EXHIBIT 96.1

This Amended S-K 1300 Initial Assessment Mineral Resource Report of the “LOST CREEK ISR URANIUM PROPERTY, SWEETWATER COUNTY, WYOMING, USA” dated September 19, 2022 has been prepared under the supervision of, and signed by the following Qualified Persons:

Prepared under the Supervision of:

WWC Engineering

1849 Terra Avenue

Sheridan, WY 82801

USA

Report Prepared for:

10758 W. Centennial Road

Suite 200

Littleton, CO 80127

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS (Continued)

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary (Report) for the Lost Creek Property (the Property) has been prepared for Ur-Energy Inc. (URE) and its subsidiaries, Lost Creek ISR, LLC (LC) and NFU Wyoming, LLC under the supervision of Western Water Consultants, Inc., d/b/a WWC Engineering (WWC), pursuant to Regulation S-K Subpart 1300, “Modernization of Property Disclosures for Mining Registrants” (S-K 1300). Its objective is to evaluate the technical and economic viability of the Property using the most current scientific, engineering and technical information. This Report covers resource calculations from drilling activities and production operations information through December 31, 2021.

The Lost Creek PROPERTY represents the composite of six individual contiguous PROJECTS:

The licensed and operating Lost Creek Project is considered the core project while the others are collectively referred to as the Adjoining Projects. The Adjoining Projects were acquired by URE as exploration targets to provide resources supplemental to those recognized at the Lost Creek Project. Most were initially viewed as stand-alone projects but expanded over time such that collectively they now represent a contiguous land position and mineral property along with the Lost Creek Project. The Lost Creek Property is located in the northeast corner of Sweetwater County, approximately 90 miles southwest of Casper, Wyoming. Current total acreage is approximately 35,400 acres of federal mineral claims and state of Wyoming mineral leases (Figure 1).

The Property is situated in the northeastern part of the Great Divide Basin (GDB), which is underlain by up to 25,000 ft. of Paleozoic to Quaternary sedimentary units. Rock outcrops in the GDB are dominated by the Battle Spring Formation of Eocene age, which also hosts the uranium mineralization considered in this Report. The dominant lithology in the Battle Spring Formation is coarse arkosic sandstone, interbedded with intermittent mudstone, claystone and siltstone. Deposition occurred as alluvial-fluvial fan deposits within a south-southwest flowing paleo-drainage.

Exploration in the Lost Creek region started in the mid-1960s. Several companies explored portions of the current Property during this early period and continued to advance the uranium discoveries until 1983 when market conditions declined. New Frontiers Uranium, LLC acquired the Lost Creek Project in 2000 and held it until 2005 when Ur-Energy USA Inc. purchased 100 percent ownership of the property through the purchase of a wholly owned company, NFU Wyoming, LLC.

The uranium mineralization occurs as roll front type deposits formed where uranium precipitated from oxidizing groundwater when it contacted reduced host rock. The majority of known, potentially recoverable uranium throughout the Property occurs within two major mineralized trends. The Main Mineral Trend (MMT) lies within the Lost Creek Project and the East

Mineral Trend (EMT) occurs in the LC East Project. The main mineralized stratigraphic intervals are identified by URE as the HJ and KM Horizons of the Battle Spring Formation.

Additional uranium has been identified in the overlying FG and DE Horizons and also in the underlying Deep Horizons.

Construction of the Lost Creek plant and installation of Mine Unit 1 (MU1) was initiated in October 2012. Production operations in MU1 within the HJ Horizon began on August 2, 2013, and, through December 31, 2021, 2.735 million pounds of U₃O₈ have been produced from the originally planned 13 header houses (HHs) in MU1 and the first three planned HHs in Mine Unit 2 (MU2). For this Report, in order to accurately reflect existing resources, all resources produced through December 31, 2021, have been subtracted from total Measured resources from the HJ Horizon in MU1 and MU2. All the wells to support the originally planned 13 HHs for MU1 have been completed, and surface installations installed, as have the first three HHs in MU2. All monitor ring wells have been installed and pump tested in MU2. The Lost Creek Project is currently operating on a limited basis to maintain operational bleed in the wellfields due to depressed uranium prices. The processing plant and the wellfield remain in operable condition such that production can be quickly ramped up should prices improve.

The existing plant, wellfields, and disposal wells are all fully permitted with the appropriate authorities. Additionally, URE has received approval from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) Uranium Recovery Program (URP) for production in the HJ and KM Horizons within the LC East Project and to authorize production from additional HJ mine units within the EMT in the Lost Creek Project. Upon approval of an amendment of the Permit to Mine, URE will be able to pursue production in the KM and HJ Horizons at the LC East Project and additional HJ Units at the Lost Creek Project.

The mineral resource estimate for the Property is 11.914 million pounds in the Measured and Indicated categories, and 6.607 million pounds eU₃O₈ in the Inferred category. Lost Creek has produced 2.735 million pounds U₃O₈ as of December 31, 2021. The mineral resource reported here has been reduced to account for production to date. The resource estimate is summarized in Table 1.

The QP firm (QP), is of the opinion that the classification of the resources as stated meets the established professional standards and guidelines for reporting mineral resources for the purposes of S-K 1300. The mineral resource estimates in this Report, based on historical and URE drilling, were reviewed and accepted by the QP.

The majority of resources within the Property have been geographically allocated to 12 designated Resource Areas (RAs) which represent the accumulation of resources within a given horizon in a given area. Economic analyses in this Report are performed solely on these designated areas, due to the vertical and lateral continuity of the resources. RAs represent precursors to potential mine units (wellfields).

To date, RAs 1 and 2 have been converted to MU1 and MU2, respectively. At the current time, approximately 85 percent of the total Property resources, as presented in Table 1, are contained within RAs.

Table 1. Lost Creek Property – Resource Summary

Cautionary statement: This Report is preliminary in nature and includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. There is increased risk and uncertainty to commencing and conducting production without established mineral reserves that may result in economic and technical failure which may adversely impact future profitability. The estimated mineral recovery used in this Report is based on recovery data from wellfield operations to date, as well as Ur-Energy personnel and industry experience at similar facilities. There can be no assurance that recovery at this level will be achieved.

The QP has assumed that URE’s operations at the Property will be conducted in conformance with applicable laws, regulations and requirements of federal, state and local agencies. It is also assumed that organization and management controls have been and will continue to be established to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and to implement URE’s policy for providing a safe working environment including the philosophy of maintaining radiation exposures As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA).

The resources identified and evaluated have been added to the Lost Creek production plan and continue to support the possible economics of the Property. Using the estimated capital expenses (CAPEX), operating expenses (OPEX) and closure costs presented herein, a cash flow statement has been developed. The statement assumes no escalation, and no debt, interest or capital repayments. It also does not include depreciation. It should be noted that Lost Creek ISR, LLC is the recipient of a State of Wyoming Taxable Industrial Development Revenue Bond, as amended from time to time. Debt interest and repayment of this bond is not included in the economic analysis. This information is summarized in the following Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of Economics

The economic analyses presented herein provide the results of the analyses for pre-income tax and post-income tax, which includes U.S. federal and Illinois state income taxes. There is no State of Wyoming income tax, and all sales are assumed to take place in Illinois where the conversion facility is located. The only difference between the two scenarios is the value of the estimated income taxes. All other sales, property, use, severance and conservations taxes as well as royalties are included in both scenarios. Both economic analyses presented herein assume no escalation and no debt, interest or capital repayments. Ur-Energy USA Inc. files consolidated federal tax returns in the United States and had approximately $105.6 million in tax loss carry forwards as of December 31, 2021. URE does not anticipate paying any significant federal income taxes until the existing, and any future, tax loss carry forwards are utilized. In addition, reclamation costs can be deducted in the early years of the Property, thus also pushing out the tax liability.

