rpa uranium one akdala ni 43-101 technical report final amended june 6, 2012.pdf

7/18/2019 RPA Uranium One Akdala NI 43-101 Technical Report FINAL AMENDED June 6, 2012.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rpa-uranium-one-akdala-ni-43-101-technical-report-final-amended-june-6-2012pdf 1/93

February 17, 2012Amended May 2, 2012

ROSCOE POSTLE ASSOCIATES INC.

URANIUM ONE INC.

TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE

AKDALA URANIUM MINE,KAZAKHSTAN

NI 43-101 Report

Qualified Persons:Wayne W. Valliant, P.Geo.R. Dennis Bergen, P.Eng.



Report Control Form

Document Title Technical Report on the Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan

Client Name & Address Uranium One Inc.Suite 1710, 333 Bay StreetBay Adelaide CentreToronto, OntarioM5H 2R2

Document Reference

Project #1744

Status &Issue No.

Final

Version

Rev 0

Issue Date February 17, 2012 Amended May 2, 2012

Lead Author Wayne Valliant, P.Geo.

R. Dennis Bergen, P.Eng.

(Signed)

(Signed)

Peer Reviewer Deborah A. McCombe (Signed)

Project Manager Approval Wayne W. Valliant (Signed)

Project Director Approval William E. Roscoe (Signed)

Report Distribution Name No. of Copies

Client

RPA Filing 1 (project box)

Roscoe Postle Assoc iates Inc.55 University Avenue, Suite 501

Toronto, Ontario M5J 2H7Canada

Tel: +1 416 947 0907Fax: +1 416 947 0395

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





www.rpacan.com

Uranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine, Project #1744

Technical Report NI 43-101 – Amended May 2, 2012 Rev. 0 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

1 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................1-1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................1-1

Technical Summary ................................................................................................1-3

2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................2-1

3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS ........................................................................... 3-1

4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ..........................................................4-1

5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE ANDPHYSIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................5-1

6 HISTORY ..................................................................................................................6-1

7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION ................................................... 7-1

Regional Geology ...................................................................................................7-1

Property Geology....................................................................................................7-1

Local Geology ........................................................................................................7-2

Mineralization .........................................................................................................7-5

8 DEPOSIT TYPES ......................................................................................................8-1

9 EXPLORATION .........................................................................................................9-1

10 DRILLING .............................................................................................................. 10-1

11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY ..................................... 11-1

12 DATA VERIFICATION ........................................................................................... 12-1

13 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING ............................... 13-1

14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE ....................................................................... 14-1

15 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE .......................................................................... 15-1

16 MINING METHODS .............................................................................................. 16-1

17 RECOVERY METHODS ....................................................................................... 17-1

18 PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................................................ 18-1

19 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS................................................................ 19-1

Markets ................................................................................................................19-1

Contracts ..............................................................................................................19-2

20 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITYIMPACT ..................................................................................................................... 20-1

21 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS .................................................................... 21-1

Capital Cost Estimate ........................................................................................... 21-1

Operating Costs ................................................................................................... 21-2

22 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 22-1



www.rpacan.com


Technical Report NI 43-101 – Amended May 2, 2012 Rev. 0 Page ii

23 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ................................................................................... 23-1

24 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION ................................................. 24-1

25 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................ 25-1

26 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 26-1

27 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 27-1

28 DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE ............................................................................ 28-1

29 CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON ............................................................. 29-1

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

Table 1-1 Mineral Resources - December 31, 2011 ................................................... 1-6

Table 1-3 Capital Expenditure Estimate ................................................................... 1-10 Table 1-4 LOM Operating Cost Estimate .................................................................. 1-10

Table 6-1 Production History ......................................................................................6-2

Table 13-1 Comparative Statistics Uranium One Mines in Kazakhstan .................... 13-2

Table 14-1 Mineral Resources - December 31, 2011 ............................................... 14-2

Table 14-2 CIS Classification of Mineral Resources ................................................. 14-3

Table 14-3 Blizhniy Measured Mineral Resources - December 31, 2011 .................. 14-8

Table 15-1 Mineral Reserves – December 31, 2011 ................................................. 15-1

Table 15-2 Breakeven Cut-off Grade ........................................................................ 15-2

Table 15-3 Incremental Cut-off Grade Estimate ....................................................... 15-3

Table 15-4 Technological Well Extraction ................................................................. 15-5

Table 15-5 Blizhniy Reserve Estimation ................................................................... 15-6

Table 15-6 Letniy Reserve Estimate ......................................................................... 15-7 Table 15-7 Comparison to Previous Estimate ........................................................... 15-7

Table 16-1 Productive Solution Grades .................................................................... 16-6

Table 16-2 Life of Mine Production Plan ................................................................... 16-7

Table 21-1 Capital Expenditure Estimate ................................................................. 21-1

Table 21-2 September 2012 Operating Cost versus Budget ..................................... 21-2

Table 21-3 LOM Operating Cost Estimate ................................................................ 21-3

Table 21-4 2012 Manpower ...................................................................................... 21-4

LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

Figure 4-1 General Location of South Kazakhstan Uranium Deposits ........................ 4-4

Figure 4-2 Akdala Licence Location ........................................................................... 4-5

Figure 7-1 Regional Geology ...................................................................................... 7-3

Figure 7-2 Regional Cross Section A-B ......................................................................7-4

Figure 7-3 Akdala Plan Map ....................................................................................... 7-6

Figure 7-4 Deposit #1 Section Looking West .............................................................. 7-7



www.rpacan.com


Technical Report NI 43-101 – Amended May 2, 2012 Rev. 0 Page iii

Figure 13-1 Process Flow Sheet .............................................................................. 13-3

Figure 16-1 General Layout – Blizhniy Area Resource/Reserve Blocks .................... 16-3

Figure 16-2 Typical Wellfield Layout ......................................................................... 16-4

Figure 16-3 Typical Well Cross Section .................................................................... 16-5

Figure 16-4 2011 Productive Solution Grade ............................................................ 16-6

Figure 17-1 Akdala Extraction Versus Months Leaching........................................... 17-2

Figure 17-2 Akdala Extraction Versus Liquid:Solid Ratio .......................................... 17-2

Figure 18-1 UxC U3O8 Historical Uranium Prices ...................................................... 19-2



www.rpacan.com


Technical Report NI 43-101 – Amended May 2, 2012 Rev. 0 Page 1-1

1 SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. (RPA) was retained by Uranium One Inc. (Uranium One),

to prepare an independent Technical Report on the Akdala Uranium Mine (the Mine),

Kazakhstan. The purpose of this report is to provide an updated estimate of the Mineral

Resources and Mineral Reserves at the Mine and support the public disclosure of

information related to the Mine. This Technical Report conforms to NI 43-101 Standards

of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101). RPA carried out a site visit on October

17, 2011. This Technical Report was amended on May 2, 2012, to reflect a slight

modification in the mineral extraction tax (MET) estimate, however, this has no impact on

the Mineral Reserve estimate.

Uranium One is a Canadian based uranium producing company with a principal listing

on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX:UUU) and a secondary listing on the

Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE:UUU). The company has producing operations

and/or advanced exploration projects in Kazakhstan, USA, and Australia and is the

operator of a uranium project in Tanzania.

The Mine is an in-situ recovery (ISR) project which includes wellfields, a pumping

station, and a processing plant. The final product produced at the Mine is uranium oxide

(U3O8). The Mine is owned and operated by the Betpak Dala Joint Venture LLP (Betpak

Dala), a joint venture between Uranium One (70%) and Kazakhstan National Atomic

Company (Kazatomprom) (30%).

The Akdala Mine comprises:

• An ISR operation producing uranium yellowcake from production wells pumpingleach solutions from wellfields.

• A processing plant with a design capacity to produce nominally 1,000 tonnes Uper annum.

• Infrastructure including office buildings, warehouse, and materials storage areas.



www.rpacan.com



CONCLUSIONS

Based on the site visit, review of the available data, and field observations, RPA

concludes that:

• The uranium mineralization is a sandstone-hosted, roll front type deposit.

• The December 31, 2011 Mineral Resources are estimated to be:

o Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 33.9 million tonnes grading0.010% U (0.012% U3O8) containing approximately 3,381 t U (8.8 M lbU3O8).

o Inferred Mineral Resources of 9.7 million tonnes grading 0.062% U(0.073% U3O8) containing approximately 6,015 t U (15.6 M lb U3O8).

• The December 31, 2011 Mineral Reserves as estimated by RPA consist of 28.6million tonnes of Proven Mineral Reserves grading 0.009% U (0.011% U3O8) and

containing 2,690 t of extractable U (6.99 M lb U3O8) and 1.3 million tonnes ofProbable Mineral Reserves grading 0.028% U (0.033% U3O8) and containing 360t of extractable U (0.94 M lb U3O8).

• The extraction of the Mineral Reserves is estimated to be 90%.

• The Akdala deposit is being successfully exploited using ISR techniques.

• The production to date is from the Blizhniy deposit while future production isexpected to include production from the Letniy deposit as well.

• There has not been a project to date reconciliation between the production and

the original Mineral Reserve estimate for the producing areas.

• The estimated operating cost for the Akdala Mine is US$20.66 per pound U3O8 sold.

• The Life of Mine (LOM) plan includes the extraction of 3,050 tonnes U from theestimated Mineral Reserves. The remaining mine life as of December 31, 2011,and based on current Mineral Reserves, is 3.5 years.

• The maximum annual production is estimated to be 1,000 tonnes U.

• The capital cost for the LOM is US$48.7 million including plant construction,

production and exploration drilling, sustaining capital and contingency.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the site visit and review of technical data, RPA recommends that Uranium

One:

• Continue production at the Blizhniy deposit, development of the Letniy depositand exploration to upgrade Inferred Resources.



www.rpacan.com



• Pursue the implementation of reconciliation procedures that are maintained on aregular basis and include block by block reconciliation of the productioncompared to the Mineral Reserve estimate.

• Direct more effort to the analysis of the physical and chemical data related to thewellfields, process solutions and plant operations to assist in the evaluation of the

operations and to possibly determine the cause of better or worse than plannedoperating results.

• Consider and implement procedures to obtain all of the exploration andtechnological estimation data on a timely basis and complete Mineral Resourceand Mineral Reserve estimates independently of the joint venture for reporting asa Canadian issuer.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Under NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, producing issuers may exclude the information

required for Section 22 (Economic Analysis) for properties that are currently inproduction, unless the Technical Report includes a material expansion of current

production. RPA notes that Uranium One is a producing issuer, the Akdala Mine is

currently in production, and a material expansion is not being planned. RPA has

performed an economic analysis of the Akdala Mine as part of its estimate of Mineral

Reserves using the estimates presented in this report and concluded that the outcome is

a positive cash flow.

TECHNICAL SUMMARY

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

The Akdala deposit is located in the Suzak region of the South Kazakhstan Oblast, in the

Republic of Kazakhstan, approximately 240 km in a direct line north of Shymkent,

Kazakhstan. The property is accessible by a 240 km paved road, which runs northeast

from Suzak, and by a 470 km road, some of which is unimproved, from Shymkent The

closest airports with scheduled local service are at Shymkent and Kyzylorda.

The property comprises three non-contiguous adjacent blocks, totalling 31.54 km2 and

centred about Longitude 68o37’E and Latitude 45o30’N. The Blizhniy deposit is being

mined and is adjacent to the plant, the Letniy deposit, planned for mining in 2012, is

some 30 km from the plant, and the Don deposit is an exploration target.



www.rpacan.com



LAND TENURE

The property is held under a Subsoil Use Contract granted by the Republic of

Kazakhstan dated March 28, 2001, as subsequently amended, which authorizes

exploration and production on the Akdala deposit (the Akdala Contract). The Akdala

Contract is valid for a period of 25 years and may be renewed by the mutual agreementof the parties if all conditions of the contract have been met.

EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE

There are power lines to the sites and access roads to major centres. On site, there are

office buildings, solution ponds, wellfields, pump houses, and service areas, all part of

the ISR operation.

HISTORY

Drilling in the region began in 1961 and resulted in the discovery of a few small deposits

in 1963. The Akdala deposit was discovered in 1982. By 1999, the Akdala deposit was

considered a separate entity and detailed drilling was carried out between 2001 and

2003. Kazatomprom entered into a Subsoil Use Agreement with the Ministry of

Environment and Mineral Resources of Kazakhstan (MEMR), which authorized

Kazatomprom to carry out exploration and production on the Akdala deposit.

The contract was amended on June 7, 2004, to change the holder of the mineral rights

from Kazatomprom to Betpak Dala. On November 7, 2005, UrAsia Energy (BVI) Ltd.

(UrAsia) acquired a 70% interest in Betpak Dala. On April 20, 2007, Uranium One

acquired 100% of UrAsia’s parent corporation, thereby acquiring a 70% interest in

Akdala.

The Mine commenced official production in January 2004 and has produced 8,025

tonnes uranium from the start of extraction to September 30, 2011.

GEOLOGY AND MINERALIZATION

The Mine is located in the Chu-Sarysu depression, which represents a large Cretaceous

age basin up to 250 km wide and which extends northward for more than 1,000 km from

the foothills of the Tien Shan Mountains.



www.rpacan.com



The mineralized horizons extend for over 45 km along strike. As the mineralized

horizons occur as sinuous structures, the lineal length is much greater. The three

Akdala deposits cover a minimum strike length of approximately 25 km and are underlain

by Cretaceous to Cenozoic sediments, predominately sands, with occasional pebble and

gravel layers, clay and loamy soils up to 190 m thick. The sediments are gently dippingto the southeast. The various plans and sections observed by RPA do not indicate the

presence of any significant faulting.

Mineralization on the Akdala licence occurs at depths varying between 136 m and 190 m

over a distance of 25 km. The Jalpak horizon hosts the two main deposits, Blizhniy and

Letniy, that contain the majority of the Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves. Other

mineralized bodies include those hosted in the finer grained Intymak horizon at a depth

of 70 m to 90 m containing approximately 10% of the Inferred Resources. Mineralization

has also been intersected in wide-spaced drilling on the Mynkuduk horizon in three

areas at a depth of about 220 m.

Roll fronts are continuous along strike and have widths from 30 m to 60 m. Thickness

varies between 0.5 m and 12 m at the thickest part of the roll front, averaging seven

metres. The principal ore minerals are pitchblende (36%) and coffinite (64%), often

accompanied by selenium, rhenium, yttrium, molybdenum, arsenic, and phosphorus.

EXPLORATION STATUS

All of the exploration on the site was completed prior to the acquisition of the interest in

the Mine by UrAsia and Uranium One. There has been technological drilling for the

wellfields.

MINERAL RESOURCES

Mineral resources at Akdala were originally estimated by Volkov Geological and Mining

Company (Volkovgeologia), the exploration arm of Kazatomprom, effective 2001, using

the system developed for Mongolia and the CIS countries. In 2006, Scott Wilson

Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. (Scott Wilson RPA), a predecessor company to RPA,

reviewed the parameters and methodology for mineral resources and, based on the data

density, demonstrated continuity of the mineralization, and established high



www.rpacan.com



recoverability of U from the mineralization, converted the C1 and C2 category resources

to Indicated Mineral Resources and Inferred Mineral Resources, respectively.

Since that time, no further exploration drilling has been undertaken within the Indicated

Mineral Resource blocks. The Indicated Mineral Resource blocks in the Blizhniy deposithave subsequently been adjusted based on production drilling and depletion and have

been upgraded to Measured Mineral Resources. The Indicated and Inferred Mineral

Resource estimates are based on exploration drilling and remain unchanged since the

Scott Wilson RPA 2010 Technical Report.

A summary Mineral Resources estimate, effective December 31, 2011, is presented in

Table 1-1.

TABLE 1-1 MINERAL RESOURCES - DECEMBER 31, 2011

Uranium One Inc. - Akdala Uranium Mine

Classification Tonnes Grade Contained U Grade Contained U3O8 (000 t) (% U) (tonnes) (% U3O8) (000 lb)

Measured 33,230 0.009 2,982 0.011 7,753

Indicated 628 0.064 399 0.075 1,037

Meas + Indicated 33,858 0.010 3,381 0.012 8,791

Inferred 9,683 0.062 6,015 0.073 15,639

Notes:1. Mineral Resources are based on CIM definitions.2. Mineral Resources based on 0.04 m% (grade x thickness) cut-off per hole and 0.10 m% per

resource block.3. Indicated Mineral Resources include 100% of C1 CIS category resources.4. Inferred Mineral Resources include 100% of C2 CIS category resources.5. Bulk density is 1.7 t/m

3.

6. Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.7. Columns and rows may not add due to rounding.8. Measured Mineral Resources based on production drilling.9. Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources based on exploration drilling.10. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

In RPA’s opinion, the classification of Mineral Resources as reported in Table 1-1 is

consistent with CIM definitions.

MINERAL RESERVES

Proven Mineral Reserve estimates are based upon the ore developed for extraction and

Probable Mineral Reserve estimates are based upon the conversion of the remaining



www.rpacan.com



Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources. The Mineral Reserve estimates include

dilution and an estimate of the uranium extraction. The estimates are based upon

production to September 30, 2011 plus an estimate of the fourth quarter 2011

production. The Mineral Reserves are for the 100% joint venture interest and do not

represent the reserves attributable to the individual Betpak Dala partners. The estimatedMineral Reserves are shown in Table 1-2. The Qualified Person for this Mineral Reserve

estimate is R. Dennis Bergen, P.Eng.

The low grades, especially of the Proven Mineral Reserves, reflect the deduction of

uranium extracted to date. The Proven Mineral Reserves are in the Blizhniy deposit,

while the Probable Mineral Reserves are in the Letniy deposit.

TABLE 1-2 MINERAL RESERVES – DECEMBER 31, 2011Uranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

CategoryTonnes

(000)Grade(% U)

Recoverable U(tonnes)

Grade(% U3O8)

Recoverable U3O8 (M lb)

Proven 28,600 0.009 2,690 0.011 6.99

Probable 1,300 0.028 360 0.033 0.94

Prov en & Probable 29,900 0.010 3,050 0.012 7.93

Notes:1. CIM definitions were followed for Mineral Reserves.2. Mineral Reserves are estimated at a cut-off grade of 0.01% U.

3. Mineral Reserves are estimated using an average long-term uranium price of US$65 per poundU3O8.4. A minimum mining thickness of four metres was used.5. Bulk density is 1.7 t/m

3

6. Mineral Reserves assume 90% extraction of Mineral Resources.7. Numbers may not add due to rounding.8. Uranium quantities and grade are net of extraction.

MINING METHOD

Operations at the Mine include the wellfield operations and the process plant. The

Blizhniy deposit is located adjacent to the processing plant and is the sole producing

deposit. The Letniy deposit is located approximately 30 km from the plant site and is

scheduled to commence extraction of uranium in 2012.

The uranium ISR operation uses a sulphuric acid leach. Sulphuric acid leaching solution

is pumped into the mineralized zone through a network of injection wells (boreholes) and

extracted by production wells. The wells are typically 200 mm in diameter in the upper

portions reducing to 100 mm lower in the hole. At the Mine, the wells are approximately



www.rpacan.com



200 m deep and are generally placed in a hexagonal pattern with a 40 m radius or in line

patterns with wells 25 to 40 m apart on lines that are 25 to 50 m apart.

As of September 30, 2011, the wellfield had 1,346 wells in total (398 production and 948

injection), with 958 wells in operation (242 production wells and 716 injection wells).Production solutions are mainly pumped to surface using submersible pumps. The

average grade of the production solution was 79.7 mg/L U for September 2011 and

105.1 mg/L U for the project to date. Acid consumption for the project to date has

averaged 10.5 kg acid per kilogram of uranium for acidification and 13.1 kg acid per

kilogram of uranium for leaching.

The Akdala LOM plan is based on an estimated 90% extraction of in-situ uranium

resources being recovered in solution and delivered to the processing plant. Production

experience to date indicates that this rate of extraction may in fact be conservative

relative to the estimated Mineral Reserves. A number of production blocks have shown

well above 100% extraction of the estimated Mineral Resource. Other blocks have not

yet achieved the 90% target; however, they remain under leach so indications are that

on average the 90% level is likely to be exceeded. RPA is of the opinion that these

results are indicative of conservative estimation methodology.

As of September 30, 2011, the process plant was operating at a rate of 1,700 m3/h using

a resin for the recovery of uranium, producing a yellowcake precipitate which is shipped

off site for further processing.

MINERAL PROCESSING

Uranium rich solutions (pregnant solutions) are pumped from the wellfields and delivered

via a series of pipelines into the pregnant solution pond. Pregnant solution is recovered

from the pregnant solution pond via pumps located adjacent to the processing plant

facilities. Within the processing facility, the pregnant solution is passed through ionexchange columns loaded with a uranium-selective resin. The resin is loaded with

uranium within these column reactors and the barren solution is sent for re-injection at

the wellfield.

The uranium-bearing resin is transferred from the column reactors and the resin is

stripped of uranium using an ammonium nitrate solution. The strip solution is transferred



www.rpacan.com



to a precipitation vessel where hydrogen peroxide is used to precipitate the uranium out

of solution. The precipitate is dewatered using a belt filter producing a solid product

containing approximately 40% U and 12% moisture. This yellow cake material is the

final product generated at the Akdala operation.

Process recovery of the uranium delivered to the plant in solution is forecast to average

approximately 97.5%. Current operating experience indicates that this performance

level is achievable.

PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE

The Mine has a number of support facilities including:

• Connection to the electrical grid.

• Hot water heaters for plant heat supply.

• Shops and supplies storage area.

• Acid storage tanks.

• Offices, change rooms, and dining room.

• Fenced plant area with security at the gate.

ENVIRONMENTAL

Current Kazakhstan regulations regarding development are being followed. For this

operation, the environmental issues relative to start-up can be expected to be minimized.

In view of the depth of the zones being mined and the relative isolation of the aquifer,

there is no aquifer remediation planned as part of the Mine closure. The surface

disturbances will be reclaimed and process facilities will be removed.

The environmental risk is currently perceived to be low.

As of December 31, 2011, the Uranium One portion of the asset retirement obligations

(on an undiscounted basis) has been estimated at US$4.0 million for the successful

decommissioning, reclamation and long term care of the surface and well field facilities.

The total asset retirement obligation is then estimated to be US$5.7 million.



www.rpacan.com



CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE

The capital expenditures are estimated to be US$49 million over the LOM and are

summarized in Table 1-3.

TABLE 1-3 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE ESTIMATEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

2012 2013 2014 2015 Total

US$ (M) US$ (M) US$ (M) US$ (M) US$ (M)

Wellfield Development 9.14 6.76 3.00 18.91

Exploration drilling 1.22 1.51 1.62 1.66 6.01

Expansion/Upgrade 15.87 0.89 0.92 - 17.68

Sustaining Capital 1.04 4.45 5.49

Social Sphere Spending 0.56 - - - 0.56

Total 27.84 13.62 5.53 1.66 48.65

OPERATING COSTS

The LOM estimated operating costs are summarized in Table 1-4.

TABLE 1-4 LOM OPERATING COST ESTIMATEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

2012 2013 2014 2015 Total


Mining 13.62 14.40 15.45 3.90 47.38

Processing 6.04 6.26 6.70 1.68 20.68 Auxiliary 5.53 6.10 6.33 1.58 19.53

Administration 2.36 2.53 2.71 0.68 8.27

Contract Processing Services 4.17 4.46 4.78 1.19 14.61

Betpak Office Allocation 2.98 3.27 3.48 0.87 10.60

Selling expenses 3.07 2.89 2.93 3.00 11.89

Subtotal 37.77 39.91 42.37 12.90 132.96

Social Cost 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.64

Training 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.13 1.33

Reclamation 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.13 1.33

Subtotal other costs 0.92 0.96 1.01 0.42 3.30

Total operating costs 38.69 40.87 43.38 13.32 136.26

MET 6.27 6.58 6.58 1.74 21.17


Cost per lb U Sold 21.24 22.41 29.50 28.45 24.38

Cost per kg U Sold 46.82 49.40 65.03 62.72 53.75

Cost per lb U3O8 Sold 18.00 18.99 25.00 24.11 20.66



www.rpacan.com



2 INTRODUCTION

Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. (RPA) was retained by Uranium One Inc. (Uranium One),

to prepare an independent Technical Report on the Akdala Uranium Mine (the Mine),Kazakhstan. The purpose of this report is to provide an updated estimate of the Mineral

Resources and Mineral Reserves at the Mine and support the public disclosure of

information related to the Mine by Uranium One. This Technical Report conforms to

National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101).

This Technical Report was amended on May 2, 2012, to reflect a slight modification in

the mineral extraction tax (MET) estimate, however, this has no impact on the Mineral

Reserve estimate.

Uranium One is a Canadian based uranium producing company with a principal listing

on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX:UUU) and a secondary listing on the

Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE:UUU). The company has producing operations

and/or advanced exploration projects in Kazakhstan, USA, and Australia and is the

operator of a uranium project in Tanzania.

The Mine is an in-situ recovery (ISR) project which includes wellfields, a pumping

station, and a processing plant. The final product produced at the Mine is uranium oxide

(U3O8). The Mine is owned and operated by the Betpak Dala Joint Venture (Betpak

Dala), a joint venture between Uranium One and Kazakhstan National Atomic Company

(Kazatomprom), on a 70-30 basis respectively.

RPA prepared a report for UrAsia Energy (BVI) Ltd. entitled “Technical Report on the

Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan”, dated October 3, 2005, and updated March 21,

2006, as well a previous report for Uranium One Inc. entitled “Technical Report on the

Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan”, dated May 27, 2010 .

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

A site visit was carried out on October 17, 2011, by Mr. Wayne W. Valliant, P.Geo.,

Principal Geologist, RPA, and Mr. R. Dennis Bergen, P.Eng., Associate Principal Mining

Engineer, RPA.



www.rpacan.com



Discussions were held with personnel from Uranium One and the Akdala Mine:

• Mr. Thys Heyns, Senior Vice President, New Business and TechnicalServices, Uranium One

• Mr. Jan Fajgl, Manager Technical, Uranium One, Kazakhstan• Mr. Kanat Duisemuratov, Mine Manager, Akdala Mine• Mr. Mokhoten, Chief Geologist, Akdala Mine

Mr. Valliant prepared sections 2 through 14 and 23 and with Mr. Bergen contributed to

sections 1, 25, 26, and 27. Mr. Bergen prepared sections 13, 15 through 22 and 24 and

with Mr. Valliant contributed to sections 1, 25, 26, and 27.

The documentation reviewed, and other sources of information, are listed at the end of

this report in Section 27 References.



www.rpacan.com



LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Units of measurement used in this report conform to the Imperial system. All currency in

this report is US dollars (US$) unless otherwise noted.

µ micron km square kilometre

°C degree Celsius kPa kilopascal°F degree Fahrenheit kVA kilovolt-amperesµg microgram kW kilowatt

A ampere kWh kilowatt-houra annum L litrebbl barrels L/s litres per secondBtu British thermal units lb poundC$ Canadian dollars m metrecal calorie M mega (million)cfm cubic feet per minute m

2 square metre

cm centimetre m3 cubic metre

cm square centimetre min minuted day m /h cubic metres per hour

dia. diameter MASL metres above sea leveldmt dry metric tonne mm millimetredwt dead-weight ton mph miles per hourft foot MVA megavolt-amperesft/s foot per second MW megawattft square foot MWh megawatt-hourft cubic foot opt, oz/st ounce per short tong gram oz Troy ounce (31.1035g)G giga (billion) ppm part per millionGal Imperial gallon psia pound per square inch absoluteg/L gram per litre psig pound per square inch gaugeg/t gram per tonne RL relative elevationgpm Imperial gallons per minute s second

gr/ft

3

grain per cubic foot st short tongr/m3 grain per cubic metre stpa short ton per year

hr hour stpd short ton per dayha hectare t metric tonnehp horsepower tpa metric tonne per yearin inch tpd metric tonne per dayin square inch US$ United States dollarJ joule USg United States gallonk kilo (thousand) USgpm US gallon per minutekcal kilocalorie V voltkg kilogram W wattkm kilometre wmt wet metric tonnekm/h kilometre per hour yd cubic yard

yr year

Contained uranium is expressed as pounds of U3O8 or tonnes of U and grades are

expressed as %U or % U3O8. The conversion factor to convert tonnes of U to pounds of

U3O8 is 2,599.78. The conversion factor to convert %U to %U3O8 is to multiply %U by

1.179.



www.rpacan.com



3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

This report has been prepared by RPA for Uranium One. The information, conclusions,

opinions, and estimates contained herein are based on:

• Information available to RPA at the time of preparation of this report;

• Assumptions, conditions, and qualifications as set forth in this report; and

• Data, reports, and other information supplied by Uranium One and other thirdparty sources.

For the purpose of this report, RPA has relied on ownership information provided by

Uranium One. RPA has not researched property title or mineral rights for the Mine and

expresses no opinion as to the ownership status of the property.

RPA has relied on Uranium One for guidance on applicable taxes, royalties, and other

government levies or interests, applicable to revenue or income from the Mine.

Except for the purposes legislated under provincial securities laws, any use of this report

by any third party is at that party’s sole risk.



www.rpacan.com



4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

The Akdala deposit is located in the Suzak region of the South Kazakhstan Oblast,

approximately 240 km in a direct line north of Shymkent, Kazakhstan. The propertycomprises three non-contiguous adjacent blocks, totalling 31.54 km2 and centred about

Longitude 68o37’E and Latitude 45o30’N. The Subsoil Use Contract gives Betpak Dala

the right to mine the deposits to a depth of 220 m and was granted under the

Kazakhstan Republic Mining Law #2828, January 27, 1996.

The MEMR was dissolved in March 2010 and its responsibilities with respect to all

matters relating to power generation, mining, and the nuclear industry were transferred

to a new body, the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies (MINT). All references to

the MEMR in this report include the MINT for all matters from and after March 2010.

LAND TENURE

SUBSOIL USE CONTRACT

In Kazakhstan, the grant of rights for the exploration and exploitation of mineral

resources and reserves takes the form of a Subsoil Use Contract. This contract is

negotiated between the Government of Kazakhstan and the operator. The Subsoil Use

Contract defines the area to which the rights apply and defines a work program for theexploration and development of the property including an approved production schedule.

The contract can be amended by the parties.

Kazatomprom, the Kazakh state-owned uranium mining company entered into a contract

with the MEMR of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 28, 2001, which authorized

Kazatomprom to carry out exploration and production on the Akdala deposit (the Akdala

Contract). The Akdala Contract is valid for a period of 25 years and may be renewed by

the mutual agreement of the parties if all conditions of the contract have been met. The Akdala Contract was amended on June 7, 2004, to change the holder of mining rights

under the contract from Kazatomprom to Betpak Dala. Betpak Dala is a joint venture

between Uranium One and Kazatomprom on a 70%-30% basis respectively. The

Akdala Contract was further amended on April 25, 2005 and December 29, 2006, with

minor changes to applicable taxes, royalties, bonuses, and other expenses.



www.rpacan.com



The Subsoil Use Contract gives Betpak Dala the exclusive right to explore for uranium

at, and produce (mine) uranium from, the Akdala Mine for the periods indicated, and to

own the uranium so produced. Under the Subsoil Use Contract, Betpak Dala is required

to comply with a detailed exploration and production work program on an annual basis.

The term of the Subsoil Use Contract may be extended by the mutual agreement of the

parties, and upon such renewal, the terms and conditions of the agreement may be

changed by written agreement between the parties. The Subsoil Use Contract may not

be assigned, nor may the subsoil use rights be pledged or otherwise encumbered

without the prior consent of the Government of Kazakhstan.

The Subsoil Use Contract may be unilaterally terminated by the MEMR if Betpak Dala

defaults on any terms of the contract more than twice and fails to cure such defaults

within the period set by the MEMR. In addition, the Subsoil Use Contract can be

terminated for such things as a breach by the subsoil user of the government’s pre-

emptive right or the failure of the subsoil user to obtain consent from the MEMR for the

disposal of subsoil use rights and associated rights.

The Subsoil Use Contract may also be amended and/or terminated unilaterally by the

MEMR if any actions of the subsoil user may result in a material negative impact on

Kazakhstan’s economic interests and/or potentially constitute a threat to national

security.

The Government of Kazakhstan possesses certain statutory pre-emptive rights to (i) to

purchase and requisition uranium from subsoil users, including Betpak Dala, at prices

not exceeding world market prices, (ii) to purchase subsoil use rights or equity interests

in entities holding such rights if the same are put up for sale, and (iii) to terminate, in

certain circumstances, the Subsoil Use Contract.

The Subsoil Use Contract provides that, to the extent that there are any disputes thatcannot be resolved through negotiations between Betpak Dala and the Government of

Kazakhstan, such disputes are to be submitted to the courts of Kazakhstan rather than

to an independent international arbitration body.

The following is a summary of the other principal terms of the current Akdala Subsoil

Use Contract translated from the Russian text and is not meant to be exhaustive:



www.rpacan.com



1. All assets including the raw materials processed at the site are the property of theContractor (Betpak Dala).

2. The Contractor has the right to “use at its discretion the results of its operations,including produced uranium”.

3. The Government of Kazakhstan has the right in the case of emergencies torequisition all or part of the minerals produced by the Contractor at the Mine.

4. The Government of Kazakhstan has a pre-emptive right to purchase up to 10% ofthe annual output of uranium at prices not exceeding world market rates.

5. The Contractor is obligated to use local goods, services and employees providedthat such services are competitive and at comparable quality.

6. The Contractor must allocate no less that 0.05% of operating costs to trainKazakh personnel and provide at least US$50,000 per year to maintain the socialsector of the local village.

7. In the initial five years of the contract, the Contractor is to carry out an explorationprogram, including a full scale pilot plant test. This requirement has been met,and the property is in production.

8. A payment to the Kazakhstan government of US$1,493,919 is required to be paidin 40 instalments on a quarterly basis commencing January 1, 2008, and endingDecember 31, 2017 as a reimbursement for historic costs.

In addition to applicable taxes and various user fees, the Contractor shall pay a

Commercial Discovery Bonus upon a discovery or increase in the initial reserves within

the Contract Area at the rate of 0.05% of the approved recoverable reserves value.

The Akdala Subsoil Use Contract contains various social obligations for the benefit of

Betpak Dala employees. These social obligations include investing at least 0.05% of

Betpak Dala’s operating expenses per annum in training programs for its Kazakh

employees. In addition, Betpak Dala has undertaken to purchase goods and services

from Kazakh businesses to service the Akdala Mine whenever possible provided that

such goods and services are competitive with those that are available outside

Kazakhstan and are of at least comparable quality. Currently most services are suppliednot by Kazatomprom itself, but by its affiliates. The Akdala Contract does not provide for

specific thresholds as to procurement from Kazakh businesses.

RPA is of the opinion that the contract provides sufficient surface rights for the planned

operations.



February 2012 Source: UrAsia, 2005

N

General Location of SouthKazakhstan Uranium Deposits

Uranium One Inc.

Akdala Uranium MineKazakhstan

Figure 4-1

4-4

www.rpacan.co



AKDALA

UVANAS

45°N

67°E68°E

Roll Front Deposits

MYNKUDUK

BUDENOVSKOYE

SHOLAK - ESPE

INKAI

0 10 40

Kilometres

20 30

N

February 2012 Source: UrAsia, 2005.

Akda

U

Ak

4 -

5



www.rpacan.com



5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCALRESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE ANDPHYSIOGRAPHY

ACCESSIBILITY

The property is accessible by a 240 km paved road, which runs northeast from Suzak,

and by a 470 km road, some of which is unimproved, from Shymkent (see Figure 4-1).

The railway passes through Suzak. The closest airports with scheduled local service are

at Shymkent and at Kyzylorda, which is approximately 350 km to the southwest.

CLIMATE

The climate is continental, with annual precipitation from 130 mm to 170 mm, occurring

mostly in winter and spring. There are extreme temperature fluctuations, both daily and

annually, reaching from -40oC in January to 40oC in July. The climate does not unduly

affect production, although during extreme cold, if the solutions are not continually

pumped, there is the potential to freeze solution in the pipes and a loss of production

may occur until the solution can be thawed.

LOCAL RESOURCESThe local resources are limited in the area of the Mine. The area is predominantly desert

terrain and has limited agriculture use. Local communities exist although they are

sparsely populated and with limited access to resources or infrastructure.

INFRASTRUCTURE

The Stepnoye Mining Company town site, Kyzymshek, 45 km south of the Mine,

provides housing for the workers and their families for all the nearby mining activities.

A 35 kV power line is connected to the site. Both mill and potable water is obtained from

the local aquifers.



www.rpacan.com



On site are several office buildings, a cafeteria, a work shop, and a processing plant with

associated pregnant and barren solution ponds, wellfields, and pump houses connected

with the ISR operation.

PHYSIOGRAPHYThe property is located in the Betpak-Dala desert plateau with elevations of 245 MASL

to 265 MASL. The ground consists of extensive sand deposits. There are no significant

rivers in the area and vegetation is limited to grasses and occasional low bushes.



www.rpacan.com



6 HISTORY

EXPLORATION HISTORY

In 1956, geologists studying uranium deposits in Uzbekistan established a model basedon the spatial relation of uranium mineralization to the boundaries between yellow

oxidized sands and unoxidized grey sands, which is now the established model of roll

front type uranium deposits.

In the late 1950s, exploration commenced in the Chu-Sarysu basin based on the

presence of young uplifted mountains adjacent to the basin. Initial reconnaissance

drilling was carried out at a line spacing of 25.6 km, often reduced to 12.8 km and 6.4 km

depending on the results of reconnaissance work. A line spacing of 3.2 km to 1.6 kmwas used to increase the possibility of discovering a deposit once the roll front had been

identified. Spacing of the drill holes was reduced as discoveries were made, with

resource estimation requiring a line spacing of 400 m to 800 m with holes 50 m to 200 m

apart.

Drilling in the region began in 1961 and resulted in the discovery of a few small deposits,

and in 1963, Uvanas was discovered. The Mynkuduk deposit, which extends over a 65

km length, was explored between 1975 and 1989. The Inkai deposit, which covers an

area of 55 km in length and up to 17 km in width, was explored between 1976 and 1991.

Uranium was initially discovered at Akdala in 1982 as part of the Mynkuduk deposit,

which was actively explored during the period 1982 to 1987. The Akdala deposit was

considered a separate entity by 1999, and detailed drilling was carried out between 2001

and 2003. The results of the exploration program were used to estimate the Mineral

Resources and Mineral Reserves in this report. Exploration work included the

establishment of a pilot ISR extraction and processing facility.

OWNERSHIP HISTORY

Kazatomprom entered into a Subsoil Use Contract with the MEMR dated March 28,

2001, which authorized Kazatomprom to carry out exploration and production on the

Akdala deposit. The contract was amended on June 7, 2004, to change the holder of



www.rpacan.com



the mining rights from Kazatomprom to Betpak Dala, and the Subsoil Use Contract was

assigned to Betpak Dala in September 2004.

On November 7, 2005, UrAsia acquired a 70% interest in Betpak Dala. The remaining

30% interest in Betpak Dala is owned by Kazatomprom.

On April 20, 2007, Uranium One acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of

UrAsia’s parent company, thereby acquiring an indirect 70% interest in Akdala.

PRODUCTION HISTORY

The Mine commenced official production in January 2004 and has produced 20.9 million

lb U3O8 (8,025 t U) from January 2004 to September 31, 2011. The production history is


TABLE 6-1 PRODUCTION HISTORY


Year U3O8 Uranium

(000 lb) (t)

2001 194 74.6

2002 1,210 465.6

2003 740 284.6

2004 1,463 562.8

2005 1,906 733.1

2006 2,702 1,039.2

2007 2,610 1,003.9

2008 2,676 1,029.3

2009 2,701 1,038.8

2010 2,686 1,033

2011 Sep YTD 1,976 760.3

Total 20,864 8,025.2

Note: The estimates above represent uranium process plant production.



www.rpacan.com



7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING ANDMINERALIZATION

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The Mine is located in the Chu-Sarysu depression (Figures 7-1 and 7-2), which

represents a large Cretaceous age basin up to 250 km wide and which extends

northward for more than 1,000 km from the foothills of the Tien Shan Mountains. The

basin is underlain by folded Proterozoic and Early Paleozoic formations which flank the

basin and are exposed at the southwest margin, where the Karatau Mountains separate

the Chu-Sarysu basin from the parallel Syrdarya basin. The platform sediments are

continental sediments up to 320 m thick and marine Paleogene sediments of up to 200

m that are overlain by red-coloured sandy-clay Oligocene to Quaternary sediments.

The basin is an asymmetric syncline with a broad gently sloping northeast limb and an

uplifted south limb which form the Karatau Mountains. The axis of the basin is parallel to

its southwest margin.

PROPERTY GEOLOGY

The mineralized horizons extend for over 45 km along strike. As the mineralized

horizons occur as sinuous structures, the lineal length is much greater. The three

Akdala deposits cover a minimum strike length of approximately 25 km and are underlain

by Cretaceous to Cenozoic sediments, predominately sands, with occasional pebble and

gravel layers, clay and loamy soils up to 190 m thick. The sediments are gently dipping

to the southeast. The various plans and sections observed by RPA do not indicate the

presence of any significant faulting.

The local stratigraphy is divided into nine main units as follows:

1. N21 N2

2 - Middle Miocene to Lower Pliocene, sands, gravel, clay, 0 m to 45 mthick.

2. P23-N

11 - Upper Oligocene to Lower Miocene, clays, sands, 20 m to 35 m thick.



www.rpacan.com



3. P22

3 - Middle to Upper Eocene, Intymak horizon, greenish-grey to dark grey claysintercalated with sands to the east, 40 m to 50 m thick, contains minormineralization on Akdala.

4. P11

2 - Lower to Upper Paleocene, Uvanas horizon, grey to greenish grey sandswith interbedded clays.

5. K2km-P11 zp2 - Lower Paleocene to Upper Paleocene, Upper zone, Jalpak

horizon, light grey to greenish-grey to yellow fine- to medium-grained sands withinterbedded dark grey clays and lignites 20 m to 40 m thick.

6. zp1 - Lower Paleocene, Jalpak Horizon, sands, interbedded clays and siltstones,20 m to 35 m thick, principal mineralized horizon on Akdala.

7. K2t2-st - Cretaceous, Inkuduk horizon, greenish to yellowish-white sandy gravels,interbedded with clays and carbonated sandstones, 25 m to 50 m thick, maycontain mineralization.

8. K2t1-mk - Cretaceous, Mynkuduk horizon, grey to greenish-grey, varied sized

sands interbedded with gravels, contains Mineral Resources on Akdala.

9. P1 - Lower Permian, folded basement rocks, siltstones, limestones, salt, andgypsum found at a depth of 230 m to 250 m in the area.

The lower Jalpak horizon consists of medium-grained grey sand and gravel with an

average of 85% silica content. Thickness varies from 15 m to 20 m. The upper horizon

consists of fine- to medium-grained sands, intercalated with mottled clays up to two

metres in thickness and densely cemented carbonaceous sandstones. Thickness of the

upper horizon varies from 40 m to 45 m. Organic content varies between 0.05% and0.5%.

LOCAL GEOLOGY

The local geology is the same as the property geology described above.



Regional Cross SectionRefer to Figure 7-2

MYNKUDUK

A

AKDALA

I N K A I

Q

Q

Q

68° 30’68° 15’68° 00’67° 45’68° 30’

45°

40’

45°

50’

45°

20’

45°

30’

45°

10’

68° 30’68° 15’68° 00’67° 45’68° 30’

68° 45

Mineralization

Legend:

Quaternary

Lower Pliocene sands, gravel

Q

K

Lower Miocene sands, clays

Intymak horizon clays sands

Cretaceous sands2

P 2

N 1

N 2 1-2

2-3

bt

im


R

U

7 -

3



MYNKUDUK

A

AKDALA

Legend:

Sand, gravel, clay Clay, sands

Intymak horizon, clays intercalated with sands

Jalpak horizon, sands with interbedded clays and lignites principal mineralized horizon on Akdala

P 2

K 2

N

2

1

km-P

-st

N

2

2

P 2 3 - N 11

2 3

P 1

1

1

1

2

K 2 t 2

-mk K 2 t 1

P 1

Inkuduk horizon, sandy gravels, interbedded with clays and carbonated sandstones

zp2 ,zp1

Mynkuduk horizon, sands interbedded with gravels

Lower Permian, folded basement rocks

Uvanas horizon, grey to greenish grey sands with interbedded clays

Clay Permian Basement Sands

0


Regio

U

Akd

7 - 4



www.rpacan.com



MINERALIZATION

Mineralization at Akdala occurs primarily at depths varying between 136 m and 190 m

over a distance of 25 km. The Jalpak horizon illustrated in Figure 7-3 hosts the two main

deposits, Blizhniy and Letniy, that contain the majority of the Mineral Resources and

Mineral Reserves. At least one other mineralized occurrence has been discovered to

date on this horizon. Other mineralized bodies include those hosted in the finer grained

Intymak horizon at a depth of 70 m to 90 m containing approximately 10% of the Inferred

Resources. Mineralization has also been intersected in wide-spaced drilling on the

Mynkuduk horizon in three areas at a depth of approximately 220 m. The #1 deposit in

the Blizhniy area is currently in production from several resource blocks as illustrated in

the cross sections in Figure 7-4.

Roll fronts are continuous along strike and have widths from 30 m to 60 m. Thickness

varies between 0.5 m and 12 m at the thickest part of the roll front, averaging seven

metres.

The principal ore minerals are pitchblende (36%) and coffinite (64%), often accompanied

by selenium, rhenium, yttrium, molybdenum, arsenic, and phosphorus.



Intymak (horizon)

Jalpak

Mynkuduk

Section line / Drill hole

Inkuduk

Mineralized Horizons

OccurrenceM 4

D e p o s i

t # 1

J 2

I 7 M 4

M 5

J 3

M 6

D

Letniy Deposit

B l i z h n

i y D e p o

s i t

0


A

U

Ak

7 -

6



Oxidized Sands

1:000 horizontal 1:200 vertical

Oxidized Sands

Clays

ClaysGrey Sands

I

Block

II


Mineralization

Legend:

Assay interval

15-1-5

14624

Production wells

Exploration wellsScreen interval

m grade GT (m.%)

Deposit #1Section Looking West

Uranium One Inc.

Akdala Uranium MineKazakhstan

Figure 7-4

7-7

www.rpacan.co



www.rpacan.com



8 DEPOSIT TYPES

Sedimentary uranium deposits typically occur in medium- to coarse-grained sandstones

deposited in a continental fluvial environment. Impermeable shale/mudstone units

acting as barriers to the percolating fluids are interbedded in the sequence and oftenoccur above and below the mineralized sandstones. The uranium, perhaps derived from

nearby igneous rocks, is precipitated out of solution under reducing conditions caused

by a variety of reducing agents in the sandstone, including carbonaceous material,

sulphides, or hydrocarbons.

There are three main types of sandstone deposits:

1. Tabular deposits, irregular elongate bodies deposited parallel to the depositionaltrend, often associated with organic trash and carbon.

2. Tectonic/lithologic deposits adjacent to permeable fault zones.

3. Roll front deposits, arcuate bodies of mineralization that crosscut sandstonebedding.

The Akdala deposits in Kazakhstan are diagenetic in origin and hosted by Lower

Paleocene (Jalpak) alluvial deposits. As such, they are considered similar to roll front

deposits, as in the Shirley Basin and the Powder River Basin of Wyoming in the United

States.

The Kazakhstan deposits are considered similar to roll front deposits. The geology and

genesis of roll front uranium deposits has been studied since the 1960s. They are

typically found in Cenozoic intermontaine basins where uranium occurs in the form of

mineralized roll fronts emplaced at a redox interface in continental sandstones

containing detrital carbonaceous material. Epigenetic deposits are formed by down dip

migration of oxidizing solutions, with a concentration of uranium mineralization occurring

in the solution front. The highest grade portion of the front is the main part of the “C”

shape, with lesser grades found on the upper and lower limbs. The sandstone behind

the front is altered but essentially barren.

The most favourable host rocks are friable fine- to coarse-grained arkosic sandstones

containing pyrite and carbonaceous material. Interbedded mudstone, claystone, and



www.rpacan.com



siltstone interbeds are often present and sand and silt channels with crossbedding are

common. Below the water table, unaltered sandstones are light grey to greenish grey

with abundant pyrite and carbonaceous material, while the altered sandstones are

reddish or greenish yellow coloured with no pyrite and little carbonaceous material.

Alteration that marks the roll front penetrates the sandstone down dip. The fronts varywidely in size and shape and commonly have lateral extensions of several miles and

thicknesses of several feet. Within any one formation, there may be many individual

beds that contain roll fronts.



www.rpacan.com



9 EXPLORATION

Exploration at Akdala consists exclusively of drilling as described in Section 6 and

Section 10. All of the exploration at Akdala was completed prior to the acquisition of an

interest in the Mine by Uranium One.



www.rpacan.com



10 DRILLING

Neither Uranium One nor UrAsia has carried out any exploration drilling on the property.

Previous drilling to establish the resource was carried out under the direction of theSoviet Union exploration company, by the state government of Kazakhstan, and other

entities. Rotary mud drilling, using Russian equipment, was supplemented by core

drilling using the same rigs. The core produced by these rigs was approximately nine

centimeters in diameter. Approximately 70% of the holes drilled on the property were

cored through the mineralized horizons. All holes were electrically logged as discussed

in Section 11, Sample Preparation, Analysis, and Security.

The Akdala deposit was considered a separate entity by 1999, and detailed drilling was

carried out between 2001 and 2003. Total drilling on the deposit during the period 1982

to 2003 was 252,531 m in 1,433 drill holes. This figure includes exploration drilling along

the mineralized horizon and therefore may include some drilling beyond the current

Subsoil Use Contract boundaries. Stated exploration drilling on the Blizhniy and Letniy

deposits amounted to 595 holes totaling 110,984 m and 482 holes totaling 77,871 m,

respectively. Total length of core recovered is reported to be 2,868 m. In addition, 49

hydrological holes totalling 8,652 m were completed on the two deposits and 1,346

technological holes (398 production holes and 948 injection holes) were drilled for

wellfield exploitation within the currently producing licence.

The mineralization is generally horizontal and, as the drill holes are vertical, the

mineralized intersections represent the true thickness.



www.rpacan.com



11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES ANDSECURITY

RPA was provided with a summary of the sampling methods carried out by previous

workers.

Kazatomprom reports that mineralized intervals (greater than 40 microroentgens per

hour) in the core portions of the holes were split in half. The sample intervals ranged in

length from 0.15 m up to 1.2 m, averaging 0.4 m in length. Both halves of the core were

sent to different laboratories for assays by chemical methods. Samples submitted for

uranium and radium chemical assays included 4,173 samples totaling 1,994 m for the

Blizhniy deposit and 504 samples totaling 172 m for the Letniy deposit.

Approximately 70% of all exploration drill holes were cored through the mineralized

zones. Mineralized core is chemically assayed for uranium, radium, rhenium, yttrium,

scandium, and total rare earths. Kazatomprom reports that chemical analyses on

mineralized intervals in the diamond drill holes were carried out at the Central Analytical

Laboratory PGO Volkovgeologia using the roentgen-spectral method on a fluorescent

roentgen analyzer. On the entire Akdala exploration project, a total of 11,041 samples

were analyzed for uranium and radium. Protocols for internal standards and external

control assays at other laboratories were in place. A total of 756 uranium analyses werererun for internal control and 563 samples were submitted to other laboratories in

Kazakhstan, Central Analytical Laboratory VIMS, and the Central Scientific Research

Laboratory KGRK. Reproducibility on both internal and external controls was shown to

be well within standard limits, but RPA has not verified this statement.

All drill holes were probed with electric logging tools, with results including gamma

counts, caliper, deviation measurements, and self-potential. Chemical assay results

were used to calibrate the gamma data to account for possible disequilibrium. Allreserve and resource estimations were then based on calibrated gamma data.

The gamma calibration process was detailed and exhaustive. Each portion of

approximately six sectors of the mineralized uranium roll front was assigned a specific

chemical to gamma correction factor based on statistical analysis of the chemical assay

data. Overall correlation between corrected gamma and chemical values was reported



www.rpacan.com



to be within approximately five percent. RPA has not verified the raw data associated

with this statement but considers the results to be satisfactory and the data suitable for

inclusion in a database used to estimate resources and reserves.

RPA considers the sampling method and approach to be appropriate for MineralResource estimation.



www.rpacan.com



12 DATA VERIFICATION

RPA did not collect any independent samples as the mineralization occurs at depth and

no core was available. As discussed above, the entire mineralized core is submitted for

chemical assay and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) protocols.

RPA has reviewed sample drill logs, cross sections, plan maps, and electric logs from

the Akdala geologic database. The Akdala geologic database was originally developed

under the guidelines of the Ministry of Geology of the former USSR and more recently by

the Commission on Mineral Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Based on past experience, RPA is of the opinion that the process of uranium drill hole

data collection and evaluation developed and used in the former Soviet Union and itsnow independent states, such as Kazakhstan is very exhaustive. RPA has accepted the

basic drill hole data, which are used for estimation of reserves and resources.

RPA, in Sections 14 and 15 of this report, compared the Mineral Resource estimate to

the production from each Mineral Resource block in production. The reconciliation was

favourable and, by inference, RPA considers the data used for the Mineral Resource

estimate to be reliable.



www.rpacan.com



13 MINERAL PROCESSING ANDMETALLURGICAL TESTING

Akdala is an operating sulphuric acid ISR uranium mine, which produces an intermediate

(approximately 40% U) filter cake yellowcake (U3O8) product. Commercial operations

commenced on January 1, 2004, following a 2.25 year pilot plant testing program

conducted during the period from October 1, 2000 through December 31, 2003. The

total uranium extracted from the subsoil from the commencement of extraction to

September 30, 2011 is 8,319 tonnes U.

The Akdala process plant is operating and has been operating for a number of years.

The operating experience is considered to be a suitable demonstration of the process

and the process performance as opposed to any of the old metallurgical testing work.

In September 2011, the processing facilities treated 2,016 m3/h of pregnant solution

carrying an average uranium solution grade of 79.7 mg U/L. The 2011 year to date

(YTD) pregnant solution grade was 65.3 mg U/L. Overall uranium recovery in the

process plant from pregnant solution to finished product averaged 98.3% for the month

and 98.1% YTD. This production level and recovery performance exceeded plan for the

period.

Acid consumption at Akdala has averaged 10.5 kg of sulphuric acid per kg of uranium for

initial acidification of the production areas and 13.3 kg sulphuric acid per kilogram of

uranium for leaching.

Figure 13-1 illustrates the process flow sheet for the facility.

COMPARATIVE STATISTICS FOR URANIUM ONE OPERATIONS IN KAZAKHSTANUranium One has interests in six ISR uranium operations in Kazakhstan, for information

and for comparison between the operations, some comparative statistics for the

operations are shown in Table 13-1.



www.rpacan.com



TABLE 13-1 COMPARATIVE STATISTICS URANIUM ONE MINES INKAZAKHSTAN

Uranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

SolutionFlow Rate

SolutionGrade Sept

2011 Acid Use (Kg) Solution Acidity

m3/h mg/L U Acidi fy Leach Total g/L (PTD)

South Inkai 3,368 56 15.3 36.3 51.6 6.5

Akdala 2,016 80 9.2 13.0 22.2 2.4

Zarechnoye 2,562 31 35.8 102.0 137.8 7.1

Kharasan 713 85 13.2 160.5 173.7 12.0

Akbastau 582 156 5.8 18.8 24.6 7.1

Karatau 1,836 150 5.7 28.4 34.1 6.8

Notes: Statistics are at September 30, 2011Solution acidity is period to date value

Acid consumption are period to date values

Acidification based on 90% of total U under leach at Sept 30 2011



Uranium Precipitation Tank(Slurry)

Barren

SolutionPond(TWD)

Barren Solution

Productive Solution

Filter Press

or

DenitrificationTanks

StrippedResin

Rich Eluate

R

IX Columns (Absorption Tanks)

Pressure Press

Yellow Cake

Product

U-Shape Column(Desorption Tank)

3 in Circuit

Precipitated Slurry

CleanResin

U-Loa

dedResin

February 2012

Akd

Pr

U

1

3 - 3



www.rpacan.com



14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

Mineral Resources at Akdala were originally estimated by Volkov Geological and Mining

Company (Volkovgeologia), the exploration arm of Kazatomprom, effective 2001, using

the system developed for Mongolia and CIS countries. In 2006, Scott Wilson RoscoePostle Associates Inc. (Scott Wilson RPA), a predecessor company to RPA, reviewed

the parameters and methodology for mineral resources and, based on the data density,

the demonstrated continuity of the mineralization, and the established high recoverability

of U from the mineralization, converted the CIS C1 and C2 category resources to

Indicated Mineral Resources and Inferred Mineral Resources, respectively.

Since that time, no further exploration drilling has been undertaken within the Indicated

Mineral Resource blocks. The Indicated Mineral Resource blocks in the Blizhniy deposithave subsequently been adjusted based on production drilling and depletion and

upgraded to Measured Mineral Resources. The Indicated and Inferred Mineral

Resource estimates are based on exploration drilling and remain unchanged since the

Scott Wilson RPA 2010 Technical Report (Valliant and Hendry, 2010).

RPA is of the opinion that the methodology used to estimate the original and updated

mineral resources is appropriate and is in accordance with industry standards. RPA has

reviewed the drill density, geological knowledge, and mineral resource versus productionreconciliation of producing wellfields and has reclassified the resources to conform to the

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum Definition Standards for Mineral

Resources and Mineral Reserves dated November 27, 2010 (CIM definitions). The

Mineral Resources estimate, effective December 31, 2011, is summarized in Table 14-1.



www.rpacan.com



TABLE 14-1 MINERAL RESOURCES - DECEMBER 31, 2011


Classification Area Tonnes Grade Contained U Grade Contained U3O8

(000 t) (% U) (tonnes) (% U3O8) (000 lb)

Measured Blizhniy 33,230 0.009 2,982 0.011 7,753

Letniy - - - - -

Total 33,230 0.009 2,982 0.011 7,753

Indicated Blizhniy - - - - -

Letniy 628 0.064 399 0.075 1,037

Total 628 0.064 399 0.075 1,037

Measured +Indicated Blizhniy 33,230 0.009 2,982 0.011 7,753

Letniy 628 0.064 399 0.075 1,037

Total 33,858 0.010 3,381 0.012 8,791

Inferred Blizhniy 911 0.046 415 0.054 1,079

Letniy 8,772 0.064 5,600 0.075 14,560

Total 9,683 0.062 6,015 0.073 15,639

Notes:1. Mineral Resources are based on CIM definitions.2. Mineral Resources based on 0.04 m% (grade x thickness) cut-off per hole and 0.10 m% per

resource block.3. Indicated Mineral Resources include 100% of C1 CIS resources.4. Inferred Mineral Resources include 100% of C2 CIS resources.5. Bulk density is 1.7 t/m

3.

6. Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.7. Columns and rows may not add due to rounding.8. Measured Mineral Resources based on production drilling.9. Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources based on exploration drilling.10. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability

In RPA’s opinion, the classification of Mineral Resources as reported in Table 14-1 is

consistent with CIM definitions.

RPA COMMENTS ON CIS RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION

Mineral resources and reserves in Mongolia and the CIS countries are classified

accordingly to the 1981 system developed in the former Soviet Union (Diatchkov, 1994).

According to this system, mineral concentrations are divided into seven categories in

three major groups based on the level of exploration performed. A general comparison

with the CIM system is provided in Table 14-2.



www.rpacan.com



TABLE 14-2 CIS CLASSIFICATION OF MINERAL RESOURCESUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

CIS Classification CIS Categories Comparable CIM Classification

Explored Resources A and B Measured Resources

Explored Resources C1 Indicated/Measured Resources

Evaluated Resources C2 Inferred/Indicated Resources

Prognosticated Resources P1, P2 and P3 Exploration Data

The density of the exploration grid and continuity of the mineralization determines the

resource category of each geological block. This, in turn, is dependent on the

complexity of the deposit (size, shape, and thickness and grade variability). Resource

block classification is based on the degree of variability (coefficient of variation) of

tonnage and grade. Prognosticated Resources (P1, P2, and P3) are not recognized as

Mineral Resources under the CIM definitions but are equivalent to exploration data, and

estimations of tonnage and grade are considered conceptual or order of magnitude.

Note that under the CIS classification system, all of the categories set out in the above

table are referred to as “reserves”. To avoid confusion with the CIM definitions, in this

report, RPA has changed the terminology use for the CIS classification categories

throughout this report so that CIS system “reserves” are referred to as “resources”. The

resource and reserve categories under the CIM definitions are further distinguished from

the CIS classifications by being written with initial capital letters. Hence, “Mineral

Resources” and “Mineral Reserves” refers to categories under the CIM definitions, while

“resources” refers to categories under the CIS classification system.

PARAMETERS

The parameters of resource estimation at the Akdala deposit have been approved by the

Commission on Mineral Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Protocol #158-02-K

dated May 23, 2003. These parameters include:

• The cut-off grade used for establishing ore widths is 0.01% U.

• The minimum metre % (m%) per hole used within the orebody outline is 0.040m%.

• The maximum thickness of individual barren/uneconomic ore zones included inthe resource estimation is 1.0 m.



www.rpacan.com



• The minimum GT value used within the outline of a resource block is 0.1 m%.

• Overall thickness of barren interbeds included in one resource block is not toexceed 6 m.

• The minimum ore-to-barren ratio (a ratio between the number of positive holes to

the total number of holes within the outline of a resource block) is 0.75.

• The minimum area of an isolated resource block is 40,000 m2, and the maximumarea is 300,000 m2.

• The content of <0.05 mm silt-clay material per ore width is not to exceed 30%.

• Minimum permeability of host strata (a permeability rate) is 1.0 m/d.

• Accessory metal resource (Rh, Sc, Y, REE) is also estimated within the outline ofthe resource block.

Resource blocks located in the permeable strata are to be included in the low-grade

uneconomic resources. They are delineated using a minimum GT of 0.2 m% (without

limitations on the average m% per block), a maximum thickness of six metres for barren

interbeds, and all the other parameters as listed above for the economic resources. The

U resource in clay and clayey rocks (containing >30% of fine silt-clay material) is

included in the statistics based on a cut-off grade of 0.035 U and a GT cut-off of 0.035

m%.

RPA notes that the grade cut-off used is considered low by Western standards, but the

mineralized interval also has to meet cut-offs based on permeability and GT parameters.

In addition, production costs are low and the project has a positive cash flow. RPA is of

the opinion that the methodology is appropriate for the estimation of resources and

reserves. RPA is also of the opinion that the uneconomic resources should not be

reported under CIM definitions.

METHODOLOGY

Mineral resources are estimated utilizing a sectional method with resource blocks

outlined on the cross sections and the mineral resource volumes are estimated by the

product of the average ore width on a given section times the area of influence of that

section.



www.rpacan.com



Current Measured Mineral Resources are based on the production drilling either in a

hexagonal pattern with a 40 m radius or in-line patters with holes drilled on 25 m to 40 m

spacing on 25 m to 50 m sections. Indicated Mineral Resources (previously C1) have

been drilled on fences 200 m apart with holes on 50 m intervals. Inferred Mineral

Resources (previously C2) have been drilled on fences 800 m apart with drill holes on 50m to 100 m intervals.

The development of the resource model is based on the geological interpretation of the

structure and morphology of the mineralization. Correlation of the units includes

lithological characteristics and permeability rates.

The mineralized bodies were subdivided into fronts, limbs, and outliers. Overall,

correlation based on all of the above parameters gives reliable results. In some areas,

however, the thickness of six metres for barren interbeds was exceeded to make the

correlation possible. On sections, the lower and upper block boundaries are based on

the assay cut-off grade.

The delineation of mineralization and the resource blocks was carried out on plans with

scales of 1:2,000 and 1:10,000. The sections for the production zones have scales of

1:1,000 (horizontal) and 1:200 (vertical).

If a single hole showed a sudden decrease in mineralized width, the upper and lower

limits were extrapolated from adjacent holes, and the blocks included barren or low

grade intervals. In such cases, the overall thickness of a block was determined

graphically and, if low-grade or barren widths exceeded six metres, they were not

included in the calculation of the average parameters of the block.

In plan, the blocks were separated by straight lines connecting points identified by

means of interpolation between high-grade and low-grade or barren holes along the line.

The position of a hole on the plan was defined as a projection of hole intersection with

the footwall of the orebody. The points and the hole itself were projected onto a vertical

plane (along the line), and then the vertical limits of the block were identified.

In most cases, the roll fronts thin out abruptly within short distances. Therefore, the

interpolation used ¼ of the distance between holes.



www.rpacan.com



For the limbs, the interpolation used ¼ of the distance between high-grade and barren

holes, and ½ of the distance between high-grade and low-grade holes. If the thickness

of the mineralization in a high-grade hole exceeded significantly the thickness of the

mineralization in a low-grade hole, the interpolation was based on the accepted ¼

distance to avoid overestimation of the block area.

RESOURCE ESTIMATION

The resources were estimated using a sectional method. The following formula was

used:

P=S*Co*ρ,

where P is metal content, S is the area of block in plan, Co is an ore-to-barren

ratio, and ρ is an average productivity per block in kg/m2.

The average productivity is the product of an average GT per block and bulk density

(1.70):

ρ=m*c*d.

In addition to resource estimates, the assessment of the following parameters was

carried out:

Mo – overall thickness of the permeable strataM – average mineralized thicknessC – an average U grade based on a cut-off grade of 0.01%Vp – mineralization volumeϑp – ore tonnageVbl – the volume of a production unit before leaching

The C1 category resource blocks are plotted on 1:2,000 plans and the C2 resource

blocks and P1 resource blocks are plotted on 1:10,000 plans.

The plans show GT, mineralized widths, and U grades for each intercept. Theseparameters were used to estimate resource volume in each hole. A resource block

calculation spreadsheet contains the average parameters of the uranium mineralization,

as well as the average permeability of the rocks (the permeability rate) and carbonate

and clay (<0.05 mm silt and clay) contents.



www.rpacan.com



The permeable host strata are characterized by high permeability rates exceeding

significantly the limit of 1.0 m/d as per the parameters listed above. Therefore, all of the

mineralization located in the permeable strata is amenable to the ISR mining method.

The rocks of the Mynkuduk and Jalpak horizons were subdivided into similar rock types,which, along with the quantitative analysis of permeability, allowed estimation of an

average permeability rate per block. The statistics of resources shared between the

various rock types is also included. The resource by type calculation is proportional to

the summary thickness of a certain rock type included in a resource block. This statistic

allows one to assess the permeability pattern (whether uniform or not uniform) of a

block.

The production zone sections also show the outlines and parameters of mineralization,

and the widths for both permeable and impermeable ores. Along with the quantitative

and qualitative permeability estimates, the sections provided CO2 and clay content plots

for ores and host rocks. This provided additional information on blocks that can be used

in future during mine development and mining.

In RPA’s opinion, based on the data density, demonstrated continuity of the

mineralization, and established high recoverability of U from the mineralization, the

Akdala mineral resources as per the CIS classification system were correctly converted

to CIM equivalent Mineral Resources where C1 and C2 resources as per the CIS

classification system were treated as equivalent to Indicated and Inferred Mineral

Resources in the CIM classification system, respectively.

CURRENT MINERAL RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION

Mineral resources were revised based on data derived from the production drilling. All of

the geological blocks in the Blizhniy area have had production drilling and are currently

in production. No production drilling has been done in the Letniy area as it will require asatellite process plant which has yet to receive approval. From start-up to December 31,

2011 inclusive (including an estimate of fourth quarter 2011 production), Akdala

produced 8,658 t U. Based on the revisions due to production drilling and depletion, the

Blizhniy Measured Mineral Resources have been re-estimated effective December 31,

2011 as summarized in Table 14-3. For the Mineral Reserve estimation, RPA

considered the blocks with extraction in excess of 100% to be complete and deleted



www.rpacan.com



them from the remaining Mineral Reserve. RPA recognizes that these blocks remain in

production and will continue to provide some uranium production, but there is no

reasonable manner in which to estimate this additional production.

TABLE 14-3 BLIZHNIY MEASURED MINERAL RESOURCES - DECEMBER31, 2011


Original Estimated Measured Extracted Remainder In Situ Measured

BlockNo.

Tonnes GradeContained

U3O8 U3O8 Tonnes GradeContained

U3O8

(000 t) (% U3O8) (000 lb) (000 lb) (000 t) (% U3O8) (000 lb)

3+4+5 1,855 0.048 1,947 1,875 1,855 0.002 73

13 2,364 0.035 1,836 1,568 2,364 0.005 268

14 3,039 0.025 1,682 1,284 3,039 0.006 398

23 2,486 0.050 2,751 1,984 2,486 0.014 76716 1,664 0.016 575 551 1,664 0.001 23

17 2,184 0.017 837 590 2,184 0.005 247

24 2,362 0.043 2,215 1,394 2,362 0.016 822

25 1,072 0.011 257 231 1,072 0.001 26

26 995 0.012 265 237 995 0.001 29

27 938 0.016 333 234 938 0.005 99

31 1,986 0.049 2,155 1,100 1,986 0.024 1,056

28 822 0.018 320 161 822 0.009 159

18 2,722 0.016 936 468 2,722 0.008 468

19 1,626 0.015 538 294 1,626 0.007 24420 1,447 0.012 398 62 1,447 0.011 335

32 1,561 0.038 1,300 159 1,561 0.033 1,141

104 1,874 0.018 728 16 1,874 0.017 712

13a 2,233 0.018 887 - 2,233 0.018 887

Total 33,230 0.027 19,960 12,207 33,230 0.011 7,753



www.rpacan.com



15 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE

The estimated Akdala Mineral Reserves are shown in Table 15-1. The low grades,

especially of the Proven Mineral Reserves reflect the deduction of uranium extracted to

date. The Proven Mineral Reserves are in the Blizhniy deposit while the ProbableMineral Reserves are in the Letniy deposit.

