ENERGY FUELS INC 10-K

efr-20211231 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31 , 2021 or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from ___________________ to ___________________ Commission file number: 001-36204 ENERGY FUELS INC. (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Ontario, Canada 98-1067994 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 225 Union Blvd., Suite 600 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) ( 303 ) 974-2140 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Shares, no par value UUUU NYSE American EFR Toronto Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None (Title of Class) Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act: Large Accelerated Filer ☒ Accelerated Filer ☐ Non-Accelerated Filer ☐ Smaller Reporting Company ☐ Emerging Growth Company ☐ If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management's assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒ State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $ 886.2 million. The number of common shares of the Registrant outstanding as of March 10, 2022 was 156,707,285 . ENERGY FUELS INC. FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUBPARTS ITEM I: CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND RISK FACTOR SUMMARY 3 ITEM II: CAUTIONARY NOTE TO INVESTORS CONCERNING DISCLOSURE OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND RESERVES 7 ITEM III: GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS 10 ITEM IV: GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY AGENCIES AND EXCHANGES 12 PART I ITEM 1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS 13 ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS 33 ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS 52 ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES 53 ITEM 2A. OVERVIEW 54 ITEM 2B. SUMMARY OF MINERAL RESERVES AND RESOURCES 56 ITEM 2C. THE NICHOLS RANCH PROJECT 59 ITEM 2D. THE ALTA MESA PROJECT 72 ITEM 2E. THE WHITE MESA MILL 81 ITEM 2F. THE PINYON PLAIN PROJECT 87 ITEM 2G. THE ROCA HONDA PROJECT 93 ITEM 2H. THE SHEEP MOUNTAIN PROJECT 100 ITEM 2I. THE BULLFROG PROJECT 108 ITEM 2J. THE LA SAL PROJECT 113 ITEM 2K. NON-MATERIAL MINERAL PROPERTIES 124 ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 128 ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE 129 PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES 130 ITEM 6. [RESERVED] 133 ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS 134 ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK 147 ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA 149 ITEM 8A. REPORTS OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 150 ITEM 8B. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) 153 ITEM 8C. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS 154 ITEM 8D. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY 155 ITEM 8E. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS 157 ITEM 8F. NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 159 ITEM 8F(1). THE COMPANY AND DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS 159 ITEM 8F(2). BASIS OF PRESENTATION 159 ITEM 8F(3). SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES 159 ITEM 8F(4). MARKETABLE SECURITIES 165 1 ITEM 8F(5). RECEIVABLES 166 ITEM 8F(6). INVENTORIES 166 ITEM 8F(7). INVESTMENTS ACCOUNTED FOR AT FAIR VALUE 166 ITEM 8F(8). PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT AND MINERAL PROPERTIES 167 ITEM 8F(9). IMPAIRMENTS 169 ITEM 8F(10). ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS AND RESTRICTED CASH 169 ITEM 8F(11). LOANS AND BORROWINGS 170 ITEM 8F(12). CAPITAL STOCK 170 ITEM 8F(13). BASIC AND DILUTED INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE 171 ITEM 8F(14). SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS 172 ITEM 8F(15). LEASES 176 ITEM 8F(16). INCOME TAXES 177 ITEM 8F(17). SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION 179 ITEM 8F(18). COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES 180 ITEM 8F(19). FAIR VALUE ACCOUNTING 182 ITEM 8F(20). REVENUE RECOGNITION AND CONTRACTS WITH CUSTOMERS 183 ITEM 8F(21). RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS 183 ITEM 8F(22). SUBSEQUENT EVENTS 184 ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE 184 ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES 184 ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION 185 PART III ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 186 ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION 186 ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS 186 ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE 186 ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES 186 PART IV ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES 186 ITEM 16. FORM 10-K SUMMARY 189 SIGNATURES 190 2 CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND RISK FACTOR SUMMARY This Annual Report and the exhibits attached hereto (the “ Annual Report ”) contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable United States (“ U.S. ”) and Canadian securities laws, which may include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to Energy Fuels Inc.’s (the “ Company ” or “ Energy Fuels ”): anticipated results and progress of our operations in future periods, planned exploration, if warranted, development of our properties, plans related to our business, including our rare earth element (“ REE ”) initiatives, and other matters that may occur in the future, any expectation related to the proposed establishment of a uranium reserve for the United States (the “ U.S. Uranium Reserve ”) pursuant to the COVID-Relief and Omnibus Spending Bill (See Part I, Item 1, “ Proposed Establishment of a U.S. Uranium Reserve ,” below), any expectation related to any additional or future recommendations of the United States Nuclear Fuel Working Group (the “ U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group ” or “ Working Group ”), any plans we may have with regard to REE production, any plans we may have with respect to the recovery of radioisotopes for use in the production of medical isotope therapeutics, any plans we may have to evaluate the ramp-up of production at any of our properties, and the expected costs of production of any properties that may be ramped up. These statements relate to analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determinable and assumptions of management. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, schedules, assumptions, future events, or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as “expects” or “does not expect,” “is expected,” “is likely,” “budgets,” “scheduled,” “forecasts,” “intends,” “anticipates” or “does not anticipate,” “continues,” “plans,” “estimates,” or “believes,” and similar expressions or variations of such words and phrases or statements stating that certain actions, events or results “may,” “could,” “would,” “might,” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of management as of the date such statements are made. We believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, but no assurance can be given that these expectations will prove to be correct, and such forward-looking statements included in, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report should not be unduly relied upon. This information speaks only as of the date of this Annual Report. Readers are cautioned that it would be unreasonable to rely on any such forward-looking statements and information as creating any legal rights, and that the statements and information are not guarantees and may involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, and that actual results are likely to differ (and may differ materially) and objectives and strategies may differ or change from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements or information as a result of various factors. Such risks and uncertainties include global economic risks such as the occurrence of a pandemic, risks associated with our ramp-up to commercial production of REE carbonate (“ RE Carbonate ”), risks associated with the potential recovery of radioisotopes for use in the production of medical isotope therapeutics, and risks generally encountered in the exploration, development, operation, and closure of mineral properties and processing and recovery facilities, as well as risks related to the proposed establishment of a U.S. Uranium Reserve and risks related to any additional or future recommendations of the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group not benefiting us in any material way. Forward-looking statements are subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, without limitation the following risks (the “ Risk Factor Summary ”): 3 • global economic risks, including the occurrence of unforeseen or catastrophic events, such as the emergence of a pandemic or other widespread health emergency (or concerns related thereto), which could create economic and financial disruptions and require us to reduce or cease operations at some or all of our facilities for an indeterminate period of time, and which could have a material impact on our business, operations, personnel and financial condition; • risks associated with Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource estimates, including the risk of errors in assumptions or methodologies; • risks associated with changes to applicable Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource estimates disclosure rules and regulations; • risks associated with estimating mineral extraction and recovery, forecasting future price levels necessary to support mineral extraction and recovery, and our ability to increase mineral extraction and recovery in response to any increases in commodity prices or other market conditions; • uncertainties and liabilities inherent to conventional mineral extraction and recovery and/or in situ recovery (“ ISR ”); • risks associated with our ramp-up to commercial production of RE Carbonate and potentially other REE and REE-related value-added processes and facilities, at our White Mesa Mill (the “ White Mesa Mill ” or the “ Mill ”) in Utah or elsewhere including the risk: that we may not be able to produce RE Carbonate that meets commercial specifications at commercial levels or at all, or at acceptable cost levels; of not being able to secure adequate supplies of uranium and REE bearing ores in the future at satisfactory costs to us; of not being able to increase our sources of uranium and REE bearing ores to meet future planned production goals; of not being able to sell the RE Carbonate we produce at acceptable prices to us; of not being able to successfully construct and operate an REE separation facility, and potentially other downstream REE activities, including metal-making and alloying, in the future, which are currently being evaluated; of legal and regulatory challenges and delays; and the risk of technological or market changes that could impact the REE industry or our competitive position; • risks associated with the establishment of a U.S. Uranium Reserve, being subject to appropriation by the U.S. Congress, and details of implementation of the U.S. Uranium Reserve; • risks associated with any additional recommendations of the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group not benefiting us; • risks associated with the change in administration, or its lack of support of mining, uranium mining, nuclear energy or other aspects of our business, including not supporting the proposed establishment of a U.S. Uranium Reserve included in the COVID-Relief and Omnibus Spending Bill passed by the U.S. Congress in December 2020; • geological, technical and processing problems, including unanticipated metallurgical difficulties, less than expected recoveries, ground control problems, process upsets, and equipment malfunctions; • risks associated with the depletion of existing Mineral Resources through mining or extraction, without replacement with comparable Mineral Resources; • risks associated with identifying and obtaining adequate quantities of other uranium-bearing materials not derived from conventional material and sourced by third parties (“ Alternate Feed Materials ”) and other feed sources required for the operation of our Mill; • risks associated with labor costs, labor disturbances, and unavailability of skilled labor; • risks associated with the availability and/or fluctuations in the costs of raw materials and consumables used in our production processes; • risks and costs associated with environmental compliance and permitting, including those created by changes in environmental legislation and regulation, and delays in obtaining permits and licenses that could impact expected mineral extraction and recovery levels and costs; • actions taken by regulatory authorities with respect to mineral extraction and recovery activities; • risks associated with our dependence on third parties in the provision of transportation and other critical services; • risks associated with our ability to obtain, extend or renew land tenure, including mineral leases and surface use agreements, on favorable terms or at all; • risks associated with our ability to negotiate access rights on certain properties on favorable terms or at all; • risks associated with potential information security incidents, including cybersecurity breaches; • risks that we may compromise or lose our proprietary technology or intellectual property in certain circumstances, which could result in a loss in our competitive position and/or the value of our intangible assets; • risks associated with us potentially not being able to successfully develop, attract and retain qualified management personnel in the future, given that the number of individuals with significant experience in the uranium, vanadium, REE and radioisotope industries is relatively small; • the adequacy of our insurance coverage; • uncertainty as to reclamation and decommissioning liabilities; • the ability of our bonding companies to require increases in the collateral required to secure reclamation obligations; • the potential for, and outcome of, litigation and other legal proceedings, including potential injunctions pending the outcome of such litigation and proceedings; • our ability to meet our obligations to our creditors; • our ability to access credit facilities on favorable terms; • risks associated with our relationships with our business and joint venture partners; • failure to obtain industry partner, government, and other third-party consents and approvals, when required; 4 • competition for, among other things, capital, mineral properties, and skilled personnel; • failure to complete and integrate proposed acquisitions, or incorrect assessment of the value of completed acquisitions; • risks posed by fluctuations in share price levels, exchange rates and interest rates, and general economic conditions; • risks inherent in our and industry analysts’ forecasts or predictions of future uranium, vanadium, copper and REE price levels, including the prices for RE Carbonates, REE oxides, REE metals and REE metal alloys; • market prices of uranium, vanadium, copper and REEs, which are cyclical and subject to substantial price fluctuations; • risks associated with our uranium sales, if any, being required to be made at spot prices, unless we are able to enter into new long-term contracts at satisfactory prices in the future; • risks associated with our vanadium sales, if any, generally being required to be made at spot prices; • risks associated with our proposed RE Carbonate sales, if any, being tied in whole or in part to REE spot prices; • failure to obtain suitable uranium sales terms at satisfactory prices in the future, including spot and term sale contracts; • failure to obtain suitable vanadium sales terms at satisfactory prices in the future; • failure to obtain suitable copper or REE sales terms at satisfactory prices in the future; • risks associated with any expectation that we will be successful in helping the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“ EPA ”) and Navajo Nation address the clean-up of historic abandoned uranium mines; • risks associated with asset impairment as a result of market conditions; • risks associated with lack of access to markets and the ability to access capital; • the market price of our securities; • public resistance to nuclear energy or uranium extraction and recovery; • governmental resistance to nuclear energy or uranium extraction or recovery; • risks associated with inaccurate or nonobjective media coverage of our activities and the impact such coverage may have on the public, the market for our securities, government relations, permitting activities and legal challenges, as well as the costs to us of responding to such coverage; • risks associated with potential impacts of public perceptions on our commercial relations; • uranium industry competition, international trade restrictions and the impacts on world commodity prices of foreign state subsidized production; • risks associated with foreign governmental actions, policies, laws, rules and regulations, and foreign state subsidized enterprises, with respect to REE production and sales, which could impact REE prices available to us and impact our access to global and domestic markets for the supply of REE-bearing ores and the sale of RE Carbonate and other REE products and services to world and domestic markets; • risks associated with our involvement in industry petitions for trade remedies and the extension of the Russian Suspension Agreement, including the costs of pursuing such remedies and the potential for negative responses or repercussions from various interest groups, consumers of uranium, and participants in other phases of the nuclear fuel cycle, both domestically and abroad; • risks associated with governmental actions, policies, laws, rules and regulations with respect to nuclear energy or uranium extraction and recovery; • risks related to potentially higher than expected costs related to any of our projects or facilities; risks related to our ability to recover copper from our Pinyon Plain uranium project mineralized materials; • risks related to stock price, volume volatility and recent market events; • risks related to our ability to maintain our listing on the NYSE American and the Toronto Stock Exchange (“ TSX ”); • risks related to our ability to maintain our inclusion in various stock indices; • risks related to dilution of currently outstanding shares from additional share issuances, depletion of assets, etc.; • risks related to our securities, including securities regulations, and our lack of dividends; • risks related to our issuance of additional common shares under our At-the-Market (“ ATM ”) program or otherwise to provide adequate liquidity in depressed commodity market circumstances; • risks related to acquisition and integration issues, or related to defects in title to our mineral properties; • risks related to our method of accounting for equity investments in other companies could result in material changes to our financial results that are not fully within our control; • risks related to any material weakness that may be identified in our internal controls over financial reporting. If we are unable to implement/maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, negatively affecting the market price of our common stock; • risks of amendment to mining laws, including the imposition of any royalties on minerals extracted from federal lands, the designation of national monuments, mineral withdrawals or similar actions, which could adversely impact our affected properties or our ability to operate our affected properties; and • risks related to our potential recovery of radioisotopes at the Mill for use in the development and production of emerging cancer treatment therapeutics, including any expectation that: such potential recovery will be feasible or that the radioisotopes will be able to be sold on a commercial basis; all required licenses, permits and regulatory approvals will be obtained on a timely basis or at all; the cancer treatment therapeutics will receive all approvals and will be commercially successful; and the risk of technological or market changes that could impact the TAT industry or our competitive advantage. 5 Such statements are based on a number of assumptions which may prove to be incorrect, including, but not limited to, the following assumptions: that there is no material deterioration in general business and economic conditions; that there is no unanticipated fluctuation of interest rates and foreign exchange rates; that the supply and demand for, deliveries of, and the level and volatility of prices of uranium, vanadium, REEs and our other primary metals, radioisotopes and minerals develop as expected; that uranium, vanadium and REE prices required to reach, sustain or increase expected or forecasted production levels are realized as expected; that our proposed RE Carbonate production or any other REE activities, our proposed radioisotope program, or other potential production activities will be technically or commercially successful; that we receive regulatory and governmental approvals for our development projects and other operations on a timely basis; that we are able to operate our mineral properties and processing facilities as expected; that we are able to implement new process technologies and operations as expected; that existing licenses and permits are renewed as required; that we are able to obtain financing for our development projects on reasonable terms; that we are able to procure mining equipment and operating supplies in sufficient quantities and on a timely basis; that engineering and construction timetables and capital costs for our development and expansion projects and restarting projects on standby are not incorrectly estimated or affected by unforeseen circumstances; that costs of closure of various operations are accurately estimated; that there are no unanticipated changes in collateral requirements for surety bonds; that there are no unanticipated changes to market competition; that our Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource estimates are within reasonable bounds of accuracy (including with respect to size, grade and recoverability) and that the geological, operational and price assumptions on which these are based are reasonable; that environmental and other administrative and legal proceedings or disputes are satisfactorily resolved; that there are no significant changes to regulatory programs and requirements that would materially increase regulatory compliance costs, bonding costs or licensing/permitting requirements; and that we maintain ongoing relations with our employees and with our business and joint venture partners. This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect our forward-looking statements. Some of the important risks and uncertainties that could affect forward-looking statements are described further under the section headings: Item 1. Description of the Business ; Item 1A. Risk Factors ; and Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of this Annual Report. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, believed, estimated, or expected. We caution readers not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. Except as required by law, we disclaim any obligation to subsequently revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events. Statements relating to “Mineral Reserves” or “Mineral Resources” are deemed to be forward-looking statements, as they involve the implied assessment, based on certain estimates and assumptions that the Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources described may be profitably extracted in the future. We qualify all forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report by the foregoing cautionary statements . 6 CAUTIONARY NOTE TO INVESTORS CONCERNING DISCLOSURE OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND RESERVES We are a U.S. Domestic Issuer for United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“ SEC ”) purposes, most of our shareholders are U.S. residents, we are required to report our financial results under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“ U.S. GAAP ”) and our primary trading market is the NYSE American. However, because we are incorporated in Ontario, Canada and also listed on the TSX, this Annual Report also contains or incorporates by reference certain disclosure that satisfies the additional requirements of Canadian securities laws that differ from the requirements of U.S. securities laws. On October 31, 2018, the SEC adopted the Modernization of Property Disclosures for Mining Registrants (the “ New Rule ”), introducing significant changes to the existing mining disclosure framework to better align it with international industry and regulatory practice, including Canadian National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“ NI 43-101 ”), a rule developed by the Canadian Securities Administrators (the “ CSA ”) that establishes standards for all public disclosure an issuer makes of scientific and technical information concerning mineral projects. The New Rule was codified as 17 CFR Subpart 220.1300 and 229.601(b)(96) (collectively, “ S-K 1300 ”) and replaced SEC Industry Guide 7. Pursuant to the New Rule, issuers are required to comply with S-K 1300 as of their annual reports for the first fiscal year beginning on or after January 1, 2021, and earlier in certain circumstances. As such, all mineral estimates constituting mining operations that are material to our business or financial condition included in this Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2021, and in the documents incorporated by reference herein, have been prepared in accordance with both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 and are supported by pre-feasibility studies and/or initial assessments prepared in accordance with both the requirements of S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 both provide for the disclosure of: (i) “Inferred Mineral Resources,” which investors should understand have the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources and thus may not be considered when assessing the economic viability of a mining project and may not be converted to a Mineral Reserve; (ii) “Indicated Mineral Resources,” which investors should understand have a lower level of confidence than that of a “Measured Mineral Resource” and thus may be converted only to a “Probable Mineral Reserve”; and (iii) “Measured Mineral Resources,” which investors should understand have sufficient geological certainty to be converted to a “Proven Mineral Reserve” or to a “Probable Mineral Reserve.” Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of Measured or Indicated Mineral Resources will ever be converted into Mineral Reserves as defined by S-K 1300 or NI 43-101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an Inferred Mineral Resource exists or is economically or legally mineable, or that an Inferred Mineral Resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. All mineral disclosure reported in this Form 10-K has been prepared in accordance with the definitions of both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. S-K 1300 Definitions: • Development Stage Issuer: is an issuer that is engaged in the preparation of mineral reserves for extraction on at least one material property. • Development Stage Property: is a property that has mineral reserves disclosed, pursuant to S-K 1300, but no material extraction. • Exploration Stage Issuer: is an issuer that has no material property with Mineral Reserves disclosed. • Exploration Stage Property: is a property that has no mineral reserves disclosed. • Feasibility Study: is a comprehensive technical and economic study of the selected development option for a mineral project, which includes detailed assessments of all applicable modifying factors, as defined in S-K 1300, together with any other relevant operational factors, and detailed financial analyses that are necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable. The results of the study may serve as the basis for a final decision by a proponent or financial institution to proceed with, or finance, the development of the project. (1) A feasibility study is more comprehensive, and with a higher degree of accuracy, than a pre-feasibility study. It must contain mining, infrastructure, and process designs completed with sufficient rigor to serve as the basis for an investment decision or to support project financing. (2) The confidence level in the results of a feasibility study is higher than the confidence level in the results of a pre-feasibility study. Terms such as full, final, comprehensive, bankable, or definitive feasibility study are equivalent to a feasibility study. • Indicated Mineral Resource: is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with an 7 indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because an indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource, an indicated mineral resource may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. • Inferred Mineral Resource: is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. Because an inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability, an inferred mineral resource may not be considered when assessing the economic viability of a mining project, and may not be converted to a mineral reserve. • Initial Assessment: is a preliminary technical and economic study of the economic potential of all or parts of mineralization to support the disclosure of mineral resources. The initial assessment must be prepared by a qualified person and must include appropriate assessments of reasonably assumed technical and economic factors, together with any other relevant operational factors, that are necessary to demonstrate at the time of reporting that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction. An initial assessment is required for disclosure of mineral resources but cannot be used as the basis for disclosure of mineral reserves. • Measured Mineral Resource: is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because a measured mineral resource has a higher level of confidence than the level of confidence of either an indicated mineral resource or an inferred mineral resource, a measured mineral resource may be converted to a proven mineral reserve or to a probable mineral reserve. • Mineral Reserve: is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted. • Mineral Resource: is a concentration or occurrence of material of economic interest in or on the earth's crust in such form, grade or quality, and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction. A mineral resource is a reasonable estimate of mineralization, taking into account relevant factors such as cut-off grade, likely mining dimensions, location or continuity, that, with the assumed and justifiable technical and economic conditions, is likely to, in whole or in part, become economically extractable. It is not merely an inventory of all mineralization drilled or sampled. • Modifying Factors: are the factors that a qualified person must apply to indicated and measured mineral resources and then evaluate in order to establish the economic viability of mineral reserves. A qualified person must apply and evaluate modifying factors to convert measured and indicated mineral resources to proven and probable mineral reserves. These factors include, but are not restricted to: mining; processing; metallurgical; infrastructure; economic; marketing; legal; environmental compliance; plans, negotiations, or agreements with local individuals or groups; and governmental factors. The number, type and specific characteristics of the modifying factors applied will necessarily be a function of and depend upon the mineral, mine, property, or project. • Preliminary Feasibility Study (or Pre-Feasibility Study): is a comprehensive study of a range of options for the technical and economic viability of a mineral project that has advanced to a stage where a qualified person has determined (in the case of underground mining) a preferred mining method, or (in the case of surface mining) a pit configuration, and in all cases has determined an effective method of mineral processing and an effective plan to sell the product. (1) A pre-feasibility study includes a financial analysis based on reasonable assumptions, based on appropriate testing, about the modifying factors and the evaluation of any other relevant factors that are sufficient for a qualified person to determine if all or part of the indicated and measured mineral resources may be converted to mineral reserves at the time of reporting. The financial analysis must have the level of detail necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable. (2) A pre-feasibility study is less comprehensive and results in a lower confidence level than a feasibility study. A pre-feasibility study is more comprehensive and results in a higher confidence level than an initial assessment. • Preliminary Market Study: is a study that is sufficiently rigorous and comprehensive to determine and support the existence of a readily accessible market for the mineral. It must, at a minimum, include product specifications based on preliminary geologic and metallurgical testing, supply and demand forecasts, historical prices for the preceding five or more years, estimated long term prices, evaluation of competitors (including products and estimates of production volumes, sales, and prices), customer evaluation of product specifications, and market entry strategies. The study must 8 provide justification for all assumptions. It can, however, be less rigorous and comprehensive than a final market study, which is required for a full feasibility study. • Probable Mineral Reserve: is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource. • Proven Mineral Reserve: is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource. • Qualified Person: is an individual who is: (1) a mineral industry professional with at least five years of relevant experience in the type of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and in the specific type of activity that person is undertaking on behalf of the registrant; and (2) an eligible member or licensee in good standing of a recognized professional organization at the time the technical report is prepared. For an organization to be a recognized professional organization, it must: (i) be either: (A) an organization recognized within the mining industry as a reputable professional association; or (B) a board authorized by U.S. federal, state or foreign statute to regulate professionals in the mining, geoscience or related field; (ii) admit eligible members primarily on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience; (iii) establish and require compliance with professional standards of competence and ethics; (iv) require or encourage continuing professional development; (v) have and apply disciplinary powers, including the power to suspend or expel a member regardless of where the member practices or resides; and (vi) provide a public list of members in good standing. CIM and NI 43-101 Definitions: • Feasibility Study: A “feasibility study” is a comprehensive technical and economic study of the selected development option for a mineral project that includes appropriately detailed assessments of applicable modifying factors, together with any other relevant operational factors and detailed financial analysis that are necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is reasonably justified (economically mineable). The results of the study may reasonably serve as the basis for a final decision by a proponent or financial institution to proceed with, or finance, the development of the project. The confidence level of the study will be higher than that of a pre-feasibility study. • Indicated Mineral Resource: An “indicated mineral resource” is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation. An indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than that applied to a measured mineral resource and may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. • Inferred Mineral Resource: An “inferred mineral resource” is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply, but not verify, geological and grade or quality continuity. An inferred mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an indicated mineral resource and must not be converted to a mineral reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of inferred mineral resources could be upgraded to “indicated mineral resources” with continued exploration. • Measured Mineral Resource: A “measured mineral resource” is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the application of modifying factors to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling, and testing and is sufficient to confirm geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation. A measured mineral resource has a higher level of confidence than that applied to either an indicated mineral resource or an inferred mineral resource. It may be converted to a proven mineral reserve or to a probable mineral reserve. • Mineral Reserve: A “mineral reserve” is the economically mineable part of a measured and/or indicated mineral resource. It includes diluting materials and allowances for losses which may occur when the material is mined or is extracted and is defined by studies at pre-feasibility or feasibility level as appropriate that include application of modifying factors. Such studies demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction could reasonably be justified. The reference point at which mineral reserves are defined, usually the point where the ore is delivered to the processing plant, must be stated. It is important that, in all situations where the reference point is different, such as for a saleable product, a clarifying statement is included to ensure that the reader is fully informed as to what is being reported. The public disclosure of a mineral reserve must be demonstrated by a pre-feasibility study or feasibility study. 9 • Mineral Resource: A “mineral resource” is a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological characteristics of a mineral resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling. • Modifying Factors: “ Modifying factors” are considerations used to convert mineral resources to mineral reserves. These include, but are not restricted to, mining, processing, metallurgical, infrastructure, economic, marketing, legal, environmental, social, and governmental factors. • PEA: A Preliminary Economic Assessment performed in accordance with NI 43-101. A Preliminary Economic Assessment is a study, other than a pre-feasibility study or feasibility study, which includes an economic analysis of the potential viability of mineral resources. • Pre-Feasibility Study: A “pre-feasibility study” is a comprehensive study of a range of options for the technical and economic viability of a mineral project that has advanced to a stage where a preferred mining method, in the case of underground mining, or the pit configuration, in the case of an open pit, is established and an effective method of mineral processing is determined. It includes a financial analysis based on reasonable assumptions on the modifying factors and the evaluation of any other relevant factors which are sufficient for a qualified person, acting reasonably, to determine if all or part of the mineral resource may be converted to a mineral reserve at the time of reporting. A pre-feasibility study is at a lower confidence level than a feasibility study. • Probable Mineral Reserve: A Probable Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of an Indicated, and in some circumstances, a Measured Mineral Resource. The confidence in the Modifying Factors applying to a Probable Mineral Reserve is lower than that applying to a Proven Mineral Reserve. • Proven Mineral Reserve: A Proven Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource. A Proven Mineral Reserve implies a high degree of confidence in the Modifying Factors. • Qualified Person: means an individual who (a) is an engineer or geoscientist with a university degree, or equivalent accreditation, in an area of geoscience, or engineering, relating to mineral exploration or mining; (b) has at least five years of experience in mineral exploration, mine development or operation or mineral project assessment, or any combination of these, that is relevant to his or her professional degree or area of practice; (c) has experience relevant to the subject matter of the mineral project and the technical report; (d) is in good standing with a professional association; and (e) in the case of a professional association in a foreign jurisdiction, has a membership designation that (i) requires attainment of a position of responsibility in their profession that requires the exercise of independent judgment; and (ii) requires A. a favorable confidential peer evaluation of the individual’s character, professional judgement, experience, and ethical fitness; or B. a recommendation for membership by at least two peers, and demonstrated prominence or expertise in the field of mineral exploration or mining. GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS The following defined technical terms are used in this Annual Report: • % U 3 O 8 Eq: equivalent uranium grade calculated by combining uranium content and copper content by taking into account commodity price and recovery factors. • APP: An Aquifer Protection Permit, issued by ADEQ (see “ Glossary of Regulatory Agencies and Exchanges ” below). • Assay: The testing of a metal or ore to determine its ingredients and quality. • Breccia: A rock in which angular fragments are surrounded by a mass of fine-grained materials. • CAP: A Corrective Action Plan. • Copper: A red-brown metal, the chemical element of atomic number 29. • Cut-off grade: The grade (i.e., the concentration of metal or mineral in rock) that determines the destination of the material during mining. For purposes of establishing “prospects of economic extraction,” the cut-off grade is the grade that distinguishes material deemed to have no economic value (it will not be mined in underground mining or if mined in surface mining, its destination will be the waste dump) from material deemed to have economic value (its ultimate 10 destination during mining will be the processing facility). Other terms used in similar fashion as cut-off grade include net smelter return, pay limit, and break-even stripping ratio. • EA: Environmental Assessment prepared under NEPA for a mineral project. • EIS: Environmental Impact Statement prepared under NEPA for a mineral project. • eU 3 O 8 : This term refers to equivalent U 3 O 8 grade derived by gamma logging of drill holes. • Extraction: The process of physically extracting mineralized material from the ground. Exploration continues during the extraction process and, in many cases, mineralized material is expanded during the life of the extraction activities as the exploration potential of the deposit is realized. • FONSI: Finding of No Significant Impact under NEPA, as defined below, for a mineral project. • Formation: A distinct layer of sedimentary or volcanic rock of similar composition. • Grade: Quantity or percentage of metal per unit weight of host rock. • GWDP: A groundwater discharge permit, issuable by UDEQ. • Host Rock: The rock containing a mineral or an ore body. • In-situ recovery or ISR: The recovery, by chemical means, of the uranium component of a deposit without the physical extraction of uranium-bearing material from the ground. ISR utilizes injection of appropriate oxidizing chemicals into a uranium-bearing sandstone deposit by injection wells, with the uranium-bearing solution being removed by extraction wells; also referred to as “solution mining.” • Mineral: A naturally formed chemical element or compound having a definite chemical composition and, usually, a characteristic crystal form. • Mineralization: A natural occurrence, in rocks or soil, of one or more metal yielding minerals. • Mineralized material: Material that contains mineralization (e.g., uranium, vanadium and/or copper) and that is not included in an SEC Reserve as it does not meet all of the criteria for adequate demonstration of economic or legal extraction. • Monazite: a phosphate mineral with a chemical composition of (Ce,La,Nd,Th)PO 4 . It is a naturally occurring uranium- and rare earth-bearing mineral. • NEPA: The United States National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. • NOI: A Notice of Intent, filed by Energy Fuels to a regulatory agency as a part of a licensing or permitting action related to a mineral project. • Open Pit: Surface mineral extraction in which the mineralized material is extracted from a pit or quarry. • Ore: Mineral-bearing rock that can be mined, processed and concentrated profitably under current or immediately foreseeable economic conditions. A company may only refer to reserves (as that term is defined in S-K 1300) as “ore.” • Ore body: A mostly solid and fairly continuous mass of in-ground mineralization estimated to be economically mineable. • Outcrop: That part of a geologic formation or structure that appears at the surface of the Earth. • PO: Plan of Operations for a mineral project prepared in accordance with applicable United States Bureau of Land Management or United States Forest Service regulations. • Rare Earth Elements or REEs: a group of seventeen metallic elements consisting of the fifteen lanthanide elements along with scandium and yttrium. • Reclamation: The process by which lands disturbed as a result of mineral extraction activities are modified to support beneficial land use. Reclamation activity may include the removal of buildings, equipment, machinery, and other physical remnants of mining activities, closure of tailings storage facilities, leach pads, and other features, and contouring, covering and re-vegetation of waste rock, and other disturbed areas. • RoD or Record of Decision: The final approval issued by a public land management agency for a PO. 11 • Uranium: a heavy, naturally radioactive, metallic element of atomic number 92. Uranium in its pure form is a heavy metal. Its two principal isotopes are U-238 and U-235, of which U-235 is the necessary component for the nuclear fuel cycle. However, “uranium” used in this Annual Report refers to triuranium octoxide, also called “U 3 O 8 ” and the primary component of “yellowcake,” and is produced from uranium deposits. It is the most actively traded uranium-related commodity. • Uranium concentrate: a yellowish to yellow-brownish powder obtained from the chemical processing of uranium-bearing material. Uranium concentrate typically contains 