AMERICA’S NEXT URANIUM DEVELOPER Investor Presentation – June 2015 TSX: AZZ / FRA: P8AA / OTCMKTS: PWURF
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
AMERICA’S NEXT URANIUM DEVELOPER Investor Presentation – June 2015
TSX: AZZ / FRA: P8AA / OTCMKTS: PWURF
2
DISCLAIMER / SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT
Certain statements in this presentation are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements consist of statements that are not purely historical, including any statements regarding beliefs, plans, expectations or intentions regarding the future. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “plans”, “expects”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, or “believes” or variations (including negative and grammatical variations) of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “should”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved. Such forward-looking statements may include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to the future financial or operating performance of the Company and its mineral projects, the estimation of mineral resources, the timing and amount of estimated future production and capital, operating and exploration expenditures. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause Azarga Uranium Corp.’s (“Azarga” or the "Company”) actual results, performance or achievements, or industry results, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. No assurance can be given that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking statements will occur or, if they do occur, what benefits the Company will obtain from them. These forward-looking statements reflect management's current views and are based on certain expectations, estimates and assumptions which may prove to be incorrect. A number of risks and uncertainties could cause its actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward looking statements, including, but not limited to: global economic conditions; uranium price fluctuations; public acceptance of nuclear energy and competition from other energy sources; the Company will require significant amounts of additional capital in the future; competition for properties and experienced employees; uranium industry competition and international trade restrictions; possible loss of interests in exploration and development properties; mining and mineral exploration is inherently dangerous and subject to factors beyond the Company’s control; the Company’s mineral resources are estimates; the nature of exploration and development projects; environmental regulatory requirements and risks; currency fluctuations; government regulation and policy risks; public involvement in the permitting process; Native American involvement in the permitting process; political risk; the Company has no history of mining operations; property title rights; dependence on key personnel and qualified and experienced employees; delineation of mineral reserves and additional mineral resources; insurance coverage; dilution from further equity financing and outstanding stock options and warrants; the market price of the Company’s shares; the Company has never paid dividends and may not do so in the foreseeable future; litigation and other legal proceedings; technical innovation and obsolescence; disclosure and internal controls; conflicts of interest; exposure to emerging markets and the resolution of contentions pertaining to the Dewey Burdock United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission license. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this presentation and, except as required by applicable securities laws, the Company assumes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, or to update the reasons why actual results differed from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Additional information about these and other assumptions, risks and uncertainties are set out in the "Risks and Uncertainties" section in the Company's MD&A filed with Canadian security regulators. Certain technical data in this presentation was taken from the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report Preliminary Economic Assessment Dewey-Burdock Uranium ISR Project, South Dakota, USA” dated 29 January 2015, prepared by Douglass H. Graves of TREC Inc. and Steve E. Cutler of Roughstock Mining Services (the “Technical Report and PEA”) and is subject to the assumptions, qualifications and procedures described therein. The Technical Report and PEA 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 categorize them as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that the results of the Technical Report and PEA will be realized. Mineral Resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. Mr. John Mays, P.E. is the Qualified Person who supervised the preparation of the exploration technical data in this presentation. This presentation shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy securities.
3
ARE EXPERIENCED MINE DEVELOPERS BELIEVE IN URANIUM UPSIDE OWN THE HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR URANIUM PROJECT, DEWEY BURDOCK, AMONG PEER GROUP1 ARE PROGRESSING A PIPELINE OF PROJECTS ARE TSX MAIN BOARD LISTED AND RESOURCED TO SUCCEED
WE…
Notes: 1. Various company announcements and research notes; refer to slide 12 for additional details.
