Niger Uranium

SCARAB
ENTERPRISES Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects, Niger

Technical Report – May 2009
SCARAB
ENTERPRISES
BATALENE 1 AND 2 PROSPECTS

NIGER
Technical Report
Prepared by Scarab Enterprises on behalf of
Cooper Minerals Inc.
Contact information
Nico Scholtz
Postal Address: P.O. Box 1316
Physical Address: 52 Diamond Street
Vineta
Swakopmund
Namibia
Mobile: +264 81 3286 253
Email: scholtzn@gmail.com
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises i

SCARAB
BATALENE 1 AND 2 URANIUM PROJECTS, NIGER
TECHNICAL REPORT
Prepared by Scarab Enterprises on behalf of:
Cooper Minerals Inc.
Author/s Mr Nico Scholtz (M.Sc. Geology Pr. Sci. Nat.)

Principal Geologist
Date: 6 May 2009
Job Number: G09/003
Printed copies: 2
Client: 1
Scarab: 1
th
Signed on this 6 day of May 2009:
……………………………………………………
Nico Scholtz
Principal Geologist for Scarab Enterprises
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises ii

SCARAB
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE.............................................................................1

1.1 Scope and purpose of the Report.................................................................................................1
1.2 Independence ...............................................................................................................................1
1.3 Sources of Information..................................................................................................................1
1.4 Personal Inspection on Property...................................................................................................2
1.5 Qualifications and Experience ......................................................................................................2
2. RELIANCE ON OTHER INDUSTRY EXPERTS ................................................................................4
3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ..................................................................................5
3.1 Background information on Niger .................................................................................................5
3.2 Property Location..........................................................................................................................6
3.3 Mineral Tenure..............................................................................................................................7
3.3.1 Prospecting Licence ..............................................................................................................7
3.3.2 Mining Licence.......................................................................................................................7
3.4 Property boundary demarcation ...................................................................................................8
3.5 Agreements...................................................................................................................................8
3.6 Environmental liabilities and permits ............................................................................................8
4. LOCAL CLIMATE, PHYSIOGRAPHY, RESOURCES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ...........................9
4.1 Climate..........................................................................................................................................9
4.2 Physiography ..............................................................................................................................10
4.3 Niger resources...........................................................................................................................12
4.3.1 Uranium ...............................................................................................................................12
4.3.2 Other commodities ..............................................................................................................14
4.4 Infrastructure and availability for exploration requirements........................................................14
4.5 Operating season........................................................................................................................14
5. HISTORY ..........................................................................................................................................15
5.1 Prior ownership ...........................................................................................................................15
5.2 Previous exploration ...................................................................................................................15
5.3 Historical Mineral Resources and Reserves...............................................................................15
5.4 Production...................................................................................................................................15
6. GEOLOGICAL SETTING .................................................................................................................16
6.1 Regional Geology .......................................................................................................................16
6.1.1 Niger Geology......................................................................................................................17
6.1.2 Iullemeden Basin .................................................................................................................17
6.1.3 Tim Mersoi sub-basin ..........................................................................................................19
6.2 Project Geology ..........................................................................................................................21
6.2.1 Stratigraphic setting.............................................................................................................21
7. DEPOSIT TYPE AND MODEL .........................................................................................................24
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises iii

SCARAB
7.1 Karoo Uranium Province.............................................................................................................24

7.2 Colorado Plateau ........................................................................................................................24
7.3 Kazakhstan .................................................................................................................................25
7.4 Generalized model for sandstone hosted uranium.....................................................................26
7.5 Geological model for uranium in Niger .......................................................................................26
7.5.1 Stratigraphic setting.............................................................................................................27
7.5.2 Mineralogy ...........................................................................................................................28
7.5.3 Source of uranium ...............................................................................................................29
7.5.4 Pathfinder elements.............................................................................................................30
7.5.5 Controls on uranium precipitation........................................................................................30
7.5.5.1 Structural controls ........................................................................................................31
7.5.5.2 Salt diapirs ...................................................................................................................31
7.5.6 Summarized Geological Model for Uranium in Niger ..........................................................32
7.6 Exploration techniques ...............................................................................................................32
8. EXPLORATION ................................................................................................................................34
9. DRILLING .........................................................................................................................................35
10. SAMPLING METHOD AND APPROACH ......................................................................................36
11. SAMPLE PREPARATION AND ANALYSES ................................................................................37
12. DATA VERIFICATION ....................................................................................................................38
13. ADJACENT PROPERTIES ............................................................................................................39
13.1 Arlette deposit (Somair) ............................................................................................................40
13.2 Akouta deposit (Cominak) ........................................................................................................42
13.3 Madaouela (GoviEx, CAMECO) ...............................................................................................42
13.4 Agelal Prospects (Homeland) ...................................................................................................43
14. MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING .....................................................44
15. MINERAL RESOURCE AND RESERVE ESTIMATES..................................................................45
16. OTHER RELEVANT DATA ............................................................................................................46
17. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................47
17.1 Target identification ..................................................................................................................47
17.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................52
18. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................54
18.1 Exploration programme budget ................................................................................................54
18.2 Phase 2 field reconnaissance budget.......................................................................................55
19. REFERENCES................................................................................................................................57
20. DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE ....................................................................................................60
20.1 Certificate of Qualified Person ..................................................................................................60
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises iv

SCARAB
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Location of Niger in West Africa. ...........................................................................................5

Figure 3.2 Location of Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) Mineral Prospects. ...................................................6
Figure 4.1 Agriculture, perennial drainage and precipitation in Niger.....................................................9
Figure 4.2 Topographical setting of Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) Prospect areas..................................10
Figure 4.3 General topography of Batalene 1 and 2 looking southeast (Aïr Massif in background). ...11
Figure 4.4 Topographical map of Batalene 1 and 2..............................................................................11
Figure 4.5 Nearby properties with significant U mineralisation.............................................................13
Figure 6.1 Setting of Niger in West Africa showing distribution of Phanerozoic Basins. ......................16
Figure 6.2 Geological setting of Niger showing distribution of Proterozoic basement and Phanerozoic
basins. ...................................................................................................................................................17
Figure 6.3 Geological setting of the Iullemeden Basin hosting the Cooper Minerals (CM) prospects
showing position of section between Niamey and Agadez (cf. Figure 6.4). .........................................18
Figure 6.4 Section across Iullumeden Basin (cf. Figure 6.3). From Guiraud et al., (2005). .................19
Figure 6.5 Geological section across the Tim Mersoi sub-basin showing position of section on inset.20
Figure 6.6 Geological setting of Cooper Minerals (CM) prospects. ......................................................21
Figure 6.7 Local geological setting of Batalene 1 and 2. ......................................................................22
Figure 6.8 Similar Geological setting between Batalene 1 and 2 and Somair and Cominak mines.....22
Figure 6.9 Section across the Tim Mersoi sub-basin showing lithological thicknesses according to
mean sea level, major lineaments and U deposits. A to B from North (2006) and B to C postulated
from Kogbe (1991). ...............................................................................................................................23
Figure 7.1 Geological setting for Kazakhstan sandstone hosted U deposits (From Jaireth et al., 2008).
...............................................................................................................................................................25
Figure 7.2 General geological setting for sandstone hosted U deposits (From Jaireth et al., 2008)....26
Figure 7.3 Geological setting for U mineralisation in Niger (From Niger Uranium, 2009). ...................29
Figure 7.4 Paleozoic volcanics in the Aïr Massif...................................................................................30
Figure 7.5 Formation of salt diapirs. From Nely (2007). .......................................................................31
Figure 13.1 Location of significant U mineralisation near Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) prospects. ........39
Figure 13.2 Cross section of Arlette open pit (From Bowden et al., 1981) ...........................................41
Figure 13.3 Geological section of the Arlette U deposit showing mineralisation present in all facies of
the Tarat Formation sandstone. ............................................................................................................41
Figure 13.4 Geological section of Arlette and Akouta U deposits, Niger (Bigotte and Molinas, 1973). 42
Figure 13.5 Mineralisation at Madaouela below the water table...........................................................42
Figure 17.1 Generalized geological section (NE-SW) of Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects, Niger. .............47
Figure 17.2 Major and minor lineaments at Batalene 1 and 2. .............................................................48
Figure 17.3 Stratigraphic and structurally generated targets at Batalene 1. ........................................49
Figure 17.4 Stratigraphic and structurally generated targets at Batalene 2. ........................................50
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises v

SCARAB
Figure 17.5 Stratigraphic and structurally generated targets at Batalene 1 and 2 as well as generated
salt diapir targets. ..................................................................................................................................51
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Reserves and Resources for U deposits within Niger (WISE Uranium). ..............................13
Table 7.1 Stratigraphic column of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin................................................................27
Table 13.1 Stratigraphic setting of Arlit, Madaouela, Imouraren and Azelik U deposits in Niger. ........40
Table 18.1 Three year Exploration Budget per Project.........................................................................54
Table 18.2. Phase 2 Field reconnaissance budget...............................................................................56
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises vi

SCARAB
SUMMARY
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises CC (Scarab) has been commissioned by Cooper
Minerals Inc. (CM) to prepare a Technical Report according to the National Instrument 43-101
(Canadian Standards for disclosure of Mineral Projects) on two (2) Mineral (Uranium) Properties,
2
Batalene 1 and 2, within Niger, West Africa totalling a combined area of 974 km . Both properties
have been granted as Exploration Licences by the Nigerien Ministry of Mines and Energy valid up to
st
end March 2012. Scarab has delineated targets within this Technical Report (1 phase) and
nd
recommends a reconnaissance field investigation (2 phase) to examine the said targets.
Property and location

The Batalene Prospects are located 60 km northwest (NW) of the town of Arlit within typical Sahel
desert terrains, mostly flat and monotonous with an average relief varying between 250 m and 300 m
above mean sea level. The rainy season is from May through October, with most rainfall occurring in
July and August, which may result in impassable field conditions.
Geological setting
The prospects are located within the Paleozoic fringe, stratigraphically located between the
Carboniferous and Permian Periods. Most of the surface is covered by the Carboniferous Upper
Tagora - (Somair U deposit stratigraphy) and younger, overlying Permian Izeguandane Series. Both
prospects have a similar geological setting to that of the nearby Somair and Cominak (AREVA) U
mines. A correlation in age, sedimentary setting, structural relations, ore minerals as well as reducing
agents is evident between sandstone hosted U mineralisation in Niger, Karoo (South Africa),
Colorado (U.S.A.) and Kazakhstan. Based upon the similarities between sandstone hosted U
mineralisation, within the described localities, to that of Niger, Scarab portrays a Geological Model for
U in Niger that would assist in target generation at the Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects.
Target generation and conclusions

