Atomic Eagle Limited (‘Atomic Eagle’ or ‘the Company’) (ASX: AEU | OTCQB: AEUXF) is pleased to announce
that it has entered into a binding option agreement (the Option Agreement) to acquire 100% of the large-scale
Sitwe Uranium Project (“Sitwe” or the “Project”), located in the Luangwa Valley of north‑eastern Zambia.
The acquisition materially expands Atomic Eagle’s uranium exploration footprint in Zambia and reinforces the
Company’s position as one of the leading uranium explorers and developers in the country.
Highlights
• Expansion of uranium footprint in Zambia, with the addition of the 429 km² Sitwe Project within the
prospective Luangwa Valley Karoo Basin, a 38% increase in the Company’s tenement holdings.
• Strengthens Atomic Eagle’s position as a leading uranium explorer and developer in Zambia,
complementing the flagship Muntanga Uranium Project.
• Located on a regional geological trend with the Kayelekera uranium deposit in Malawi, supporting
prospectivity of the broader portfolio.
• Encouraging historical drilling at Sitwe North with high-grade, shallow uranium intercepts including:
o 1m at 1,620ppm from 35m (STN001).
o 1m at 1,080ppm from 42m (STN002).
o 2m at 639ppm from 37m (STN002).
o 5m at 566ppm from 7m (STN003).
o 2m at 636ppm from 32m (STN003).
o 6m at 735ppm from 61m (STN003).
o 6m at 365ppm from 11m (STN005).
o 10m at 247ppm from 29m (STN005).
• Significant exploration upside across a large, underexplored licence area with multiple untested
radiometric anomalies.
• Low‑risk entry via capital‑disciplined option structure, requiring US$200k in exploration and statutory
expenditure, with the right to acquire 100% of the licence for US$400k.
19 May 2026
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 2 of 19
Atomic Eagle CEO Phil Hoskins said:
“The addition of the Sitwe Uranium Project materially expands Atomic Eagle’s uranium footprint in Zambia and
further consolidates our position as a leading uranium explorer and developer in the country.
Zambia is a well-established and supportive mining jurisdiction, and we continue to see significant opportunity to
build scale through the acquisition and systematic exploration of high-quality uranium assets.
Sitwe complements our flagship Muntanga Project by adding a large, prospective licence position in a highly
endowed basin, with encouraging historical results and clear potential for further discovery.
Importantly, the option structure allows us to advance this opportunity in a disciplined manner while maintaining
flexibility as we continue to grow our broader uranium portfolio in Zambia.”
STRATEGIC RATIONALE
The acquisition of the Sitwe Uranium Project is aligned with Atomic Eagle’s strategy to build a district‑scale uranium
portfolio in Zambia, a well-established and mining‑friendly jurisdiction with a strong regulatory framework for
resource development.
Key strategic considerations include:
• District-Scale Footprint Expansion – Sitwe materially increases Atomic Eagle’s uranium landholding in
Zambia, expanding the Company’s presence across highly prospective Karoo Basin geology and
strengthening its position as a leading uranium explorer and developer in the country.
• Consolidation of a Leading Zambian Uranium Platform – The addition of Sitwe complements the flagship
Muntanga Uranium Project and supports the development of a multi-asset portfolio, providing a foundation for
long-term resource growth and potential future production scale.
• Jurisdictional Focus – Zambia offers a stable and established mining jurisdiction with demonstrated uranium
endowment, existing infrastructure and a supportive regulatory environment, providing a favourable backdrop
for disciplined project advancement.
• Resource Growth Optionality at Low Entry Cost – The option structure provides exposure to a large,
underexplored licence with demonstrated uranium mineralisation and exploration upside, allowing the
Company to pursue resource growth in a capital-efficient manner.
• Portfolio Diversification Within a Known Operating Environment – Sitwe is located in a separate basin to
Muntanga, diversifying geological and project risk while leveraging Atomic Eagle’s established in-country
capability and operational experience.
