Horseshoeand raven deposits_rhysetal2010

Horseshoe and Raven deposits

A new look at basement hostedA new look at basement-hosted mineralization in the Horseshoe and

Raven deposits, eastern Athabasca BasinRaven deposits, eastern Athabasca Basin

David Rhys, Sierd Eriks and Leo HornUEX C tiUEX Corporation

Saskatchewan Geological Survey Open House, Nov. 29, 2010


Forward-Looking StatementsThis presentation contains “forward-looking statements” that are based on UEX’s currentexpectations, estimates, forecasts and projections. These forward-looking statementsinclude statements regarding UEX’s resource estimates, outlook for our future operations,plans and timing for the commencement or advancement of exploration activities on ourproperties, and other expectations, intention and plans that are not historical fact. Thewords “estimates”, “projects”, “expects”, “intends”, “believes”, “plans”, or their negatives orother comparable words and phrases are intended to identify forward-looking statements.other comparable words and phrases are intended to identify forward looking statements.Such forward-looking statements are based on certain factors and assumptions and aresubject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differmaterially from future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements.Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from UEX’s expectationsi l d t i ti l ti t i t t ti f d ill lt d l dditi l d illiinclude uncertainties relating to interpretation of drill results and geology, additional drillingresults, continuity and grade of deposits, public acceptance of uranium as an energy source,fluctuations in uranium prices and currency exchange rates, changes in environmental andother laws affecting uranium exploration and mining, and other risks and uncertaintiesdisclosed in UEX’s Annual Information Form and other filings with the securities commissiongon SEDAR. Many of these factors are beyond the control of UEX. Consequently, all forward-looking statements made in this presentation are qualified by this cautionary statement andthere can be no assurance that actual results or developments anticipated by UEX will berealized. For the reasons set forth above, investors should not place undue reliance on suchforward looking statements Except as required by applicable law UEX disclaims anyforward-looking statements. Except as required by applicable law, UEX disclaims anyintention or obligation to update or revise forward-looking information, whether as a resultof new information, future events or otherwise.

Horseshoe and Raven depositsHidden Bay setting

Horseshoe and Raven are located on UEX’s 100% owned Hidden Bay project on the eastern margin of the Athabasca Basin


Hidden Bay projecty p j

57,000 hectare property in eastern Athabasca uranium district (area has >360

illi lb d ti

Tent-Seal

million lbs production + resources, excludes Cigar Lake)

ShamusTelephone

Rabbit Lake

Vixen

Horseshoe and Raven

Contains Horseshoe, Raven and West Bear deposits

Rabbit Lake fault

Wolf Deposits located only 4 km south of Cameco’s Rabbit Lake mill facility

Dwyer

Rhino

West Bearin an area of excellent infrastructure

Dwyer


Horseshoe-Raven history

Two deposits approx. 1 km apart discovered through follow-up of a radioactive boulder train in the early 1970’s by Gulf Minerals

Gulf drilled 202 widely spaced (50 to 100 m apart) drill holes between 1972 and 1978 to define historical, non-compliant resources of 23 million lbs U O grading at 0 16% in bothresources of 23 million lbs U3O8 grading at 0.16% in both deposits

1 3S-9RAS

HS-4

5HS-1

HS-4

3

HS-1

3

HS-4

HS

RAVEN

SYNCLINE

4.11m @0 88% U O

1.5m @0.25% U O 3 8

Cross section through Horseshoe deposit prior to drilling by UEX: grade continuity perceived to be

1.2m @ 0meters

100

16 0

3 80.88% U O

0.22% U O 3 8

grade continuity perceived to be discontinuous, but drill holes very

widely spaced

83

16.0m @ 0.8% U O Horseshoe zone

Section 148+00SView Northeast


UEX drilling, 2005-2009

Potential to upgrade and further explore the deposits beyond the Gulf

Between 2005 and 2009 UEX completed 663 drill holes (198 000 m of

resources was recognized.

