Corporate  Presenta,on  Annual  General  &  Special  Mee,ng  June  8,  2011  

2  

The information in this document has been prepared as of February 9, 2011. Certain statements contained in this document constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and forward looking information under the provisions of Canadian provincial securities laws. When used in this document, the words “anticipate”, “expect”, “estimate”, “forecast”, “will”, “planned”, and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements or information. Specifically, this presentation contains forward looking statements regarding the results and projections contained in the February 2011 technical report of the Haile Gold project, including the expected mine life, recovery, capital costs, cash operating costs and other costs and anticipated production of the described open pit mine, the projected internal rate of return, the projected payback period, the availability of capital for development, sensitivity to metal prices, ore grade, the reserve and resource estimates on the project, the financial analysis, the timing for completion of the revised feasibility study on the Haile Gold project, the timing and amount of future production, the timing of construction of the proposed mine and process facilities, capital and operating expenditures, the timing of the receipt of permits, rights and authorizations, communications with local stakeholders and community relations, availability of financing and any and all other timing, development, operational, financial, economic, legal, regulatory and political factors that may influence future events or conditions and expected drilling activities. In addition, this presentation also contains updated resource estimates contained in the February 2011 technical reports. Scientific and technical information referred herein has been extracted from and are hereby qualified in their entirety by reference to the aforementioned technical reports (“Technical Reports”). Joshua Snider, P.E., Thomas L. Drielick, P.E., Lee “Pat” Gochnour, M.M.S.A., John Marek, P.E. and Derek Wittwer, P.E. are responsible for preparing the Technical Reports. Each of the above referenced persons is a “qualified person” as defined in National Instrument 43-101 — Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects. Such forward‐looking statements are based on a number of material factors and assumptions, including, but not limited in any manner, those disclosed in any aother of Romarco’s public filings, and include the ultimate determination of mineral reserves and resources, availability and final receipt of required approvals, licenses and permits, sufficient working capital to develop and operate the proposed mine, access to adequate services and supplies, economic conditions, commodity prices, foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates, access to capital and debt markets and associated cost of funds, availability of a qualified work force, lack of social opposition and legal challenges, and the ultimate ability to mine, process and sell mineral products on economically favorable terms. While Romarco considers these assumptions to be reasonable based on information currently available to it, they may prove to be incorrect. Actual results may vary from such forward‐looking information for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to risks and uncertainties disclosed in other Romarco filings at www.sedar.com. Forward‐looking statements are based upon management’s beliefs, estimate and opinions on the date the statements are made and, other than as required by law, Romarco does not intend, and undertakes no obligation to update any forward‐looking information to reflect, among other things, new information or future events Cautionary Note to United States Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources: Certain tables may use the terms “Measured”, “Indicated” and “Inferred” Resources. United States investors are advised that while such terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, however, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. “Inferred Mineral Resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an Inferred Mineral Resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources may not form the basis of feasibility or other economic studies. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of Measured or Indicated Mineral Resources will ever be converted into Mineral Reserves. United States investors are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of a Mineral Resource is economically or legally mineable.

All figures are US$ unless otherwise indicated

Cau,onary  Statement  

3  

Strong  Board,  Management  and  Technical  Team  §  Proven  gold  mine  development,  finance,  permiFng  and  opera,ons  experience  

ê  Romarco  has  the  team  in  place  to  bring  Haile  into  produc5on  

Experienced  Board  of  Directors   Strong  Management  &  Technical  Team  

Edward  A.  van  Ginkel,  Chairman  § Consultant,  former  Noranda,  Dayton  Mining  Diane  R.  GarreO  §  Former  Dayton  Mining,  US  Global  Investors  James  R.  Arnold  §  Former  Freeport,  Gold  Fields  –  Richards  Award  Winner  Leendert  Krol  §  Former  Brazuro,  Newmont  Don  MacDonald  § CFO  QuadraFNX,  former  NovaGold,  DeBeers,  Dayton  Mining  John  Marsden  § Consultant,  former  Freeport  –  Richards  Award  Winner  Patrick  Michaels  § PorMolio  Manager  –  Zuri-­‐invest,  Switzerland  Robert  van  Doorn  §  Former  Mundoro,  Rio  Narcea,  Morgan  Stanley  