Scarab undertook a Remote Sensing target generation programme by applying the Geological Model
to the Batalene Prospects. To assist in target identification, Scarab constructed major lineaments
using Landsat 7 images as well as minor lineaments using more detailed satellite imagery available
®
from GoogleEarth . Scarab demarcated two stratigraphic near surface target zones based upon
underlying, impermeable clay rich layers. These zones include the contact between the Talach and
Lower Tagora as well as the contact between the Lower and Upper Tagora Series. These lithological
targets coincide to similar Uranium Provinces where impermeable mud and clay-rich layers always
under-and/or overlie U deposits. Scarab recommends that these target contact lithologies be
nd
investigated by a 2 phase ground reconnaissance survey. It is important that these stratigraphic
targets be regarded as target zones and not as target points. The presence of mineralised
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises vii

SCARAB
outcropping contact zones would assist in postulating whether similar subsurface contact zones might
host mineralisation worthy of further investigation.
®
Scarab used high definition GoogleEarth imagery as well local topographical maps to detect the
presence of salt diapirs within the prospect areas. Although circular features were detected, the
associated radial cracks related to these structures were not evident. Seven (7) targets were
generated all of which appear in vicinity of minor lineaments as generated by Scarab. This is
significant as the areas may act as fluid migration zones and constitute U mineralisation. Scarab
nd
suggests investigating these targets during the 2 phase field reconnaissance survey.
Recommendations
Cooper Minerals Inc. have supplied a comprehensive three year exploration and resource definition
programme and combined budget per project. Scarab considers the proposed expenditure to be
consistent with the potential of the project and to be adequate to cover the cost of the proposed
programs. The budget is adequate to meet minimum statutory expenditure requirements.
nd
Scarab recommends the commencement of the 2 phase field reconnaissance survey (budgeted
st
accordingly as part of CM’s expenditure for 1 year) to investigate the general geological setting and
st nd
target areas as demarcated in this Technical Report (1 phase). This 2 phase field reconnaissance
survey should include, but not be limited to, the following:
- Airborne geophysics (magnetics and radiometrics)

- Investigate target contact lithologies (stratigraphic setting)
- Ground geophysics (spectrometry)
- Identify historic drillhole collars (if available) for future down-the-hole geophysics and drillhole
optics
- Alpha track surveys on demarcated targets lithologies and/or on lineaments identified with the
aid of airborne magnetics
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises viii

SCARAB
1. INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.1 Scope and purpose of the Report

Minerals Inc. (CM) to prepare a technical review according to the National Instrument 43-101
(Canadian Standards for disclosure of Mineral Projects) of available data and acquire any additional
information on two (2) Mineral Properties (Batalene 1 and Batalene 2) within Niger, West Africa. CM is
based in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. The company's main properties are U and
polymetallic properties in the Northwest Territories in Canada, U properties in Finland as well as
recently acquired U properties in Niger.
st
This report is considered the 1 phase of an investigation into the U potential on the Batalene
Prospects and investigates regional geology of Niger and local geology at the said Prospects. It
furthermore investigates similar styles of U mineralisation and associated exploration techniques and
addresses comparisons between mineralisation styles and exploration techniques applicable to the
Batalene Prospects. Subsequently the potential for U mineralisation is addressed and targets
nd
delineated for follow-up during a 2 phase field investigation.
1.2 Independence
Neither Scarab nor the author of this report have or have had any previous material interest in CM or
related entities or interests. Our relationship with CM is one of professional association between client
and independent consultant. This report is prepared in return for fees based upon agreed commercial
rates and the payment of these fees is in not dependent on the results of this report.
1.3 Sources of Information

Scarab relied upon the following documents for legal, title, tenure, land acquisition and compensation,
and permitting implications:
1. Convention Minière entre la République du Niger et Cooper Minerals Inc. pour le permis
Batalene 1
Created by: Republic of Niger, Ministry of Mines & Energy, Minister of Mines.
Reliance: Signed agreement from Ministry of Mines & Energy, original, signed on 19 March 2009.
2. Convention Minière entre la République du Niger et Cooper Minerals Inc. pour le permis
Batalene 2
Created by: Republic of Niger, Ministry of Mines & Energy, Minister of Mines.
Reliance: Signed agreement from Ministry of Mines & Energy, original, signed on 19 March 2009.
Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 1

SCARAB
Scarab used the following sources for further information gathering on drainage, infrastructure,
topography, geology and U deposits of Niger and similar style of mineralisation elsewhere:
- Sciencedirect peer reviewed publication website www.sciencedirect.com

- World Information Service on Energy – Uranium www.wise-uranium.org
®
- High definition satellite imagery from Google Earth http://earth.google.com/
- Internet Encyclopaedia www.wikipedia.org
- Personal communication with lecturers in Geology at the University of the Free State
(UFS), South Africa (R.S.A.)
- Libraries at the University of the Free State and Department Geology at UFS, R.S.A (cf.
Section 19 for References).
1.4 Personal Inspection on Property

Scarab did not carry out a personal inspection of the area prior to the completion of this report. Such
nd
an inspection will form part of a 2 phase field visit during which targets delineated in this report will
be investigated (cf. Section 17.1). Scarab’s experience in U mineralisation of similar styles and
deposit types where structural coordination and stratigraphic setting is of importance (Namib Desert,
Namibia and Karoo U Province, R.S.A.) have revealed that a Remote Sensing investigation as part of
a Technical Report (Phase 1) to delineate targets for field reconnaissance (Phase 2) is not only cost
effective, but also time efficient.
1.5 Qualifications and Experience

Nico Scholtz, Principal Geologist of Scarab serves as a competent person under National Instrument
43-101 (Canadian Standards for disclosure of Mineral Projects) with sufficient experience in the style,
genesis and occurrence of U mineralisation within primary and secondary environments. He is a
member of the South African Council for Natural and Scientific Professions (SACNASP Reg. No.
400299/07).
During his employment at The University of the Free State, South Africa (R.S.A.), he was contracted
by SXR Uranium One (2005 to 2007) to delineate and investigate U targets in the Permo-Triassic
sedimentary layers of the Karoo, South Africa where he used stratigraphic setting, structural
coordination, geophysics and interdisciplinary studies for target delineation. During this time he
authored and co-authored two scientific papers in peer reviewed journals, one book chapter and
presented and co-presented twenty-one oral and poster presentations at local and international
scientific conferences, mostly on U exploration techniques.
More recently he was employed as Chief Geologist at Reptile Uranium Namibia (2007 to 2009), a
wholly owned subsidiary of Perth based Deep Yellow Ltd where he managed the Geology
Department and delineated green – and brownfields drilling targets. Target delineation included

SCARAB
remote sensing, geological mapping and interpretation of ground – and airborne radiometrics,
magnetics and electromagnetics in the search for alaskite, calcrete and skarn type U mineralisation
within the Damara Supergroup of Namibia. He is a Member of Namibian Scarab Enterprises and
actively involved in mineral exploration and associated environmental monitoring in Namibia as well
as Niger (Uranium) and Mali (Gold) in West Africa. Nico has been invited as guest speaker to various
Scientific Symposiums in southern Africa, obtained research funding from amongst others the
National Nuclear Regulator (NNR), SXR Uranium One and National Research Foundation (NRF). He
is an affiliated lecturer with the Department Geology, University of the Free State, R.S.A., part-time
lecturer with the Department Geology, University of Namibia as well as a member of the Scientific
Advisory Board to the Department Geology, University of Namibia.

SCARAB
2. RELIANCE ON OTHER INDUSTRY EXPERTS
Scarab has prepared this report for Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM). The information, conclusions,
opinions, and estimates contained herein are based on information available to Scarab at the time of
preparation of this report. For the purpose of this report, Scarab has relied on ownership information
provided by CM. Scarab did not research property title or mineral rights for the CM prospects and
expresses no legal opinion as to the ownership status of these properties.

SCARAB
3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
3.1 Background information on Niger

The landlocked Republic of the Niger is the largest country in West Africa (Figure 3.1), covering an
2
area of 1,267,000 km . Niger is bordered on the north by Libya, on the east by Chad, on the south by
Nigeria, on the southwest by Benin and Burkina Faso, on the west by Mali, and on the northwest by
Algeria. Niger’s capital city, Niamey, is located in the southwestern part of the country.
Figure 3.1 Location of Niger in West Africa.
French is the national and official language, although spoken by only a minority of the people. The
various ethnic groups make use of their own local languages. The Hausa dialect is spoken throughout
Niger as the language of trade. The nomadic Tuaregs were the first inhabitants in the Sahara region.
The Hausa (14th century), Zerma (17th century), Gobir (18th century), and Fulani (19th century) also
established themselves in the region. Niger was incorporated into French West Africa in 1896. There
were frequent rebellions, but when order was restored in 1922, the French turned the area into a
colony. In 1958, the voters approved the French constitution and voted to make the territory an
autonomous republic within the French Community.
SCARAB
The republic adopted a constitution in 1959 but the next year withdrew from the Community,
proclaiming its independence. From 1974, a series of coups and military rule occurred over the next
20 years. In November 1999, a new president was elected. As a result, foreign aid, primarily from
France, was restored (Hermann et al., No date).
3.2 Property Location

Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) has acquired two (2) uranium (U) properties in the Arlit region of Niger
located within the Tim Mersoi sub-basin, on the western flank of the Aïr Massif (Figure 3.2). This
basin contains all the known U deposits of Niger. The two contiguous CM assets are situated 60 km
northwest (NW) of the town of Arlit and comprise the following:
- Batalene 1 (BAT1) of 491.2 km²

- Batalene 2 (BAT2) of 483.7 km²
Figure 3.2 Location of Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) Mineral Prospects.

SCARAB
3.3 Mineral Tenure

In Niger, all mineral rights are vested in the State. The Code Minier De la République Du Niger
(Mining Code) of 2006 regulates the mining industry in the country. The Act has been designed to
facilitate and encourage the private sector to evaluate and develop mineral resources. The Ministry of
Mines and Energy is usually the first contact for investors, as it handles all applications for, and
allocation of mineral rights in Niger. Mineral rights licenses issued by the Nigerien Ministry of Mines
and Energy include the following:
1. Prospecting Licence
2. Exploration Licence
3. Mining Licence
The CM Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects have been issued as Exploration Licenses with expiry date end
of March 2012. Both Exploration Licenses comprise surface – and subsurface rights, which includes
permission for all pitting, trenching, drilling and sampling as required by CM. The Exploration licence
is valid for three years, renewable for two further three-year periods subject to certain land holding
2
reduction (50% after 3 years) criteria. The area held under a permit cannot exceed 500 km in a
rectangular block. An Exploration licence confers to the holder the right to dispose of any minerals
obtained during exploration and test work, and also confers the right to a Mining licence if a viable
reserve is discovered. CM has stipulated the minerals sought to be Uranium (additional minerals can
be included later if required), and a work schedule and budget for the first 3 years to the Nigerien
Ministry of Mines and Energy. Other mineral rights licenses issued by the Nigerien Ministry of Mines
and Energy include the following:
3.3.1 Prospecting Licence

A Prospecting licence gives the holder the right to search for one or a number of minerals. It is non-
exclusive and confers to the holder any rights to an exclusive exploration permit within the limits and
time validity of the licence. Prospecting licences are valid for one year, renewable indefinitely for one-
year periods. Only surface prospecting is permitted, including remote sensing techniques. The
objective of the prospecting program must be stated in the application, although there are no fee or
land holding requirements.
3.3.2 Mining Licence

A Mining licence will be granted in the case of successful exploration, subject to the right of the
Government to participate in the project. A “small mine” permit is valid for five years, renewable three
times for five-year periods, while a “large mine” permit lasts for 20 years initially, renewable two times
per a period of 10 years. Further extensions are possible if commercial reserves remain. Companies
applying for a Mining licence must conform to Nigerien Company law.