70% to 90% U 3 O 8 by weight. Uranium concentrate is also referred to as “yellowcake.” • V 2 O 5 : Vanadium pentoxide, or the form of vanadium typically produced at the White Mesa Mill, also called “black flake.” • Yellowcake: Another name for Uranium Concentrate (U 3 O 8 ). GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY AGENCIES AND EXCHANGES • ADEQ: The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. • BLM: The U.S. Bureau of Land Management, an agency of the United States Department of the Interior. • CRA: The Canada Revenue Agency, of the Government of Canada. • DOC: The U.S. Department of Commerce, an executive department of the federal government. • DOE: The U.S. Department of Energy, a cabinet-level department of the United States Government. • DOI: The U.S. Department of Interior, a federal executive department of the United States Government. • DWQ: The Utah Division of Water Quality. • EIA: The U.S. Energy Information Administration, a principal agency of the U.S. Federal Statistical System. • EPA: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, an independent agency of the United States government. • MSHA: The Mine Safety and Health Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Labor. • NRC: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an independent agency of the United States government. • NYSE American: The NYSE American stock exchange, a stock exchange based in New York, New York. • OSC: The Ontario Securities Commission. • OSHA: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, an agency of the United States Department of Labor. • SEC: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, an independent agency of the United States federal government. • TCEQ: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. • TSX: The Toronto Stock Exchange, a stock exchange located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. • UDAQ: The Utah Division of Air Quality. • UDEQ: The Utah Department of Environmental Quality. • UDOGM: The Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. • USACE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, an agency of the U.S. Department of Defense. • USFS: The U.S. Forest Service, an agency of the United States Department of Agriculture. • USFW: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior. • WDEQ: The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. • WDEQ-AQD: The Air Quality Division of the WDEQ. • WDEQ-LQD: The Land Quality Division of the WDEQ. • WDEQ-WQD: The Water Quality Division of the WDEQ. • WSEO: The Wyoming State Engineer’s Office 12 PART I ITEM 1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS General Development of the Business Corporate Structure Energy Fuels Inc. (the “ Company ” or “ Energy Fuels ”) is an Ontario corporation with its corporate offices located in Lakewood, Colorado (a city in the Denver metropolitan area). It was incorporated on June 24, 1987 in the Province of Alberta under the name “368408 Alberta Inc.” In October 1987, 368408 Alberta Inc. changed its name to “Trevco Oil & Gas Ltd.” In May 1990, Trevco Oil & Gas Ltd. changed its name to “Trev Corp.” In August 1994, Trev Corp. changed its name to “Orogrande Resources Inc.” In April 2001, Orogrande Resources Inc. changed its name to “Volcanic Metals Exploration Inc.” On September 2, 2005, the Company was continued under the Business Corporations Act (Ontario). On March 26, 2006, Volcanic Metals Exploration Inc. acquired 100% of the outstanding shares of “Energy Fuels Resources Corporation.” On May 26, 2006, Volcanic Metals Exploration Inc. changed its name to “Energy Fuels Inc.” On November 5, 2013, the Company amended its Articles to consolidate its issued and outstanding, freely tradable Common Shares of the Company (the “ Common Shares ”) on the basis of one post-consolidation Common Share for every 50 pre-consolidation Common Shares (the “ Consolidation ”). All of the Company’s assets, management and employees are located in the western United States. The Company’s assets, which include uranium, vanadium and REE extraction, recovery, permitting, evaluation and exploration assets, are held directly and indirectly, as the case may be, by the Company’s wholly owned subsidiaries Energy Fuels Holdings Corp. (“ EF Holdings ”) and Strathmore Minerals Corp. (“ Strathmore ”). All of the Company’s employees are employed by its subsidiary Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. (“ EFUSA ”), a wholly owned subsidiary of EF Holdings, which also serves as operator of all of the Company’s properties. A diagram depicting the organizational structure of the Company and its active subsidiaries, including the name, U.S. state or Canadian province of incorporation, and proportion of ownership interest of each, is included as Exhibit 21.1 to this Annual Report. Energy Fuels also owns a number of inactive subsidiaries which have no material assets or liabilities and do not engage in any material business activities. Each of the Company’s subsidiaries has its principal place of business and corporate office at 225 Union Blvd., Suite 600, Lakewood, Colorado 80228, USA, though additional support offices are located at the White Mesa Mill (the “ Mill ”) and ISR facilities. The registered office of EFUSA and principal place of business for the Company is at 225 Union Blvd., Suite 600, Lakewood, Colorado 80228, USA, and the registered office of the Company is located at 82 Richmond Street East, Suite 308 Toronto, Ontario, M5C 1P1, Canada. The Company’s website address is www.energyfuels.com . The primary trading market for Energy Fuels’ Common Shares is the NYSE American under the trading symbol “ UUUU ,” and the Company’s Common Shares are also listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“ TSX ”) under the trading symbol “ EFR .” Energy Fuels is a U.S. domestic issuer for SEC reporting purposes and, in addition, is a reporting issuer in all of the Canadian provinces other than in Quebec. Options on Energy Fuels’ Common Shares are traded on The Chicago Board Options Exchange. The Designated Primary Market Maker for the options is Group One Trading, LP. Citadel Securities is the Company’s Market Maker on the NYSE American. In addition, as of December 31, 2021 the Company holds 9,439,857 shares of Virginia Energy Resources Inc. (TSXV:VUI; OTCQX:VEGYF) representing an approximate 14.8% equity interest in that company, and 13,735,186 shares of Consolidated Uranium Inc. (TSXV: CUR; OTCQB: CURUF) (“ CUR ”, f/k/a International Consolidated Uranium Inc.) representing an approximate 19.1% equity interest in the company. Business Overview Energy Fuels is engaged in conventional and in situ recovery (“ ISR ”) uranium extraction and recovery, along with the exploration, permitting, and evaluation of uranium properties in the United States. The Company also extracts and recovers vanadium from certain of its uranium projects, as market conditions warrant. In 2021, the Company commenced its ramp-up to commercial production of rare earth element (“ REE ”) carbonate (“ RE Carbonate ”), another byproduct of the uranium recovery process, and is evaluating the potential to recover isotopes from its existing process streams needed for emerging targeted alpha therapy (“ TAT ”) cancer therapeutics. The Company's Mill, located near Blanding, San Juan County, Utah, is the only conventional uranium, vanadium and REE recovery facility operating in the U.S., having a licensed capacity of over 8 million pounds of U 3 O 8 per year. In addition to uranium, the Mill can recover vanadium as a co-product of mineralized material produced from certain of its projects in Colorado and Utah and from solutions in its tailings impoundment system, as market conditions warrant. The Mill is also currently producing RE Carbonate from various uranium- and REE-bearing ores acquired from third parties and is actively 13 engaged in discussions to secure its own sources of monazite sands or other REE deposits in furtherance of a fully integrated U.S.-based REE supply chain. In addition, Energy Fuels recovers uranium from other uranium-bearing materials not derived from conventional material, referred to as “Alternate Feed Materials,” at its Mill, thereby recycling materials back into the market that would otherwise be lost to direct disposal. With its uranium, vanadium, REE and potentially radioisotope production, the Mill is quickly becoming a critical minerals hub for the U.S. Uranium, which is the fuel for carbon-free, emission-free baseload nuclear power, is one of the cleanest forms of energy in the world. The REEs we are now producing are used for the manufacture of permanent magnets for electric vehicles, wind turbines and other clean energy and modern technologies, and the radioisotopes we are evaluating for recovery from our REE and uranium processing streams have the potential to provide the isotopes needed for emerging TAT cancer-fighting therapeutics. The very heart of our business – uranium and rare-earth production and recycling – helps us play a big part in addressing global climate change, reducing air pollution, and making the world a cleaner and healthier place. In terms of conventional mining, the Company owns uranium and uranium/vanadium properties and projects in various stages of exploration, permitting, and evaluation, as well as fully permitted uranium and uranium/vanadium projects on standby. Energy Fuels also owns the Nichols Ranch Uranium Recovery Facility in Wyoming (the “ Nichols Ranch Project ”), which is a fully permitted uranium ISR facility with a licensed capacity of 2 million pounds of U 3 O 8 per year, and the Alta Mesa Project in Texas (the “ Alta Mesa Project ”), which is also a fully permitted ISR uranium production facility with a licensed capacity of 1.5 million pounds of U 3 O 8 per year, both of which are currently on standby. ISR Operations The Company conducts its ISR activities through (i) its Nichols Ranch Project in northeast Wyoming, which it acquired in June 2015 through its acquisition of Uranerz Energy Corporation (“ Uranerz ”), and (ii) its Alta Mesa Project in south Texas, which the Company acquired in June 2016 through its acquisition of Mesteña Uranium, LLC (“ Mesteña ” ) , which is now named EFR Alta Mesa LLC (“ EFR Alta Mesa ”). The Nichols Ranch Project includes: (i) a licensed and operating ISR processing facility (the “ Nichols Ranch Plant ”); (ii) licensed and operating ISR wellfields (the “ Nichols Ranch Wellfields ”); (iii) additional licensed ISR wellfields planned for future production (the “ Jane Dough Property ”), and; (iv) a licensed satellite ISR uranium project (the “ Hank Project ”), which will include an ISR satellite processing plant (the “ Hank Satellite Plant ”) that, when constructed, will produce loaded-resin, and associated planned wellfields (the “ Hank Property ”). See “ The Nichols Ranch ISR Project ” under Item 2 below. Also through the acquisition of Uranerz, the Company acquired the West North Butte property (the “ West North Butte Property ”) and the North Rolling Pin property (the “ North Rolling Pin Property ”), as well as the Arkose Mining Venture (the “ Arkose Mining Venture ”), which is a joint venture of Wyoming ISR properties held 81% by Energy Fuels. The Nichols Ranch Project is an ISR facility currently on standby that recovers uranium through a series of injection and recovery wells. Using groundwater fortified with oxygen and sodium bicarbonate, uranium is dissolved within a deposit. The uranium-bearing groundwater is then collected in a series of recovery wells and pumped to the Nichols Ranch Plant where the uranium is extracted from the water. The Nichols Ranch Plant creates a yellowcake slurry that is transported by truck to the White Mesa Mill, where it is dried and packaged into drums that are shipped to uranium conversion facilities. Construction of the Nichols Ranch Plant, other than the elution, drying and packaging circuits, was completed in 2013, and it commenced uranium recovery activities in the second quarter of 2014. In September of 2015, the Company commenced construction of an elution circuit at the Nichols Ranch Plant, which was completed and began operations in February 2016. The Nichols Ranch Project was placed on standby in 2020. As a result, the Company recovered de minimis pounds of U 3 O 8 from the Project in 2021 and expects to recover de minimis quantities of U 3 O 8 in 2022. Nichols Ranch is expected to be able to ramp back up to commercial production levels with limited required capital within approximately twelve months of a production decision. See Part II, Item 7 “ Outlook: ISR Activities. ” The Alta Mesa Project is a fully licensed, permitted and constructed ISR processing facility that has an operating capacity of 1.5 million pounds of uranium per year and comprises a total of 195,501 contiguous acres of land. The Alta Mesa Project is currently on standby and ready to resume production, as market conditions warrant. It is expected to be able to reach commercial production levels with limited required capital within approximately twelve months of a production decision. See “ The Alta Mesa Project ” under Part I, Item 2 below. Conventional Operations The Company conducts its conventional uranium, REE, vanadium and potential medical isotope extraction and recovery activities through the Mill, which is the only operating conventional uranium, REE and vanadium processing facility in the 14 United States. The Mill located near Blanding, San Juan County, Utah, is centrally located such that it can be fed by a number of the Company’s uranium and uranium/vanadium projects in Colorado, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico, as well as by ore purchases or toll milling arrangements with third parties in the region, as market conditions warrant. The Mill is licensed to process 2,000 tons of ore per day. It is primarily a uranium recovery facility but can also recover REEs and vanadium. The Mill is also evaluating the potential to recover certain radioisotopes from its existing process streams that can be used for medical purposes. In addition, the Mill can recycle other uranium-bearing materials not derived from conventional ore, known as Alternate Feed Materials, for the recovery of uranium, alone or in combination with other metals. In this regard, the Company is currently evaluating a number of potential Alternate Feed Materials for the recovery of REEs in addition to uranium. The Mill has historically operated on a campaign basis, whereby mineral processing occurs as mill feed, contract requirements, as market conditions warrant. Over the years, the Company’s own, and third-party owned, conventional uranium properties in Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico have been both active and on standby in response to changing market conditions. From 2007 through 2014, running on a campaign basis, the Mill recovered on average over 1 million pounds of U 3 O 8 per year from conventional sources, including its La Sal Project, Daneros Project, and Tony M property in Utah (the latter two of which were sold in 2021, see Part I, Item 1 “ Development of the Business — Major Transactions over the Past Five Years ”); its Arizona 1 Project and Pinenut Project (which is currently almost fully reclaimed) in Arizona; and Alternate Feed Materials. During 2016, the Mill recovered a total of 680,000 pounds of U 3 O 8 , of which 433,000 pounds were recovered from conventional materials from the Company’s Pinenut Project and 248,000 pounds from processing Alternate Feed Materials. During 2017, the Mill recovered 310,000 pounds of U 3 O 8 from processing tailings pond solutions and 1,000,000 pounds from processing Alternate Feed Materials, of which a total of 360,000 pounds were for the Company’s account and 950,000 pounds were for the account of third parties. During 2018, the Mill recovered 215,719 pounds of U 3 O 8 from processing tailings pond solutions and 561,628 pounds from processing Alternate Feed Materials, of which a total of 82,709 pounds were for the Company’s account and 448,919 pounds were for the account of third parties under a tolling arrangement. In late 2018, the Mill shifted to producing vanadium from tailings pond solutions and, during 2019, 1,807,732 pounds of V 2 O 5 were produced from tailings pond solutions for the Company's own account, and no uranium was produced at the Mill. During 2020, the Company recovered approximately 190,500 pounds of U 3 O 8 at the Mill from in-circuit uranium inventories extracted from the previous year's vanadium pond-return campaign, and from Alternate Feed Materials, as well as approximately 67,000 pounds of V 2 O 5 from in-process solutions from the 2019 vanadium pond-return campaign. During 2021, the Company began ramping up production of RE Carbonate, while recovering de minimis quantities of uranium and vanadium. See Part II, Item 7 “ Outlook: Conventional Extraction and Recovery Activities. ” During 2021, the Company recovered de minimis quantities of U 3 O 8 at the Mill. The Company is also ramping up its commercial production of a mixed RE Carbonate, having so far produced approximately 200 tons of mixed RE Carbonate at the Mill, which it sold to REE separation facilities outside of the U.S. in 2021. To the extent not sold, the Company expects to stockpile mixed RE Carbonate at the Mill for future separation and other downstream REE processing at the Mill or elsewhere. See Part II, Item 7 “ Outlook: Rare Earth Sales .” During 2022, the Company expects to recover 100,000 to 120,000 pounds of U 3 O 8 and 300 to 450 tonnes of total rare earth oxide (“ TREO ”) at the Mill. Part II, Item 7 " Outlook: Overview: Extraction and Recovery Activities Overview. " In addition, the Company currently has approximately 691,000 pounds of finished U 3 O 8 inventory held at the Mill and the conversion facilities owned by ConverDyn and Cameco, along with another 355,000 pounds of U 3 O 8 contained in stockpiled Alternate Feed Material and mineralized material inventory that can be recovered in the future for the proposed U.S. Uranium Reserve or as general market conditions warrant. In addition, there remains an estimated 1.0 to 3 million pounds of solubilized recoverable V 2 O 5 inventory remaining in the Mill's tailings facility awaiting future recovery, as market conditions may warrant. See Part II, Item 7 “ Outlook: Conventional Extraction and Recovery Activities. ” The Company continues to receive and process Alternate Feed Materials at the Mill, as well as low-grade mineralized material from the cleanup of a conventional mine in northwest New Mexico. At the Company’s permitted Pinyon Plain Project, standby and environmental compliance activities continued during 2021, including activities to replace the Company’s existing General Permits with an Individual Permit, as issued by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (“ ADEQ ”). The timing to extract and process mineralized material from the Pinyon Plain Project will be based on market conditions, available financing, and sales requirements. The Company’s Pinenut Project, where mineral extraction activities occurred until September 2015, has been depleted and is now almost fully reclaimed, with clean closure pending the Company’s submittal of a Clean Closure Report to ADEQ, which is expected to occur in 2022. The Company also pursued a small-scale test mining campaign targeting vanadium at its La Sal Complex in 2018 and early 2019, along with rehabilitation of existing mine workings, which ceased in 15 early 2020. All the Company’s other conventional properties and projects are currently in the permitting process or on standby pending improvements in market conditions. The Company also owns the Sheep Mountain Project (the “ Sheep Mountain Project ”), which is a conventional uranium extraction project located in Wyoming. Due to its distance from the Mill, the Sheep Mountain Project is not expected to be a source of feed material for the Mill. The Sheep Mountain Project consists of permitted open pit and underground extraction components (the “ Sheep Mountain Extraction Operation ”) and a planned processing facility to process extracted mineralized material (the “ Sheep Mountain Processing Operation ”), which has not yet been permitted. The Company’s principal conventional properties include the following: • the Mill, a 2,000 ton per day uranium, vanadium and REE processing facility located near Blanding, Utah, held through the Company’s subsidiary EFR White Mesa LLC. See “ The White Mesa Mill ” under Part I, Item 2; • the Pinyon Plain Project, which is a fully permitted uranium project with all surface facilities and a shaft in place (see “ The Pinyon Plain Project ” under Part I, Item 2); • the Wate project (the “ Wate Project ”), which is a uranium deposit in the permitting stage; the Arizona 1 project (the “ Arizona 1 Project ”), which is a fully permitted uranium project on standby; and the EZ properties (“ EZ Properties ”), which are uranium deposits in the exploration and evaluation stage. All the Company’s Arizona Strip properties are held by the Company’s subsidiary EFR Arizona Strip LLC, with the exception of the Wate Project, which is held by the Company’s subsidiary Wate Mining Company LLC. See “ Non-Material Mineral Properties – Other Conventional Projects – Arizona Strip ” under Part I, Item 2; • the Roca Honda Uranium Project (the “ Roca Honda Project” ), which is located near the town of Grants, New Mexico, held by the Company’s subsidiaries Strathmore Resources (US), Ltd. and Roca Honda Resources LLC. See “ The Roca Honda Project ” under Part I, Item 2; • the Sheep Mountain Project, which is a uranium project located near Jeffrey City, Wyoming, including permitted open pit and underground components held by the Company’s subsidiary Energy Fuels Wyoming Inc. See “ The Sheep Mountain Project ” under Part I, Item 2; • the Bullfrog Project (the “ Bullfrog Project ”), which is located in south central Utah near the town of Ticaboo, and which is held by the Company’s subsidiary EFR Henry Mountains LLC. See “ Bullfrog Project ” under Part I, Item 2; • the La Sal complex of uranium and uranium/vanadium projects (the “ La Sal Project ”) (see “ The La Sal Project ” under Part I, Item 2) and the Whirlwind uranium/vanadium project (the “ Whirlwind Project ”), both of which are located near the Colorado/Utah border (the “ Colorado Plateau ”) and, in addition to nearby exploration properties, are held by the Company’s subsidiary EFR Colorado Plateau LLC. See “ Non-Material Mineral Properties – Other Conventional Projects – Colorado Plateau ” under Part I, Item 2; and • a number of non-core uranium properties, which are held in various of the Company’s subsidiaries. See “ Non-Material Mineral Properties ” under Part I, Item 2. See also Part I, Item 1. “ Development of the Business: Major Transactions over the Past Five Years ” for a description of the Company’s recent sale of certain of its non-core conventional uranium mining assets to CUR. Mineral Exploration Energy Fuels holds a number of exploration properties in the Colorado Plateau, Arizona Strip, and Powder River Basin Districts. Energy Fuels conducted intermittent exploration drilling on numerous projects in the period from February 2007 through December 2013. Several of those projects have been abandoned or sold. No further exploration drilling has been performed at these properties since 2013. See “ Non-Material Mineral Properties ” under Part I, Item 2 below. The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business On April 13, 2020, the Company announced its entry into the REE sector by embarking on a program to evaluate the production of REEs and uranium at the Mill from uranium and REE-bearing mineralized materials, thereby taking a step towards bringing the REE supply chain back to the U.S. REEs are a group of 17 chemical elements (the 15 elements in the lanthanum series, plus yttrium and scandium) that have a variety of industrial, energy, and defense uses, including advanced permanent magnets for electric vehicles and wind turbines, communications technology, clean energy production, consumer electronics, defense systems, lasers and numerous other applications. See “ The Rare Earth Element Market ” below. 16 On November 3, 2020, the Company announced it had produced a mixed RE Carbonate on a pilot scale at the Mill, using existing Mill infrastructure and technologies, along with the contained uranium, from a sample of monazite sands from a North American source. Monazite sands are a valuable natural uranium ore and also one of the highest-grade REE minerals in the world . The RE Carbonate is an intermediate product which is sent to an REE separation facility for separation into individual REE oxides, which is the next step in producing usable REE products. See “ The Rare Earth Element Market ” below. On December 14, 2020, the Company announced it had entered into a three-year supply agreement with The Chemours Company (NYSE:CC) (“ Chemours ”) to acquire natural monazite sands from Chemours’ Offerman Mineral Sand Plant in Georgia for processing at the Mill for the production of a marketable mixed RE Carbonate, as well as for the recovery of the contained uranium, representing an important step toward re-establishing a fully integrated U.S. REE supply chain. On March 1, 2021, the Company announced an agreement in principle with Neo Performance Materials Inc. (“ Neo ”) under which the Company will process monazite sands into a mixed RE Carbonate at the Mill for use as feed material for Neo's rare earth separations facility in Sillamäe, Estonia (“ Silmet ”), thereby creating a new REE production initiative spanning European and North American critical material supply chains. Neo will then process the RE Carbonate into separated REE materials for use in REE permanent magnets and other rare earth-based advanced materials. Silmet has been separating REEs into commercial value-added products for more than 50 years. In addition to supplying RE Carbonate to Neo, Energy Fuels also announced it is evaluating the potential to develop its own separation capabilities at the Mill, or nearby, and possibly adding metals, alloys, and REE permanent magnets manufacturing capabilities. As a first step, the Company hired the French firm, Carester SAS (“ Carester ”), a leading global consultant in the production of separated REE products, to produce a scoping study, including capital and operating costs needed for full commercial scale REE separations capability at the Mill, which would be the next important step towards fully integrating a U.S. REE supply chain in the coming years, in addition to continuing to supply RE Carbonate to European markets over the long-term. Based on the results of the scoping work, the Company is evaluating installing a full separation circuit at the Mill to produce both “light” and “heavy” separated REE oxides in the coming years, subject to successful licensing, financing, and commissioning and continued strong market conditions, and has hired Carester to support these REE separation initiatives. During Q1-2022, the Company began commercially separating La and Ce from its RE Carbonate on a small scale using an existing solvent extraction circuit at the Mill. This represents the first commercial level REE separation to occur in the U.S. in many years. The Company has been performing laboratory-scale REE separations for the last several months on a 24/7 basis, successfully executing the La, Ce, and NdPr separations at high-purities and with excellent recoveries. On April 21, 2021, the Company announced the execution of a non-binding memorandum of understanding (“ MOU ”) for the supply of natural monazite sands from IperionX Limited (“ IperionX ”) (formerly, Hyperion Metals Limited) Titan Project in Tennessee, if and when the project is developed and mined. IperionX’s Titan Project covers a large area of heavy mineral sands properties in Tennessee prospective for titanium, zircon, Monazite and other valuable minerals such as high-grade silica sand and other refractory minerals. On April 23, 2021, the Company announced that the U.S. Department of Energy (“ DOE ”) Office of Fossil Energy and National Energy Technology Laboratory had exercised their option to award Energy Fuels, working with a team from Penn State University, an additional $1.75 million to complete a feasibility study on the production of REE products from natural coal-based resources, as well as from other materials such as REE-containing ores like the natural monazite sands the Company is currently processing at the Mill. This award follows the DOE providing Energy Fuels a $150,000 contract in 2020 for the successful completion of a conceptual design for the same initiative, resulting in a total award to Energy Fuels of $1.9 million. The feasibility study is intended to support a cost estimate for the production of individually separated rare earth oxides and rare earth metals and alloys from coal-based resources or other resources, including monazite, within the U.S., with a focus on REEs for the production of commodity and defense-related products. On July 7, 2021, the Company announced that the first container (approximately 20 tonnes of product) of an expected 15 containers of mixed RE Carbonate had been successfully produced by Energy Fuels at the Mill and was en route to Neo’s Silmet rare earth separations facility in Estonia. During 2021, the Company delivered approximately 270 tonnes of mixed RE Carbonate to Neo’s Silmet facility for separation into individual REE oxides, and expects to deliver approximately 650 to 1,000 tonnes of RE Carbonate to Silmet in 2022. See Part II, Item 7 “ Outlook: Update on Rare Earth Element Initiative .” This commercial-scale production of RE Carbonate by Energy Fuels from a U.S. mined rare earth resource positions Energy Fuels as the only company in North America that currently produces a Monazite-derived, enhanced REE material. The physical delivery of this product also represents the launch of a new, environmentally responsible REE supply chain that allows for source validation and tracking from mining through to final end-use applications for manufacturers in North America, Europe, Japan, and other nations. 17 On December 15, 2021, the Company announced the execution of an MOU with Nanoscale Powders LLC (“ NSP ”) for the development of a novel technology for the potential production of REE metals, subject to the finalization of definitive agreements. Producing REE metals and alloys is a key step in a fully integrated REE supply chain, after commercial production of separated REE oxides and before the manufacture of neodymium iron boron (“ NdFeB ”) magnets used in electric vehicles, wind generation and other clean energy and advanced technologies. The production of REE metals utilizing this technology would involve feeding anhydrous REE chloride materials, which are free of water, into a molten sodium bath. A rapid reaction takes place between the molten sodium and the REE chlorides. The process is highly exothermic, releasing energy, so the molten sodium acts to control the rate of the reaction. The reaction products are REE metal and sodium chloride, commonly known as salt. The Company believes the NSP sodium reduction of REE metals has several advantages over the industry standard REE metal making method, which utilizes electrolytic reduction of REE oxides in molten lithium fluoride/REE fluoride baths. First, the NSP process does not have any associated air emissions, and therefore presents a significant improvement over the current technology, which emits carbofluoromethane (CF 4 ) gas, which is a powerful greenhouse gas emitter. Second, it does not consume graphite crucible materials and is expected to utilize significantly less energy and labor. Finally, the NSP process requires anhydrous chloride feeds, which we believe can be generated directly from rich liquor streams coming from the Mill's planned REE separations circuit. This could eliminate the need for oxalate precipitation and calcination of materials destined for REE metal making. As a result of these factors, the Company believes operating costs could potentially be significantly less than conventional REE metal-making methods. See also “ The Rare Earth Element Market ,” below, for further details on the REE market and Part II, Item 7. “ Rare Earth Sales ” and “ Update on Rare Earth Element Initiative ” for further details on the above-referenced REE developments. The Company’s mixed RE Carbonate production from monazite sand ores utilizes only a very small amount of the Mill’s ore production capacity. The Company has a goal to increase production in the future to approximately 15,000 tons or more of monazite sands per year. For comparison, the Mill is licensed and designed to process 2,000 tons of ore per day on average, or 720,000 tons of ore per year. Therefore, 15,000 tons would represent approximately 2% of its capacity. If the Company is successful in securing 15,000 tons of ore similar to the Chemours monazite, the Company would be able to produce approximately 50% of current U.S. REE demand in a mixed RE Carbonate. Furthermore, since monazite is typically comprised of approximately 55% recoverable uranium and REEs, the total volume of the resulting waste is significantly lower than for most other Mill feeds. The Company currently has 1.5 million tons of existing capacity in its fully constructed 1,000-year design tailings impoundments. Therefore, the annual waste streams from monazite ore processing are expected to represent less than 1% of existing tailings capacity. Because the Company is obtaining monazite from Chemours’ existing mining facilities in Georgia, U.S. and utilizing its existing Mill, it has been able to avoid the significant time and cost required to license and develop new facilities. In addition, since the monazite sands are currently being separated from other mineral sands in Georgia and elsewhere, the Company will only incur the cost to acquire the monazite, thereby avoiding mining costs and associated risks. If the Company proceeds to develop REE separation and other capabilities at the Mill or elsewhere, additional capital expenditure would be required for those activities. There are a number of risks inherent to the Company’s REE activities. See “ Item 1A. Risk Factors ” under Item 1A, below. The Company’s Strategic Alliance for the Development of Radioisotopes for Medical Therapeutics On July 28, 2021, the Company announced the execution of a Strategic Alliance Agreement with RadTran, a technology development company focused on closing critical gaps in the procurement of medical isotopes for TAT cancer therapeutics and other applications. TAT is an in-development method of targeted radionuclide therapy of various cancers. It employs radioactive substances which undergo alpha decay to treat diseased tissue at close proximity. It has the potential to provide highly targeted treatment, especially to microscopic tumor cells. As in diagnostic nuclear medicine, appropriate alpha-emitting radionuclides can be chemically bound to a targeting biomolecule, such as a peptide, which carries the combined radiopharmaceutical to a specific treatment point (the cancerous cells). During the last decade, radiolabeled peptides that bind to different receptors on the tumors have been investigated as potential therapeutic agents both in the preclinical and clinical settings. Peptides, such as octreotide, alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone analogues, arginine-glycine-aspartic acid-containing peptides, bombesin derivatives, and others may all be feasible for use with alpha-emitters. The primary advantage of alpha particle emitters over other types of radioactive sources is their very high linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness. By comparison, beta particle emitters such as yttrium-90 can travel considerable distances beyond the immediate tissue before depositing their energy, thereby causing damage to surrounding healthy tissues, while alpha 18 particles deposit their energy in 70–100 μm long tracks, thereby causing significantly less harm to surrounding healthy tissues. Further, alpha particles are more likely than other types of radiation to cause double-strand breaks to DNA molecules, which is one of several effective causes of cell death. In other words, t he high level of radiobiological effectiveness of alpha particles, in comparison with beta emissions, requires fewer particle tracks to induce cell death. Though many alpha emitters exist, useful isotopes need to have sufficient energy to cause damage to cancer cells, while at the same time have a half-life that is long enough to provide a therapeutic dose without remaining long enough to damage surrounding healthy tissue. Clinically effective alpha particle-emitting isotopes for cancer therapy should therefore have a short half-life, which will limit long-term radiation exposure and allow for the production, preparation, and administration of these isotopes for clinical use and application. Radium 223 dichloride is the first-in-class, commercially available targeted alpha therapy approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with bone metastases. Given the established overall survival benefit conferred by radium 223 for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, several other targeted alpha therapies are being investigated in clinical trials across many tumor types. Under its strategic alliance with RadTran, the Company is evaluating the feasibility of recovering Th-232 and Ra-226 from its existing RE Carbonate and uranium process streams at the Mill and, together with RadTran, is evaluating the feasibility of recovering Ra-228 from the Th-232 and Th-228 from the Ra-228 and concentrating Ra-226 to commercial specifications at the Mill using RadTran technologies. Recovered Ra-228, Th-228 and Ra-226 would then be sold to pharmaceutical companies and others to produce Pb-212, Ac-225, Bi-213, Ra-224 and Ra-223, which are the leading medically attractive TAT isotopes for the treatment of cancer at this time. Existing supplies of these isotopes for TAT applications are in short supply, and methods of production are costly and currently cannot be scaled to meet the demand created as new drugs are developed and approved. This is a major roadblock in the research and development of new TAT drugs as pharmaceutical companies wait for scalable and affordable production technologies to become available. Under this initiative, the Company has the potential to recover valuable isotopes from its existing process streams, therefore recycling back into the market material that would otherwise be lost to disposal for use in treating cancer. Activities being undertaken by the Company at this time include evaluations of the technical feasibility of recovering Th-232, Ra-228 and Th-228 from the Mill’s RE Carbonate process streams, and Ra-226 from the Mill’s uranium process streams; the permitting and licensing required to separate and recover Th-232, Ra-228, Th-228 and Ra-226 at the Mill; and the commercial feasibility of this project. There are a number of risks inherent to the Company’s isotope activities. See “ Item 1A. Risk Factors ” under Item 1A, below. San Juan County Clean Energy Foundation On September 16, 2021, the Company announced its establishment of the San Juan County Clean Energy Foundation (the “ Foundation ”), a fund specifically designed to contribute to the communities surrounding the Mill in Southeastern, Utah. Energy Fuels deposited an initial $1 million into the Foundation at the time of formation and anticipates providing ongoing annual funding equal to 1% of the Mill’s future revenues, providing funding to support local priorities. The Foundation will focus on supporting education, the environment, health/wellness, and local economic development in the City of Blanding, San Juan County, the White Mesa Ute Community, the Navajo Nation and other area communities. Development of the Business: Major Transactions over the Past Five Years Over the past five years, the Company has completed the following major transactions : On October 27, 2021 (the “ Closing Date ”), CUR and the Company jointly announced the closing of a transaction (the “ CUR Sale ”) whereby CUR acquired a portfolio of Energy Fuels’ non-core conventional uranium projects located in Utah and Colorado, including the Daneros mine, the Tony M mine (formerly a part of the Bullfrog Project), the Rim mine, the Sage Plain project (formerly a part of the La Sal Project), and several DOE leases located in Colorado, in exchange for the following consideration: • $2,000,000 in cash on the Closing Date; • the issuance of 11,860,101 Common Shares of CUR, constituting 19.9% of the issued and outstanding Common Shares of CUR immediately after the Closing Date, at a price per share equal to the closing price of the Common Shares of CUR on the TSX Venture Exchange on the last trading day immediately prior to issuance; • an additional CDN$3,000,000 in cash payable on or before the 18-month anniversary of the Closing Date; • an additional CDN$3,000,000 in cash payable on or before the 36-month anniversary of the Closing Date; and • the commitment to make production payments on a per-project basis totaling CDN$5,000,000 as set forth pursuant to individual production payment agreements executed on the Closing Date. 19 As a part of the CUR Sale, the parties entered into a number of mine operating agreements pursuant to which the Company will act, through EFUSA, as operator to the sale projects and pending Daneros mine litigation (see Part II, Item 8, Note 18) “ Commitments and Contingencies ,” below) in accordance with a program and budget negotiated annually by the parties, in exchange for which the Company will receive reimbursement for all direct costs in addition to an overhead allocation and management fee. These non-core conventional uranium project assets met held-for-sale criteria, but as these assets had no carrying value, there were only asset retirement obligations of $0.27 million separately presented for the year ended December 31, 2021. In August 2018, the Company acquired royalties on the Nichols Ranch Project, along with royalties on several operating, standby and advanced-stage ISR projects in Wyoming owned and operated by Power Resources, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cameco Corporation. In May 2018, the Company sold its non-core Reno Creek Property to Uranium Energy Corp. 2021 Corporate Developments On March 1, 2021, the Company and Neo announced a new rare earth production initiative spanning European and North American critical material supply chains. Under an agreement in principle signed on March 1, 2021 by the companies' respective affiliates, subject to completion of definitive agreements, Energy Fuels will process natural monazite sands into an RE Carbonate beginning in March or April 2021 and ship a portion of that production to Silmet. Neo will then process the RE Carbonate into separated REE materials for use in REE permanent magnets and other REE-based advanced materials. The Company also announced that, in addition to supplying RE Carbonate to Neo, Energy Fuels is evaluating the potential to develop U.S. separation capabilities at the Mill, or nearby, as it works to increase its monazite sand supplies, thereby fully integrating a U.S. REE supply chain in the coming years, in addition to supplying RE Carbonate to European markets. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. Effective March 18, 2021, the Company filed a new base shelf registration statement on Form S-3 with the SEC allowing the Company to issue Common Shares, warrants, subscription receipts, preferred shares, debt securities, or any combination of such securities as units, in amounts, and at prices, and on terms to be determined based on market conditions at the time of sale, and as set forth in an accompanying prospectus supplement, for an aggregate offering amount of up to US$300 million during the 36-month period that the statement remains effective. On March l6, 2021, the Company received a receipt for a corresponding base shelf prospectus in Canada for an aggregate offering amount in Canada of up to US$300 million. On April 9, 2021, the Company filed a prospectus supplement to its effective U.S. registration statement on Form S-3 in connection with its Controlled Equity Offering SM Sales Agreement with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC and Roth Capital Partners, LLC, dated May 6, 2019. Pursuant to the ATM prospectus supplement, the Company is permitted, at its discretion from time to time, to sell up to an additional $33.5 million of Common Shares under its ATM program, with sales only being made on the NYSE American at then-prevailing market prices, or any other existing trading market of the common shares in the United States. On April 21, 2021, the Company announced the execution of a non-binding MOU for the supply of natural monazite sands from IperionX’s Titan Project in Tennessee, if and when the project is developed and mined. IperionX's Titan Project covers a large area of heavy mineral sands properties in Tennessee prospective for titanium, zircon, Monazite and other valuable minerals such as high-grade silica sand and other refractory minerals. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. On April 23, 2021, the Company announced that the DOE Office of Fossil Energy and National Energy Technology Laboratory had exercised their option to award Energy Fuels, working with a team from Penn State University, an additional $1.75 million to complete a feasibility study on the production of REE products from natural coal-based resources, as well as from other materials such as REE-containing ores like the natural monazite sands the Company is currently processing at the Mill. This award follows the DOE providing Energy Fuels a $150,000 contract in 2020 for the successful completion of a conceptual design for the same initiative, resulting in a total award to Energy Fuels of $1.9 million. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. On April 27, 2021, the Company announced it had engaged Carester to prepare a scoping study for the development of a solvent extraction REE separation circuit at the Mill. Based in Lyon, France, Carester is a leading global consultant in the production of separated REE products, with expertise in designing, constructing, operating and optimizing REE production 20 facilities globally. Carester was engaged to support Energy Fuels' planned development of full commercial scale REE separation capabilities at the Mill, utilizing the Mill's existing equipment and infrastructure to the extent applicable, to create a continuous, integrated and optimized rare earth production sequence. Carester's scoping work included an evaluation of the Mill's current monazite leaching process, preparation of an REE separation flow sheet, capital and operating expense estimates, incorporation of new technologies where applicable, and recommendations on equipment vendors. Based on the results of the scoping work, the Company is evaluating installing a full separation circuit at the Mill to produce both “light” and “heavy” separated REE oxides in the coming years, subject to successful licensing, financing, and commissioning and continued strong market conditions, and has hired Carester to support these REE separation initiatives. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. On June 7, 2021, the Company filed a prospectus supplement to its effective U.S. registration statement on Form S-3 in connection with its Controlled Equity Offering SM Sales Agreement with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC and Roth Capital Partners, LLC, dated May 6, 2019. Pursuant to the ATM prospectus supplement, the Company is permitted, at its discretion from time to time, to sell up to an additional $50 million of Common Shares under its ATM program, with sales only being made on the NYSE American at then-prevailing market prices, or any other existing trading market of the common shares in the United States. On July 7, 2021, the Company announced that the first container (approximately 20 tonnes of product) of an expected 15 containers of mixed RE Carbonate had been successfully produced by Energy Fuels at the Mill and was en route to Neo's Silmet REE separations facility in Estonia. This commercial-scale production of RE Carbonate by Energy Fuels from a U.S. mined REE resource positioned Energy Fuels as the only company in North America that currently produces a Monazite-derived, enhanced REE material. The physical delivery of this product also represented the launch of a new, environmentally responsible REE supply chain that allows for source validation and tracking from mining through to final end-use applications for manufacturers in North America, Europe, Japan, and other nations. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. On July 29, 2021, the Company announced the execution of a Strategic Alliance Agreement with RadTran, LLC to evaluate the recovery of thorium, and potentially radium, from the Company's existing RE Carbonate and uranium process streams for use in the production of medical isotopes for emerging TAT cancer therapeutics. This initiative complements the Company's existing uranium and RE Carbonate businesses, as it investigates the potential recovery of isotopes in existing process streams at the Mill for medical purposes. RadTran is a Denver, Colorado -based technology development company focused on closing critical gaps in the procurement of medical isotopes for these applications. See “ The Company’s Strategic Alliance for the Development of Radioisotopes for Medical Therapeutics ,” above. On September 16, 2021, the Company announced its establishment of its new Foundation, a fund specifically designed to contribute to the communities surrounding the Mill in Southeastern, Utah by providing funding to support local priorities. The Foundation will focus on supporting education, the environment, health/wellness, and local economic development in the City of Blanding, San Juan County, the White Mesa Ute Community, the Navajo Nation and other area communities. See “ San Juan County Clean Energy Foundation ,” above. On October 27, 2021, CUR and the Company jointly announced the closing of a transaction whereby CUR acquired a portfolio of Energy Fuels’ non-core conventional uranium projects located in Utah and Colorado, including the Daneros mine, the Tony M mine (formerly a part of the Bullfrog Project), the Rim mine, the Sage Plain project, and several DOE leases located in Colorado, in consideration for a 19.9% share ownership interest in CUR and other consideration. See “ Development of the Business: Major Transactions over the Past Five Years , ” above. On December 15, 2021, the Company announced the execution of an MOU with NSP for the development of a novel technology for the potential production of REE metals, subject to the finalization of definitive agreements . We believe this technology, which was initially developed by NSP, and will be advanced by the Company and NSP working together, has the potential to revolutionize the rare earth metal making industry by reducing costs of production, reducing energy consumption, and significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Producing REE metals and alloys is a key step in a fully integrated REE supply chain, after production of separated REE oxides and before the manufacture of NdFeB magnets used in electric vehicles, wind generation and other clean energy and advanced technologies. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. 2022 Corporate Developments On January 3, 2022, the Company filed a prospectus supplement to its effective U.S. registration statement on Form S-3 in connection with its Controlled Equity Offering SM Sales Agreement with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC 21 and Roth Capital Partners, LLC, dated May 6, 2019. Pursuant to the ATM prospectus supplement, the Company is permitted, at its discretion from time to time, to sell up to an additional $50 million of Common Shares under its ATM program, with sales only being made on the NYSE American at then-prevailing market prices, or any other existing trading market of the common shares in the United States. On January 25, 2022, the Company’s Board of Directors appointed Ms. Ivy V. Estabrooke to serve as a director of the Company. Dr. Estabrooke is currently the Vice President of Operations and Corporate Affairs at IDbyDNA Inc., a venture backed commercial stage biotech company. She has led innovative research and development programs in both the public and private sectors delivering technology solutions for national security and public health challenges. Prior roles include as a technical program manager for the US Department of the Navy, the executive director of the State of Utah’s technology based economic development agency and science advisor to the Governor of Utah. She earned her doctorate in neuroscience at Georgetown University in 2005, received a master’s degree in national resource strategy from the National Defense University in 2013 and a bachelor’s degree in biological sciences from Smith College in 1998. She serves on the board of the Girl Scouts of Utah and a member of the Utah District Export Council. On the same date, the Board approved the appointment of two new officers to the Company: the appointment of then-current Staff Attorney Julia C. Hoffmeier to Corporate Counsel & Assistant Corporate Secretary; and the appointment of then-current Controller Sarai C. Luksch to Chief Accounting Officer & Controller. All such appointments were effective as of the date the appointments were made. Company Strategy Energy Fuels intends to continue to strengthen its position as a leading uranium extraction and recovery company in the United States, supporting that goal through uranium recovery, Alternate Feed Materials processing, third-party processing, and potential land clean-up work. The Company’s strategy is to maintain and increase its ability to increase uranium production in improved market conditions through the Mill (currently operating), the Nichols Ranch and Alta Mesa ISR Projects (both currently on standby), a large uranium resource base, and existing conventional projects on standby, under construction, and/or in permitting. In addition, the Company produces vanadium along with uranium from certain of its properties, as market conditions warrant, from its large vanadium resource base. In 2022, the Company expects to continue ramping up its commercial production of RE Carbonate, along with uranium from monazite sands, Alternate Feed Materials and other ores. See “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above. The Company will also continue to evaluate the potential for recovering certain radioisotopes from its existing process streams for use in making medical isotopes for emerging cancer treatment therapies. See “ The Company’s Strategic Alliance for the Development of Radioisotopes for Medical Therapeutics ,” above. As a result of the foregoing, we intend to engage in the following activities: • in response to improving uranium market conditions and the procurement of new long-term sales commitments, the Company intends to evaluate activities aimed towards increasing uranium production at all or some of our production facilities, including the currently operating Mill, as well as the Nichols Ranch ISR Facility, Alta Mesa ISR Project, La Sal Project, Whirlwind Project and the Pinyon Plain Project, all of which are currently on standby, as market conditions may warrant; • continue to pursue U.S. government support for U.S. uranium production, including support for the establishment of a U.S. Uranium Reserve or other remedies; • continue the Company’s ongoing efforts to develop a fully integrated U.S. REE supply chain, including its initiatives for: the production of RE Carbonate from monazite sands sourced from third-party sources; the potential acquisition of additional sources of monazite sands; the evaluation, permitting, and potential construction of an onsite REE separation facility at the Company’s Mill site; and the advancement of new technologies for the production of REE metals (see “ The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ,” above); • continue: Alternate Feed Material processing, as well as pursue additional Alternate Feed Materials (including potential REE-bearing Alternate Feed Materials); third-party processing and other sources of feed for the Mill (including potential material generated from abandoned uranium mine (“ AUM ”) and other land cleanup work); and, when market conditions warrant, pursue the recovery of uranium and/or vanadium dissolved in the Mill’s tailings pond solutions; 22 • continue to carry out engineering, procurement and construction management activities at the Pinyon Plain Project in 2022, and maintain the property on standby until uranium prices improve or suitable long-term sales contracts can be procured; • continue to maintain standby projects and facilities (including the Pinyon Plain Project, the Nichols Ranch Project, the Alta Mesa Project, the La Sal Project and the Whirlwind Project) in a state of readiness for the purpose of restarting mining activities, as market conditions may warrant. With the exception of the Whirlwind Project, which is expected to undertake rehabilitation work on the decline during spring/summer 2022, all of the Company’s conventional projects are expected to remain on standby until market conditions improve, or are in the evaluation or permitting process; • continue permitting activities for the Roca Honda Project through the end of 2022; and • continue to evaluate the potential for recovering certain radioisotopes from its existing process streams for use in making medical isotopes for emerging cancer treatment therapies. Uranium Sales As a result of weak uranium market conditions that previously existed until mid-2021, both ISR and conventional uranium recovery have been maintained at reduced levels until such time as market conditions improve sufficiently. However, recent market improvements, along with the improved prospect of procuring new long-term sales commitments, have improved the outlook for future profitable production. As of the date of this Annual Report, the Company has not entered into any uranium sales commitments for 2022, but is actively engaged in pursuing selective long-term uranium sales contracts. 2022 uranium production is expected to be added to existing inventories or sold on the spot market, if suitable pricing is available. Energy Fuels’ significant uranium inventory provides the Company with financial flexibility, and the Company believes its existing inventories and new production may be worth significantly more in the future as a result of improving market conditions, government support for domestic uranium production, and/or future sales commitments. However, if suitable uranium price increases are observed in 2022, or if cash needs arise, the Company may elect to complete some discretionary uranium sales in 2022. The Company is also actively engaged in pursuing selective long-term uranium sales contracts. Overview of Uranium Market The primary use of uranium is to fuel nuclear power plants for the generation of carbon- and emission-free electricity. According to the World Nuclear Association (“ WNA ”), as of February 2022, there were 437 operable nuclear reactors world-wide, which required approximately 162 million pounds of U 3 O 8 fuel annually at full operation. Worldwide, there are currently 58 new reactors under construction with an additional 96 reactors on order or in the planning stage and 325 having been proposed. According to data from TradeTech LLC (“ TradeTech ”), the world continues to require more uranium than it produces from primary extraction. The gap between demand and primary supply is filled by stockpiled inventories and secondary supplies. According to the WNA, the United States currently has 93 operating reactors, two reactors under construction, and another 21 reactors on order, planned or proposed. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (“ NEI ”), in 2020 the United States produced approximately 19.7% of its electricity from nuclear technology, while achieving an average capacity factor of 92.5%, leading all other carbon-free sources by a wide margin. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (“ EIA ”), U.S. utilities purchased approximately 48.9 million pounds of U 3 O 8 in 2020. However, in 2020, the U.S. uranium production figures were withheld due to confidentiality concerns, which the Company believes are the result of low production figures. In 2021, investor interest in the uranium and nuclear sectors grew substantially, which the company believes was driven by global efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The European Union (“ EU ”) included nuclear in its taxonomy on a transitional basis, by adopting a Complementary Delegated Act recognizing the importance of nuclear energy in achieving decarbonatization (WNA, February 2, 2022). In the U.S., the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law includes a $6 billion civil nuclear credit program to support the continued operation of U.S. nuclear reactors (U.S. Department of Energy, February 11, 2022). China continues to lead the world in nuclear construction with 31 units added to their grid since the beginning of 2015 (WNA). China is planning to increase nuclear capacity to 70 gigawatts-electric (“ GWe ”) by 2025 from their previous goal of 58 GWe in 2020 (WNA; IEA, April 27, 2021), and construct 150 new reactors in the next 15 years (Bloomberg, November 2, 2021). 23 Uranium is not traded on an open market or organized commodity exchange, although the CME Group provides financially-settled uranium futures contracts. Typically, buyers and sellers negotiate transactions privately, either directly or through brokers and intermediaries. Spot uranium transactions typically involve deliveries that occur immediately and up to 12 months in the future. Term uranium transactions typically involve deliveries that occur more than 12 months in the future, with long-term transactions involving delivery terms of at least three years. Uranium prices, both spot and term, are primarily published by two independent market consulting firms, TradeTech and UxC, LLC (“ UxC ”), on a weekly and monthly basis, along with daily price indicators. Other brokers, including Uranium Markets LLC, Evolution Markets Inc. and Numerco Ltd., also publish daily average uranium prices. The spot and term prices of uranium are influenced by a number of global factors. For example, both the spot and term prices of uranium were negatively impacted by the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant in March 2011. The events at Fukushima created heightened concerns regarding the safety of nuclear plants and led to both temporary and permanent closures of nuclear plants around the world. The Fukushima incident has created downward pressure on uranium prices over the past nine years, which is still being felt today. In contrast, China is pursuing an aggressive nuclear program, with 53 units now operating, 18 new units under construction, 35 units which are planned, and 168 units that have been proposed, according to January 2022 WNA data. It remains to be seen whether Russia’s attack on the Ukraine will result in the United States and other western countries desiring to rely less on Russian uranium, conversion and enrichment services thereby increasing the demand for non-Russian sources of uranium and conversion and enrichment services, which could benefit the U.S. uranium mining industry. In addition, Ukraine has fifteen operating nuclear power plants (World Nuclear Association). The March 3, 2022 attack on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant by Russian forces raised concerns about a nuclear incident similar to the Fukushima accident, or more generally about the security of nuclear power plants in war zones, which could result in downward pressure on uranium prices. Historically, most nuclear utilities have sought to purchase a portion of their uranium needs through mid- and long-term supply contracts, while other portions are bought on the spot market. According to EIA data, in 2020, U.S. utilities purchased 24% of their uranium on the spot market with the remaining 76% purchased under mid- and long-term contracts; through 2030, U.S. utilities have approximately 187.5 million pounds of unfilled uranium requirements (EIA, Uranium Marketing Annual Report, 2020). Buyers seek to balance the security of supply with the opportunity to take advantage of lower prices. For this reason, both buyers and sellers track current spot and term prices for uranium carefully, make considered projections as to future prices, and negotiate with one another on transactions which each deems favorable to their respective interests. The graph, below, shows the monthly spot (blue line) and long-term (red line) uranium price from August 1969 up to February 2022 as reported by TradeTech (not adjusted for inflation): To give a more recent perspective over the last five years, the graph below shows the monthly spot (blue line) and long-term (red line) uranium price from February 2017 up to February 2022 as reported by TradeTech (not adjusted for inflation): 24 According to monthly price data from TradeTech, uranium prices during 2021 were up $11.60, or 38% for the year. Monthly spot prices began the year at $30.40 per pound of U 3 O 8 on December 31, 2020 and ended the year at $42.00 per pound, reaching a high of $45.50 per pound for the month of November 2021 and a low of $27.75 per pound in February 2021. According to Trade Tech, the spot price was $58.50 per pound on March 11, 2022. TradeTech price data also indicated that long-term U 3 O 8 prices began 2021 at $37.00 per pound and ended 2021 at $45.00 per pound. The high long-term price for 2021 was $45.00 per pound for the months of September through December 2021, and the low long-term price was $35.00 per pound for the months of February through August 2021. The long-term price at February 28, 2022 was $45.25 per pound. Uranium Market Outlook and Uranium Marketing Strategy World demand for clean, carbon-free, reliable, and affordable baseload electricity is growing. As a result of the expected growth of nuclear energy and the depletion of existing uranium mines and inventories, the Company believes the long-term fundamentals of the uranium industry remain positive. Despite the significant increase in uranium prices during 2021, the Company continues to believe that prices must rise to higher levels to support the new primary production that will be required to meet the increasing demand. We expect to see as more nuclear units constructed around the world, while primary mine production drops due to depletion of resources, reduced production and low prices. According to TradeTech, world uranium requirements continue to exceed primary mine production, with the gap being bridged by secondary supplies and excess uranium inventories in various forms that have already been mined. However, a large portion of global uranium production is state-owned and state-subsidized, and therefore not subject to normal market fundamentals. It is for this reason that the Company supports the creation of the proposed U.S. Uranium Reserve to ensure the U.S. has sufficient uranium mining capacity to meet national security and energy security needs. The Company estimates that, for 2020, well less than 1% of U.S. reactor demand was met by new production from U.S. uranium mines. The Company has believed for several years that market forces will cause uranium prices, and long-term contracting levels in particular, to return to levels that are sufficient to incentivize new mine production. However, it is the Company’s belief that secondary supplies, inventories, and non-free market forces have delayed this recovery, though the Company has recently observed more interest in long-term contracts from utilities. The Company believes prices likely hit a bottom in 2016, and the lows of 2016 have not been repeated since. During 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic continued to cause disruptions to uranium supply. In addition, 2021 saw significant increases in both spot and term prices, primarily due in part to increased demand primarily from traders, financial entities and intermediaries, including the launch of the Sprott Physical Uranium Trust (“ SPUT ”) in July 2021 (TradeTech, NMR, July 23, 2021). In mid-August, SPUT announced the launch of an at-the-market (“ ATM ”) offering program to issue up to $300 million of units of the trust for the purpose of acquiring and holding physical uranium (TradeTech, NMR, August 20, 2021). In September, SPUT announced that it had increased the size of its ATM offering program to $1.3 billion (TradeTech, NMR, September 10, 2021). During Q4-2021, the spot uranium price traded mostly in the low- to mid-$40s per pound, and according to TradeTech, “[w]hile the market has largely been dominated by the Sprott Physical Uranium Trust since its launch in August, buying by the fund has been lower in recent weeks in the wake of growing concerns over COVID-19 and inflation, as well as the general downturn in global financial markets.” (TradeTech, NMR, December 17, 2021). Indeed, December volume pulled back to 3.3 million pounds versus 8.9 million pounds in November. (TradeTech, NMR, December 31, 2021). Nonetheless, 2021 was a record year with over 95 million pounds having traded on the spot market for the year. (TradeTech, NMR, December 31, 2021). 25 The Company believes that certain uranium supply and demand fundamentals continue to point to higher prices in the future, including significant production cuts and increased demand from utilities, financial entities, traders, and producers. However, the Company also believes that while uranium market conditions have improved significantly in 2021, they still remain vulnerable primarily as a result of excess uranium supplies caused by large quantities of secondary uranium supplies, excess inventories, and non-market activities of state-owned enterprises. The Company also believes utilities, traders and financial entities are taking a “wait-and-see” approach to determine whether the significant price increases observed in 2021 are sustainable. As mentioned above, it remains to be seen whether Russia’s attack on the Ukraine will result in the United States and other western countries desiring to rely less on Russian uranium, conversion and enrichment services thereby increasing the demand for non-Russian sources of uranium and conversion and enrichment services, which could benefit the U.S. uranium mining industry. In addition, Ukraine has fifteen operating nuclear power plants (World Nuclear Association). The March 3, 2022 attack on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant by Russian forces raised concerns about a nuclear incident similar to the Fukushima accident, or more generally about the security of nuclear power plants in war zones, which could result in downward pressure on uranium prices. The Company’s marketing strategy is to seek a base of earnings and cash flow through sales of a portion of its uranium into term contracts, to the extent such contracts are available at satisfactory prices, which has not been the case until recently. To gain exposure to increasing uranium prices, the Company seeks to sell a portion of its planned uranium extraction into contracts with market-related formulas, if available at satisfactory prices, and through future spot and term sales. Further exposure to increasing uranium prices can be generated through the Company’s ability to bring additional uranium extraction online in the future in response to increasing prices, which can be sold on a market-related or fixed basis at then prevailing prices. The Company did not complete any material uranium sales in 2021, at its election, but is now actively engaged in pursuing selective long-term uranium sales contracts. It has maintained its uranium inventory for future sales in anticipation of higher uranium prices in the future and/or deliveries into term contracts. While the Company does not currently forecast the need to complete any spot sales in 2022 for cash generation purposes, uranium inventories, along with expected uranium production in 2022, are expected to provide the Company with the flexibility to complete spot sales in 2022 in response to improved market conditions, should the Company desire to do so. The Rare Earth Element Market REEs are a group of 17 chemical elements (the 15 elements in the lanthanum series, plus yttrium and scandium) that are used in a variety of clean energy and advanced technologies, including wind turbines, electric vehicles (“ EVs ”), cell phones, computers, flat panel displays, advanced optics, catalysts, medicine, and national defense applications. Monazite, the source of REEs currently utilized by the Company, also contains significant recoverable quantities of uranium, which fuels the production of carbon-free electricity using nuclear technology. According to industry analyst Roskill, most demand for REE’s is in the form of separated REEs, “as most end-use applications require only one or two separated rare earth compounds or products.” (Roskill, Rare Earths, Outlook to 2030, 20 th Edition). The main uses for REEs include: (i) battery alloys; (ii) catalysts; (iii) ceramics, pigments and glazes; (iv) glass polishing powders and additives; (v) metallurgy and alloys; (vi) permanent magnets; (vii) phosphors; and (viii) others (Adamas Intelligence). By volume, REEs used for permanent magnets (neodymium (Nd), praseodymium (Pr), dysprosium (Dy), and terbium (Tb)) and catalysts (cerium (Ce) and lanthanum (La)) comprised 60% of total consumption, yet over 90% of the value consumed. Typical natural monazite sands from the southeast U.S. average about 55% TREO and 0.20% uranium, which is the typical grade of uranium found in uranium mines that have historically fed the Mill. Of the 55% TREO typically found in the monazite sands, the neodymium and praseodymium (“ NdPr ”) comprise approximately 22% of the TREO. NdPr are among the most valuable of the REEs, as they are the key ingredient in the manufacture of high-strength permanent magnets which are essential to the lightweight and powerful motors required in EVs and permanent magnet wind turbines used for renewable energy generation, as well as in an array of other modern technologies, including mobile devices and defense applications. Monazite also contains higher concentrations of “heavy” rare earths, including dysprosium (Dy) and terbium (Tb) used in permanent magnets, relative to other common REE ores. The Company is currently primarily focused on NdPr and, to a lesser extent, La, Ce and Sm. The REE supply chain starts at the mine. REEs are mined both as a primary target, like the Mountain Pass REE mine in California, and as a byproduct, which is the case for Chemours’ Offerman Mineral Sand Plant, where the natural monazite sands are physically separated from the other mined sands mined. Mining creates an ore, which in the case of the Chemours material is the natural monazite sands that are physically separated from the other mined mineral sands. The ore will then go through a process of cracking and cleaning at the Mill that may include acids or caustic solutions, elevated temperature, and pressure to recover the uranium and free the REEs from the mineral matrix. After removal of the uranium and other 26 radionuclides, which will be sold into the commercial nuclear fuel cycle for the creation of carbon-free nuclear energy, this solution is cleaned of any remaining deleterious elements (including remaining radioactive elements) and made into an RE Carbonate, which is a form acceptable as a solvent extraction (“ SX ”) feedstock for REE separation. SX facilities then use solvents and a series of mixer-settlers for the separation of the REEs in the RE Carbonate from each other and to create the desired purified REE products (often as oxides) for the market or particular end user. Separated REE products are typically sold to various markets, depending on the use. Separated REE products can be made into REE metals and metal-alloys, which are used for magnets and other applications. At this time, the Mill is producing an RE Carbonate, a portion of which has been sold to Neo, and which is expected to be sold, potentially, to other third-party SX separation facilities for separation into individual separated REE products. The Mill is evaluating the potential to perform SX REE separation, and potentially other downstream REE activities, including metal-making and alloying, in the future at the Mill or elsewhere in the U.S. REEs are commercially transacted in a number of forms and purities. Therefore, there is no single price for REEs collectively, but numerous prices for various REE compounds and materials. The primary value that the Company expects to generate in the short- to medium-term will come from NdPr, Ce, and La, as the price the Company receives from the sale of its RE Carbonate is tied to the prices of those REE oxides. In addition, the Company expects to produce separated REE oxides in the future. According to data from Asian Metal, NdPr Oxide (Pr 6 O 11 25%; Nd 2 O 3 75%) mid-point prices in China rose approximately 111% during the year from $402 RMB/kg (about $63.61/kg) to $850 RMB/kg (about $134.50/kg). The price for NdPr Oxide at February 28, 2022 was $1,047 RMB/kg (about $165.66/kg). Mid-point Ce Oxide (99.9%) rose about 26% during the year from $2.15/kg to $2.65/kg. The current price for Ce Oxide is $2.65/kg (Asian Metal). Mid-point La Oxide (99.9%) prices fell about 5% during the quarter from $1.50/kg to $1.43/kg. The current price for La Oxide is $1.43/kg (Asian Metal). The REE market is dominated by China, which produces 83% of refined REE products with other Asia Pacific operations providing an additional 15%. According to WoodMacKenzie (formerly Roskill), “Prices for rare earths in the years to come will follow different trajectories based on their involvement with the magnet industry.” WoodMacKenzie forecasts that prices for magnet elements, including neodymium (Nd) and praseodymium (Pr), will remain elevated through 2050, supporting new primary and secondary supply. Prices for elements used as additives or fillers in magnets, namely terbium (Tb) and dysprosium (Dy), will see “short-term price support followed by a steady decline as supply availability improves.” Prices for other non-magnet elements, including cerium (Ce) and lanthanum (La), will remain stable at roughly the cost of production. Adamas Intelligence projects that global demand for magnet REE oxides to increase by five-fold between 2020 and 2030. While China consumes the most REEs in its manufacturing industries, much of it is consumed in the manufacture of end-use goods for export and by non-Chinese companies operating within China. REE separation facilities are additionally located in Vietnam, India, as well as Silmet in Estonia, and use a variety of feedstocks and sources, with small-scale or experimental operational facilities located elsewhere (Russia included). The REE industry was primarily based on material extracted from monazites from 1891-1965, and monazites continued to provide substantial material through the late 1990s. The subsequent decline in monazite production stemmed from increased environmental concerns related to handling radioactivity and the resulting waste, with facilities struggling to adequately address the ore’s uranium and thorium content and stringent licensing requirements. The Mill, however, is licensed to process uranium and thorium-bearing materials and does not face those issues. More recently, China began importing monazite and recovering its uranium as a feed source for the nuclear industry, while concurrently producing RE Carbonate as a feed source for the REE industry. The Company sees its commercial production of RE Carbonate as the first step in an effort to restore the REE supply chain in the U.S., where one currently does not exist. Multiple potential domestic sources of mined mineral sands, including monazites, exist in North America and are potential feedstocks for the Mill; in addition, there is one producer of REEs from hard rock mining in California, which currently ships its material to Asia. On a global level, there is a potential to acquire natural monazite sands from the following locations: Australia, South Africa, Madagascar, New Zealand, the Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, Malaysia, Thailand, India, Russia, and others. As demand for clean energy technologies and other advanced technologies, increases in the coming years, the Company expects demand and prices for REEs to increase. Increases in supply sources for REEs are expected in conjunction with anticipated rising REE prices. The Vanadium Market Vanadium is a metallic element that, when converted into ferrovanadium (“ FeV ”) (an alloy of vanadium and iron), is used primarily as an additive to strengthen and harden steel and make it anti-corrosive. According to market consultant FastMarkets, over 90% of FeV is used in the steel industry. In addition, vanadium is used in the aerospace and chemical industries, and continues to see interest in energy storage technologies, including vanadium redox flow batteries. China is the largest global producer of vanadium, with additional production coming from Russia, South Africa, and Brazil (Roskill). During 2021, the 27 mid-point price of vanadium pentoxide (V 2 O 5 ) in Europe rose 62%, from $5.40 per pound to $8.75 per pound. As of March 11, 2022, the price of vanadium pentoxide was $12.25 per pound. Vanadium prices were relatively flat near the end of the 2021 year, but with FastMarkets reporting that producers had been sold out of V 2 O 5 and were looking to buy extra material (FastMarkets, December 17, 2021, “Cobalt prices steady in thin trading, … ”). As a result of such increase in demand, by January 2022, vanadium prices began to rise with “offers increasing for the second consecutive week amid material tightness.” (FastMarkets, January 28, 2022, “Demand revival boosts EU soda ash price… ). Since January, prices have continued to rise, “even prior to the invasion [of Ukraine by Russia] due to fears surrounding possible sanctions against Russia … [t]his resulted in end-users in the steel industry, as well as traders, avoiding material with Russian origins and starting to build ‘safety stocks.’” FastMarkets, March 8, 2022, European FeV prices continue to rise, so too the risk of ferro-niobium ‘switch’: sources ). However, as vanadium prices rise, there is a risk of substitution, as “ferro-niobium can be used interchangeably to meet the required tensile strength in some steel products.” (Ibid). As a result of strengthening Vanadium markets, the Company sold 5,000 pounds of FeV in 2021 at a weighted average price of $14.74 per pound. The Company expects to continue to sell vanadium from its inventory into rising markets if they continue, failing which the Company plans to maintain its vanadium inventory for future sales at opportune times. The Company currently has an estimated 1.0 to 3 million pounds of V 2 O 5 in its tailings solutions which are available for future recovery, as market conditions warrant. Competition The uranium industry is highly competitive. The Company competes with mining and exploration companies for uranium sales, the acquisition of uranium mineral properties, and the procurement of equipment, materials and personnel necessary to explore, develop, and extract uranium from such properties. There is competition for a limited number of uranium acquisition opportunities, including competition with other companies having substantially greater financial resources, staff and facilities than the Company. As a result, the Company may encounter challenges in acquiring attractive properties, and exploring and advancing properties currently in the Company’s portfolio. In addition, Energy Fuels competes with other uranium recovery companies, along with traders, brokers, financial institutions, converters, enrichers, and other market actors, including some that are state-owned and state-subsidized, for uranium sales. Due to the Company’s limited capital and personnel and the relative size of its operations, the Company may be at a competitive disadvantage compared to some other companies with regard to exploration and, if warranted, development of mining properties and securing uranium sales. The Company believes that competition for acquiring mineral prospects and completing uranium sales will continue to be intense in the future. The availability of funds for exploration, evaluation, permitting and construction of uranium projects is limited, and the Company may find it difficult to compete on an international scale with larger and more established uranium exploration and production companies for capital. The Company’s inability to continue exploration, advancement, and the acquisition of new properties due to lack of funding could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s future operations and financial position. However, the Company believes it has a competitive advantage over its peers in the U.S. domestic uranium space to the extent it has diversified business opportunities, including its ability to produce vanadium as market conditions may warrant, its ability to recycle uranium through its Alternate Feed Materials processing business, its ability to recover RE Carbonate, along with uranium, from monazite sand ores and its potential ability to recover certain radioisotopes for use in TAT medical therapeutics. Government Regulation The Company’s properties and facilities are subject to extensive laws and regulations which are overseen and enforced by multiple federal, state and local authorities. These laws govern exploration, construction, extraction, recovery, processing, exports, various taxes, labor standards, occupational health and safety, waste disposal, protection and remediation of the environment, protection of endangered and protected species, toxic and hazardous substances, and other matters. Uranium minerals exploration, extraction, recovery, and processing are also subject to risks and liabilities associated with the perceived potential for impacts to the environment and disposal of waste products occurring as a result of such activities. Compliance with these laws and regulations may impose substantial costs on the Company and may subject the Company to significant potential liabilities. Changes in these regulations could require the Company to expend significant resources to comply with new laws or regulations or changes to current requirements and could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business operations. However, compliance with government regulations generally, including but not limited to environmental regulations, is an integral part of the Company’s day-to-day business and impacts virtually all of the Company’s capital expenditure and operating decisions at its facilities, as the Company’s facilities and operations must comply with this extensive array of environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. The costs of compliance with these laws and regulations are therefore well understood and assumed by the Company in all of its capital budgeting decisions, project analyses and cost and earnings projections. As all of the Company’s competitors in the uranium mining industry in the U.S. face the 28 same or similar regulatory requirements, the Company does not believe its need to comply with this extensive array of laws and regulations materially affects the Company’s competitive position within the U.S. uranium mining industry. Environmental Regulations Exploration, development, and extraction activities are subject to environmental regulations which may prevent or delay the continuance of our activities. In general, our exploration, evaluation, and extraction activities are subject to federal and state laws and regulations relating to environmental quality and pollution control. Such laws and regulations increase the costs of these activities and may prevent or delay the commencement or continuance of a given operation. Specifically, we are subject to legislation regarding emissions into the environment, water discharges, and storage and disposition of hazardous wastes. In addition, legislation has been enacted which requires facility sites to be reclaimed in accordance with such legislation. Compliance with these laws and regulations has not had a material effect on our operations or financial condition to date. Uranium milling in the U.S. is primarily regulated by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the “ NRC ”) pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 , as amended. Its primary function is to ensure the protection of employees, the public, and the environment from radioactive materials, and it also regulates most aspects of the uranium recovery process. The NRC regulations pertaining to uranium recovery facilities are codified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. On August 16, 2004, the State of Utah became an Agreement State for the regulation of uranium mills. This means that the primary regulator for the Mill is now the State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality (“ UDEQ ”) rather than the NRC. At that time, the Mill’s NRC Source Material License was transferred to the State of Utah and became Radioactive Materials License Number UT 1900479 (the “ Radioactive Materials License ”), which was renewed in January 2018 as Amendment #8 (Renewal), then reissued as a Revised Renewal on February 16, 2018, by UDEQ’s Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control (“ DWMRC ”). The Radioactive Materials License is up for renewal in February 2028. The State of Utah incorporates, through its own regulations or by reference, all aspects of Title 10 pertaining to uranium recovery facilities. When the State of Utah became an Agreement State, it required that a Groundwater Discharge Permit (“ GWDP ”) be put in place for the Mill. The GWDP is required for all similar facilities in the State of Utah, and specifically tailors the implementation of the state groundwater regulations to the Mill site. The State of Utah requires that every operating uranium mill have a GWDP, regardless of whether the facility discharges to groundwater. The GWDP for the Mill was finalized and implemented in March 2005, then renewed in January 2018. The GWDP is up for renewal in January 2023. The Mill also maintains a permit approval for air emissions with the UDEQ, Division of Air Quality. Conventional uranium extraction is subject to regulation by a number of agencies including: (1) local county and municipal government agencies; (2) the applicable state divisions responsible for mining and protecting the environment within Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and Wyoming; (3) the Bureau of Land Management (the “ BLM ”) and the United States Forest Service (the “ USFS ”) on public lands under their jurisdiction; (4) the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (“ MSHA ”); (5) the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “ EPA ”) for radon emissions from underground mines; and (6) other federal agencies, including without limitation the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“ USFW ”), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“ USACE ”) and the DOE, where certain conditions exist. In addition, a uranium processing facility at the Sheep Mountain Project, if and when constructed, will be subject to regulation under the State of Wyoming, as an NRC Agreement State, as a uranium processing facility and for permanent disposal of the resulting tailings. The provisions of the Atomic Energy Act and its regulations that are applicable to uranium milling also apply to our ISR facilities in Wyoming and Texas. The Nichols Ranch Project and the Alta Mesa Project each have a Source Material License. The Nichols Ranch Source Material License was originally issued by the NRC; however, the State of Wyoming became an NRC Agreement State on September 30, 2018 and the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (“ WDEQ ”) - Land Quality Division (“ WDEQ-LQD ”) subsequently assumed all management and oversight functions. The Nichols Ranch Source Material License was issued most recently by the NRC on March 22, 2017 as Amendment No. 5, which is currently in timely renewal with WDEQ-LQD. Texas, an NRC Agreement State since 1963, issued the Alta Mesa Radioactive Material License through its Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“ TCEQ ”). The Alta Mesa Radioactive Material License was originally issued in October 2002 and has been amended 18 times, with the most recent being on June 17, 2021. The Alta Mesa Radioactive Material License is currently in timely renewal. ISR facilities are also regulated by the State of Wyoming and State of Texas, respectively, and the EPA under the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In addition, ISR wellfields require an Underground Injection Control (“ UIC ”) Permit under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as administered by the State and/or EPA. ISR operations are subject to regulations by the U.S. Occupational, Safety and Health Administration (“ OSHA ”), rather than MSHA. Because monazite sands are a naturally occurring uranium ore, which also contains REEs, it is processed at the Mill under its existing Radioactive Materials License, GWDP and other permits as a uranium ore, and the resulting RE Carbonate is also recovered under those existing licenses and