed studies (based on OoM)

Refinements (based on PFS)

2012 2013 2014 2015

Feasibility Study

11

A fully integrated project schedule minimises the risk of decoupling the technical/engineering

aspects from the environmental, stakeholder and socio-economic aspects of the project

Refinements (based on PFS)

Regulatory approvals

Referral, Notice of Intent

Decision on controlled action

MTC Application or other EIA Process

Processing context

• Uranium hosted in the Upper Mine Sequence (UMS) and Lower Mine Sequence

(LMS) which has higher carbonates.

• Current Resource has 75% of U3O8 in UMS and 25% of U3O8 in LMS

• Ranger 3 Deeps UMS ore is similar to Pit 3 ore

• Opportunity to mine the high grade mineralised fault zones that intersect the

LMS

12

• Radiometric sorting is the preferred treatment technology and the existing

plant will be re-commissioned to test carbonate removal from Ranger 3 Deeps

ores

• Carbonate flotation will also be evaluated

Open stoping is the most likely mining method for proposed Ranger 3 Deeps mine

13

This represents a simple schematic of open stoping

Conceptual layout of the sub-level open stoping mine method and ventilation systemFresh air flows along level drives into the

crosscuts and is exhausted up the cut-off

raises to the footwall exhaust drive

Raise bored

ventilation shaft

cut-off slot raise

14

“Fresh” air Air exposed to mineralised material

Level drives 5 m x 5 m