SCARAB
The Government requires an initial 10% share in the mining project, free of all costs, which can later
be increased to a maximum of 40% through share purchases.
3.4 Property boundary demarcation

Boundary coordinates were obtained from the Mining Conventions (cf. Section 1.3). CM has,
however, budgeted to survey the exact boundary positions (cf. Table 18.1).
3.5 Agreements
CM was granted the Batalene 1 and 2 Projects by application and therefore no agreements and
encumbrances exist outside the current agreements with the Nigerien Ministry of Mines and Energy.
Pursuant to the agreements signed between the parties and subsequently endorsed by the Nigerien
Minister for Mines and Energy on 19 March 2009, CM has the right to explore the two concessions
over a 3-year period. The main points of importance for the agreement are:
 Minimum spending of approximately US$ 2,000,000.00 per project over 3 years.

 Submission of quarterly reports and annual exploration program.
 Ten percent (10 %) freehold equity at the exploitation stage to Niger Government.
3.6 Environmental liabilities and permits

The Batalene 1 and 2 project areas have no known associated environmental liabilities. Both projects
are located in the Sahara desert in areas with no permanent population or infrastructure. Scarab
understands that the ministry allows exploration and mining within these areas, and is unaware of any
current regulations that may significantly restrict access to this area for exploration. It is, however,
suggested to inform the Nigerien Ministry of Mines and Energy as well as the Governor of Agadez of
intended visits to the properties.

SCARAB
4. LOCAL CLIMATE, PHYSIOGRAPHY, RESOURCES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
4.1 Climate
Niger is four-fifths desert, and most of the northeast is uninhabitable. The southern fifth of the country
is savannah, suitable mainly for livestock raising and limited agriculture, whilst grazing occurs in the
centre, up to a northern limit due to lack of precipitation (Figure 4.1). In the central region is the Aïr
Massif, reaching a height of 1,944 m on Mt. Gréboun, the nation’s highest point. The Niger River flows
for about 560 km through southwestern Niger.
Figure 4.1 Agriculture, perennial drainage and precipitation in Niger.
Niger, one of the hottest countries in the world, has three basic climatic zones namely the Saharan
desert in the north, the Sahel to the south of the desert, and the Sudan (not to be mistaken with the
country) in the southwestern corner. The average rainfall in the Aïr Massif is limited to a maximum of
250 mm annually, and most of the rain falls during a two-month period (July and August).

SCARAB
At Agadez, in the northern Sahel, annual rainfall averages 150 mm, but yearly totals often vary greatly
(cf. Figure 4.1). The rainy season is from May through October, with most rainfall occurring in July and
August. In Arlit, the average maximum daily temperature fluctuates from 35°C in August to 45°C in
April. Nights are cool (below 20° C) from November to February.
4.2 Physiography
The Batalene 1 and 2 prospect areas are located in typical Sahel desert terrains, mostly flat with an
average relief varying between 250 m and 300 m above mean sea level (Figure 4.2).
Figure 4.2 Topographical setting of Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) Prospect areas.
A general topographical investigation using topographical maps and a GoogleEarth® (vertical

exaggeration of 3) revealed that both prospects are generally monotonous and flat lying with minor
topographical highs and drainage incisions (Figures 4.3 and 4.4).

SCARAB
Figure 4.3 General topography of Batalene 1 and 2 looking southeast (Aïr Massif in background).
Figure 4.4 Topographical map of Batalene 1 and 2.

SCARAB
4.3 Niger resources

The economy of Niger is based largely on subsistence crops, livestock, and some of the world's
th
largest uranium (U) deposits. Niger ranks 174 (out of 177) on the Human Development Index of the
United Nations Development Programme (Watkins, 2008). The literacy rate is 28.7%, 63% of the
population lives below the national poverty line and life expectancy at birth is 55 years. 20% of the
population uses suitable sanitation and 60% uses an improved water source (AREVA in Niger, 2009).
A majority of Niger's population are rural residents engaged in agriculture, mostly in the southern and
southwestern parts of the nation. While these people are dependent on the agricultural market for
their production and consumption, much of Nigerien farming is subsistence agriculture outside the
marketplace.
4.3.1 Uranium
Uranium dominates Niger’s mining sector, ranking it third in the world in production and fifth in
reserves. In 2005 Niger produced 3,434 tU, whilst cumulative production from the country passed
100,000 tU in November 2006. About 56,000 tU of this total has been from underground and 44,000 t
from open pit mining operations (AREVA in Niger, 2009).
Uranium is mined close to the mining town of Arlit, 1,200 km north-east of the capital Niamey on the
southern border of the Sahara desert and on the western range of the Aïr Massif, by two companies
incorporated under Nigerien law namely Somair and Cominak. These companies are operated by
their principal shareholder, AREVA. Each mine further has its own ore processing plant (AREVA in
Niger, 2009). AREVA is also preparing to start mining the Imouraren deposit in 2012. The estimated
resource of ~120,000 tons U at Imouraren will be extracted from the largest open-pit U mine in West
Africa and the second-largest U mine in the world. Production will ultimately be about 5,000 tons of U
per year, and mining is expected to continue for more than 35 years (AREVA in Niger, 2009).
The China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), through its subsidiary China Nuclear International
Uranium Corporation (SinoU) holds rights to the ~6,000 tU Madaouela deposit in the Arlit region and
to the Azelik deposit (Teguida mine), southwest of Imouraren, the former is to come into production in
2010-11 at 700 tU/ per annum. Teguida is reported to have resources of 13,000 tU at 0.2%. The
Azelik project is owned by Societe des Mines d'Azelik SA (SOMINA), a joint venture established in
2007 with equity 37.2% SinoU, 33% Niger government, 24.8% ZXJOY Invest and 5% Trendfield
Holdings Ltd.
Other important U properties include Tin Negouran (Global Uranium), In Gall and Irhazer prospects
(Niger-Uranium), the Asaouas prospect (Selier Energy) (cf. Table 3.1 for resource and reserve
statements).

SCARAB
Figure 4.5 Nearby properties with significant U mineralisation.
Table 4.1 Reserves and Resources for U deposits within Niger (WISE Uranium).
1 1
END 2005 RESERVES RESOURCES
PROVEN PROBABLE MEASURED INDICATED INFERRED
ARLETTE 10,115 tU @
(Somair) 16,716 tU @ 0.3% 6,397 tU @ 0.16% 0.3%
AKOUTA 18,718 tU @
(Cominak) 7,909 tU @ 0.46% 15,737 tU @ 0.43% 2,544 tU @ 0.33% 5,725 tU @ 0.31% 0.25%
IMOURAREN
(AREVA NC) 118,100 tU @ 0.11% 25,500 tU @ 0.1%
AZELIK n/a 12,764 n/a n/a n/a
IN GALL n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,688 @

0.012 %
TIN NEGOURAN n/a n/a Work in progress
1
Reserves are confirmed and economically mineable quantities of uranium, whereas resources are assumed to exist and their
economic profitability is not proven. More precise data concerning resources allows the latter to be reclassified as reserves.

SCARAB
4.3.2 Other commodities

Exploitable deposits of gold are known to exist in Niger in the region between the Niger River and the
border with Burkina Faso. Substantial deposits of phosphates, coal, iron, limestone, and gypsum have
also been found. Several oil companies explored for petroleum since 1992 in the Djado plateau in
northeastern Niger and the Agadern basin, north of Lake Chad but made no discoveries worth
developing at the time. In June 2007, however, China National Petroleum Corporation (state-owned
by the People's Republic of China) signed a US$5 billion agreement to extract oil in the Agadem block
as well as build a 20,000 barrels per day oil refinery and a 2,000 km oil pipeline in the country;
production is expected to start in 2009.
Niger's known coal reserves, with low energy and high ash content, cannot compete against higher
quality coal on the world market. However, the parastatal SONICHAR (Société nigérienne de
charbon) in Tchirozerine (north of Agadez) (cf. Figure 3.3) extracts coal from an open pit and fuels an
electricity generating plant that supplies energy to the U mines (Wikipedia, 2009).
4.4 Infrastructure and availability for exploration requirements

The Batalene 1 and 2 project areas are located 50 km north of the town of Arlit on the road to the
Algerian border 200 km further to the north (cf. Figure 4.1). Although the road between Arlit and
Agadez (Uranium Highway) is in a good condition, limited information is available for the road beyond
Arlit and northwards to the Algerian border. Sources indicate that although the road is traveled, it is in
poor condition.
Arlit is an industrial, purpose built town, capital of the Arlit Department of the Agadez Region of
northern-central Niger, on the western edge of the Aïr Massif. The town was founded in 1969 after the
discovery of U in the area. It is highly adapted to suit Expats from France and elsewhere, employed in
the U industry. Apart from the French, thousands of SOMAIR and COMINAK Nigerien employees
have moved to Arlit where the townships have mushroomed to house and serve the people working in
the U industry. The town had a population of almost 70,000 at the 2001 census, and an estimated
population of 80,000 in 2006. Arlit has developed a first-world infrastructure and airport to serve U
workers and their families. The town has electricity and water along with hotel accommodation, fuel
and basic living necessities (Geels, 2006; Wikipedia, 2009).
4.5 Operating season

The rainy season is from May through October, with most rainfall occurring in July and August
resulting in difficult and impassable terrain (Pers. Comm. AfriResources Niger SA).