permits. The Company is evaluating whether any additional licenses or permits or 29 amendments to existing licenses or permits may be required for the potential construction and operation of an REE separation circuit at the Mill. It is expected that the potential recovery and concentration of Th-232, Ra-228, Th-228 and Ra-226 will require additional licensing by DWMRC at the Mill. Reclamation bonds or the equivalent have been posted for each of the Company’s material properties that have structures or facilities. Energy Fuels is required to have export licenses issued by the NRC for its uranium exports, unless otherwise permissible pursuant to the Mill’s existing Radioactive Materials License due to the nature of the material in question. Such licenses are obtained by the Company as required. Land Tenure The Company’s land holdings are held either by leases from the fee simple owners (private parties or the State) or unpatented mining claims located on property owned and managed by the U.S. Federal Government. Annual fees must be paid to maintain unpatented mining claims, but work expenditures are not required. Holders of unpatented mining claims are generally granted surface access to conduct mineral exploration and extraction activities. However, additional permits and plans are generally required prior to conducting exploration or mining activities on such claims. On July 9, 2009, BLM issued a Notice of Proposed Withdrawal (“ 2009 Notice ”) under which it proposed that a total of approximately one million acres of public lands around the Grand Canyon National Park be withdrawn from location and entry under the Mining Law of 1872 (the “ Mining Law ”), subject to valid existing rights. In the 2009 Notice, BLM stated that the purpose of the withdrawal, if determined to be appropriate, would be to protect the Grand Canyon watershed from any adverse effects of locatable hardrock mineral exploration and mining. The 2009 Notice segregated the lands from location and entry under the mining laws for up to two years to allow time for various studies and analyses, including appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (“ NEPA ”) analysis. In order to allow more time for BLM to complete its NEPA analysis, the U.S. Department of the Interior (the “ DOI ”) published Public Land Order 7773 on June 21, 2011, which effected a six-month emergency withdrawal of the area. The emergency withdrawal prevented the lands from being open to location and entry under the Mining Law upon expiration of the two-year segregation while the DOI completed the decision–making process on the proposed withdrawal. The emergency withdrawal was effective from July 21, 2011 to January 20, 2012. During the two-year segregation and six-month emergency withdrawal, the BLM, along with its cooperating agencies, completed various studies and analyses of resources in the withdrawal area, including an Environmental Impact Statement (“ EIS ”) under NEPA. These studies and analyses were undertaken to provide the basis for the final decision regarding whether to proceed with the proposed withdrawal or to select an alternative action. Based on this analysis, on January 9, 2012, the DOI announced its final decision to withdraw from location and entry under the Mining Law, subject to valid existing rights, the total of approximately one million acres of lands originally proposed in the 2009 Notice (the “ Withdrawn Lands ”), for a 20-year period. Lawsuits challenging this decision were filed by various industry groups and interested parties. In addition, legislation has been proposed in both the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, which would make the withdrawal permanent, subject to preexisting rights. The Company will continue to track the progress of this legislation. As a result of the 2009 withdrawal from location and entry, no new mining claims may be staked on the Withdrawn Lands and no new Plans of Operations may be approved, other than Plans of Operations on mining claims that were valid at the time of withdrawal and that remain valid at the time of plan approval. Case law indicates that a miner establishes valid Congressionally provided rights under the Mining Law through certain unilateral acts, and that such acts are presumptively recognized as valid claims in which the holder has valid existing rights unless and until the DOI or U.S. Federal Courts declare otherwise. However, the BLM and USFS, each at their discretion, may perform a mineral examination and Mineral Report, which involves an economic evaluation of a project, in order to reflect an agency’s belief about certain mining claims that may be used in support of a future mining claim contest on the validity of existing rights. All the Company’s properties located on the Arizona Strip, with the exception of its Wate property and certain exploration properties held by the Company’s subsidiary, Arizona Strip Partners LLC, are located within the Withdrawn Lands. A mineral examination on the Company’s EZ Project will need to be completed by BLM, in conjunction with its review of the Company’s proposed Plan of Operations for that project. Mineral examinations were not required for the Company’s Arizona 1 and Pinenut projects, which had previously approved Plans of Operations and were previously active. Although the Company’s Pinyon Plain Project also has an approved Plan of Operations, and a mineral examination is not required, the USFS voluntarily performed a mineral examination on that project in 2012 in order to clarify the agency’s own position on the underlying claims and concluded that the Pinyon Plain Project’s claims constituted valid existing rights (“ VERs ”). The USFS also concluded that no additional approvals were required on the Pinyon Plain Project that would trigger any further NEPA analysis as a major federal action. The Company believes that all its material projects within the Withdrawn Lands are on valid mining claims that will each withstand a mineral examination. However, market conditions may postpone or prevent the performance of mineral 30 examinations on certain properties and, if a mineral examination is performed on a property, there can be no guarantee that the mineral examination would not result in one of more of the Company’s mining claims being deemed invalid and/or that ongoing litigation challenging the validity of a VER determination would not result in the overturn of such determination, either of which could prevent a project from proceeding. Former President Obama additionally designated the Bears Ears National Monument by executive order in December of 2016, which comprised 1.35 million acres of land in San Juan County, Utah. The designated land included a portion of County Road 258, which the Company formerly relied on for access to its formerly owned Daneros Project (for which it now acts as Operator on behalf of CUR, see Part I, Item 1 “ Development of the Business – Major Transactions over the Past Five Years ”), and a property boundary that abutted the boundary of the Mill and encompassed two water sampling sites the Company monitors for the Mill. In December 2017, former President Trump issued a Proclamation that amended former President Obama’s 2016 Proclamation and reduced the monument to two parcels encompassing a total of 201,876 acres, releasing 1.15 million acres. That Proclamation was later challenged in Federal Court. On December 23, 2017, the Company issued a press release reiterating its past and present support of Bears Ears National Monument, and clarifying that the Company sought only minor adjustments to the original boundaries of the monument to prevent the boundary from directly abutting some of its existing operations, which were very minor adjustments, insignificant compared to the original size of the monument and not a reflection of former President Trump’s nearly 85% reduction. Then, on October 8, 2021, President Biden issued a new proclamation restoring the original borders of Bears Ears National Monument, which consists “of those lands reserved as part of the Bears Ears National Monument as of December 3, 2017, and the approximately 11,200 acres added by Proclamation 9681, encompassing approximately 1.36 million acres.” In doing so, all such lands and interests contained within the monument were “appropriated and withdrawn from all forms of entry, location, selection, sale, or other disposition under the public land laws or laws applicable to the USFS, from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, and from disposition under all laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing, other than by exchange that furthers the protective purposes of the monument” (see “ A Proclamation on Bears Ears National Monument ,” dated October 8, 2021). As a result, it is possible that the Mill could become subject to additional requirements, restrictions and costs if the reversion to the original designation is upheld in Court, pending any legal challenges by the State of Utah or otherwise. Environmental and Social Efforts and Impacts Uranium is the fuel for carbon-free, emission-free baseload nuclear power and is a key factor in successfully combating global climate change. In addition to producing uranium from our mines, we recycle other companies’ uranium-bearing tailings or wastes (Alternate Feed Materials) at the Mill for the extraction of uranium that would otherwise have been permanently disposed of, thereby reducing the need for new mining by maximizing extraction of existing sources and limiting the number of constituents ultimately disposed of. We also recover previously disposed of uranium and vanadium by recycling the Mill’s tailings solutions. Furthermore, our production of a commercially salable RE Carbonate through the recycling of natural monazite sands, which have historically been considered wastes due to their radioactive content, allows us to provide a crucial link in a commercially viable U.S. REE supply chain for use in key green energy technologies, such as solar panels, wind turbines, and electric and hybrid car batteries. In addition, our program for the potential recovery of radioisotopes for use in the production of TAT therapeutics for cancer treatments involves recycling the Mill’s existing process streams for the recovery of valuable radioisotopes that have traditionally been considered wastes and have been permanently disposed of. Through these operations and initiatives, we remain diligent in our efforts to ensure our operations minimize any impacts to public health, safety and the environment, including any impacts to water, air, wildlife, soil, cultural resources, the occupational health and safety of our workers and any impacts to members of the public. Our Environment, Health, Safety and Sustainability (“ EHSS ”) Committee has been delegated authority by the Board to monitor and guide the Company in developing and implementing its core EHSS principles, including maintaining radiation exposures not only within regulatory limits but as low as reasonably achievable (“ ALARA ”) through an extensive internal audit program, as well as authority for monitoring programs to identify and mitigate risks in ensuring the highest standards of environmental protection and human health and safety across the Company’s operations. The EHSS Committee also monitors the Company’s sustainability programs, including its efforts to pro-actively evaluate its programs and activities to ensure they meet the Company’s sustainability goals and objectives. Our Sustainability Report is available on the Company’s website at www.energyfuels.com . Our operations are located primarily in rural and underserved areas and support the local economies, not only through the taxes we pay to local authorities and the salaries and wages we pay to our employees and to numerous third-party contractors, such as transportation companies, equipment rental companies, equipment vendors and service providers, but also indirectly through the “multiplier effect” to the communities as a whole. That is, the money we pay directly to our employees, contractors vendors and providers is spent by them in the communities, thereby providing income to local businesses and wages and salaries to employees and owners of those business, who in turn spend their income, salaries and wages on other businesses in the 31 community. Indeed, as the largest private employer in San Juan County, Utah, the Mill is a very significant factor in the local economy. In furtherance of our sustainability objectives, the Company recently established the San Juan County Clean Energy Foundation, a fund specifically designed to contribute to the communities surrounding the Mill in Southeastern, Utah by providing funding to support local priorities. The Foundation will focus on supporting education, the environment, health/wellness, and local economic development in the City of Blanding, San Juan County, the White Mesa Ute Community, the Navajo Nation and other area communities. See “ San Juan County Clean Energy Foundation .” Employees As of the date of this Annual Report, the Company and its subsidiaries have approximately 103 full-time employees, all of whom are employed through the Company’s wholly owned, indirectly held subsidiary Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. We operate in established mining areas where we have found sufficient available personnel for our business plans. Energy Fuels is an equal opportunity employer and is committed to making employment decisions based on valid job requirements, without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, veteran status or any other legally protected status. The Company also provides reasonable accommodation for qualified individuals with known disabilities and employees whose work requirements interfere with a religious belief unless doing so would result in an undue hardship to the Company or cause a direct threat to health or safety. Available Information Detailed information about us is or will be contained in our annual reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements on Schedules 14A and other reports, and amendments to those reports, that we file with or furnish to the SEC and, for Canadian purposes, the Ontario Securities Commission (“ OSC ”). The Company is a U.S. Domestic Issuer for SEC purposes, most of its shareholders are U.S. residents, the Company is required to report its financial results under U.S. GAAP and its primary trading market is the NYSE American. However, prior to January 1, 2016, we were a foreign private issuer subject to limited periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ Exchange Act ”), so we did not file Forms 10-K or 10-Q prior to January 2016. All such Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K, including any amendments to such reports, filed after January 1, 2016 are available free of charge on our website, www.energyfuels.com , as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such reports with or furnish such reports to the SEC. However, our website and any contents thereof should not be considered to be incorporated by reference into this document. In addition, all public filings, including Insider Reports, of the Company can be found on the SEC’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (“ EDGAR ”) platform, and on the OSC’s System for Electronic Document Analysis and Retrieval (“ SEDAR ”) and System of Electronic Disclosure by Insiders (“ SEDI ”). We will furnish copies of such reports free of charge upon written request to our Investor Relations department. You can contact our Investor Relations department at: Energy Fuels Inc. 225 Union Blvd., Suite 600 Lakewood, Colorado, 80228 Tel: 303.974.2140 Fax: 303.974.2141 Toll Free: 1.888.864.2125 E-mail: investorinfo@energyfuels.com Additionally, our Articles of Incorporation and By-laws, Charters of the Audit, Compensation, Governance & Nominating, and EHSS Committees, Sustainability Report, and the majority of our Company policies, are available on our website. We will furnish copies of such information free of charge upon written request to our Investor Relations department. 32 ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS The following information pertains to the outlook and conditions currently known to Energy Fuels that could have a material impact on the financial condition of Energy Fuels. Other factors may arise in the future that are currently not foreseen by management of Energy Fuels that may present additional risks in the future, including risks which the Company currently feels are immaterial. Current and prospective security holders of Energy Fuels should carefully consider these risk factors. Our failure to successfully address any of the risks and uncertainties described below could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and/or results of operations, and the trading price of our Common Shares may fluctuate widely. We cannot assure you that we will successfully or fully address these risks or other unknown risks that may affect our business. Risks Related to our Industry We are subject to the risks normally encountered by companies in the mineral extraction industry. We are subject to the risks normally encountered by companies in the mineral extraction industry, such as: • the discovery of unusual, or unexpected geological formations; • accidental fires, floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other natural disasters; • unplanned power outages and water shortages; • controlling water and other similar mining hazards; • operating labor disruptions and labor disputes; • the ability to obtain suitable or adequate machinery, equipment, or labor; • our liability for potential pollution or other hazards; and • other known and unknown risks involved in the conduct of exploration, development, and operation of mines, extraction and recovery facilities, and mills, along with the market for uranium and vanadium. The development of mineral properties is affected by many factors, including, but not limited to: the cost of operations; variations in the grade of mineralized material; fluctuations in metal markets; costs of extraction and processing equipment; availability of equipment and labor; labor costs and possible labor strikes; government regulations, including without limitation, regulations relating to taxes, royalties, allowable extraction or production, importing and exporting of minerals; foreign exchange; employment; worker safety; transportation; and environmental protection. Our results of operations are significantly affected by the market price of uranium, vanadium and rare earth elements, which are cyclical and subject to substantial price fluctuations. Our earnings and operating cash flow are and will be particularly sensitive to the long- and short-term changes in the market price of uranium, vanadium and REEs. Among other factors, these prices also affect the value of our resources, reserves, and inventories, as well as the market price of our Common Shares. Market prices are affected by numerous factors beyond our control. With respect to uranium, such factors include, among others: demand for nuclear power; political and economic conditions in uranium producing and consuming countries; public and political response to a nuclear incident or fear of a nuclear incident; reprocessing of used reactor fuel, the re-enrichment of depleted uranium tails and the enricher practice of underfeeding; sales of excess civilian and military inventories (including from the dismantling of nuclear weapons; the premature decommissioning of nuclear power plants; and from the build-up of Japanese utility uranium inventories as a result of the Fukushima incident) by governments and industry participants; uranium supply, including the supply from other secondary sources; production levels and costs of production, and government actions such as, potentially, those planned in President Biden’s 2022 fiscal budget and those taken pursuant to the 2021 Omnibus Spending Bill that appropriates funding for the proposed U.S. Uranium Reserve. With respect to vanadium, such factors include, among others: demand for steel; the potential for vanadium to be used in advanced battery technologies; political and economic conditions in vanadium producing and consuming countries; world production levels; and costs of production. With respect to REEs, such factors include, among others: demand for REEs; political and economic conditions in REE producing and consuming countries; REE-bearing ore supply from secondary sources; international interest in the purchase of RE Carbonate, absent a U.S.-based separation facility; public and political response to REE initiatives at the Mill; governmental investment in domestic REE infrastructure; world production levels; costs of production; risks associated with foreign governmental actions, policies, laws, rules and regulations, and foreign state subsidized enterprises, with respect to REE production and sales, which could impact REE prices available to the Company and impact our access to world and domestic markets for the supply of REE-bearing ores and the sale of RE Carbonate and other REE products and services to world and domestic markets; and other government actions, including licensing and import requirements. Other factors relating to the price of uranium, vanadium and REEs include: levels of supply and demand for a broad range of industrial products; substitution of new or different products in critical applications for our existing products; expectations with 33 respect to the rate of inflation; the relative strength of the U.S. dollar and of certain other currencies; interest rates; global or regional political or economic crises; regional and global economic conditions; and sales of uranium, vanadium and RE Carbonate by holders in response to such factors. If prices are below our cash costs of extraction or recovery and remain at such levels for any sustained period, we may determine that it is not economically feasible to continue commercial extraction, recovery or processing at any or all of our projects or other facilities and may also be required to look for alternatives other than cash flow to maintain our liquidity until prices recover. Our expected levels of uranium recovery and business activity are dependent on our expectation and the industry’s expectations of uranium, vanadium and REE prices, which may not be realized or may change. In the event we conclude that a significant deterioration in expected future uranium prices has occurred, we will assess whether an impairment allowance is necessary which, if required, could be material. The recent fluctuations in the price of many commodities is an example of a situation over which we have no control, and which could materially adversely affect us in a manner for which we may not be able to compensate. There can be no assurance that the price of any minerals recovered from or processed at our properties will be such that any deposits can be operated at a profit. Our profitability is directly related to the market price of uranium, vanadium and REEs recovered. We may, from time to time, undertake commodity and currency hedging programs, with the intention of maintaining adequate cash flows and profitability to contribute to the long-term viability of the business. We anticipate selling forward in the ordinary course of business if, and when, we have sufficient assets and recovery to support forward sale arrangements, and forward sale arrangements are available on suitable terms. There are, however, risks associated with forward sale programs. If we do not have sufficient recovered product to meet our forward sale commitments, we may have to buy or borrow (for later delivery back from recovered product) sufficient product in the spot market to deliver under the forward sales contracts, possibly at higher prices than provided for in the forward sales contracts, or potentially default on such deliveries. In addition, under forward contracts, we may be forced to sell at prices that are lower than the prices that may be available on the spot market when such deliveries are completed. Although we may employ various pricing mechanisms within our sales contracts to manage our exposure to price fluctuations, there can be no assurance that such mechanisms will be successful. There can also be no assurance that we will be able to enter into term contracts for future sales of uranium, vanadium or RE Carbonate at prices or in quantities that would allow us to successfully manage our exposure to price fluctuations. The majority of our properties do not contain Mineral Reserves under S-K 1300 and NI 43-101, and many of the Company’s properties, projects, and facilities are not economic at today’s commodity prices. Only one of our properties – Sheep Mountain – contains Mineral Reserves under SEC S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 (see “ Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Disclosure of Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Estimates ”). At current uranium and vanadium prices, many of our properties, projects, and facilities are not economic for uranium or vanadium extraction, recovery, or processing. At our Pinyon Plain Project, we are currently evaluating the possibility of recovering copper as a byproduct along with uranium and the impact of any recovered copper on the economics of that project at current uranium prices. We intend to continue to hold, and in certain cases advance, a number of those properties, projects, and facilities in anticipation of possible future increases in the prices of uranium and/or vanadium, as the case may be. However, there can be no assurance that uranium and/or vanadium prices will ever, or within a reasonable time period, increase to the levels required to advance those properties or, in the case of projects or facilities on standby, to resume exploration, extraction, recovery, or processing activities at those projects or facilities. Similarly, there can be no assurance that the value of any copper recovered as a byproduct at the Pinyon Plain Project will be sufficient to advance that project without increases in the price of uranium and/or copper. We continue to hold such properties, projects, and facilities because we believe that uranium and/or vanadium prices are likely to rise to such levels within a reasonable time period and that the Company could potentially be able to demonstrate a significant copper credit at the Pinyon Plain Project, and the ability to maintain scalability as commodity prices increase is a key component of our business strategy. However, as there is a cost associated with holding and in some cases maintaining on standby such properties, projects, or facilities, we continuously evaluate, on a case-by-case basis, such costs against the prospects for price increases, and may from time to time sell, drop or reclaim any such properties, projects, or facilities. Exploration, development, extraction, mining, recovery and milling of minerals, and the transportation and handling of the products recovered, are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws and regulations. These regulations govern, among other things; acquisition of the property or mineral interests; maintenance of claims; tenure; expropriation; prospecting; exploration; development; construction; extraction and mining; recovery, processing, milling and production; price controls; exports; imports; taxes and royalties; labor standards; occupational health; waste disposal; toxic substances; water use; land use; Native American consultations and accommodations; environmental protection and remediation; endangered and protected species; mine, mill and other facility decommissioning and reclamation; mine safety; transportation safety and emergency response; and other matters. Compliance with such laws and regulations has increased the costs of exploring, drilling, developing, constructing, operating and closing of our mines, mills, plants and other extraction, 34 recovery and processing facilities. It is possible that, in the future, the costs, delays and other effects associated with such laws and regulations may impact our decision as to whether to operate existing mines or facilities, or, with respect to exploration, development or construction properties, whether to proceed with exploration, development or construction, or that such laws and regulations may result in our incurring significant costs to remediate or decommission properties that do not comply with applicable environmental standards at such time. We expend significant financial and managerial resources to comply with such laws and regulations. We anticipate continuing to do so as the historic trend toward stricter government regulation may continue. There can be no assurance that future changes in applicable laws and regulations will not adversely affect our activities, operations or financial condition. New laws and regulations, amendments to existing laws and regulations or more stringent implementation of existing laws and regulations, including through stricter license and permit conditions, could have a material adverse impact on us, increase costs, cause a reduction in levels of, or suspension of, extraction or recovery and/or delay or prevent the construction or development of new mineral extraction properties. Mineral extraction is subject to potential risks and liabilities associated with impacts to the environment and the disposal of waste products occurring as a result of mineral exploration, extraction, mining, milling, recovery and production. Environmental liability may result from mining or mineral extraction activities conducted by others prior to our ownership of a property. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permitting requirements may result in enforcement actions. These actions may result in orders issued by regulatory or judicial authorities causing activities or operations to cease or be curtailed, and may include corrective measures requiring capital expenditures, installation of additional equipment or remedial actions. Companies engaged in uranium exploration operations may be required to compensate others who suffer loss or damage by reason of such activities and may have civil or criminal fines or penalties imposed for violations of applicable laws or regulations. Should we be unable to fully fund the cost of remedying an environmental problem, the Company might be required to suspend activities or operations, declare bankruptcy, or enter into interim compliance measures pending completion of the required remedy, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company. To the extent that we are subject to uninsured environmental liabilities, the payment of such liabilities would reduce otherwise available earnings and could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, we do not have coverage for environmental losses generally or for certain other risks as such coverage cannot be purchased at a commercially reasonable cost. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations requires significant expenditures and increases mine and facility, construction, development and operating costs. While the very heart of our business – uranium production, which is the fuel for carbon-free, emission-free baseload nuclear power – and our recycling programs, help address global climate change and reduce air pollution, the world’s focus on addressing climate change will require the Company to continue to conduct all of its operations in a manner that minimizes the use of resources, including the unnecessary use of energy resources, in order to continue to minimize air emissions at our facilities, which can also increase mine and facility, construction, development and operating costs. Regulatory and environmental standards may also change over time to address global climate change, which could further increase these costs. With the recent change in administration, there is a risk that the new administration will not support mining, uranium mining, nuclear energy or other aspects of our business, including: not supporting the proposed establishment of a U.S. Uranium Reserve included in the COVID-Relief and Omnibus Spending Bill passed by the U.S. Congress in December 2020, or any or all of the other recommendations of the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group; and limiting, restricting or preventing the use of public lands for mining and other activities. Worldwide demand for uranium is directly tied to the demand for electricity produced by the nuclear power industry, which is also subject to extensive government regulation and policies. The development of mineral properties and related facilities is contingent upon governmental approvals that are complex and time consuming to obtain and which, depending upon the location of the project, involve multiple governmental agencies. The duration and success of such approvals are subject to many variables outside of our control. Any significant delays in obtaining or renewing such permits or licenses in the future could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, the international marketing of uranium is subject to governmental policies and certain trade restrictions, such as those imposed by the suspension agreement between the United States and Russia. Changes in these policies and restrictions may adversely impact our business. Public acceptance of nuclear energy and competition from other energy sources is unknown. Growth of the uranium and nuclear industry will depend upon continued and increased acceptance of nuclear technology as an economic means of generating electricity. Because of unique political, technological and environmental factors that affect the nuclear industry, including the risk of a nuclear incident and fears of nuclear incidents in the event of terrorism, wars or insurrection, the industry is subject to public opinion risks that could have an adverse impact on the demand for nuclear power and increase the regulation of the nuclear power industry. Nuclear energy competes with other sources of energy, including oil, natural gas, coal, hydro-electricity and renewable energy sources. These other energy sources are to some extent interchangeable with nuclear energy, particularly over the longer term. Sustained lower prices of oil, natural gas, coal and 35 hydroelectricity may result in lower demand for uranium concentrates. Increased government regulation and technical requirements may make nuclear uneconomic, resulting in lower demand for uranium concentrates. Technical advancements and government subsidies in renewable and other alternate forms of energy, such as wind and solar power, could make these forms of energy more commercially viable and put additional pressure on the demand for uranium concentrates. Unfavorable media coverage of mining or nuclear energy could negatively affect our business. The Company is subject to media coverage relating to mining and the production of uranium and other forms of nuclear energy, as well as the production of RE Carbonate and the extraction and concentration of radioisotopes for use in medical isotopes, some of which can be inaccurate, non-objective or politically motivated. As a result, the Company is frequently required to address or respond to such media coverage, which can be costly and time-consuming for the Company. Such inaccurate and non-objective media coverage can also negatively impact public perception of the Company’s activities, the market for the Company’s securities, government relations, permitting activities and legal challenges. Potential impacts of public perceptions on our commercial relations Given the controversial nature of the mining and nuclear industries, the Company is subject to the risk that suppliers, customers, co-venturers or other business relations may be discouraged from or decline to continue commercial relations with or enter into new commercial relations with the Company due to fear of reprisals from the media, public or special interest groups, based on public perceptions of the nature of the Company’s business or the nature or location of its assets, particularly driven by the ability of the media, public and special interest groups to influence public perceptions through the media, social media and the internet. The uranium industry is highly competitive. The international uranium industry, including the supply of uranium concentrates, is competitive. We market uranium in direct competition with supplies available from a relatively small number of uranium mining companies, from nationalized uranium companies, from uranium produced as a byproduct of other mining operations, from excess inventories, including inventories made available from decommissioning of nuclear weapons, from reprocessed uranium and plutonium, from used reactor fuel, and from the use of excess Russian enrichment capacity to re-enrich depleted uranium tails. A large quantity of current world production is foreign state subsidized and appears to be relatively inelastic, in that uranium market prices appear to have little effect on the quantity supplied. In the case of foreign state subsidized production, uranium production may not be fully subject to market factors and may be sold at prices that may be less than the cost of production. The supply of uranium from Russia is, to some extent, impeded by a number of international trade agreements and policies. These agreements and any similar future agreements, governmental policies or trade restrictions are beyond our control and may affect the supply of uranium available in the United States and Europe. We compete with other mining companies and individuals for capital, mineral resources and reserves, and other mining assets, which may increase the cost of acquiring suitable claims, properties and assets, and we also compete with other mining companies to attract and retain key executives, employees and consultants. In addition, there are relatively few customers for uranium. There can be no assurance that we will continue to be able to compete successfully with our competitors in acquiring such properties and assets or in attracting and retaining skilled and experienced employees. Mining operations involve a high degree of risk. The exploration, construction, development, operation, and other activities associated with mineral projects, along with the expansion of existing recovery operations and mining activities and restarting of projects, involve significant risks, including financial, technical, and regulatory risk. Development or advancement of any of the exploration properties in which we have an interest will only follow upon obtaining satisfactory exploration results, project permitting and licensing, and financing. The exploration, construction, development, operation and other activities associated with mineral projects involves significant financial risks over an extended period of time, which even a combination of careful evaluation, experience and knowledge may not eliminate. While discovery of a mine or other facility may result in substantial rewards, few properties which are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines or extraction or recovery facilities. Major expenses may be required to establish mineral resources and mineral reserves by drilling and to finance, permit, license, and construct extraction, mining, recovery and processing facilities. It is impossible to ensure that the current or proposed exploration, permitting, construction, or development programs on our mineral properties will result in a profitable commercial extraction, mining, or recovery operations. 36 Whether a mineral deposit will be commercially viable depends on a number of factors, which include, among other things: the accuracy of resource and reserve estimates; the particular attributes of the deposit, such as its size, geology and grade; the ability to economically recover commercial quantities of the minerals; proximity to infrastructure and availability of personnel; financing costs; governmental regulations, including regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties; the potential for litigation; land use; importing and exporting; and environmental and cultural protection. The construction, development, expansion and restarting of projects are also subject to: the successful completion of engineering studies; the issuance of necessary governmental permits; the availability of adequate financing; engineering and construction timetables and capital costs being correctly estimated for our projects, including restarting projects on standby; and such construction timetables and capital costs not being affected by unforeseen circumstances. The effect of these factors cannot be accurately predicted, but the combination of these factors, along with others, may result in our not receiving an adequate return on invested capital. It is possible that actual costs and economic returns of current and new extraction, mining, or recovery operations may differ materially from our best estimates. It is not unusual in the mining industry for new mining operations and facilities to experience unexpected problems during the start-up phase, take much longer than originally anticipated to bring into a recovery or producing phase, require more capital than anticipated, operate at a higher cost than expected, and/or have reclamation liabilities which are higher than expected. There can be no assurance that as the Company mines its properties, or disposes of properties, the reduction of existing mineral resources through depletion or sales, will be replaced with new resources of comparable value. There is uncertainty in the estimation of Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources. Only one of our properties – Sheep Mountain – contains Mineral Reserves as defined under S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. See “ Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Disclosure of Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Estimates. ” Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources are statistical estimates of mineral content pursuant to S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 based on limited information acquired through drilling and other sampling methods and require judgmental interpretations of geology. Successful extraction requires safe and efficient mining and processing. Our Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources are estimates, and no assurance can be given that the estimated Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources are accurate or that the indicated level of uranium or vanadium will be produced economically or otherwise. Such estimates are, in large part, based on interpretations of geological data obtained from drill holes and other sampling techniques. Actual mineralization or formations may be different from those predicted. Further, it may take many years from the initial phase of drilling before production is possible, and during that time the economic feasibility of exploiting a discovery may change. Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource estimates for properties that have not commenced extraction, production or recovery are based, in many instances, on limited and widely spaced drill-hole information, which is not necessarily indicative of the conditions between and around drill holes. Accordingly, such Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates may require revision as more drilling information becomes available or as actual extraction, production or recovery experience is gained. It should not be assumed that all or any part of our Mineral Resources constitute, or will be converted into, Mineral Reserves. Market price fluctuations of uranium or vanadium, as applicable, as well as increased production and capital costs or reduced recovery rates, may render our proven and probable Mineral Reserves unprofitable to develop at a particular site or sites for periods of time or may render mineral reserves containing relatively lower grade mineralization uneconomic. Opposition to mining may disrupt our business activities. In recent years, governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, individuals, communities and courts have become more vocal and active with respect to their opposition to certain mining and business activities including with respect to production and uranium recovery at our facilities, such as the Mill and the Pinyon Plain Project. This opposition may take on forms such as road blockades, applications for injunctions seeking to cease certain construction, development, extraction, mining and/or milling or recovery activities, refusals to grant access to lands or to sell lands on commercially viable terms, lawsuits for damages or to revoke or modify licenses and permits, issuances of unfavorable laws and regulations, and other rulings contrary to our interests. These actions can occur in response to current activities or in respect of mines or facilities that are decades old. In addition, these actions can occur in response to our activities or the activities of other unrelated entities. Opposition to our activities may also result from general opposition to nuclear energy and mining. Opposition to our business activities are beyond our control. Any opposition to our business activities may cause a disruption to our business activities and may result in increased costs and delays, and this could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. 