The sale price for the produced uranium is assumed to vary based on an annual average of the projections prepared by VIII Capital Corp.; Cantor Fitzgerald Canada Corporation; H.C. Wainwright & Co.; and UxC, LLC (See Chapters 16 and 24). The revenue for the cash flow estimate was developed using the GT contour mineral resource estimate for the MMT and EMT, and further assumed that, based on an 80 percent recovery factor, approximately 12.3 million pounds of U3O8 will be recovered from the MMT and EMT at the Property.

Remaining CAPEX costs are for sustaining capital requirements at the mine site and are for the installation of a wastewater treatment building to optimize wastewater reduction. The remaining sustaining capital is for the replacement of equipment that will be used in future operations of the plant and the wellfields. The sustaining capital cost is estimated to be $19.9 million. In addition, costs are included in the wellfield development portion of this analysis for the installation of one additional Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class I deep disposal well (DDW) at an estimated cost of $3.2 million. The sustaining capital estimate is based on the actual previous purchases of the same equipment and/or vendor prices, thus the predicted level of accuracy of the sustaining capital estimate is +/- 10 percent. In cases where price quotes or previous purchases were made more than a year prior to this analysis, costs were escalated against the Consumer Price Index or the gross domestic product: implicit price deflator adjusted to December 2021 (CPI, 2021 & FRED, 2021)

URE purchased and paid for the processing plant and much of the first mine unit prior to the commencement of operations in 2013 and prior to this economic analysis. Those initial capital costs totaled approximately $46.5 million and are not included in this economic analysis because they were previously incurred.

OPEX cost estimates were developed by evaluating each process unit operation and associated operating services (power, water, air, waste disposal), infrastructure (offices, shops), salary plus burden, and environmental control (heat, air conditioning, monitoring). The OPEX estimate is based on URE’s current operating costs, budgets, development plan, deliverables, process flow sheets, process design, materials balance and project manpower schedule. The annual OPEX is provided in Chapter 18.0.

Construction of the plant and MU1 began in October 2012. Plant construction was completed in the third quarter of 2013. Wellfield drilling and construction activities have been completed to various levels with the majority of the work occurring in the MU1 and the areas of the first three HHs in MU2.

Subsequent to initial capital purchases, all other installation costs have been expensed. These include additional construction in MU1, installation of the monitor well ring in MU2 and drilling and construction of the third DDW. The Net Present Value (NPV) calculations assume that cash flows occur in the middle of the accounting periods. The NPV is calculated from the discounted cash flow model and is based on the CAPEX, OPEX and closure cost estimates, a variable future uranium price and the anticipated production schedule. Excluding sunk costs which occurred prior to December 31, 2021, the Property is estimated to generate net cash flow over its life, before income tax, of $376.4 million and $267.1 million after income tax. Payback of the initial capital investments, including $23.7 Million in sunk costs which occurred prior to the beginning of this analysis, is estimated during the second quarter of 2024. The Property has a calculated before tax Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of 72.2 percent and a before tax NPV of $210.9 million applying an eight percent discount rate. When income taxes are included in the calculation, the after-tax IRR is 66.8 percent and the after tax NPV is $156.8 million applying an eight percent discount rate. Life of Mine (LoM) operating costs are approximately $33.61 per pound of U₃O₈ produced including royalties and local taxes. Federal and State income taxes are estimated to be $8.72 per pound. A summary of the current project economics is presented below in Table 3 and is discussed in more detail in Chapter 19.

Approximately 27.4 percent of the resources in the economic analysis were inferred resources. Inferred resources are resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have modifying factors applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves, and there is no certainty that this economic assessment will be realized. To account for the chance that the inferred resources are not upgraded as mining progresses and URE collects additional drilling data, a second economic analysis was prepared which excluded the inferred resources. The estimated recovery excluding the inferred resources was 8.6 million pounds. Without the inferred resources the Property is estimated to generate net cash flow over its life, before income tax, of $234.8 million and $175.3 million after income tax. Without the inferred resources the calculated before tax IRR is 71.7 percent and a before tax NPV of $153.4 million applying an eight percent discount rate. When income taxes are included in the calculation without inferred resources, the after-tax IRR is 67.0 percent and the after tax NPV is $120.0 million applying an eight percent discount rate. Without the inferred resources LoM operating costs are estimated at approximately $36.23 per pound of U₃O₈ produced including royalties and local taxes. Income taxes are estimated to be $6.69 per pound.

Table 3. Cash Flow Summary

The QP finds the Property is potentially viable based on the assumptions contained herein. There is no certainty that the mineral recovery or the economic analyses presented in this Report will be realized. In order to realize the full potential benefits described in this Report, the following activities, as discussed in Chapter 23.0 (Recommendations), are required:

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Registrant

WWC has been retained by URE to prepare this Report for the Property, which includes the Lost Creek Project and the Adjoining Projects located in northeastern Sweetwater County in south-central Wyoming, USA. This Report has been prepared in accordance with the guidelines set forth under S-K 1300 for the submission of technical reports on mineral properties. This Report also presents a validation of the estimate of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources as defined in S-K 1300 (17 CFR §229.1300). Estimates of Mineral Reserves were not prepared. Property economics and related analyses were also updated from earlier such analyses.

URE was incorporated on March 22, 2004 and is an exploration stage mining company engaged in the identification, acquisition, evaluation, exploration, development and operation of uranium properties in the United States. URE is incorporated in Canada with principal executive offices located at 10758 West Centennial Road, Suite 200, Littleton, CO 80127. URE’s uranium mineral property portfolio includes properties in the Great Divide Basin, the Shirley Basin, and the Gas Hills mining districts of Wyoming.

2.2 Terms of Reference

This Report was prepared to disclose the updated results of mineral resource estimations for the Property prompted by development activities through December 31, 2021. Property economics and related analyses were also updated from earlier such analyses. This is the first S-K 1300 technical report for the Property. However, reports meeting Canadian National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) standards have been previously prepared and are referenced in this report. The last NI 43-101 compliant report prepared for the Property had a February 8, 2016, effective date (TREC, 2016).

2.3 Information Sources and References

The information and data presented in this Report was gathered from various sources listed in Chapters 24 and 25. Technical information was provided to WWC by URE and includes data from other professional consultants and follows generally accepted uranium ISR practices. Mineral resource estimates are based on exploration, delineation and production drilling, and associated data, provided by URE and reviewed by WWC.

The wellfield design was provided by URE with associated numbers and locations of wells and HHs. It includes the as-built design in MU1 and MU2 as well as anticipated wellfield layout for future development. The cost estimates presented here are based on wellfield layouts, process flow diagrams, tank and process equipment and buildings currently installed at the Property, personnel and capital equipment requirements provided by URE.

Units of measurement, unless otherwise indicated, are feet (ft.), miles, acres, pounds avoirdupois (lbs.), and short tons (2,000 lbs.). Uranium is expressed as pounds U₃O₈, the standard market unit. All references to dollars ($) are in U.S. dollars. Grades reported for historical resources and the mineral resources reported and used herein are percent eU₃O₈ (equivalent U₃O₈ by calibrated gamma geophysical logging unit). ISR refers to in situ recovery, sometimes also termed ISL or in situ leach. A complete list of abbreviations is provided on pages vii-viii.

2.4 Inspection of the Property by Each Qualified Person

WWC professionals have most recently visited the site on January 28, 2022, and on February 1, 2022. The purpose of these site visits was to observe the geography and geology of the Project site, verify work done at the site by URE, observe the potential locations of Project components, confirmation drilling and other site activities, and confirm existing site infrastructure including installed wellfields, plant facilities and equipment at the site.

2.4.1 QP Qualifications

Completion of this Report was under the direction and supervision of WWC. WWC is a third-party QP as defined by Regulation S-K 1300. Additionally, WWC has approved the technical disclosure contained in this Report.