Any future development of Sitwe would be assessed on a standalone basis or in the context of regional
infrastructure and processing options.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 3 of 19
SITWE PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Sitwe Uranium Project is located within the Luangwa Valley Karoo Basin, part of a broader series of Karoo
basins in southern Africa that host a number of uranium occurrences and deposits. The basin extends into
neighbouring Malawi and is on geological trend with the Kayelekera uranium deposit.
Figure 1: Location of Sitwe Uranium Project
The exploration licence (Licence No. 40954‑HQ‑LEL) covers an area of approximately 429 km² and was granted
in August 2025 for an initial four‑year term, with renewal subject to statutory relinquishment requirements. The
licence is held by Tumaini Land Surveyor Limited and permits exploration for uranium and a range of other
commodities.
Historical work completed by African Energy Resources Limited (AFR) between 2010 and 2012 included airborne
radiometric surveys, mapping, trenching and limited drilling, which identified several radiometric anomalies and
zones of uranium mineralisation. The most advanced area, Sitwe North, has been drill tested with encouraging
results. All of the seven holes drilled encountered uranium mineralisation with the key intercepts shown in Table 1
below.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 4 of 19
Table 1: Significant drill hole intercepts from Sitwe North
Hole_ID From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Grade (ppm U3O8)
STN001 35 36 1 1620
STN002 37 39 2 639
STN002 42 43 1 1080
STN003 2 5 3 257
STN003 7 13 5 566
STN003 32 34 2 636
STN003 61 67 6 735
STN004 58 61 3 322
STN005 11 17 6 365
STN005 29 39 10 247
STN006 23 25 2 138
STN006 33 35 2 167
STN006 51 52 1 606
STN007 9 10 1 425
STN007 25 27 2 194
* see AFR ASX announcement dated 29th April 2011.
The drilling identified moderately dipping uranium mineralization with a true thickness of 2 ‐10m in strongly sheared
feldspathic gneisses near the Unconformity between Irumide (ca. 1100 million years old) basement rocks and the
younger Karoo sediments (Figure 2). The drilling tested five distinct horizons over a strike length of 450m. The
mineralisation is open along strike in both directions and at depth. A large area of the Karoo Basin sedimentary
rocks, a well-known host to uranium mineralisation, crops out in the southern half of the licence. These rocks also
contain untested airborne radiometric anomalies while other areas remain to be surveyed using radiometrics.
Figure 2: Sitwe licence area geology, showing location of drilling and other untested radiometric anomalies
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 5 of 19
OPTION AGREEMENT – KEY TERMS
Under the Option Agreement, Atomic Eagle, through its Zambian subsidiary, has secured the right to acquire 100%
ownership of the Sitwe Uranium Project on the following key terms:
• Option Period Expenditure – Atomic Eagle must incur a minimum of US$200,000 in exploration and licencerelated expenditure prior to 30 June 2027.
• Exercise of Option – Upon completion of the required expenditure, Atomic Eagle may exercise the option to
acquire the licence for cash consideration of US$400,000.
SITWE EXPLORATION UPSIDE
Mapping and drilling by AFR identified uranium mineralisation hosted in feldspathic bands of the basement gneissic
rocks (Irumide Metamorphics) that warrants further testing. The Sitwe licence also contains both Upper Karoo
(host of the Company’s Muntanga deposit) and Lower Karoo (host of Lotus Resources’ Kayelekera and Letlhakane
deposits) stratigraphy. Uranium mineralisation developed in the Karoo Basin sediments is generally thought to be
derived from nearby basement rocks, so this enhances the prospectivity of the Karoo sediment outcropping at
Sitwe North.
Large portions of the licence area have not been systematically surveyed and a radiometrics survey over the
licence area is warranted. There are already multiple radiometric anomalies identified that warrant follow‑up
exploration.
NEXT STEPS
Atomic Eagle is in the planning phase for its initial Sitwe work program which is expected to include mapping and
ground radiometrics to determine the most prospective areas for drill testing.