SCARAB
5. HISTORY
5.1 Prior ownership

Apart from the project areas being part of a larger area that have been worked by COGEMA (now
AREVA) during the 1960’s and 1970’s, no prior ownership details are available.
5.2 Previous exploration

Scarab could not locate any historical exploration results after verification with Nigerien Ministry of
Mines and Energy as well as AREVA, who supposedly covered large areas of the Tim Mersoi sub-
basin in a regional exploration programme in the early 1960’s and 1970’s.
5.3 Historical Mineral Resources and Reserves

No uranium (U) resources, within the concession boundaries, have been estimated in compliance with
the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards.
5.4 Production
No historic U production has been recorded on any of the Cooper Minerals Inc. project concessions.

SCARAB
6. GEOLOGICAL SETTING
6.1 Regional Geology

The principal palaeogeographic characteristics of North and Central Africa during the onset of the
Phanerozoic were the permanency of large exposed lands over central Africa, surrounded by
northerly and northwesterly dipping pediplanes, episodically flooded by epicontinental seas (Figure
6.1) (Guiraud et al., 2005).
Figure 6.1 Setting of Niger in West Africa showing distribution of Phanerozoic Basins.
Phanerozoic African basins developed during the migration of the continent as part of Gondwana over
the South Pole and northwards to its present position with the infill of basins by sedimentary material
reflecting a change in palaeoclimate (Bumby & Guraud, 2005). The development and extent of these
Phanerozoic basins are important due to their potential association with uranium (U) throughout Africa
(Hambleton-Jones, 2007).

SCARAB
6.1.1 Niger Geology

Most of Niger comprises Phanerozoic sediment filled basins coupled with Mesozoic and Cenozoic rift
systems as well as major fault zones (Figure 6.2). Pre-Cambrian or Proterozoic basement is located
in the southwest and centre of the country, which comprises crystalline and metamorphic rocks of the
Aïr Massif (Kogbe, 1991).
Figure 6.2 Geological setting of Niger showing distribution of Proterozoic basement and
Phanerozoic basins.
6.1.2 Iullemeden Basin

The Iullemeden Basin, to the west of the Aïr Massif, is a vast structural depression of about 360,000
km² covering virtually all of western Niger, with extensions in Algeria, Mali, Benin and Nigeria (Figure
6.3). It is filled with up to 1,500 m to 2,000 m of sediments of alternating marine and continental origin.
2
It covers an area of 800,000 km and borders the Adrar des Iforas, the Hoggar and the Aïr Massif in
the north; the Gourma and Liptako Massifs and crystalline rocks of the Benin Republic to the west and
the Nigerian basement rocks to the south and southeast. The basin is underlain by crystalline
basement consisting of igneous and metamorphic rocks.

SCARAB
The Iullemeden Basin is one of three important sub-Saharan inland basins consisting of a broad
syncline with gently dipping flanks. The syncline axis trends N-S between 3 and 4° longitude. The
overlying sedimentary sequences become progressively younger from the northeast to the southwest,
indicating the directions of successive Cretaceous marine transgressions (Kogbe, 1991).
Figure 6.3 Geological setting of the Iullemeden Basin hosting the Cooper Minerals (CM) prospects
showing position of section between Niamey and Agadez (cf. Figure 6.4).
Three principal fault trends predominate. These are north-northeast south-southwest (NNE-SSW),
north-northwest south-southeast (NNW-SSE) and east-west (E-W). The most important is the NNE-
SSW trend, which is responsible for the existence of two depressions in the basin (Talach and
Azaouak depressions). Repeated movements along fracture zones or lineaments controlled the
deposition of the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary rocks in the Iullemeden Basin since the early
Paleozoic to the late Cretaceous (Kogbe, 1991). These lineaments define north-south zones of
alternately uplifted blocks and depressions in central West Africa. It was within one of these
depressions, intersected and controlled by major NNE-SSW or NNW-SSE lineaments that the
sedimentary rocks of the Iullemeden Basin accumulated.

SCARAB
Figure 6.4 Section across Iullumeden Basin (cf. Figure 6.3). From Guiraud et al., (2005).
Niger’s main U resources are all contained in the sediments of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin, which is
mainly the continental part of the sedimentary layers of the Iullemmeden sedimentary basin. The large
deposits currently mined by Cominak and Somair are located respectfully in the Lower Tagora and in
the overlying Upper Tagora Series (Carboniferous) (Turpin et al., 1991). The continental sediments
above the Carboniferous Period are termed the Continental intercalaire, which consist of the following
units (cf. Table 7.1):
- Tegama Group (Cretaceous Period) at the top

- Dabla Series (Jurassic – Cretaceous Period)
- Agadez sandstone (Triassic – Jurassic Periods)
- Izegouandane Series at the base (Permian Period)
6.1.3 Tim Mersoi sub-basin

The geology of central Niger is dominated by the Aïr Massif which is a horst block of metamorphic
rocks and calc-alkaline intrusives of Pre-Cambrian age, penetrated by over a dozen Palaeozoic
(gabbro)-syenite-granite ring complexes. The Middle Continental series (Palaeozoic and Mesozoic
formations) outcrop in the Tim Mersoi sub-basin along the western margin of the Aïr Massif and
comprises formations ranging from Cambrian to Cretaceous (Turpin et. al., 1991).
During the middle Paleozoic (Cambrian – to Carboniferous Periods), sediment began to accumulate
in a shallow lake. As the basin grew, the land to the east began to rise even as the basin continued to
subside. The Carboniferous Terada - as well as Lower - and Upper Tagora Series were deposited
during this time. The Terada Series consist of basal conglomerates and fluvio-glacial sandstones. The
Lower and Upper Tagora Series consist of fluvio-deltaic sandstones. Each of these Series is overlain
by marine shales or an alteration of shales and continental sandstones (Kogbe, 1991).

SCARAB
In the late Paleozoic, carbonate began to cement the sand and gypsum nodules grew in the
mud. Whilst a rare mineral, analcime (feldspathoid requiring high pH and large concentrations of
silica and sodium), formed thin beds in the Jurassic Period (Agadez Series), carbonates again
predominated during the end of the Cretaceous.
By the middle to end of the Mesozoic (Jurassic – to Cretaceous Periods) highly alkaline volcanic
eruptions began along a north-south line about 100 km east of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin within the Aïr
Massif. Volcanic rocks of this type carry high proportions U, thorium (Th), rare earth elements (REE),
tin (Sn) and molybdenum (Mo) amongst others. The vitric ash from these volcanic eruptions dissolved
in the Mesozoic waters, resulting in an increase in pH and carrying capacity of U in solution as uranyl-
carbonate complexes which were deposited under suitable organic-chemical conditions in the
Jurassic-Cretaceous sediments of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin (Kogbe, 1991). The Paleozoic
sequences thin towards the centre of the basin, each overlapping the previous one from north to
south and sedimentation is structurally controlled (Figure 6.5).
Figure 6.5 Geological section across the Tim Mersoi sub-basin showing position of section on
inset.

SCARAB
6.2 Project Geology

6.2.1 Stratigraphic setting
The Batalene 1 and 2 prospects are located within the Paleozoic fringe, stratigraphically located
between the Carboniferous to the northeast and Permian (or onset of the Continental intercalaire) to
the southwest (Figure 6.6) (cf. Section 6.1.2).
Figure 6.6 Geological setting of Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) prospects.
Most of the surface is covered by the Upper Tagora - (Somair U deposit stratigraphy) and younger,
overlying Izeguandane Series. The Batalene 1 prospect shows limited outcrop of the Talach -
(Madaouela U deposit stratigraphy) and overlying Lower Tagora Units (Cominak U deposit
stratigraphy). The Batalene 2 prospect is covered by sediment from the younger Carboniferous upper
Tagora – and Permian Izegouandane Series.
Both prospects have a similar geological setting to that of the Somair and Cominak U mines (Figures
6.7 and 6.8) albeit that the latter mine targets the deeper Guezouman sandstones (underground
operation) of the Lower Tagora Series (cf. Section 6.1.2).

SCARAB
Figure 6.7 Local geological setting of Batalene 1 and 2.
Figure 6.8 Similar Geological setting between Batalene 1 and 2 and Somair and Cominak mines.
SCARAB
A section across the central Tim Mersoi sub-basin (Figure 6.9) from A (northeast) to B and C
(southwest) reflects the displacement of U deposits resulting from major faults (North, 2006; Kogbe,
1991). The downthrow of the main Arlit-In Azaoua fault is evident in a deepening of U bearing
formations of the Upper and Lower Tagora to the east of this fault (Nicholls and Morel, 2007).
This section provides a good regional indication of the approximate depth and thickness of the
Paleozoic Formations from the Carboniferous to Cretaceous and gives an indication of depth for U
mineralisation in the Tim Mersoi sub-basin. However, the depth and lithological thicknesses at the
western border (cf. point C on Figure 6.9) of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin is vague and the section only
provides a postulated depth at this locality.
Figure 6.9 Section across the Tim Mersoi sub-basin showing lithological thicknesses according to
mean sea level, major lineaments and U deposits. A to B from North (2006) and B to C postulated
from Kogbe (1991).

SCARAB
7. DEPOSIT TYPE AND MODEL
World-class sandstone-type uranium (U) deposits are defined as epigenetic concentrations of U

minerals occurring as uneven impregnations and minor massive replacements primarily in fluvial,
lacustrine, and deltaic sandstone formations (IAEA, 1985). The mineralisation occurs in medium to
coarse-grained sandstones deposited in a continental fluvial or marginal marine sedimentary
environment. Impermeable shale/mudstone units are interbedded in the sedimentary sequence and
often occur immediately above and below the mineralised sandstone.
Uranium precipitated under reducing conditions produced by a variety of reducing agents within the
sandstone include carbonaceous material such as detrital plant debris, amorphous humate and
marine algae, sulphides (pyrite, H2S), hydrocarbons (petroleum), and interbedded basic volcanics with
abundant ferro-magnesian minerals (e.g. chlorite). The main primary uranium minerals are uraninite
and coffinite.
Large sandstone deposits (> 10,000 tU) occur in South Africa (Karoo Basin), Colorado Plateau (USA),
Kazakhstan and Niger. Scarab investigated these deposits for geological model similarities and
extrapolation to Niger U mineralisation to construct a Geological Model for the Batalene 1 and 2
prospect areas that would assist in target generation.
7.1 Karoo Uranium Province

In the Karoo U is precipitated as tabular deposits in permeable sandstone layers capped and
underlain by impermeable mudstone in the presence of a suitable reducing agent such as organic
debris. The structural framework of the Karoo further provides amble pathways for fluid movement
and possible remobilization of mineralisation (Du Plessis & Scholtz, 2006; Kennedy & Scholtz, 2006).
Sandstone hosted U in the Karoo, South Africa furthermore have a molybdenum (Mo) potential and
averages 800 ppm Mo over 1 m in high grade localities. The U and Mo occur in the association U-Mo-
As-Cu-Pb (Turner, 1985; Cole & Wipplinger, 2001, Scholtz et al., 2005) and these trace elements
show a positive correlation with U grade. Kara & Scholtz (2006) also found Tungsten (W) to occur
within this association, although W is not present in this association throughout the Karoo, South
Africa.
7.2 Colorado Plateau