2.5 Previous Technical Report Summaries

URE has not previously filed a Technical Report Summary under S-K 1300 regulations. Additional reports meeting Canadian National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) standards have been previously prepared and are referenced in this report.

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

3.1 Location and Size

The Property is located in the northeastern corner of Sweetwater County in south-central Wyoming. As shown on Figure 1, the Property is in an unpopulated area located approximately 15 miles southwest of Bairoil, Wyoming, about 38 miles northwest of Rawlins, Wyoming and about 90 miles southwest of Casper, Wyoming. It is centered at approximately 42 degrees, 8.06 minutes North latitude and 107 degrees, 51.7 minutes West longitude. All references herein to Township and Range occur within the 6th Prime Meridian.

The Lost Creek plant is constructed and operating. Production well installation for the originally designed 13 HHs in MU1 is complete and production operations have occurred in all 13. Additionally, the first three HHs of MU2 have been constructed and are operational. Additional HHs will be developed in both mine units and additional recovery areas, as production requirements warrant. Three DDWs were drilled and operated; subsequently, one deep well was plugged and abandoned. Shallow UIC Class V wells for water recycling were permitted, drilled and have been in operation since 2017. Associated access roads have been constructed. URE has also installed numerous monitoring and other wells in support of its permit and license applications and to further mine planning. Various other infrastructure, including wells, water tanks, ponds, a meteorological station, and other equipment, has been placed on the Property by URE in support of its mining, development, exploration, and permit/license activities.

The Property currently comprises six individual Projects named the Lost Creek, LC East, LC North, LC South, LC West, and EN Projects (Figure 2) located over approximately 35,400 acres. The Lost Creek Project is considered the core project, with current production occurring in MU1 and MU2. The other five Projects, collectively referred to as the Adjoining Projects, are extension and exploration properties targeted as possible sources of additional feed to the Lost Creek Project production facilities. All Projects within the Property consist mostly or entirely of federal unpatented lode mining claims. Three of the Projects also have state mineral leases. URE does not hold any private (fee) mineral leases within the Property. Land holdings within the six Projects of the Property are summarized below. With the exception of the Lost Creek Project, acreage estimates are rounded to the nearest 10s.

Lost Creek Project: is located in Sections 13, 24 and 25 of T25N, R93W, and Sections 16 through 20 and 29 through 31 of T25N, R92W (Figure 3a). The Project is approximately 4,194 acres in size, including 3,554 acres in 201 federal unpatented lode mining claims and 640 acres in one state of Wyoming mineral lease.

Adjoining Company Projects:

LC East Project: is a block of 324 federal mineral claims (Figure 3b) which are adjoining to the east and northeast of the Lost Creek Project, within Sections 1 through 3, 10 through 15, 20 through 23, 27 through 29 of T25N, R92W. The LC East Project encompasses approximately 5,750 acres.

LC North Project: is adjoining to the north and west of the Lost Creek Project in Sections 4 through 10, 17, and 18 of T25N, R92W, Sections 1, 11 through 15, 22, 23, 26, and 27 of T25N, R93W and Sections 33 through 34 of T26N, R92W (Figure 3c). The LC North Project includes 338 federal unpatented lode mining claims totaling approximately 6,260 acres.

LC South Project: is an adjoining project to the south and east of the Lost Creek Project in Sections 22 through 35 of T25N, R92W, Sections 3 through 6, and 8 through 11, 14, and 15 of T24N, R92W, and Section 1 of T24N, R93W (Figure 3d). The LC South Project encompasses 546 federal unpatented lode mining claims totaling approximately 10,200 acres.

LC West Project: consists of a block of mining claims plus one state lease in two parcels (Figure 3e). Most of LC West adjoins the Lost Creek, LC North and LC South Projects within Sections 16, 21, 22, 25 through 28, 33 through 36 of T25N, R93W, and Sections 2 through 5 of T24N, R93W. One of the state mineral lease parcels lies as a disconnected parcel approximately a mile north from the LC West mining claims. LC West Project encompasses a total of approximately 3,840 acres, including 2,800 acres in 142 federal unpatented lode mining claims and 1,040 acres in the state of Wyoming mineral lease.

EN Project: is the adjoining project to the east of the LC South Project in Sections 31 through 34 of T25N, R91W, Sections 5 through 7 of T24N, R91W, Sections 35 and 36 of T25N, R92W, and Sections 1 through 3 and 10 through 12 of T24N, R92W (Figure 3f). The current EN Project encompasses approximately 5,160 acres, including approximately 4,520 acres in 234 federal unpatented lode mining claims and 640 acres in the state of Wyoming mineral lease.

3.2 Mining Claims, Mineral Leases and Surface Use Agreements

Collectively the Property currently consists of a total of 1,785 federal unpatented lode mining claims and three state of Wyoming leases for uranium and associated minerals. The land status of each project is illustrated in Figures 3a-f and described below:

The surface of all the mining claims is controlled by the BLM, with URE possessing the right to use as much of the surface as is necessary for exploration and mining of the claims, subject to compliance with all federal, state and local laws and regulations. Surface use on BLM lands is administered under federal regulations.

The Lost Creek and other projects currently held by LC are subject to a mortgage securing a bond loan with Sweetwater County, Wyoming, through the State of Wyoming Taxable Industrial Development Revenue Bond program, and the related State bond which was issued for this loan in October 2013. The mortgage, as amended, is recorded in Sweetwater County, Wyoming (October 23, 2013, Rec. 1630230 Bk. 1202, pg. 5867; December 28, 2015, Rec. 1646033 Bk. 1212, pg. 4611); October 1, 2019, Rec. 1669974, Bk. 1228, pg. 5759; and October 7, 2020, Rec. 1677345, Bk. 1235, Pg. 976).

Similarly, access to state-controlled land is largely inherent within the state of Wyoming mineral leases. The state lease within the Lost Creek Project requires a nominal surface impact fee to be paid as may the other state mineral leases from time to time. Various Temporary Use Permits are in place at the Property, including one which allows for the use and maintenance of an improved road on the leased state section within the Lost Creek Project.

3.3 Title to Property

URE, through its wholly owned subsidiaries Lost Creek ISR, LLC and NFU Wyoming, LLC controls the federal unpatented lode mining claims and state of Wyoming mineral leases which comprise the Property. Currently, NFU Wyoming, LLC controls the mining claims and state lease at the EN Project. Lost Creek ISR, LLC controls the lands at the other five projects within the Property, including Lost Creek Project. Title to the mining claims is subject to rights of pedis possessio against all third-party claimants as long as the claims are maintained. The mining claims do not have an expiration date. Affidavits have been timely filed with the BLM and recorded with the Sweetwater County Recorder attesting to the payment of annual maintenance fees to the BLM as established by law. The state leases have a ten-year term, subject to renewal for successive ten-year terms. From time to time, formal mineral title reports are prepared for URE by mineral title attorneys.

3.3.1 Property Boundaries

A professional legal survey of the permit area boundary of the Lost Creek Project was completed in advance of the submission of applications for permits and licenses on the Project. Similarly, a professional legal survey was conducted for the permit area for the LC East Project permit amendments. Legal surveys of individual mining claims are not required, and otherwise have not been completed. The area covered by the state leases is based on the legal subdivision descriptions as set forth by the U.S. Cadastral Survey and has not been verified by legal surveys.