Between 2005 and 2009, UEX completed 663 drill holes (198,000 m of drilling) at Horseshoe and Raven to establish resources at 15 to 30 m hole spacing. Historical drill holes could not be used due to QA/QC concerns.

Drilling established continuity of mineralization expanded the deposit Drilling established continuity of mineralization, expanded the deposit footprints into areas not historically drilled, and identified areas of higher grade mineralization within the deposits.


Resources based on drilling to July 23, 2009

July 2009 43-101 complaint resources for the Horseshoe and Raven deposits estimated by K. Palmer, P. Geo. of Golder Associates, at a

cutoff grade of 0 05% U O :cutoff grade of 0.05% U3O8 :

Deposit Tonnes U3O8 % U3O8 (pounds)Horseshoe 5,119,700 0.203 22,895,000IndicatedRaven 5,173,900 0.107 12,149,000

Totals 10,293,600 0.170 35,044,000

IndicatedResources

Deposit Tonnes U3O8 % U3O8 (pounds)Horseshoe 287,000 0.166 1,049,000Raven 822 200 0 092 1 666 000

InferredR Raven 822,200 0.092 1,666,000

Totals 1,109,200 0.111 2,715,000Resources

In addition to these deposits, Hidden Bay also contains the West Bear deposit. At a p y pcutoff grade of 0.05% U3O8, West Bear is host to 79,914 tonnes grading 0.908 % U3O8

(1.57 million pounds U3O8) in near surface (<30m) resources (2009 N.I. 43-101 complaint resources)


Central Hidden Bay property – Geological settingGeological setting - property straddles the gradational contact between

the Paleoproterozoic Mudjatik Domain to the NW (granitic gneiss domes + psammitic to pelitic gneiss), and the Wollaston Domain to the southeastg ),

HorseshoeRaven


Geological setting

- Deposits lie outside of Athabasca Basin: sandstone eroded here- Competent metamorphic hostCompetent metamorphic host rocks

Local geological setting of the Horseshoe and Raven deposits

Horseshoe and Raven depositsHost lithologies

Calc-arkosic to calc-silicate gneiss: Quartzite: >85% quartz, with K-Ca c a os c o ca c s ca e g e ssplagioclase-K-feldspar-pyroxene-biotite-

amphibole – above mineralization

Qua e 85% qua ,feldspar, biotite, 20-70 m thick –

hosts upper parts of mineralization

Arkosic quartzite: 40-65% quartz, 20-55% Lower biotite-quartz-feldspar, pelitic and Arkosic quartzite: 40 65% quartz, 20 55% feldspars; massive to banded (relict beds),

20 to 150 m thick – main host to mineralization

q p pcalc-silicate gneiss: mixed assemblage of biotite and calc-silicate bearing ortho-and paragneiss – below mineralization

Horseshoe and Raven depositsStructural setting

Folded lower biotite-quartz-feldspar gneiss beside Ravenfeldspar gneiss beside Raven camp, view down, top to NE. Shows style of open D2 (F2)

foldingg

Two phases of syn-metamorphic Hudsonian deformation at amphiboliteTwo phases of syn metamorphic Hudsonian deformation at amphibolite grade. Two metamorphic pulses between 1830 - 1795 Ma (Annesley et al.)

D1 = Early penetrative S1 foliation/gneissosity is dominant foliation. Regionally associated with tight to isoclinal foldsRegionally associated with tight to isoclinal folds.

D2 = Open F2 folds with second, steeply dipping spaced to penetrative NE trending foliation. Form dominant NE trending folds and principal geometry of lithologies in local area (e g Raven Syncline) with horizontal to northeastof lithologies in local area (e.g. Raven Syncline) with horizontal to northeast plunging fold axes. Non-cylindrical fold axes regionally.

