High-Grade Uranium Intercepts at Groundhog

*A Private Investor is a recipient of the information who meets all of the conditions set out below, the recipient:

Obtains access to the information in a personal capacity;
Is not required to be regulated or supervised by a body concerned with the regulation or supervision of investment or financial services;
Is not currently registered or qualified as a professional securities trader or investment adviser with any national or state exchange, regulatory authority, professional association or recognised professional body;
Does not currently act in any capacity as an investment adviser, whether or not they have at some time been qualified to do so;
Uses the information solely in relation to the management of their personal funds and not as a trader to the public or for the investment of corporate funds;
Does not distribute, republish or otherwise provide any information or derived works to any third party in any manner or use or process information or derived works for any commercial purposes.

Please note, this site uses cookies. Some of the cookies are essential for parts of the site to operate and have already been set. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but if you do, parts of the site may not work. To find out more about the cookies used on Investegate and how you can manage them, see our Privacy and Cookie Policy

To continue using Investegate, please confirm that you are a private investor as well as agreeing to our Privacy and Cookie Policy & Terms.

Prospect	Hole ID	Interval (m) *	eU₃O₈ ppm	eU₃O₈ %	GT (m x ppm)	Depth (m)
Section 23	23WBRA001	0.3	280	0.028	84	133
Section 23	23WBRA002	0.5	175	0.017	88	101.35
Section 23	23WBRA003	0.6	100	0.010	60	99.5
Section 23	23WBRA004	0.6	324	0.032	194	100.0
Section 23	23WBRA005	0.5	714	0.071	357	101.2
Section 23	23WBRA006	0.3	427	0.043	128	121.9
Section 23	23WBRA007	0.6	110	0.011	66	121.3
Section 23	And	0.3	485	0.049	146	122.6
Section 23	23WBRA008	Multiple Intercepts < 100ppm
Section 23	23WBRA009	0.9	578	0.059	520	124.3
Rim Rock	23WBRA010	Hole hit historic workings at Rim Rock
Rim Rock	23WBRA011	0.5	3186	0.319	1593	76.2
Rim Rock	23WBRA012	0.6	1708	0.172	1025	63.1
Rim Rock	23WBRA013	0.3	1075	0.108	323	61.45
Rim Rock	23WBRA014	0.6	487	0.049	292	56.9
Rim Rock	And	0.6	450	0.045	270	57.0
Rim Rock	23WBRA015	1.2	268	0.027	322	58.55
Rim Rock	23WBRA016	0.8	1954	0.2	1563	67.54
Groundhog	23WBRA017	0.8	687	0.07	550	89.18
Groundhog	23WBRA018	0.3	786	0.08	236	88.67
Groundhog	23WBRA019	0.3	3362	0.34	1009	90.22
Groundhog	23WBRA020	0.9	6885	0.69	6197	82.66
Groundhog	23WBRA021	0.6	308	0.03	185	85.53
Groundhog	23WBRA022	0.5	1553	0.16	777	85.22
Groundhog	23WBRA023	0.3	914	0.09	274	91.99

Prospect	Hole ID	Easting	Northing	Elevation (m)	Azimuth	Dip	Hole Depth (m)
Section 23	23WBRA001	690892	4222825	2043	360	-90	148
Section 23	23WBRA002	690924	4222795	2044	360	-90	142
Section 23	23WBRA003	690862	4222796	2043	360	-90	142
Section 23	23WBRA004	690893	4222765	2046	360	-90	145
Section 23	23WBRA005	690883	4222717	2048	360	-90	142
Section 23	23WBRA006	690759	4222867	2039	360	-90	142
Section 23	23WBRA007	690728	4222837	2042	360	-90	142
Section 23	23WBRA008	690751	4222815	2042	360	-90	142
Section 23	23WBRA009	690826	4222762	2043	360	-90	142
Rim Rock	23WBRA010	687970	4225686	2022	360	-90	57
Rim Rock	23WBRA011	688010	4225566	2038	360	-90	99
Rim Rock	23WBRA012	687957	4225545	2030	360	-90	94
Rim Rock	23WBRA013	687976	4225613	2030	360	-90	99
Rim Rock	23WBRA014	688000	4225656	2026	360	-90	99
Rim Rock	23WBRA015	687939	4225656	2022	360	-90	99
Rim Rock	23WBRA016	687937	4225413	2040	360	-90	148
Groundhog	23WBRA017	688089	4224022	2098	360	-90	104
Groundhog	23WBRA018	688051	4224007	2100	360	-90	104
Groundhog	23WBRA019	688047	4224017	2102	360	-90	105
Groundhog	23WBRA020	688093	4223969	2092	360	-90	105
Groundhog	23WBRA021	688123	4223999	2092	360	-90	99
Groundhog	23WBRA022	688218	4224064	2089	360	-90	105
Groundhog	23WBRA023	688435	4224036	2091	360	-90	136