3.4 Royalties, Taxes and Fees

URE is required to pay various state and local taxes related to production and the ownership of property. These taxes are in the form of severance, ad valorem, gross products, personal, and real property taxes. There is no state income tax in Wyoming. Royalties based on sales of uranium will be paid to the state under the state mineral lease at the Project. The state mineral leases carry the standard five percent royalty required by law. There are no royalties owed on the mining claims held at the Lost Creek Project. Various royalties exist on portions of the Adjoining Projects, including on a portion of LC East Project. Those royalties, as they pertain to currently anticipated production, have been included in the analysis but are relatively insignificant affecting only three future HHs at a rate of one percent of production sales. Additionally, maintenance fees will be paid to the BLM, and payments made to the state for the state mineral leases. Currently, annual maintenance fees to the BLM are $165/claim with a nominal recording fee paid to Sweetwater County (i.e., <$200, annually). Annual payments of the three state mineral leases in the Property are currently $3.00/acre (Lost Creek lease, $1,920; EN lease, $1,920; LC West lease, $3,120).

The Property economic analysis includes tax estimates for state severance taxes, county ad valorem taxes and property taxes, all of which are directly attributable to the Property. The economic analyses presented herein also provide the results of the analyses for pre-income tax and post-income tax, which includes U.S. federal and Illinois state income taxes. There is no State of Wyoming income tax, and all sales are assumed to take place in Illinois where the conversion facility is located. The only difference between the two scenarios is the value of the estimated income taxes. All other sales, property, use, severance and conservations taxes as well as royalties are included in both scenarios. Both economic analyses presented herein assume no escalation and no debt, interest or capital repayments. Ur-Energy USA Inc. files consolidated federal tax returns in the United States and had approximately $105.6 million in tax loss carry forwards as of December 31, 2021. URE does not anticipate paying any significant federal income taxes until the existing, and any future, tax loss carry forwards are utilized. In addition, reclamation costs can be deducted in the early years of the project, thus also pushing out the tax liability.

3.5 Significant Encumbrances or Risks to Perform Work on the Property

3.5.1 Environmental Liabilities

There were no pre-existing mineral processing facilities or related tailings ponds or waste deposits within the Property prior to the initiation of the construction of Lost Creek’s ISR facilities and wellfields. Surface disturbance included in the economic analysis is associated with drilling, well installation, wellfield construction, plant construction and installation of the three deep waste disposal wells. Likewise, subsurface disturbance is associated with the injection and production operations in MU1 and MU2. Other than the foregoing, there are no known environmental liabilities on the Property. The total bond held by the WDEQ to reclaim property disturbances for which LC is liable is $16.844 million as of December 31, 2021.

3.5.2 Existing and Required Permits

All permits and authorizations required to operate the Lost Creek Mine, as currently operating, are in place and include the following:

The following permits will be required before beginning recovery at LC East and within the additional HJ Horizon Mine Units at Lost Creek.

3.5.3 Significant Risks that May affect Access, Title, or Right to Perform Work

The Lost Creek plant has been constructed and is operational. Production well installation in MU1 is complete for all 13 originally designed HHs and the first three planned HHs in MU2. HHs 1-1 through 1-13 and HHs 2-1 through 2-3 were operational prior to the reduction in operations. The plant is currently operating at a limited capacity to maintain required wellfield bleed. The reduction in operations is due to depressed uranium prices. The plant remains fully operational to take advantage of improving prices in the future. Three DDWs were drilled at the Property, of which one has been plugged and abandoned; the other two deep wells remain operational. Two UIC Class V wells were installed and are operational. The plant and associated access roads have been constructed. URE has also installed numerous monitoring and other wells in support of its permit and license applications and to further its mine planning. Various other infrastructure, including wells, water tanks, a meteorological station, and other equipment, has been placed on the Property by URE in support of its mining, development, exploration, and permit/license activities.

The QP is aware of no significant factors that contribute to operational risks for the Property.

4.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

4.1 Physiography

The Property is located near the northeastern part of the Great Divide Basin (GDB) and occurs at an elevation of approximately 7,000 ft. above mean sea level. The GDB is an oval-shaped structural depression encompassing some 3,500 square miles in south-central Wyoming. The GDB is bounded on the north by the Wind River Range and Granite Mountains, on the east by the Rawlins Uplift, on the south by the Wamsutter Arch, and on the west by the Rock Springs Uplift.

Most of the Property consists of flat upland areas and gentle south facing slopes that are dissected by southerly-flowing ephemeral washes. There are no perennial streams on the Property. The vegetation on the Property is dominated by sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) which occurs throughout both upland and lowland environmental settings. Sagebrush is well adapted to the cold winter temperatures and limited precipitation that characterize the Property. Other vegetation identified at the Property includes native cool season perennial grasses, perennial forbs, cushion plants, semi-shrubs, cacti, shrubs and lichens.

4.2 Means of Access

Regional access to the Property relies almost exclusively on existing public roads and highways. The local and regional transportation network relevant to the Property consists of primary, secondary, local and unimproved roads (Figures 1 and 2). Direct access to the Property relies mainly on two crown-and-ditched gravel paved access roads to the processing plant. One enters from the west off Sweetwater County Road 23N (Wamsutter-Crooks Gap Road). The other enters from the east off of BLM Sooner Road. In addition to the designated routes, there are a number of four-wheel-drive “two-track” roads that traverse the area for recreation and grazing access, as well as various other uses, including uranium exploration. On a wider basis, from population centers, the Property area is served by an Interstate Highway (Interstate 80), a U.S. Highway (US 287), Wyoming state routes (SR 220 and 73 to Bairoil), local county roads, and BLM roads.

4.3 Proximity to Population Centers

The Property is located in a remote area of south-central Wyoming. The nearest town, Bairoil, with a population of less than 100, is about 17 miles northeast of the Lost Creek plant. The Wyoming towns of Rawlins, Rock Springs and Casper are approximately 36, 82 and 90 miles from the Property, respectively. Figures 1 and 2 show the locations of population centers with respect to the Property.

Sweetwater County, in which the Property is located, had a population of 42,272 in 2020. This represents a 3.5 percent decrease in Sweetwater County’s population since the 2010 census (U.S. Census Bureau 2020 Report on Sweetwater County, WY). Sweetwater County has a population density of 4.2 people per square mile. Carbon County, which is south of the Property, had a population of 14,537 in 2020 which was primarily located in the town of Rawlins. This represents an 8.5 percent decrease in Carbon County’s population since the 2010 census (U.S. Census Bureau 2020 Report on Carbon County, WY).

Personnel required for management, construction, development, and operation of the Property are drawn from Rawlins, Bairoil, Jeffrey City, Lander, Riverton, Rock Springs and Casper, Wyoming.

4.4 Climate and Operating Season

The Property is located in the intermountain semi-desert eco-region (Curtis and Grimes, 2004), which has cold winters and short, hot summers (Bailey, 1995). The average annual temperatures range from 40 to 52 degrees Fahrenheit. The average annual precipitation ranges from five to 14 inches (Bailey, 1995). Winter weather may limit the time periods for certain portions of wellfield drilling and construction at the Property but to date has not significantly affected operation of the ISR facility. ISR operations at the Property are conducted year-round.

The state of Wyoming has developed a Core Area Strategy to help protect the greater sage-grouse species within certain core areas of Wyoming. Exploration areas of the Property are all within the Greater South Pass core area and are thus subject to work activity restrictions from March 1 to July 15 of each year. The timing restriction precludes exploration drilling and other non-operational based activities that may disturb the greater sage-grouse. Drilling activity is not restricted outside this period.

The greater sage-grouse timing restrictions relevant to ISR production activities at the Lost Creek Project are somewhat different because the state of Wyoming has recognized that mines within core areas must be allowed to operate year-round. Therefore, since construction at the Lost Creek Project began, there have been no timing restrictions on drilling, construction, or operational activities within pre-approved disturbed areas as shown in the Permit to Mine. These disturbed areas include the processing plant, holding ponds, roads, power lines, wellfields, and DDWs. Any exploration drilling within the Property but outside the pre-defined disturbed area of the Permit to Mine will continue to be subject to greater sage-grouse timing restrictions.

