The Kiggavik Project: Challenges in designing uranium development in Nunavut

2. The Kiggavik Project: Challenges in designing uranium development in Nunavut Frederic Guerin General Manager, Mine Projects AREVA Resources Canada Inc. Iqaluit April 19, 2012

3. AREVA Mines Uranium and Gold • Exploration, Project Development, Mining, Milling and Decommissioning • Diversification Strategy • Operating mines in Canada, Niger and Kazakhstan, • Second largest uranium mining producer in the world with 9,142 tU in 2011 URANIUM • La Mancha (LMA-TSX) • 3 operating mines (Ivory Coast, Soudan, Australia) GOLD NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 3

4. AREVA Resources Canada Athabasca Basin AREVA operations • McClean Lake • Cluff Lake - decommissioned AREVA’s minority interests • McArthur River (30%) / Key Lake • Cigar Lake (37%) AREVA’s projects • Midwest, McClean & Caribou • Shea Creek • Exploration program Nunavut AREVA’s projects • Kiggavik Project (JV AREVA, JCU, Daewoo) • Strong exploration program Saskatchewan NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 4

5. Kiggavik Project Main, Centre and East deposits • Resource • 51,000 tU (133 Mlbs) • @0.54% U3O8 • 4 open pits • 1 underground mine • 1 mill & associated facilities • Project Proposal 2008 • Draft EIS Dec. 2011 • Construction 2017 Andrew Lake and End Grid deposits NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 5

6. Kiggavik Main Zone Geology Permafrost 220m 10-10 m/s < K < 10-7 m/s NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 6

7. Kiggavik Project - Key Numbers 600 employees Capex $2.1 billion Opex $240M/yr 3,000 loads/year 25 barges/year Mining rate 80,000 t /day Mill feed 3,000 t ore/day 6 flights/week Production 3,500 tU/year NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 7

8. Saskatchewan DepositsKey Technical Challenges Radiation protection due to high grade uranium ores (locally > 20% U3O8) Control of groundwater (potential for 1,500 m3/hr) Ground support in areas of weak rock These challenges often occur concurrently in the immediate area of massive mineralizatiom requiring innovative ground support and mining methods Ground freezing (mass freezing, frozen walls) Non-entry mining methods (surface access borehole mining, jet boring system, raisebore mining, roadheader, remote control) NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 8

9. Ground freezing examples Caribou Mine Project 1.5 km McClean North Project NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 9

10. Jet Boring Systems From surface Underground Cigar Lake Project Orebody Orebody 1.5 km Surface access borehole mining with jet boring NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 10

11. Kiggavik Project Saskatchewan challenges are less pronounced Medium uranium ore grade conditions (vs high grade in SK) allowing the use of traditional mining methods combined with robust radiation protection measures Low permeability bedrock and permafrost conditions reducing groundwater control requirements Reasonable geotechnical conditions allowing traditional ground support and mining methods Kiggavik specific challenges Lack of infrastructure (power, road access) Lack of surface water requiring optimization of the mill process to reduce water consumption and release of treated effluent Water and tailings management requirements (in-pit disposal) interacting with mine planning NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 11

12. Tailings Management - Design Principles To avoid interaction between tailings and natural water bodies To maximize the use of mine workings for long-term management of tailings To ensure the long-term protection of Kiggavik’s terrestrial, aquatic and human environment Potential for future deposits to be considered Stability, integrity and geochemical performance should not rely on maintaining present temperatures and permafrost conditions NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 12

13. Mine planning Water reservoir Pits converted into Tailings Management Facilities 1.5 km • Mine plan to account for water and tailings management requirements NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 13

14. Example - Centre Zone • Optimum pit is determined then expanded for tailings management purposes Designed Pit Whittle Shell 6.8 Mbcm Depth 110m 2.2 Mbcm Ore 824 kt Grade 0.476 %U Metal 3,925 tU NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 14

15. Proposed Kiggavik Site 1.5 km NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 15

16. Decommissioning – Centre Zone NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 16

17. Decommissioning – Main Zone NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 17

18. Permafrost vs Climate Warming Complete melting of permafrost is conservatively assumed to assess long term performance NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 18

19. KiggavikA Long-term Perspective A Large Potential Solid baseline (approximately 133 Mlbs @ 0.54% U3O8) Area is under-explored - numerous targets “Clean ore” easy to process Challenges Capital and operating expenditures Logistics and operating conditions Public perception Complex regulatory regime Water management, tailings management & mine planning NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 19

20. Conditions for continued success • Market conditions • Regulatory approvals and social licence • To demonstrate that the Kiggavik Project can be operated in an environmentally, socially and economically sustainable manner • Continued public acceptance • AREVA’s track record • Uranium in general NMS, Iqaluit – April 19, 2012 20

21. THANK YOU! arevaresources.ca Check us out on and • Kiggavik Project Blog • www.kiggavik.ca