Later crenulations and minor folds in later, retrograde lower strain events


Geological setting

Hematite breccias and intense clay alteration + silicification

Local geological setting of the Horseshoe and Raven deposits

Post-metamorphic and in part post-Athabasca brittle faulting regionally in NE trending reverse faults (e g Rabbit Lake Collins Bay faults) and in

along Dragon Lake fault: fluid conduit for mineralization?

NE trending reverse faults (e.g. Rabbit Lake, Collins Bay faults), and in north-trending Tabbernor sinistral faults such as the Dragon Lake fault

Dragon Lake fault lies on east side of deposit – surrounded by intense alteration which joins the eastern parts of the Horseshoe alteration zone:alteration which joins the eastern parts of the Horseshoe alteration zone: may have been an important fluid conduit for mineralization

?Pre-mineral NE trending, SE dipping fault zone along mineralized zones

Horseshoe and Raven depositsUranium mineralization

Deposits are entirely basement hosted and d l d t d th fdeveloped to depths of 450 m below the current surface. L ll d Locally preserved paleoweathering suggests current surface was close to the now Local geological setting of the


Deposits are developed over a 2.3 km strike length along and southeast of the Raven syncline Mineralization occurs over a strike of 800 m at

was close to the now eroded unconformity.

the Raven syncline. Mineralization occurs over a strike of 800 m at Horseshoe and 900 m at Raven, with a 600 m poorly mineralized gap between the deposits

Mineralization occurs in areas of hematite alteration within and Mineralization occurs in areas of hematite alteration within, and surrounding southeast dipping clay-chlorite alteration zones that may be localized along pre-mineral faults

Horseshoe and Raven depositsExploration techniques

H h

Horseshoe

Horseshoe

Raven

Raven

Gravity data

DC resistivity, 175 m modeled depth, Horseshoe Raven area Gravity dataHorseshoe-Raven areaWarm colours = resistivity highs

Geophysical exploration: Gravity and Resistivityf Deposits initially discovered partially as a result of a gravity survey by

Gulf Minerals, on basis of gravity low over Rabbit Lake deposit, in follow up of radioactive boulder trainG i d DC R i i i l id if f l l i Gravity and DC Resistivity lows identify areas of clay alteration associated with uranium mineralization. Mineralization is often on the margins of the most intense lows, beside areas of most intense alteration


Exploration techniquesResistivity section, 4700N

Pelitic gneissLithologiesHS-02

7

HS-039

HS-042

HU-018

HU-019

HU-020

HU-021

HU-022

HU-024

HU-040

HU-044

HU-047

HU-054

HU-058

HU-062

HU-064

HU-065

HU-069

Pelitic gneiss

Metaquartzite

Arkosic quartzite

Calc-arkose

Hematite

Moderate clay

Alteration

300 RL

400 RL50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

200

50 m

100

150

200

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

50 m

100

150

CARK

QZIT

Hematite-pitchblende-uranophane-clay

Mineralization

UEX drill holes

Drill holes

Historic Gulf drill holes

0.395 %11.56m

Grade U O3 8

Core length (m)200 RL

HS-013

S-045

350 m

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

200

250

300

0.21 %28.95m

0.09 %15.2m

0.15 %10.4m

0 12 %

0.30 %5.65m

0.17 %13.7m

0.18 %8.5m

0.14 %14.9m

0.20 %

ARKQ

B zon

A3 zone

A2 zone

A zone

B zone west

Horseshoe DepositSection 4700N

Looking Northeast

0Meters

50 100

0 RL

100 RL

0 E

0 E

0 E

0 E

0 E

HS

350350

350

400

350 350350

350 350

400

450

350

400

350

400

450

0.23 %15.0m

0.12 %13.9m 0.10 %

15.4m

0.61%17.65m

11.0m

C zone

zone east

Looking Northeast

470

480

490

500

510

Resistivity inversion successfully modeled alteration, and patterns are locally independent of lithologylocally independent of lithology Resistivity also showed significant down dip potential of mineralization beyond the limits of Gulf drilling