The Core Area Strategy also places limitations on the amount of disturbance within an area. Planned disturbance is limited and therefore is unlikely to result in limitations on exploration drilling. For the Property, there is a five percent cap on anthropogenic disturbance in the area. Analyses of the planned disturbance on the Property, including those areas which are permitted, or for which permits will be sought, will be conducted to be consistent with the Wyoming regulatory scheme, and also will be reviewed on a time-to-time basis by WGFD. The WGFD has also approved the Lost Creek Sage Grouse Protection Plan for the Lost Creek Project.

4.5 Property Infrastructure

The Property currently contains an operational ISR processing plant, wellfields, water disposal infrastructure, and necessary equipment to support ISR operations. The basic infrastructure (power, water, and transportation) necessary to support an ISR mining operation is located within reasonable proximity of the Property. Generally, the proximity of the Property to paved roads is beneficial with respect to transportation of equipment, supplies, personnel and product to and from the Property. Improved gravel surfaced access roads have been constructed to the Property from adjacent county roads. Existing regional overhead electrical service is aligned in a north-to-south direction along the western boundary of the Lost Creek Project. An overhead raptor resistant power line, approximately two miles in length, was constructed in 2012 to bring power from the existing Pacific Power line to the Lost Creek plant. Power drops have been made to the Project and distributed to the plant, offices, wellfields, and other facilities.

Previous infrastructure near the Property is predominantly related to oil and gas development, past and present uranium exploration and beneficiation, and recreation. There have been several historical conventional uranium mills and mines and one historical ISR project (Bison Basin Project) in the vicinity of the Property (Figure 2). The closest mining facility to the Property is the Sweetwater Mine and Mill, a conventional uranium mine and mill that is not currently operational. The facility lies about three and one-half miles south of the southwestern-most boundary of URE’s Lost Creek Project, with less than one mile separating the respective property boundaries.

Lost Creek operations require disposal into DDWs of limited quantities of fluids that cannot be returned to the production aquifers. Five DDWs are permitted for the Lost Creek Project, of which three have been drilled to date, and two remain operational after one DDW was plugged and abandoned. Three additional deep wells are proposed for LC East. Two UIC Class V injection wells have been completed and have been in operation since 2017 as a part of the water recycling systems. Two storage ponds, permitted by state and federal regulators, are located adjacent to the plant and are used to temporarily store the water that will ultimately be disposed of in the DDWs.

The first DDW (LC DW #1) was installed in 2008 and is located in the extreme southwest corner of the Lost Creek Project. The second DDW (LC DW #4) was drilled in 2012 immediately south of the plant building. A third DDW (LC DW #3) was drilled and installed in the SW quarter of Section 13, T25N, R92W in 2014. The location of the other planned DDW for Lost Creek is the SE quarter of Section 17, T25N, R92W. An additional permitted option is in the SE quarter of Section 19, T25N, R92W.

Three additional DDWs proposed by the amendments for LC East would be located in T25N, R92W in the SW quarter of Section 22, NW quarter of Section 23 and the SE quarter of Section 10. For a further discussion of the wastewater disposal and related infrastructure, see Chapter 14.3 (Liquid Disposal). Ponds, outdoor tank storage, and the Class V disposal wells are located proximate to the plant and office building location (see Figures 2 and 12).

Tailings storage areas, solid waste disposal areas, and heap leach pad(s) will not be a part of the infrastructure for the Property as ISR operations do not require these types of facilities.

4.5.1 Water Supply

Most of the non-potable water for ISR operations is obtained from the mining operation, i.e., from extracted groundwater. With the exception of a 0.5 percent to 1.5 percent bleed, the groundwater extracted by the production wells will continue to be recycled through the system.

Water for activities within the Property is currently supplied by 12 water wells drilled by URE. Eight of these are located within the Lost Creek Project, one is in the LC North Project, one is in the LC South Project, and one is in the EN Project. All but one of the active wells produces water in excess of 25 gallons per minute. Water usage in the past has been mostly for drilling, casing wells, and abandonment of exploration and delineation holes. Two of the eight wells in the Lost Creek Project are adjacent to the plant site. One of those is being used as a source of fire suppression water and the other as a source of fresh water. Additional wells may be necessary as exploration and production activities extend further from the plant.

5.0 HISTORY

Uranium was discovered in the GDB in 1936. Exploration activity increased in the early 1950s after the Gas Hills District discoveries, and continued to increase in the 1960s, with the discovery of numerous additional occurrences of uranium. Wolf Land and Exploration (a private corporation which later became publicly traded as Inexco), Climax (Amax) and Conoco Minerals were the earliest operators in the area of what is now the Property and made the initial discoveries of low-grade uranium mineralization in the Battle Spring Formation in 1968.

Conoco entered into a joint venture with Inexco in 1969. Conoco gained sole control of the properties in 1970 and continued to explore their large land position in the region as what they called “Project A”. In doing so, they identified the eastern half of what is now referred to as the MMT in the Lost Creek Project and also what is known as the EMT in the LC East Project. Conoco’s “Project A” also included large portions of what are now the LC North, LC South and EN Projects.

Kerr-McGee, Humble Oil (Exxon), and Valley Development, Inc. were also active early in the region.

5.1 Ownership History

5.1.1 Ownership History of Lost Creek Project

Inexco, Conoco, Climax and Valley Development, Inc. obtained the initial land positions in the Lost Creek Project area in the late 1960s. Conoco took over Inexco’s land position in 1970.

Texasgulf entered the area in 1976 by acquiring the western half of what is now the Lost Creek Project through a joint venture with Climax. Also in 1976, Texasgulf entered into a joint venture with Valley Development, Inc. and initiated a major exploration program that resulted in the identification of the western half of the MMT. In 1978, Texasgulf joined with Conoco as operator in a joint venture to continue exploring the MMT. Texasgulf acquired a 100 percent interest in Valley Development, Inc. property in 1979 and continued with extensive exploration efforts and, by the early 1980s, had fully identified the MMT. They subsequently dropped the property in 1983 due to the declining uranium market.

The property was subsequently acquired by Cherokee Exploration, Inc., which conducted no field activities. In 1987, Power Nuclear Corporation (also known as PNC Exploration) acquired 100 percent interest in the project from Cherokee Exploration, Inc. PNC Exploration carried out a limited exploration program as well as geologic investigations and an evaluation of previous in situ leach testing by Texasgulf.

In 2000, New Frontiers Uranium, LLC acquired the property and related database from PNC Exploration but conducted no drilling or geologic studies. New Frontiers Uranium, LLC later transferred the Lost Creek Project-area property, along with its other Wyoming properties, to NFU Wyoming, LLC.

In 2005, Ur-Energy USA Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of URE, purchased 100 percent ownership of NFU Wyoming, LLC. Within the first year of ownership, URE initiated drilling, and preparations for mining permit applications. Toward that goal, it conducted engineering studies, core drilling for metallurgical studies, and delineation drilling to outline and define the uranium resources. In addition, comprehensive baseline studies were initiated, including installation of additional monitor wells for hydrological testing and water-quality sampling and a meteorological station within the Property area. Figure 3a shows the current Lost Creek Project boundary and claims.

In 2007, NFU Wyoming, LLC transferred the Lost Creek Project to Lost Creek ISR, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ur-Energy USA Inc. formed for the purpose of owning and developing the Project through the permitting process and into operations as an ISR mine. In 2012 the LC East Project was transferred into Lost Creek ISR, LLC. The LC South, LC West and LC North Projects were transferred to Lost Creek ISR, LLC in 2013. EN Project remains an asset of NFU Wyoming, LLC.