37 We are subject to technical innovation and obsolescence. Requirements for our products and services may be affected by; technological changes in nuclear reactors, enrichment, and used uranium fuel reprocessing; facilities and processes for REE and radioisotope recovery; and substitutes for REEs and the radioisotopes the Company may potentially be producing. These technological changes could reduce the demand for our products and services and/or increase the supply of competitive products and services. The cost competitiveness of our operations may be impacted through the development and commercialization of other mining, milling, processing and other technologies. As a result, our competitors may adopt technological advancements that give them an advantage over the Company, or that reduce the demand for the Company’s products and services or make them obsolete. Mining, extraction, recovery, processing, construction, development, and exploration activities depend, to a substantial degree, on adequate infrastructure. Reliable roads, bridges, power sources, and water supply are important determinants affecting capital and operating costs. We consider the existing infrastructure to be adequate to support our proposed operations and activities. However, unusual or infrequent weather phenomena including drought, sabotage, government, or other interference in the maintenance or provision of such infrastructure could adversely affect our operations and activities, financial condition and results of operations. Mining, mineral extraction, recovery and milling are subject to a high degree of risk, and we are not insured to cover against all potential risks. Our operations and activities are subject to all of the hazards and risks normally incidental to exploration, construction, development, extraction and mining of mineral properties, and recovery, processing and milling, including: environmental hazards; industrial accidents; labor disputes, disturbances and unavailability of skilled labor; encountering unusual or unexpected geologic formations; rock bursts, pressures, cave-ins, flooding; periodic interruptions due to inclement or hazardous weather conditions; technological and processing problems, including unanticipated metallurgical difficulties, ground control problems, process upsets and equipment malfunctions; the availability and/or fluctuations in the costs of raw materials and consumables used in our production and recovery processes; the ability to procure mining and other equipment and operating and other supplies in sufficient quantities and on a timely basis; and other extraction, mining, recovery, milling, and processing risks, as well as risks associated with our dependence on third parties in the provision of transportation and other critical services. Many of the foregoing risks and hazards could result in damage to, or destruction of, our mineral properties or processing or recovery facilities, personal injury or death, environmental damage, delays in or interruption of or cessation of extraction, mining, production and recovery from our mines or processing facilities or in our exploration, construction or development activities, delay in or inability to receive regulatory approvals to transport our uranium concentrates, or costs, monetary losses and potential legal liability and adverse governmental action. In addition, due to the radioactive nature of the materials handled in uranium extraction, mining, recovery, and processing, additional costs and risks are incurred by us on a regular and ongoing basis. While we may obtain insurance against certain risks in such amounts as we consider adequate, the nature of these risks are such that liabilities could exceed policy limits or could be excluded from coverage. There are also risks against which we cannot insure or against which we may elect not to insure. The potential costs which could be associated with any liabilities not covered by insurance or in excess of insurance coverage or compliance with applicable laws and regulations may cause substantial delays and require significant capital outlays, adversely affecting our future earnings, financial position and competitive position. No assurance can be given that such insurance will continue to be available or will be available at economically feasible premiums or that it will provide sufficient coverage for losses related to these or other risks and hazards. This lack of insurance coverage could result in material economic harm to us. Risks associated with our REE business. There are a number of risks inherent to our REE activities, which include the following: • The risk of achieving and maintaining an adequate supply of monazite sands for processing at the Mill. The Company does not currently own its own monazite-bearing mines and is completely dependent on contractual arrangements for its REE feed sources. There can be no guarantee that the Company will be able to secure adequate monazite supply over the long-term at suitable prices. In addition, the price the Company may be required to pay for monazite sands is subject to the risk of influence by foreign policy and/or foreign state-owned enterprises. We will evaluate potential acquisitions of mines or resource properties and joint ventures with mine or resource property owners but there can be no guarantee that any such acquisitions or joint ventures can be realized on acceptable terms. Further, to the extent the Company is required to purchase monazite ore sources and rely on REE separation facilities located outside the United 38 States, we may be at a transportation cost disadvantage compared to processing facilities in China or elsewhere that may be closer to potential ore sources and/or REE separation facilities; • The risk of being able to contract to sell the Mill’s REE product at satisfactory prices. The Company has entered into one sales contract with an REE separation facility and intends to secure potential sales contracts with other REE separation facilities for the sale of the RE Carbonate produced at the Mill, but there can be no guarantee that any such contracts will be entered into on satisfactory terms, or at all, or extended, in the future. If the Company is not able to secure adequate contracts for the sale of its RE Carbonate, or the Company does not develop its own REE separation capability, we may be required to hold our RE Carbonate in inventory until it can be sold at reasonable prices, which would require the commitment of the Company’s cash resources while the REE product is being held in inventory. We would also bear the risk that the REE product may not be able to be sold at reasonable prices in the future, either due to a lack of a market for the purchase of our RE Carbonate, and/or a reduction in REE commodity prices and hence a reduction in the value of the carbonate. We anticipate that the U.S. government may take steps to support the development of a U.S. supply chain for REEs through price support or other mechanisms, but there can be no guarantee that any such support will be given, or if given, would benefit the Company. • The risk of process failures in the production of RE Carbonates such as the ability of the Company to produce RE Carbonate to meet commercial specifications on a commercial scale at acceptable costs, which could prevent the commercial production of RE Carbonate at the Mill cost-competitively or at all; • The risk that we may not be able to increase our sources of natural monazite sands or other ores in amounts sufficient to result in cost competitive production of RE Carbonate at the Mill; • The inability of the Company to successfully or cost-competitively process other types of REEs and uranium bearing ores at the Mill produced from coal-based resources; • The inability of the Company to construct and operate an REE separation facility, and potentially other downstream REE activities, including metal-making and alloying, in the future at the Mill or elsewhere in the United States; • The risk of permit and license challenges or the failure to obtain any needed permit or license amendments. The Mill can produce RE Carbonate, along with uranium, from natural uranium- and REE-bearing monazite sand ores, but additional licensing may be required to permit and construct a separation facility and potential REE metal and metal alloy facilities at the Mill. The existing licensing regime and any new permits or licenses or amendments that may be required are subject to challenge, which could delay or prevent existing production or any new construction, as well as any separation and other activities; • The risk that our strategic venture for the development of a novel technology for the production of REE metals may not actually be able to reduce the costs of production, reduce energy consumption, and/or significantly reduce green house gas emissions and as a result the technology may not be technically or economically feasible. In addition, there is a risk that technological enhancements in competing technologies could render the technology less attractive or obsolete; • The current shortage of supply of REEs and the resulting prices for REEs, and the fear that supplies of REEs may not be forthcoming on a timely basis to meet new demands for REEs, such as for permanent magnets for EVs, may encourage end-users to substitute away from REEs to advance and use other technologies to meet consumer demands for end products, which could result in a significant reduction in demand for and prices of REEs. Sustained reductions in the price of REEs would impact the Company’s returns from its REE initiatives and could render them infeasible; and • Increases in the supply of REEs through the addition of REE processing facilities could increase the global supply of REEs and reduce the price of REEs. Sustained reductions in the price of REEs would impact the Company’s returns from its REE initiatives and could render them infeasible. Risks Associated with our TAT Radioisotope Initiatives There are a number of risks related to our potential recovery of radioisotopes at the Mill for use in the development and production of emerging cancer treatment therapeutics, including: • The risk that the potential recovery of such radioisotopes at the Mill may not be technically feasible or that the radioisotopes may not meet commercial specifications; • The risk that such radioisotopes may not be economically feasible to produce or may not be able to be sold on a commercial basis at a sufficient price and quantity; • The risk that the Company may not be able to secure the reagents necessary for recovery of the radioisotopes on reasonable commercial terms or in adequate quantities; • The risk that all required licenses, permits and regulatory approvals may not be obtained on a timely basis or at all; • The risk that the medical isotopes derived from such radioisotopes produced at the Mill may not prove their efficacy at clinical trials and may not obtain all required approvals for commercial use; 39 • The development of competing cancer treatment therapeutics that could render the TAT therapeutics less attractive or obsolete; • The current shortage of supply of such radioisotopes and the resulting prices for such radioisotopes, and the fear that supplies of the radioisotopes may not be forthcoming on a timely basis to meet new demands for cancer therapies, may encourage pharmaceutical companies to advance and use other technologies to meet consumer demands for end products, which could result in a significant reduction in demand for and prices of the radioisotopes the Mill is capable of producing. Sustained reductions in the price of such radioisotopes would impact the Company’s returns from its TAT initiatives and could render them infeasible; and • Increases in the supply of such radioisotopes, through the addition of radioisotope processing facilities, including the permitting and retrofitting of other uranium mills for the recovery of radioisotopes, could increase the global supply of such radioisotopes and reduce the price of the radioisotopes. Sustained reductions in the price of such radioisotopes would impact the Company’s returns from its TAT radioisotope initiatives and could render them infeasible. Risks Relating to our Regulatory Environment The SEC’s adoption of the “Modernization of Property Disclosures for Mining Registrants,” as codified in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K 1300, has created new disclosure requirements for Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources that create ambiguity for issuers required to comply with both the requirements of S-K 1300 and NI 43-101, and may result in increased compliance costs for the Company. SEC Industry Guide 7 has been rescinded and replaced by S-K 1300, which requires that the Company disclose specific information related to its material mining operations, including with particularity its Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves. While S-K 1300 is substantively the same as NI 43-101 (with the primary difference being NI 43-101’s required format, a matter on which S-K 1300 is silent), the regulatory changes nonetheless required the Company to update its existing technical reports to ensure its continued compliance within the U.S. requirements. However, S-K 1300 is subject to unknown interpretations, which could require the Company to incur substantial costs associated with compliance. The Company has prepared one report for each of its material properties to comply with the requirements of both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101; however, there has been little guidance as to the acceptability of such an approach by the SEC and OSC. Where substantive disclosure in one regulatory scheme is more restrictive/stringent than in the other, the Company has opted to take the more restrictive/stringent approach. As NI 43-101 has a prescribed format and S-K 1300 does not, the reports follow the formatting requirements of NI 43-101. This is the first year in which the Company is required to comply with both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 and the Company cannot predict the nature of any future enforcement, interpretation, or application of S-K 1300. Any further revisions to, or interpretations of, S-K 1300 or NI 43-101 could result in the Company incurring unforeseen costs associated with compliance, including in relation to its NI 43-101 disclosure. We are a “large accelerated filer” and are subject to a fully integrated audit pursuant to SOX. As of December 31, 2021, the Company qualified as a “large accelerated filer,” meaning that, as of that date: (i) we had a public float of $700 million or more as of the most recently completed second fiscal quarter; (ii) we had been subject to the requirements of the Exchange Act Section 13(a) or 15(d) for a period of at least 12 calendar months; (iii) we filed at least one annual report pursuant to the Exchange Act Section 13(a) or 15(d), and (iv) we were not eligible to use the requirements for “smaller reporting companies” (“ SRCs ”) under the applicable revenue test. As a result of the transition from our status as a “non-accelerated filer” SRC to a “large accelerated filer,” we are required to file this Annual Report 30 days earlier than before and without the scaled disclosure options provided to SRCs. In addition, we are subject to a fully integrated audit pursuant to SOX 404(b) in order to assess, as of the most recent fiscal year-end, the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting, as reported in an audit report of our independent public accounting firm. As a result, there are risks that one or more significant deficiencies or material weaknesses may be identified in the Company’s internal controls and procedures requiring remediation. Our future business and results of operations face uncertainties as a result of any action or inaction of the U.S. Government pursuant to the 2021 Omnibus Spending Bill that appropriates funding for a proposed U.S. Uranium Reserve, and any further evaluations by the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group. On December 27, 2020, the COVID-Relief and Omnibus Spending Bill, which includes $75 million per year for the proposed establishment of a strategic U.S. Uranium Reserve, was signed into law. Because the U.S. Uranium Reserve has yet to be established at this time, however, there can be no certainty as to the outcome of a Uranium Reserve, if any, including the process for and details of its development, or for any further evaluations of the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group established in July 2019 to “develop recommendations for reviving and expanding domestic nuclear fuel production.” If the required 40 appropriations passed by the U.S. Congress are deferred, or if they are implemented in a way that does not provide the required support for the Company’s activities, and uranium and vanadium markets do not improve and/or the Company’s REE and TAT initiatives are not adequate to otherwise sustain the Company’s other business activities, we may further reduce our operational activities and monetize certain non-core conventional mining assets as required in order to minimize our cash expenditures while preserving our core asset base for increased production in the future as market conditions may warrant. Participation in Industry Trade Petition and related activities could have negative repercussions. The Company previously participated in the filing of a Petition for Relief with the U.S. Department of Commerce (“ DOC ”) under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (as amended) From Imports of Uranium Products that Threaten U.S. National Security (the “ Section 232 Petition ”), which resulted in the establishment of the Working Group on July 12, 2019 to study U.S. nuclear fuel production, including uranium mining, in order “to develop recommendations for reviving and expanding domestic nuclear fuel production” and to “reinvigorate the entire nuclear fuel supply chain, consistent with United States national security and nonproliferation goals.” Based on recommendations from the Working Group, the U.S. Congress included in its COVID-Relief and Omnibus Spending Bill, which was signed into law on December 27, 2020, $75 million for the proposed establishment of a strategic U.S. Uranium Reserve. Although the Company believes this bipartisan appropriation is a significant accomplishment that will ultimately strengthen the U.S. uranium mining industry, bolster national defense, and improve supply diversification for U.S. utilities and their customers, there is a risk that such funds will not be allocated in a way that benefits the Company, a risk that the proposed U.S. Uranium Reserve will not be established, or will see a delay in its establishment, and the potential for negative responses or repercussions to these activities from various special interest groups, government entities, consumers of uranium and participants in other phases of the nuclear fuel cycle, both domestically and abroad, which could have a negative impact on the Company and its operations. In addition, the costs of pursuing such actions have been and could continue to be significant. It should also be noted that there can be no certainty as to the any further recommendations of the Working Group, and therefore its influence on the U.S. Congress and uranium industry going forward is uncertain. Participation in the renewal of the Russian Suspension Agreement and related activities could have negative repercussions. In October 2020, the DOC and State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom, on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation, signed an amendment (the “ Russian Amendment ”) to the “ Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation ” (the “ Russian Agreement ”), thereby extending limitations on the import of Russian low-enriched uranium into the U.S. for use as fuel for nuclear reactors until the year 2040 and tightening restrictions in order to close loopholes identified in the original Russian Agreement. The Company participated with the DOC in its efforts to secure the Russian Amendment as an advocate for domestic uranium producers, which has the potential for negative responses or repercussions to these activities from various special interest groups, government entities, consumers of uranium and participants in other phases of the nuclear fuel cycle, both domestically and abroad, which could have a negative impact on the Company and its operations. Our business is subject to extensive environmental regulations that may make exploring, mining, or related activities expensive, and which may change at any time. We are required to comply with environmental protection laws and regulations and permitting requirements promulgated by federal agencies and various states and counties in which we operate and conduct our activities, in connection with extraction, mining, recovery and milling operations. The uranium industry is subject not only to the worker health and safety and environmental risks associated with all mining activities, but also to additional risks uniquely associated with uranium extraction, mining, recovery, and milling. We expend significant resources, both financial and managerial, to comply with these laws and regulations. The possibility of more stringent regulations exists in the areas of worker health and safety, storage of hazardous materials, standards for heavy equipment used in extraction, mining, recovery or milling, the disposition of wastes, the decommissioning and reclamation of exploration, extraction, mining, recovery, milling and in-situ sites, climate change and other environmental matters, each of which could have a material adverse effect on the cost or the viability of a particular project. We cannot predict what environmental legislation, regulations or policies will be enacted or adopted in the future or how future laws and regulations will be administered or interpreted. The recent trend in environmental legislation and regulation is generally toward stricter standards, and this trend is likely to continue in the future. This recent trend includes, without limitation, laws and regulations relating to air and water quality, mine and other facility reclamation, waste handling and disposal, the protection of certain species and the preservation of certain lands. These regulations may require the acquisition of permits or other authorizations for certain activities. These laws and regulations may also limit or prohibit activities on certain 41 lands. Compliance with more stringent laws and regulations, as well as potentially more vigorous enforcement policies, stricter interpretation of existing laws and stricter permit and license conditions, may necessitate significant capital outlays, may materially affect our results of operations and business or may cause material changes or delays in our intended activities. There can be no assurance of our continued compliance or ability to meet stricter environmental laws and regulations and permit or license conditions. Delays in obtaining permits and licenses could impact expected production levels or increases in expected uranium extraction levels. Our operations may require additional analysis in the future including environmental, cultural, and social impact and other related studies. Certain activities require the submission and approval of environmental impact assessments. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain all necessary permits that may be required to continue operations or exploration and development of our properties or, if feasible, to commence construction, development, operation or other activities relating to mining facilities at such properties on terms that enable operations or activities to be conducted at economically justifiable costs. If we are unable to obtain or maintain, licenses, permits or other rights for construction or development of our properties, or otherwise fail to manage adequately future environmental issues, our uranium recovery operations and mining activities could be materially and adversely affected. Mineral Withdrawals and National Monuments Mining claims on U.S. federal lands are subject to mineral withdrawals by the federal government or the designation of national monuments by the President of the United States under the Antiquities Act. In both cases the withdrawal or the designation of a national monument withdraws the area from location and entry under the Mining Law of 1872, subject to valid existing rights. What this means is that no new mining claims may be filed on the withdrawn or designated lands and no new plans of operations may be approved, other than plans of operations on mining claims that were valid at the time of withdrawal or designation and that remain valid at the time of plan approval. Whether or not a mining claim is valid must be determined by a mineral examination conducted by BLM or USFS, as applicable. The mineral examination, which involves an economic evaluation of a project, must demonstrate the existence of a locatable mineral resource and that the mineral resource constitutes discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. We believe that all of our material Arizona Strip projects are on valid mining claims that would withstand a mineral examination. Mineral claims that are in the exploration stage and upon which economic deposits have not yet been delineated are generally prevented from proceeding to the plan of operations stage during the withdrawal period or indefinitely in the case of the designation of a national monument. See the discussions under Part I, Item 1. “ Land Tenure ,” above, for a discussion on the recent Grand Canyon withdrawal and designation of the Bears Ears National Monument, both of which do not have significant impacts on the Company at this time, but which have the potential to significantly impact the Company in the future. In addition to the Grand Canyon withdrawal and the Bears Ears National Monument, there are currently other designated or proposed withdrawals of federal lands for the purposes of mineral location and development and proposed designations of national monuments. While such proposals are not yet final and would require further federal action, if they were to occur, it is uncertain whether any such withdrawals or designations would affect in any manner our current mineral projects. Any future withdrawal of mineral lands from location and entry or future designation of additional national monuments has the potential to prevent further development on exploration stage claims held by the Company in the affected area as well as the potential for the Company to lose the ability to continue to develop mining operations on other claims in the affected area if a mineral examination indicates the deposit is uneconomical and that the claim is not valid, either of which could have significant impacts on the Company. The new or lasting impacts of the USMCA (formerly NAFTA) on the Company remain unclear, and any action by President Biden to withdraw from or materially modify certain other international trade agreements in the future could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, to the extent dependent on the jurisdiction of our incorporation. Although our primary trading market is the NYSE American, we have a majority of U.S. resident shareholders, are a U.S. Domestic Issuer for SEC purposes, and all of our assets, operations and employees are in the U.S., the Company is incorporated in Ontario, Canada. On September 30, 2018, trade representatives acting on behalf of the U.S., Mexico and Canada renegotiated the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (“ NAFTA ”) in what is known as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“ USMCA ”), which entered into force on July 1, 2020 after being approved by the U.S. Congress. At this time, the new or lasting impacts of the USMCA on the Company remain unclear. In addition, if President Biden takes action to withdraw from or materially modify certain other international trade agreements, and such actions depend on the jurisdiction of our 42 incorporation, then our business, financial condition and results of operations could possibly be adversely affected, depending on the nature of the action. Possible amendments to the General Mining Law or other laws could make it more difficult or impossible for us to execute our business plan. Members of the U.S. Congress have repeatedly introduced bills which would supplant or alter the provisions of the United States Mining Law of 1872, as amended. Such bills have proposed, among other things, to (i) either eliminate or greatly limit the right to a mineral patent; (ii) significantly alter the laws and regulations relating to uranium mineral development and recovery from unpatented and patented mining claims; (iii) impose a federal royalty on production from unpatented mining claims; (iv) impose time limits on the effectiveness of plans of operation that may not coincide with mine or facility life; (v) impose more stringent environmental compliance and reclamation requirements on activities on unpatented mining claims; (vi) establish a mechanism that would allow states, localities and Native American tribes to petition for the withdrawal of identified tracts of federal land from the operation of the U.S. general mining laws; and (vii) allow for administrative determinations that mining or similar activities would not be allowed in situations where undue degradation of the federal lands in question could not be prevented. If enacted, such legislation could change the cost of holding unpatented mining claims and could significantly impact our ability to develop locatable mineral resources on our patented and unpatented mining claims. Although it is impossible to predict at this point what any legislated royalties might be, enactment could adversely affect the potential for construction and development and the economics of existing operating mines and facilities. Passage of such legislation could adversely affect our financial performance. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has in recent years announced an intention to propose new rules that, if promulgated, could result in increases in mine surety arrangements to cover currently non-existing and unidentified potential future environmental costs, which could severely impact or render infeasible many existing or prospective mining operations. EPA dropped this proposal after considering comments received during the public participation process. Nevertheless, there is a risk that similar regulations could be proposed in the future, which could have significant impacts on the Company and the mining industry as a whole. Risks Related to Our Business Because the probability of an individual prospect ever having Mineral Reserves as defined by S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 is not known, our properties (other than Sheep Mountain) may not contain any Mineral Reserves, and any funds spent on exploration may be lost. We have only one Mineral Reserve, the Sheep Mountain Project, as defined by S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. Because the probability of an individual prospect ever having Mineral Reserves” as defined by S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 is uncertain, our properties may not contain any Mineral Reserves, and any funds spent on exploration, construction, development, extraction, and recovery may be lost. We do not know with certainty that economically recoverable uranium exists on any of our properties as defined by S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. Further, although we are undertaking uranium extraction activities at our Mill, our lack of established reserves means that we are uncertain as to our ability to continue to generate revenue from our operations. We may never discover additional uranium in commercially exploitable quantities, and our identified deposits currently classified as Mineral Resources may never qualify as commercially mineable Mineral Reserves. We will continue to attempt to acquire the surface and mineral rights on lands that we think are geologically favorable or where we have historical information in our possession that indicates uranium mineralization might be present. The exploration and, if warranted, construction relating to or development of mineral deposits involves significant financial and other risks over an extended period of time, which even a combination of careful evaluation, experience and knowledge may not eliminate. Few properties which are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines. Major expenditures are required to establish Mineral Reserves by drilling and to construct mining and processing facilities at a site. Other than Sheep Mountain, which is classified as a Mineral Reserve, all of our uranium properties are classified under S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 as being in the “exploration” stage without any known Mineral Reserves at this time (though the Company itself is deemed to be a “development stage issuer” as a result of the Sheep Mountain Mineral Reserve). It is impossible to ensure that the current or proposed exploration programs and other activities on properties in which we have an interest will result in the delineation of Mineral Reserves or in profitable commercial operations. Our operations and activities are subject to the hazards and risks normally incident to exploration and production of uranium, precious and base metals, any of which could result in damage to life or property, environmental damage and possible legal liability for such damage. While we may obtain insurance against certain risks, the nature of these risks is such that liabilities could exceed policy limits or could be excluded from coverage. There are also risks against which we cannot insure or against which we may elect not to insure. The potential costs which could be associated with any liabilities not covered by insurance, or in excess of insurance coverage, or compliance with 43 applicable laws and regulations may cause substantial delays and require significant capital outlays, adversely affecting our future earnings and competitive position and, potentially our financial viability. The Mill has historically been run on a campaign basis as sufficient feed materials are available, and there can be no assurance that sufficient mill feed will be available in the future to sustain future campaigns. The Mill has historically operated on a campaign basis, whereby mineral processing occurs as mill feed, cash needs, contract requirements, and/or market conditions may warrant. Each milling campaign is subject to receipt of sufficient mill feed that would allow us to operate the Mill on a profitable basis and/or recover a portion of its standby costs. At current uranium and vanadium prices, none of the Company’s conventional mines were active in 2021; all such conventional properties are either on standby, in the evaluation and permitting phase, or inactive, and no third-party conventional properties are operating to provide mill feed. In times of depressed commodity prices, when conventional mine production is on standby, the Mill has relied primarily on processing Alternate Feed Materials and has also recycled tailings pond solutions for the recovery of uranium and vanadium. The Company continuously seeks to identify and secure additional Alternate Feed Materials and other sources of mill feed, such as materials from the cleanup of abandoned uranium mine sites. The Company is also in the process of ramping up its commercial production of RE Carbonate, having commenced such production at the Mill in 2021. However, there can be no assurance that sufficient conventional ores, Alternate Feed Materials, suitable tailings pond solutions and/or other sources of mill feed will be available in the future, or that our planned increases to production of RE Carbonate will be successful, so as to allow us to operate the Mill on a profitable basis and/or recover a portion of the Mill’s standby costs at any time. Our prior term sales contracts for a portion of our recovered uranium have expired, with no new long-term contracts for the sale of uranium or vanadium made in 2021 or to date in 2022, and there can be no guarantee that we will be able to enter into new term sales contracts in the future for uranium, vanadium or REEs on suitable terms and conditions. All the Company’s existing long-term sales contracts for a portion of our recovered uranium expired following the Company’s final April 1, 2018 deliveries. Fixed-price long-term contracts for vanadium are generally not available and the Company’s existing contract for the sale of RE Carbonate is at prices that vary with the prices of REEs. The Company did not enter into any new long-term contracts for the sale of uranium or vanadium in 2019, 2020, 2021 or, as of the date of this Form 10-K, in 2022, and there can be no guarantee that the Company will be able to enter into long-term contracts for the delivery of a sufficient amount of uranium, vanadium or RE Carbonate at satisfactory prices in the future. The failure to enter into new term sales contracts on suitable terms could adversely impact our operations and mining activity decisions and resulting cash flows and income. Vanadium mineral resource estimates for the La Sal Complex are based in part on Mill production records. For the Company’s La Sal Complex uranium-vanadium property, vanadium assay results are not available for all drill holes such that the vanadium mineral resource estimate is in part based on a ratio of vanadium to uranium supported by actual mill production records from the Mill. There is a risk that the use of a ratio based on mill production records may increase the potential uncertainty in vanadium grades. We may be unable to timely pay our outstanding debt obligations, which may result in us losing some of our assets covered by mortgage and/or other security arrangements, and which may adversely affect our assets, results of operations, and future prospects. We may from time to time enter into arrangements to borrow money in order to fund our operations and expansion plans, and such arrangements may include covenants that restrict our business in some way. We may also from time to time acquire properties whereby certain payment obligations owed to the seller are paid by us over time, with the seller’s sole remedy for non-payment by us being re-acquisition of the property. Events may occur in the future, including events out of our control that would cause us to fail to satisfy our debt or financing instruments. In such circumstances, or if we were to default on our obligations under such debt or financing instruments, the amounts drawn in accordance with the underlying agreements may become due and payable before the agreed maturity date, and we may not have the financial resources to repay such amounts when due. Although most, but not all, of our reclamation obligations are bonded, and cash and other assets have been reserved to secure a portion but not all of this bonded amount, to the extent the bonded amounts are not fully collateralized, we will be required to provide additional cash to perform our reclamation obligations when they occur. In addition, the bonding companies have the right to require increases in collateral at any time, failure of which would constitute a default under the bonds. In such 44 circumstances, we may not have the financial resources to perform such reclamation obligations or to increase such collateral when due. We may need additional financing in connection with the implementation of our business and strategic plans from time to time. The exploration, construction and development of mineral properties and the ongoing operation of mines and other facilities requires a substantial amount of capital and may depend on our ability to obtain financing through joint ventures, debt financing, equity financing or other means. We may accordingly need further capital in order to take advantage of further opportunities or acquisitions. Our financial condition, general market conditions, volatile uranium and vanadium markets, volatile interest rates, legal claims against us, a significant disruption to our business or operations, or other factors may make it difficult to secure financing necessary for the expansion of mining activities or to take advantage of opportunities for acquisitions. Further, continuing volatility in the credit markets may increase costs associated with debt instruments due to increased spreads over relevant interest rate benchmarks, or may affect our ability, or the ability of third parties we seek to do business with, to access those markets. Continued volatility in equity markets, specifically including energy and commodity markets, may increase the costs associated with equity financings due to a low share price, and the potential need to offer higher discounts and other value (e.g., warrants). There is no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining required financing as and when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. We have experienced negative cash flows from operations and may need additional financing in connection with the implementation of our business and strategic plans from time to time. The Company has had negative cash flow from operations in prior years, and at low commodity prices a number of our mining properties will be on standby, making it less likely that the Company will be able to generate positive cash flows from operations. If the Company cannot generate positive cash flows from operations, its ability to fund its operations and implement its business plans may depend on its ability to obtain financing through joint ventures, debt financing, equity financing or other means. There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve and maintain positive cash flow from operations to fund our financing needs. Further, if cash flows from operations are negative, there is no assurance that the Company will be able to raise additional funds, if needed, or that if any such additional funds are raised, that the Company will be able to raise such funds on commercially attractive terms. If we do not achieve positive cash flows or are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may not be able to continue to fund our operations. We are subject to costs associated with decommissioning and reclamation of our properties. As owner and operator of the Mill, the Nichols Ranch Project, the Alta Mesa Project, and numerous uranium and uranium/vanadium projects and other facilities located in the United States and certain permitting, construction, development and exploration properties, and for so long as we remain an owner thereof, we are obligated to eventually reclaim or participate in the reclamation of such properties. Most, but not all, of our reclamation obligations are bonded, and cash and other assets have been reserved to secure a portion, but not all, of this bonded amount. Although our financial statements will record a liability for the asset retirement obligation, and the bonding requirements are generally periodically reviewed by applicable regulatory authorities, there can be no assurance or guarantee that the ultimate cost of such reclamation obligations will not exceed the estimated liability to be provided on our financial statements. Further, to the extent the bonded amounts are not fully collateralized, we will be required to come up with additional cash to perform our reclamation obligations when they occur. Decommissioning plans for our properties have been filed with applicable regulatory authorities. These regulatory authorities have accepted the decommissioning plans in concept, not upon a detailed performance forecast, which has not yet been generated. Over time, further regulatory review of the decommissioning plans may result in additional decommissioning requirements, associated costs and the requirement to provide additional financial assurances, including as our properties approach or go into decommissioning. It is not possible to predict what level of decommissioning and reclamation (and financial assurances relating thereto) may be required in the future by regulatory authorities. Our mineral properties may be subject to defects in title. We have investigated our rights to explore and exploit all of our material properties and, to the best of our knowledge, those rights are in good standing. However, no assurance can be given that such rights will not be revoked, or significantly altered, to our detriment. There can also be no assurance that our rights will not be challenged or impugned by third parties, including by governments, surface owners, and non-governmental organizations. 45 The validity of unpatented mining claims on U.S. public lands is sometimes difficult to confirm and may be contested. Due to the extensive requirements and associated expense required to obtain and maintain mining rights on U.S. public lands, our properties are subject to various title uncertainties which are common to the industry with the attendant risk that there may be defects in title. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior has withdrawn certain lands around the Grand Canyon National Park from location and entry under the Mining Laws. All of our material Arizona Strip properties, other than the Wate Property, are located on these withdrawn lands. No new mining claims may be filed on the withdrawn lands and no new plans of operations may be approved, other than plans of operations on mining claims that were valid at the time of withdrawal and that remain valid at the time of plan approval. Whether or not a mining claim is valid must be determined by a mineral examination conducted by BLM or USFS, as applicable. The mineral examination, which involves an economic evaluation of a project, must demonstrate the existence of a locatable mineral resource and that the mineral resource constitutes discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. We believe that all of our material Arizona Strip projects are on valid mining claims that would withstand a mineral examination. Further, our Arizona 1 Project has an approved PoO which, absent modification, would not require a mineral examination. Although our Pinyon Plain Project also has an approved PO, which, absent modification, would not require a mineral examination, the USFS performed a mineral examination at that mine in 2012, and concluded that the underlying mining claims are valid existing rights (a decision which has been involved in a court challenge). However, market conditions may postpone or prevent the performance of mineral examinations on certain other properties and, if a mineral examination is performed on a property, there can be no guarantee that the mineral examination would not result in one or more of our mining claims being considered invalid, which could prevent a project from proceeding. Certain of our properties, or significant portions thereof, are mineral leases that have fixed terms, both with State and private parties. Certain of our properties are subject to other agreements that may affect our ability to explore, permit, develop and operate them, including surface use, access and other agreements. There can be no guarantee that we will be able to renew or extend such leases and agreements on favorable terms or at all. The failure to renew any such leases or agreements could have a material adverse effect on our operations. Because we may be unable to secure access rights to certain of our properties, we may be unable to explore and/or advance such properties. We are currently in the process of negotiating and clarifying access rights to certain of our properties, such as the Roca Honda Project and the Wate Project, with private landholders. There can be no guarantee that we will be able to negotiate or clarify such access rights on favorable terms, or at all. The failure to negotiate or clarify such access rights on suitable terms could have a material adverse effect on our operations. We are subject to foreign currency risks. Our operations are subject to foreign currency fluctuations. Our operating expenses and revenues are primarily incurred in U.S. dollars, while some of our cash balances and expenses are measured in Canadian dollars. The fluctuation of the Canadian dollar in relation to the U.S. dollar will consequently have an impact on our profitability and may also affect the value of our assets and shareholders’ equity. In addition, any strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies makes our mineral extraction and recovery less competitive in relation to similar activities in other countries. Any strengthening of the U.S. dollar in relation to the currencies of other countries can have a material impact on our cash flows and profitability and affect the value of our assets and shareholders’ equity. We may not realize the anticipated benefits of previous acquisitions. We may not realize the anticipated benefits of acquiring: the Sheep Mountain Project in 2012; Denison Mines Corp.’s U.S. Mining Division in 2012, including the Mill, certain of the Arizona Strip Properties, the Bullfrog Project, and the La Sal Project; Strathmore in 2013, including the Roca Honda Project; Uranerz in 2015, including the Nichols Ranch Project; and EFR Alta Mesa in 2016, including the Alta Mesa Project, due to integration, operational and uranium market challenges. Decreases in commodity prices have required us to place or maintain a number of acquired properties and facilities on standby and to defer permitting and construction and development activities on certain other acquired assets, until market conditions warrant otherwise, and, in some cases, we have elected to sell or abandon certain of these properties at a loss. Our success following those acquisitions will depend in large part on the success of our management in integrating the acquired assets into the Company. Our failure to achieve such integration and to mine or advance such assets could result in our failure to realize the anticipated benefits of those acquisitions and could impair our results of operations, profitability and financial results. 