The Company recently commenced a 30,000m drill program at its Muntanga Uranium Project aimed at increasing
the Mineral Resource, with further drill results due in the coming weeks.
Approved for release by the Board of Atomic Eagle Limited.
For further information, please contact:
Phil Hoskins Nathan Ryan
Chief Executive Officer Investor and Media Relations
Atomic Eagle Limited NWR Communications
E: info@atomiceagle.com.au E: nathan.ryan@nwrcommunications.com.au
P: +61 8 6382 1805 P: +61 420 582 887
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 6 of 19
About Atomic Eagle
Atomic Eagle Limited (ASX: AEU) is an ASX-listed mineral resource company focused on exploration and
development of uranium assets in Africa, with the 100%-owned district-scale Muntanga Uranium Project in Zambia
as its core asset. The Muntanga Project area spans four mining licences and two exploration licences over a
146km strike length covering 1,136km2, adjacent to Lake Kariba. The Muntanga Uranium Project contains a
Measured and Indicated Resource of 50.4Mt @ 359ppm U3O8 for a total of 40.0 Mlbs U3O8 and an Inferred
Resource of 35.8Mt @ 238ppm U3O8 for a total of 18.8 Mlbs U3O8 to deliver a combined total of 58.8Mlb U₃O₈
at 309ppm.
Muntanga benefits from excellent infrastructure, being located near the town of Chirundu close to the Zimbabwe
border, with sealed road access to Chirundu, Siavonga and Lusaka (the capital). This network gives the project
easy access to Lusaka’s international airport and to Namibia’s port of Walvis Bay via Livingstone (about 560km
west) providing export routes to both western and eastern markets.
Competent Person’s Statement – Exploration Results
The information in this announcement relating to Exploration Results, is based on information compiled and
supervised by Mr Harry Mustard, who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Mustard is a
geologist with over 40 years of experience in mineral exploration and mining, including 8 years working on
sediment-hosted and granite-related uranium deposits in Asia and Africa. He is a consultant to Atomic Eagle. Mr
Mustard has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration
and to the exploration activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code
(2012 Edition). Mr Mustard consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on their
information in the form and context in which it appears.
Atomic Eagle confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have
not been materially modified from the original report and that the Competent Person’s consent remains in place
for subsequent releases by Atomic Eagle of the same information in the same form and context, until the consent
is withdrawn or replaced by a subsequent report or accompanying consent.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 7 of 19
APPENDIX 1: DRILL HOLE LOCATIONS
Collar ID East
(mE)
North
(mN)
RL
(mASL)
DIP
(˚)
AZI
(˚) DEPTH (m)
STN001 520817 8830604 1093 -60 305 70
STN002 520940 8830806 1084 -60 305 60
STN003 520867 8830630 1113 -65 320 70
STN004 520712 8830698 1097 -60 320 70
STN005 520610 8830556 1067 -60 320 70
STN006 520635 8830790 1079 -60 320 58
STN007 520872 8830880 1076 -60 290 60
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 8 of 19
APPENDIX 2: ALL DRILL HOLE ASSAYS
Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Grade (U3O8ppm)
STN001 0 16 16 Not assayed
STN001 16 17 1 7
STN001 17 18 1 5