5.1.2 Ownership History of Adjoining Projects

The Adjoining Projects share a history of ownership similar to that of the Lost Creek Project because over the years they were operated by many of the same companies which maintained large property holdings in the vicinity. The Adjoining Projects have been acquired by URE since 2006 through the location of federal unpatented lode mining claims, purchase agreements made with individuals and companies, and through leases with the state of Wyoming. Additions which resulted in the formation of LC East and LC West were made through an asset exchange with Uranium One Americas, Inc. (U1) in 2012 and by staking of additional mining claims in 2011 and 2012, and 2014. The individual Projects originally were stand-alone exploration projects, but expanded over time such that now, along with the Lost Creek Project, they collectively represent a largely contiguous land position known as the Property.

5.1.2.1 LC East

LC East is drawn in part from two large blocks of claims (RD and PN claims) obtained in 2012 from U1, and additional mining claims located in 2011 and 2012, and 2014 by URE.

Similar to the other projects, the earliest historical ownership within what is now the LC East Project was by Wolf Land and Exploration in 1967. In 1969 Conoco entered into a joint venture with Wolf Land and Exploration, with Conoco acting as the operator. The next year Conoco took over the project and continued to explore the area as part of its “Project A”.

In 1978 Texasgulf continued the activity as the operator of “Project A” in a joint venture with Conoco until 1983. PNC Exploration later acquired some of the ground in 1987 and held it until 2000.

With the resurgence of the uranium industry, High Plains Uranium, Inc. (HPU) and Energy Metals Corporation (EMC) both staked claims within the current LC East Project boundaries in 2004. The HPU controlled claims subsequently were transferred to EMC in 2007 when that company acquired HPU. Later that year EMC was acquired by U1. U1 maintained the claims until they were acquired in 2012 by URE. Figure 3b shows the current LC East Project boundary and claims.

5.1.2.2 LC North

Early historic ownership of claims within what is now the LC North Project began in 1967 and continued into the mid-1970s. Activity was dominated by Conoco, at times in a joint venture with Inexco. Climax also held property in the late 1960s but to a much lesser extent. In the mid- to late-1970s Texasgulf continued as the primary operator until 1983 when they discontinued operations in the GDB.

Initial claim staking by URE in the LC North Project commenced in 2007 and various changes to the land position have been made in the years since. Figure 3c shows the current LC North Project boundary and claims.

5.1.2.3 LC South

Wolf Land and Exploration was the earliest operator within what is now the LC South Project and was active from 1967 to 1968. Conoco then became the dominant operator through the mid- 1970s, exploring the ground as part of their “Project A”. They were replaced by Texasgulf in 1978 when it took over operatorship of the “Project A” joint venture until 1983.

Acquisition by URE of the LC South Project began in 2007 and was expanded thereafter through location of claims and acquisitions of claims from third parties. Figure 3d shows the current LC South Project boundary and claims.

5.1.2.4 LC West

The earliest known operator on this ground was Wolf Land and Exploration who drilled only a few holes in 1967. Conoco controlled most of the ground in the early 1970s within its “Project A” and was later succeeded by Texasgulf in the mid-1970s to early 1980s when they took control of the “Project A” joint venture. Minerals Exploration Corporation also held portions of this ground in the early 1970s as part of their Sweetwater exploration activities. LC West, as currently known, was created from portions of the U1 asset exchange and through location of additional claims. Figure 3e shows the current LC West boundary and claims.

5.1.2.5 EN

The earliest operator in the EN area was Wolf Land and Exploration, which held portions of the current EN ground in the late 1960s. Humble (Exxon) also controlled portions of the land through 1970. Conoco entered into a joint venture with Wolf in 1969 and eventually assumed full control through 1974 as part of their “Project A”. Other operators who held portions of the ground during the 1970s include Teton Exploration, Kerr-McGee, and Climax (Amax). The last historical operator was Texasgulf who held the property in the late 1970s.

URE’s original land position arose through acquisition of claims from a private party in 2006. This was augmented with the staking of additional claims by NFU Wyoming, LLC and claims obtained through another acquisition. Figure 3f shows the current EN Project boundary and claims.

5.2 Exploration History

Significant exploration of the property began in the 1960s and has continued off and on by various operators since then. No significant uranium development work was conducted within the Property by previous operators. A summary of all historic and URE drill holes is presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Drill Hole Summary – Historical and Recent

5.3 Previous Mineral Resource Estimates and Their Reliability

Several historic estimates of uranium mineral resources by previous operators have been made within the current Property. Most focused on what is now referred to as the MMT and EMT. However, because historical project boundaries varied considerably from the current project boundaries, direct comparison of historical estimates to current estimates is not possible.

Table 5 outlines various historical resource estimates covering areas within the Property that were conducted by several organizations since 1978. It also lists NI 43-101 mineral resource estimates for the Lost Creek Project/Property completed since 2006 through the 2016 PEA by URE. The historical resource estimates address diverse geographical areas, various host sand horizons, and utilize different and, in some instances, unknown resource determination methods. URE has not treated these historic estimates (Table 5) as current mineral resources or reserves and they are superseded by the current mineral resource estimate. Most of the earlier resource estimates did not differentiate resources in terms of currently recognized resource categories (Measured, Indicated, and Inferred). Mineral resource estimates in Table 5 are superseded by the resource estimates presented in this Report.

5.4 Production History

Regionally, historical production activities have been from the production of numerous underground and surface mines in the Crooks Gap / Sheep Mountain District approximately 25 miles to the north; at the Sweetwater Mine and Mill approximately three and one-half miles to the south; and limited ISR production in the Bison Basin approximately 27 miles to the northwest (Figure 2). All of these mining activities had ceased by the mid-1980s. Production at the Lost Creek Project commenced on August 2, 2013, and 2.7 million pounds of U₃O₈ have been produced up to December 31, 2021, from the Project. Elsewhere within the Property area, there has been no conventional or ISR production of uranium nor any pilot plant activities.

Table 5. Previous Resource Estimates   

6.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION

6.1 Regional Geology

The Property is situated in the northeastern part of the GDB, which is underlain by up to 25,000 ft. of Paleozoic to Quaternary sediments (Figures 4 and 5). The GDB together with the Washakie Basin to the south comprise the eastern half of the greater Green River Basin, which occupies much of southwestern Wyoming. The GDB lies within a unique divergence of the Continental Divide and is bounded by structural uplifts or fault displaced Precambrian rocks, resulting in internal drainage and an independent hydrogeologic system.

GDB geology is dominated by the Eocene age Battle Spring Formation. Dominant Battle Spring Formation lithology is coarse arkosic sandstone, interbedded with intermittent mudstone, claystone and siltstone. Deposition occurred as alluvial-fluvial fan deposits within a south-southwest flowing paleo-drainage. The Granite Mountains approximately 30 miles to the north are the assumed sedimentary source, with possible minor contributions from volcanic sources. Maximum thickness of the Battle Spring Formation sediments within the GDB is 6,000 ft.

Approximately six miles west of the Property, the Battle Spring Formation interfingers with the Wasatch and Green River Formations of equivalent age (Eocene) within a belt roughly 15 miles wide, as shown in Figure 4. The Wasatch and Green River together represent low-energy fluvial, lacustrine and paludal depositional environments, which are time-equivalents of the alluvial fan deposits of the Battle Spring Formation.

Deep-seated regional thrust faulting associated with the Wind River thrusting occurred at depth in the central portions of the GDB. The horizontal component of displacement is possibly greater than nine miles. However, displacement does not extend to the surface. In addition, shallow normal faulting is also common throughout the GDB, having a preferential orientation generally east to west. These faults are relatively local and appear to be late-stage events in the structural history of the basin. Throws are generally less than 200 ft. and typically on the order of 25 to 50 ft. as illustrated by the Lost Creek Fault, discussed below. Strata within the GDB generally exhibit gentle dips of one to three degrees to the west and southwest, increasing to as much as 20 degrees in some locations along the basin margin. Gentle folding during late Eocene accompanied late-stage regional thrusting; therefore, broad anticlinal and synclinal folds are present within the Battle Spring Formation. Similar to the shallow normal faulting, the fold axes generally are oriented east-west.