4
MINE DEVELOPERS
Alexander Molyneux Chairman and CEO Former CEO SouthGobi Resources (Ivanhoe Group) with 10-years+ prior experience as resources banker
Richard Clement Deputy Chairman Professional Geologist with 35-years+ experience in uranium and former CEO of Azarga Uranium
John Mays Chief Operating Officer 20-years+ experience in design, construction and operation of ISR uranium mines and formerly Chief Engineer, UrAsia Energy
Blake Steele Chief Financial Officer Former SouthGobi Resources Finance Director and previously with Deloitte in Audit and Financial Advisory practices
Curtis Church Vice President and Director 18-years mining and exploration experience, 8-years based in Central Asia
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
5
URANIUM UPSIDE Analysts’ forecast a recovery in Uranium price
US$/lb
Source: TradeTech for historical spot. Analysts’ forecast is based on average of 16 analyst forecasts as shown in latest available reports (analysts include: BAML; BMO; Cantor; CIBC; CIMB; Comark; CS; Dundee; JPM; Raymond James; RBC; RFC Ambrian; Salman; Scotiabank; TD; and UBS).
39
48
57
67 Fukushima incident
Uranium at nine-year low
Analysts’ forecast
6
§ 2017 will see nuclear power generation pass its pre-Fukushima high § 65 reactors under construction – 59% of them in Asia § Demand growth of 4-5% per year to 2020
URANIUM UPSIDE Strong demand growth is now expected at a time when supply has been cut back
NUCLEAR MAKES SENSE § Unlike solar or wind, nuclear supplies reliable base load power § Unlike coal, oil or natural gas, nuclear is carbon free
URANIUM DEMAND IS GROWING1
SUPPLY HAS BEEN CUT BACK § Supply reduced 10% in 20142
§ Mined supply cut back in price downturn – Kaylekera and Honeymoon shutdown, Areva and Cameco on growth moratoria3
§ Secondary supply from historical deal between Russia and America to down blend Russian highly enriched uranium eliminated
Notes: 1. World Nuclear Association. 2. Raymond James research note of 20 May 2015. 3. Company announcements.
0 20 40 60 80
100
Spot Long-term contract
Supply incentive
price
7
URANIUM UPSIDE A 40% increase in mined supply is needed by 2020 and prices need to move to achieve that
HIGHER PRICES ARE NEEDED
FUEL CYCLE IS LONG SO MARKETS REACT EARLY
§ A JPMorgan analysis of March 2015 estimates the average price required to induce meaningful new supply is US$80-85/lb
US$/lb
36 49
80-85
Mining / milling UF6 conversion U-235 enrichment Fuel fabrication Fuel loading
12-18 months
8
DEWEY BURDOCK SOUTH DAKOTA, USA
HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT
9
HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT What is in-situ recovery (ISR) mining?
Source: United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (www.nrc.gov)
§ Produces >47% of global uranium § Injection wells add oxygen and carbon
dioxide to groundwater creating a lixiviant solution in the layer of earth containing the uranium ore
§ Uranium dissolves into the solution § Recovery wells pump the solution back
to the surface to a processing facility and then returned to injection wells after removal of uranium
§ Monitoring wells are checked regularly to ensure uranium and lixiviant is not escaping the uranium deposit
ISR VS CONVENTIONAL – GRADE AND CASH COST COMPARISON USING CAMECO AS A GUIDE
10
§ No movement of rock, no dust or tailings
§ Average global cash costs are c. 25% cheaper than non-ISR
§ Capital costs per lb of production around 65% cheaper
§ New projects in Athabasca can be high-grade but in general fail to achieve project economics of ISR
§ Only sandstone hosted deposits with the right hydrological and geological conditions are amenable to ISR
0
10
20
0
10
20
30
McArthur River &
Key Lake
Cigar Lake Inkai
Nebraska &
Wyoming
Conventional ISR
Reserves grade (% U3O8)
Cash cost (US$/lb)
Ave = 17.3%
Ave = 0.1%
Ave = US$23/lb Ave = US$21/lb
Grades of Athabasca assets average 200x more than ISR… BUT ISR has 10% lower cash cost!
Notes: Data sourced from Dundee’s Cameco research note of 29 October 2014. Cash cost numbers are 2016’F to take into account when all comparable assets are in steady state production (i.e., after Cigar Lake has ramped up to 8m lb per annum).
HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT Why we like ISR so much?... It’s cheaper and more reliable
11
§ Edgemont uranium district in south west South Dakota, approximately 60 miles from Cameco’s Crow Butte mine in Nebraska
§ Mineral rights and surface rights covering approximately 17,800 acres and 13,880 acres, respectively
§ Well served for infrastructure
Source: Technical Report and PEA.
Dewey Burdock: Location and infrastructure
Sixteen miles from Edgemont, serviced by two lane, all weather gravel road Residential / light use power already at site will supply first two years, then 15 miles of 69kV line to be built to nearest substation to provide upgraded power for central processing plant in third year Two 3,000 foot wells to be drilled on site to pump water from the Madison Formation
HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT
10 miles
§ Measured & Indicated: 8,582,000 lbs at average grade of 0.25%
§ Inferred: 3,528,000 lbs at average grade of 0.05%
12
Source: Technical Report and PEA. Only includes ISR amendable resources. Mineral Resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. .
Dewey Burdock: Highest grade among peers
NI 43-101 COMPLIANT RESOURCE
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
DEWEY BURDOCK2
HIGHEST GRADE AMONG PEERS1
Life of mine project size (lbs)
Gra
de (U
3O8%
)
CENTENNIAL3
Notes: 1. Peers include: Uranium Energy Corp.’s Golliad and Burke Hollow, Uranerz’s Nichols Ranch, UR-Energy’s Lost Creek and Shirley Basin, and Peninsula Energy’s Lance. Peer grade data is sourced from latest NI 43-101 compliant published average grade for Measured plus Indicated Resources for all except Lance, where the grade was published according to the Australian JORC Code for Measured plus Indicated Resources. Life of Mine project size data comes from the latest published stated life of mine production from each project. 2. Source: Technical Report and PEA; includes some Inferred Resources in production. 3. Source: NI 43-101 Preliminary Assessment Powertech Uranium Corp. Centennial Uranium Project Weld County, Colorado, SRK, 2 June 2010; includes some Inferred Resources in production.
HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT
13
1.0m lbs Annual U3O8 production
11 years Mine life (incl. two year ramp-up)
9.7m lbs Total LOM production
US$27.0m or US$2.80/lb Initial capital expenditure
US$18.86/lb US$8.50/lb US$1.25/lb US$2.06/lb US$7.05/lb
Cash operating costs - Plant and well field operating - Restoration / de-commissioning - Site management / overhead - Production taxes and royalties
US$284.2m / US$220.9m Free cash flow pre-tax / post-tax
US$149.4m / US$113.8m NPV (8% disc) pre-tax / post-tax
67% / 57% IRR pre-tax / post tax Notes: 1. Source: Technical Report and PEA, which 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 categorize them as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that the results of the Technical Report and PEA will be realized. Mineral Resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
§ Initial capital of US$27m is ‘sector leading’ for a project of this size
§ Cash costs below peers’ projections from Peninsula Energy, Uranerz and Uranium Energy Corp.