Diane  R.  GarreO,  Ph.D.,  President  &  CEO  §  Former  Dayton  Mining,  US  Global  Investors  James  R.  Arnold,  Sr.  VP,  COO  §  Former  Freeport,  Gold  Fields  –  Richards  Award  Winner  Stan  Rideout,  Sr.  VP,  CFO  §  Former  Phelps  Dodge  James  Berry,  Chief  Geologist  &  Regional  Explora,on  Manager  §  Former  Barrick  Brent  Anderson,  Mine  Manager  §  Former  Quadra,  Freeport  Kevin  Russell,  Regional  Geologist  §  Former  Barrick  Jim  Wickens,  Mill  Manager  §  Former  Barrick  OO  Jackson,  Health  &  Safety  §  Former  Freeport  Johnny  Pappas,  Director  of  Environmental  Affairs  §  Former  Freeport  Ramona  Schneider,  Environmental  Manager  §  Former  Kinross  Dan  Symons,  Manager  Investor  Rela,ons  §  Former  Renmark  Financial  

4  

Romarco  –  Company  Overview  

§ Romarco  is  a  gold  development  company  focused  on  produc,on  primarily  in  the  U.S.  

§ The  Company’s  flagship  project  is  the  Haile  Gold  Mine  in  South  Carolina  ê  Feasibility  study  completed  ê  Permits  pending  ê  System  remains  open  in  all  direc5ons  at  depth  

§ Experienced  board,  management  &  technical  team  

Company  Descrip,on  

Exchange/  Symbol   TSX:R  

Share  Price(1)   C$2.06  

Shares  Outstanding  (Basic)(2)   503.3M  

FD  Shares  Outstanding  (TSM)(2)   516.3M  

Market  Capitaliza5on(1)   C$1,064M  

52  Week  High  /  Low   C$2.88  /  C$1.53  

Cash  Balance  (May  24,  2011)   US$72M  (1)  As  at  close  on  May  31,  2011  (2)  Calculated  using  treasury  stock  method.  Includes  13.0mm  “in-­‐the-­‐money”  opCons  at  an  

average  strike  price  of  C$1.21  as  of  May  31,  2011  

Capitaliza,on  Summary  

Project  Loca,on  

181  Bay  St.  Suite  3630,  Toronto,  ON,  M5J  2T3  │Email:  info@romarco.com  │Office:  416.367.5500  │Fax:    416.367.5505    │Website:  www.romarco.com  

Atlantic Ocean

SOUTH CAROLINA

GEORGIA

NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte

Myrtle Beach Columbia

Haile Mine

•  Romarco  controls  10,000+  acres  of  100%  private  land  

•  Surface,  mineral  and  water  rights  •  ~  9,600  acres  owned  fee  simple  

5  

Introduc,on  to  the  Haile    Gold  Mine  Project  

FEBRUARY 2011 §  Feasibility completed

$275 million §  One of lowest capital cost projects in industry

$379/oz ($347/oz first 5 years) §  One of lowest operating cost projects in industry

2.06 g/t §  One of highest grade open-pit projects in industry

6  

Low  Capital  Cost  

*  All  figures  are  in  millions  of  dollars  (1)    Source:  Company  Disclosure  

Peers  include  direct  and  indirect  costs,  conCngency  funding  and  previously  sunk  development  capital  (sustaining  capital  not  included)    

Development  Capex  for  Primary  Open  Pit  Asset  (US$mm)  (1)  

7  

Low  Cash  Cost  

(1)  Source:  GFMS  presentaCon,  Gold  Survey  2010  Update  (2)  Announced  February  9,  2011  

AVERAGE CASH COST LOWEST QUARTILE Q3 2010 (1)

Industry Average (1) ROMARCO ��� LOM Average (2)

Lowest Quartile��� Average Q3 2010 (1)

8  

High  Reserve  Grade  for  Open  Pit  

Reserve  Grade  for  Primary  Open  Pit  Asser  (g/t  Au)  

9  

Investment  Highlights  

§  Near  term,  low  cost  gold  producer  with  strong  project  economics  

§  Located  in  a  mining  friendly  jurisdic5on  with  excellent  infrastructure  

§  Large  resource  with  significant  remaining  explora5on  upside  poten5al  

§  Strong  board,  management  and  technical  team  

§  Clear  plan  to  bring  Haile  into  produc5on  

§  11  drill  rigs  -­‐  172,000  meters  drilling  scheduled  for  2011  (~US$30  million)  

§  Haile  system  remains  open  in  all  direc5ons  at  depth  

§  Solid  cash  posi5on  (~US$72  million),  no  debt  –  as  of  May  24,  2011  

10  

Near  Term,  Low  Cost  Gold  Producer  

§  Posi,ve  feasibility  study  on  Haile  announced  on  Feb.  9,  2011  

§  Strong  project  economics  with  robust  IRR  and  NPV  at  conserva,ve  gold  prices  ê  Low  cash  cost  opera5on  ê Manageable,  low  cost  capital  requirements  

§  Posi,ve  feasibility  study  does  not  include  ê  Horseshoe  ê  Snake  Deep  ê West  Ledbeier  ê West  South  Pit  ê  601  ê  Inferred  resources  within  US$950  Pit  

§  Open  all  direc,ons  and  at  depth  §  2011  economic  studies  

ê  Underground  at  Horseshoe  ê  Expansion    ê  Trade  off    

Summary  of  Haile  Feasibility  Study  (US$950  Gold)  

2  P  Gold  Reserves  (‘000  oz)   2,018  Recovery  Rate  (%)   83.7  Net  Recoverable  Gold  (‘000  oz)   1,681  

Annual  Mill  Throughput  (‘000  t)   2,555  

Daily  Mill  Throughput  (tpd)   7,000  Mine  Life  (years)   13.25  Overall  Strip  Ra5o  (waste:ore)   7.2:1  Average  Feed  Grade  to  Mill  (LOM)  (g/t)   2.06  Average  Produc5on  (year  1)  (‘000  oz)   172  

Average  Produc5on  (years  1  -­‐  5)  (‘000  oz)   150  

Cash  Costs  (year  1-­‐5)  (US$/oz)   347  Cash  Costs  (LOM)  (US$/oz)   379  Ini5al  Capital  Expenditures  (US$M)   275.5  Sustaining  Capital  Expenditures  (US$M)   119.2  Net  Present  Value  (5%  discount)  

Pre-­‐Tax  (US$M)   279  Internal  Rate  of  Return  

Pre-­‐Tax  (%)   19.6  

11  

NPV  &  IRR  Sensi,vity  to  Gold  Price    

Gold  Price  Per  oz.  

NPV  @0%   NPV  @  5%   NPV  @  10%   IRR  %  PAYBACK  YEARS  

$1500   $1,426   $930   $621   47.0%   2.0  

$1400   $1,259   $811   $534   42.3%   2.2  

$1300   $1,092   $693   $447   37.6%   2.4  

$1200   $925   $575   $359   32.7%   2.7  

$1100   $758   $457   $272   27.6%   3.1  

$1000   $591   $339   $185   22.3%   3.8  

$950   $507   $279   $141   19.6%   4.2  

$800   $257   $102   $10   10.7%   7.6  

$700   $90   -­‐$16   -­‐$77   4.0%   9.4  

Pre-­‐tax  NPV  and  IRR  Sensi,vity  to  Gold  Price  

($  Millions,  except  gold  price)  

12  

Resource  Growth  

601 CHAMPION SMALL SOUTH PIT LEDBETTER SNAKE HORSESHOE

US$950 PITS

US$950 PIT LIMITS

2 0 1 0

PLAN VIEW

HAILE LONG SECTION

3.5 KM

Significant  Remaining  Explora,on  Upside  Poten,al  

§  2010  drill  program  of  108,000m  confirmed  resource  at  Haile  remains  open  along  strike  and  at  depth  ê  40%  of  2010  drilling  focused  on  condemna5on  drilling  to  locate  suitable  tailings  site  

2010 Highlights

§ M&I resources increased 44% § M&I grade increased 21% (to 1.82 g/t) § M&I tonnes increased 20% §  Inferred resources declined 46%

ê  Conversion to indicated §  Inferred grade increased 33% (to 1.34 g/t) §  2P reserves increased 54%

!"#$$%

&'"$$$%

($!"$$$%

(&)"$$$%

!"

#!$!!!"

%!$!!!"

&!$!!!"

'!$!!!"

(!!$!!!"

(#!$!!!"

(%!$!!!"

(&!$!!!"

('!$!!!"

#!!$!!!"

*+,+-.%/

0%1-23324

5%

2008   2009   2010   2011  

13  

14  

Significant  Remaining  Explora,on  Upside  Poten,al  

Upside  From  Mineraliza,on  Not  Captured  

Deep Horseshoe Zone

§  Zone not yet drill defined along strike and down dip

§  Potential new zone may exist south of main Horseshoe/Snake trend

Snake Deep Zone

§ Mineralization encountered in down dip extensions of Snake deposit

§  Areas lie beneath the resource shell §  Additional drilling is planned

West Ledbetter

§  Drill hole intercepts lie below the resource shell

§  Additional drilling is planned

West South Pit

§  Strike extends beyond the resource shell §  Step-out drilling is planned to test extent

2010  Explora,on  Findings  

Horseshoe Discovery

§  Confirms underground potential §  Highest grade §  Underground economic study (2011)

South Pit §  Extending to west and south §  Higher grades encountered

Ledbetter §  Extending to west and at depth §  Higher grades

Snake §  Extending at depth §  Higher grades

Haile Corridor

§  Remains open §  Connecting Horseshoe

15  

Clear  Plan  to  Bring  Haile  Into  Produc,on  

Design  Overflow  &  Process  Descrip,on  

§  Conven,onal  opera,on  §  Simple  flowsheet  §  Off-­‐the-­‐shelf  

technology  §  Ability  to  expand  

project  scale  to  include  addi,onal  resource  discoveries  

Design  Overflow   Process  Descrip,on  

§ Robust  “Simple”  Flowsheet   Crush    Grind    Flota,on  

§ Proven  Technologies   Regrind  Flot  Con    Leach  Con  

§ Flexible,  Expandable   Leach  Flot  Tail    Recover  both  

§ Non-­‐Refractory   CN  Detox    Tail  Storage  Facility  

§ Off-­‐The-­‐Shelf  Technology   Standard  Carbon  Elu,ons,  EW  

§ No  Long  Lead  Time  Units  

16  

Environmental  Opera,ons  Team  

Consultants  

JIM  ARNOLD  Sr.  VP.,  COO  &  Director  P.E.,  B.Sc.  Metallurgical  Engineering  

 

JOHNNY  PAPPAS  Director  of  Environmental  Affairs  

 

RAMONA  SCHNEIDER  Environmental  Manager  

 James  R.  Arnold  is  the  current  Senior  Vice  President  and  Chief  Opera5ng  Officer  of  Romarco.  Mr.  Arnold  was  recently  Vice  President,  Colorado  Opera5ons  for  Freeport-­‐McMoRan  where  he  led  the  Climax  re-­‐start  project  through  feasibility,  engineering,  staffing  and  construc5on.  Prior  to  there  he  was  V.P.  Technical  Services  for  Coeur  d’Alene  Mines  Corp.  and  also  held  the  posi5on  of  General  Manager  for  Kinross’  Goldbanks  Project  and  Manager  of  Santa  Fe  Pacific  Gold’s  Twin  Creeks  project  in  Nevada.  Mr.  Arnold  holds  a  degree  in  Metallurgical  Engineering  from  University  of  Idaho  and  an  M.S.  degree  in  Engineering  Management.  

Johnny  Pappas  has  a  dis5nguished  career  in  the  field  of  environmental  management  and  permirng.  Mr.  Pappas  recently  held  the  posi5on  of  Environmental  Manager  of  the  Climax  Mine  and  was  Permit  Coordinator  for  Barrick’s  Cortez  Gold  Mines.  In  addi5on,  he  has  held  several  Senior  Environmental  Engineer  posi5ons  with  Pacificorp,  Plateau  Mining,  and  Santa  Fe  Pacific  Gold.  Mr.  Pappas  is  recognized  as  a  leader  in  his  field  and  has  won  numerous  awards  including  the  2003  “Best  of  the  Best”  Award  –  awarded  by  the  Department  of  Interior’s  Office  of  Surface  Mining  in  recogni5on  for  extraordinary  personal  commitment  and  outstanding  contribu5on  for  the  reclama5on  success  at  the  Castle  Gate  Mine  and  the  2003  “Excellence  in  Surface  Coal  Mining  Reclama5on”  Award.  

Ramona  Schneider  has  been  with  the  Haile  Gold  Mine  since  1990  working  for  Piedmont  Mining  Company,  AMAX  Gold,  and  Kinross  Gold.  As  Environmental  Manager,  Ms.  Schneider  is  responsible  for  

permirng,  maintaining  current  permits  and  regulatory  compliance,  organizing  closure  sampling  programs,  preparing  regulatory  repor5ng  documents,  monitoring  reclama5on  projects,  and  managing  the  baseline  programs.  

•  Gochnour  &  Associates  Pat  Gochnour  

•  Kennedy  ConsulBng  Services  Craig  Kennedy  

•  AMEC  Earth  and  Environmental  

•  Tetra  Tech  

•  Schlumberger  Water  Services  

•  Schafer  Limited  

•  Arcadis  

•  Genesis  ConsulBng  Group  

•  Ecological  Resources  Consultants  

•  Environmental  Banc  and  Exchange  (EBX)  

•  McNair  Law  Firm  

•  C.A.  Clark  ConsulBng,  LLC  Catherine  Clark  

17  

HGM  PermiFng  

• 404  Wetlands  Permit  only  • USACE  is  sole  deciding  regulatory  body  

• All  other  agencies  commen5ng  agencies  only  –  EPA,  US  Fish  and  Wildlife,  etc.  

•  401  Water  Quality  Cer5fica5on  

•  Mining  Permit  •  Opera5ng  Permit  •  Air  Quality  Permit  •  Others  

Federal  –  USACE*   State  –  DHEC**  

* US Army Corps of Engineers���** South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control

18  

Streams  &  Wetlands  

§  61%  of  all  func5ons  rated  low  (very  impaired  or  impaired)  

§  29%  of  all  func5ons  rated  moderate  (par5ally  impaired)  

§  10%  of  all  func5ons  rated  high  (fully  func5onal)  

19  

Wetlands  Mi,ga,on  Plan  SubmiOed  

§  161  acres  of  wetlands  impacted  (1,842  credits*)  

§  1,932  acres  total  credits  (105%)  

• Mi5ga5on  plan  submiied  (credit  for  credit)    Mi5ga5on  Plan:      297  acres  Restored      621  acres  Preserved      918  acres  Mi5gated  

§  Mi5ga5ng  571%  of  impact  

* Credits are determined in accordance with USACE’s procedures

20  

Streams  Mi,ga,on  Plan  SubmiOed  

§  38,775  linear  feet  of  streams  impacted  (296,396  stream  credits*)  

§  314,646  total  stream  credits  (106%)  

•   Mi5ga5on  Plan:      68,271  linear  feet  of  streams  Restored      151,692  linear  feet  of  streams  Preserved      219,963  linear  feet  of  streams  Mi5gated  

 