6.2 Project Geology

Uranium deposits in the GDB are found principally in the Battle Spring Formation, which hosts the Property resources. Lithology within the Lost Creek deposit consists of approximately 60 percent to 80 percent poorly consolidated, medium to coarse arkosic sand beds up to 50 ft. thick, and 20 percent to 40 percent interbedded mudstone, siltstone, claystone and fine sandstone, each generally less than 25 ft. thick. This lithological assemblage remains consistent throughout the entire vertical section of interest in the Battle Spring Formation. Figure 7 illustrates a Type Log for the Lost Creek Project and is representative of the entire Property.

Outcrop within the Property is exclusively the Battle Spring Formation. Due to the friable nature of the formation, this occurs largely as sub-crop beneath the soil. The alluvial fan origin of the formation yields a complex stratigraphic regime subdivided throughout the Property into several thick horizons dominated by sands, with intervening named mudstones (Figure 7).

6.3 Stratigraphy

Provided below is a brief description of each named stratigraphic unit or “horizon” for the Property. Descriptions of lithology and thickness should be considered generalizations, and depths below ground surface (bgs) at which a given horizon can be encountered may vary considerably due to regional stratigraphic dip and displacement due to normal faulting. Figures 8a and 8b present cross-sectional views of this stratigraphic sequence within the MMT and EMT. The locations of these cross sections are shown on Figure 9.

DE Horizon -- The DE Horizon is locally absent in the northern and southern portions of the Property, having been removed by erosion. This horizon consists of a sequence of sands and discontinuous clay/shale units. In portions of the Lost Creek Project, the lower shale boundary is absent such that the sands of the DE Horizon coalesce vertically with sands of the underlying FG Horizon. In the Lost Creek Project, the top of the unit ranges from 80 to 200 ft. bgs and is approximately 80 ft. thick where the entire section is present.

EF Shale -- Underlying the DE is the EF Shale interval. It can be characterized as mudstone or claystone, interbedded commonly with silt and sand. This unit is not always present due to the coalescing nature of the DE and FG sands.

FG Horizon -- In the Lost Creek Project, the top of the FG Horizon occurs at depths of approximately 150 to 300 ft. bgs. The total thickness of the FG Horizon is approximately 160 ft. The FG is generally composed of fine to coarse-grained arkosic sands with thin discontinuous intervals of fine sand, mudstone and siltstone. Stratigraphically, the FG Horizon is subdivided into the Upper FG (UFG), Middle FG (MFG) and the Lower FG (LFG). The FG contains significant measurable uranium mineralization in both the Lost Creek and LC East Projects.

Lost Creek Shale (LCS) -- Underlying the FG Sands is the LCS. The LCS is continuous across the Property, ranging from 5 to 45 ft. in thickness. Typically, this unit has a thickness of 10 to 25 ft. Its lithology is dominated by silty mudstone and dense claystone. It commonly includes siltstone and may locally be sandy or contain thin lenticular sands.

HJ Horizon -- The HJ Horizon is the primary target for uranium production at the Lost Creek Project and is the dominant host for uranium in the MMT and EMT. The HJ Horizon has been subdivided into four sub-units: Upper HJ (UHJ), Middle HJ1 (MHJ1), Middle HJ2 (MHJ2) and the Lower HJ (LHJ). These sub-units are generally composed of course- grained arkosic sands, locally with thin discontinuous intervals of fine sand, siltstone and mudstone. Likewise, the four sub-units are separated by locally continuous mudstone and siltstone. The bulk of the uranium mineralization is present in the two MHJ sub-units. The total thickness of the HJ Horizon ranges from 120 to 140 ft., averaging approximately 130 ft. The top of the HJ Horizon ranges from approximately 300 to 450 ft. bgs within the MMT at the Lost Creek Project. The horizon shallows considerably to the north within the EMT in the LC East Project.

Sage Brush Shale (SBS) -- Beneath the HJ Horizon is the SBS. Within the Lost Creek Project, the top of this shale ranges from 450 to 550 ft. bgs. The SBS is laterally extensive and ranges from 5 to 75 ft. in thickness. Lithology of the SBS is typically that of claystone and mudstone with interbedded silts and thin sands.

KM Horizon -- The KM Horizon is present beneath the SBS. The KM Horizon is generally coarse sandstone with discontinuous fine sandstone and mudstone intervals. The KM has also been further subdivided into the Upper KM (UKM) and the Lower KM (LKM). The KM Horizon is host to a significant portion of mineralization within the Lost Creek Project and therefore is a potential production aquifer. It also hosts resources in the LC East Project within the EMT. The top of the KM Horizon is usually between 450 and 600 ft. bgs within the Lost Creek Project, but only approximately 300 feet bgs in the northern portions of the LC East Project.

L, M, and N Horizons -- These horizons are collectively referred to by URE as the “Deep Horizons” and occur immediately below the KM Horizon within a 300 to 350 ft. interval. They consist of lithologies identical to that of the HJ and KM Horizons. They remain targets of exploration. Individually, each is approximately 100 ft. thick and is composed of multiple, stacked, coarse sands, which are commonly separated by relatively thin, discontinuous shaley zones.

East-west oriented normal faulting is common within the central portions of the GDB. These appear to be the product of relatively late-stage structural adjustments. The last displacement of these faults is post-mineralization and has offset the uranium deposits. The MMT within the Lost Creek Project is bisected by a normal fault system, referred to as the Lost Creek Fault, consisting of two faults, roughly parallel, trending east-northeast to west-southwest. The easternmost main fault is downthrown to the south with a maximum displacement of approximately 80 ft. A secondary fault is positioned along the western portion of the MMT and is located 800 to 1,600 feet south of the easternmost fault to which it is sub-parallel. This westernmost fault displays opposite displacement, downthrown to the north, with a maximum displacement of approximately 50 ft. Pump-testing and monitoring on both sides of both faults have demonstrated that the fault planes are effectively sealed within the HJ Horizon and thus represent hydrologic barriers or boundary conditions. The Lost Creek Fault is taken into consideration by wellfield planning and to date has not had a significant impact on production.

Faults have also been identified in the southern portions of LC East Project, which exhibit displacement of from 40 ft. to 80 ft. and may be systemically related to the Lost Creek Fault. The resulting opposing displacements on many of these faults produce horst and graben features that are local to portions of the Property. The presence of these faults will be a matter of consideration for production planning at LC East but, like the Lost Creek Fault, they are not considered to be significant obstacles. Additional significant faults have been identified within the Property but are sufficiently distant as to have minimal effect on planned production.

6.4 Mineralization of the Lost Creek Property

Mineralization at the Lost Creek Project and Adjoining Projects occurs as roll front type uranium deposits.

Mineralization occurs in sand horizons within the Eocene-age Battle Spring Formation. The most significant mineral resources in the Property occur within two major stratigraphic horizons, the HJ and the KM Horizons. The HJ Horizon contains most of the currently defined mineral resources and hosts the current production zones. As discussed earlier, the HJ Horizon is subdivided into four stratigraphic sub-horizons that are also used for resource reporting. The highest abundance of uranium mineralization occurs in the MHJ1 and MHJ2 sub-horizons. Each sub-horizon, in turn, may consist of multiple mineralized roll fronts. The HJ Horizon, as a whole, contains up to 11 individual roll fronts within a stratigraphic interval of approximately 130 ft.

The KM Horizon underlies the HJ Horizon and contains additional significant mineralization that will be targeted for future production later in the Lost Creek mine plan. Mine approvals for the KM Horizon have and will be addressed by amendments to the mine license and permits. To date, a total of nine individual roll fronts have been identified in the KM Horizon within a stratigraphic interval of approximately 100 ft.