Uranium in the Colorado Plateau, USA, is similarly hosted by sandstone as tabular and roll-front
deposits and precipitated by groundwater solutions. Upper Paleozoic and Mesozoic fluvial
sedimentary rocks host the deposits. They were formed in three major epochs of mineralization: Late
Triassic–Early Jurassic, Late Jurassic, and Early Cretaceous (Finch, 1996). Many of the deposits
were redistributed into roll-front deposits. The source of the U is thick volcaniclastic beds overlying

SCARAB
ore-bearing horizons and ash derived from volcanic arcs to the west. The U ores in sandstone beds
were most likely precipitated by reduction between U-bearing ground water and underlying saline
brine. Uranium minerals in these deposits are intimately associated with organic detritus, often
humates (Yancey & McLemore, 2008).
7.3 Kazakhstan
The Chu–Sarysu and Syrdarya basins of Kazakhstan are components of a large artesian basin that
was split into two main components following the Pliocene uplift of the Karatau Mountain Range
(Figure 7.1). The basins are filled with thick sandstone aquifers capped by impermeable shaly beds.
Mineralisation, often as roll fronts, is hosted by sands of Upper Cretaceous and Palaeocene–Eocene
age.
The roll fronts display mineral and geochemical zoning typical of oxidation–reduction fronts.
Hydroxides of iron dominate the oxidation zone, whereas the reduced zones are dominated by iron
sulfides (pyrite and marcasite). The U zone is enriched in zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), silver (Ag), cobalt
(Co), molybdenum (Mo), nickel (Ni) and vanadium (V). Significant enrichments of selenium (Se) occur
towards the contact with the zone of reduction (Jaireth et al., 2008).
Figure 7.1 Geological setting for Kazakhstan sandstone hosted U deposits (From Jaireth et al.,
2008).

SCARAB
7.4 Generalized model for sandstone hosted uranium

A model for sandstone hosted U mineralisation can be summarized as follows (Finch and Davis,
1981; IAEA, 1985 and Jaireth et al., 2008):
 Host rock is Silurian in age, or younger

 Suitable hydraulic connections to U–enriched source rocks are required
 Provenance is granitic or felsic volcanic terrain
 Presence of permeable sandstone aquifers, with impermeable rocks above and below that
seal the aquifer
 Fossil carbonatised plant material is commonly present
Figure 7.2 General geological setting for sandstone hosted U deposits (From Jaireth et al., 2008).
7.5 Geological model for uranium in Niger

Genetic models for U mineralisation in Niger have evolved significantly over the past 40 years and
with the discovery of each new deposit, another variation is added to the described model.
Nevertheless, several common features appear to be associated with economic discoveries.
Initial geological models for Niger U were created through comparisons with the Colorado Plateau
(Bigotte and Molinas, 1973) (cf. Section 7.2). Based upon the similarities between described
sandstone hosted U mineralisation (cf. Sections 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3) and U deposits in Niger, Scarab
describes a Geological Model for U in Niger that would assist in target generation at the Cooper
Minerals Inc. (CM) Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects.

SCARAB
7.5.1 Stratigraphic setting

Uranium in the Carboniferous Period is located within the Guezouman – (Cominak), the Tarat –
(Somair) and the Talach Formations (Madaouela) (Table 7.1). The Guezouman Formation hosts the
Akouta deposit whilst the Tarat Formation hosts the Arlette deposit. In the Arlit region U deposits
occur 10 to 75 m below the surface, in Carboniferous deltaic sandstones overlain discordantly by
Permian arkosic sandstones and conglomerates. The Jurassic and Cretaceous Periods host U within
the Agadez Group and Irhazer Formations at the Imouraren and Azelik deposits respectively. The Tin
Negouran U prospect is stratigraphically located within the Tegama Series of the Cretaceous Period
(Bowden et al., 1981).
Table 7.1 Stratigraphic column of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin.

SCARAB
The six main units with significant U mineralisation within the Tim Mersoi sub-basin are detailed below
(Bigotte and Molinas, 1973; Bowden et al., 1981; Kogbe, 1991) (cf. Table 7.1):
Guezouman – The Guezouman Formation is at the base of the Carboniferous Lower Tagora
Series, and is composed of coarse sandstones with intercalations of silticeous argillite rich in
organic plant substance, resting in discordance over argillite of the Talach Series. Uraniferous
conglomerate is sporadically present at the base of the Guezouman. The Guezouman
Formation is furthermore characterized by three main levels of mineralization in the Afasto,
Akouta and Akola deposits (Cominak). The Madaouela deposit is also partially within the
Guezouman.
Tarat - This Formation from the Carboniferous Upper Tagora Series is composed of
sandstone of which reduced facies are locally impregnated by pyrite. Fine levels of argilo-silt
rich in plant substances can be found near the top of the formation. The Tarat is the host
formation of many deposits in the Arlit area (Somair) and is the second most important U-
containing Formation.
Madaouela - This Formation also forms part of the Carboniferous upper Tagora Series, rests
on the Tarat Formation and is composed of an alternation of clayey fine sandstone and clayey
silt rich in plant fragments; the U mineralization is associated with sandstones.
Tchirezrine - This Jurassic sandstone Formation is part of the upper Agadez Group. The
Formation includes two levels (Tchirezrine 1 and 2) separated with a layer of analcimolite
from the Abinky Formation (cf. section 6.1.3). The Tchirezrine 2 Formation hosts one of the
largest U deposits in the world namely AREVA’s Imouraren deposit (cf. Table 4.1).
Irhazer - The Cretaceous Irhazer Formation is composed of fine silty and calcareous layers,
sandstone lenses and beds of volcanic tuffs. This Formation is characterized by twelve levels
of U mineralization of which the most important is situated at its base. The Azelik deposit is
localized in this Formation.
7.5.2 Mineralogy
The U deposits of the Tim Mersoi sub-basin are generally oxidized and absent in the crystalline
network of clay or other minerals. Among the primary U minerals, coffinite is dominant and
accompanied by pitchblende and silicotitanates of U. The U hexavalent minerals such as uranotyle
and the meta-tyuyamunite are present in the lmouraren deposit. The gangue is composed of quartz,
feldspar, analcime and clayey minerals (illite, kaolinite, chlorite) with some zircon, ilmenite, magnetite,
tourmaline, garnet, anatase and leucoxene. The U minerals are frequently associated with copper

SCARAB
(Cu) minerals (native copper chalcocite, chalcopyrite, malachite, chrysocola) and also with iron (Fe)
minerals such as pyrite, hematite and goethite.
7.5.3 Source of uranium

Bowden et al. (1981) suggests that the ring structures in the Aïr Massif represent the roots of
volcanoes and that the eroded volcanic cover provided the source of U. Geochemical studies and
fission track observations on alkaline ignimbrites preserved in two Palaeozoic anorogenic centres in
the Aïr Massif, show that U is concentrated in the matrix and on secondary iron-oxide coatings
surrounding lithic and crystal fragments.
Based on variable Th/U ratios and degree of oxidation, it is concluded that the original ignimbrite field
was enriched in U, but that a considerable proportion was leached during the weathering of the
volcanic pile. Tectonic uplift, anorogenic magmatism, followed by weathering and erosion of the
volcanic cover, with sedimentation in nearby continental basins, have all contributed to the
development of U mineralisation in Niger (Bowden et al., 1981).
Figure 7.3 Geological setting for U mineralisation in Niger (From Niger Uranium, 2009).
A major source of the detritus and U which accumulated in the upper Palaeozoic sedimentary part
(Carboniferous) of the basin could have been derived from the Pre-Cambrian metamorphic and calc-
alkaline rocks as well as the alkali volcanic activity in the Aïr Massif (cf. Table 7.1). Further
sedimentological evidence in the southern part of the Aïr Massif indicates that a major part of the U
could have originated from the erosion of these volcanic complexes. Thus geochronological,
geochemical, and sedimentological studies indicate that the eroded volcanic cover of the Post
Palaeozoic alkali ring-complexes in the Aïr Massif could have provided the major source of U in

SCARAB
Cretaceous – and Jurassic (Imouraren deposit) sandstones, whilst Paleozoic volcanics could be the
source for U in the lower Carboniferous sandstones (Somair and Cominak). It has also been
suggested that the U in these Carboniferous sandstones are a result of remobilization of U, deposited
during the Mesozoic, along major fault and fracture zones (Bowden et al., 1981).
7.5.4 Pathfinder elements

According to Bigotte and Molinas (1973) U within the Jurassic-Cretaceous units of the Tim Mersoi
sub-basin, is constantly associated with copper (Cu). Scholtz (2009) stated that the pathfinder
elements for U deposits in Niger constitute U-Mo-Cu-Pb-Ni-V-Zn. Although correlation coefficient tests
on datasets did not constitute direct associations, he states that the datasets should be investigated
to incorporate a region of elevated U concentrations comparable to a region of element in question.
7.5.5 Controls on uranium precipitation

All major sandstone horizons adjacent to sub-volcanic ring complexes are potential sites of U
mineralisation in Niger, if the structural and sedimentological controls for trapping U solutions were
favourable.
Figure 7.4 Paleozoic volcanics in the Aïr Massif.

SCARAB
7.5.5.1 Structural controls

The location of U deposits in the Tim Mersoi sub-basin in close proximity to the eastern edge of the
Arlit - and other regional lineaments suggests a prominent if not significant structural implication for U
precipitation. It is suggested that faulting and fracturing of the sedimentary succession has
remobilized and therefore aided in the localization and concentration of U in the Tim Mersoi sub-basin
(Turpin et al., 1991).
7.5.5.2 Salt diapirs

It has been postulated that the presence of salt diapirs in the stratigraphy play an important role in U
precipitation in Niger (North, 2006). Salt diapirs form as a consequence of the relative buoyancy of
salt when buried beneath other types of sediment. The salt flows upward to form salt domes, sheets,
pillars and other structures (Figure 7.5).
Figure 7.5 Formation of salt diapirs. From Nely (2007).
Hydrocarbons are commonly found around salt domes because of the abundance and variety of traps
created by salt movement and the association with evaporate minerals that can provide excellent
sealing capabilities. It is this fluid transporting and entrapment associated with salt domes that play an
important role in U target identification in Niger. The salt domes are topographic anomalies and are
easily recognizable as circular bull’s eyes on Landsat images. Reservoirs associated with salt diapirs
that are circular or elliptical in plan view can further be segmented by radial faults, concentric faults,
both or neither, easing with identification (Stewart, 2006).