46 We prepare estimates of future uranium extraction and recovery, and there are no assurances that such estimates will be achieved. We may from time to time prepare estimates of future uranium extraction and recovery, or increases in uranium extraction and recovery, for particular operations, or relating to our ability to increase uranium extraction and recovery in response to increases in commodity prices, as market conditions warrant or otherwise. No assurance can be given that any such extraction and recovery estimates will be achieved, nor can assurance be given that extraction or recovery increases will be achieved in a cost effective or timely manner. Failure to achieve extraction and recovery estimates or failure to achieve extraction and recovery in a cost effective or timely manner could have an adverse impact on our future cash flows, earnings, results of operations and financial condition. These estimates are based on, among other things, the following factors: the accuracy of mineral resource and reserve estimates; the accuracy of assumptions regarding ground conditions and physical characteristics of mineralized materials, such as hardness and presence or absence of particular metallurgical characteristics; the accuracy of estimated rates and costs of extraction, recovery and processing; assumptions as to future commodity prices; assumptions relating to changes in laws, regulations or policies, or lack thereof, that could impact the cost and time required to obtain regulatory approvals, licenses and permits; assumptions relating to obtaining required licenses and permits in a timely manner, including the time required to satisfy environmental analyses, consultations and public input processes; assumptions relating to challenges to or delays in the licensing and permitting process; and assumptions regarding any appeals or lack thereof, or injunctions or lack thereof, relating to any approvals, licenses or permits. Our actual uranium extraction and recovery may vary from estimates for a variety of reasons, including, among others: actual mineralized material extracted, mined or recovered varying from estimates of grade, tonnage, dilution and metallurgical and other characteristics; short term operating factors relating to the mineral resources and reserves, such as the need for sequential construction or development of mineralized materials or deposits and the processing of new or different mineral grades; risk and hazards associated with extraction, mining and recovery; natural phenomena, such as inclement weather conditions, underground floods, earthquakes, pit wall failures and cave-ins; unexpected labor shortages or strikes; varying conditions in the commodities markets; and delays in obtaining or denial, challenges or appeals of regulatory approvals, licenses and permits or renewals of existing approvals, licenses or permits. In addition, the Company is evaluating potentially recovering copper at the Mill as a byproduct with uranium from its Pinyon Plain Project. There can be no assurance that this evaluation will result in the Mill being able to recover copper at the Mill as a byproduct on an economic basis. We depend on the issuance of license amendments and renewals which cannot be guaranteed. We maintain regulatory licenses and permits in order to operate our Mill, Nichols Ranch Project and Alta Mesa Project, all of which are subject to renewal from time to time and are required in order to operate in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. In addition, depending on our business requirements, it may be necessary or desirable to seek amendments to one or more of our licenses or permits from time to time. While we have been successful in renewing our licenses and permits on a timely basis in the past and in obtaining such amendments as have been necessary or desirable, there can be no assurance that such license and permit renewals and amendments will be issued by applicable regulatory authorities on a timely basis or at all in the future. We will need to continuously add to our Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource base and to our Alternate Feed Materials. The majority of our properties do not contain any Mineral Reserves under S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. See “ Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Disclosure of Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Estimates. ” Our material Mineral Resources are located at the Nichols Ranch Project, the Alta Mesa Project, the Pinyon Plain Project, the Roca Honda Project, the Sheep Mountain Project, the Bullfrog Project and the La Sal Project. These projects are our primary sources (and potential sources) of current and future uranium concentrates. Unless other Mineral Resources or Mineral Reserves are discovered or extensions to existing resource bodies are found, our sources of extraction, production and recovery for uranium concentrates will decrease over time as our current Mineral Resources and sole Mineral Reserve (Sheep Mountain) are depleted. There can be no assurance that our future exploration, construction, development and acquisition efforts will be successful in replenishing our Mineral Resources or finding or developing Mineral Reserves. In addition, while we believe that many of our properties will eventually engage in extraction or mining activities, there can be no assurance that they will be placed into such activities, or that they will be able to replace current extraction or mining activities. We also recover uranium from processing Alternate Feed Materials at our Mill. There can be no assurance that additional sources of Alternate Feed Materials will be forthcoming in the future on commercially acceptable terms or otherwise, or that we 47 will be successful in receiving all required regulatory approvals, licenses and permits on a timely basis to allow for the receipt and processing of any such Alternate Feed Materials. Our sales of uranium, vanadium and REE products expose us to the risk of non-payment. Our sales of uranium, vanadium and REE products expose us to the risk of non-payment. We manage this risk by monitoring the credit worthiness of our customers and requiring prepayment or other forms of payment security from customers with an unacceptable level of credit risk. Most of the Company’s uranium sales are to major nuclear utilities, which pose a relatively low risk of non-payment due to their large size and capitalization. We are dependent on key personnel and qualified and experienced employees. Our success will largely depend on the efforts and abilities of certain senior officers and key employees, some of whom are approaching retirement. Certain of these individuals have significant experience in the uranium industry. The number of individuals with significant experience in this industry is small. While we do not foresee any reason why such officers and key employees will not remain with us, other than through retirement, if for any reason they do not, we could be adversely affected. We have not purchased key person life insurance for any of these individuals, other than for our Chief Executive Officer. Our compensation programs include cash and equity incentive compensation components designed to attract and retain qualified personnel, which, in the case of our equity incentive programs, contain vesting requirements which also help retain qualified personnel. Further, all the Company’s current executive officers have, and all future executive officers are expected to have, employment agreements with the Company, which also serve to attract and retain qualified personnel. In addition, the Company prioritizes the development of its existing management personnel and the advancement of existing personnel to fill vacancies as they arise, which the Company believes is an important element in developing, attracting and retaining the most qualified management personnel. Nevertheless, our success will depend on the availability of qualified and experienced employees to work in our operations and our ability to develop, attract and retain such employees. The number of individuals with relevant mining and operational experience in this industry, especially the U.S. uranium industry, is small. As the Company grows there is a risk that we may not be able to grow our qualified workforce and management team in pace with the growth of our business and activities, which could hamper our growth efforts. We are dependent on business partners, government and third-party consents. We have a number of joint ventures and other business relationships from time to time relating to our properties and projects, including key projects, such as the Arkose Mining Venture, which can restrict our ability to act unilaterally with respect to those projects in certain circumstances. There can be no assurances that we will be able to maintain relationships with our joint venture and business partners to allow for satisfactory exploration, permitting, construction, development, extraction, mining, recovery or milling relating to any such projects. Our operations and activities are also dependent from time to time on receiving government and other third-party consents and approvals. There can be no assurances that all such consents and approvals will be forthcoming when required. Certain of our directors may be in a position of conflict of interest with respect to the Company due to their relationship with other resource companies. Some of our directors are also directors of other companies that are similarly engaged in the business of acquiring, exploring and developing natural resource properties. Such associations may give rise to conflicts of interest from time to time. In particular, one of the consequences will be that corporate opportunities presented to a director may be offered to another company or companies with which the director is associated and may not be presented or made available to us. Our directors are required by law to act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the Company, to disclose any interest which they may have in any project or opportunity of the Company, and to abstain from voting on such matter. Conflicts of interest that arise will be subject to and governed by the procedures prescribed in our Code of Ethics and by the Business Corporations Act (Ontario). Our relationship with our employees may be impacted by changes in labor relations. None of our operations or activities currently directly employ unionized workers who work under collective agreements. However, there can be no assurance that our employees or the employees of our contractors will not become unionized in the 48 future, which may impact our operations and activities. Any lengthy work stoppages may have a material adverse impact on our future cash flows, earnings, results of operations and financial condition. U.S. investors may have difficulty bringing actions and enforcing judgments under U.S. securities laws against an Ontario corporation. Although our primary trading market is the NYSE American, we have a majority of U.S. resident shareholders, are a U.S. Domestic Issuer for SEC purposes, and all of our assets, operations and employees are in the U.S., the Company was incorporated in Ontario, and as a result, investors in the United States or in other jurisdictions outside of Canada may have difficulty bringing actions and enforcing judgments against us, our directors, our executive officers and some of the experts named in this Annual Report on Form 10-K based on civil liabilities provisions of the federal securities laws or other laws of the United States or any state thereof or the equivalent laws of other jurisdictions of residence. An information security incident, including a cybersecurity breach, could have a negative impact to the Company’s business or reputation. To meet business objectives, the Company relies on both internal information technology (“ IT ”) systems and networks, and those of third parties and their vendors, to process and store sensitive data, including confidential research, business plans, financial information, process technology, intellectual property, and personal data that may be subject to legal protection. The extensive information security and cybersecurity threats, which affect companies globally, pose a risk to the security and availability of these IT systems and networks, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the Company’s sensitive data. The Company continually assesses these threats and makes investments to increase internal protection, detection, and response capabilities, as well as ensure the Company’s third-party providers have required capabilities and controls, to address this risk. In addition, we provide confidential and proprietary information to our third-party business partners in certain cases where doing so is necessary to conduct our business. While we obtain assurances from those parties that they have systems and processes in place to protect such data, and where applicable, that they will take steps to assure the protections of such data by third parties, nonetheless those partners may also be subject to data intrusion or otherwise compromise the protection of such data. Any compromise of the confidential data of our customers, consumers, suppliers, partners, employees or ourselves, or failure to prevent or mitigate the loss of or damage to this data through breach of our information technology systems or other means could substantially disrupt our operations, harm our customers, consumers, employees and other business partners, damage our reputation, violate applicable laws and regulations, subject us to potentially significant costs and liabilities and result in a loss of business that could be material. To date, the Company has not experienced any material impact to the business or operations resulting from information or cybersecurity attacks; however, because of the frequently changing attack techniques, along with the increased volume and sophistication of the attacks, there is the potential for the Company to be adversely impacted. The Company may not maintain cybersecurity insurance in the event of an information security or cyber incident with sufficient coverage to cover all financial losses, or at all. The Company may compromise or lose its proprietary technology or intellectual property in certain circumstances, which could result in a loss in the Company’s competitive position and/or the value of its intangible assets. The increased reliance on technology, coupled with the Company’s new REE and radioisotope initiatives, which involve novel technology developed in part by the Company and in part by others and by consultants, may expose the Company to material risks of theft or loss of proprietary technology and other intellectual property, including technical data, business processes, data sets or other sensitive information. Among the risks faced by the Company are: • Failure to obtain patents or trade rights when available; • Failure to adequately contractually establish rights to proprietary technology and other intellectual property in joint venture situations or other situations where the Company and its co-venturers, other business associates or consultants may be jointly contributing to the development of proprietary technology and other intellectual property; • Failure to adequately limit rights or access to unprotected proprietary technology and other intellectual property; • Failure to adequately identify and enforce infringements of proprietary technology and other intellectual property; • The risk of theft of technology, data and intellectual property through a direct intrusion by private parties or foreign actors, including those affiliated with or controlled by state actors; • The risk of reverse engineering by joint venture partners or other parties, including those affiliated with state actors, and any patents the Company may have being subsequently infringed or know-how or trade secrets being stolen; and • The Company may be required to compromise protections or yield rights to technology, data or intellectual property in order to conduct business in or access markets in a foreign jurisdiction, either through formal written agreements or due to legal or administrative requirements in the host nation. The Company takes what it considers to be reasonable steps to protect its proprietary technology and intellectual property, but there can be no assurance that it will successfully protect its proprietary technology and intellectual property in all 49 circumstances. There is therefore a risk that the Company may compromise or lose its proprietary technology and intellectual property in certain circumstances, which could result in a loss in the Company’s competitive position and/or the value of its intangible assets. We may be required to provide the audited financial statements of one or more of our equity method investees in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, and rely on our equity method investees to provide us with these audited financial statements to fulfill our SEC reporting obligations. We account for our economic ownership interest in our equity method investments using the equity method of accounting or at fair value using the fair value option (collectively, the “ equity method investees ”). Pursuant to Rule 3-09 of Regulation S-X (“ Rule 3-09 ”), we may be required to provide in our Annual Report on Form 10-K audited financial statements for these equity method investees (the “ Regulation S-X Audited Financial Statements ”). If required to provide Regulation S-X Audited Financial Statements for these equity method investees, we have relied, and may in the future rely, on these equity method investees to provide us with their Regulation S-X Audited Financial Statements. In addition, we do not control the financial reporting process of our equity method investees and cannot change the way in which these equity method investees report their respective financial results. These equity method investees may not provide us with the Regulation S-X Audited Financial Statements necessary to enable us to complete our SEC filings on a timely basis or at all. If we are required to provide Regulation S-X Audited Financial Statements for any of our equity method investees and are unable to do so, it may cause us to no longer be deemed timely and current with our SEC reporting obligations. In such event, we could become ineligible to use a registration statement on Form S-3. In addition, the SEC may not declare effective any registration statement that we file in connection with an offering that requires the financial statements under Rule 3-09 to be included. Any resulting inability to complete a registered offering may materially adversely impact our business, liquidity position, growth prospects, financial condition and results of operations. Our method of accounting for equity investments in other companies held by the Company could result in material changes to the Company’s financial results that are not fully within the Company’s control. The Company accounts for investments over which it exerts significant influence, but not control, over the financial and operating policies through the fair value option of ASC Topic 825 – Financial Instruments. Changes in the fair value of these investments are recognized in Other Income (Loss) in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss). The resulting related gains or losses are not fully within the control of the Company and could be material. General Risk Factors We are subject to global economic risks. In the event of a general economic downturn or a recession, there can be no assurance that our business, financial condition, and results of operations would not be materially adversely affected. During the global financial crisis of 2007-2008, economic problems in the U.S. and Eurozone caused deterioration in the global economy, as numerous commercial and financial enterprises either went into bankruptcy or creditor protection or had to be rescued by governmental authorities. Access to public financing was negatively impacted by sub-prime mortgage defaults in the U.S., the liquidity crisis affecting the asset-backed commercial paper and collateralized debt obligation markets, and massive investment losses by banks with resultant recapitalization efforts. Moreover, the occurrence of unforeseen or extended catastrophic events, including in particular the COVID-19 pandemic, and the emergence of a future pandemic or other widespread health emergency (or concerns over the possibility of such an emergency), could create economic and financial disruptions. These types of challenges can impact commodity prices, including for uranium, vanadium and REEs, as well as currencies and global debt and stock markets. As a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, or in the case of a future pandemic or other widespread health emergency, quarantine or other requirements or circumstances may require the Company to change the way it conducts its business and operations, including require the Company to reduce or cease operations at some or all its facilities for an indeterminate period of time. Furthermore, our critical supply chains may similarly be disrupted for an indeterminate amount of time. All these factors could have a material impact on the Company’s business, operations, personnel and financial condition. These types of challenges may impact our ability to obtain equity, debt, or other financing on terms commercially reasonable to us, or at all. Additionally, these types of factors, as well as other related factors, may cause decreases in asset values that are deemed to be other than temporary, which may result in impairment losses. If these types of challenges occur, or if there is a material deterioration in general business and economic conditions, our operations could be adversely impacted, and the trading price of our securities could be adversely affected. 50 COVID-19 The Company continues to respond to the effects of the global COVID-19 pandemic on the Company’s business objectives, projections and workforce. To date, although the Company has made operational adjustments since the onset of the pandemic to ensure its workforce remains protected, the Company has not been required to shut down any operations as a result of COVID-19. None of these operational adjustments have been material to the Company. The Company has evaluated any potential shutdown of Company production facilities as a result of COVID-19 and has determined that any such shutdown could be accommodated by the Company in a manner consistent with a typical shutdown of Company production facilities as a result of depressed commodity prices. Nevertheless, circumstances could change in the future, which could create economic and financial disruptions and require the Company to reduce or cease operations at some or all its facilities for an indeterminate period of time, and which could have a material impact on the Company’s business, operations, personnel and financial condition. The price of our Common Shares is subject to volatility. Securities of mining companies have experienced substantial volatility and downward pressure in the recent past, often based on factors unrelated to the financial performance or prospects of the companies involved. These factors include macroeconomic conditions in North America and globally, and market perceptions of the attractiveness of particular industries. The price of our securities is also likely to be significantly affected by short-term changes in uranium, vanadium and REE prices, changes in industry forecasts of uranium, vanadium and REE prices, other mineral prices including oil and natural gas, currency exchange fluctuation, or in our financial condition or results of operations as reflected in our periodic earnings reports. Other factors unrelated to our performance that may have an effect on the price of our securities include the following: the extent of research coverage available to investors concerning our business may be limited if investment banks with research capabilities do not follow our securities; adverse proxy voting recommendations or limited portrayals of the Company’s business, operations or executive compensation practices made to shareholders by shareholder advisory firms resulting from their use of general-purpose formulas that are not suited to the Company’s business, operations or practices, and that may counteract the Company’s substantive disclosures, which often include detailed analyses specific to the Company and which are capable of mitigating apparent market concerns; lessening in trading volume and general market interest in our securities may affect an investor's ability to trade significant numbers of our securities; the size of our public float and the exclusion from market indices may limit the ability of some institutions to invest in our securities; and a substantial decline in the price of our securities that persists for a significant period of time could cause our securities to be delisted from an exchange, further reducing market liquidity. Our exclusion from certain market indices may reduce market liquidity or the price of our securities. If an active market for our securities does not continue, the liquidity of an investor's investment may be limited, and the price of our securities may decline. If an active market does not exist, investors may lose their entire investment. As a result of any of these factors, the market price of our securities at any given point in time may not accurately reflect our long-term value. Securities class-action litigation often has been brought against companies in periods of volatility in the market price of their securities and following major corporate transactions or mergers and acquisitions. We may in the future be the target of similar litigation. Securities litigation could result in substantial costs and damages and divert management's attention and resources. The issuance of additional Common Shares may impact the trading price of our Common Shares. In times of depressed commodity prices, the Company may be required to raise additional capital to meet its liquidity requirements, through the issuance of additional Common Shares under our ATM program or otherwise, and/or dispose of assets. If we raise additional funding by issuing additional equity securities or securities convertible, exercisable, or exchangeable for equity securities, such financing may substantially dilute the interests of our shareholders and reduce the value of their investment. Similar dilution could result from the sale of assets to meet liquidity requirements. We are subject to litigation and other legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business and may be involved in disputes with other parties in the future which may result in litigation. The causes of potential future litigation and legal proceedings cannot be known and may arise from, among other things, business activities, environmental laws, permitting and licensing activities, volatility in stock prices, or alleged failure to comply with disclosure obligations. The results of litigation and proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty and may include injunctions pending the outcome of such litigation and proceedings. Failure to resolve any such disputes favorably may have a material adverse impact on our financial performance, cash flow and results of operations. 51 If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report financial results or prevent fraud. Internal controls over financial reporting are procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that transactions are properly authorized, assets are safeguarded against unauthorized or improper use, and transactions are properly recorded and reported. Disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in reports filed with securities regulatory agencies is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported on a timely basis and is accumulated and communicated to a company’s management, including its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance with respect to the reliability of reporting, including financial reporting and financial statement preparation. ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS None. 52 ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES 53 Overview Energy Fuels is engaged in conventional and ISR uranium extraction and recovery, along with the exploration, permitting and evaluation of uranium properties in the United States. On October 27, 2021, the Company and CUR jointly announced that the parties had closed on a sale of certain of Energy Fuels’ non-core conventional uranium projects located in Utah and Colorado, including the Daneros Mine, the Tony M Mine, the Rim Mine, the Calliham (Sage Plain) Project and seven DOE lease tracts. As a result, those properties are no longer included in this disclosure. ISR Uranium Activities The Company conducts its ISR recovery activities through its Nichols Ranch Project in northeast Wyoming, which it acquired in June 2015 through the acquisition of Uranerz, and its Alta Mesa Project in south Texas, which it acquired in June 2016 through the acquisition of EFR Alta Mesa. The Nichols Ranch Project includes: (i) the Nichols Ranch Plant (100% ownership); (ii) the Nichols Ranch Wellfields (100% ownership); (iii) the Jane Dough Property (81% ownership); (iv) the Hank Project (100% ownership), which includes the permitted but not constructed Hank Satellite Plant; (v) North Rolling Pin (100% ownership); and (vi) West North Butte (100% ownership). See “ The Nichols Ranch ISR Project. ” The Company also acquired through the acquisition of Uranerz the Reno Creek Property (which it has since sold) and the Arkose Mining Venture, a joint venture of ISR properties held 81% by Energy Fuels. See “ Non-Material Mineral Properties - Other ISR Projects .” Production from existing wellfields at Nichols Ranch was depleted during 2021. In order for Nichols Ranch to engage in future uranium production, the Company will need to incur capital expenditures to develop additional wellfields. A decision to commence development will be made if the Company decides to take action in response to increasing uranium prices to a point where economic feasibility of the Nichols Ranch Project is realized. The 100% owned Alta Mesa Project has a fully-licensed and constructed ISR uranium recovery plant, with a design capacity of 1.5 million pounds of uranium concentrate per year. In order for Alta Mesa to engage in future uranium production, the Company will need to incur capital expenditures to develop wellfields. A decision to commence development will be made if the Company decides to take action in response to increasing uranium prices to a point where the economic feasibility of the Alta Mesa Project is realized. Conventional Uranium Activities The Company conducts its conventional uranium extraction and recovery activities through its 100% owned White Mesa Mill, which is the only operating conventional uranium mill in the United States. The Mill located near Blanding, Utah is centrally located such that it can be fed by a number of the Company’s uranium and uranium/vanadium projects in Colorado, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico, as well as by ore purchase or toll milling arrangements with third party miners in the region, as market conditions warrant. The Company also owns the Sheep Mountain Project in Wyoming, which is a conventional uranium project. Due to its distance from the White Mesa Mill, the Sheep Mountain Project is not expected to be a source of feed material for the Mill. The Sheep Mountain Project consists of the Sheep Mountain Extraction Operation (both open pit and underground), which is permitted, and the proposed Sheep Mountain Processing Operation (heap leach), which is not permitted at this time. The Company’s principal conventional properties include the following: • the White Mesa Mill (see “ The White Mesa Mill ”); • the Pinyon Plain Project (formerly the Canyon Project) (see “ The Pinyon Plain Project ”); • the Roca Honda Project (see “ The Roca Honda Project ”); • the Sheep Mountain Project (see “ The Sheep Mountain Project ”); • the Bullfrog Project (see “ The Bullfrog Project ”); • the La Sal Project (see “ The La Sal Project ”); • the Arizona Strip uranium properties located in north-central Arizona, including: the Arizona 1 Project, the Wate Project, and EZ Project (see “ Non-Material Mineral Properties – Other Conventional Projects – Arizona Strip ”); and • the Whirlwind Project located in southwest Colorado on the Colorado and Utah border (see “ Non-Material Mineral Properties – Other Conventional Projects – Colorado Plateau ”). The Company has a 100% interest in all of these conventional properties. The Mill is licensed to process 2,000 tons of mineralized material per day. It is primarily a uranium recovery facility but can also recover vanadium and REEs. In addition, the Mill can recycle other uranium-bearing materials not derived from conventional ore, 54 known as Alternate Feed Materials, for the recovery of uranium, alone or in combination with other metals. In this regard, the Company is currently evaluating a number of potential Alternate Feed Materials for the recovery of uranium. The Mill is also currently receiving low-grade mineralized material from the cleanup of a conventional mine in northwest New Mexico and is pursuing other opportunities to process mineralized materials from the clean-up of abandoned uranium mines on the Navajo Reservation and in the four corners area of the United States. The Mill is also evaluating the potential recovery of thorium and radium from the Company's existing RE Carbonate and uranium process streams for use in the production of medical isotopes for emerging TAT cancer therapeutics. Part I, Item 1. “ Development of the Business: The Company's Strategic Alliance for the Development of Radioisotopes for Medical Therapeutics. ” The material projects are shown on the map above and are described in further detail below. Properties that the Company does not consider material are summarized at the end of this Item 2. Uranium and Vanadium Recovery History The following tables show the mineralized material processed and pounds of uranium and vanadium recovered from the Company’s projects and facilities from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021: (1) Recovery History (1) Project or Source 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 Alternate Feed Materials (2) Tons (000) --- NA (2) NA (2) NA (2) NA (2) Ave. % U 3 O 8 --- NA (2) NA (2) NA (2) 18.86% Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) --- 144 (3) --- 561 (3) 1,004 (3) Tailings Solution Recycle & In-Circuit Material (4) Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) --- 47 --- 216 308 Recovered Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) --- 67 1,807 --- --- Recovered Metric Tons Total Rare Earth Oxide (TREO) 166 --- --- --- --- Conventional Feed Materials Tons (000) --- --- --- --- --- Contained Grade % U 3 O 8 --- --- --- --- --- Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) --- --- --- --- --- Recovered Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) --- --- --- --- --- Recovered Metric Tons Total Rare Earth Oxide (TREO) 120 --- --- --- --- Nichols Ranch (5) Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) 0.5 6 70 140 259 Alta Mesa Recovered Pounds (000) --- --- --- --- --- Total Pounds of U 3 O 8 Recovered (000) --- 197 70 917 1,571 Total Pounds of V 2 O 5 Recovered (000) --- 67 1807 --- --- Total Metric Tons of TREO Recovered 120 --- --- --- --- 55 Notes: (1) Mineralized material is shown as being processed and pounds recovered during the year in which the materials were processed at the Mill or at the Nichols Ranch Plant, which is not necessarily the year in which the materials were extracted from the project facilities. (2) All Alternate Feed Materials were processed at the Mill. A number of different Alternate Feed Materials were processed during the period 2017 – 2021. The table shows the average uranium grades and the total pounds recovered from all Alternate Feed Materials processed at the Mill during each of the years in that period. Because of the variability in uranium grades, pounds recovered is considered to be the relevant metric and tons fed is not considered to be relevant. (3) The 144,000 pounds recovered in 2020 include nil pounds recovered for the accounts of third parties. The 561,000 pounds recovered in 2018 from Alternate Feed Materials include 424,000 pounds recovered for the accounts of third parties. The 1,004,000 pounds recovered in 2017 include 952,000 pounds recovered for the accounts of third parties. (4) Pounds contained in tailings solutions containing previously unrecovered uranium and vanadium, together with in-circuit mineralized material from previous conventional mine material processing, were recovered at the Mill, though tons and grade are not available because they cannot be tied to any specific source. (5) Uranium recovery commenced at the Nichols Ranch Project on April 17, 2014. Because the Nichols Ranch Project uses ISR instead of conventional extraction methods, grade and tons of mineralized material are inapplicable to the Nichols Ranch Project. Mineral Extraction The following table shows the extraction history from 2017 to December 31, 2021 from the mineral properties currently owned by the Company: Project (1) 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 Nichols Ranch Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) 0.5 6 70 140 259 Notes: (1) All properties reported in this table were owned by the Company on December 31, 2021 and continue to be owned by the Company. Nichols Ranch was acquired by the Company in June 2015 as part of the Uranerz acquisition. Properties sold or otherwise disposed of are not included in this table. Summary of Mineral Reserves and Resources Daniel Kapostasy, a Professional Geologist licensed in Wyoming (PG-6778) and in Utah (10110615-2250), employed as the Company’s Director of Technical Services, is the Qualified Person responsible for the disclosure of scientific or technical information concerning mineral projects in this Annual Report. Except to the extent explicitly stated, the land tenure and permitting efforts disclosed in this Part I, Item 2 are not made in reliance on or with reference to any of the technical reports or the preliminary feasibility study referenced herein and attached hereto as Exhibits 96.1 through 96.7, and are the responsibility of Daniel Kapostasy in his capacity as a Qualified Person. The following tables show the Company’s estimate of Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources as defined in S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 as of December 31, 2021. Both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 require mineral companies to disclose Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources using the subcategories of Proven Mineral Reserves, Probable Mineral Reserves, Measured Mineral Resources, Indicated Mineral Resources and Inferred Mineral Resources. The Company reports Mineral Resources exclusive of Mineral Reserves. Except as stated below, the Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource information shown below, which was reviewed and approved by Daniel Kapostasy, one of the Company’s non-independent Qualified Persons, is as reported in the various Technical Report Summaries prepared in accordance with S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 (the “ Technical Report Summaries ”) by Qualified Persons employed by SLR International Corporation (“ SLR ”), Woods Process Services, Consultants in Hydrogeology, and BRS Inc. (“ BRS ”), none of which is affiliated with the Company or any other entity that has an ownership, royalty, or other interest in the relevant property that is the subject of the Technical Report Summary. See “ Mineral Projects .” 56 Mineral Reserve Estimates - In Situ Uranium (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) Proven Mineral Reserves Probable Mineral Reserves Tons (000) Grade % eU 3 O 8 Pounds eU 3 O 8 (000) Tons (000) Grade % eU 3 O 8 Pounds eU 3 O 8 (000) Sheep Mountain - Congo Pit --- --- --- 3,955 0.115 % 9,117 Sheep Mountain - Underground --- --- --- 3,498 0.132 % 9,248 Total Mineral Reserves --- --- --- 7,453 0.123% 18,365 Notes: (1) The Mineral Reserve estimates in this table comply with the requirements of both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. (2) Mineral Reserves are estimated at a uranium grade x thickness (G.T.) cut-off grade of 0.10 G.T. (2 ft. of 0.05% eU 3 O 8 ) for the Congo Pit and 0.45 G.T. (6 ft. of 0.075% eU 3 O 8 ) for Sheep Underground. (3) Mineral Reserves are estimated using a long-term uranium price of $55 per pound U 3 O 8 . (4) Numbers may not add due to rounding. (5) The Mineral Reserves are fully excluded from the total Mineral Resources shown below. (6) Mineral Reserves are 100% attributable to the Company. Mineral Resource Estimates – In Situ Uranium (1)(2)(3)(4)(10) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Inferred Mineral Resources Tons (000s) Grade (% eU 3 O 8 ) Pounds (000s eU 3 O 8 ) Tons (000s) Grade (% eU 3 O 8 ) Pounds (000s eU 3 O 8 ) Tons (000s) Grade (% eU 3 O 8 ) Pounds (000s eU 3 O 8 ) ISR Properties Nichols Ranch (5) 11 0.187% 41 2,924 0.106% 6,142 614 0.097% 1,176 Alta Mesa (6) 54 0.152% 164 1,516 0.107% 3,246 6,996 0.120% 16,793 ISR Subtotal 205 9,388 17,969 Conventional Properties Pinyon Plain (7) 6 0.46% 55 127 0.92% 2,347 16 0.38% 126 Roca Honda 208 0.48% 1,984 1,639 0.48% 15,638 1,513 0.46% 13,842 Sheep Mountain (8) --- --- --- 4,210 0.11% 9,570 --- --- --- Bullfrog --- --- --- 1,560 0.29% 9,100 410 0.25% 2,010 La Sal (9) --- --- --- --- --- --- 823 0.26% 4,281 Conventional Subtotal 2,039 36,655 20,059 Total Mineral Resources 2,244 46,043 38,228 Notes: (1) The Mineral Resource estimates in this table comply with the requirements of both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. (2) Mineral Resources were estimated at various %eU 3 O 8 or G.T. cut-off grades. Nichols Ranch 0.05% U 3 O 8 (0.20 GT), Alta Mesa 0.02% U 3 O 8 (0.3 GT), Pinyon Plain 0.30% (Uranium Only) and 0.40% (Uranium + Copper) eqv. U 3 O 8 , Roca Honda 0.19% U 3 O 8 , Sheep Mountain 0.05% U 3 O 8 (0.10 GT Open Pit) and 0.05% U 3 O 8 (0.3 GT Underground), Bullfrog 0.165% U 3 O 8 (0.50 GT), and La Sal 0.17% U 3 O 8 . (3) Mineral Resources were estimated using a long-term uranium price of $65/lb. (4) Numbers may not add due to rounding. (5) The Nichols Ranch Project is comprised of four properties: Nichols Ranch, the Hank Property, the Jane Dough Property, and North Rolling Pin. The numbers shown represent Energy Fuels’ share of the Nichols Ranch Project, which is less than 100% due to a portion of the Jane Dough Property being held through the Arkose Mining Venture, in which the Company has an 81% interest. For more information, see “ The Nichols Ranch Project ,” below. (6) Includes Alta Mesa and Mesteña Grande. 57 (7) The name of the Canyon Project was changed to “Pinyon Plain Project” in 2020. (8) The Sheep Mountain Indicated Mineral Resource excludes the Probable Mineral Reserves calculated in accordance with S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 of 18,365,000 pounds of eU 3 O 8 in 7,453,000 tons at a grade of 0.123%. (9) The La Sal Project includes the Energy Queen, Redd Block, Beaver, and Pandora properties. (10) Except for Nichols Ranch (see note 5), Mineral Resources are 100% attributable to the Company. Mineral Resource Estimate – In Situ Vanadium (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Inferred Mineral Resources Tons (000) Grade % V 2 O 5 Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) Tons (000) Grade % V 2 O 5 Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) Tons (000) Grade % V 2 O 5 Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) La Sal (6) --- --- --- --- --- --- 823 1.08 % 17,746 Total Mineral Resources (V 2 O 5 ) --- --- --- --- --- --- 823 --- 17,746 Notes: (1) Both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 definitions were followed for all Mineral Resource categories. (2) Mineral Resources were estimated at a %U 3 O 8 or G.T. cut-off grade of 0.17%. (3) The cut-off grade is calculated using a metal price of $65/lb U 3 O 8 . (4) No minimum mining width was used in determining Mineral Resources. (5) Mineral Resources are based on a tonnage factor of 14.5ft 3 /ton (Bulk density 0.0690 ton /ft 3 or 2.21 t/m 3 ). (6) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. (7) Total may not add due to rounding. (8) Mineral Resources are 100% attributable to the Company. (9) The La Sal Project includes the Energy Queen, Red Block, Beaver and Pandora properties. Mineral Resource Estimate – In Situ Copper (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Inferred Mineral Resources Tons (000) Grade % Cu Pounds Cu (000) Tons (000) Grade % Cu Pounds Cu (000) Tons (000) Grade % Cu Pounds Cu (000) Pinyon Plain 6 9.60% 1,155 90 5.89% 10,553 4 6.50% 470 Total Mineral Resources (Cu) 1,155 10,553 470 Notes: (1) The Mineral Resource estimates in this table comply with the requirements of both S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. (2) For the Main and Main-Lower zones of the Pinyon Plain Project, a 0.40% uranium equivalent cut-off grade (% U 3 O 8 Eq) was applied to account for both the copper and uranium mineralization. The %U 3 O 8 Eq grade term is not the same as the eU 3 O 8 % grade term with indicates probe rather than assay data listed elsewhere in this report. For details, seethe Pinyon Plain Project below. (3) Mineral Resources are estimated using a long-term uranium price of $65 per pound and a Copper price of $4.00 per lb. (4) A copper to U 3 O 8 conversion factor of 18.19 was used for converting copper grades to equivalent U 3 O 8 grades (U 3 O 8 Eq) for cut-off grade evaluation and reporting. (5) Numbers may not add due to rounding. (6) For the Pinyon Plain Project, Mineral Resource tonnages of uranium and copper cannot be added as they overlap in the Main and Main-Lower Zones. (7) The name of the Canyon Project was changed to “Pinyon Plain Project” in 2020. (8) Mineral Resources are 100% attributable to the Company. The Company was not subject to S-K 1300 and did not obtain any Technical Report Summaries until 2022. None of the Company’s properties had S-K 1300 Mineral Reserves or Mineral Estimates as at December 31, 2020 because the Company was not then subject to S-K 1300. 