Thor Energy PLC
Nicole Galloway Warland, Managing Director Ray Ridge, CFO & Company Secretary	Tel: +61 (8) 7324 1935 Tel: +61 (8) 7324 1935
WH Ireland Limited (Nominated Adviser and Joint Broker)	Tel: +44 (0) 207 220 1666
Antonio Bossi / Darshan Patel / Isaac Hooper
SI Capital Limited (Joint Broker)	Tel: +44 (0) 1483 413 500
Nick Emerson
Yellow Jersey (Financial PR)	thor@yellowjerseypr.com
Sarah Hollins / Shivantha Thambirajah / Bessie Elliot	Tel: +44 (0) 20 3004 9512

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	· Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. · The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	Mineral rights are held by the U.S. Government, who transfers those rights to holders of valid mining claims located on open ground through the General Mining Law of 1872, as amended by other Federal, State and County regulations. Claim holders, with a few exceptions that don't apply to this project, must make annual payments to the government to maintain their rights. Holder of valid claims can transfer their rights to others. Surface ownership is also by the U.S. and managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Thor's property position consists of 199 unpatented mining claims (approx. 1,663Ha), leased from underlying owners. If Thor meets its' contractual obligations and keeps the claims in good standing with the US, then the security of tenure should be good. Depending on the location of the drill holes, the license to operate in the area is a function of permitting at differing levels of government (Local, State and Federal). The holes were in two contiguous Counties (San Miguel and Montrose). In addition to the normally required State and Federal permitting, San Miguel County imposes its' own set of regulations. Montrose County, on the other hand, is content to defer to the State and Federal governments. To date, Thor has met those permitting requirements.
Exploration done by other parties	· Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	There are no systems of consistent data archiving for mineral exploration or exploitation done under the Mining Law on Federal or on other lands within the State of Colorado. Furthermore, with some exceptions, there was not, nor is not, a requirement that explorers provide copies of their data to governmental agencies. That data was retained by private entities. It now exists in a piecemeal manner, with the data having been discarded, abandoned or available by vendors that managed to acquire and store some of it over the years. Thor's properties have bountiful surface evidence of historic drill exploration, and in some cases, mining exploitation, which appears to be mostly from the 1950's through the early 1970's. There are several mines located in the western portion of the property. Unpublished reports list these mines as producing, in aggregate, over 700,000 lbs (318,181 kg) of uranium. To the author's knowledge, very little of the historic drilling or mining data is available to Thor, and certainly not enough to help guide an exploration program. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some of the work on the property was done by Union Carbide (now defunct), the largest company that worked in the Uravan Mineral Belt.
Geology	· Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	According to the USGS Bulletin 1693 (Cox, D.P., and Singer, D. A., eds., 1986), the Deposit Model for the project is Sandstone Uranium - Tabular subtype.
Drill hole Information	· A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. · If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	Tables, plans and sections summarising significant drill results are included in the report
Data aggregation methods	· In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. · Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. · assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent · The values should be clearly stated.	Gamma data was aggregated to determine equivalent uranium oxide grades (% eU3O8), thicknesses and base of mineralization. Uranium grades and thicknesses were based on the "Uravan Method", originally devised by the AEC, which is a manual graphic method based on the shape of the gamma curve on an e-log. It consists of, for a single peak, determining the cps for the peak, and using one-half that value to determine the upper mineralization boundary. Successive cps picks on 0.5 ft (15.2cm) intervals are taken until the last interval drops below the one-half peak value. This is the lower mineralization boundary. These boundary values, plus the intervening 0.5 ft (15.2cm) interval values, are used, in conjunction with parameters such as hole diameter, whether or not the hole is dry or water-filled, if the hole is probed in an open or cased or through drill steel, gamma detector dead time and tool specific K factors, to arrive at a grade in %eU3O8, thickness and the base of mineralization, of each peak. Slight modifications to the method are made if more than one peak occurs close together.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	· These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. · If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. · If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known').	All results are assumed to be true width but is not definitively known at this stage.
Diagrams	· Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	Appropriate maps and sections are included in the report.
Balanced reporting	· Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	All results have been reported
Other substantive exploration data	· Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	No meaningful or material information has been omitted from this release.
Further work	· The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step- out drilling). · Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	The drill results suggest that several areas of potentially economic mineralization could be investigated in greater detail. A couple of these areas have had historic mining in the vicinity. Maps of where they mined are scarce, so any delineation work needs to be cognisant of that mining

§ Downhole gamma logging returns up to 6,885ppm (0.69%) eU₃O₈ uranium along strike of the historic mine working at Groundhog Mine (Figure 1 and Table A).

§ Significant uranium downhole gamma results above 2000ppm (0.2%) eU₃O₈ include:

§ The completed RC program comprised 23 shallow drillholes totalling 2,737m (Figure 1-8, Table B), with geological logging visually identifying favourably reduced sands in all drillholes.

§ Uranium and Vanadium assay results pending.

§ Further geological and mineralisation interpretations to follow.

§ Anomalous uranium and vanadium samples to be sent to Australian Laboratory Services ("ALS") Canada (results expected in Q1 2024), with review and assessment of the results expected shortly thereafter.

§ Detailed mineralisation and geological interpretations combining the 2022 results.

§ 2024 resource - infill and extension - drilling at Rim Rock and Groundhog mine areas.

Companies

UK 100

Latest directors dealings