Mineral resources that are currently targeted for mining in the Property occur within two major trends. In the Lost Creek Project, resources are focused in the east-west oriented MMT that is approximately three miles long and 500 to 2,000 ft. wide (Figure 9). Mineralization targeted for mining has also been identified within the underlying KM Horizon and the overlying FG Horizon.

A second mineralized trend of significance, the EMT, was identified by historical drilling within the LC East Project (Figure 9). Although geologically similar, it appears to be a separate and independent trend from the MMT and is believed to be the product of a different mineralization system. The EMT assumes a generalized northeast-southwest orientation extending for approximately six and one-half miles with a width of 500 to 1,500 ft. As in the MMT, the known mineralization occurs mainly in the HJ and KM Horizons. Significant occurrences have also been identified in the FG Horizon.

Geological evaluations of historical and URE drill data have resulted in the recognition of numerous additional uranium occurrences within the Property. Historical exploration drilling by previous operators was conducted within all project areas. In addition, URE has conducted exploration drilling in the LC North, LC South, and EN Projects plus limited exploration drilling in LC East.

Mineralization has also been recognized throughout the Property in horizons deeper than the KM, in what are referred to as the Deep Horizons (L, M and N). Recent and historical drill hole data confirm multiple roll fronts with locally identified Inferred resources in these horizons. URE anticipates conducting future exploration drilling to further define the resource potential of these stratigraphic horizons.

Mineralogy of the zones of interest has been studied in thin section and by x-ray diffraction analysis. Mineralogical analyses were conducted in 1979 by Russell Honea (Honea, 1979a and b), and in 2007 by Hazen Research, Inc. (Hazen Research) (Hazen, 2007) on samples derived from core. Results indicate that the uranium occurs primarily as the mineral coffinite (uranium silicate) in the form of micron- to submicron-size inclusions disseminated in and on interstitial clay, possibly absorbed by cation exchange; also intimately interspersed through some of the pyrite and as partial coatings on quartz and biotite. Minor amounts of uraninite (uranium oxide) and brannerite (uranium-titanium oxide) have also been identified. Clay rich fractions are predominantly smectite (montmorillonite), with minor kaolinite.

The Hazen Research analysis concluded that uranium should be recoverable by an ISR operation because of the unconsolidated nature of the sandstone and expected diffusion of the lixiviant through the smectite clays. Recoverability has been confirmed by leach testing and by production results in the first nine years of production.

6.5 DEPOSIT TYPE

Uranium mineralization identified throughout the Property occurs as roll front type deposits, typical in most respects of those observed in other Tertiary Basins in Wyoming. Figure 10 schematically illustrates the geometry and mineralogical model of a typical roll front uranium deposit. The formation of roll front deposits is largely a groundwater process that occurs under favorable geochemical conditions. The most favorable host rocks for roll fronts are permeable sandstones within large aquifer systems. Interbedded mudstone, claystone and siltstone are often present and aid in the formation process by focusing groundwater flow.

The geometry of mineralization is dominated by the classic roll front “C” shape or crescent configuration at the alteration interface. The highest-grade portion of the front occurs in a zone termed the “Nose” within reduced ground just ahead of the alteration front. Ahead of the Nose, at the leading edge of the solution front, uranium quantity gradually diminishes to barren within the “Seepage” zone. Trailing behind the “Nose”, in oxidized (altered) ground, are weak remnants of mineralization referred to as “Tails” which have resisted re-mobilization to the Nose due to association with shale or other lithology of lower permeability. Tails are generally not amenable to in situ recovery because the uranium is typically within strongly reduced or impermeable strata, therefore making it difficult to leach.

The source of the uranium within the Property is speculative. Boberg (2010) suggests that the source within this portion of the Wyoming Uranium Province is a combination of leaching of uraniferous Oligocene volcaniclastics that once covered the basins and the weathering and leaching of uraniferous Archean granite of the Granite Mountains (north of the GDB) which also represent the provenance of the arkosic sands comprising the Battle Spring Formation.

Oxygenated surface water passing through the overlying thick sequences of volcaniclastic material may have leached metals, including uranium. These metal-enriched fluids may have also leached additional uranium from the arkosic sands that compose the aquifers. The enriched, oxidizing fluids subsequently entered the regional groundwater systems within the basin and migrated down-dip through the aquifers as large oxidizing geochemical cells referred to as solution fronts.

Uranium precipitated in the form of roll front deposits at the leading edge of the geochemical cells where the transporting water encountered reducing geochemical environments within the host sands. Uranium quantity was enhanced where groundwater flux was focused horizontally by paleochannels or vertically by aquitards. Continuity of these conditions produced a significant accumulation of uranium at the reduction-oxidation (redox front) interface. In addition, the continued supply of oxygen to the interface leads to degradation of the reduced strata and resulted in migration down-gradient of the redox interface, thus remobilizing the associated uranium with it. In this manner the uranium deposit slowly migrated down-dip over geologic time.

The reducing environment in the host sand is generally induced by carbonaceous material within the formation or leaked reductant gases originating from deep hydrocarbon sources. Pyrite is inherently associated with both and is a significant indicator of a reducing environment. Reduced sands are typically some shade of gray and represent the regional framework prior to mineralization. The reducing environment is subsequently altered by the passage of the oxidizing solution front. Alteration typically involves oxidation of pyrite and other iron bearing minerals to hematite or limonite/goethite and destruction of carbonaceous material. As a result, altered (oxidized) sands are typically reddish or yellowish in color. Mineralized zones within a roll front vary considerably in size and shape, but are generally long, narrow, and sinuous in map view. The total length of a mineralization trend may extend for several miles. Commonly, a deposit or mineralized trend will consist of a composite of multiple, vertically stacked roll fronts.

Typical width of an individual roll front is generally 25 to 100 ft. However, in the case of multiple stacked fronts, the composite width may be several hundred feet across. Typical thickness of an individual roll front is roughly 5 to 25 ft., and the composite thickness of multiple, vertically stacked fronts may occupy as much as 200 ft.

As described above, the MMT, EMT and extension trends throughout the Property are the product of large regional geochemical alteration systems which resulted in a complex composite of multiple, stacked roll fronts at the reduction-oxidation interface. The roll front model and associated mineralized trends are the basis upon which the exploration and development programs are planned.

7.0 EXPLORATION

No non-drilling exploration surveys have been conducted by URE on the Property. However, an extensive listing of historical and URE exploration, delineation and development drilling is shown in Table 4 and depicted on Figure 9. Existing uranium resources within the property boundaries were estimated using data from this table, including the use of historical down-hole electric logs, lithology logs, drill hole location maps, summaries of mineralized drill hole intercepts and survey coordinates for drill holes. Procedures used in the verification and utilization of these historical data, as well as results of this evaluation, are described in Chapter 9.0 Data Verification and Chapter 11.0 Mineral Resource Estimate.

7.1 Drilling

7.1.1 Historic Drilling

Significant uranium exploration within the general area that comprises the Property began in the mid-1960s. In the late 1960s, several companies conducted early regional drilling operations, including Climax, Wolf Land and Exploration (Inexco), Humble Oil and Conoco Minerals. Climax held claims west of Conoco’s “Project A” but conducted only cursory exploration on them during the early 1970s. By the mid-1970s, exploration drilling was conducted primarily by Texasgulf and Conoco Minerals.

PNC Exploration carried out limited in-fill exploration drilling and geological evaluations in the area of the MMT until 1996, before selling the property in 2000. No other exploration activities were conducted until acquisition of the Lost Creek Project by URE in 2005.

URE is in possession of all known historical drilling data, maps, and reports from Conoco, Texasgulf and PNC Exploration activities. This includes: