TORONTO, Oct. 12, 2025 /CNW/ - PERTH, Australia - Oct. 13, 2025 - IsoEnergy Ltd. ("IsoEnergy") (NYSE American: ISOU) (TSX: ISO) and Toro Energy Ltd. ("Toro") (ASX: TOE) are pleased to announce that they have entered into a scheme implementation deed (the "SID") pursuant to which, among other things, IsoEnergy has agreed to acquire all of the issued and outstanding ordinary shares of Toro (the "Toro Shares")(1) by way of a scheme of arrangement under Australia's Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the "Transaction" or the "Scheme"), subject to the satisfaction of various conditions. Toro owns 100% of the Wiluna Uranium Project, located 30km south of the town of Wiluna in the northern goldfields of Western Australia ("Wiluna Uranium Project").
On implementation of the Transaction, the two companies will combine to strengthen IsoEnergy's development pipeline by adding Toro's high-quality, scoping-stage Wiluna Uranium Project in Western Australia to IsoEnergy's existing portfolio, which includes past-producing U.S. mines, the ultra-high-grade Hurricane deposit in Canada's Athabasca Basin and a diversified suite of development and exploration assets across Canada, the U.S. and Australia. Toro shareholders will gain exposure to a larger, more diversified portfolio of high-quality uranium exploration, development and near-term production assets in tier-one jurisdictions in an enlarged, liquid vehicle while retaining direct exposure to the Wiluna Uranium Project and all other Toro assets.
Under the terms of the Transaction, Toro shareholders will receive 0.036 of a common share of IsoEnergy (each whole share, an "ISO Share") for each Toro Share held on the Scheme record date (the "Exchange Ratio"). Existing shareholders of IsoEnergy and Toro will own approximately 92.9% and 7.1% on a fully-diluted in-the-money basis, respectively, of the outstanding ISO Shares upon implementation of the Transaction.(2)
The Exchange Ratio implies consideration of A$0.584 per Toro Share, representing:(3)
-- a 79.7% premium to the last traded price on the ASX of A$0.325 per Toro
Share, on October 10, 2025; and
-- a 92.2% premium to Toro's 20-day volume weighted average price ("VWAP")
on the ASX as at October 10, 2025.
The implied fully-diluted in-the-money equity value of the Transaction is equal to approximately A$75.0million (C$68.1million).(4)
(_________________________) (1 Other than those held by or on behalf of members of the IsoEnergy Group.) (2 Based on a pro-forma fully diluted in-the-money shares outstanding of 62,423,144 of the combined entity.) (3 Based on the closing price of the ISO Shares over all Canadian exchanges on October 10, 2025 of C$14.73 and an AUD:CAD exchange rate of 0.9078.) (4 Based on a Toro's fully diluted in-the-money shares outstanding of 128,406,848. The implied value is not fixed and depends on the price at which ISO Shares trade.)
Strategic Rationale
-- Tier One Uranium Portfolio -- The combination of IsoEnergy's
past-producing U.S. mines, the ultra-high-grade Hurricane deposit in
Canada's Athabasca Basin, and multiple development/exploration assets
across Canada, the U.S. and Australia with Toro's flagship Wiluna Uranium
Project in Western Australia, creates a development-ready platform with
significant near-term production potential in stable, mining-friendly
jurisdictions. The Wiluna Uranium Project--comprising the
Centipede-Millipede, Lake Way and Lake Maitland deposits--is a
scoping-level project with mineral resources that complement IsoEnergy's
development pipeline.
-- Significantly Expands and Diversifies Uranium Resource Base -- The pro
forma company ("Merged Group") will hold current NI 43-101 compliant
resources of 55.2 Mlbs U3O8 M&I and 4.9 Mlbs U3O8 Inferred5, and JORC
2012 and 2004 compliant resources of 78.1 Mlbs U3O8 M&I and 34.6 U3O8
Mlbs Inferred6 (please see the table on page 26 of this announcement for
the breakdown of the JORC 2012 and 2004 compliant resources). The Merged
Group will also hold historical resources of 154.3 Mlbs U3O8 M&I and 88.2
Mlbs U3O8 Inferred, establishing a robust and geographically diversified
resource base7.8Cautionary statement: The pro forma Merged Group
resources include foreign and historical estimates reported by IsoEnergy.
These estimates are not reported in accordance with the JORC Code. A
competent person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical
estimates or foreign estimates as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in
accordance with the JORC Code. It is uncertain that following evaluation
and/or further exploration work that the historical estimates or foreign
estimates will be able to be reported as Mineral Resources or Ore
Reserves in accordance with the JORC Code.
-- Strengthens Merged Group's Exposure to Top Uranium Jurisdictions --
Wiluna will become IsoEnergy's flagship Australian project. Australia
ranks #1 globally for uranium resources and was a Top-5 producer in 2024,
supported by strong infrastructure and mining institutions9. Western
Australia hosts significant undeveloped uranium projects, including
Kintyre and Yeelirrie (Cameco) and Mulga Rock (Deep Yellow). Toro
shareholders will have exposure to IsoEnergy's significant near-term
production potential in stable, mining friendly jurisdictions in Canada
and parts of the U.S.
-- Well-Timed to Capitalize on Strong Nuclear Market Momentum -- The World
Nuclear Association's 2025 Fuel Report projects uranium demand to rise
30% by 2030 and to more than double by 2040. A strengthened resource
base and diversified jurisdictional exposure is expected to position
IsoEnergy to benefit from rapidly tightening supply/demand outlook.
-- Well Placed to Pursue Value Accretive Growth Opportunities -- The Merged
Group will have significant balance sheet strength and access to capital
markets to fund the Merged Group's portfolio including Toro's existing
projects.
(_____________________________5 For additional information on the current resources for the Tony M Mine and Larocque East Project see the Tony M Technical Report and the Larocque East Technical Report, respectively. See Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Mineral Resource Estimates below for additional details.) 6 Based on updated mineral resource estimates for the Wiluna Uranium Project Deposits of Lake Maitland announced by Toro on September 24, 2024 and Centipede-Millipede and Lake Way announced by Toro on March 7, 2024, the Dawson Hinkler Satellite Deposit announced by Toro on May 2, 2024, the Nowthanna Deposit announced by Toro on February 1, 2016 and the Theseus Project, announced by Toro on December 5, 2012, prepared in accordance with JORC Code 2012, except Theseus which is in accordance with JORC Code 2004. Information contained in this announcement in connection with the Theseus Project was prepared and first disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially changed since it was last reported. The JORC Table 1 relevant to all of the Toro resource estimates can be found in Toro's ASX announcement of September 24, 2024 (titled "Significant Expansion Stated Lake Maitland Uranium Resource", except for Theseus, which is found in Toro's ASX announcement of December 5, 2012 (titled "Maiden Inferred Uranium Resource for Toro's Theseus Deposit"). For the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 5.23, Toro confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in those original announcements, and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the original announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed. 7 These mineral resources are considered to be "historical estimates" as defined under National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101"). A Qualified Person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimates as current mineral resources or mineral reserves and IsoEnergy is not treating the historical estimates as current mineral resources. See Disclaimer on Mineral Resource Estimates below for additional details. (8 Refer to the Pro forma Mineral Resources disclaimer on page 10.) (9 World Nuclear Association - https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium)
Philip Williams, CEO and Director of IsoEnergy, commented, "The acquisition of Toro Energy marks another important step in advancing IsoEnergy's strategy to build a globally diversified, development-ready uranium platform. The Wiluna Uranium Project strengthens our portfolio with a large, previously permitted asset in a top-tier jurisdiction at a time when global nuclear demand is accelerating. This transaction positions IsoEnergy to deliver meaningful scale, optionality, and sustained value creation for shareholders. We look forward to welcoming the Toro team, who have done an admirable job stewarding the company and its projects through often challenging markets, to IsoEnergy and advancing the project together."
Richard Homsany, Executive Chairman of Toro, commented, "This Transaction creates significant value for our shareholders, representing a material premium for Toro shareholders of 79.7% to Toro's last traded price and 92.2% to Toro's 20 day VWAP. It also provides Toro shareholders the opportunity to be part of a larger, leading uranium company listed on the TSX and NYSE. Toro shareholders will have exposure to a diverse uranium portfolio that has strong growth potential and is located in favourable regulatory jurisdictions, and the ability to attract enhanced access to funding including for the Wiluna Uranium Project.
The Toro team will benefit from the significant financial strength of ISO and looks forward to working together on the successful development of the Wiluna Uranium Project for all stakeholders."
Anticipated Benefits to IsoEnergy shareholders
-- Secures Wiluna Uranium Project, positioned for potential development,
pending alignment of government policy with uranium production in Western
Australia
-- Strengthens ranking among the Australian uranium players, on the basis of
potential production capacity, advanced mining assets and resource
exposure
-- Addition of large scale mineral resource at the scoping study stage with
an exploration portfolio hosting additional uranium resources
-- Opportunity for re-rating through de-risking near-term potential
production and enhancing scale and asset diversification across key
jurisdictions in the U.S., Canada and Australia
-- Creation of a larger platform with greater scale for M&A, access to
capital and liquidity
Anticipated Benefits to Toro shareholders
-- Immediate and significant premium of 79.7% to last close and 92.2% based
on the respective 20-day VWAPs of both companies, ending on October 10,
202510
-- Exposure to a larger, more diversified portfolio of high-quality uranium
exploration, development and near-term production assets in tier-one
jurisdictions of U.S. and Canada
-- Entry into the Athabasca Basin, a leading uranium jurisdiction, with the
high-grade Hurricane deposit
-- Upside from an accelerated path to potential production as well as from
synergies with IsoEnergy's other Utah uranium assets
-- Toro shareholders will be exposed to geographic project locations within
the Merged Group outside of Western Australia including favourable
uranium regulatory jurisdictions such as Canada and parts of the U.S.
-- Continued exposure to Toro's Wiluna Uranium Project through holding of
approximately 7.1% of the outstanding fully diluted in-the-money ISO
Shares on closing of the Transaction11
-- A Merged Group backed by corporate and institutional investors of
IsoEnergy, including NexGen Energy Ltd., Energy Fuels Inc., Mega Uranium
Ltd. and uranium ETFs
-- Increased scale expected to provide greater access to capital for project
development and on potentially more favourable terms, increased trading
liquidity, wider research coverage and greater scale for M&A
Toro IBC Recommendations and Major Shareholders Intentions
Following receipt of an initial, confidential non-binding indicative offer from IsoEnergy, the Toro Board of Directors (the "Toro Board") established an independent board committee ("Toro IBC"), comprising Richard Homsany and Michel Marier, to consider the proposal. The Toro Board formed the Toro IBC since Richard Patricio (a Toro non-executive director) is also the Chair of the Board of Directors of IsoEnergy.
The Toro IBC, and the Board of Directors of IsoEnergy (with Mr. Patricio abstaining from voting) have each unanimously approved the SID. A copy of the SID is included at Annexure A of this announcement.
The Toro IBC unanimously recommends that Toro shareholders vote in favour of the Scheme in the absence of a superior proposal and subject to the independent expert's report concluding that the Scheme is in the best interests of Toro shareholders (other than IsoEnergy). Subject to the same qualifications, each member of the Toro IBC intends to vote, or procure the voting of, all Toro Shares held or controlled by them in favour of the Scheme. As at the date of this announcement, the Toro IBC collectively has a relevant interest in 1.8% of the Toro Shares on issue.
Substantial shareholder Mega Uranium Ltd. (together with its associate Mega Redport Pty Ltd) (representing 15,226,256 Toro Shares, being 12.7% of all Toro Shares) have provided Toro with a voting intention statement that they each intend to vote in favour of the Scheme, subject to no superior proposal emerging and the independent expert concluding (and continuing to conclude) that the Scheme is in the best interests of Toro shareholders (other than IsoEnergy).(12)
As at the date of this announcement IsoEnergy holds 6,000,000 Toro Shares (approximately 4.99% of Toro shares on issue at the date of this announcement).
(__________________________) (10 Based on the closing price of the ISO Shares on the TSX of $14.73, a closing price of A$0.325 of Toro Shares on the ASX and an AUD:CAD exchange rate of 0.9078 on October 10, 2025 and a 20-day VWAP for the period ending October 10, 2025 of Toro Shares on the ASX of A$0.304) (11 Based on a pro-forma fully diluted in-the-money shares outstanding of 62,423,144 of the combined entity) (12 Mega Uranium Ltd and Mega Redport Pty Ltd have each consented to the inclusion of this voting intention statement in this document.)
Conditions to completion of the Scheme
Implementation of the Scheme is subject to various conditions, including (among others):
-- Approval of Toro shareholders in relation to the Scheme (including
approval of more than 50% of the number of Toro shareholders voting and
at least 75% of the total votes cast);
-- Court approval in relation to the Scheme;
-- No formal changes in Western Australian uranium policy to permit uranium
mining and/or mining or development of all or any part of the Wiluna
Uranium Project;
-- All Toro unquoted options having lapsed, been exercised, or cancelled;
-- Certain regulatory approvals, including Foreign Investment Review Board
of Australia, the Australian Securities Exchange ("ASX"), the Toronto
Stock Exchange (the "TSX") and the NYSE American LLC ("NYSE");
-- An independent expert concluding (and continuing to conclude) that the
Scheme is in the best interests of Toro shareholders (other than
IsoEnergy); and
-- No material adverse change or prescribed occurrences (each as defined in
the SID) occurring in relation to either IsoEnergy or Toro and no
regulatory restraints.
The SID provides for customary deal protection provisions with respect to Toro, including "no shop" as well as "no talk" and "no due diligence" restrictions (subject to customary exceptions to enable the Toro IBC to comply with its fiduciary and statutory duties), notification obligations and a matching right regime in the event any superior proposal is received by Toro. In addition, the SID provides that, under certain circumstances, IsoEnergy or Toro would be entitled to a break fee which, should either become payable, is approximately A$700,000.(13)
Following implementation of the Transaction, the ISO Shares will continue trading on the TSX and NYSE and Toro will be removed from the official list of ASX. If determined appropriate in the future, IsoEnergy may apply for admission to the official list of ASX, and quotation of the ISO Shares on ASX. Any such listing, if pursued, will be subject to IsoEnergy complying with the rules and policies of the ASX in force at such time. IsoEnergy cautions that no decision has been made to apply for an ASX listing, and that it is not a condition of the Transaction that such a listing be pursued. Approximately 54.7 million ISO Shares are currently outstanding on a non-diluted basis and approximately 58.0 million ISO Shares are currently outstanding on a fully-diluted basis. Upon implementation of the Transaction (assuming no additional issuances of ISO Shares or Toro Shares), there will be approximately 59.2 million ISO Shares outstanding on a non-diluted basis and approximately 62.4 million ISO Shares outstanding on a fully-diluted basis.
Toro option holders who validly exercise their Toro options and are issued Toro Shares prior to the Scheme record date will be entitled to participate in the Scheme. Toro and IsoEnergy propose to enter into option cancellation deeds with holders of unquoted Toro options (all of which are "out-of-the-money" as at the date of this announcement) pursuant to which the options will, subject to (among other things) the Scheme being approved and becoming effective, be cancelled for a cash payment and/or ISO share issuance(14) based on a form of Black-Scholes valuation methodology.
Furthermore, Toro must ensure that all unvested Toro performance rights automatically vest in accordance with their terms upon the Scheme becoming effective and must procure that prior to the Scheme record date, each Toro performance right is converted, such that the relevant Toro performance rights holders are entitled to participate in the Scheme.
(________________________________13 Equivalent to approximately C$635,000, based on an AUD:CAD exchange rate of 0.9078.) (14 Implied price of the ISO share issuance to be subject approval of the TSX)
Timetable
Shareholders of Toro will be asked to approve the Scheme at a shareholder meeting which is expected to be held in early 2026.
Full particulars of the Scheme will be provided to Toro shareholders in the Scheme Booklet which will include the Independent Expert Report, the reasons for the Independent Toro Directors' recommendation and an explanatory statement in respect of the Scheme.
It is expected that the Scheme Booklet will be dispatched to Toro shareholders in early 2026. Toro shareholders are not required to take any action at this stage in relation to the Scheme. It is expected that the Transaction will close in first half of 2026, subject to satisfaction of all conditions, including receipt of all necessary approvals.
Advisors
SCP Resource Finance LP is acting as financial advisor to IsoEnergy. Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP is acting as Canadian legal advisor, Hamilton Locke is acting as Australian legal advisor and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP as US legal advisor to IsoEnergy.
Canaccord Genuity is acting as financial advisor to Toro. Cardinals Lawyers and Consultants is acting as legal advisor to Toro.
Qualified Person Statement
The scientific and technical information contained in this news release with respect to IsoEnergy was reviewed and approved Dr. Dan Brisbin, P.Geo., IsoEnergy's Vice President, Exploration, who is a "Qualified Person" (as defined in NI 43-101 -- Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101")).
Each of the mineral resource estimates in respect of IsoEnergy contained in this news release, except for the Larocque East project and the Tony M mine, are considered to be "historical estimates" as defined under NI 43-101 and are not considered to be current. See "Disclaimer on Historical Mineral Resource Estimates" for additional details.
See "Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Mineral Resource Estimates" and Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Historical Mineral Resource Estimates" below for additional details.
The scientific and technical information contained in this news release with respect to Toro was prepared by Dr. Greg Shirtliff, Geology Manager of Toro, who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and "Competent Person" as defined Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) 2012 Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Shirtliff consents to the inclusion in this release of the matters based on that information in the form and context in which it appears.
About IsoEnergy
IsoEnergy (NYSE American: ISOU; TSX: ISO) is a leading, globally diversified uranium company with substantial current and historical mineral resources in top uranium mining jurisdictions of Canada, the U.S. and Australia at varying stages of development, providing near-, medium- and long-term leverage to rising uranium prices.
IsoEnergy is currently advancing its Larocque East project in Canada's Athabasca basin, which is home to the Hurricane deposit, boasting the world's highest-grade indicated uranium mineral resource. IsoEnergy also holds a portfolio of permitted past-producing, conventional uranium and vanadium mines in Utah with a toll milling arrangement in place with Energy Fuels. These mines are currently on standby, ready for rapid restart as market conditions permit, positioning IsoEnergy as a near-term uranium producer.
About Toro Energy
Toro Energy Limited (ASX:TOE) is an ASX listed uranium development and exploration company with projects in Western Australia. Toro is committed to building an energy metals business with the flagship Wiluna Uranium Project as the centrepiece. The Wiluna Uranium Project consists of the Centipede-Millipede, Lake Maitland and Lake Way uranium deposits 30km to the south of the town of Wiluna in Western Australia's northern goldfields.
Toro is committed to safe and sustainable uranium production and has health, safety, environment and community policies in place to underpin this commitment.
No securities regulatory authority has either approved or disapproved of the contents of this news release.
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information
This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and "forward-looking information" within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation (collectively, referred to as "forward-looking information"). Generally, forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as "plans", "expects" or "does not expect", "is expected", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", or "believes", or variations of such words and phrases or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will be taken", "occur" or "be achieved". The forward-looking information includes statements with respect to the consummation and timing of the Transaction; receipt and timing of approval of Toro shareholders with respect to the Transaction; the anticipated benefits of the Transaction to the parties and their respective shareholders; the expected receipt of court, regulatory and other consents and approvals relating to the Transaction; the expected ownership interest of IsoEnergy shareholders and Toro shareholders in the Merged Group; anticipated strategic and growth opportunities for the Merged Group; the successful integration of the businesses of IsoEnergy and Toro; the prospects of each companies' respective projects, including mineral resources estimates and mineralization of each project; the potential for, success of and anticipated timing of commencement of future commercial production at the companies' properties, including expectations with respect to any permitting, development or other work that may be required to bring any of the projects into development or production; increased demand for nuclear power and uranium and the expected impact on the price of uranium; and any other activities, events or developments that the companies expect or anticipate will or may occur in the future.
Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of assumptions that, while considered reasonable by management at the time, are inherently subject to business, market and economic risks, uncertainties and contingencies that may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements. Such assumptions include, but are not limited to, assumptions that IsoEnergy and Toro will complete the Transaction in accordance with, and on the timeline contemplated by the terms and conditions of the relevant agreements; that the parties will receive the required shareholder, regulatory, court and stock exchange approvals and will satisfy, in a timely manner, the other conditions to the closing of the Transaction; the accuracy of management's assessment of the effects of the successful completion of the Transaction and that the anticipated benefits of the Transaction will be realized; the anticipated mineralization of IsoEnergy's and Toro's projects being consistent with expectations and the potential benefits from such projects and any upside from such projects; the price of uranium; that general business and economic conditions will not change in a materially adverse manner; that financing will be available if and when needed and on reasonable terms; and that third party contractors, equipment and supplies and governmental and other approvals required to conduct the Merged Group's planned activities will be available on reasonable terms and in a timely manner. Although each of IsoEnergy and Toro have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
Such statements represent the current views of IsoEnergy and Toro with respect to future events and are necessarily based upon a number of assumptions and estimates that, while considered reasonable by IsoEnergy and Toro, are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, political and social risks, contingencies and uncertainties. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to the following: the inability of IsoEnergy and Toro to complete the Transaction; a material adverse change in the timing of and the terms and conditions upon which the Transaction is completed; the inability to satisfy or waive all conditions to closing the Transaction; the failure to obtain shareholder, regulatory, court or stock exchange approvals in connection with the Transaction; the inability of the Merged Group to realize the benefits anticipated from the Transaction and the timing to realize such benefits; the inability of the consolidated entity to realize the benefits anticipated from the Arrangement and the timing to realize such benefits, including the exploration and drilling targets described herein; unanticipated changes in market price for ISO Shares and/or Toro Shares; changes to IsoEnergy's and/or Toro's current and future business plans and the strategic alternatives available thereto; growth prospects and outlook of Toro's business; regulatory determinations and delays; stock market conditions generally; demand, supply and pricing for uranium; and general economic and political conditions in Canada, the United States and other jurisdictions where the applicable party conducts business. Other factors which could materially affect such forward-looking information are described with respect to IsoEnergy in IsoEnergy's annual information form in respect of the year ended December 31, 2024 and other filings with the securities regulators which are available under IsoEnergy's profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca and on EDGAR at www.sec.gov and with respect to Toro at www.asx.com.au. IsoEnergy and Toro do not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.
Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Mineral Resource Estimates
For additional information regarding IsoEnergy's Tony M Mine, including the current mineral resource estimate, please refer to the Technical Report entitled "Technical Report on the Tony M Mine, Utah, USA -- Report for NI 43-101" dated effective September 9, 2022 authored by Mr. Mark B. Mathisen, C.P.G. of SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. (the "Tony M Technical Report") , available under IsoEnergy's profile on www.sedarplus.ca. Mr. Mathisen is a "qualified person" under NI 43-101.
For additional information regarding IsoEnergy's Larocque East Project, including the current mineral resource estimate, please refer to the Technical Report entitled "Larocque East project, including the mineral resource estimate, please refer to the Technical Report entitled "Technical Report on the Larocque East Project, Northern Saskatchewan, Canada" dated effective July 8, 2022, authored by Mr. Mark B. Mathisen, C.P.G. of SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. (the "Larocque East Technical Report") , available under IsoEnergy's profile on www.sedarplus.ca. Mr. Mathisen is a "qualified person" under NI 43-101.
Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Historical Mineral Resource Estimates
Each of the mineral resource estimates, except for the Larocque East Project and Tony M, contained in this presentation are considered to be "historical estimates" as defined under NI 43-101, and have been sourced as follows:
-- Daneros Mine: Reported by Energy Fuels Inc. in a technical report
entitled "Updated Report on the Daneros Mine Project, San Juan County,
Utah, U.S.A.", prepared by Douglas C. Peters, C. P. G., of Peters
Geosciences, dated March 2, 2018;
-- Sage Plain Project: Reported by Energy Fuels Inc. in a technical report
entitled "Updated Technical Report on Sage Plain Project (Including the
Calliham Mine)", prepared by Douglas C. Peters, CPG of Peters Geosciences,
dated March 18, 2015;
-- Coles Hill: reported by Virginia Uranium Holdings Inc. In a technical
report entitled "NI43-101 preliminary economic assessment update
(revised)", prepared by John I Kyle of Lyntek Incorporated dated August
19, 2013;
-- Dieter Lake: Dated 2006 and reported by Fission Energy Corp. In a company
report entitled "Technical Report on the Dieter Lake Property, Quebec,
Canada" dated October 7, 2011;
-- Matoush: Dated December 7, 2012 and reported by Strateco Resources Inc.
in a press release dated December 7, 2012;
-- Ben Lomond: Dated as of 1982, and reported by Mega Uranium Ltd. In a
company report entitled "Technical Report on the Mining Leases Covering
the Ben Lomond Uranium-Molybdenum Deposit Queensland, Australia" dated
July 16, 2005.
-- Milo Project: Reported by Gmb Resources Ltd. in a scoping study entitled
"Milo Project Scoping Study" prepared by Peter Owens and Basile Dean of
Mining One Consultants, dated March 6, 2013.
For the Daneros Mine, as disclosed in the above noted technical report, the historical estimate was prepared by Energy Fuels using a wireframe model of the mineralized zone based on an outside bound of a 0.05% eu3o8 grade cutoff at a minimum thickness of 1 foot. Surface drilling would need to be conducted to confirm resources and connectivity of resources in order to verify the Daneros historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
For the Sage Plain Project, as disclosed in the above noted technical report, the historical estimate was prepared by Peters Geosciences using a modified polygonal method. An exploration program would need to be conducted, including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the Sage Plain historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
For the Coles Hill Project, as disclosed in the above noted revised preliminary economic assessment, the historical estimated was prepared by John I Kyle of Lyntek Incorporated. Twinning of a selection of certain holes would need to be completed along with updating of mining, processing and certain cost estimates in order to verify the Coles Hill Project historical resource estimate as a current mineral resource estimate.
For Dieter Lake, as disclosed in the above noted technical report, the historical estimate was prepared by Davis & Guo using the Thiessen (Voronoi) polygon method. Data constraints used were 200 ppm, 500 ppm, and 1000ppm u3o8 over a minimum of 1 metre thickness. Polygons created had radii of 200 metres. A rock density of 2.67g/cm3 was used. An exploration program would need to be completed, including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the Dieter Lake historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
For Matoush, as disclosed in the above noted press release, the historical estimate was prepared by RPA using block U(3) O(8) grades within a wireframe model that were estimated by ordinary kriging. The historical estimate was estimated at a cut-off grade of 0.1% U(3) O(8) and using an average long-term uranium price of us$75 per pound. Six zones make up the historical estimate at Matoush: am-15, mt-34, mt-22, mt-02, mt-06, and mt-36. Each zone is made up of one or more lenses, most of which strike north (009deg) and dip steeply (87deg) to the east. Outlines of the mineralized lenses were interpreted on ten-metre spaced vertical sections. Minimum criteria of 0.10% U(3) O(8) over 1.5 m true thickness was used as a guide. An exploration program would need to be conducted, including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the Matoush historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
For Ben Lomond, as disclosed in the above noted technical report, the historical estimate was prepared by the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC) using a sectional method. The parameters used in the selection of the ore intervals were a minimum true thickness of 0.5 metres and maximum included waste (true thickness) of 5 metres. Resource zones were outlined on 25 metre sections using groups of intersections, isolated intersections were not included. The grades from the composites were area weighted to give the average grade above a threshold of 500 ppm uranium. The area was measured on each 25 metres section to give the tonnage at a bulk density of 2.603. An exploration program would need to be conducted, including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the Ben Lomond historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
For the Milo Project, as disclosed in the above noted scoping study, the historical estimate was prepared by Peter Owens and Basile Dean of Mining One Consultants. An exploration program would need to be conducted, including twinning of a selection of certain holes, along with updating of mining processing and certain cost estimates in order to verify the Milo Project historical resource estimate as a current mineral resource estimate.
In each instance, the historical estimate is reported using the categories of mineral resources and mineral reserves as defined by the Canadian Institute CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Reserves, and mineral reserves at that time, and these "historical estimates" are not considered by IsoEnergy to be current. In each instance, the reliability of the historical estimate is considered reasonable, but a Qualified Person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as a current mineral resource, and neither IsoEnergy nor Toro is treating the historical estimate as a current mineral resource. The historical information provides an indication of the exploration potential of the properties but may not be representative of expected results.
Cautionary Note to United States Investors Regarding Presentation of Mineral Resource Estimates
The mineral resource estimates included in this press release have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the securities laws in effect in Canada and Australia, as applicable, which differ in certain material respects from the disclosure requirements promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). Accordingly, information contained in this press release may not be comparable to similar information made public by U.S. companies reporting pursuant to SEC disclosure requirements.
Pro forma Mineral Resources
This announcement refers to IsoEnergy and Toro having a combined pro forma Mineral Resource estimates of 133.4 Mlbs M&I (+141%) and 39.4 Mlbs Inferred (+704%), along with historical resources of 154.0 Mlbs M&I and 88.0 Mlbs Inferred. This is comprised of the individual Mineral Resource estimates of Toro reported in accordance with the JORC Code 2012 and 2004, and IsoEnergy reported in accordance with NI 43-101. Refer to the Mineral Resource estimates of each entity, confirmation in accordance with ASX Listing Rule 5.23 in respect of Toro on page 2 and page 26), and ASX Listing Rule 5.12 disclosures on behalf of IsoEnergy on page 11).
Competent person disclosures
The information presented here that relates to U(3) O(8) and V(2) O(5) Mineral Resources of Toro Energy's Centipede-Millipede, Lake Way, Lake Maitland, Dawson Hinkler and Nowthanna deposits is based on information compiled by Dr Greg Shirtliff of Toro Energy Limited and Mr Daniel Guibal of Condor Geostats Services Pty Ltd. Mr Guibal takes overall responsibility for the Resource Estimate, and Dr Shirtliff takes responsibility for the integrity of the data supplied for the estimation. Dr Shirtliff is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and Mr Guibal is a Fellow of the AusIMM and they have sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity they are undertaking to qualify as Competent Persons as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code 2012)'. The Competent Persons consent to the inclusion in this release of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which it appears.
The information presented here that relates to Mineral Resources of Toro's Theseus Uranium Project is based on work supervised by Michael Andrew, who is a member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Andrew is an employee of Snowden Optiro, and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Persons as defined in the 2004 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr Andrew consents to the inclusion in this release of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.
Mineral Resource Estimates of IsoEnergy
Project Location Country Category Tonnes U O contained V O contained
(m) grade U O grade V O
(%) (m lbs) (ppm) (m lbs)
Hurricane Saskatchewan Canada Indicated 0.1 34.50 % 48.6
Inferred 0.1 2.20 % 2.7
Tony M Utah USA Indicated 1.1 0.28 % 6.6
Inferred 0.4 0.27 % 2.2
Sage Plain Utah USA Indicated* 0.2 0.16 % 0.8 1.3 % 6.5
Inferred* 0.0 0.13 % 0.0 0.9 % 0.2
Daneros Utah USA Indicated* 0.0 0.36 % 0.1
Inferred* 0.0 0.37 % 0.1
Ben Lomond Queensland Australia Indicated* 1.3 0.28 % 8.1
Inferred* 0.6 0.21 % 2.8
Dieter
Lake Quebec Canada Inferred* 19.3 0.06 % 24.4
Milo Queensland Australia Inferred* 88.4 0.01 % 14.0
Matoush Quebec Canada Indicated* 0.6 0.95 % 12.3
Inferred* 1.7 0.44 % 16.4
Coles Hill Virginia USA Indicated* 108.5 0.06 % 132.9
Inferred* 32.9 0.04 % 30.4
Total M&I - 43-101 1.1 55.2 -
Total Inferred 43-101 0.4 4.9 -
Total M&I 111.8 209.5 6.5
Total Inferred 143.4 93.1 0.2
*Includes historical resources
Cautionary statement: The IsoEnergy Mineral Resource estimates comprise foreign and historical estimates for the purposes of the ASX Listing Rules. These estimates are not reported in accordance with the JORC Code. A competent person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimates or foreign estimates as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the JORC Code. It is uncertain that following evaluation and/or further exploration work that the historical estimates or foreign estimates will be able to be reported as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the JORC Code.
ASX Listing Rule 5.12 disclosures regarding historical and foreign estimates
Listing Rule Explanation Commentary
5.12.1 The source and date of the Milo: Milo Mineral Resource
historical estimates or Statement: 22 November
foreign estimates. 2012 contained in an ASX
Announcement by GBM Resources
Ltd $(GBZ.AU)$.
Ben Lomond: McKay, A. D., 1982,
Ben Lomond Deposit:
In Situ Uranium Resource
Estimate. Confidential Report
of the Australian Atomic Energy
Commission Uranium
Resource Evaluation Unit.
Vigar, A & Jones, D. 2005
Technical Report on the
Mining Leases Covering the Ben
Lomond Uranium -- Molybdenum
Deposit Queensland, Australia.
Prepared for Maple
Minerals Corporation as a
NI-43-101 Report. Available
at https://ww.sedarplus.ca.
Coles Hill: The Coles Hill
Mineral Resources are
considered to be historic in
nature. The most recent
Mineral Resource estimate was
prepared by Lyntek,
Inc. and BRS Engineering in
2013 (Kyle, John I., P.
E. and Douglas Beahm, P.E.,
P.G., 2013; NI 43-101
Preliminary Economic Assessment
Update (REVISED),
Coles Hill Uranium Property,
Pittsylvania County,
Virginia, United States of
America, and is based upon
assay and geologic data
collected by the former owner,
Marline Oil Co, who drilled out
the project between
1979 and 1981. All assays and
geotechnical data used
to develop the Mineral Resource
estimate for the Coles
Hill project was generated from
that exploration program.
Tony M: IsoEnergy's Tony M mine
project has a Mineral
Resource estimate that is
current within the context
of the Canadian Institute of
Mining, Metallurgy and
Petroleum $(CIM)$ Code for
Mineral Reserves and Mineral
Resources (CIM Code). While the
CIM Code is a foreign
estimate, its classification of
Mineral Resources
is similar in most respects to
those of the JORC Code.
Daneros: The Mineral Resource
estimate for the Daneros
mine project of IsoEnergy is
considered to be historic
in nature. Historical
exploration data used in
IsoEnergy's
project evaluation was derived
from surface rotary
and core holes drilled by Utah
Power & Light and White
Canyon Uranium (collectively
603 drill holes), and
underground long holes (583
holes) drilled by Deneson
Mines and Energy Fuels. Various
Mineral Resource estimates,
all of which are historical in
nature and not in compliance
with the JORC Code in 2009 for
White Canyon Uranium
and Energy Fuels, Inc. in 2012
and 2018. The data
used to prepare those reports
was historical exploration
drilling data and geologic
information from prior
mining operations.
Dieter Lake: The most recent
historical, foreign
Mineral Resource estimate done
for the Dieter Lake
project in Northern Quebec is
documented in two reports.
The first is "2005 Exploration
at the Dieter Lake
Property, Quebec dated November
3, 2006" by Dahrouge
Geological Consulting Ltd. for
Strathmore Minerals
Corporation which for the first
time describes the
new resource estimate. This
estimate, along with an
update on exploration activity
from 2007 to 2011,
was repeated in "Technical
Report on the Dieter Lake
Property, Quebec, Canada" dated
October 7, 2011",
prepared GeoVector Management
Inc. for Fission Energy
Corp (www.sedarplus.ca).
Clinton Davis was an author
on both reports. Michael Guo
did the 2005 modelling
and was a co-author on the 2006
report. Prior to the
2005 estimate, historical
resource estimates had been
completed in 1981, 1989, and
2004. Davis, C. & Guo, M.
(2006). 2005 Exploration at the
Dieter Lake Property, Quebec;
NI 43-101 Report for
Strathmore Minerals Corp, 28
p., with appendices. Davis,
C.F, (2011), Fission Energy
Corp, Technical
Report on the Dieter Lake
Property, Quebec, Canada,
NI43-101 Report for Fission
Energy Corp, 47 p., with
appendices (www.sedarplus.ca).
Sage Plain: Mineral resources
for IsoEnergy's Sage
Plain project were estimated by
an independent contractor
to the project's then current
owner, Energy Fuels,
Inc. and reported in the
"Updated Technical Report
on Sage Plain Project
(including the Calliham Mine)"
dated March 18, 2015 and
authored by Douglas C. Peters,
CPG of Peters Geosciences. The
Technical Report follows
the format of NI 43-101, but
the author did not identify
any Mineral Reserve and Mineral
Resource code used
to classify the mineralization.
Resources were estimated
by employing a polygonal
method. IsoEnergy considers
the Sage Plain resources to be
historic in nature.
Matoush: The most recent
historical, foreign Mineral
Resource estimate is documented
in "Technical Report
on the Mineral Resource Update
for the Matoush Project,
Central Québec, Canada,
NI43-101 Report" dated
February 15, 2012, prepared by
David A. Ross, R. Barry
Cook, Normand L. Lecuyer, and
Bruce Fielder (Melis
Engineering Ltd.) of Roscoe
Postle Associates Inc.
("RPA") for Strateco Resources
Inc. This report is
available on www.sedarplus.ca.
The historical, foreign
Mineral Resource estimate was
further updated by RPA
in December 2012, as disclosed
in a press release
of Strateco dated December 7,
2012, and in Strateco
Resources' Annual Information
For, dated March 21,
2013 (available on
www.sedarplus.ca). RPA updated
the Mineral Resource estimate
for the Matoush project
based on drill results
available as at November 22,
2012.
Hurricane: The most recent
foreign Mineral Resource
estimate is documented in
"Technical Report on the
Larocque East Project, Northern
Saskatchewan, Canada"
for IsoEnergy Ltd. This report
was prepared by Mark
B. Mathisen of SLR Consulting
(Canada) Ltd. ("SLR").
Two versions, both with an
effective date of July
8, 2022, are available at
www.sedarplus.ca - one with
a signature date of July 12,
2022, and an amended
version with a signature date
of August 4, 2022. It
is explained in the amended
report that this Technical
Report conforms to NI 43-101
Standards of Disclosure
for Mineral Projects and
replaces the technical report
filed on SEDAR on July 19,
2022, which has been revised
to correct the typographical
error related to the
Indicated U3O8 grades in Table
14-11, which summarizes
the block model sensitivity to
cut-off grade. Additional
typographical errors have been
corrected to align
the descriptions of historical
drilling in Section
6 with Table 10-1. The
recommended work plan has been
revised.
5.12.2 Whether the historical Milo: The Inferred resource was
estimates or foreign estimates calculated in accordance
use categories of with JORC 2004.
mineralisation other than those
defined in Appendix 5A (JORC
Code) and if so, an explanation
of the differences.
Ben Lomond: The Inferred
resource used JORC terminology
of the time (1982).
Coles Hill: Estimates of
Mineral Resources for the
Coles Hill project were
prepared in accordance with
Canadian National Instrument
43-101 and CIM standards
that were in effect at the time
that the resource
estimate was prepared (2013).
The estimate predates
the current CIM Standards and
CIM Estimation of Mineral
Resources & Mineral Reserves
Best Practices Guidelines,
which became effective in
November, 2019. IsoEnergy
considers the Coles Hill
resources to be historical
in nature. The use of "Inferred
Mineral Resources"
and "Indicated Mineral
Resources" follow the
requirements
of the CIM Code. The
definitions of such
classifications
("Inferred Mineral Resources"
and "Indicated Mineral
Resources") are similar to
those classifications under
the JORC Code, and there are no
differences in the
definitions of "Inferred
Mineral Resources" and
"Indicated
Mineral Resources" between the
two Codes.
Tony M: The "current" Mineral
Resource estimate for
the Tony M project was prepared
in compliance with
the CIM Definition Standards
for Mineral Resources
& Mineral Reserves (2014), CIM
Uranium Leading Practice
Guidelines (2024) and Canadian
National Instrument
43-101. The definitions of
Mineral Resource
classifications
for "Indicated Mineral
Resources" and "Inferred
Mineral
Resources" under the CIM Code
are similar to the JORC
Code definitions of "Inferred
Mineral Resources" and
"Indicated Mineral Resources".