Horseshoe and Raven depositsUranium mineralization

Mineralization and alteration cutand alteration cut obliquely across

the folded metamorphic sequence and preferentially

occur in arkosic quartzitequartzite


Horseshoe mineralization style

Pitchblende main U mineral, occurring in common mineralization styles: “Nodular” and veinlet, blebby pitchblende in red-brown hematite-clay

lt ti M b b d d d t f li ti ith h ll dialteration. May be banded, and may cut across foliation with shallow dips Disseminated pitchblende in competent arkosic quartzite with hematite-

illite and/or green chlorite alteration (most of eastern Horseshoe deposit)Paragenetically late U-silicates (boltwoodite, uranophane, and locally

coffinite) overprint pitchblende, overgrowing or crosscutting as veinlets

“Nodular” style Disseminated style


Horseshoe mineralogy

Dominant pitchblende texture is “woven intergrowth” – intergrown with hematite, chlorite and clays (i.e. synchronous)

Massive clots and fractures in quartz also common in both nodular and disseminated styles

Mineralization has low As (<100 ppm), Mo (<20 ppm), Se (<2 ppm), Co (<100 ppm), Ni (<100 ppm), V (<150 ppm) in >0.2% U3O8 samples = “clean” mineralization no deleterious elements typical of basementclean mineralization, no deleterious elements, typical of basement unconformity-type uranium signature such as Eagle Point

Metallurgically simple –composite test samples by Melis Engineering Ltd. on three HQ diameter metallurgical drill holes from both deposits showon three HQ diameter metallurgical drill holes from both deposits show 98% uranium leach extraction under relatively mild atmospheric conditions.


HU-16 high grade intercept =12.35 m @ 4.53% U3O8

2.29 % 0.95 %

22.17 %

8.14 %

Nodular pitchblende rimmed by boltwoodite

Pitchblende in hematite-clay

Late yellow boltwoodite-uranophane


Nodular/veinlet style, Horseshoe A zone

2.29 %

Mineralization comprising hematite-pitchblende bands which cross cut p

gneissosity at high angle: shallow dipping morphology to zones.

Examples from HU-28 (191 8-193 4 m =Examples from HU-28 (191.8-193.4 m = 2.55% U3O8 over 1.6 m)

Horseshoe and Raven depositsHorseshoe disseminated mineralization textures, B east zone,

Hole HU-063: Interval shown is 348-357 m typical of broad low gradeHole HU-063: Interval shown is 348-357 m, typical of broad low grade interval of 60.90 m grading 0.18 % U3O8 from 322.40-383.3 m. Note

competent nature of host rocks in zone.

Horseshoe and Raven depositsHorseshoe Section 4640N


Horseshoe Section4724N4724N

- Zones may be l li d dlocalized around a pre-mineral fault

zone

- Shallow dipping mineralized zones

may be extensional d f d iand formed in

response to late reverse faulting


Mineralogy calculated from multielement geochem.

Alteration-geochem zoning(S. Halley, 2008)

Normative mineralogical assemblages

Chlorite 2250nm

show illite core with surrounding chlorite-dominant fringe

Terraspec patterns show Mg-rich hl i i i li i d l i Chlorite 2250nm

wavelength ranges = Mg-rich chlorites proximal to mineralization, 4640N.

chlorites in mineralization and alteration; raw Mg-geochemistry shows same pattern cutting lithologic sequence

Horseshoe and Raven depositsHorseshoe wireframe models

Horseshoe wireframe

Mineralization plunges to east-northeast

Eastern margin of o ses oe e a eview NNE with drill holes shown

gorebody is parallel and adjacent to the Dragon Lake Fault. Alteration in the orebody is contiguous with intense alteration that

t d t 600extends to >600 m depth along the fault.