SCARAB
7.5.6 Summarized Geological Model for Uranium in Niger

The sandstone U deposits in the Tim Mersoi sub-basin of Niger occur in medium to coarse-grained
sandstones deposited in a continental fluvial or marginal marine sedimentary environment.
Impermeable shale/mudstone units are interbedded in the sedimentary sequence and often occur
immediately above and below the mineralized sandstone. Uranium is precipitated under reducing
conditions caused by a variety of reducing agents within the sandstone which includes carbonaceous
material (detrital plant debris, amorphous humate, marine algae), sulphides (pyrite, H2S),
hydrocarbons (petroleum), and interbedded basic volcanics with abundant ferromagnesian minerals
(e.g. chlorite) (Bowden et al., 1981).
 Significant U mineralisation is associated with the following stratigraphic units (cf. Table
7.1):
- Carboniferous Lower and Upper Tagora Unit

- Jurassic Agadez and Dabla Series
- Cretaceous Irhazer and Tegama Series
 Ore minerals include coffinite and pitchblende

 Source for U is Paleozoic volcanics in the Air Massif
 U occurs in the association U-Mo-Cu-Pb-Ni-V-Zn
 Mineralisation is associated with north-northeast south-southwest as well as north-
northwest south-southeast structural orientations
 Mineralisation is limited to cementless porous, feldspathic, fluviatile sandstones with a high
permeability, allowing easy circulation of mineralized fluids usually capped and underlain
by impermeable mudstone or clay-rich units
 Uranium is precipitated in areas of suitable reducing conditions such as in vicinity of
organic matter
7.6 Exploration techniques

Initial exploration within the Tim Mersoi sub-basin of Niger included sedimentological, structural and
stratigraphical and radiometrical field mapping. Exploration methods incorporating resistivity faced
surface disturbances due to ground aridity of the area as well as the presence of sodium carbonate in
the water table (Bigotte & Molinas, 1973) and were abandoned. Recent exploration methods
incorporated remote sensing, soil -, stream sediment - and hydrogeochemistry, alpha cup surveys
(radon) as well as magnetic - and radiometric airborne surveys and eventually drilling (Niger Uranium,
2008; Global Uranium, 2007; Nichols and Morrel, 2007; Scholtz, 2009).
In addition, because sedimentary terrains, particularly shales and immature, not well-cemented
sandstone, contribute more sediment and soluble material than do plutonic, volcanic, or metamorphic

SCARAB
terranes they are an excellent regime for hydrogeochemical and stream-sediment prospecting (IAEA,
1985).
Helium and radon are two gases produced by the radioactive decay of U. Field studies show a
dispersion of these gases from an orebody, but models quantifying the relationship of the gases to the
ore are difficult to derive. This is due to variables such as size and grade of ore, distribution of
radioactive daughters, porosity and permeability of host rock, and the geologic, hydrologic and
structural settings, which influence the concentration of the gases. Helium has a greater dispersion
than radon, which is limited by its short half-life before radioactive decay. Both gases can be useful in
identifying sandstone environments that may have the potential for hosting U deposits (IAEA, 1985).
Various exploration techniques have been useful in other sandstone hosted U occurrences. In the
Karoo (cf. Section 7.1) ground – and airborne radiometrics (Cole et al., 1991), soil and stream
sediment sampling, mapping of structural trends (Du Plessis & Scholtz, 2006; Kennedy & Scholtz,
2006) as well as the use of biological methods of exploration including termitaria sampling and
biogeochemistry (Kara & Scholtz, 2006; Scholtz et al., 2005) have proved to be successful. In an
overview of exploration activities within the Karoo during the 1970’s, Heard et al. (1991) and Le Roux
& Brynard (1994) states that stratigraphic and sedimentological knowledge is imperative in delineating
targets in the Karoo. Only after the identifying the host stratigraphy can targets be delineated through
localized geophysics and geochemistry.
Similar techniques have also been applied to the Colorado Plateau (cf. Section 6.2) and Kazakhstan
U (cf. Section 7.3) occurrences. Induced polarization (IP) and electromagnetic (EM) geophysical
surveys were completed over three areas of sedimentary U deposits in the western United States.
The EM techniques were sometimes useful for investigating general structural settings, but not for
finding U deposits per se. IP techniques were useful to help pinpoint zones of disseminated pyrite
(100 – 200 m depth) associated with the U deposits (IAEA, 1985).
In a presentation by Davis and Wilton (2008) on U exploration techniques in the U.S.A. they elucidate
on the importance of Exploration Programme design and that it is important to stick to exploration
systematics and that apart from the importance of geology, geochemistry, geophysics, remote
sensing and eventually drilling in an exploration programme, it is also important to take note of
neighbouring exploration companies and their results, but not to rely solely on the latter.

SCARAB
8. EXPLORATION
Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) have not commenced with any exploration activities on the Batalene 1 and
2 Prospects.

SCARAB
9. DRILLING
Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) have not commenced with any drilling activities on the Batalene 1 and 2
Prospects.

SCARAB
10. SAMPLING METHOD AND APPROACH
Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) have not commenced with any sampling and associated activities on the
Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects.

SCARAB
11. SAMPLE PREPARATION AND ANALYSES
Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) have not commenced with any sampling and associated activities on the

SCARAB
12. DATA VERIFICATION
The qualified person responsible for the completion of this report has relied upon the data supplied
and obtained through sources as mentioned (cf. Section 1.3). No limitations were encountered during
the verification process.

SCARAB
13. ADJACENT PROPERTIES
The Batalene 1 and 2 prospects have a similar geological setting that that of nearby Somair (Arlette
deposit) and Cominak (Akouta deposit) as well as the Madaouela deposit (Trendfield) (cf. Table 4.1)
(World Nuclear Association, 2009). The nearby Agelal Prospect (Homeland Uranium) is of importance
due to the observance of stratigraphic displacement due to the Arlit-In Azaoua flexure – fault.
Mineralisation at In Gall, Tin Negouran and Imouraren (cf. Table 7.1) is located higher in the
stratigraphic sequence and correlation is not applicable with the Batalene Prospects.
Figure 13.1 Location of significant U mineralisation near Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) prospects.
The U deposits in vicinity of Batalene 1 and 2 (Arlette-, Akouta-, and Madaouela deposits) are located
in Carboniferous deltaic sandstones, overlain unconformably by Permo-Triassic arkosic sandstones
and conglomerates (Bowden et al., 1981). The U is mainly present as pitchblende and coffinite
associated with reduced hosts. The lithological hosts are the Guezouman conglomerates of the Lower
Tagora Series (Cominak) and the Tarat Sandstone of the Upper Tagora Series (Somair) (Table 13.1).
Any exploration programme in the area should target these lithologies (cf. Section 7.5.1).

SCARAB
The Agelal Project is contiguous with the Somair and Cominak U mines. These mines are, however,
located on the eastern side of the Arlit-In Azaoua flexure – fault which has resulted in the down
faulting of all sedimentary formations to the west, meaning that the prospective Guezouman, Tarat
and Madaouela formations on the Agelal property are located up to 400 m deeper than on the eastern
side of the regional fault (Nicholls and Morel, 2007).
Table 13.1 Stratigraphic setting of Arlit, Madaouela, Imouraren and Azelik U deposits in Niger.
13.1 Arlette deposit (Somair)

Arlette is an opencast operation (approximately 60 m in depth) (World Nuclear Association, 2009).
Permian Izegouande arkosic sandstones rest unconformably on Carboniferous shales and
sandstones. Uranium is concentrated in Upper Tagora deltaic carbonaceous sandstones underlain by
a barren horizon of thin finely bedded shales and siltstones, constantly associated with abundant
carbonaceous matter and pyrite, which occurs at several stratigraphic horizons in the Tagora series
(Bowden et al., 1981).

SCARAB
The Arlette U pit shows overlying Permian Izegouande arkosic sandstone resting unconformably on
lower Carboniferous shales and sandstones (Figures 13.2 and 13.3). A thin series of finely bedded
shales and siltstones forms a barren horizon above the deltaic uraniferous carbonaceous sandstones.
PERMIAN
Izegouandane
Arkosic
sandstone
CARBONIFEROUS
Figure 13.2 Cross section of Arlette open pit (From Bowden et al., 1981).
Figure 13.3 Geological section of the Arlette U deposit showing mineralisation present in all facies
of the Tarat Formation sandstone.

SCARAB
13.2 Akouta deposit (Cominak)

Akouta is an underground operation at approximately 250 m depth (World Nuclear Association, 2009).
The mineralised body is elongated across the Akouta channel and along the Akouta syncline (Turpin
et al., 1991) and is presented as pitchblende concentrations and cementations in sandstones. The
most important mineralogical paragenesis comprises pyrite, marcasite, sphalerite and vanadiferous
chlorite.
Figure 13.4 Geological section of Arlette and Akouta U deposits, Niger (Bigotte and Molinas, 1973).
13.3 Madaouela (GoviEx, CAMECO)

The Marianne and Marylyn deposits constitute the Madaouela deposit at 9,000 t U3O8 (GoviEx, 2007).
Most of the mineralisation is situated below the water table in the Lower Carboniferous Talach
Formation of the Terada Series (cf. Section 7.5.1).
Figure 13.5 Mineralisation at Madaouela below the water table (Modified from GoviEx, 2007).
SCARAB
13.4 Agelal Prospects (Homeland)

A total of 46 deep drill holes have been completed in this project area on 5 km spacing. The regional
stratigraphy and a number of significant U results have been returned over the prospective
formations. Potential exists also in identifying U bearing formations in the upper formations along a
number of the east-northeast trending faults that splay off the main Arlit-In Azaoua flexure – fault.
Figure 13.6 Homeland drilling depicting downthrow to the west of the Arlit fault (Modified from Nicholls
and Morel, 2007).

SCARAB
14. MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING
Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) have not commenced with any mineral processing or metallurgical testing
on the Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects.

SCARAB
15. MINERAL RESOURCE AND RESERVE ESTIMATES
No Mineral Resource or Mineral Reserve estimates are available for the Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM)

SCARAB
16. OTHER RELEVANT DATA
No other relevant data is applicable.

SCARAB
17. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS
17.1 Target identification

Mineralisation in the Tim Mersoi sub-basin occurs in the Carboniferous, Jurassic and early
Cretaceous (cf. Table 7.1). Known uranium (U) deposits are associated with NNE and NNW trending
linear structure zones or faults (cf. Section 7.5.5). Any remote sensing target identification should
investigate the stratigraphical setting (cf. Section 7.5.1) and incorporate an associated lineament and
proposed diapir recognition programme (cf. Section 7.5.5).
A NE-SW geological section was constructed over the Batalene Prospects. Although this section does
not take any down or upthrow from lineaments into consideration or the accurate dip or thickness of
units, the section does show the proposed dip and direction of dip of sedimentary layers. The section
further poses to supply a generalised subsurface view of lithological units based upon Scarab’s
review of available literature and of exploration results from nearby projects.
Figure 17.1 Generalized geological section (NE-SW) of Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects, Niger.