§ Pre-tax IRR of 67% at US$65/lb long-term uranium price (note: post-Federal tax IRR of 57%)
§ At US$49/lb uranium, which is current long-term price as assessed by UxC, pre-tax IRR is 38%
§ Vanadium income has not been incorporated but assays and historical data indicate significant vanadium is present
Dewey Burdock: 2015 PEA demonstrating robust economics
ROBUST PROJECT ECONOMICS1
HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT
US$14.00/lb
Sustaining capital costs
14
Final Source and Byproduct
Materials License
§ Issued April 2014 § ASLB partially dismissed the contentions on NRC
license 30 April 2015 § Remaining contentions concerning historical site
preservation have a clear process to completion
UIC Class III
UIC Class V
§ Expected publication of draft permits on completion of ASLB contentions process
Water Rights Permit
Large Scale Mine Permit
§ Applications complete and recommended for approval
§ Preliminary decision in late-2013 contending that under SD Law, SD will issue permits after federal regulators approve
§ State hearings could be convened once EPA permit is published
Dewey Burdock: Status of key permits HIGHEST GRADE UNDEVELOPED ISR PROJECT
15
PIPELINE OF PROJECTS Summary of projects
USA ASIA Kyzyl Ompul (Kyrgyz)
Dewey Burdock
(SD)
Centennial (CO)
Dewey Terrace
(WY)
Aladdin (WY)
Savageton (WY)
Development projects with NI 43-101 Resources and PEAs
Exploration projects with NI 43-101 Resources
Green fields exploration
16
0.7m lbs Annual U3O8 production
9.5m lbs Total LOM production
US$71.1m or US$7.5/lb Initial capital expenditure
US$34.95/lb Cash operating costs2
US$51.8m Pre-tax NPV (8% discount)3
Notes: 1. Source: NI 43-101 Preliminary Assessment Powertech Uranium Corp. Centennial Uranium Project Weld County, Colorado, SRK, 2 June 2010, which 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 categorize them as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that the results of the Technical Report and PEA will be realized. Mineral Resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. 2.Includes US$10.63/lb of satellite/well-field development costs. 3. At US$65/lb uranium price and including a 20% contingency on costs and capital expenditure.
PIPELINE OF PROJECTS Centennial: Second project for development
NI 43-101 COMPLIANT RESOURCE § Indicated: 10,371,571 lbs at average
grade of 0.09% § Inferred: 2,325,514 lbs at average grade
of 0.09% Source: NI 43-101 Preliminary Assessment Powertech Uranium Corp. Centennial Uranium Project Weld County, Colorado, SRK, 2 June 2010
PROJECT ECONOMICS1
17
US$5.7m Cash and listed securities1
Notes: 1. As at 2 June 2015. 2. Based on 1 CAD = 0.81 USD exchange rate.
RESOURCED TO SUCCEED Financial resources and capital structure
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
Note: 1. As at 31 March 2015 (last quarterly filing). Includes cash of US$1.7m plus: Black Range Minerals (ASX: BLR) shares at US$1.7m; and Anatolia Energy Shares (ASX: AEK) at US$2.3m. It should be further noted that for accounting purposes the shareholdings in the two ASX-listed companies are considered non current assets.
59.4m Shares outstanding1
CAPITAL STRUCTURE
C$0.375/share Share price (TSX: AZZ)1
C$22.3m Market cap (CAD)
US$18.1m Market cap (USD)2
SHARE PERFORMANCE
0.55
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
C$/share
1 Nov 14 2 June 15
Source: Quotemedia.
18
RESOURCED TO SUCCEED Investment summary
§ Highest grade undeveloped ISR uranium project among peer group1 § Robust economics at low uranium prices
DEVELOPMENT ASSETS WITH COMBINED PRE-TAX NPV >US$200m
CLASS LEADING ‘FLAGSHIP’ DEWEY BURDOCK
§ Two economically assessed development projects, two exploration projects with established resources and two green fields exploration projects
PORTFOLIO OF PROJECTS AT VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT STAGES
§ Finalization of Dewey Burdock permitting § Off-take or sales agreements over future uranium production § Results of geological work on exploration assets § Dewey Burdock moving to the construction phase
VARIETY OF POTENTIAL UPCOMMING CATALYSTS
Notes: 1. Various company announcements and research notes; refer to slide 12 for additional details.
Corporate office Powertech (USA) Inc. Suite #140, 5575 DTC Parkway Greenwood Village, Colorado USA 80111 International operations Azarga Uranium Corp. Level 5-1, Suite 9, Sun’s Group Centre 200 Gloucester Road Wanchai Hong Kong SAR Email: [email protected] Web: www.azargauranium.com Twitter: @AzargaUranium
Related Documents