Daneros: Mineral resources for
the Daneros Mine project
were estimated for former
project owner Energy Fuels,
Inc. by Douglas C. Peters, CPG
and this estimate is
contained within the "Updated
Report On The Daneros
Mine Project, San Juan County,
Utah, U. S. A." dated
March 2, 2018. Although the
resource is considered
to be historic, the estimate
uses resource classifications
that are the same as those of
the JORC Code.
Dieter Lake: The Davis and Guo
(2006) report and
contained Mineral Resource
estimate predate the current
CIM Standards (May 2014) and
CIM Estimation of Mineral
Resources & Mineral Reserves
Best Practices Guidelines
(November 2019), and for
IsoEnergy the Mineral Resources
are a historical estimate under
National Instrument
43-101 -- Standards of
Disclosure for Mineral Projects
("NI 43-101") and a qualified
person has not done
sufficient work to classify the
historical estimate
as current Mineral Resources.
It is uncertain whether
the Inferred resources in the
2006 report would qualify
as Inferred resources under
JORC standards.
Sage Plain: Resources estimated
and reported in the
2015 Technical Report on the
Sage Plain Project" are
historical in nature do not
appear to be consistent
with Mineral Resource codes in
effect at the time
of the report.
Matoush: The Ross et al (2012)
report and contained
Mineral Resource estimate, and
the historical, foreign
Mineral Resource update in the
March 21, 2013 Strateco
Resources Annual Information
Form predate the current
CIM Standards (May 2014) and
CIM Estimation of Mineral
Resources & Mineral Reserves
Best Practices Guidelines
(November 2019), and for
IsoEnergy the Mineral Resources
are a historical estimate under
National Instrument
43-101 -- Standards of
Disclosure for Mineral Projects
("NI 43-101") and a Competent
Person has not done
sufficient work to classify the
historical estimate
as current Mineral Resources.
It is uncertain whether
the Inferred and Indicated
resources in the 2012 report
would qualify as Inferred
resources under JORC (2012)
standards.
Hurricane: The Mathison (2022)
report conforms to
NI 43-101 Standards of
Disclosure for mineral
projects.
Foreign mineral resources were
classified in accordance
with definitions for mineral
resources in the Canadian
Institute of Mining, Metallurgy
and Petroleum (CIM)
Definition Standards for
Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves dated May 10, 2014.
The definitions of Mineral
Resource classifications for
"Indicated Mineral Resources"
and "Inferred Mineral
Resources" under the CIM Code
are similar to the JORC Code
definitions of "Indicated
Mineral Resources" and
"Inferred Mineral Resources".
5.12.3 The relevance and materiality Milo, Ben Lomond, Daneros,
of the historical estimates Dieter Lake, Sage Plain,
or foreign estimates to the Matoush, Coles Hill: The
entity. estimate is considered relevant
however not material in the
context of global uranium
resources held.
Tony M: The Tony M project
Mineral Resources are
"current" under the CIM Code
and are not "historic"
in nature. As such they are
relevant and are material
to IsoEnergy.
Hurricane: The Mathisen (2022)
foreign Mineral Resource
estimate, is considered to be
both relevant and material
to IsoEnergy.
5.12.4 The reliability of historical Milo: The estimates would
estimates or foreign require some additional
estimates, including by work to conform to JORC 2012
reference to any of the however the methodologies
criteria for preparing the resource
in Table 1 of Appendix 5A (JORC estimates have not changed
Code) which are relevant significantly in comparison to
to understanding the previous reporting.
reliability of the historical
estimates or foreign estimates.
Ben Lomond: The estimate is
indicative of the
mineralisation
present however substantial
re-drilling and assaying,
down hole surveys and
radiometric logging etc would
be required to provide a JORC
2012 resource estimate.
Coles Hill: Although the Coles
Hill resource estimate
is considered to be an accurate
and relevant representation
of the nature of the uranium
mineralization at the
project, additional work, as
per the recommendations
in the technical report, will
be required for the
resources to be reclassified as
"current" under the
CIM Code and the CIM Uranium
Leading Practice Guidelines
(2024). The existing resource
estimate was prepared
in accordance with the
then-prevailing NI 43-101 and
CIM standards, although the
drill hole data that forms
the basis of the resource
estimate had not been confirmed
at the time the estimate was
prepared. While this
estimate predates the current
CIM Standards (2014)
and CIM Estimation of Mineral
Resources & Mineral
Reserves Best Practices
Guidelines (November, 2019),
the methodologies for preparing
and evaluating the
resource estimates have not
changed significantly
in comparison to those in
effect at the time of the
most recent estimate (2013).
The historical Mineral
Resources are considered to be
reliable.
Tony M: The Tony M resources
are relevant and reliable
in the context of evaluating
the project. The resources
are "current" and are not
historical in nature.
Daneros: Resources at the
Daneros mine are not "current"
and are historic in nature.
However, they may be relevant
to the evaluation of the
project and its exploration
potential in the future.
Dieter Lake: The historical,
foreign, Inferred resources
presented in both the Davis and
Guo (2006) and Davis
(2011) reports predate the
current CIM Standards (May
2014) and CIM Estimation of
Mineral Resources & Mineral
Reserves Best Practices
Guidelines (November 2019),
and for IsoEnergy the Inferred
resources are a historical
estimate under National
Instrument 43-101 -- Standards
of Disclosure for Mineral
Projects ("NI 43-101") and
a Competent Person has not done
sufficient work to
classify the historical
estimate as current Mineral
Resources. Until this work is
done, the reliability
of the historical Dieter Lake
resource estimate is
uncertain.
Sage Plain: The methodology for
resource estimation
used for the Sage Plain project
is consistent with
historical work throughout the
central Colorado Plateau
uranium region. Polygonal
estimation methodology,
and the classification of
resources and/or reserves
derived from such studies have
served small underground
uranium mining adequately for
decades. While local
miners are familiar with the
classifications and
methodologies,
they are not appropriate or
reliable for IsoEnergy.
Matoush: The Ross et al (2012)
report and contained
Mineral Resource estimate, and
the historical, foreign
Mineral Resource update in the
March 21, 2013 Strateco
Resources Annual Information
Form predate the current
CIM Standards (May 2014) and
CIM Estimation of Mineral
Resources & Mineral Reserves
Best Practices Guidelines
(November 2019), and for
IsoEnergy the Mineral Resources
are a historical estimate under
National Instrument
43-101 -- Standards of
Disclosure for Mineral Projects
("NI 43-101") and a Competent
Person has not done
sufficient work to classify the
historical, foreign
estimate as current Mineral
Resources. Until this
work is done, the reliability
of the historical, foreign
Mineral Resource estimate is
uncertain, and it is
uncertain whether the Inferred
and Indicated resources
in the 2012 report would
qualify as Inferred and
Indicated
resources under JORC (2012)
standards.
Hurricane: The Mathison (2022)
report conforms to
NI 43-101 Standards of
Disclosure for mineral
projects.
Foreign Mineral Resources were
classified in accordance
with definitions for Mineral
Resources in the Canadian
Institute of Mining, Metallurgy
and Petroleum (CIM)
Definition Standards for
Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves dated May 10, 2014
current CIM Standards
(May 2014), and IsoEnergy
reports the Mineral Resources
as a compliant estimate under
National Instrument
43-101 -- Standards of
Disclosure for Mineral Projects
("NI 43-101").
5.12.5 To the extent known, a summary Milo: The most recent JORC 2004
of work programs on Mineral Resource estimate
which the historical estimates was completed for the Milo
or foreign estimates Project by Kerrin Allwood
are based and a summary of the F.AusIMM and published as a
key assumptions, mining JORC 2004 Resource in
and processing parameters and 2012 (Allwood.K , Nov, 2012).
methods used to prepare The Nov, 2012 historical
the historical or foreign JORC 2004 Resource estimate was
estimates. calculated for co-incident
TREEYO & P2O5 and a copper
equivalent resource comprising
Au, Ag, Cu, Mo, Co & U. The
Milo JORC 2004 estimate
block model was generated from
34 drillholes and 9878
samples with a total core
length of 11572m, all of
which were competed by GBM
Resources Ltd (ASX:GBZ)
from 2009 to 2012.
Detailed summaries of the GBM
Resources Ltd drill
programs completed from 2009 to
2012 are covered in
Allwood & Norris (Feb, 2012),
Allwood & Norris . (August,
2012), and Allwood & Norris
(Nov, 2012). The objective
of diamond drill programs from
2009 to 2012 was to
verify and test the Milo
deposit ( 22 drillholes,
3696 samples ) (, Allwood &
Norris Feb, 2012), identify
anomalous intersections in the
Milo deposit for followSHY
up drilling Allwood & Norris .
(August, 2012), 31
drillholes for 11464m of
drilling and complete a further
3 drillholes to complete the
Inferred resource for
an initial Scoping Study
Allwood & Norris ( Nov, 2012),
34 drillholes, 11572m, 3503 RC,
8069 DD. 9878m sampled
at largely 1m intervals.
Ben Lomond: In total 73,151 m
of drilling was completed with
63,292 available for the
quatoed estimate. ( detailed
below ). All holes were
radiometrically logged. The
data was digitised so that
computer analysis including
the restitution of logs and the
estimation of resources,
could be carried out at various
cut-off grades.
Chemical analyses of the core
gave the required control
for the radiometric
equivalent-grade calculations,
by defining the equilibrium
ratio between radiometric
grade and the actual grade as
determined by analysis.
Extensive documentation exists
on the calibration
of the various spectrometers
used during the drilling
campaigns and a different
calibration factor is used
for each. The actual uranium
values used are therefore
a combination of actual assays
and down-hole spectrometer
probe readings. Correlation
overall is good and
discrepancies
minor (McKay 1982).
The parameters used in the
selection of the ore intervals
were a minimum true thickness
of 0.5 metres and maximum
included waste (true thickness)
of 5 metres. Resource
zones were outlined on 25m
sections using groups of
intersections, isolated
intersections were not
included.
The grades from the composites
were area weighted
to give the average grade above
a threshold of 500
ppm uranium. The area was
measured on each 25m section
to give the tonnage at a bulk
density of 2.603
The resource categories were
chosen based on the Australian
JORC code guidelines of the
time. The categories were:
-- Indicated -- extend up to 5
metres from a drill-hole
up or down dip, or half the
distance to the next drill-hole
if less than 5 metres.
-- Inferred - extend 5 to 15
metres from a drill-hole
up or down dip, or half the
distance to the next drill-hole
if between 5 and 15 metres.
Drilling 1975-1981
No. of Holes Metres
Diamond Core Surface 98 19,459
Underground 30 2,797
Percussion Surface 201 28,915
Underground 77 2,582
Air Trac Surface 230 9,539
SUB-TOTAL: 636 63,292
1982-1984:
No. of holes Metres
Diamond core
Surface 21 4,895
Percussion
Surface 43 4,964
GRAND TOTAL: 700 73,151
Coles Hill: The Coles Hill
uranium deposits were
discovered by
Marline Oil in 1979 and 1980.
Marline conducted a
large-scale core drilling
program to test their
previously
identified geophysical,
radiometric, and geochemical
anomalies at the project site,
and this work resulted
in the initial definition of
the Coles Hill North
and South uranium deposits. The
Marline core drilling
program extended into 1981, and
the data generated
from that drilling program has
served as the basis
for all subsequent resource
estimations. In 1982 Union
Carbide Corporation (later
known as Umetco) entered
into a joint venture with
Marline with the objective
of preparing a feasibility
study that would lead to
the development of the Coles
Hill uranium deposits
and advance the project to a
production status. Mineral
resource estimates for the
project that are considered
to be relevant to the project
were prepared utilizing
the radiometric and chemical
assays derived from the
1979-1981 drilling program of
263 core holes, as well
as 3 core holes drilled at the
property in 2008. The
fundamental assay and
geological data for the project
was preserved, and a
significant portion of the core
was stored in covered
facilities. Comparison of
historical
assay data with "check" assays
from sampling programs
in 2008 and 2013 generally
confirmed the validity
of the historical data. The
Mineral Resource estimate
for the project were estimated
by BRS Engineering,
a Wyoming-based independent
minerals exploration and
engineering company that has
extensive experience
in the evaluation of uranium
projects. BRS employed
radiometric assay data from 264
drill holes to develop
the estimate of Mineral
Resources at Coles Hill. Drill
hole assay data was compiled in
Datamine software
at an interval of 0.50 feet
within a "mineralized
envelope" of 0.02% eU3O8 to
constrain grade interpolation.
A sample composite of 1.0 feet
was selected. The kriging
methodology employed optimum
block sizes
and the optimum number of
samples to access in the
estimate were determined by a
number of test runs
on strategically placed blocks
in high density and
low-density areas in each area.
The optimum parameters
were determined by observing
what produced the best
regression slope $(R)$ and
kriging efficiency, and the
lowest spread in 90% confidence
limits, but still
retaining the smallest block
size relating to the
probable future smallest mining
unit ("SMU"). These
three parameters produced good
correlations amongst
themselves. Three separate
searches were affected,
namely 1 times the range of the
variogram, 1.5 times
the range of the variogram and
2 times the range of
the variogram. For the North
Coles a minimum of 17
samples and a maximum of 25
samples were deemed to
be geostatistically appropriate
for the first two
searches. The 3rd search was
set at a minimum of 8
samples and a maximum of 25
samples. For the South
Coles a minimum of 10 samples
and a maximum of 20
samples for the first two
searches and for the 3rd
a minimum of 8 samples and a
maximum of 20 samples
were deemed to be appropriate
(Figures 19 and 21).
The search was confined to a
specific layer due to
the vertical variability of the
mineralization and
therefore the octant search
method was deemed unnecessary.
A draft NI 43-101 Preliminary
Economic Assessment
date (Revised) on the Coles
Hill project was prepared
for former owner Virginia
Energy in 2013 by John Kyle
of Lyntek, Inc. and Douglas
Beahm, principal Engineer
of BRS Engineering, Inc. This
study, which is not
publicly available, includes
data verification information
for all of the drill hole
information, including assays,
as well as summaries of
metallurgical testing
undertaken
by Umetco Minerals, proposed
mining methods, metallurgical
recovery methods, and proposed
project infrastructure.
Copies of this report are in
IsoEnergy's files. This
study of the Coles Hill project
included data on mining
and mineral processing
methodologies in sufficient
detail to identify cut-off
grade criteria for estimation
of Mineral Resources.
Tony M: The Tony M uranium
deposit and several other
similar
and nearby deposits were
discovered in a remote part
of southeast Utah in the mid
1970s by Plateau Resources,
a subsidiary of a midwestern US
electrical utility
company. Plateau's discovery
was made through wide-spaced
exploration drilling in an area
of several very small-scale
underground mines. The newly
discovered deposits were
outlined by conventional "open
hole" rotary drilling
and "spot "coring of
potentially economic
mineralization
within favorable flat lying
sandstones. Plateau commenced
with the development of a
large-scale room and pillar
underground mine in 1978. There
was limited uranium
production from Tony M prior to
its shut-down in 1984,
but production was restarted
for a short period of
time in 2007-2008, before being
shut down again due
to low commodity prices. From
the time of discovery
to shut-down of mining
operations at Tony M a
considerable
amount of drill data from
surface drilling and
underground
long-hole drilling was
collected, and that data, as
well as mine operational data
and metallurgical recovery
information provided a
substantial foundation for
a new Mineral Resource estimate
that was prepared
in 2022 by SLR International
Corporation. and these
data conform to Canadian
National Instrument 43-101
Standards of Disclosure for
Mineral Projects. The
report, entitled "Technical
Report on the Tony M Mine,
Utah, USA Report for NI 43-101"
is dated September
9, 2022, and can be viewed via
IsoEnergy's profile
on the SEDAR Plus web site
(accessed 8/11/2025). The
resource estimate was based
upon the results of 1,678
vertical conventional ("open
hole") rotary drill holes,
totalling 947,610 feet. One
thousand six hundred seventy
of the drill holes were
completed by former owner
of the Tony M mine Plateau
Resources and the remainder
(eight) were completed by
IsoEnergy. The eight IsoEnergy
holes were drilled as offsets
to holes previously
drilled by Plateau in order to
confirm the results
of the historical drill holes.
The holes drilled by
IsoEnergy included 2,555 feet
of "conventional" open
hole rotary drilling and 439
feet of core. All holes
were vertical in orientation.
Mineral resources at
the Tony M project were
classified in accordance with
the Canadian Institute of
Mining, Metallurgy and
Petroleum
(CIM) Definition Standards for
Mineral Resources and
Mineral Reserves, dated May 10,
2014, definitions
which are incorporated by
reference in NI 43-101. SLR
estimated the resources using a
conventional
block modelling approach
utilizing the inverse squared
(ID2) methodology and
length-weighted 1.0- foot
uncapped
composites to estimate the
uranium grades (% eU3O8)
in a three-pass approach. The
resource estimate was
based upon a US$65 per pound
uranium price, and a
cut-off grade oof 0.14% eU3O8.
IsoEnergy is in possession
of all of the technical data
used to prepare the current
Mineral Resource estimate.
Daneros: The Daneros mine
project has been the site
for numerous exploration and
development activities
since the early 1950s. Much of
the data from those
efforts has been lost or is not
accessible to IsoEnergy.
Recent mine production and
exploration undertaken
by IsoEnergy has provided data
for evaluation of the
project and exploration
planning but is not complete
enough for a new resource
estimate or for updated
mine planning.
Dieter Lake: Based on the Davis
and Guo (2006) and
Davis (2011) reports, the 2006
historical, foreign
Mineral Resource estimate,
which is repeated in the
2011 report, used both 2005
drill core resampling
data and historic data from 96
drill holes. Resource
modelling was also updated in
2005 as part of the
evaluation of the data
collected during the 2005
exploration
program and compared to the
existing historical resource
model. This estimate used 200 m
radius polygons, a
minimum cutoff of 200 ppm over
1 metre, and a density
of 2.67g/cm(3) .
Sage Plain: Records of
exploration results and uranium
production from the Sage Plain
project area are generally
limited to borehole gamma-ray
logs, and drill hole
maps of programs carried out
periodically, and they
have served as the basis for
the historical estimates.
The historic resource estimates
for the Sage Plain
project were generally
calculated using either a
polygonal
or circle-tangent modelling
method, both of which
have been superseded by more
applicable geostatistical
resource estimation methods.
Summaries of historical
exploration and mining
activities at the Sage Plain
project are not available to
IsoEnergy. The historical
resource estimates do not
conform to either the current
JORC Code or the CIM Code.
Matoush: The Ross et al (2012)
historical, foreign
Mineral Resource estimate in
the NI43-101 report dated
February 15, 2012 for Strateco
Resources utilized
drill hole data available as of
December 31, 2011
when the Matoush Gemcom
database included 515 diamond
core holes up to and including
hole MT-11-039. Of
these, 392 holes representing
175,190 m of drilling
are located within the area of
resources. The wireframe
models representing the
mineralized zones are
intersected
by 150 drill holes. As of
December 31, 2011, chemical
analyses for all holes had been
received. Equivalent
U3O8 (eU3O8) values were not
used for this resource
estimate, as was done in
previous resource estimates.
A set of cross-sections and
plan views were used to
construct three-dimensional
wireframe models at a
cut-off grade of 0.1% U3O8.
High-grade values were
cut to 9% U3O8 prior to
compositing. Outlines of the
mineralized lenses were
interpreted on ten-metre spaced
vertical sections. Minimum
criteria of 0.1% U3O8 over
1.5 m true thickness was used
as a guide. Narrow intercepts
grading 0.05% to 0.1% U3O8
located adjacent to the
main mineralized intercept were
included. Where necessary,
the wireframe intercept was
"bulked out" to a minimum
of 1.5 m true thickness.
Low-grade intercepts were
included in the initial
wireframe models for zones
MT-34 and MT-22. Many of these
intercepts were removed
by clipping the resource
wireframe if below 0.1% U3O8.
Some intersections grading
0.05% to 0.1% U3O8 were
included in the grade
interpolation to preserve
continuity
and/or maintain a soft
boundary. Variogram parameters
were interpreted from two-metre
composited values.
Sample intervals within the
wireframe models range
from ten centimetres to five
metres, and average 70
cm. Assays within the wireframe
models were composited
to two-metre lengths starting
at the first mineralized
wireframe boundary from the
collar and resetting at
each new lens wireframe
boundary. Several shorter
composites occur at the bottom
of the mineralized
zone, immediately above where
the drill hole exits
the wireframe. Partial
composites less than 60 cm
long were removed from the
dataset. Non-assayed intervals
were treated as zero grade.
Block U3O8 grades within
the wireframe models were
estimated by ordinary kriging.
For density, RPA reviewed
results of 945 bulk density
measurements made by Strateco
technicians using the
water immersion method. RPA
concluded that smaller
samples may have poor accuracy
and precision, and
therefore elected to use only
samples weighing greater
than 450 g to calculate the
average density of
mineralization
at 2.6 t/m3. This factor was
then used to convert
resource volumes to a tonnage.
RPA manually classified
the Mineral Resources based on
drill hole spacing,
geology, lens thickness,
continuity, and variogram
ranges. Most areas of Indicated
are supported by 30
m to 40 m drill hole spacing,
with some exceptions
in areas of thicker and more
continuous mineralization
where drill hole spacing up to
50 m was included.
The drill hole spacing in the
AM-15 zone is generally
less than 20 m. The MT-34 (Main
lens), South lens,
and most of the North Lens were
classified as Indicated.
Although there are some areas
of closely spaced drilling
in the upper MT-34 (part of
AM-15 zone) and South
lenses, no blocks were
classified as measured because
grade and geometrical
continuity has not been
established
to the confidence level
required for the measured
category. Several shorter
composites occur at the bottom
of
the mineralized zone,
immediately above where the
drill hole exits the wireframe.
Partial composites
less than 60 cm long were
removed from the dataset.
Non-assayed intervals were
treated as zero grade.
Block U3O8 grades within the
wireframe models were
estimated by ordinary kriging.
For density, RPA reviewed
results of 945 bulk density
measurements made by Strateco
technicians using the water
immersion method. RPA
concluded that smaller samples
may have poor accuracy
and precision and therefore
elected to use only samples
weighing greater than 450 g to
calculate the average
density of mineralization at
2.6 t/m3. This factor
was then used to convert
resource volumes to a tonnage.
RPA manually classified the
Mineral Resources based
on drill hole spacing, geology,
lens thickness, continuity,
and variogram ranges. Most
areas of Indicated are
supported by 30 m to 40 m drill
hole spacing, with
some exceptions in areas of
thicker and more continuous
mineralization where drill hole
spacing up to 50 m
was included. The drill hole
spacing in the AM-15
zone is generally less than 20
m. The MT-34 (Main
lens), South lens, and most of
the North Lens were
classified as Indicated.
Although there are some areas
of closely spaced drilling in
the upper MT-34 (part
of AM-15 zone) and South
lenses, no blocks were
classified
as measured because grade and
geometrical continuity
has not been established to the
confidence level required
for the measured category. In
2012, Strateco Resources
carried out an additional
15,000-metres drilling,
including some 11,000 metres
of definition drilling aimed at
outlining the Indicated
resource within the boundaries
of the new Inferred
resource zones. On December 7,
2012, the Strateco
Resources announced the results
of the latest Matoush
project historical, foreign
Mineral Resource update
by RPA, which showed that the
Indicated Mineral Resource
had increased since the
previous resource estimate,
dated February 15, 2012. The
update was based on drill
results available as of
November 22, 2012 and was
also published in their March
21, 2013 Annual Information
Form which is available on
www.sedarplus.ca
Hurricane: The cut-off date of
the Mineral Resource
database is March 22, 2022,
which represents the date
in which all assays were
received from IsoEnergy's
Winter 2022 drill program. The
Hurricane resource
database, dated March 22, 2022,
includes drill hole
collar locations (including dip
and azimuth), assay,
alteration, geochemical, and
lithology data from 106
drill holes totalling 37,875.3
m of drilling completed
from 1983 through spring of
2022. A total of 785 samples
of the 1,504 in the database
were contained within
the mineralized uranium
wireframes. The wireframe
models representing the
Hurricane low-grade (LG),
medium-grade $(MG)$ and
high-Grade $(HG)$ mineralized
zones are intersected by 48 of
106 drill holes. Geological
interpretations supporting the
estimate were generated
by SLR and reviewed by
IsoEnergy personnel. Wireframe
models of mineralized zones
were used to constrain
the block model grade
interpolation process. The
models
represent grade envelopes using
the geological interpretation
described above as guidance.
The wireframes consisted of a
LG domain using a nominal
COG of 0.05% U3O8 and a minimum
core length of one
metre. SLR considers the
selection of 0.05% U3O8 to
be appropriate for construction
of mineralized wireframe
outlines, as this value
reflects the lowest COG that
is expected to be applied for
reporting of the Mineral
Resources in an underground
operating scenario and
is consistent with other known
deposits in the Athabasca
Basin. Sample intervals with
assay results less than
the nominated COG were included
within the mineralized
wireframes if the core length
was less than two metres
or allowed for modelling of
grade continuity. Wireframes
of the MG and HG domains were
created using a grade
intercept limit equal to or
greater than one metre
with a minimum grade of 5% U3O8
and 25% U3O8, respectively,
although lower grades were
incorporated in places
to maintain continuity and to
meet a minimum thickness
of one metre. Uranium outliers
were capped at 5% U3O8 and 20%
U3O8
within the LG and MG domains,
resulting in a total
of 10 capped assay values. No
capping was applied
to the HG domain. SLR's QP
chose to limit the influence
of the higher grade composites
by employing spatial
restriction in the High Grade
domain. SLR used the
Leapfrog restrictive search
tool "clamp" that reduces
the high value to a threshold
value once the maximum
distance is reached rather than
discarding the high
grade composite completely. The
maximum distance of
influence was set to 15 m x 15
m x 1.5 m with a grade
x density threshold value of
250 (approximately equivalent
to 55% U3O8) in both estimation
passes. Composites
were created from the capped,
raw assay values using
the downhole compositing
function of Seequent Leapfrog
Geo modelling software package.
The composite lengths
used during interpolation were
chosen considering
the predominant sampling
length, the minimum mining
width, style of mineralization,
and continuity of
grade, and ranged from 0.5 m to
3.0 m within the wireframe
models, with 97.2% of the
samples taken at 0.5 m
intervals.
Given this distribution, and
considering the width
of the mineralization, the SLR
QP chose to composite
to one metre lengths. Assays
within the wireframe
domains were composited
starting at the first
mineralized
wireframe boundary from the
collar and resetting at
each new wireframe boundary.
Assays were capped prior
to compositing. A small number
of unsampled and missing
sample intervals were ignored.
Residual composites
were maintained in the dataset.
SLR generated downhole,
omni-directional, and
directional
variograms using the one metre
U3O8 composite values
located within the LG and MG
mineralized domains.
The MG domain variogram was
calculated using composites
located within MG and HG
wireframes to allow for more
pairs in the analysis. The
variograms were used to
support search ellipsoid
anisotropy, linear trends
observed in the data, and
Mineral Resource classification
decisions. The downhole
variograms suggests a relative
nugget effect of approximately
10%. Long range directional
variograms were focused in the
primary plane of
mineralization,
which commonly strikes
northeast and horizontally
across the strike direction.
Most ranges were interpreted
to be 27 m to 35 m. The uranium
grade was used to
estimate the density of each
sample with the polynomial
formula. Densities were then
interpolated into the
block model to convert
mineralized volumes to tonnage
and were also used to weight
the uranium grades interpolated
into each block. All modelling
work was carried out
using Leapfrog Edge version
2021.2.4 software. The
Hurricane block model has 5 m x
2 m x 1 m whole blocks.
A regularized whole block
approach was used whereby
the block was assigned to the
domain where its centroid
was located. The variables
Grade, Density, and Grade
x Density were interpolated for
U3O8 using the inverse
distance cubed (ID3)
methodology. Estimation of
grades
was controlled by mineralized
wireframe zones. In
order to reproduce the
direction of the thin, folded,
and faulted domains, SLR
employed a variable orientation
tool in Leapfrog Edge. The tool
allows the search
to be locally adjusted to the
orientation of the
mineralization,
which results in improved local
grade estimates. SLR
used the hanging wall and
footwall of each domain
to guide the variable direction
search. Hard boundaries were
used to limit the use of
composites
between different
mineralization domains for U3O8
interpolation. SLR validated
the block model using
the following methods: -- Swath
plots of composite grades
versus ID3, ordinary
kriging (OK), and nearest
neighbour $(NN)$ grades in
the X, Y, and Z -- Volumetric
comparison of blocks versus
wireframes -- Visual Inspection
of block versus composite
grades
on plan, vertical, and long
section -- Statistical
comparison of block grades with
assay
and composite grades SLR found
grade continuity to be
reasonable and confirmed
that the block grades were
reasonably consistent with
local drill hole composite
grades. A review of other
uranium development projects
and
operating mines in the
Athabasca Basin was undertaken
to ascertain certain operating
parameters as they
relate to the estimate of a
cut-off grade (COG). The
following assumptions were used
in the development
of the COG for Hurricane: --
Hurricane would be developed
using remote mining
extraction methods similar to
other development projects
or operating mines in the
Athabasca Basin. --
Metallurgical recovery is
assumed to be similar
to other past and present
uranium mines in the Athabasca
Basin. -- The long-term U3O8
price is assumed to be US$65/lb
U3O8, and the exchange rate is
assumed to be C$/US$
= 0.75. -- Provincial revenue
royalties are based on
guidelines
published by the Saskatchewan
government. -- Operating costs
would be representative of a
remote
mining extraction method.
Applying these factors resulted
in a COG of 1.00%
U3O8. Classification of Mineral
Resources as defined in
Canadian Institute of Mining,
Metallurgy and Petroleum
definition Standards for
Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves (CIM 2014) were
followed for classification
of Mineral Resources. The SLR
QP has considered the following
factors that
can affect the uncertainty
associated with each
classification
of Mineral Resources:
reliability of sampling data,
confidence in interpretation
and modelling of geological
and estimation domains, and
confidence in block grade
estimates. The SLR QP offers
the following conclusions
related to each of these
factors: -- Reliability of
sampling data: o Drilling,
sampling, sample preparation,
and assay
procedures follow industry
standards. o Data verification
and validation work confirm
drill
hole sample databases are
reliable. o No significant
biases were observed in the
QA/QC
analysis results. -- Confidence
in interpretation and modelling
of
geological and estimation
domains: o Mineralization
domains are interpreted
manually
in cross-sections and refined
in longitudinal sections
by an experienced resource
geologist. o There is good
agreement between the drill
holes
and mineralization wireframe
shapes o The mineralization
wireframe shapes are well
defined
by sample data in areas
classified as Indicated. --
Confidence in block grade
estimates: o Indicated block
grades correlate well,
spatially
and statistically, with
composite data, both locally
and globally. Blocks were
classified as Indicated or
Inferred based
on drill hole spacing,
confidence in the geological
interpretation, and apparent
continuity of mineralization.
All the blocks within the HG
domains and blocks within
the MG domain with apparent
grade continuity from
two or more holes were
classified as Indicated. For
the LG grade domain, blocks
that did not meet the
criteria of grade x thickness
$(GT)$ greater than or
equal to 1.0%*m were removed
from the Mineral Resource
reporting. All remaining blocks
within the MG and
LG domains were assigned an
Inferred category.
5.12.6 Any more recent estimates or Milo, Ben Lomond, Coles Hill,
data relevant to the Tony M, Daneros, Dieter
reported mineralisation Lake, Sage Plain, Matoush,
available to the entity. Hurricane: No more recent
estimates have been completed
or data relevant to
the reported mineralisation is
available. Additional technical
information, derived primarily
from exploration drilling, is
limited in scope and
has no impact upon the Mineral
Resource estimates.
5.12.7 The evaluation and/or For all projects, it is noted
exploration work that needs that IsoEnergy is not
to be completed to verify the required to disclose its
historical estimates Mineral Resources or Ore
or foreign estimates as Mineral Reserve estimates in accordance
Resources or Ore Reserves with the JORC Code,
in accordance with Listing as it is a Canadian entity and
Rules Appendix 5A (JORC is not admitted to
Code). the official list of ASX.
Accordingly, there is no
present intention to undertake
work for the purposes
of reporting IsoEnergy's
Mineral Resource estimates
in accordance with the JORC
Code.
Milo: The data would require
review and preparation
of a Table 1. The copper
equivalent would require
updating in line with JORC
2012.
Ben Lomond: A substantial
re-drilling / drilling
campaign would be required with
the associated work
necessary to report the
resource in accordance with
JORC (2012).
Coles Hill, Tony M: It is
expected that all future
Mineral Reserve and Mineral
Resource estimates of
IsoEnergy will be prepared in
accordance with the
then-prevailing Canadian
Institute of Mining, Metallurgy
and Petroleum Code and Canadian
National Instrument
NI 43- 101. Planning and
scheduling of future work
that may be required to advance
the Mineral Resources
from an historical
classification to a current
Mineral
Resource, as defined by the CIM
Code, will be done
as technical evaluation of the
project is progressed. "Offset
drilling" of key drill holes in
the Coles
Hill North and Coles Hill South
uranium deposits will
be required to confirm the
validity of the historical
drill results from the Marline
Oil drilling program. Only a
limited drilling program would
be required
to verify the Tony M resources
under the JORC Code.
Daneros: Additional work
required to evaluate, confirm,
and upgrade the historical
Mineral Resources at Daneros
would by rotary and core
drilling to validate historical
drilling information, and
infill rotary and core drilling
to test potential extensions to
known mineralized
zones, and underground long
hole drilling.
Dieter Lake: The competent
person of the independent
geological consulting firm that
IsoEnergy engaged
in 2025 to update the Dieter
Lake historical foreign
resource estimate to current
NI43-101 and CIM standards
recommended that historic drill
hole data verification
will be required - including a
visit to the property
to verify drill hole locations
and carry out verification
sampling. The property visit
was done in July 2025.
Verification samples were
collected but helicopter
issues prevented conformation
of drill hole collar
locations from being completed.
The consultant's report
is pending. There is no present
intention to report
the estimate in accordance with
the JORC Code (2012)
edition, as IsoEnergy is not
presently required to
comply with this reporting
code.
Sage Plain: Historic resources
at the Sage Plain
project could be advanced to
"current" status under
the CIM Code through additional
rotary and core drilling
programs. Any future Mineral
Reserve and Mineral Resource
estimates of IsoEnergy Limited
will be prepared in
accordance with the
then-prevailing Canadian
Institute
of Mining, Metallurgy and
Petroleum Code and the context
of Canadian National Instrument
NI 43- 101.
Matoush: An evaluation of the
work required to verify
the historical, foreign mineral
resource estimates
as Mineral Resources or Ore
Reserves in accordance
with JORC 92012) code has not
been done.
Hurricane: An evaluation of the
work required to
verify the foreign mineral
resource estimates as Mineral
Resources or Ore Reserves in
accordance with JORC
(2012) code has not been done.
5.12.8 The proposed timing of any Milo: Further drilling is
evaluation and/or exploration planned to extend the resource.
work that the entity intends to The entity can fund that work
undertake and a comment from existing capital.
on how the entity intends to Initial Reverse Circulation
fund that work. drill program of 1,000m
being contemplated for Q2 2026.
Ben Lomond: Not presently
planned.
Coles Hill: Drilling to confirm
the historical drill
results is yet to be planned
but will be funded from
existing sources.
Tony M: Current work at the
Tony M project relates
to assessment of technical
topics that may have a
bearing on future development
and operation of the
Tony M mine. Such a work
program has not been scheduled.
This work is being funded
through IsoEnergy's current
budget.
Daneros: A confirmation
drilling program at the Daneros
project has not yet been
scheduled. Future work at
the Daneros project would be
funded by IsoEnergy's
existing resources.
Deiter Lake: IsoEnergy has
engaged an independent
geological consulting firm to
update the historical
Mineral Resource estimate to
current NI43-101 and
CIM standards. It is
anticipated their report will
be received by December 31,
2025 but until their evaluation
of historical drill hole data
is complete it is uncertain
whether the Mineral Resource
estimate will be received
in 2025.
Sage Plain: Exploration and
confirmation drilling
for the Sage Plain project has
not yet been scheduled.
Future activities at the Sage
Plain project will be
funded through IsoEnergy's
existing resources.
Matoush: There is no present
intention to report
the estimate in accordance with
the JORC Code (2012)
edition, as IsoEnergy is not
presently required to
comply with this reporting
code.
Hurricane: There is no present
intention to report
the estimate in accordance with
the JORC Code (2012)
edition, as IsoEnergy is not
presently required to
comply with this reporting
code.
5.12.9 A cautionary statement A proximate cautionary
proximate to, and with equal statement has also been
prominence as, the reported included
historical estimates or within the main body of this
foreign estimates stating that: announcement as required.
-- the estimates are historical
estimates or foreign
estimates
and are not reported in
accordance with the JORC Code;
-- a competent person has not
done sufficient work
to classify
the historical estimates or
foreign estimates as Mineral
Resources or Ore Reserves in
accordance with the JORC
Code; and -- it is uncertain
that following evaluation
and/or
further exploration work that
the historical estimates
or foreign estimates will be
able to be reported as
Mineral Resources or Ore
Reserves in accordance with
the JORC Code.
5.12.10 A statement by a named The information in this
competent person or persons announcement provided under
that the information in the ASX Listing Rules 5.12.2 to
market announcement provided 5.12.7 is an accurate
under rules 5.12.2 to 5.12.7 is representation of the available
an accurate representation data and studies for
of the available data and the IsoEnergy projects and has
studies for the material been reviewed by the
mining project. The statement competent person or persons
must include the information named below.
referred to in rule 5.22(b) and
(c).
Milo, Ben Lomond: Peter James
Mullens. Peter James
Mullens is an employee of
IsoEnergy and a fellow of
the Australian Institute of
Mining and Metallurgy.
Mr Mullens consents to the
inclusion in this release
of the matters based on that
information in the form
and context in which it
appears.
Daneros, Sage Plain, Coles
Hill, Tony M: Dean T.
Wilton. Dean T Wilton is a
consultant to IsoEnergy,
a member of the Australian
Institute of Professional
Geoscientists and a Certified
Professional Geologist
as designated by the American
Institute of Professional
Geologists. Mr Wilton consents
to the inclusion in
this release of the matters
based on that information
in the form and context in
which it appears.
Dieter Lake, Matoush,
Hurricane: Daniel Brisbin.
Daniel Brisbin is an employee
of IsoEnergy and a member
of Association of Professional
Engineers and Geoscientists
of Saskatchewan. Mr Brisbin
consents to the inclusion
in this release of the matters
based on that information
in the form and context in
which it appears.
Mineral Resource Estimates of Toro Energy
Notes:
1. Data in the table has been rounded to 1 decimal place, which is the
nearest 100,000t or lbs in the case of ore and contained oxide
respectively; this can cause rounding errors in subsequent calculations.
2. The JORC Table 1 relevant to all of the resource estimations related to
the resources stated in the above table can be found in Toro's ASX
announcement of September 24, 2024, except for Theseus, which can be
found in Toro's ASX announcement of December 5, 2012. For the purposes of
ASX Listing Rule 5.23 Toro confirms that it is not aware of any new
information or data that materially affects the information included in
those original announcements, and that all material assumptions and
technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the original
announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed.
3. Refer to relevant Competent Persons statements as given in this release.
4. All resources prepared in accordance with JORC 2012, except Theseus which
is in accordance with JORC 2004. Information contained in this release in
connection with the Theseus Project was prepared and first disclosed
under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since to comply with
the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially
changed since it was last reported.
Annexure A Scheme Implementation Deed
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/isoenergy-to-acquire-toro-energy-strengthening-a-top-tier-uranium-portfolio-in-a-rising-market-302581511.html
SOURCE IsoEnergy Ltd.
/CONTACT:
Copyright CNW Group 2025
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
October 12, 2025 18:23 ET (22:23 GMT)