SCARAB
Scarab has applied the Geological Model (cf. Section 7.5.6) to Batalene 1 and 2 and has
consequently undertaken a target generation programme by considering the following aspects:
- Proximity to eroded Paleozoic and post-Paleozoic alkali volcanic complexes

- Favourable stratigraphic setting derived from geological maps and reports
- North-northwest and north-northeast fault corridor detection
- Presence of salt diapirs
Both prospects are located on the western edge of the Aïr Massif within the Tim Mersoi sub-basin and
are located in vicinity of eroded Palaeozoic and post-Paleozoic alkali volcanic complexes. The
stratigraphic setting is similar to that of the nearby Somair and Cominak U deposits, albeit the
possibility of down or upthrow associated with nearby faults and fracture zones. To assist in target
identification, Scarab generated major lineaments using Landsat 7 images as well as minor
®
lineaments (Figure 17.2) using more detailed satellite imagery available from GoogleEarth . The
relative movement, if any, of the lineaments can, however, only be ascertained with detailed fieldwork
and associated drilling.
Figure 17.2 Major and minor lineaments at Batalene 1 and 2.

SCARAB
Scarab has delineated two stratigraphic target zones based upon underlying, impermeable clay rich
layers. These zones include the contact between the Tarat and Tchinezogue (clay) and contact
between the Guezouman and Talach (clay) (cf. Figure 13.4). The former hosts the Arlette – and the
latter the Akouta deposits. The Guezouman - Talach contact can also be regarded as the Talach and
Lower Tagora contact, whilst the contact between the Tarat and Tchinezogue can be regarded as the
contact between the Lower and Upper Tagora Series (cf. Table 7.1).
The contact between the Talach and Lower Tagora should be discernable in the far northeastern
corner of the Batalene 1 prospect (Figure 17.3), whilst the contact between the Upper and Lower
Tagora should be discernable on the same prospect, approximately 10 km further south (Figure 17.3).
The presence of both contact zones is easily traceable on a geological map. Scarab recommends that
an initial field reconnaissance survey incorporates an investigation to delineate outcrop, associated
geological features and radiometric surface anomalies. The presence of outcropping contact zones
would support not only stratigraphic location determination, but will also assist in postulating whether
the buried mentioned contact zones might host mineralisation worthy of further investigation.
Figure 17.3 Stratigraphic and structurally generated targets at Batalene 1.

SCARAB
Although the mentioned important lithological contacts should be present in the subsurface of both the
Batalene Prospects, their respective depths will increase from the northeast in a southwesterly
direction due to dipping of sedimentary layers (cf. Figure 17.1). It appears as if the lineaments
generated by Scarab were not responsible for any up- or downthrow of sedimentary sequences
(based upon general surface mapping) and that the lineaments are possibly not faults, but immobile
fracture zones. Scarab recommends local ground geophysics and an associated geochemical
sampling programme at three targets (not labeled to any sequence) generated on lineaments in
vicinity of surface lithological contacts of Talach and Lower Tagora Series as well as the contact
between the Lower and Upper Tagora Series (cf. Figure 17.3). Although further subsurface targets
may exist on the Prospects, these may only appear after thorough fieldwork and associated ground -
or airborne geophysics.
Although no significant U mineralisation has been detected within the sediments of the Izegouandane,
overlying the Tarat of the Upper Tagora, a thin series of finely bedded shales and siltstones forms a
barren horizon between the Series that should also constitute a permeability barrier and host
mineralisation in the Izegoundane (cf. Section 13.1). NNE-SSW and NNW-SSE trending lineaments
on this lithological contact may therefore also be regarded as target zones on Batalene 2 (Figure
17.4).
Figure 17.4 Stratigraphic and structurally generated targets at Batalene 2.

SCARAB
Scarab recommends investigating the lithological contact between the Izegouandane and the Upper
Tagora during an initial field reconnaissance survey where this contact is traversed by minor
lineaments as generated by Scarab. Four target localities have been generated based on the former
scenario and labeled accordingly (no sequence) (Figure 17.4).
®
presence of salt diapers (Figure 17.5) within the prospect areas. Although circular features were
detected (cf. Section 7.5.5.2), the associated radial cracks related to these structures were not
evident. Seven (7) targets were generated and interestingly they all appear in vicinity of minor
lineaments as generated by Scarab. This is significant as the areas may act as fluid migration zones
and constitute U precipitation and mineralisation. Scarab suggests investigating these targets during
an initial field reconnaissance survey.
Figure 17.5 Stratigraphic and structurally generated targets at Batalene 1 and 2 as well as
generated salt diapir targets.

SCARAB
17.2 Conclusion
Minerals Inc. (CM) to prepare a Technical Report according to the National Instrument 43-101
(Canadian Standards for disclosure of Mineral Projects) on two (2) Mineral (Uranium) Properties,
Batalene 1 and 2, within Niger, West Africa.
The prospects are located within the Paleozoic fringe, stratigraphically located between the
Carboniferous and Permian Periods. Most of the surface is covered by the Upper Tagora - (Somair U
deposit stratigraphy), Lower Tagora (Cominak U deposit stratigraphy) and younger, overlying
Izegouandane Series. Both prospects have a similar geological setting to that of the Somair and
Cominak U mines. A correlation in age, sedimentary setting, structural relations, ore minerals and
reducing agents exist between Niger, Karoo (South Africa), Colorado (U.S.A.) and Kazakhstan. Based
upon the similarities between the described models for sandstone hosted U mineralisation to that of
Niger, Scarab described a Geological Model for U in Niger that would assist in target generation at the
CM Prospects.
 Significant U mineralisation is associated with the following stratigraphic units in Niger:
- Carboniferous Lower and Upper Tagora Units

- Jurassic Agadez and Dabla Series
- Cretaceous Irhazer and Tegama Series
 Ore minerals include coffinite and pitchblende

 Source for U is Paleozoic volcanics in the Air Massif
 U occurs in the association U-Mo-Cu-Pb-Ni-V-Zn
 Mineralisation is associated with north-northeast south-southwest as well as north-
northwest south-southeast structural orientations
 Mineralisation is limited to cementless porous, feldspathic, fluviatile sandstones with a high
permeability, allowing easy circulation of mineralized fluids usually capped and underlain
by impermeable mudstone or clay-rich units
 Uranium is precipitated in areas of suitable reducing conditions such as in vicinity of
organic matter
Scarab has undertaken a Remote Sensing target generation programme by applying the Geological
Model to the Batalene Prospects. To assist in target identification, Scarab created major lineaments
using Landsat 7 images as well as minor lineaments using more detailed satellite imagery available
®
from GoogleEarth .

SCARAB
Scarab demarcated two stratigraphic near surface target zones based upon underlying, impermeable
clay rich layers. These zones include the contact between the Talach and Lower Tagora as well as
the contact between the Lower and Upper Tagora Series. These lithological targets coincide with U in
similar Geological Provinces where impermeable mud and clay-rich layers always under-and/or
overlie U deposits (cf. Section 7). Scarab recommends that these target contact lithologies be
nd
investigated, where possible, in a 2 phase field reconnaissance programme to include the following
techniques:
 Identify stratigraphic setting

 Take note of reductants such as organic matter
 Take note of mineral phases pyrite, marcasite, spalerite and vanadiferous chlorite
 Groundradiometrics including spectrometry to investigate potential for U and Th (Scholtz,
2009)
 Follow-up geochemical sampling for U-Mo-Cu-Pb-Ni-V-Zn including W and Se
It is important that the stratigraphic targets be regarded as target zones and not as target points. The
presence of outcropping contact zones would support not only stratigraphic location determination,
but will also assist in postulating whether the buried mentioned contact zones might host
mineralisation worthy of further investigation.
®
presence of salt diapirs within the prospect areas (cf. Figure 17.5). Although circular features were
detected (cf. Section 7.5.5.2), the associated radial cracks related to these structures were not
evident. Seven (7) targets were generated all of which appear in vicinity of minor lineaments as
generated by Scarab. This is significant as the areas may act as fluid migration zones and constitute
nd
U precipitation and mineralisation. Scarab suggests investigating these targets during a 2 phase
field reconnaissance survey to including the exploration techniques described above. The
stratigraphic setting, generated targets based upon lineament construction and salt diapir recognition
on the Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects should be regarded as significant.

SCARAB
18. RECOMMENDATIONS
18.1 Exploration programme budget

Cooper Minerals Inc. have supplied a comprehensive three year exploration and resource definition
programme and combined budget per prospect. Each year of exploration proposed is based upon
successful results from the previous year.
Table 18.1 Three year Exploration Budget estimate per prospect.
First year (All costs in US$)
Contribution to technical training 10,000

Salaries of expatriate staff 20,000
Salaries of local staff 25,000
Airborne Survey (3,000 line km @ 200 m spacing x US$ 20 / lkm) 60,000
Purchase of vehicle 15,000
Purchase and rental equipment 20,000
Office, Camp ground 25,000
Travel, Communications 20,000
Consumables, Fuel 25,000
Alpha Cup survey (1,000 stations x US$ 10 / station) 10,000
Miscellaneous 15,000
TOTAL 245,000
Second year

Reverse circulation drilling in (2,500 m x US$ 90 / m) 225,000
Down the hole geophysics (2,500 m x US$ 10 / m) 25,000
Chemical (5,000 samples x US$ 15 / sample) 75,000
Purchase of vehicle 10,000
Buy and equipment rental 15,000
Travel and communications 40,000
TOTAL 590,000

SCARAB
Third year

Surveys to reverse circulation (7,500 m x US$ 90 / m) 675,000
Down the hole geophysics (7,500 m x US$ 10 / m) 75,000
Chemical (9,000 samples x US$15 / sample) 135,000
Purchases and equipment 15,000
Travel and communications 40,000
TOTAL 1,180,000
TOTAL FOR THREE BUDGET YEARS (per project) 2,015,000
Scarab considers the proposed expenditure of US$ 2,015,00.00 per prospect over the initial 36
month period to be consistent with the potential of the project, providing it is appropriately staged such
that the results of each phase can be reviewed before proceeding to the next stage. The proposed
expenditure is considered adequate to cover the cost of the proposed programs and the budgets are
sufficient to meet minimum statutory expenditure requirements.
18.2 Phase 2 field reconnaissance budget

nd
Scarab recommends the commencement of a 2 phase field reconnaissance survey (part of year 1
expenditure) to investigate the general geological setting and target areas as demarcated in this
st nd
report (1 phase). The 2 phase field reconnaissance survey should include, but not be limited to, the
following techniques:
- Airborne geophysics (magnetics and radiometrics)