Horseshoe wireframe view SSE from above


RRaven

wireframe

Raven

View southwest from Horseshoemodels Horseshoe from Horseshoe

towards Raven with drill hole traces

Raven view ENE

Raven view NNE

Horizontal zone: no plunge. Basal planar (L) zone (in red) dips southeast, with shallower dipping zones above reaching to 60 m from surface

Horseshoe and Raven depositsRaven mineralization

Mineralization discordant to foliation in drill hole RU-118 from interval at

RU-026 mineralization, 118-124 m. Concordant mineralization style in

in drill hole RU 118, from interval at 118.2 m grading 0.63% (in interval =

19.8 m @0.517% U3O8)

interval of 2.98% U3O8 / 5.2 m)

RU-095 mineralization,

148-149 m FromRU-002 , 106.5 m, 0.4 m at 2.13% U3O8

148 149 m. From interval 0.38%

U3O8 over 37.3 m

Horseshoe and Raven depositsRaven section 5445E5445E

Like Horseshoe, mineralizationmineralization surrounds a clay alteration zone

Lithologies thinner:

150 RL200 RL

250 RL300 RL

350 RL400 RL

450 RL

50 m10015 020 0

50 m100150200236.2 m

50 m 50 m100

150200250294.7 m

50 m100150192.9 m

50 m100

1502 00218.8 m

5 0m100

150200

25030 0313 m

50 m100

150200239 m

100

150200212 m

10 0150200

250300

50 m100

150185 .1 m

L B-040LB-041LB-0 66 LB-069L B-072RU-001RU-002RU-003RU-004 RU-006RU-008

Lithologies thinner: mineralization extends to shallower depths s a o e dept sthan Horseshoe into calc-arkose

Upper, thick parts of pp , porebody within 100 m of surface may be amenable to open pit mining.

Horseshoe and Raven depositsRaven section 5630E

150 RL200 RL

250 RL300 RL

350 RL400 RL

450 RL

50 m10015 020 0

50 m100150200236.2 m

50 m 50 m100

150200250294.7 m

50 m100150192.9 m

50 m100

1502 00218.8 m

5 0m100

150200

25030 0313 m

50 m100

150200239 m

100

150200212 m

10 0150200

250300

50 m100

150185 .1 m

L B-040LB-041LB-0 66 LB-069L B-072RU-001RU-002RU-003RU-004 RU-006RU-008

Mineralization locally exploits lithologies and lithologic contacts above a steep SE dipping basal zone and alteration


Conclusions UEX successfully upgraded and expanded resources in the

Horseshoe and Raven deposits, increasing the deposit footprint and establishing continuity of mineralizationand establishing continuity of mineralization

The deposits are remarkable for their great extent into basement rocks, but with no association with graphitic faults. Geophysical t t i lt ti t hit Si il iti t Ki ik?target is alteration – not graphite. Similarities to Kiggavik?

Basement – basin fluid mixing and redox reaction along Dragon Lake and pre-mineralization hosting fault zones, and reaction with p greduced wallrocks may have contributed to mineralization formation

“Basement” signature geochemistry of mineralization: favorable metallurgy without deleterious elements similar mineralogy tometallurgy without deleterious elements, similar mineralogy to Eagle Point

Occurrence of mineralization in competent hematite alteration within basement wallrocks allows good geotechnical conditions forwithin basement wallrocks allows good geotechnical conditions for open pit and ramp access underground mining (i.e. no ground freezing)


Advancing the Horseshoe and Raven depositsg p

In anticipation of feasibility, initial metallurgical, geotechnical and p y g genvironmental baseline studies have been undertaken

High proportion of resources already in indicated category Scoping study underway examining mining methods and options Scoping study underway, examining mining methods and options

for both deposits, including possible future use of any open pit developed at Raven or Horseshoe as a regional tailings facility for other deposits in the areaother deposits in the area

Area of excellent existing mining and milling infrastructure: Potential for toll milling at Rabbit or McClean Lake is being assessed.

Additional targets in local area will be tested in 2011 which could expand local resource basee pa d oca esou ce base

Horseshoeand raven deposits_rhysetal2010

Technology

Transcript of Horseshoeand raven deposits_rhysetal2010