§  Mi5ga5ng  567%  of  impact  

* Credits are determined in accordance with USACE’s procedures

21  

Streams  at  Haile  Property  

Perennial  Streams  (Haile  Gold  Mine  Creek)  

22  

Streams  at  Haile  Property  

Non-­‐Rela5vely  Permanent  Waters  (intermiient  stream  channel)  

23  

Streams  at  Haile  Property  

Typical  Riverine  (stream  channel)  

24  

Wetlands  at  Haile  Property  

Typical  Palustrine  Forested  Wetland  (inundated)  

25  

Wetlands  at  Haile  Property  

Typical  Palustrine  Forested  Wetland  (saturated)  

26  

Wetlands  at  Haile  Property  

Typical  Palustrine  Emergent  Wetland  

27  

Wetlands  at  Haile  Property  

Typical  Palustrine  Emergent  Wetland  

28  

Permit  Status  

§ Romarco  has  responded  to  all  comments  

§  ~  30  day  review  of  data  by  USACE  § Addi,onal  ques,ons  and  responses  may  occur  

§ USACE  writes  an  Environmental  Assessment  /  Statement  of  Findings  (EA/SOF)  Decision  Document  

§ Decision  ê Environmental  Assessment  Finding  Of  No  Significant  Impact  –  Mi5gated  FONSI,  or  ê Environmental  Impact  Statement  

29  

Environmental  Assessment  Process  

§ USACE  completes  technical  review  

§ DHEC  simultaneously  completes  technical  review  

§ USACE  renders  Draw  404  Permit  

§ DHEC  issues  401  Water  Quality  Cer,fica,on  

§ USACE  issues  final  404  Permit  

30  

Environmental  Impact  Statement  Process  

§  Only  pertains  to  Wetlands  Permit  not  Mine  Opera,ng  Permits  §  No,ce  of  Intent  to  prepare  an  EIS  published  in  the  Federal  Register  §  90  day  public  comment  period  §  Agency  and  public  scoping  mee,ng  –  one  or  more  §  Draw  EIS  §  90  day  public  review  and  comment  period  §  Romarco  responds  to  comments  §  Final  EIS  includes  comments,  amendments  if  necessary  §  30  day  minimum  comment  period  §  Record  of  Decision  (ROD)  

31  

What  if  EIS?  

§  Approximate  12  month  delay  of  start-­‐up  §  Analysts  es,mate  5-­‐11%  NAV  impact  to  project  due  to  cash  flow  ,ming  §  Explora,on  con,nues  

ê Poten5al  to  increase  reserves  and  grade  ê Reduce  strip  ra5o  

ê  Further  define  mineraliza5on  between  deposits  ê Addi5onal  5me  to  op5mize  mine  plan  with  new  resources  &  reserve  model  

ê  Within  exis5ng  permit  area  and  7,000  tpd  mill  ê More  5me  to  define  and  study  underground  targets  

§  More  ,me  to  value  engineer  plant  design  

Haile  Gold  Mine  Update  

32  

•  Explora5on  drilling  con5nuing  to  expand  Ledbeier,  Mill  Zone,  Snake,  Horseshoe,  Bermuda  Triangle  -­‐  Focus  is  to  add  ounces  within  permiied  footprint  

•  Lab  construc5on  on  schedule  &  on  budget  (June  2011)  

•  Equipment  orders  and  delivery  5me  remain  on  schedule  

•  Specifica5ons  for  grinding  mills  complete  

33  

New  Regional  Explora,on  Targets  

§  3  in  South  Carolina  ê Bayberry  –  drill  ready  

ê  Similar  host  rocks,  altera5on  and  mineraliza5on  as  observed  at  Haile  

ê  74  shallow  rotary  holes,  8  RC  holes,  and  8  core  holes  previously  drilled  on  the  property  

ê  Historical  Reported,  highlighted  intercepts  include:  ê  7.0  meters  of  4.3  g/t  ê  26.0  meters  of  1.8  g/t  ê  12.0  meters  of  1.2  g/t  ê  7.3  meters  of  1.8  g/t  