- Ground geophysics (spectrometry)
- Investigate target contact lithologies
- Identify historic drillhole collars (if any) for future down-the-hole geophysics and drillhole
optics
- Alpha track surveys on demarcated target lithologies and/or on lineaments identified with the
aid of airborne magnetics
nd
The following costs are an estimate for the 2 phase field reconnaissance programme combined for
both prospects:

SCARAB
Table 18.2. Phase 2 Field reconnaissance budget estimate for both prospects.
2nd Phase Survey (All costs in US$)
Airborne Survey (magnetic and radiometric) (200 m flight line

spacing) 120,000
Ground investigation (2nd Phase) of targets delineated in 1st phase
Traveling to Niger 3,000

Traveling to prospects (2 vehicles, 2,500 km return) 10,000
Accommodation (2 personnel for 20 days) 4,000
Sustenance (2 personnel for 20 days) 500
Purchase equipment (Satellite phone, GPS and ground
geophysical equipment) 12,000
Geochemical sampling and analyses (100 samples) 3,000
Shipping of samples to Laboratory 1,000
Alpha track survey (2,000 stations) 20,000
Miscellaneous 3,000
Further exploration recommendations based upon 2nd phase
Report writing (14 days) 4,200
TOTAL (Both prospects) 180,700

SCARAB
19. REFERENCES
AREVA in Niger. No Editor. 2009.
Bigotte G. and Molinas E. How French Geologists discovered Niger uranium deposits. World Mining.
Bowden P. Bennet J.N and Kinnaird J.A. 1981. Uranium in the Niger-Nigeria younger granite
Province. Mineralogical Magazine 44, 379 – 389.
Bumby A.J. and Guiraud R. 2005.The geodynamic setting of the Phanerozoic basins of Africa.
Journal of Afr. Earth Sci. 43. 1 - 12.
Cole D.I., Labuschagne L.S. and Söhnge A.P.G. 1991. Aeroradiometric survey for uranium and
ground water follow up in the main Karoo Basin. Memoir 76 of the Geological Survey. Department of
mineral and energy affairs, 145pp.
Cole D.I. And Wipplinger P.E. 2001 The sedimentology and molybdenum potential of the Beaufort
Group in the main Karoo Basin, South Africa. Memoir 80 of the Geological Survey. Council for
Geoscience, p. 225.
Davis J. and Wilton D. 2008. How we used to find Uranium and will these techniques work now?
Minexpo International. Las Vegas Convention Centre.
Du Plessis M. and Scholtz N. 2006. Remote sensing as an exploration method for uranium ore
deposits. Student GeoCongress.
Finch. W.I. 1996 Uranium Provinces of North America—Their Definition, Distribution, and Models U.S.
Geological Survey Bulletin 2141 United States Government printing office, Washington.
Geels J. 2006. Niger: The Bradt Travel Guide. Bradt Travel Guides.280 pp.
Global Uranium 2008. Exploration Update on Tin Negouran Project.
GoviEx Uranium 2007. Central high grade in a world class Uranium Province. Presentation.
Guiraud R.,. Bosworth W., Thierry J. and Delplanque A. 2005. Phanerozoic geological evolution of
Northern and Central Africa: An overview. Journal of Afr. Earth Sci. 43. 83 – 143.

SCARAB
Hambleton-Jones. 2007. Uranium in Africa. Geological Society of South Africa symposium: Uranium
in Africa. Johannesburg.
Heard R.G., Brynard H.J., Andersen N.J.B., Faurie J.N., Levin M., Hennop F. and Schoeman R.P.
1994. Karoo Uranium Project Report. Atomic Energy Corporation (now NECSA).
Herrmann L., Stahr K. and Vennemann K.. Atlas of Natural and Agronomic Resources of Niger and
Benin, "Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft" (German Research Foundation), the University of
Hohenheim. (No date).
IAEA 1985. Geological Environments of Sandstone Type Uranium Deposits. 391 pp. Report of the
working group on Uranium Geology by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Jaireth S., McKay A. and Lambert I. 2008. The geology of uranium deposits in Kazakhstan points
to similar deposits in Australia AusGeo News , Issue No. 89.
Kara S. and Scholtz N. 2006. The use of termitaria of Trinervitermes trinervoides (Isoptera:
Termitidae) in geochemical exploration in the Karoo Uranium Province of South Africa. Student
GeoCongress.
Kennedy J.H. and Scholtz. N. 2006. Lithostratigraphy and controlling factors of uranium mineralization
of the Mooifontein Uranium Deposit, South Africa. Student GeoCongress.
Kogbe C.A. 1991. Stratigraphy and tectonic history of the Iullemeden Basin in west Africa. S. Afr. J.
Geol. 94 (1), 19 – 31.
Le Roux J.P. and Brynard H.J. 1994. A strategy for uranium exploration in the Permo-Triassic
Beaufort Group of the main Karoo Basin, South Africa. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 18, (3). 245 – 253.
Nely G. 1994. Evaporite Sequences in Petroleum Exploration: Geophysical Methods. TECHNIP. 252
pp.
Nicholls and Morel. 2007. Technical Report (NI-43-101) on Agelal and Asekra Uranium Projects,
Niger prepared on behalf of Homeland Uranium Inc.
Niger Uranium 2008. In Gall Target Resource Statement.
North J. 2006. StockInterview.com. Exposed: The world’s best kept uranium secret. Interview with Dr.
Jon North.

SCARAB
Scholtz, N., Scholtz, O.F. and Potgieter, G.P. 2005. Potential environmental impact resulting from
inadequate remediation of uranium mining in the Karoo Uranium Province, South Africa. In: Uranium
in the Environment. Merkel, B.J. and Hasche- Berger, A. (eds.). Springer, Berlin, p. 897.
Scholtz N. 2009. Technical Report (SAMREC) on 8 Uranium (U) properties in the Tim Mersoi sub-
basin, Niger.
Stewart. 2006. Implications of passive salt diapir kinematics for reservoir segmentation by radial and
concentric faults. Marine and Petroleum Geology 23, 843-853.
Turner B.R. 1985. Uranium mineralization in the Karoo Basin, South Africa. Economic Geology 80,
256-269.
Turpin L., Clauer N., Forbes P. and Pagel M. 1991. U-Pb, Sm-Nd and K-Ar systematics of the Akouta
Uranium deposit, Niger. Chemical Geology 87, 217 – 230.
Yancey C.L. and McLemore V.T. 2008. Uranium Geology of the West. 2008. Southwest Hydrology.
Watkins K. 2008. Human Development Report. United Nations Development Programme.
World Nuclear Association. 2009. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf110.html
Internet references
www.sciencedirect.com
www.wise-uranium.org
http://earth.google.com/
www.wikipedia.org
http://www.niger-uranium.com/

SCARAB
20. DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE
20.1 Certificate of Qualified Person

As a reviewer of the report entitled “Batalene 1 and 2 Uranium Projects, Niger – Technical Report”
dated May, 2009, on the Uranium Projects of Cooper Minerals Inc, I hereby state:
1. My name is Nico Scholtz, Principal Geologist with Scarab Enterprises of PO Box 1316,
Swakopmund, Namibia.
2. My residential address is 52 Diamond Ave, Swakopmund, Namibia.
3. I am a practising geologist and a member of the South African Council for Natural and
Scientific Professions (SACNASP).
4. I am a M.Sc. graduate of Dept Geology, University of the Free State, South Africa.
5. I have practiced my profession continuously since 2004.
6. I am a “qualified person” as that term is defined in National Instrument 43-101 (Standards of
Disclosure for Mineral Projects) (the “Instrument”).
7. I have reviewed this report along with data supplied by Cooper Minerals Inc.
8. I am independent of Cooper Minerals Inc.
9. I have read the National Instrument and Form 43-101F1 (the “Form”) and this report has been
prepared in compliance with the Instrument and the Form.
10. I do not have nor do I expect to receive a direct or indirect interest in the Uranium properties
of Cooper Minerals Inc., and I do not beneficially own, directly or indirectly, any securities of
Cooper Minerals Inc. or any associate or affiliate of such company.
Dated at Swakopmund, Namibia, on 6 May 2009
…………………………………………………………
Nico Scholtz
Principal Geologist
M.Sc. Geology (Pr. Sci. Nat.)

Niger Uranium

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Niger Uranium

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

SCARAB

ENTERPRISES Batalene 1 and 2 Prospects, Niger

BATALENE 1 AND 2 PROSPECTS

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises i

BATALENE 1 AND 2 URANIUM PROJECTS, NIGER

Prepared by Scarab Enterprises on behalf of:

Cooper Minerals Inc.

Author/s Mr Nico Scholtz (M.Sc. Geology Pr. Sci. Nat.)

Date: 6 May 2009

Job Number: G09/003

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises ii

1. INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE.............................................................................1

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises iii

7.1 Karoo Uranium Province.............................................................................................................24

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises iv

Figure 3.1 Location of Niger in West Africa. ...........................................................................................5

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises v

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises vi

Property and location

Target generation and conclusions

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises vii

- Airborne geophysics (magnetics and radiometrics)

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises viii

1. INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

1.1 Scope and purpose of the Report

1.3 Sources of Information

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 1

- Sciencedirect peer reviewed publication website www.sciencedirect.com

1.4 Personal Inspection on Property

1.5 Qualifications and Experience

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 2

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 3

2. RELIANCE ON OTHER INDUSTRY EXPERTS

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 4

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

3.1 Background information on Niger

Figure 3.1 Location of Niger in West Africa.

3.2 Property Location

- Batalene 1 (BAT1) of 491.2 km²

Figure 3.2 Location of Cooper Minerals Inc. (CM) Mineral Prospects.

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 6

3.3 Mineral Tenure

3.3.1 Prospecting Licence

3.3.2 Mining Licence

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 7

3.4 Property boundary demarcation

 Minimum spending of approximately US$ 2,000,000.00 per project over 3 years.

3.6 Environmental liabilities and permits

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 8

4. LOCAL CLIMATE, PHYSIOGRAPHY, RESOURCES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Figure 4.1 Agriculture, perennial drainage and precipitation in Niger.

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 9

A general topographical investigation using topographical maps and a GoogleEarth® (vertical

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 10

Figure 4.4 Topographical map of Batalene 1 and 2.

4.3 Niger resources

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 12

Figure 4.5 Nearby properties with significant U mineralisation.

PROVEN PROBABLE MEASURED INDICATED INFERRED

AZELIK n/a 12,764 n/a n/a n/a

IN GALL n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,688 @

TIN NEGOURAN n/a n/a Work in progress

Scarab Environmental and Geological Enterprises 13

4.3.2 Other commodities