TABLE 15-1 MINERAL RESERVES – DECEMBER 31, 2011Uranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Category Tonnes(000)

Grade(%U)

RecoverableU (t)

Grade(%U3O8)

Recoverable U3O8 (M lb)

Proven 28,600 0.009 2,690 0.011 6.99

Probable 1,300 0.028 360 0.033 0.94

Proven & Probable 29,900 0.010 3,050 0.012 7.93

Notes:1. CIM definitions were followed for Mineral Reserves.2. Mineral Reserves are estimated at a cut-off grade of 0.01% U.3. Mineral Reserves are estimated using an average long-term uranium price of US$65 per

pound U3O8.4. A minimum mining thickness of four metres was used.5. Bulk density is 1.7 t/m

3.

6. Mineral Reserves assume 90% extraction of Mineral Resources.7. Numbers may not add due to rounding.8. Uranium quantities and grade are net of extraction.

Proven Mineral Reserve estimates were based upon the ore developed for extraction

and Probable Mineral Reserves are based upon the conversion of the remaining

Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource estimates. The Mineral Reserve estimates

include dilution and an estimate of the uranium extraction. The estimates are based

upon production to September 30, 2011 plus an estimate of the fourth quarter 2011

production. The Mineral Reserve estimates are for the 100% joint venture interest and

not the amounts attributable to the individual Betpak Dala partners.

CUT-OFF GRADERPA has generated a breakeven cut-off grade estimate for the Akdala Mineral Reserves

based upon the operating costs projected in the budget for 2011 to 2014. The approach

was to determine the processing costs per cubic metre of process flow and the average

liquid:solid (L:S) ratio considered necessary for extraction of the uranium. The L:S ratio

is the weight of leach solutions (taken as one tonne per cubic metre) divided by the ore



www.rpacan.com



(rock) tonnage. This is a measure of the number of leach cycles that a given tonnage of

rock will be subjected to.

From the review of the technological block operations, the L:S ratio for the planned

extraction was estimated to be three. While some blocks already have an L:S ratio inexcess of three there may be blocks that attain the planned extraction at a lower L:S

ratio. RPA has used an L:S ratio of three as the basis for the cut-off grade calculation as

shown in Table 15-2. Other ratios are included in Table 15-2 for comparison.

Metal prices used for Mineral Reserve estimates are based on consensus, long term

forecasts from banks, financial institutions, and other sources.

RPA is of the opinion that a breakeven cut-off grade of 0.01% U exceeds the calculated

cut-off grade and is suitable for the Akdala deposit and that with a four metre minimum

thickness, the minimum GT is 0.04 m% U.

The full cost breakeven cut-off grade for the solution is estimated to be 18 mg/L U.

TABLE 15-2 BREAKEVEN CUT-OFF GRADEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Description Unit 2012 2013 2014

Total Operating Costs US$(M) 44.79 42.74 40.85

Flow m3/h m

3/h 1,700 1,700 1,700

Cost per m3 of solution US$ 3.01 2.87 2.74

U3O8 Price US$/lb 65.00 65.00 65.00

U price $/kg US$/kg U 168.99 168.99 168.99

Solution cut-off grade g/t 17.8 17.0 16.2

Extraction % 90 90 90

Block grade cut-off (kg of U)L:S = 3 kg U/m

3 0.059 0.057 0.054

L:S = 4 kg U/m3 0.079 0.075 0.072

L:S = 5 kg U/m3 0.099 0.094 0.090

Bulk Density kg/ m3 1,700 1,700 1,700

L:S = 3 %U 0.003 0.003 0.003

L:S = 4 %U 0.005 0.004 0.004

L:S = 5 %U 0.006 0.006 0.005



www.rpacan.com



An incremental cut-off grade estimate was calculated and is shown in Table 15-3. The

incremental cut-off grade for the solution is estimated to be 8 mg/L U.

TABLE 15-3 INCREMENTAL CUT-OFF GRADE ESTIMATEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Description Unit 2012 2013 2014

Total Operating Costs US$(M) 20.91 19.73 18.69

Flow m3/h m

3/h 1,700 1,700 1,700

Cost per m3 of solution US$ 1.40 1.33 1.25

U3O8 Price US$/lb 65.00 65.00 65.00

U price $/kg US$/kgU 168.99 168.99 168.99

Solution cut-off grade g/t 8.3 7.8 7.4

Extraction % 90 90 90

Block grade cut-off (kg of U)

L:S = 3 kg U/m3 0.028 0.026 0.025

L:S = 4 kg U/m3 0.037 0.035 0.033

L:S = 5 kg U/m3 0.046 0.044 0.041

Bulk Density 1,700 1,700 1,700

L:S = 3 %U 0.002 0.002 0.001

L:S = 4 %U 0.002 0.002 0.002

L:S = 5 %U 0.003 0.003 0.002

EXTRACTION

The subsoil contract for Akdala requires the extraction of 90% of the uranium reserve.

There are a number of technological (mining) blocks that had attained extraction in

excess of 90%. RPA has estimated the average extraction at Akdala to be 90%.

DILUTION AND ORE LOSS

In the technological blocks, the dilution is included in the block calculation as the volume

is based upon the effective thickness of the production zone.

For the conversion of Indicated Mineral Resources, dilution is added to the Mineral

Resource estimate. Considering the technological block grades as compared on

average to the resource grades, RPA has assigned a 100% dilution factor to the

Indicated Mineral Resources in the conversion to Probable Mineral Reserves.



www.rpacan.com



In the ISR fields, the dilution represents a cost in that additional material must be

acidified and will contribute to acid consumption and time to attain the desired L:S ratio

for the extraction of the uranium. The dilution is applied to the resource tonnage at zero

grade.

RPA has assigned no loss of uranium in the conversion from Mineral Resources to

Mineral Reserves. RPA recommends a detailed reconciliation between the Mineral

Resource estimates and Mineral Reserve estimates calculated from the technological

(wellfield) drilling to assess the conversion factors and to develop more accurate

conversion factors.

GRADE ESTIMATION

The Mineral Reserve grades are estimated with the same method as for the Mineral

Resource grade estimates described in Section 14 of this report, but with the addition of

the mine dilution and as modified for extraction to the date of the Mineral Reserve

estimate. For Mineral Resource blocks being converted to Probable Mineral Reserves,

the reserve grades are calculated from the Mineral Resource grades. For the Proven

Mineral Reserve blocks, the tonnage and grade is taken from the technological block

calculations which use the same method as the Mineral Resource grade estimates but

are based upon geophysical and radiometric data from the technological (production and

injection) well drilling.

CLASSIFICATION OF MINERAL RESERVES

RPA considers the Mineral Reserves currently in production to be Proven Mineral

Reserves and the Mineral Reserves estimated from the conversion of Mineral Resource

blocks to be Probable Mineral Reserves.

ESTIMATION OF MINERAL RESERVES

For the purpose of this report, the Mineral Reserves have been estimated at December

31, 2011, using the September 30, 2011 project to date (PTD) production (8,319 t U)

plus an estimate of the fourth quarter 2011 production (339 t U) for a total of 8,658 t U

extracted to December 31, 2011. The estimate of production is based upon continued

extraction at the September 2011 rate.



www.rpacan.com



There have been 13 technological blocks that have demonstrated extraction in excess of

90%. As of September 30, 2011, there were 1,071 t U produced from these blocks in

excess of the 90% extraction estimated for these blocks.

The extraction from the blocks currently under leach is summarized in Table 15-4.

TABLE 15-4 TECHNOLOGICAL WELL EXTRACTIONUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

BlockNo.

Ore U Reserves U Extracted Extraction

(000t) (t U) (t U) Factor (%)

1+2 702 503 829 165.0

3+4+5 1,855 749 721 96.3

6 673 155 189 121.9

7 874 150 152 101.5

8 1,037 336 446 132.8

9 1,000 190 215 112.8

10+11 1,988 410 436 106.3

12+11а 2,168 557 657 117.8

13 2,364 706 603 85.3

14 3,039 647 494 76.3

23 2,486 1,058 763 72.1

30 1,297 178 213 119.7

22 1,222 272 307 112.9

15 1,152 151 178 117.9

16 1,664 221 212 96.217 2,184 322 227 70.6

24 2,362 852 538 63.1

25 1,072 99 89 90.4

26 995 102 91 89.0

27 938 128 90 70.2

31 1,986 829 423 51.0

28 822 123 62 50.6

18 2,722 360 180 50.1

19 1,626 207 113 54.8

20 1,447 153 24 15.6

32 1,561 500 61 12.3104 1,874 280 6 2.0

13а 2,233 341

Total 45,344 10,578 8,319 78.6

For the Mineral Reserve estimation, RPA considered the blocks with extraction in excess

of 90% to be complete and subtracted them from the remaining mineral reserve. RPA

recognizes that these blocks remain in production and may continue to provide some



www.rpacan.com



uranium production but there is no reasonable manner in which to estimate this

additional production.

RPA has estimated the remaining Proven Mineral Reserves in the Blizhniy deposit, as

the original tonnage of uranium adjusted for the production from blocks in excess of 90%and adjusted for production estimated to the end of 2011 (Table 15-5). Subtracting the

tonnage of technological blocks that already have extraction in excess of 90% leaves a

total of 28,600 tonnes of Proven Mineral Reserves. Therefore, the Proven Mineral

Reserves are estimated to be 28,600 tonnes grading 0.009% U and containing 2,690 t

U.

TABLE 15-5 BLIZHNIY RESERVE ESTIMATIONUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Descrip tion t U

Technological wells total inventory 10,578

Production to Sep 11 8,319

Deduct for blocks over 90% 1,071

Net production to Sep 11 7,248

Three months production to Dec 31 339

Tons U removed 7,587

Remaining 2,99190% extraction 2,692

Rounded Proven Reserve 2,690

The Letniy deposit has not been developed for mining and contains Indicated Mineral

Resources. These Mineral Resources were converted to Probable Mineral Reserves as

shown in Table 15-6.



www.rpacan.com



TABLE 15-6 LETNIY RESERVE ESTIMATEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Tonnes(000)

Grade(%U)

TonnesU

Mineral Resources 628 0.064 399

Dilution (100%) 1,256 0.032 399

Extraction (90%) 359

Production - -

Total Mineral Reserve 1,256 0.029 359

Probable Mineral Reserve 1,300 0.029 360

COMAPRISON TO PREVIOUS MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE

The 2010 Mineral Reserve estimate by Scott Wilson RPA was based upon the

conversion of Indicated Mineral Resources to Probable Mineral Reserves. A comparisonof the contained uranium in that previous Mineral Reserve estimate as depleted for

production is shown in Table 15-7.

TABLE 15-7 COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS ESTIMATE


Calculated by subtraction from last report

Production(t U)

ExtractionOver 90%

(t U)Net(t U)

March 2010 6,795 857 5,938

September 2011 8,319 1,071 7,248

Net production to September 30, 2011 1,310

Estimated production for fourth quarter 2011 339

Net production since 2010 estimate 1,649

Scott Wilson RPA estimate 4,613

Less net production 1,649

New Mineral Reserve 2,964

RPA notes that there is a discrepancy in the extraction to March 31, 2010 and the

current RPA estimate is 294 tonnes U higher than the Scott Wilson RPA report value of

6,501 t U.

RPA is of the opinion that the 2011 estimate is appropriate.



www.rpacan.com



KAZAKH MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATION

Mineral reserves in Kazakhstan are approved by the State Committee on Mineral

Reserves and are completed by consultants for the licence holders. The consultants

typically handle all of the sampling, drilling, testing, and estimation and the final result is

then shared with the licence holder and subsequently submitted to the State Committeefor approval. The process is lengthy, the consultants do not release data to the licence

holder on an ongoing basis, and the licence holder is not “involved” in the estimation

procedure. The procedures for the evaluation of mineral resources and mineral reserves

are dictated by the State guidelines and the consultants follow these guidelines.

RPA considers the process to be unwieldy and inconsistent with the North American

public company requirements for continuous disclosure of material information. In some

regards the methods may, through a focus on resource extraction, be inconsistent withthe Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimation standards of CIM in which the

proof of economic viability is paramount to resource extraction. Furthermore, the lack of

involvement of site personnel may mean that ongoing experience at a site is not

available or being used in the estimation of the Mineral Reserves. RPA recommends

that Uranium One consider and implement procedures to obtain all of the exploration

and technological estimation data on a timely basis and complete Mineral Resource and

Mineral Reserve estimates independently of the joint venture.

RPA OPINION

RPA is of the opinion that the Mineral Reserve estimate as stated is consistent with the

CIM guidelines for the estimation of Mineral Reserves.

RPA notes that the timing of the estimation of Mineral Reserves in Kazakhstan may be

inconsistent with the ongoing reporting required of North American listed public

companies. Uranium One will be required to state its Mineral Reserves annually and will

require an annual estimate of the Mineral Reserves. RPA recommends that UraniumOne establish a practical system for Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimation

consistent with CIM standards on an annual basis.



www.rpacan.com



16 MINING METHODS

The Akdala Mine is a producing ISR uranium operation. To September 30, 2011, the

operation has extracted 8,319 tonnes of uranium for subsequent treatment.

MINING METHOD

The Akdala Mineral Reserves are located in permeable sandstones some 200 m below

surface. In light of the depth of the deposit, the sand host rock, and the low grades, RPA

concurs that ISR mining is the appropriate method for the deposit. The general layout of

the Blizhniy deposit is shown in Figure 16-1.

MINING OPERATIONS

Operations at the Mine include the wellfield operations and the process plant. The

Akdala property comprises two deposits, Blizhniy which is located adjacent to the

processing plant and is the sole producing deposit, and Letniy which is located

approximately 30 km from the plant site. Betpak Dala is the operator of the Mine.

The uranium ISR operation uses a sulphuric acid leach. Sulphuric acid leaching solutionis pumped into the mineralized zone through a network of injection wells (boreholes) and

extracted by production wells. The wells are typically 200 mm in diameter in the upper

portions reducing to 100 mm lower in the hole. At the Mine, the wells are approximately

200 m deep and are generally placed in a hexagonal pattern with a 40 m radius or in line

patterns with wells 25 m to 40 m apart on lines that are 25 m to 50 m apart.

The leaching process begins with the acidification of the technological blocks. In this

phase, an acid solution is injected into the ore zones and recirculated with acid additionuntil the desired acid concentration in the groundwater is achieved. After a block is

acidified, the acid content of the injected solution is reduced and the production solutions

are sent to the process plant for the recovery of uranium and the barren solution from the

plant is returned to the injection wells.



www.rpacan.com



As of September 30, 2011, the process plant was operating at a rate of 1,700 m3/h using

a resin for the recovery of uranium, producing a precipitate which is filtered to reduce

water content and then shipped off site for further processing.

WELLFIELD PRODUCTION

As of September 30, 2011, the wellfield had 1,346 wells in total (398 production and 948

injection), with 958 wells in operation (242 production wells and 716 injection wells).

Production solutions are mainly pumped to surface using submersible pumps. The

average grade of the production solution was 79.7 mg/L U for September 2011 and

105.1 mg/L U for the project to date. Acid consumption for the project to date has

averaged 10.5 kg acid per kilogram of uranium for acidification and 13.1 kg acid per

kilogram of uranium for leaching.

The Blizhniy deposit is being leached and the work in the wellfield involves working over

the existing wells to maintain good flow rates.

WELL OPERATIONS

At Letniy, there are no production wells in place. Wells will be drilled by contractors and

are subject to detailed specifications including less than one metre of deviation per 100

m over the length of the hole. Holes are drilled, surveyed, and subjected to testing as

they are drilled. A drill rig can drill 2.5 to three wells per month. A plan showing typical

wellfield patterns is shown in Figure 16-2.

After drilling, a network of pipes and cables is required for the field. Power is required for

submersible pumps and is provided from local substations installed in the wellfield.

Piping is required for the acid feed to the wells, production solutions from the wells, and

barren solutions to the wells. The piping consists of a system of larger main lines fed by

small lines from the production areas. Well houses are built from sea containers and

contain the injection and production well manifolds and valves for a given block. Flow

meters are employed at all well houses to provide operating information. Drip samplers

are used to collect solution samples at the well houses.

A sectional view of typical wells is shown in Figure 16-3.



C1 Resource Block

C2 Resource Blocks

Technological blocks in production

Area of Subsoil Use Contract

Below cut-off limits

ProcessingPlant

0

N

February 2012 Source: Uranium One Inc., 2010.

GeneraResou

U

Ak

1

6 - 3



7Hp

2Hp

1Hp

4HH

5HB

10HH

3-8-2

3-8-11-2-12

3-6-2

3-

3-6-1

3-4-1

3-4-2

6Hp

3Hp

8Hp

9Hp

1-1-2

1-3-2 1-3-3 1-3-4 1-3-5 1-3-7 1-3-9 1-3-11 1-3-12 1-3-131-3-101-3-81-3-6

1-1-3 1-1-4

1-1-1

1-3-1

1-2-111-2-101-2-91-2-8

1-2-5 1-2-6

1-2-7

1-2-41-2-31-2-21-2-1

1-1-5 1-1-61-1-7

1-1-8

1-1-9 1-1-10 1-1-11 1-1-12 1-1-13 3-7-1

3-7-3

3-7-5

3-7-6

3-7-4

3-7-2

3-9-5

3-9-4

3-9-3

3-9-2

3-9-1

3

3-3-3

3-3-23-3-1

3-5-5

3-5-4

3-5-3

3-5-2

3-5-1

Block No.1(60x30m Pattern)

Block No.2 (50x25m Pattern)

Injection Wells

Legend:

Monitor Wells

Production Wells

February 2012 Source: Uranium One Inc., 2010.

Akd

Typi

U

1

6 - 4



Extraction Injection and Monitoring

Cement

Cement

PVC

Settler 11 m long

Ø 118 mmØ 118 mmFilter or ScreenFilter or Screen

Cement

Cement

PVC

Settler 11 m long

Ø 295 mm

Ø 161 mm

Ø 90 mm

Ø 195 mm

Ø 100 mm

PVC

Source: Uranium One Inc., 2010.February 2012

Akdala Uranium Mine

Typical Well Cross Section

Uranium One Inc.

Kazakhstan

Figure 16-3

16-5

www.rpacan.co



www.rpacan.com



The average production solution grades have ranged from 54 mg/L U to 80 mg/L U

through 2011 as shown in Figure 16-4 and Table 16-1. New blocks that have been

brought on line at Akdala have had very high productive solution grades (>400 mg/L U)

immediately after leaching commences.

FIGURE 16-4 2011 PRODUCTIVE SOLUTION GRADE

TABLE 16-1 PRODUCTIVE SOLUTION GRADESUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Monthly(mg/L U)

Project to Date(mg/L U)

Jan-11 62.3 111.2

Feb-11 65.1 110.3

Mar-11 64.4 109.6

Apr-11 69.7 108.8

May-11 66.8 108.1

Jun-11 57.6 107.2

Jul-11 54.9 106.3 Aug-11 65.6 105.6

Sep-11 79.7 105.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

P r o d u c t i v e S o l u t i o n G r a d e ( m g / l U )

Months 2011



www.rpacan.com



GEOMECHANICS

The key geotechnical aspect related to the deposit is the permeability of the mineralized

horizon and the presence (or absence) of impermeable zones above, below or within the

mineralized zones. The permeability is determined in the course of drilling and the ability

of the ore zone to permit the transmission of water is demonstrated by the ongoingoperation.

LIFE OF MINE PLAN

RPA has prepared a production schedule which is based upon the extraction of the

estimated Mineral Reserves using management’s plan as a basis for the schedule. The

plan includes ongoing production through processing at the plant with 90% extraction

and 97.5% recovery of the uranium extracted. There are no Inferred Mineral Resources

included in the Life of Mine (LOM) plan.

The proposed production schedule used for this report is shown in Table 16-2.

TABLE 16-2 LIFE OF MINE PRODUCTION PLAN


Blizhniy LetniyU produced from

Subsoil U3O8 equivalent Sales of U3O8

(t U) (t U) (t U) (000 lb) (000 lb)

2012 950 50 1,000 2,601 2,498

2013 800 200 1,000 2,601 2,498

2014 700 100 800 2,081 1,999

2015 240 10 250 650 625

Total 2,690 360 3,050 7,934 7,620

The LOM plan production for Akdala is 7.62 million pounds of U3O8 sold from mine

production. The LOM plan includes production from the Letniy deposit.

There are Inferred Mineral Resources at Akdala which may, with additional exploration

work, be converted to Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources and then to Mineral

Reserves to extend the life of the project. There can be no assurance that any such

Inferred Mineral Resources will be converted to Measured and Indicated Mineral

Resources. There are no Inferred Mineral Resources included in the LOM Plan.



www.rpacan.com



MINE EQUIPMENT

There is little major equipment associated with the operation. All of the well drilling and

installation is done by contractors. The operation has the rework equipment, light

vehicles, and small forklifts for handling concentrate bins, supplies, and reagents.

In the wellfields, there are pump and flow control units generally built from sea

containers and there are pumps in each production well and the associated electrical

power distribution and motor controls.



www.rpacan.com



17 RECOVERY METHODS

Uranium rich solutions (pregnant solutions) are pumped from the wellfields and delivered

via a series of pipelines into the pregnant solution pond. This lined pond allows

accumulation and drawdown of the solutions and provides a buffer between wellfieldoperations and process plant operations. Pregnant solution is recovered from the

pregnant solution pond via pumps located adjacent to the processing plant facilities.

Within the processing facility, the pregnant solutions are passed through a series of 50

m3 ion exchange columns loaded with a uranium-selective resin. Within these column

reactors, the uranium is adsorbed from the solutions onto the resin. Resin loading of 20

kg U per m3 is targeted in this process. The solution exiting the column reactors has

been stripped of its uranium content and is returned to the barren solution side for pH

adjustment and eventual re-injection at the wellfield.

The uranium-bearing resin is transferred from the column reactors to 100 m3 desorption

columns where uranium is stripped from the resin with ammonium nitrate solution,

returning the uranium back into solution. The stripped resin is recycled back to the

column reactors for reloading. The strip solution contains approximately 55 g U/L to 70 g

U/L and is transferred to a precipitation vessel where hydrogen peroxide is used to

precipitate the uranium out of solution. The precipitate is dewatered using a belt filter

producing a solid product containing approximately 40% U and 12% moisture. Thismaterial is the final product generated at the Akdala operation, which is then shipped in

sealed containers to South Inkai for drying and then to off-site converters for upgrading

to international market quality yellowcake. The off-site refining process is carried out at

one of two alternative sites; Oskemen (formerly Ust-Kamenogorsk), Kazakhstan, and

Kara Balta, Kyrgyzstan.

The process plant capacity was increased in 2011 and plant throughput rose from 1,378

m

3

/h in January, 2011 to an average of approximately 1,860 m

3

/h for the next eightmonths.

WELLFIELD RECOVERY

The extraction of uranium from the wellfield is demonstrated in Figures 17-1 and 17-2.

In Figure 17-1, the extraction shown versus months of leaching. The graph is based on



www.rpacan.com



the nine months of 2011 to September 2011 and has all of the technological blocks

included.

FIGURE 17-1 AKDALA EXTRACTION VERSUS MONTHS LEACHING

FIGURE 17-2 AKDALA EXTRACTION VERSUS LIQUID:SOLID RATIO

Figure 17-1 demonstrates that the technological blocks generally attain 90% extraction

in less than 40 months, but some are taking longer and some may not reach the 90%

goal.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

U E x t r a c t i o n ( % )

Months Leaching

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

U E x t r a c t i o n ( % )

L:S Ratio



www.rpacan.com



Figure 17-2 demonstrates that the extraction is generally attained with a L:S ratio of less

than three.

The Akdala LOM plan is based on an estimated 90% extraction of in-situ uranium

resources being recovered in solution and delivered to the processing plant. Productionexperience to date indicates that this rate of extraction may in fact be conservative

relative to the estimated reserves. As outlined above, a number of production blocks

have shown well above 100% extraction of the estimated resource. Other blocks have

not yet achieved the 90% target, however, they remain under leach so indications are

that on average the 90% level is likely to be exceeded. RPA is of the opinion that these

results are indicative of conservative estimation methodology.

Process recovery of the uranium delivered to the plant in solution is forecast to average

approximately 97.5%. Current operating experience indicates that this performance

level is achievable.

RPA notes that there are a comprehensive set of data reports related to the wellfield

operations, process solution chemistry and process plant operation which are collected

and reported on a monthly basis; however, there does not appear to be a focus on

analysis of the data. RPA is of the opinion that such analysis may indicate the potential

causes for better or worse than expected performance and it would provide a better

tracking of the wellfield performance.

RPA recommends that more effort be placed on analysis of the physical and chemical

data related to the well fields, process solutions and plant operations to assist in the

evaluation of the operations and to possibly determine the cause of better or worse than

planned operating results.



www.rpacan.com



18 PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE

The Mine has a number of support facilities including:

• Connection to the electrical grid.

• Hot water heaters for plant heat supply.• Shops and supplies storage area.

• Acid storage tanks.

• Offices, change rooms and dining room.

• Fenced plant area with security at the gate.

• Employee housing.

CAMP

The camp is located outside the plant security fence and is situated approximately 500 m

from the plant yard. Kazakh regulations do not allow the camp to be located immediately

adjacent to the plant.

The cook house is located within the administration building.

POWER

Electrical power is supplied from the grid and emergency back-up is only able to providepower for critical plant operations in the event of a failure of the grid power supply. The

electrical power use is approximately 3.4 MW.

TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS

The site is accessed by a combination of hard surface roads and highways. The Letniy

deposit is located on each side of a paved road and a power line crosses the deposit.



www.rpacan.com



19 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

MARKETS

SALES CONTRACTS

Generally, Uranium One sells its uranium production to major nuclear utilities in North

America, Europe, and Asia under long term supply agreements and, in limited

circumstances, to third parties such as trading companies, in small quantities. Uranium

One has entered into market-related sales contracts with price mechanisms that

reference the market price in effect at or near the time of delivery. In addition, Uranium

One has negotiated floor price protection in many of its sales contracts.

Customers take delivery of U3O8 at conversion facilities and Uranium One ships the

U3O8 produced at its mines to converters in time for scheduled deliveries to customers.

Depending on the location of the conversion facility, shipping times from Kazakhstan can

be up to four months and the lead time between production of U 3O8 and sales has a

significant impact on the inventory levels at any given time. Uranium One has entered

into a uranium logistics agreement with JSC Atomredmetzoloto, the Russian state-

owned uranium mining company, which allows both parties to enter into location swaps

and spot sales in order to facilitate deliveries of uranium to customers, and to better

manage shipping logistics.

URANIUM PRICE

RPA notes that the market for uranium fluctuated during the past four years. Figure 18-

1, copied from the Ux Consulting Company, LLC (UxC) website, shows the trend in

uranium pricing over the past three years.



www.rpacan.com



FIGURE 18-1 UXC U3O8 HISTORICAL URANIUM PRICES

Source: The Ux Consulting Company, LLC available at http://www.uxc.com

The spot quote listed by UxC on February 13, 2012 was US$52.00/lb U 3O8. For

economic analysis, RPA has used a spot price of US$55.00/lb in 2012, US$65.00/lb in

2013, US$70.00/lb in 2014, and US$65.00/lb U3O8 thereafter.

Metal prices used for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves are based on

consensus, long term forecasts from banks, financial institutions, and other sources.

Uranium One did not complete any market studies or analysis for this report.

CONTRACTS

Akdala has contracts in place for the major services and supplies including:

• Sulphuric acid.

• Processing of product.

• Shipping of the product to a refiner.

• Well drilling.

http://www.uxc.com/

http://www.uxc.com/

http://www.uxc.com/

http://www.uxc.com/



www.rpacan.com



The contracts are generally for annual periods and include the usual provisions for

documentation, material specifications, and events such as force majeure.



www.rpacan.com



20 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES,PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITYIMPACT

ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND SAFETY

The operation has systems in place for ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and ISO 18001 standards

and management indicated that the ISO status was confirmed in 2010.

Initial observations were that the site was well kept, clean, and with good housekeeping

practices. Staff appeared to be knowledgeable in their job areas, and designs appeared

to be adequate for the nature of the work at the facility. Conventional health and safety

programs exist with respect to acid management (a key health safety and environment

program element) as well as other conventional health and safety elements.

A radiation protection program also exists that is based on international standards for

exposure (IAEA) that monitors worker health and safety. Key elements of the program

include good housekeeping, and monitoring of gamma radiation exposures through the

use of worker thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) (reported and posted quarterly) and

periodic radon measurements at selected areas of the plant.