STN001 18 19 1 7
STN001 19 20 1 6
STN001 20 21 1 5
STN001 21 22 1 6
STN001 22 23 1 307
STN001 23 24 1 81
STN001 24 25 1 224
STN001 25 26 1 11
STN001 26 27 1 9
STN001 27 28 1 11
STN001 28 29 1 7
STN001 29 30 1 7
STN001 30 31 1 313
STN001 31 32 1 11
STN001 32 33 1 185
STN001 33 34 1 45
STN001 34 35 1 33
STN001 35 36 1 1620
STN001 36 37 1 20
STN001 37 38 1 15
STN001 38 39 1 9
STN001 39 40 1 92
STN001 40 41 1 6
STN001 41 42 1 7
STN001 42 43 1 287
STN001 43 44 1 5
STN001 44 45 1 6
STN001 45 46 1 7
STN001 46 70 24 Not Assayed
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 9 of 19
Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Grade (U3O8ppm)
STN002 0 6 6 Not Assayed
STN002 6 7 1 7
STN002 7 8 1 6
STN002 8 9 1 5
STN002 9 10 1 58
STN002 10 11 1 8
STN002 11 12 1 9
STN002 12 13 1 8
STN002 13 14 1 8
STN002 33 34 1 14
STN002 34 35 1 8
STN002 35 36 1 6
STN002 36 37 1 8
STN002 37 38 1 449
STN002 38 39 1 828
STN002 39 40 1 9
STN002 40 41 1 5
STN002 41 42 1 6
STN002 42 43 1 1080
STN002 43 44 1 47
STN002 44 45 1 11
STN002 45 46 1 9
STN002 46 47 1 9
STN002 47 48 1 7
STN002 48 60 12 Not Assayed
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 10 of 19
Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Grade (U3O8ppm)
STN003 0 1 1 244
STN003 1 2 1 25
STN003 2 3 1 283
STN003 3 4 1 604
STN003 4 5 1 483
STN003 5 6 1 59
STN003 6 7 1 44
STN003 7 8 1 316
STN003 8 9 1 1010
STN003 9 10 1 662
STN003 10 11 1 800
STN003 11 12 1 469
STN003 12 13 1 137
STN003 13 14 1 34
STN003 14 15 1 26
STN003 15 16 1 21
STN003 16 17 1 17
STN003 17 18 1 88
STN003 18 19 1 15
STN003 19 20 1 8
STN003 20 21 1 275
STN003 21 22 1 8
STN003 22 23 1 7
STN003 23 24 1 7
STN003 24 25 1 6
STN003 25 26 1 6
STN003 26 27 1 6
STN003 27 28 1 6
STN003 28 29 1 7
STN003 29 30 1 7
STN003 30 31 1 6
STN003 31 32 1 11
STN003 32 33 1 809
STN003 33 34 1 463
STN003 34 35 1 11
STN003 35 36 1 8
STN003 36 37 1 12
STN003 37 60 23 Not Assayed
STN003 60 61 1 25
STN003 61 62 1 283
STN003 62 63 1 640
STN003 63 64 1 1660
STN003 64 65 1 588
STN003 65 66 1 573
STN003 66 67 1 666
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 11 of 19
STN003 67 68 1 65
STN003 68 70 2 Not Assayed
STN004 0 56 56 Not Assayed
STN004 56 57 1 3
STN004 57 58 1 5
STN004 58 59 1 347
STN004 59 60 1 64
STN004 60 61 1 555
STN004 61 62 1 17
STN004 62 63 1 3
STN004 63 64 1 3
STN004 64 65 1 3
STN004 65 70 5 Not Assayed
STN005 3 4 1 7
STN005 4 5 1 7
STN005 5 6 1 37
STN005 6 7 1 142
STN005 7 8 1 51
STN005 8 9 1 8
STN005 9 10 1 7
STN005 10 11 1 20
STN005 11 12 1 596
STN005 12 13 1 357
STN005 13 14 1 81
STN005 14 15 1 250
STN005 15 16 1 801
STN005 16 17 1 104
STN005 17 18 1 6
STN005 18 19 1 25
STN005 19 27 8 Not Assayed
STN005 27 28 1 3
STN005 28 29 1 3
STN005 29 30 1 210
STN005 30 31 1 416
STN005 31 32 1 333
STN005 32 33 1 328
STN005 33 34 1 72
STN005 34 35 1 387
STN005 35 36 1 165
STN005 36 37 1 195
STN005 37 38 1 179
STN005 38 39 1 288
STN005 39 40 1 145
STN005 40 41 1 6
STN005 41 42 1 3
STN005 42 43 1 3
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 12 of 19
STN005 43 70 27 Not Assayed
STN006 0 8 8 Not Assayed
STN006 8 9 1 7
STN006 9 10 1 7
STN006 10 11 1 46
STN006 11 12 1 7
STN006 12 13 1 5
STN006 13 14 1 7
STN006 14 15 1 134
STN006 15 16 1 70
STN006 16 17 1 37
STN006 17 18 1 7
STN006 18 19 1 7
STN006 19 20 1 12
STN006 20 21 1 22
STN006 21 22 1 14
STN006 22 23 1 99
STN006 23 24 1 162
STN006 24 25 1 114
STN006 25 26 1 20
STN006 26 27 1 83
STN006 27 28 1 99
STN006 28 29 1 85