58 The Nichols Ranch Project The following technical and scientific description of the Nichols Ranch Project is based in part on the report titled “ Technical Report on the Nichols Ranch Project, Johnson and Campbell Counties, Wyoming, USA ” dated February 22, 2022, prepared by Grant A. Malensek, M.Eng., P. Eng., Mark B. Mathisen, C.P.G., Jeremy Scott Collyard, PMP, MMSA QP, each a Qualified Person employed by SLR, Jeffrey L. Woods, MMSA QP, a Qualified Person employed by Woods Process Services, and Phillip E. Brown, C.P.G., R.P.G., a Qualified Person employed by Consultants In Hydrogeology (the “ Nichols Ranch Technical Report Summary ”). The Nichols Ranch Technical Report Summary was prepared in accordance with S-K 1300 and also constitutes a PEA pursuant to NI 43-101. The Nichols Ranch Project does not have known “Mineral Reserves” and is therefore considered under SEC S-K 1300 definitions to be an exploration stage property, despite commercial uranium extraction activities occurring as recently as 2019. Property Description The Nichols Ranch Uranium Complex (the “ Complex ”) is an existing ISR mine with associated prospective ISR properties located in Campbell and Johnson Counties, in eastern Wyoming, USA in the Pumpkin Buttes Mining District of the Powder River Basin, 80 miles northeast of the city of Caspar, Wyoming. The Complex is located approximately at latitude 43°42' North and longitude 106°01' West. The proposed Nichols Ranch Project will produce approximately 366 klb of U 3 O 8 annually. Excluding the Jane Dough area in which the Company owns an 81% interest, the Company owns a 100% interest in the remaining areas which comprise the Complex land holdings totaling 10,755 acres. The Complex is divided into two primary areas, the Nichols Ranch Mining Unit and the Satellite Properties. 59 The Nichols Ranch Mining Unit includes the following: a. Nichols Ranch Area (approximately 740 acres) b. Jane Dough Area (approximately 3,680 acres) c. Hank Area (approximately 2,250 acres) Nichols Ranch and Jane Dough are contiguous, and the Hank area is located approximately six miles north of Nichols Ranch. The Company currently controls four additional properties (the Satellite Properties) which are known to have significant mineralization, but not currently included in the mine permit. These include: a. North Rolling Pin (NRP) Area (approximately 1,180 acres) b. West North Butte (WNB) Area (approximately 2,360 acres) c. East North Butte (ENB) Area (approximately 325 acres) d. Willow Creek (WC) Area (approximately 220 acres) Ownership Nichols Ranch The permit boundary for the Nichols Ranch Area, located in Sections 7, 8, 17, and 18, T43N, R76W, encompasses 1,120.00 acres. Within the Nichols Ranch permit boundary, Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. (“ EFR ”) has 38 unpatented lode-mining claims, two fee mineral leases and three Surface Use Agreements (“ SUAs ”). The claims and fee leases encompass approximately 920 acres. 60 The mineral fee leases and SUA have a 10-year term. Provisions are set by the SUA for reimbursement to the surface owner for damages resulting from operations. Claims do not have an expiration date, however, affidavits must be filed annually with the BLM) and respective county recorder’s offices in order to maintain the claims’ validity. In addition, most of the unpatented lode claims are located on Stock Raising Homestead land where the U.S. government has issued a patent for the surface to an individual and reserved the minerals to the U.S. government subject to the location rights by claimants as set forth in the 1872 Mining Law. The Nichols Ranch lode mining claims are held by Uranerz Energy Corporation (“ Uranerz ”), which is 100% owned by the Company. In Section 21, the northern portion of Section 28, eastern portion of Section 20, and northeast quarter of Section 29, unpatented lode mining claims have an overriding royalty interest burden of 6% or 8% depending on the sale price of uranium. In the southern portion of Section 32, 20 of the unpatented lode mining claims have an overriding royalty of 0.25% based on production. In the southern portion of Section 28 where North Jane is located, 14 fee mineral leases have royalties ranging from 2% to 10% depending on the sale price of uranium. In the western half of Section 29 two mineral leases have a royalty of 6% or 8% depending on the sale price of uranium. Surface owners have a set rate for reimbursement of any land taken out of service for mining activities and two of the Surface Owners could receive an extraction fee on production with a burden of 1% or 2% percent depending on the sale price of uranium. The unpatented lode mining claims will remain the property of EFR provided it adheres to the required filing and annual payment requirements with Campbell County and the BLM. The SUA’s will remain in force so long as the mining claims are maintained. Legal surveys of unpatented lode mining claims are not required and are not known to have been completed. All of the unpatented lode mining claims have annual filing requirements (US$165 per claim) with the BLM, to be paid on or before September 1 of each year. Jane Dough The permit boundary for the Jane Dough Area encompasses approximately 3,680 acres. Within the Jane Dough permit boundary, the Company controls 117 unpatented lode-mining claims, three SUAs, and 16 fee mineral leases. The fee mineral leases and claims encompass approximately 3,121.43 acres. The fee mineral leases and SUAs have terms of 10 years, which can be extended indefinitely. The SUAs have set provisions for reimbursement to the surface owner for damages resulting from the Company’s operations. Portions of the Jane Dough Area were formerly held separately by EFR and the Arkose Project Joint Venture (“ JV ”). These holdings have been combined. The Company retains 100% of the mineral rights for the portion it originally held and 81% of the mineral rights for the Arkose Project JV portion of Jane Dough. Mineral Resources for Jane Dough reflect this partition of mineral ownership. The Jane Dough lode mining claims are held by Uranerz, which is 100% owned by the Company. In a single instance, in the south half of Section 28, T43N, R76W, the JV only controls 57.29% of a fee mineral lease. The partial ownership of the lease is split along the JV ownership agreement with the Company holding 81%. In the south portion of Section 32, twenty of the unpatented lode mining claims have an overriding royalty of 0.25% based on production. In the southern half of Section 28 and northern half of section 32, five fee mineral leases have royalties ranging from 2% to 10% depending on the sale price of uranium. In the west half of Section 29, two mineral leases have a royalty of 6% or 8% depending on the sale price of uranium. Surface owners have a set rate for reimbursement of any land taken out of service for mining activities and two of the Surface Owners could receive an extraction fee on production with a burden of 1% or 2%, depending on the sale price of uranium. The unpatented lode mining claims will remain the property of EFR provided it adheres to required filing and annual payment requirements with Campbell County and the BLM. The SUAs will remain in force so long as the mining claims are maintained. Legal surveys of unpatented lode mining claims are not required and are not known to have been completed. All of the unpatented lode mining claims have annual filing requirements with the BLM, to be paid on or before September 1 of each year. Hank The Hank Area permit boundary encompasses approximately 2,250 acres. Within the permit boundary, the Company has 49 unpatented lode-mining claims, and one SUA covering approximately 1,392.58 acres. The Hank lode mining claims are held by Uranerz, which is 100% owned by the Company. 61 All claims were located or acquired by EFR and a portion of the claims were subject to a 6% to 8% royalty which has since been extinguished. Four claims may be subject to a 5% overriding royalty vested in Brown Land Company and its successors. The claims will remain the property of EFR provided they adhere to required filing and annual payment requirements with Campbell County and the BLM. All of the unpatented lode claims have annual filing requirements with the BLM, to be paid on or before September 1 of each year. The SUA will remain in force so long as the terms of the agreements are met. Legal surveys of unpatented claims are not required and are not known to have been completed. North Rolling Pin The North Rolling Pin (“ NRP ”) Area has 54 unpatented lode-mining claims and one SUA. There are no mineral fee leases associated with the NRP Area. There is one SUA that will remain in force so long as the terms of the agreement are met. All of the unpatented lode mining claims have annual filing requirements with the BLM, to be paid on or before September 1 of each year. The claims area encompasses approximately 1,180 acres. The NRP lode mining claims are held by Uranerz, which is 100% owned by the Company. Lode mining claims in the North Rolling Pin area are not subject to royalties. There are no fee mineral leases. West North Butte The West North Butte (“ WNB ”) Area claims were acquired by Uranerz, which was acquired by the Company in 2015. There are no fee leases associated with West North Butte. There is one SUA that will remain in force provided the terms of the agreement are met. The WNB lode mining claims are held by Uranerz, which is 100% owned by the Company. The claims were acquired by Uranerz and none of the unpatented lode claims in the West North Butte Area are subject to a royalty. There are no fee leases associated with West North Butte. There is one SUA which will remain in force so long as the mining claims are maintained. East North Butte The East North Butte (“ ENB ”) Area claims were acquired by Uranerz. There are no fee leases associated with East North Butte. There is one SUA which will remain in force so long as the terms of the agreement are met. The ENB lode mining claims are held by Uranerz, which is 100% owned by the Company. None of the unpatented lode claims in the ENB Area are subject to a royalty. There are no fee mineral leases. Willow Creek The Willow Creek (“ WC ”) Area claims were acquired by Uranerz. There are no fee leases associated with Willow Creek. There is one SUA that will remain in force so long as the terms of the agreement are met. The WC lode mining claims are held by Uranerz, which is 100% owned by the Company. The claims were acquired by Uranerz and none of the unpatented lode claims in the WC Area are subject to a royalty. There are no fee leases associated with Willow Creek. Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography Nichols Ranch is located 80 mi northeast of Casper, Wyoming and accessible via two-wheel drive on existing county and/or private gravel and dirt roads by proceeding north approximately 10 mi from Wyoming Highway 387 on the IDT Road and approximately 12 mi northwest of the junction of Wyoming Highway 387 and Wyoming Highway 50. NRP is accessible via two-wheel drive on existing private gravel and dirt roads, many of which have been improved by coal bed methane (“ CBM ”) development. The approximate center of the NRP property is approximately nine miles north of Wyoming Highway 387. Some road development and improvements may be required at a later time to facilitate future development of wellfields or satellite facilities. WNB is accessible via two-wheel drive on existing county and/or private gravel and dirt roads. The approximate center of the Satellite Properties is roughly 8 mi to 11 mi west of Wyoming Highway 50, and the southern edge of the Satellite Properties is 62 approximately 12 mi to 15 mi north of Wyoming Highway 387. Road development and improvements may be required at a later time to facilitate future development of wellfields and processing facilities. The north-northwest half of the WNB Area is located in an area of significant topographical relief and would likely require significant excavation to construct roads to potential wellfields or require the use of directional drilling to develop the resource. In the vicinity of the Nichols Ranch Uranium Complex, the climate is semi-arid and receives an annual precipitation of approximately 13 in., the majority of which falls from February to April as snow. Cold, wind, and snow/blizzards may occasionally present challenges for winter exploration and construction work in this area however operations can take place year-round. The summer months are typically hot, dry, and clear, except for infrequent high-intensity, short-duration storm events. The Nichols Ranch Uranium Complex is located in Johnson and Campbell Counties. These counties are generally rural; according to the 2010 United States Census, there were 8,569 people living in Johnson County and 46,133 people living in Campbell County. Most of the workers at the Complex are from the local area and nearby communities such as Casper, Wyoming, approximately 80 mi southwest of the Complex. Casper is the county seat of Natrona County and, as of the 2010 census, has a population of 55,316. Casper has numerous industrial supply and service companies to support mining operations. EFR maintains an office in Casper to support its Wyoming mining operations. The Company has secured sufficient surface access rights for exploration and development of the Complex. The Nichols Ranch Mining Unit is a fully licensed, operable facility with sufficient sources of power, water, and waste disposal facilities for operations and aquifer restoration. The basic infrastructure (power, water, and transportation) necessary to support an ISR mining operation has been established at the Nichols Ranch Mining Unit and is located within reasonable proximity of all satellite properties within this report. Existing infrastructure is associated with local oil, gas, and CBM development. Non-potable water is and/or will be supplied by wells developed at or near the sites. Water extracted as part of ISR operations will be recycled for reinjection. Typical ISR mining operations also require a disposal well for limited quantities of fluids that cannot be returned to the production aquifers. Two deep disposal wells have been permitted and are operational at the Nichols Ranch ISR Plant. The proximity of the Complex to paved roads will facilitate transportation of equipment, supplies, personnel, and product to and from the properties. Although the population within 50 mi of the subject properties consists mainly of rural ranch residences, personnel required for exploration, construction, and operation are available in the nearby towns of Wright, Midwest, Edgerton, Gillette, Buffalo, and Casper, Wyoming. Power transmission lines are located on or near parts of the property. EFR has secured power from the local electrical service provider to accommodate all operational needs. Tailing storage areas, waste disposal areas, heap leach pad(s) are not part of the required infrastructure for the Complex, as ISR operations do not require these types of facilities. Waste disposal is accomplished via deep well injection. EFR has two such wells permitted and in operation at Nichols Ranch. The Complex is located within the Wyoming Basin physiographic province in the western portion of the Powder River Basin, within the Pumpkin Buttes Mining District. The Pumpkin Buttes are a series of small buttes rising up to nearly 6,000 feet above sea level (ft ASL) in elevation and approximately 1,000 ft above the surrounding plains. The rock capping the top of the buttes is the Oligocene age White River Formation erosional remnant, which is believed to have overlain the majority of the Powder River Basin. The volcanic tuffs in the White River Formation have been cited as the source of uranium in the basin (Davis, 1969). Historic and current land use in the Pumpkin Buttes Mining District includes livestock grazing, mineral development, and oil and gas development. Vegetation and wildlife surveys of the Complex area were completed as part of the environmental baseline studies required for permitting and licensing. Vegetation communities consist primarily of sagebrush shrub-land and mixed grasslands, with limited juniper, greasewood, and wetland communities. The Complex area has the potential to provide habitat for mule deer, elk, pronghorn antelope, jackrabbit, cottontail rabbit, coyote, bobcat, mountain lion, red fox, badger, raccoon, skunk, chipmunk, rodents, songbirds, waterfowl, eagles, hawks, owls, sage grouse, chukar, wild turkey, Hungarian partridge, mourning dove, magpie, and crow. Most species are yearlong residents, however, some species such as elk, eagles, songbirds, and waterfowl are more abundant during migration periods. 63 The Nichols Ranch Mining Unit is situated in a low-lying plain with elevations ranging from roughly 4,600 ft ASL to 4,900 ft ASL. There are two main ephemeral drainages at the site. Both are tributaries of Cottonwood Creek, which drains to the Cheyenne River. The NRP Area area consists of sagebrush and native grasses, covering rolling hills, steep walled gullies, and ephemeral streams. Elevations range from approximately 4,800 ft ASL to 5,180 ft ASL. The WNB is located on the west flank of the North Pumpkin Butte. This area consist of sagebrush and native grasses, covering rolling hills, steep walled gullies, and flat-topped North Butte. Elevations range from approximately 4,900 ft ASL to 5,800 ft ASL, and generally slope from northeast to southwest. History The Complex was originally part of a large exploration area encompassing Townships 33 through 50 North of Ranges 69 through 79 West, on the Sixth Principal Meridian. In 1966, Mountain West Mines Inc. (“ MWM ”) – now Excalibur Industries) began a drilling exploration program in this area. In 1967, MWM entered into an agreement with Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Company (“ CCI ”) for further exploration and option if suitable resources were found. CCI exercised its option in 1976 with plans to begin underground mining operations near North Butte, approximately six and a half miles northeast of Nichols Ranch. As economic conditions changed, and with the development of ISR mining technology, CCI’s interest in the area waned. By the late 1980s, it began selling select properties or allowing them to revert back to MWM. Uranerz acquired six uranium properties in the Powder River Basin from a third party in 2005, including the Complex. In June 2015, EFR acquired all of the outstanding shares of Uranerz. Under that transaction, EFR acquired the Nichols Ranch Project, the Hank Project, the Reno Creek Property, the West North Butte Property, the North Rolling Pin Property, and the Arkose Project Joint Venture (a joint venture of ISR mining properties held 81% by Uranerz and 19% by United Nuclear Corp.), uranium sales contracts, and other assets, as well as the shares of Uranerz, which holds those assets. In May 2018, EFR sold its non-core Reno Creek Property to Uranium Energy Corp. In August 2018, EFR acquired royalties on the Nichols Ranch Project, along with royalties on several operating, standby, and advanced-stage ISR projects in Wyoming owned and operated by Power Resources, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Cameco Corporation. The Nichols Ranch Mining Unit includes: (i) the Nichols Ranch Plant; (ii) the Nichols Ranch Wellfields; (iii) the Jane Dough Area; and (iv) the Hank Area, which includes the permitted but not constructed Hank Satellite Plant and the Hank Deposit. A portion of the Jane Dough Area is held through the Arkose Project JV, in which the EFR has an 81% interest. The North Rolling Pin Area is located within a large exploration area encompassing Townships 33 through 50 North of Ranges 69 through 79 West, on the Sixth Principal Meridian. In 1966, MWM (now Excalibur Industries) began a successful drilling exploration program in a portion of the larger area. In 1967, MWM entered into an agreement with CCI for further exploration and option if suitable resources were found. CCI exercised its option in 1976 with plans to begin underground mining operations in the vicinity of North Butte. Changing economic conditions and the development of ISR mining technology reportedly ended much of CCI’s interest in the area. In addition to CCI, other uranium exploration companies during the last forty years have controlled property either within or near the North Rolling Pin Property. These included Kerr McGee, Conoco, Texaco, American Nuclear, Tennessee Valley Authority, Rio Algom Mining Corporation (Rio Algom), and Uranerz. The mining claims and leases originally controlled by most of these companies were let go over the years due to market conditions. These property abandonments continued into 2004. In February 2007, Uranerz purchased the North Rolling Pin claims group from Robert Shook as part of a larger 138 Federal mining claims acquisition. Uranerz subsequently expanded the properties by staking additional claims in the immediate area. The West North Butte, East North Butte, and Willow Creek Areas were originally part of a large exploration area encompassing Townships 33 through 50 North of Ranges 69 through 79 West, on the 6th principal meridian. In 1966, MWM (now Excalibur Industries) began a successful drilling exploration program in a portion of this area. In 1967, MWM entered into an agreement with CCI for further exploration and option if suitable resources were found. CCI exercised its option in 1976 with plans to begin underground mining operations in the vicinity of North Butte. Changing economic conditions and the development of ISR mining technology reportedly ended much of CCI’s interest in the area. In addition to CCI, other uranium exploration companies during the last forty years have controlled property either within or near the Satellite Properties. These included Kerr McGee, Conoco, Texaco, American Nuclear, Tennessee Valley Authority, and Uranerz U.S.A., Inc. Areva NC, via subsidiary Cogema Resources Inc. (Cogema), and Power Resources Inc. (a subsidiary of Cameco 64 Corporation) have retained portions of their original land positions in the area. The mining claims and leases originally controlled by most of these companies were let go over the years due to market conditions. These property abandonments continued into 2004. WNB, ENB, and WC cover an area of land located on the west, east and south flank of North Butte in Campbell County, Wyoming. Detailed disclosure pertaining to the chain of title of the properties comprising these Areas is not known to the Authors or Uranerz representatives and is beyond the scope of this Technical Report. The following is a brief description of what is known about ownership history of these Areas. The locators of the claims acquired rights to the properties comprising the West North Butte Area in 1987. In January 2007, Uranerz completed an acquisition of an undivided one-hundred percent interest in the claims comprising the West North Butte Area. The locators of the claims acquired rights to the properties comprising the East North Butte Area in 1987. In January 2007, Uranerz completed an acquisition of an undivided 100% interest in the claims comprising the East North Butte Area. The locators of the claims acquired rights to the properties comprising the Willow Creek Area in the 1960s. In December 2005, Uranerz entered into an option agreement to acquire an undivided one-hundred percent interest in the claims comprising the Willow Creek Area. The terms of the option agreement were satisfied in 2007 and the transfer of the claims to Uranerz was completed. On October 15, 1951, J. D. Love discovered uranium mineralization in the Pumpkin Buttes districts in the Wasatch Formation on the south side of North Pumpkin Butte in the west-central portion of the Powder River Basin. The mineralization was one of eight areas recommended by the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) in April 1950 for investigation in the search for uranium bearing lignites and volcanic tuffs. In response to this recommendation, an airborne radiometric reconnaissance of most of these areas was undertaken by the USGS in October 1950. The uranium mineralization discovered by J. D. Love was near an aerial radiometric anomaly identified from this survey (Love, 1952). Exploration drilling was conducted in the Jane Dough Area, Section 21 and 28, T43N, R76W, between the late 1960s and late 1970s by CCI. Little interest was generated by the completion of 46 holes from this drilling. Between 1968 and 1980 CCI drilled 150 holes and installed 3 water wells on the Nichols Ranch and Jane Dough Areas. Texas Eastern Nuclear Inc. completed limited drilling and exploration on the property in 1985. In the early 1990s, Rio Algom also completed limited drilling in the area. In December 2005, Uranerz purchased the Nichols Ranch, Jane Dough, and Hank claims groups as part of a six-property agreement to option from Excalibur Industries. Uranerz then expanded the properties by staking additional claims in the immediate and surrounding areas. Uranerz began exploration drilling on the Nichols Ranch Area on July 11, 2006, and continued to June 6, 2015. A total of 1,098 holes (253 exploration holes, 105 monitor wells, and 740 production wells) were drilled during that time. A total of 51 exploration holes were drilled on the Hank Area in 2008. Uranerz received the Source Material License SUA-1597 in July of 2011. Nichols Ranch ISR operations began on April 15, 2014, after completion of a pre-operational inspection by the NRC Region IV office. There were two planned Production Areas (PA1 and PA2) in the Nichols Ranch Area. Five header houses and their respective wellfields were installed and in operation in June 2015, when EFR acquired Uranerz, in Production Area #1. Header house #6 was commissioned in November 2015. In 2016, the EFR completed drilling 12 delineation holes and drilling and casing of 86 extraction wells in Header Houses #7 and #8 in Production Area #1. Header House #7 was turned on in March 2016 and Header House #8 was turned on in June 2016. In Production Area #2, 133 extraction and injection wells were drilled and cased. Header House #9 was completed and turned on in March 2017. No drilling or other development activities have been performed since 2017. In January 2008, Uranerz entered into a joint venture (JV) on the Arkose Project, resulting in an 81% undivided interest in the mineral rights controlled by the JV. Uranerz commenced exploration on the Arkose Project in 2008. A total of 1,971 exploration holes were drilled on the Arkose Project JV from April 2008 to August 2012. A portion of the Arkose Project JV holdings were subsequently incorporated into the Jane Dough portion of the Nichols Ranch Mining Unit and remain subject to the 81% ownership, as discussed in Section 4.0 of this Technical Report. Mining claims were first staked in the North Rolling Pin Area by MWM sometime before 1968. Exploration drilling was conducted in the North Rolling Pin Area Sections 11, 14 and 15, T43N, R76W, between 1968 and 1982 by CCI. A total of 476 exploration holes were drilled including 10 core holes. CCI was reported to be investigating the NRP Area for open pit mining potential but never carried those plans past the exploration phase. In 2008 and 2009, Uranerz drilled 18 exploration holes in Sections 11 and 14. This drilling was performed to evaluate the potential for mineralization below the zones explored by CCI and for confirmation of the previously identified mineralization in the F Sand. 65 Between 1968 and 1985, CCI drilled approximately 380 exploratory holes within the West North Butte, East North Butte, and Willow Creek Areas. From 1983 to 1985, Texas Eastern Nuclear drilled approximately 12 exploratory holes in these Areas. From approximately 1990 to 1992, Rio Algom drilled approximately 5 exploratory holes. In 2006, Uranerz completed an acquisition of these Areas, and in 2007 and 2008, drilled approximately 127 exploratory holes. The Complex is an advanced stage project which is licensed to operate by the NRC and the WDEQ. Construction of the processing facility began in 2011. Plant construction and initial wellfield installation was competed in 2014 and operations were initiated in April 2014. Production of 1,265,805 pounds of uranium oxide has been reported from initiation of production through December 31, 2019, via ISR mining. Since 2019, the Nichols Ranch portion of the Complex has been on standby due to low uranium prices. Permitting and Licensing Energy Fuels has received all regulatory approvals necessary to conduct extraction and uranium processing activities at the Nichols Ranch Plant and Nichols Ranch Wellfield. In December 2010, Uranerz received its Permit to Mine for the Nichols Ranch Project from the WDEQ-LQD. In July 2011, Uranerz received a Source Material License from the NRC for the Nichols Ranch Plant and Nichols Ranch Wellfield, and construction of the Nichols Ranch Plant immediately began. Effective September 30, 2018, the State of Wyoming became an Agreement State under the Atomic Energy Act (as amended) for the regulation of uranium mills and uranium ISR facilities, and regulation of the Source Material License was transferred from the NRC to WDED-LQD. Both the state and federal agencies analyzed all environmental aspects of the Nichols Ranch Project including reclamation of the land surface following extraction operations and restoration of impacted ground water. Workplace safety and the safety of the public are also closely monitored by regulatory agencies. We have posted a reclamation bond with the regulatory agencies in an amount of $6.8 million to cover the total estimated cost of reclamation by a third party as a requirement of the licenses. The various state and federal permits and licenses that were required and have been obtained for the Nichols Ranch Project, exclusive of the expansion to the Jane Dough Property, are summarized below: Primary Permits and Licenses for the Nichols Ranch Project (Nichols Ranch and Hank Units Only) Permit, License, or Approval Name Agency Status Source Material License NRC (2011); WDEQ-LQD (2018) Obtained Permit to Mine (UIC Permit) WDEQ-LQD Obtained Aquifer Exemption WDEQ-LQD; EPA Obtained Permit to Appropriate Groundwater WSEO Obtained Wellfield Authorization WDEQ-LQD Obtained Class I UIC Deep Disposal Well Permits WDEQ-WQD Obtained WYPDES WDEQ-WQD Obtained Plan of Operations (Hank Unit only) BLM Obtained Air Quality Permit WDEQ-AQD Obtained Notes: (1) NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2) EPA - Environmental Protection Agency (3) UIC - Underground Injection Control (4) WDEQ-LQD - Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality Land Quality Division (5) WDEQ-WQD - Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division (6) WDEQ-AQD - Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality Air Quality Division (7) WSEO - Wyoming State Engineer’s Office (8) WYPDES - Wyoming Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Under the licensed plan, the Nichols Ranch Plant has been built, and a satellite processing facility is licensed for the Hank Project. In 2017, the NRC approved a source material license amendment to add the Jane Dough Property to the existing license for the Nichols Ranch Project, and the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality approved an amendment to our Permit to Mine to 66 incorporate the Jane Dough Property. The Jane Dough Property is now fully licensed and permitted as part of the Nichols Ranch Project. The Jane Dough Property is adjacent to the Nichols Ranch Wellfield and is expected to share its infrastructure. We are now able to bring the Jane Dough Property into extraction operations before the Hank Project. Due to its close proximity, extracted solutions from the Jane Dough Property may be delivered directly to our Nichols Ranch Plant by pipeline, thus eliminating the need for a larger capital outlay to construct a satellite plant as is planned for the Hank Project. The Jane Dough Property includes the Doughstick, South Doughstick and North Jane properties. Additional wellfields may be added to the extraction operations plan as the Company continues to assess geological data. Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit The Complex is located in the Powder River Basin, which is a large structural and topographic depression sub-parallel to the trend of the Rocky Mountains. The Basin is bounded on the south by the Hartville Uplift and the Laramie Range, on the east by the Black Hills, and on the west by the Big Horn Mountains and the Casper Arch. The Miles City Arch in southeastern Montana forms the northern boundary of the Basin. The Powder River Basin is an asymmetrical syncline with its axis closely paralleling the western basin margin. During sedimentary deposition, the structural axis (the line of greatest material accumulation) shifted westward resulting in the Basin’s asymmetrical shape. Uranium mineralization at the Complex deposits is hosted by the Eocene Wasatch Formation. The Wasatch Formation was deposited in a multi-channel fluvial and flood plain environment. The climate at the time of deposition was wet tropical to subtropical with medium stream and river sediment load depositing most medium grained materials. The source of the sediments, as evidenced by abundant feldspar grains in the sandstones, was the nearby Laramie and Granite Mountains. Within the Complex, there is a repetitive transgressive/regressive sequence of sandstones separated by fine-grained horizons composed of siltstone, mudstone, carbonaceous shale, and poorly developed thin coal seams. The fine-grained materials were deposited in flood plain, shallow lake (lacustrine), and swamp environments. Ultimately, deposition of the Wasatch Formation was a function of stream bed load entering the basin and subsidence from within the basin. However, in the central part of the Powder River Basin, long periods of balanced stability occurred. During these periods the stream gradients were relatively low and allowed for development of broad (0.5 mi to 6.0 mi wide) meander belt systems, associated over-bank deposits, and finer grained materials in flood plains, swamps, and shallow bodies of water. Meander belts in the Wasatch Formation are generally 5 ft to 30 ft thick. The A Sand at Nichols Ranch Area is made up of three to four stacked meander belts and the F Sand at Hank Area has two to three stacked meander belts. Individual meander belt layers will rarely terminate at the same location twice. Meanders have been noted to frequently terminate in the interior of a belt system but are more likely to terminate somewhere closer to the edge of the meander stream valley. The net effect for fluvial sands is to generally thin away from the main axis of the meander belt system. The A Sand meander belt system at Nichols Ranch Area is approximately four miles wide. At Hank, the F Sand meander belt system is smaller than Nichols Ranch at approximately one and a half miles wide. At the North Rolling Pin Area, the mineralized sand horizon (F Sand) occurs within the Wasatch Formation at an approximate depth from surface ranging from 51 ft to 403 ft and averaging 282 ft to the top of the mineralization. Generally, the depth of mineralization decreases from the northeast to the southwest due mainly to topography along which the surface elevation decreases from approximately 5,180 ft to approximately 4,800 ft. The F Sand primarily consists of two stacked sand sets, termed the Upper and Lower F Sands that each average 20 ft to 25 ft thick. The mineralized sand horizons occur within the lower part of the Wasatch Formation, at an approximate depth from surface ranging from 482 ft to 1,012 ft at West North Butte, 540 ft to 660 ft at East North Butte, and 172 ft to 567 ft at Willow Creek. The host sands are primarily arkosic in composition, friable, and contain trace carbonaceous material and organic debris. There are local sandy mudstone/siltstone intervals with the sandstones, and the sands may thicken or pinch-out in some locations. Mineral resources are located in the Eocene age Wasatch Formation in what is identified as the A, B, C and F host sand units of the WNB Area, the A and B host sands of the ENB Area and in the A and F host sand units of the WC Area. The uranium mineralization is composed of amorphous uranium oxide, sooty pitchblende, and coffinite, and is deposited in void spaces between detrital sand grains and within minor authigenic clays. The host sandstone is composed of quartz, feldspar, accessory biotite and muscovite mica, and locally occurring carbon fragments. Grain size ranges from very fine to very coarse sand but is medium-grained overall. The sandstones are weakly to moderately cemented and friable. Pyrite and calcite are associated with the sands in the reduced facies. Hematite or limonite stain from pyrite are common oxidation products in the oxidized facies. 67 Montmorillonite and kaolinite clays from oxidized feldspars are also present in the oxidized facies (Uranerz, 2010a). The uranium being extracted is hosted in a sandstone, roll front deposit at a depth ranging from 400 ft to 800 ft. Wyoming uranium deposits are typically sandstone roll front uranium deposits as defined in the “World Distribution of Uranium Deposits (UDEPO) with Uranium Deposit Classification” (IAEA, 2009). The key components in the formation of roll front type mineralization include: • A permeable host formation: ◦ Sandstone units of the Wasatch Formation. • A source of soluble uranium: ◦ Volcanic ash flows coincidental with Wasatch deposition containing elevated concentration of uranium is the probable source of uranium deposits for the Pumpkin Buttes Uranium District. • Oxidizing groundwaters to leach and transport the uranium: ◦ Groundwaters regionally tend to be oxidizing and slightly alkaline. • Adequate reductant within the host formation: ◦ Conditions resulting from periodic hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S gas) migrating along faults and subsequent iron sulfide (pyrite) precipitation created local reducing conditions. • Time sufficient to concentrate the uranium at the oxidation/reduction interface. ◦ Uranium precipitates from solution at the oxidation/reduction boundary (REDOX) as uraninite (UO 2 , Uranium oxide), which is dominant, or coffinite (USiO 4 , uranium silicate). ◦ The geohydrologic regime of the region has been stable over millions of years with groundwater movement controlled primarily by high-permeability channels within the predominantly sandstone formations of the Tertiary. Data Verification The primary assay data used to calculate the Mineral Resource estimate for the Complex is downhole radiometric log data. Calibration data for both natural gamma and prompt fission neutron (“ PFN ”) geophysical logging units are available for both historical and recent drilling. When drilling is active, both the natural gamma and PFN logging trucks are calibrated at least every three months. Natural gamma calibration is performed at U.S. Department of Energy (“ DOE ”) standard calibration facilities located in Casper, Wyoming. Commercial logging services for both natural gamma and PFN logging are calibrated at the DOE standard facilities located in Casper, Wyoming, and/or Grand Junction, Colorado. Utilizing only natural gamma logs as assay data could lead to an over or under estimation of Mineral Resources due to disequilibrium. Positive disequilibrium occurs when the uranium present has not had enough time to decay and produce daughter isotopes, which are what are actually measured during a natural gamma assay. Under positive disequilibrium a natural gamma assay would indicate lower amounts of uranium than what is present. Negative disequilibrium occurs when uranium has had enough time to decay to produce the daughter radioisotopes, but was remobilized and removed from the deposit. This would lead to measuring more uranium than is present. The use of a PFN logging unit, which directly measures uranium content, would remove this risk. The disequilibrium factor applied to the Mineral Resource is 1.0. Mineral Resource Estimates Mineral Resources have been estimated using the GT (Grade x Thickness) contour method for each of the mineral sandstone horizons or units identified across the deposits (1, A, B, C, F, G and H). The uranium resource can generally be defined by existing drilling information which is of sufficient density and continuity to identify a meandering discontinuous mineralized trend. The grade and mineralized zone thickness were obtained from historical and recent drilling. The GT contour method is well suited for estimating tonnage and average grades of relatively planar mineralized bodies. It is a smoothing technique that allows the geologist to apply judgment regarding the variability of the mineralization within the plane of the mineralized body. This technique is particularly effective in generating a realistic landscape of metal values along the plane of the mineralized body and limiting the effect of local high values. The technique is best applied to estimate tonnage and average grade of relatively planar bodies, i.e., where the two dimensions of the mineralized body are much greater than the third dimension (Agnerian and Roscoe, 2001). For these types of deposits, the contour method can provide a clear view of the “mineralization landscape” with “peaks and valleys” along the plane of the mineralization. Due to the two-dimensional nature of the contour method, data from drillhole intersections means the reported averaged assay grade is across the entire thickness of the mineralized body being considered. If necessary, the average intersection value is diluted to a specified minimum thickness. The rationale for all Mineral Resource estimation methods is that there is continuity of mineralization from one sample point to another, whether they are drillhole pierce points, underground workings, surface trenches, or wellfields. When a mineral deposit has 68 been tested by many drillholes, the estimate of tonnage and average grade by all of the conventional methods will likely be similar. When a deposit has been tested by a relatively few widely spaced or irregularly spaced drillholes, however, the estimates by various methods may vary greatly and a few high-grade or wide intercepts may have a large influence on the average grade or tonnage of the deposit. The contour method can be effective in reducing the influence of high-grade or wide intersections as well as the effects of widely spaced, irregularly spaced, or clustered drillholes. This is particularly the case for roll front uranium deposits. It can also be applied to estimate Mineral Reserves by deleting certain portions of the Mineral Resources estimated by the same method, such as clipping the edges of the contoured area, deleting certain parts of the tonnage estimate as pillars and sills and/or applying economic factors to the Mineral Resources. The Mineral Resource estimates were calculated using GT contours with a minimum grade cut-off of 0.03% eU 3 O 8 and a minimum mineralization thickness of 1.0 feet. The GT values of the subject sand intervals for each hole were plotted on a drillhole map and contour lines were drawn along the mineralization trend using ArcGIS software. The contour map was developed from the calculated GTs for various GT ranges. The areas within the GT contour boundaries, up to certain distances from the drillhole and to certain maximum areas of influence, were used for calculating estimates for resources. All resources were limited to the extent of the 0.2 GT boundaries. The contained pounds of uranium were calculated using the following formula: Mineral Resource, pounds = (Area, ft 2 ) x (GT, %-ft) x (20 lb) x (DEF) / (RD, ft 3 /ton) • Area (ft 2 ) = Area of influence in square feet (measured from contour interval) • GT (percent x feet) = Material grade in percent times feet thickness of mineralization (GT multiplied by 20 lb to convert from short tons to pounds as 1% of a short ton equals 20 lb) • DEF (1.00) = Disequilibrium factor (1.00) • RD (15.5) = Rock density (15.5 ft 3 /ton) Tonnage was calculated based on grade, pounds and a tonnage conversion factor for a given GT contour area. Details regarding the Mineral Resource estimate disclosed herein can be found in Section 14.0, Mineral Resource Estimates of the Nichols Ranch Technical Report Summary. The table below sets out the Mineral Resources estimates for the Nichols Ranch Project as at December 31, 2021. These estimates are derived from the Nichols Ranch Technical Report Summary, which estimated the Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021. Daniel Kapostasy, the Company’s non-independent Qualified Person, reviewed and confirmed that the Mineral Resources estimates set forth in the Nichols Ranch Technical Report Summary remained accurate as at December 31, 2021. Nichols Ranch Remaining Mineral Resources – In Situ Uranium (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) Classification Project Area Cut-off (ft-%) (2)(8) Tons (000s) Grade (%U 3 O 8 ) Contained Metal (000s lb U 3 O 8 ) EFR Basis (%) EFR Metal (000s lb U 3 O 8 ) Measured Mineral Resources (M) Nichols Ranch 0.2 11 0.187 41 100 41 Jane Dough 0.2 --- --- --- --- --- Hank 0.2 --- --- --- --- --- North Rolling Pin 0.2 --- --- --- --- --- West North Butte 0.2 --- --- --- --- --- Total Measured 11 0.187 40 100 40 Indicated Mineral Resources (I) Nichols Ranch 0.2 359 0.166 1,190 100 1,190 Jane Dough 0.2 1,892 0.112 4,237 81 3,432 Hank 0.2 450 0.095 855 100 855 North Rolling Pin 0.2 582 0.057 665 100 665 Total Indicated 0.2 3,283 0.106 6,947 88.4 6,142 Total Measured + Indicated (M+I) 0.2 3,294 0.106 6,988 88.5 6,183 69 Inferred Mineral Resources (I) Nichols Ranch 0.2 --- --- --- --- --- Jane Dough 0.2 188 0.112 420 81 340 Hank 0.2 423 0.095 803 100 803 North Rolling Pin 0.2 39 0.042 33 100 33 Total Inferred 0.2 650 0.097 1,256 93.6 1,176 Notes: (1) SEC S-K definitions were followed for all Mineral Resource categories. These definitions are also consistent with CIM (2014) definitions in NI 43-101. (2) The cut-off grade is calculated using a metal price of $65/lb. U 3 O 8 . (3) Mineral Resources are based on a tonnage factory of 15.0 ft 3 /ton (Bulk density 0.0667 ton/ft 3 or 2.13 t/m 3 ). (4) Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. (5) Numbers may not add due to rounding. (6) Mineral Resources are 100% attributable to EFR for Nichols Ranch, Hank, and North Rolling Pin. (7) Mineral Resources are 81% attributable to EFR and 19% attributable to United Nuclear Corp in parts of Jane Dough. (8) Cut-off grade is a GT cut-off or %U 3 O 8 x thickness (ft). Present Condition of the Property Current Status of Wellfields All the currently planned and permitted wellfields are in Production Areas #1 and #2 of the Nichols Ranch Wellfield. The Nichols Ranch Wellfield is expected to have a total of 13 header-houses, with Production Area #1 comprising header-houses 1 through 8, and Production Area #2 comprising header-houses 9 through 13. Each of the two planned Nichols Ranch Wellfield Production Areas will include a number of injection wells, recovery wells, monitoring wells, header houses and associated piping and power supply. Header houses will be located within the Production Areas and will distribute recovered fluids from recovery wells to trunk lines, and injection fluids from the processing facility through the trunk lines to injection wells. The first five header houses and their respective wellfields in Production Area #1 at the Nichols Ranch Wellfield were installed and extracting uranium at the time we acquired Uranerz in June 2015. Header house #6 was turned on in November 2015. The Company placed the 7th and 8th header-houses on-line in March and July 2016, respectively, thereby completing development of Production Area #1. In February 2017 we completed construction on our 9th header-house, marking the beginning of development in Production Area #2. Uranium recovery operations from Production Area #2 commenced in March of 2017. Nichols Ranch is currently on standby and is engaged in reduced uranium recovery activities in Production Area #1 and Production Area #2. In order for Nichols Ranch to engage in future uranium production, the Company will need to incur capital expenditures to develop additional wellfields. Nichols Ranch Plant In 2014, construction of the Nichols Ranch Plant was completed. The Nichols Ranch Plant is licensed to produce up to two million pounds of uranium per year through three major processing solution circuits: (i) a recovery and extraction circuit; (ii) an elution circuit; and (iii) a yellowcake production circuit. The Nichols Ranch Plant is currently constructed and operated with the recovery and extraction circuit and the elution circuit installed. We retain the ability to construct and operate a yellowcake drying and packaging circuit at the Nichols Ranch Plant at a later date if desired. The Nichols Ranch Plant is currently on standby, but is still processing uranium-bearing wellfield solutions from Production Areas #1 and #2 of the Nichols Ranch Wellfield for de minimis recoveries of uranium. When not on standby, yellowcake slurry, produced at the Nichols Ranch Plant, is shipped by truck from the Nichols Ranch Project to the White Mesa Mill where it is dried and packaged in drums as uranium concentrate product. Prior to the completion of the elution circuit in February 2016, loaded resin was transported by truck to a third-party facility for elution, drying and packaging, under a toll processing arrangement. In August 2020, deep disposal well #1 (NICH-DW-1) was placed back into operation after a successful work-over. The Nichols Ranch Plant was acquired by the Company on June 18, 2015 through the acquisition of Uranerz. As of December 31, 2021, the total book value attributable to the Nichols Ranch Plant on the Company’s financial statements was $19.7 million. 