 

ê Locust  –  drill  ready  ê  Small  historical  oxide  resource  (pre  43-­‐101)  ê  34  RC  and  27  core  holes  have  been  drilled  on  the  property  

ê  Historical  Reported,  highlighted  intercepts  include:  ê  71.5  meters  of  2.9  g/t  ê  5.1  meters  of  1.5    g/t  ê  74.6  meters  of  1.5    g/t  ê  65.0  meters  of  1.9    g/t  

ê Elm  ê  Property  is  ready  for  soil  and  rock  chip  sampling  ê  Preliminary  rock  chip  sampling  has  yielded  8.6  g/t    

 

Tennessee  

Kentucky  West  Virginia  

North  Carolina  

Georgia  

South  Carolina  

Haile  Mine  Buzzard  

Elm  

Hickory   Ironwood  

Bayberry  

Locust  

34  

New  Regional  Explora,on  Targets  

§  2  in  North  Carolina  ê Hickory  –  drill  ready  

ê  Historical  produc5on  during  1800s  ê  Historical  drilling  consists  of  11  core  holes  and  130  

RC  holes  ê  Historical  Reported,  highlighted  intercepts  include:  

ê  19.8  meters  of  4.7  g/t  ê  21.3  meters  of  4.0  g/t  ê  22.9  meters  of  3.4  g/t  ê  17.0  meters  of  2.1  g/t  

 

ê  Ironwood  –  drill  ready  ê  The  highest  grade  encountered  in  the  trenching  was  

9.1  g/t  ê  Twelve  shallow  RC  holes  and    two  core  holes  have  

been  drilled    ê  Historical  Reported,  highlighted  intercepts  include:  

ê  3.0  meters  of  4.4  g/t    

Tennessee  

Kentucky  West  Virginia  

North  Carolina  

Georgia  

South  Carolina  

Haile  Mine  Buzzard  

Elm  

Hickory   Ironwood  

Bayberry  

Locust  

35  

Located  in  Mining  Friendly  Jurisdic,on  

§  Romarco  con,nues  to  build  strong  local  rela,onships  and  support  ê High  local  unemployment  ê  Romarco  hires  locally  

• 113  employees  +  30  contractors  ê  $1  million/month  spent  locally  

Ongoing  Community  Involvement  

Strong  Community  Support  

§  Strong  State  and  local  support  for  Haile  ê Drill  permits  received  in  <2  weeks  (650  holes)  

ê No  Federal,  State  or  local  opposi5on  to  date  ê  State  offered  tax  incen5ves  

• $3M  in  annual  savings  • Tax  reduc5on  from  10%  to  4%  

§  PermiFng  ê  Federal  (404)  -­‐  SUBMITTED  

• Wetlands  ê  State  (South  Carolina)    

• Mining  /  opera5ng  permit  –  SUBMITTED  - Water  treatment  permit  - Storm  water  permit  - Air  permit  

• Water  (401)  –  SUBMITTED  

Awards  

From  leY  to  right:  

•  2010  OUTSTANDING  BUSINESS  AWARD  presented  to  HAILE  GOLD  MINE  by  Kershaw  Chamber  of  Commerce  

•  2011  CITIZEN  OF  THE  YEAR  presented  to  DIANE  GARRETT  by  Kershaw  Chamber  of  Commerce  

•  2011  COMMUNITY  CITIZENSHIP  AWARD  presented  to  DAVID  THOMAS  by  Mining  AssociaCon  of  South  Carolina    

36  

§  Strong  track  record  of  achieving  milestones  and  delivering  shareholder  returns  

Track  Record  of  Achieving  Milestones  

3-Feb-09: Completes bankable feasibility study on Haile

3-Mar-09: Completes private placement (72.1M units @ C$0.37/unit); proceeds of C$27M

19-Mar-09: Files 43-101 feasibility study for Haile

13-Aug-09: Completes private placement (52.3M shares @ C$0.88/share); proceeds of $46M