STN006 29 30 1 24
STN006 30 31 1 32
STN006 31 32 1 19
STN006 32 33 1 58
STN006 33 34 1 150
STN006 34 35 1 184
STN006 35 36 1 20
STN006 36 37 1 17
STN006 37 38 1 15
STN006 38 48 10 Not Assayed
STN006 48 49 1 15
STN006 49 50 1 14
STN006 50 51 1 17
STN006 51 52 1 606
STN006 52 53 1 19
STN006 53 54 1 17
STN006 54 55 1 19
STN006 55 56 1 53
STN006 56 57 1 259
STN006 57 58 1 27
STN007 0 6 6 Not Assayed
STN007 6 7 1 14
STN007 7 8 1 21
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Page 13 of 19
STN007 8 9 1 13
STN007 9 10 1 425
STN007 10 11 1 41
STN007 11 12 1 15
STN007 12 13 1 13
STN007 13 22 9 Not Assayed
STN007 22 23 1 18
STN007 23 24 1 29
STN007 24 25 1 18
STN007 25 26 1 203
STN007 26 27 1 184
STN007 27 28 1 60
STN007 28 29 1 28
STN007 29 30 1 19
STN007 30 31 1 20
STN007 31 32 1 29
STN007 32 33 1 24
STN007 33 34 1 20
STN007 34 35 1 32
STN007 35 36 1 35
STN007 36 37 1 38
STN007 37 38 1 55
STN007 38 39 1 20
STN007 39 40 1 15
STN007 40 41 1 22
STN007 41 42 1 18
STN007 42 43 1 15
STN007 43 44 1 29
STN007 44 45 1 24
STN007 45 46 1 25
STN007 46 47 1 22
STN007 47 48 1 19
STN007 48 49 1 18
STN007 49 50 1 24
STN007 50 51 1 19
STN007 51 52 1 14
STN007 52 53 1 18
STN007 53 54 1 33
STN007 54 55 1 19
STN007 55 56 1 21
STN007 56 57 1 17
STN007 57 58 1 18
STN007 58 59 1 18
STN007 59 60 1 19
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU OTCQB: AEUXF | ABN: 20 108 958 274
Suite 4.01, 66 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005
P: +61 8 6382 1805 E: info@atomiceagle.com.au W: atomiceagle.com.au
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling
techniques
• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or
specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate
to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should
not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.
• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems
used.
• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the
Public Report.
• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be
relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1
m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge
for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required,
such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling
problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg
submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
• At Sitwe North, the reverse circulation drilling was conducted by
African Energy Resources Ltd in 2010. The primary method of grade
determination was through assaying. RC chips were collected at the
base of a cyclone in large plastic bags. The 1m samples were
screened using a handheld scintillometer and for any anomalous
samples a 1.5 – 2.5 kg split was taken from the main 1m sample
using a 3- tier riffle splitter.
• The 1m split sample was sent to an accredited lab (ALS
Johannesburg) for pulverising and assay by XRF.
Drilling
techniques
• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air
blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other
type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).
• Reverse circulation hammer (diameter of 125mm) with a face
sampling bit was the drilling technique used.
• After completion, holes were not surveyed for dip and azimuth
deviation due to the early nature of the exploration holes.
Drill sample
recovery
• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries
and results assessed.
• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure
representative nature of the samples.
• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade
and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential
loss/gain of fine/coarse material.
• Most samples were dry and recoveries considered high (>90%). Any
wet samples were dried prior to splitting and sending for assay.
• The lenses of uranium mineralisation at Sitwe North dip
approximately 40º to 50º to the southeast. Drill holes were angled
between -60º and -65º to the northwest, perpendicular to the strike of
the mineralised horizons to maximise the representative nature of the
samples. Due to the intercept angle it is assumed that intercepts are
approximately 20º longer than true width.
• No bias was identified in the drilling, sample recovery and sampling.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Logging • Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and
geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate
Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical
studies.
• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
costean, channel, etc) photography.
• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
• All drill holes were logged in detail by geologists on site during the
drill program. Data was recorded for each 1m sample interval and
included colour, hardness, lithology, texture, weathering and
alteration minerals, level of dryness i.e. dry, moist, wet.
• Logging is both qualitative and quantitative depending on the criteria
being logged. All holes were logged in their entirety.
• Representative samples were collected in chip trays for future
reference if required.
Sub-sampling
techniques
and sample
preparation
• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core
taken.
• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and
whether sampled wet or dry.
• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the
sample preparation technique.
• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
maximise representivity of samples.
• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in
situ material collected, including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material
being sampled.
• 1 metre samples were collected in a large 1000m x 600mm plastic
bag set underneath a cyclone.
• Anomalous samples were split from the 1m bags using a riffle splitter.
Samples were split down to between 1.5 and 2.5kg.
• The sample sizes collected and use of a rig mounted cyclone is
considered appropriate for the style of the mineralisation and early
stage of exploration.
• In this drill programme duplicates, blanks and standards were
inserted in the sample stream. Every 20th sample was a duplicate
collected at the riffle splitting stage. Every 50th sample was a blank
and 1 in 50 samples was a standard.
• 16 duplicate samples were sent for analysis. Assays for 65% (10) of
the duplicate sample uranium analyses were within 5%, the
remainder (6 samples) ranged from 5-45%
• Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the grain size of the
material being sampled and the nature of mineralisation.
Quality of
assay data
and
laboratory
tests
• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and
laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered
partial or total.
• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument
make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their
derivation, etc.
• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels
of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.
• All samples were analysed by ALS in Johannesburg, South Africa.
Samples were pulverised to 85% passing 75 microns. A split from the
pulverised sample was analysed by XRF.
• ALS also ran their own laboratory internal checks via repeat analyses,
standards and blanks.
• No data from geophysical tools or hand-held assay devices have
been reported.
• Internal laboratory standards and repeats are not available.
• In this drill programme duplicates, blanks and standards were
inserted in the sample stream. Every 20th sample was a duplicate
collected at the riffle splitting stage. Every 50th sample was a blank
and 1 in 50 samples was a standard.
• 16 duplicate samples were sent for analysis. Assays for 65% (10) of
the duplicate sample uranium analyses were within 5%, the
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
remainder (6 samples) ranged from 5-45%.
Verification of
sampling and
assaying
• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or
alternative company personnel.
• The use of twinned holes.
• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data
verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
• Significant intersections were reviewed internally.
• All geological logs were recorded and stored in an access database.
Validation measures for the field data are built into the access
database.
• No holes were twinned at this early stage of exploration.
• No adjustment was made to the lab assay data.
Location of
data points
• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and
down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations
used in Mineral Resource estimation.
• Specification of the grid system used.
• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
• Collar positions were located using a handheld GPS.
• The projection used is UTM WGS84 Zone36South
Data spacing
and
distribution
• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.
• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the
degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
• The drill hole spacing is along lines spaced 200m apart with holes
drilled at 150m intervals along the lines
• No sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation of
data in
relation to
geological
structure
• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of
possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering
the deposit type.
• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation
of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
• All holes were drilled at -60º perpendicular to the strike of the
mineralisation. The Sitwe North mineralisation dips approximately –
40º to 50º to the SE.
• All drill intercepts are close to perpendicular to the orientation of the
mineralisation, however the intercepts are considered to be
approximately 20% greater than true width.
Sample
security
• The measures taken to ensure sample security. • Once a drill hole was completed all selected 1m samples were
bagged and sealed for shipment. Samples were always under the
care and supervision of AFR geologists until samples were loaded
onto trucks for shipment to ALS Johannesburg by AFR personnel.
Audits or
reviews
• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • There has been no independent review of the sampling techniques
and data.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)
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.
• The Sitwe North licence (40954-HQ-LEL) was granted on 22/8/2025
for a period of 4 years and is valid until 21st August 2029, after which
it can be renewed. The license is 100% owned by Tumaini Land
Surveyors Ltd.
• The western portion of the licence comprising approximately 30% of
the overall licence area sits within a Game Management Area subject
to approvals for exploration and mining.
Exploration
done by other
parties
• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. • Limited exploration for uranium was undertaken in this area by the
Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (“PNC”)
in the mid 1970s. This exploration evaluated a series of regional
uranium anomalies identified in a reconnaissance airborne
radiometric survey flown for the Government of Zambia over 30 years
ago.
• African Energy evaluated the region through a series of detailed
airborne radiometric surveys completed in December 2006 and
October 2007. These surveys identified several uranium anomalies.
Reconnaissance evaluation in April 2008 confirmed the presence of
Karoo sediments at a number of these anomalies. Regional areas
were identified for systematic follow‐up field exploration including the
Sitwe North area where several elongate uranium anomalies
identified. Programmes of geological evaluation and ground
radiometric surveying was conducted at the Sitwe Prospect in 2008.
In late 2010, seven RC holes for a total of 458m were drilled at Sitwe
North testing outcropping mineralisation hosted in feldspathic gneiss
beds.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. • Geology in the Sitwe North license is dominated by Proterozoic age
gneisses and granitoids of the Irumide Belt and Carboniferous to late
Triassic age, terrestrial sediments of the Karoo Basin. The Karoo
Basin sediments unconformably overly the metamorphic rocks of the
Irumide Belt.
• In the region, sandstone hosted style uranium mineralisation has
been found in the Upper Karoo sediments (Muntanga, Kayelekera)
and Lower Karoo sediments (Letlhakane).
• The source of the uranium in the Karoo basin rocks is believed to be
from the surrounding Proterozoic gneisses and plutonic basement
rocks. Having been weathered from these rocks, the uranium has
been dissolved, transported in solution and precipitated under
reducing conditions in siltstone and sandstone.
• At Sitwe North uranium mineralization has been found outcropping in
feldspathic units of basement gneiss. The units range from 2 to 10m
in thickness, strike NNE and dip moderately to steeply SE.
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.
• Drill collar information is provided in Appendix 1
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.
• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values
should be clearly stated.
• See Appendix 2 for all assay results. No changes to the original lab
assays has been made.
Atomic Eagle Limited | ASX:AEU | www.atomiceagle.com.au
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
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’).
• Drill hole orientations were between -60º and -65º as the dip angle of
mineralisation generally dipped, between -40 and -50 degrees from
horizontal. Holes were orientated perpendicular to the strike of the
mineralised units.
• All downhole intercepts reported are close to true width, but are
considered to be approximately 20% greater than true width.
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 have been provided in the attached press release.
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 assays have been listed in Appendix 2
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.
• Based on the drilling results from uranium mineralisation identified in
basement rocks. The nearby overlying Karoo sediments are
considered an attractive target for sandstone hosted style uranium
mineralisation.
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.
• To determine the extent of the uranium drilled in the gneissic units a
program of surface mapping and lines of scintillometer surveys are
planned.
• The large areas of Karoo basin sedimentary rocks that lie within the
license area will be explored using radiometric surveys.
T.AEUXF significantly expands Zambian uranium footprint with Sitwe option