Small quantities of sand may accumulate in the process ponds. This material may

contain radioactive materials and is planned to be disposed of in an approved waste

disposal area off site.

No material issues of concern became evident and no fatal flaws from an environmental

perspective were identified.

Current Kazakhstan regulations regarding development are being followed. For this

operation, the environmental issues relative to start-up can be expected to be minimized.


there is no aquifer remediation planned as part of the closure. The surface disturbances

will be reclaimed and process facilities will be removed.

The environmental risk is currently perceived to be low.



www.rpacan.com



PROJECT PERMITTING

The Akdala Mine is operating and has obtained the necessary permits for the operation.

SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY REQUIREMENTS

The community of Kyzymshek is approximately 45 km south of the Akdala site. There

are no residents in the immediate Mine area.

MINE CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS


there is no aquifer remediation planned as part of the closure. The surface disturbances

will be reclaimed and process facilities will be removed.

As of December 31, 2011, the Uranium One portion of the asset retirement obligations

(on an undiscounted basis) has been estimated at US$4.0 million for the successful

decommissioning, reclamation and long term care of the surface and well field facilities.

The total asset retirement obligation is estimated to be $5.7 million.



www.rpacan.com



21 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE

The Akdala Mine is in operation and the planned expenditures are for the ongoing well

field development and, in particular, the Letniy field and satellite plant plus sustaining

capital. The LOM plan capital cost for the Akdala Mine has been prepared based upon

management’s budgets but reflects the LOM plan in this report.

The capital expenditures are estimated to be $49 million over the LOM and are


TABLE 21-1 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE ESTIMATEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

2012 2013 2014 2015 Total


Wellfield Development 9.14 6.76 3.00 18.91

Exploration drilling 1.22 1.51 1.62 1.66 6.01

Expansion/Upgrade 15.87 0.89 0.92 - 17.68

Sustaining Capital 1.04 4.45 5.49

Social Sphere Spending 0.56 - - - 0.56

Total 27.84 13.62 5.53 1.66 48.65

The following is excluded from the capital cost estimate:

• Project financing and interest charges.• Owner’s costs.• Escalation.• Environmental impact studies.• Value added taxes.• Import duties and custom fees.• Working capital.• Sunk costs.

• Costs of fluctuations in currency exchanges.• Future expansion.



www.rpacan.com



OPERATING COSTS

The September 2011 YTD operating costs are shown in Table 21-2. Akdala Mine is an

established operating mine and the operating costs are effectively on budget while

production is approximately 8% over budget.

TABLE 21-2 SEPTEMBER 2012 OPERATINGCOST VERSUS BUDGET


Sept Sept Variance

Actual Budget

Production YTD YTD

Tons U 760 705 (55)

lb U3O8 1,976,576 1,833,708 (142,868)

Cash Operating Costs(US$000) (US$000) (US$000)

Mining 7,192 7,275 83

Processing 3,528 3,700 171

Auxiliary 2,303 2,559 256

Mine Site Services 1,127 1,273 145

Mine Administration 731 652 (79)

MET 3,796 3,728 (68)

Other Fines fees and taxes 29 12 (17)

Other Administration 0 1 1

Contract Processing 3,460 3,569 109

Regional Office Allocation 2,255 2,025 (229)

Total Operations 24,422 24,793 371

Other Expenses

Selling Expenses 1,694 1,484 (210)

Total Other Expense 1,694 1,484 (210)

Total 26,115 36,401 10,286

The LOM estimated operating costs are summarized in Table 21-3. The LOM operating

costs have been taken from management’s budgets but modified for the production

forecast in this report.



www.rpacan.com



TABLE 21-3 LOM OPERATING COST ESTIMATEUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

2012 2013 2014 2015 Total


Mining 13.62 14.40 15.45 3.90 47.38

Processing 6.04 6.26 6.70 1.68 20.68

Auxiliary 5.53 6.10 6.33 1.58 19.53

Administration 2.36 2.53 2.71 0.68 8.27

Contract Processing Services 4.17 4.46 4.78 1.19 14.61

Betpak Office Allocation 2.98 3.27 3.48 0.87 10.60

Selling expenses 3.07 2.89 2.93 3.00 11.89

Subtotal 37.77 39.91 42.37 12.90 132.96

Social Cost 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.64

Training 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.13 1.33

Reclamation 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.13 1.33Subtotal other costs 0.92 0.96 1.01 0.42 3.30


MET 6.27 6.58 6.58 1.74 21.17


Cost per lb U Sold 21.24 22.41 29.50 28.45 24.38

Cost per kg U Sold 46.82 49.40 65.03 62.72 53.75

Cost per lb U3O8 Sold 18.00 18.99 25.00 24.11 20.66

MANPOWER

The site manpower for Akdala consists of approximately 314 persons. The 2012 plan is

for the manpower level to increase from 314 in January to 339 by year end, with the

start-up of activity at the Letniy site.

The average manpower by department for 2012 is shown in Table 21-4.



www.rpacan.com



TABLE 21-4 2012 MANPOWERUranium One Inc. – Akdala Uranium Mine

Area 2012 Average

Management 18

Technical 7

Geology 6Wellfields 94

Process Plant 60

Plant maintenance 5

Instrumentation 18

Laboratory 14

Electrical/mechanical 12

Safety 14

Administration 40

Logistics 6

Motor Transport 34

Total on Site 328



www.rpacan.com



22 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Under NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, producing issuers may exclude the information

required for Section 22 (Economic Analysis) for properties that are currently inproduction, unless the Technical Report includes a material expansion of current

production. RPA notes that Uranium One is a producing issuer, Akdala Mine is currently

in production, and a material expansion is not being planned. RPA has performed an

economic analysis of Akdala Mine as part of its estimate of Mineral Reserves using the

estimates presented in this report and concluded that the outcome is a positive cash

flow.



www.rpacan.com



23 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

There are no adjacent properties as defined by NI 43-101.



www.rpacan.com



24 OTHER RELEVANT DATA ANDINFORMATION

No additional information or explanation is necessary to make this Technical Reportunderstandable and not misleading.



www.rpacan.com



25 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

Based on the site visit and review of the available data, and field observations RPA

concludes that:

• The uranium mineralization is a sandstone-hosted, roll front type deposit.

• The December 31, 2011 Mineral Resources are estimated to be:

o Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 33.9 million tonnes grading0.010% U (0.012% U3O8) and containing approximately 3,381 t U (8.8 Mlb U3O8).

o Inferred Mineral Resources of 9.7 million tonnes grading 0.062% U(0.073% U3O8) and containing approximately 6,015 t U (15.6 M lb U3O8).

• The December 31, 2011 Mineral Reserves as estimated by RPA consist of 28.6million tonnes of Proven Mineral Reserves grading 0.009% U (0.011% U3O8) andcontaining 2,690 t of extractable U (6.99 M lb U3O8) and 1.3 million tonnes ofProbable Mineral Reserves grading 0.028% U (0.033% U3O8) and containing 360t of extractable U (0.94 M lb U3O8).

• The extraction of the Mineral Reserves is estimated to be 90%.

• The Akdala deposit is being successfully exploited using ISR techniques.

• The production to date is from the Blizhniy deposit while future production is

expected to include production from the Letniy deposit as well.

• There has not been a project to date reconciliation between the production andthe original Mineral Reserve estimate for the producing areas.

• The estimated operating cost for the Akdala Mine is $20.66 per pound U3O8 sold.

• The LOM plan includes the extraction of 3,050 tonnes U from the estimatedMineral Reserves. The remaining mine life as of December 31, 2011, and basedon current Mineral Reserves, is 3.5 years.

• The maximum annual production is estimated to be 1,000 tonnes U.

• The capital cost for the life of mine is $48.7 million including plant construction,production and exploration drilling, sustaining capital and contingency.



www.rpacan.com



26 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the site visit and review of technical data, RPA recommends that Uranium

One:

• Continue production at the Blizhniy deposit, development of the Letniy depositand exploration to upgrade Inferred Resources.

• Pursue the implementation of reconciliation procedures that are maintained on aregular basis and include block by block reconciliation of the productioncompared to the Mineral Reserve estimate.

• Direct more effort to the analysis of the physical and chemical data related to thewellfields, process solutions and plant operations to assist in the evaluation of theoperations and to possibly determine the cause of better or worse than plannedoperating results.

• Consider and implement procedures to obtain all of the exploration andtechnological estimation data on a timely basis and complete Mineral Resourceand Mineral Reserve estimates independently of the joint venture for reporting asa Canadian issuer.



www.rpacan.com



27 REFERENCES

Canada NewsWire, 2007, Uranium One Completes Acquisition of UrAsia Energy, file onSEDAR, Uranium One Inc., April 20, 2007.

Diatchkov, S.A., 1994, Principles of Classification of Reserves and Resources in the CISCountries: Mining Engineering, pp. 214-217.

Pool, T.C., 2006, Technical Report on the Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan, preparedfor Urasia Energy (BVI) Ltd., by Roscoe Postle Associates Inc., October 3, 2005,Revised March 21, 2006.

Shashkova, Z., 2010, 100408_2009_nudget vs actually_Akdala.xls, April 8, 2010.

Shindler, K., 2010, Life of Mine Plan.xls, April 14, 2010.

Uranium One Inc., Annual Information Form Year Ended December 31, 2009, March

312010.

Valliant, W.W., and Hendry J.W., 2010, Technical Report on the Akdala Uranium Mine,Kazakhstan, prepared by Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. for UraniumOne Inc., dated May 27, 2010.



www.rpacan.com



28 DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE

This report titled ”Technical Report on the Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan” and dated

February 17, 2012 as amended May 2, 2012, was prepared and signed by the followingauthors:

(Signed & Sealed) “ Wayne W. Valliant”

Dated at Toronto, ONMay 2, 2012 Wayne W. Valliant, P.Geo.

Principal Geologist

(Signed & Sealed) “ R. Dennis Bergen”

Dated at Vancouver, BCMay 2, 2012 R. Dennis Bergen, P.Eng.

Associate Principal Mining Engineer



www.rpacan.com



29 CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

WAYNE W. VALLIANT

I, Wayne W. Valliant, P.Geo., as an author of this report entitled “Technical Report onthe Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan” prepared for Uranium One Inc. and datedFebruary 17, 2012 as amended May 2, 2012, do hereby certify that:

1. I am Principal Geologist with Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. of Suite 501, 55University Ave Toronto, ON, M5J 2H7.

2. I am a graduate of Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada in 1973 with aBachelor of Science degree in Geology.

3. I am registered as a Geologist in the Province of Ontario (Reg.# 1175). I haveworked as a geologist for a total of 37 years since my graduation. My relevantexperience for the purpose of the Technical Report is:

• Review and report as a consultant on more than fifty mining operations andprojects around the world for due diligence and resource/reserve estimation

• General Manager of Technical Services for corporation with operations and minedevelopment projects in Canada and Latin America

• Superintendent of Technical Services at three mines in Canada and Mexico• Chief Geologist at three Canadian mines

4. I have read the definition of "qualified person" set out in National Instrument 43-101(NI 43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professionalassociation (as defined in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill therequirements to be a "qualified person" for the purposes of NI 43-101.

5. I visited the Akdala Mine on October 17, 2011.

6. I am responsible for Sections 2 through 12 inclusive, 14, 23, and share responsibilitywith my co-author for Sections 1, 25, and 26 of the Technical Report.

7. I am independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

8. I prepared a Technical Report on the Akdala Mine dated May 27, 2010.

9. I have read NI 43-101, and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliancewith NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1.



www.rpacan.com



10. At the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge,information, and belief, the Technical Report contains all scientific and technicalinformation that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report notmisleading.

Dated this 2nd day of May, 2012

(Signed & Sealed) “ Wayne W. Valliant”

Wayne W. Valliant, P. Geo.



www.rpacan.com



RAYMOND DENNIS BERGEN

I, Raymond Dennis Bergen, P.Eng., as an author of this report entitled “Technical Reporton the Akdala Uranium Mine, Kazakhstan”, prepared for Uranium One Inc., datedFebruary 17, 2012 as amended May 2, 2012, do hereby certify that:

1. I am an Associate Principal Mining Engineer engaged by Roscoe Postle Associates

Inc. of Suite 501, 55 University Ave Toronto, ON, M5J 2H7.

2. I am a graduate of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, in1979 with a Bachelor of Applied Science degree in Mineral Engineering. I am agraduate of the British Columbia Institute Technology in Burnaby, B.C. Canada, in1972 with a Diploma in Mining Technology.

3. I am registered as a Professional Engineer in the Province of British Columbia (Reg.#16064) and as a Licensee with the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologistsand Geophysicists of the Northwest Territories (Licence L1660). I have worked as anengineer for a total of 29 years since my graduation. My relevant experience for thepurpose of the Technical Report is:

• Practice as a mining engineer, production superintendent, mine manager, VicePresident of Operations and a consultant in the design, operation and review ofmining operations.

• Review and report, as an employee and as a consultant, on numerous miningoperations and projects around the world for due diligence and operationalreview related to project acquisition and technical report preparation, including NI43-101 technical report preparation.

• Mining engineer in underground gold and base metal mines.• Consulting engineer working on project acquisition and project design.• Mine Manager at three different mines with open pit and underground operations• Review of uranium ISR projects in the USA, Australia and Kazakhstan.

4. I have read the definition of "qualified person" set out in National Instrument 43-101("NI 43-101") and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professionalassociation (as defined in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill therequirements to be a "qualified person" for the purposes of NI 43-101.

5. I visited the Akdala Mine on October 17, 2011.

6. I am responsible for Sections 13, 15 through 22 and 24 and contributed to sections 1,25, 26, and 27 of the Technical Report.

7. I am independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

8. I have had no prior involvement with the property that is the subject of the TechnicalReport.

9. I have read NI 43-101, and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliancewith NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1.



www.rpacan.com

10. To the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the Technical Report containsall scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make thetechnical report not misleading.

Dated this 2

nd

day of May, 2012

(Signed & Sealed) “ R. Dennis Bergen”

Raymond Dennis Bergen, P.Eng.

rpa uranium one akdala ni 43-101 technical report final amended june 6, 2012.pdf

Documents