28-Sep-09: Announces acquisition of 662 acres of land adjacent to Haile

1-Dec-09: Announces initiation of feasibility study at Haile

11-Jan-10: Announces expansion of 2010 drill program at Haile

19-Jan-10: Acquisition of additional property at Haile increasing land position by 53%

13-Apr-10: Completes public offering (61M shares @ C$1.97/share); proceeds of C$120M

2-Nov-10: Announces updated in-shell resource estimate at Haile

9-Nov-10: Announces conditional approval for TSX listing

15-Dec-10: Appoints financial advisor for debt financing for Haile

11-Jan-11: Announces drill results of 30.7 m of 16.1 g/t Au at Haile

3-Feb-11: Announces 2011 172,000 m drill program and increased land holdings of 79,000 ac

22-Feb-11: Files NI 43-101 feasibility study for Haile

9-Feb-11: Completes feasibility study for Haile

9-Mar-11: Announces drill results of 31.8 m of 17.3 g/t Au at Haile

1-Apr-11: Deadline for submission of comments on Company's application for Haile Gold Mine

2-May-11: Announces drill results of 36.3 m of 5.5 g/t Au at Horseshoe and 7.6 m of 24.1 g/t Au at South Pit

37  

Clear  Plan  to  Bring  Haile  Into  Produc,on  

§  Strong  balance  sheet  with  approximately  $72M  in  cash  and  no  debt(1)  

§  Well  defined  project  schedules  and  clear  development  milestones  

Project  Schedule  if  EA   Haile  Milestones  and  Status  Report  

Milestone  /  Ac5vity   Status  Complete  feasibility  study   P  State  opera5ng  permit  submiied   P  

401/404  permit  submiied   P  

Resource  /  reserve  report   P  

Expand  Haile  &  Horseshoe   2011  

Acquire  other  proper5es   2011  

Explore  regional  targets   2011  

2011   2012   2013   2014  Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4  

Feasibility  Study  Op5miza5on  Permirng  Construc5on  Produc5on  Explora5on  

(1)  As  at  May  24,  2011  

Project  Schedule  if  EIS  

2011   2012   2013   2014  Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4  

Feasibility  Study  Op5miza5on  Permirng  Construc5on  Produc5on  Explora5on  

38  

Well-­‐Posi,oned  in  Peer  Group  

§  Romarco  trades  at  a  discount  to  its  developer  peers  on  a  P/NAV  basis(1)  

R-T

(1)  Source:  Wellington  West  Capital  Markets  as  of  May  31,  2011  

39  

Analyst  Coverage  

§  6  Analysts  Covering  Romarco  

ANALYSTS  

Paradigm  Capital   $3.40  

BMO  Capital  Markets   $3.25  

GMP  Securi5es   $3.10  

RBC  Capital  Markets   $3.00  

Wellington  West  Capital  Markets   $2.90  

CIBC  World  Markets   $2.50  

12  Month  Target  Price  

40  

Summary  

§  Near  term,  low  cost  gold  producer  with  strong  project  economics  

§  Located  in  a  mining  friendly  jurisdic5on  with  excellent  infrastructure  

§  Large  resource  with  significant  remaining  explora5on  upside  poten5al  

§  Expansion  studies  underway  

§  Underground  economic  studies  underway  

§  Solid  cash  posi5on  (~  US$72  million),  no  debt  –  as  of  May  24,  2011  

§  11  drill  rigs  –  172,000  meters  drilling  scheduled  for  2011  (~US$30  million)  

§  Permits  submiied  and  pending  

41  

Romarco  Minerals  Inc.  Brookfield  Place  

181  Bay  Street,  Suite  3630    Toronto,  Ontario  M5J  2T3  

Tel:  416.367.5500  Fax:  416.367.5505  

Email:  info@romarco.com  Website:  www.romarco.com  

Dan  Symons  Manager,  Investor  Rela5ons  dsymons@romarco.com  

Contact  Informa,on   Head  Office  Informa,on