70 The Company’s Planned Work Nichols Ranch is currently on standby, pending market conditions improving sufficiently to resume production. In 2022, the Company will contemplate initiating restoration activities at Production Area #1. In order for Nichols Ranch to engage in future uranium production, the Company will need to incur capital expenditures to develop additional wellfields, as all existing wellfields are now depleted. A decision to commence development will be made if the Company decides to take action in response to uranium prices increasing to a point where the economic feasibility of the Nichols Ranch Project is realized. 71 The Alta Mesa Project The following technical and scientific description of the Alta Mesa Project is based in part on the report titled “ Technical Report Summary for the Alta Mesa Uranium Project, Brooks and Jim Hogg Counties, Texas, USA ” dated December 31, 2021, prepared by Douglas Beahm, PE, PG, a Qualified Person employed by BRS, as well as Travis Boam, PG, a non-independent Qualified Person employed with the Company (the “ Alta Mesa Technical Report Summary ”). The Alta Mesa Technical Report Summary was prepared in accordance with S-K 1300 and also constitutes a PEA pursuant to NI 43-101. The Alta Mesa Project does not have known “Mineral Reserves” and is therefore considered under SEC S-K 1300 definitions to be an exploration stage property, despite commercial uranium extraction activities occurring as recently as 2013. 72 Property Description The Alta Mesa Project is a fully-licensed ISR uranium recovery facility that the Company acquired in June 2016 through the acquisition of EFR Alta Mesa LLC (previously named Mesteña Uranium LLC). It is located in South Texas and is currently on standby. The Alta Mesa Project is not an underground or open pit project. The Alta Mesa Project does not have known “Mineral Reserves” and is therefore considered under S-K 1300 definitions to be exploratory in nature. The Alta Mesa central processing facility and mine office is located at 755 CR 315, Encino, Texas 78353, in Brooks County, Texas, at approximately 26° 54’ 08” North Longitude and 98° 18’ 54” West Latitude. The site is located approximately 11 miles west of the intersection of US 281 and Ranch Road 755, which is 22 miles south of Falfurrias, Texas. The Alta Mesa Project is located within a portion of the private land holdings of the Jones Ranch, founded in 1897. The ranch comprises approximately 380,000 acres. The ranch holdings include surface and mineral rights including oil and gas and other minerals including uranium. Active uses of the lands in addition to uranium exploration and production activities include agricultural use (cattle), oil and gas development, and private hunting. The Alta Mesa Project consists of Uranium Mining Leases for uranium ISR mining (4,598 acres) and Mineral Options (195,501 acres) comprising some 200,099 total acres. The Alta Mesa Project is defined as constituting two distinct project areas with sufficient drilling to define resources. These two areas are subdivided, as listed below and illustrated on the map on the following page: • The Alta Mesa project area, Brooks County, Texas, comprising 16,010 acres, including, ◦ The Alta Mesa mine area and central processing facility ◦ South Alta Mesa ◦ Indigo Snake • The Mesteña Grande project area, Jim Hogg County, Texas, comprising 47,088 acres, including, ◦ Mesteña Grande Goliad ◦ Mesteña Grande North ◦ Mesteña Grande Central ◦ Mesteña Grande Alta Vista ◦ El Sordo The remaining 137,002 acres lack sufficient exploration drilling to define any resources at this time. Ownership Mineral ownership in Texas is a private estate. Private title to all land in Texas emanates from a grant by the sovereign of the soil (successively, Spain, Mexico, the Republic of Texas, and the state of Texas). By a provision of the Texas Constitution the state released to the owner of the soil all mines and mineral substances therein. Under the Relinquishment Act of 1919, as subsequently amended, the surface owner is made the agent of the state for the leasing of such lands, and both the surface owner and the state receive a fractional interest in the proceeds of the leasing and production of minerals. The Alta Mesa Project consists of a private Uranium Solution Mining Lease (4,598 acres) and Options (195,501 acres) for uranium comprising some 200,100 total acres consisting of acreage associated with currently approved mining permits issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and 9 prospect areas. The Uranium Solution Mining Lease, originally dated June 1, 2004, covers approximately 4,575 acres out of the “La Mesteñas” Ysidro Garcia Survey, A-218, Brooks County, Texas and “Las Mesteñas Y Gonzalena” Rafael Garcia Salinas Survey, A-480, Brooks County, Texas (description corrected in a later amendment). This original Uranium Solution Mining Lease has been superseded by the Amended and Restated Uranium Solution Mining Lease dated June 16, 2016, as part of the share purchase agreement between the Company and the various former holders of the Alta Mesa Project. The Lease now covers uranium, thorium, vanadium, molybdenum, other fissionable minerals, and associated minerals and materials under 4,597.67 acres. The term of the amended lease is fifteen (15) years commencing on June 16, 2016, or so long as the lessee is continuously engaged in any mining, development, production, processing, treating, restoration or reclamation operations on the leased premises. The amended lease can be extended by the Lessee for an additional 15 years upon payment of a stipulated cash payment. The lease includes provisions for royalty payments on the net proceeds (less allowable deductions) received by the Lessee. The royalty payment is 7.5% of Market Value of Product sold at a uranium price greater than $95.00 per pound, 6.25% of Market Value of Product sold at a uranium price 73 greater than $65.00 and up to and including $95.00 per pound, and 3.125% of the Market Value of Product sold at a uranium price of $65.00 or less per pound. The Uranium Testing Permit and Lease Option Agreement, originally dated August 1, 2006, covers all of the land containing mineral potential as identified through exploration efforts and covers uranium, thorium, vanadium, molybdenum, and all other fissionable materials, compounds, solutions, mixtures, and source materials, has been superseded by the Amended and Restated Uranium Testing and Lease Option Agreement dated June 16, 2016, as part of the share purchase agreement between the Company and the various holders of the Alta Mesa Project. It now covers some 195,501.03 acres. The term of the amended lease and option agreement is for eight years commencing June 16, 2016. The amended lease and option agreement can be extended by the grantee for an additional seven years. Certain payments by the Grantee to the Grantor are required prior to year three of the initial eight-year lease. The amended Lease Option Agreement provides for designating acreage to be leased for production by making certain payments to the Grantor (cash or stock). If acreage designation occurs within the first three years of the initial eight-year lease, the payments will be deducted from the certain payments required by year three in the lease option agreement. The Grantor then has sixty business days to execute and return the lease. Amended surface use agreements have been entered in to with all surface owners on the various prospect areas as part of the Membership Interest purchase agreement between the Company and the various former holders of the Alta Mesa Project. These amended agreements, unchanged from those originally entered in to on June 1, 2004, provide, among other things, for stipulated damages to be paid for certain activities related to the exploration and production of Uranium. Specifically, the agreements call for Consumer Price Index adjusted payments for the following disturbances: exploratory test holes, development test holes, monitor wells, new roads, and related surface disturbances. The lease also outlines an annual payment schedule for land taken out of agricultural use around the area of a deep disposal well, land otherwise taken out of agricultural use, and pipelines constructed outside of the production area. Surface rights are expressly stated in the lease and in general provide the lessee with the right to ingress and egress, and the right to use so much of the surface and subsurface of the leased premises as reasonably necessary for ISR mining. Open pit and/or strip mining is prohibited by the lease. Ad valorem tax rates per $100 of taxable value applicable to tangible property for 2016 were as follows: Brooks County 0.743829 Brooks County Rd and Bridge 0.150000 Brooks County ISD 1.572555 Brooks County FM FC 0.098837 Brush Country Groundwater 0.026020 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography The Alta Mesa Project is located primarily in Brooks and Jim Hogg counties, Texas, with the central processing facility in Brooks County. Brooks County is generally rural and according to the 2010 United States Census, there were 7,223 people living in the county. The population density was 8 people per square mile. Most of the workers for the operation are from the local area and nearby communities such as Kingsville, Texas approximately 40 miles from the site. Some staff members commute from Corpus Christi, Texas approximately 90 miles from the site. The Alta Mesa Project is located in the coastal plain of the Gulf of Mexico. Topography of the lower Gulf Coast is relatively flat, whereas the upper Gulf Coast, including most of the current and past mining operations of the South Texas Uranium Province, generally has low relief, rolling plains, except where it is locally dissected by rivers and streams. Elevations range from sea level to about 800 ft. in the southwest. Three major rivers from south to north are: the Nueces River, which flows into Corpus Christi Bay, and the San Antonio and Guadalupe Rivers, which flow into San Antonio Bay southeast of the city of Victoria. The Alta Mesa Project is accessible year-round by various paved, gravel and dirt roads. The site is located approximately 11 miles west of the intersection of US Highway 281 (paved) and Ranch Road 755 (paved), 22 miles south of Falfurrias, Texas. Commercial airlines serve San Antonio, Corpus Christi and Harligen. Many of the local communities have small airfields and there are numerous private airfields in the region. In general, the climate is warm and dry, with hot summers and relatively mild winters. However, the region is strongly influenced by its proximity to the Gulf of Mexico and, as a result, has a much more marine-type climate than the rest of Texas, which is more typically continental. Monthly mean temperatures in the region range from 55 o F in January to 96 o F in August. The area rarely experiences freezing conditions and, as a result, the majority of the processing facility and infrastructure is located outdoors. 74 Wellfield piping and distribution lines do not require burial for frost protection. Annual precipitation ranges from 20 to 35 inches regionally. Primary risk for severe weather is related to heavy thunderstorms and the effects of hurricanes along the Gulf Coast. 75 Local infrastructure includes electricity service, which is adequate for mine and mineral processing activities. The Alta Mesa facility also has telephone and internet service in the form of a T-1 fiber optics line. The plant has an automated control and monitoring system, which allows remote monitoring of the facility, and includes fail safe systems, which can shut down portions of the system in the event of an upset condition. The facility is fully secured with on-site and remote monitoring. Water supply for the Alta Mesa Project is from established and permitted local wells. Liquid waste from the processing facility is disposed of via deep well injection through two permitted Class I UIC disposal wells. Solid waste from the processing facilities is disposed of off-site at licensed disposal facilities. No tailings or other related waste disposal facilities are needed. The Alta Mesa Project is located on an operating cattle ranch. In addition, there is significant local oil and gas development and production. The Alta Mesa area was first developed as an oilfield in the 1930s with production ongoing, primarily for natural gas. Other land uses include farming and recreational uses, such as hunting. The area is regionally classified as a coastal sand plain. Brooks County comprises 942 square miles of brushy mesquite land. The level to undulating soils are poorly drained, dark and loamy or sandy; isolated dunes are found. In the northeast corner of the county the soils are light-colored and loamy at the surface and clayey beneath. The mineral leases and options described below include provisions for reasonable use of the land surface for the purposes of ISR mining and mineral processing. Alta Mesa is a fully licensed, operable facility with sufficient sources of power, water, and waste disposal facilities for operations and aquifer restoration. While the current staff level has been reduced, sufficient local personnel are available for mine operations. History Ownership of the Alta Mesa Project has changed several times in the past. • Early 1970s through June 1985, Chevron Minerals. • June 1985, mineral leases reverted to landowners. • July 1988 to 1993, Total Minerals (“ Total ”). ◦ Total engaged Uranium Resources Incorporate (“ URI ”) to complete a feasibility study of the project. ◦ 1993 Total relinquished mineral leases to Cogema under directive form French government. • 1993 to 1996, Cogema. • 1996 to 1998, URI who obtained the Radioactive Materials License for the facility. • 1999, Mesteña Uranium LLC (“ MULLC ”) was formed by landowners. ◦ MULLC completed most of the drilling on the project. ◦ MULLC began construction of the ISR facility in 2004 ◦ Production began in the 4 th quarter of 2005. ◦ MULLC operated the facility through February 2013 and the project has been on care and maintenance standby since that time. • June 17, 2016, EFR acquired the Project, including both Alta Mesa and Mesteña Grande. Alta Mesa was first discovered in the mid-1970s by Chevron Resources as a result of researching oil and gas logs for natural gamma geophysical signatures. Chevron controlled the Alta Mesa portion of the project through June of 1985 when they returned the mineral lease due to Chevron exiting the uranium business. Chevron reportedly drilled a total of 360 holes inclusive of exploration drilling, coring, and well completion during a four-year period from 1981 through 1984. In July of 1988, Total executed a lease agreement for the Alta Mesa portion of the project. Total also engaged URI to complete a feasibility study for the project. The Total mineral lease was terminated as a result of the French Government requiring Total to sell all their uranium assets to Cogema. Subsequently, the Alta Mesa Project was evaluated by Cogema in 1994 and later by URI. URI held the mineral lease and obtained the Radioactive Material License during the period of 1996 through 1998. EFR Alta Mesa (previously named Mesteña Uranium LLC) was formed in 1999 and continued permitting activities in April of 2000 and completed licensing in 2003. Plant construction at Alta Mesa began in 2004 with initial production in the 4th quarter of 2005. The Alta Mesa Project produced approximately 4.6 million pounds of uranium oxide between 2005 and 2013 via ISR mining. The facility was in production from 2005 until primary production ceased in February 2013. The Alta Mesa Project operated in a groundwater clean-up mode until February 2015; therefore, any uranium mined since 2013 remains as in-circuit inventory. 76 Permitting and Licensing The Alta Mesa Project area is fully permitted for ISR mining and recovery of uranium. The table below summarizes the current permits held by EFR Alta Mesa. Similar permits would be required for the Mesteña Grande project area depending upon the nature of operations and their integration with the Alta Mesa facility. Primary Permits and Licenses for the Alta Mesa Project Permit, License or Approval Name Agency Status Radioactive Material License TCEQ Obtained Class III UIC Mine Area Permit TCEQ Obtained Aquifer Exemption TCEQ Obtained Production Area Authorization(s) TCEQ Obtained Class I UIC Deep Disposal Well Permit(s) TCEQ Obtained Notes: (1) TCEQ - Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (2) UIC - Underground Injection Control The ISR processing facility at Alta Mesa has an operating capacity of 1.5 million pounds of uranium per year. Primary regulatory authority resides with the State of Texas. Financial assurance instruments are held by the state for completed wells, ISR mining, and uranium processing to ensure reclamation and restoration of the affected lands and aquifers in accordance with state regulations and permit requirements. Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit The Alta Mesa Project is located within the Texas Gulf Coast along a belt of Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary formations. The Alta Mesa Project is located within the South Texas Uranium Province, which is known to contain more than 100 uranium deposits that were developed in the second half of the 20th century. Regionally, uranium deposits are hosted by four formations : • Miocene/Pliocene Goliad Formation, consisting of fluvial deposits, mostly unconsolidated sands. • Miocene Oakville Formation, consisting of fluvial deposits (sands, some clay). • Oligocene/Miocene Catahoula Formation, consisting of fluvial deposits, mostly sands, clay, and clastic volcanic rich sediments. • The Jackson Group consisting of fluvial deposits sands, silt, clay, and lignite. At the Alta Mesa Project, in order of importance, uranium is hosted by the Goliad, Oakville, and Catahoula formations. South Texas uranium deposits are sandstone roll-front uranium deposits. The key components in the formation of roll-front type mineralization include: • A permeable host formation : ◦ Sandstone units of the Goliad, Oakville, and Catahoula formations. • A source of soluble uranium : ◦ Volcanic ash-fall tuffs coincidental with Catahoula deposition containing elevated concentration of uranium is the probable source of uranium deposits for the South Texas Uranium Province. • Oxidizing ground waters to leach and transport the uranium : ◦ Ground waters regionally tend to be oxidizing and slightly alkaline. • Adequate reductant within the host formation : ◦ Conditions resulting from periodic H2S gas migrating along faults and subsequent iron sulfide (pyrite) precipitation created local reducing conditions. • Time sufficient to concentrate the uranium at the oxidation/reduction interface : ◦ Uranium precipitates from solution at the oxidation/reduction boundary (REDOX) as uraninite which is dominant (UO 2 , uranium oxide) or coffinite (USiO 4 , uranium silicate). 77 ◦ The geohydrologic regime of the region has been stable over millions of years with ground water movement controlled primarily by high-permeability channels within the predominantly sandstone formations of the Tertiary. The structural map of the Gulf Coast area is dominated by an abundance of growth faults that trend with, or are slightly oblique to, stratigraphic strike, which is roughly parallel to the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, local structural features such as salt domes influence the distribution and deposition of uranium mineralization potentially through various mechanisms including effects on ground water flow and the introduction of additional reductant via the migration of H 2 S gas along the faulting related to the salt dome intrusion. This mechanism is thought to be of importance at Alta Mesa. The Alta Mesa Project is located in the South Texas Uranium Province. Mineralization within the South Texas Uranium Province is interpreted to be dominantly roll-front type mineralization and primarily of epigenetic origin. Roll-fronts are formed along an interface between oxidizing ground water solutions, which encounter reducing conditions within the host sandstone unit. This boundary between oxidizing and reducing conditions is often referred to as the REDOX interface or front. Mineralization tends to be very continuous. Within the Alta Mesa portion of the Alta Mesa Project, Quaternary formations are exposed at the surface. These are conformably underlain by the Goliad Formation, the primary uranium host. Alta Mesa ISR mine units have exploited uranium mineralization in the Goliad C sands within wellfields PAA-1, PAA-2, PAA-3, PAA-4, and PAA-6. The B sand was targeted in wellfield PAA-5. Mineral resources have been estimated for the A, B, C, and D sands. Exploration targets in the South Alta Mesa area lie within successively deeper D, E, F, G, and H sands of the Goliad. Within the Mesteña Grande portion of the project, mineralization is also present in the Goliad Formation but is dominantly found in the Oakville Formation. In the western portion of Mesteña Grande mineralization is found in the Catahoula Formation. Mineral resources have been estimated for all areas within the Mesteña Grande portion of the project. Data Verification The primary assay data used to calculate the Mineral Resource estimate for Alta Mesa is downhole radiometric log data. Calibration data for both natural gamma and PFN geophysical logging units are available for both historical and recent drilling. When drilling is active, both the natural gamma and PFN logging trucks are calibrated quarterly. Natural gamma calibration is performed at U.S. Department of Energy DOE standard calibration facilities located in George West, Texas. Utilizing only natural gamma logs as assay data could lead to an over or under estimation of Mineral Resources due to disequilibrium. Positive disequilibrium occurs when the uranium present has not had enough time to decay and produce daughter isotopes, which are what are actually measured during a natural gamma assay. Under positive disequilibrium a natural gamma assay would indicate lower amounts of uranium than what is present. Negative disequilibrium occurs when uranium has had enough time to decay to produce the daughter radioisotopes, but was remobilized and removed from the deposit. This would lead to measuring more uranium than is present. The use of a PFN logging unit, which directly measures uranium content, would remove this risk. The disequilibrium factor applied to the Mineral Resource is 1.0. Mineral Resource Estimates The primary geologic modeling associated with roll-front deposits in Texas is first identifying the sand in which the uranium mineralization is contained. The geophysical logs obtained following drilling contain gamma data as described in previous sections as well as electrical properties of the rock formations. A trained geologist can interpret these electrical logs as different rock types and therefore assign a formation or sand unit to a uranium intercept. The gamma signature and the cuttings logged during drilling can be used to tell what where the drill hole is within the roll front. The drill hole can be on the oxidized or reduced side of the roll front or within the mineralized “nose” of the roll front. All this information is used to define geologic continuity and the location of the mineralization. Where drilling density was sufficient to complete GT contour calculations, resource estimates were completed in accordance with industry standards, in areas where this was not possible, trend width was determined from producing wellfields PAA-6 and portions of PAA-4 or average GT values where estimated based on overall averages for all Alta Mesa drill hole data. Estimation parameters used for each resource area are provided in the discussions that follow. When dealing with ISR mineral resources, the contained pounds of uranium are calculated from the GT value applied to the respective area of mineralization with the application of the appropriate bulk density. As such average thickness is not a critical parameter in the determination of the pounds contained but is needed to calculate tonnage and average grade. Based on the typical geometry of the sands, a thickness of 10 feet was assumed for exploration targets and corresponds generally with the average 78 screened interval for wells. Mineral resource tonnages were thus calculated assuming an average thickness of 10 feet unless specific data relating to thickness was available. The table below sets out the Mineral Resources estimates for the Alta Mesa Project as of December 31, 2021. These estimates are derived from the Alta Mesa Technical Report Summary. Daniel Kapostasy, the Company’s non-independent Qualified Person, reviewed and confirmed that the Mineral Resources estimates set forth in the Alta Mesa Technical Report Summary remained accurate as at December 31, 2021. Alta Mesa and Mesteña Grande Mineral Resources – In Situ Uranium (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8) Classification Cut-Off Grade (GT) Tons (000 Grade % eU 3 O 8 Pounds eU 3 O 8 (000) Total Measured Resources (M) (5) 0.3 54 0.152% 164 Alta Mesa Indicated Resources (I) 0.3 1,397 0.106% 2,959 Mesteña Grande Indicated Resources (I) 0.3 119 0.120% 287 Total Indicated Resources 0.3 1,516 0.107% 3,246 Total (M & I) 0.3 1,570 0.109% 3,410 Alta Mesa Inferred Resources 0.3 1,263 0.126% 3,192 Mesteña Grande Inferred Resources 0.3 5,733 0.119% 13,601 Total Inferred Resources 0.3 6,996 0.120% 16,793 Notes: (1) S-K 1300 and NI 43-101 definitions were followed for all Mineral Resource categories. (2) Mineral Resources are estimated at a 0.3 GT (0.02% U 3 O 8 minimum). (3) Mineral Resources are estimated using a long-term Uranium price of US$65 per pound. (4) Total measured mineral resource is that portion of the in-place mineral resources that is estimated to be recoverable within existing well fields. Wellfield recovery factors have not been applied to indicated and inferred mineral resources. (5) Bulk density is 0.0588 tons/ft 3 (17.0 ft 3 /ton). (6) Mineral Resources are exclusive of Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. (7) Numbers may not add due to rounding. (8) Mineral Resources are 100% attributable to the Company. Present Condition of the Property and Work Completed to Date The Alta Mesa Project produced approximately 4.6 million pounds of uranium oxide between 2005 and 2013 via In Situ Recovery mining. The facility was in production from 2005 until primary production ceased in February 2013. The Alta Mesa Project operated in a groundwater clean-up mode until February 2015; therefore, any uranium mined since 2013 remains as in-circuit inventory. The first wellfield (PAA-1) has undergone restoration, and the groundwater has been released by the State of Texas. In 2018, all of the cased wells associated with PAA-1 were plugged as per permit requirements. All other wellfields are being maintained by a small bleed (less than 100 gpm) for permit compliance. The bleed solutions are disposed of in the deep disposal wells. Drill data is available for a total of 10,744 drill holes of which approximately 3,000 are within existing wellfields. The primary assay data for the Alta Mesa Project is downhole geophysical log data. EFR Alta Mesa relied entirely on prompt-fission-neutron (“ PFN ”) logging for uranium grade assay and used natural gamma logging to screen intervals for PFN logging. Of the 10,744 drill holes in the Alta Mesa database, PFN logging was not available for only 7.2% of the drill holes. For the Mesteña Grande portion of the Alta Mesa Project, all 460 drill holes were completed by EFR Alta Mesa and all gamma intercepts greater than 0.02 % eU 3 O 8 were logged by PFN. For determination of uranium grade, EFR Alta Mesa LLC relied on PFN log data for 92.8% of the data, which is a direct measurement of uranium content and not an equivalent radiometric assay. As a result, assessment of disequilibrium factor (“ DEF ”) is not applicable. 79 In 2019, the Company performed significant surface decommissioning work in PAA-1. The Alta Mesa Project was maintained in a standby mode during 2021. As of December 31, 2021, the total book value attributable to the Alta Mesa Project on the Company’s financial statements was $9.1 million. The Company’s Planned Work In 2022, the Company expects to continue to keep the Alta Mesa Project on standby until such time as improvements in uranium market conditions are observed or suitable sales contracts can be procured. Alta Mesa is capable of resuming production within a relatively short period of time after a positive production decision by the Company, with only minimal capital requirements. 80 The White Mesa Mill General The White Mesa Mill is a fully licensed uranium and vanadium processing facility located in southeastern Utah, approximately six miles south of the city of Blanding, Utah. The Mill offices are located at 37°32’3.749” north latitude and 109°30’10.297” west longitude. It is within trucking distance of the Company’s conventional properties in Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico, including the Pinyon Plain Project, the Roca Honda Project, the Bullfrog Project, the La Sal Project and the Whirlwind Project. The Mill is the only fully operational and licensed conventional uranium mill in the U.S. It is capable of functioning independently of off-site support except for commercial power from Rocky Mountain Power and as-needed supplemental water supply from the City of Blanding, Utah, and the San Juan Water Conservancy District. The Mill is a uranium processing and recovery facility. It is not an underground or open pit project. The Mill is licensed to process an average of 2,000 tons of ore per day and to extract over 8.0 million pounds of U 3 O 8 per year. In addition to the conventional circuit, the Mill has a separate vanadium by-product recovery circuit. In addition to the Mill processing equipment, which includes the grinding and leaching circuits, CCD (liquid–solid separation), solvent extraction, and precipitation and drying circuits, the Mill has several days of reagent storage for sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, ammonia, salt, soda ash, caustic soda, ammonium sulfate, flocculants, kerosene, amines, and liquefied natural gas. The onsite infrastructure also includes a stockpile area capable of storing up to 450,000 tons of mineralized material, and existing tailings capacity of approximately 3.5 million tons of solids. In addition, the Mill has approximately 90 acres of evaporation capacity. Synthetic lined cells are used to contain tailings and solutions for evaporation. The Company operates two tailings cells and one or more evaporation ponds during normal operations. As each tailings cell is filled, the water is drawn off and pumped to an 81 evaporation pond and the tailings solids are allowed to dry. As each tailings cell reaches final capacity, reclamation begins with the placement of interim cover over the tailings. Additional cells are excavated, and the overburden is used to reclaim previous cells. In this way, there is an ongoing reclamation process. When in full operation, the Mill employs approximately 150 people, which is reduced to approximately 110 people when the vanadium circuit is not being operated. Alternate Feed Materials The Mill License (defined below) also gives the Company the right to process other uranium-bearing materials known as Alternate Feed Materials pursuant to an Alternate Feed Guidance published by the NRC. Alternate Feed Materials are uranium-bearing materials, usually classified as waste products by the generators of the materials, which can be recycled by the Mill for the recovery of U 3 O 8 . The Mill License does not permit the processing of uranium-bearing materials that have undergone enrichment. Requiring a routine amendment to the Mill License for each different Alternate Feed Material, the Company can process these uranium-bearing materials and recover uranium, in some cases, at a fraction of the cost of processing conventionally mined material. In other cases, the generators of the Alternate Feed Materials are willing to pay a recycling fee to the Company to process these materials to recover uranium and then dispose of the remaining by-product in the Mill’s licensed tailings cells, rather than directly disposing of the materials at a disposal site. By working with the Company and taking the recycling approach, the suppliers of Alternate Feed Materials can significantly reduce their remediation costs, as there are only a limited number of disposal sites for such materials in the United States. Alternate Feed Materials are particularly attractive to Energy Fuels because they carry no associated mining costs. Throughout its history, the Mill has received 18 license amendments, authorizing it to process 22 different Alternate Feed Materials. Of these amendments, twelve have involved the processing of feeds provided by nuclear fuel cycle facilities and private industry, and one has involved the processing of material from the DOE. These thirteen feed materials have been relatively high in uranium content and relatively low in volume. The remaining five amendments have allowed the Mill to process uranium-bearing soils from former defense sites, known as FUSRAP sites, which were being remediated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. These materials are typically relatively low in uranium content but relatively high in volume. The Mill has a separate circuit for processing certain types of Alternate Feed Materials, which was built in 2009. This circuit enables the Mill to process both conventionally mined material and Alternate Feed Materials simultaneously. Rare Earth Elements In 2021, the Company began utilizing the Mill to process REEs at commercial scale from a monazite feed source. Monazite is typically produced as part of heavy-mineral sand mining operations and contains elevated quantities of the rare earth suite of elements as well as uranium and thorium. The Mill was able to successfully recover rare earths as a mixed rare earth carbonate (" RE Carbonate ") product which was then sold into the rare earth market. The Mill processed approximately 400 tons of monazite in 2021 and the Company is planning on processing 800 to 1,200 tons of monazite in 2022. The Mill has also begun piloting the separation of the individual rare earth elements by solvent extraction. The Mill is uniquely suited to process monazite and extract both the REEs as well as the uranium and safely dispose of the thorium. See “Part I, Item 1. Business Overview: The Company’s Rare Earth Elements Business ” for a more detailed discussion of the Company’s REE initiative. Potential Recovery of Radioisotopes for use in Advanced Cancer Therapeutics In 2021, the Company announced the execution of a Strategic Alliance Agreement with RadTran, LLC, a technology development company focused on closing critical gaps in the procurement of medical isotopes for emerging TAT cancer therapeutics and other applications. Under this strategic alliance, the Company is evaluating the feasibility of recovering Th-232, and Ra-226, from its existing RE Carbonate and uranium process streams at the Mill and, together with RadTran, is evaluating the feasibility of recovering Ra-228 from the Th-232, Th-228 from the Ra-228 and concentrating Ra-226 at the Mill using RadTran technologies. Recovered Ra-228, Th-228 and Ra-226 would then be sold to pharmaceutical companies and others to produce Pb-212, Ac-225, Bi-213, Ra-224 and Ra-223, which are the leading medically attractive TAT isotopes for the treatment of cancer. Existing supplies of these isotopes for TAT applications are in short supply, and methods of production are costly and currently cannot be scaled to meet the demand created as new drugs are developed and approved. This is a major roadblock in the research and development of new TAT drugs as pharmaceutical companies wait for scalable and affordable production technologies to become available. Under this initiative, the Company has the potential to recover valuable isotopes from its existing process streams, therefore recycling back into the market material that would otherwise be lost to disposal for use in treating cancer. See “ Part I, Item 1. Business Overview: The Company’s Strategic Alliance for the Development of Radioisotopes for Medical Therapeutics” for a more detailed discussion of this initiative. 82 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography The Mill is located in central San Juan County, Utah, approximately six miles (9.5 km) south of the city of Blanding. It can be reached by taking a private road for approximately 0.5 miles west of U.S. Highway 191. The climate of southeastern Utah is classified as dry to arid continental. Although varying somewhat with elevation and terrain, the climate in the vicinity of the Mill can be considered as semi-arid with normal annual precipitation of about 13.4 inches. The weather in the Blanding area is typified by warm summers and cold winters. The mean annual temperature in Blanding is about 50° (F). Winds are usually light to moderate in the area during all seasons, although occasional stronger winds may occur in the late winter and spring. The Mill site is located on a gently sloping mesa that, from the air, appears similar to a peninsula, as it is surrounded by steep canyons and washes and is connected to the Abajo Mountains to the north by a narrow neck of land. On the mesa, the topography is relatively flat, sloping at less than one (1) percent to the south and nearly horizontal from east to west. The natural vegetation presently occurring within a 25-mile (40-km) radius of the Mill site is very similar to that of the region, characterized by pinyon-juniper woodland integrating with big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) communities. Off-site infrastructure includes paved highway access from U.S. Highway 191, and rights-of-way for commercial power and a water supply pipeline from Recapture Reservoir, which brings up to 1,000 acre-feet of water per year to the Mill site. The Mill also has three deep (2,000+ foot) water supply wells, which are available to supply process water during normal operations. Ownership The White Mesa Mill is located on 4,816 acres of private land owned in fee by Energy Fuels. This land is located in Township 37S and 38S Range 22E Salt Lake Principal Meridian. Energy Fuels also holds 253 acres of mill site claims and a 320-acre Utah state lease. No facilities are planned on the mill site claims or leased land, which are used as a buffer to the operations. All operations authorized by the Mill’s License are conducted within the confines of the existing site boundary. The milling facility currently occupies approximately 50 acres, and the current tailings disposal cells encompass another 250 acres. Permitting and Licensing The White Mesa Mill holds a Radioactive Materials License through the State of Utah (the “ Mill License ”). Uranium milling in the U.S. is primarily regulated by the NRC pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. The NRC’s primary function is to ensure the protection of employees, the public and the environment from radioactive materials, and it also regulates most aspects of the uranium recovery process. The NRC regulations pertaining to uranium recovery facilities are codified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations also apply to our ISR facilities in Wyoming and Texas. On August 16, 2004, the State of Utah became an Agreement State for the regulation of uranium mills. This means that the primary regulator for the Mill is the UDEQ rather than the NRC. At that time, the Source Material License, which was previously issued and regulated by the NRC, was transferred to the State and became a Radioactive Materials License. The State of Utah incorporates, through its own regulations or by reference, all aspects of Title 10 pertaining to uranium recovery facilities. The Mill License was due for renewal on March 31, 2007. Energy Fuels’ predecessor timely submitted its application for its Mill License renewal on February 28, 2007. The renewed Mill License was issued by UDEQ on January 19, 2018, then reissued on February 16, 2018 for a period of ten years (with a number of Amendments issued since), after which another application for renewal will need to be submitted. During the review period for each application for renewal, the Mill can continue to operate under its then existing Mill License until such time as the renewed Mill License is issued. The Mill License was initially issued in 1980 and was also renewed in 1987 and 1997. When the State of Utah became an Agreement State, it required that a GWDP be put in place for the Mill. The GWDP is required for all similar facilities in the State of Utah, and effects the State groundwater regulations to the Mill site. The State of Utah requires that every operating uranium mill have a GWDP, regardless of whether the facility discharges to groundwater. The GWDP for the Mill was finalized and implemented in March 2005. The GWDP required that the Mill add over 40 additional monitoring parameters and 15 additional monitoring wells at the site. The GWDP came up for renewal in 2010, at which time an application for renewal was timely submitted. The renewed GWDP was issued by UDEQ on January 19, 2018 for a period of five years. An application for renewal of the GWDP will need to be submitted prior to expiration of the current GWDP. During the review period for each application for renewal, the Mill can continue to operate under its then existing GWDP until such time as the renewed GWDP is issued. The Mill also maintains a permit for air emissions with the UDEQ, Division of Air Quality. 83 The Mill is subject to decommissioning liabilities. Energy Fuels, as part of the Mill License, is required to annually review its estimate for the decommissioning of the Mill site and submit it to UDEQ for approval. The estimate of closure costs for the Mill is $20.8 million as of December 31, 2021, and financial assurances are in place for the total amount. However, there can be no assurance that the ultimate cost of such reclamation obligations will not exceed the estimated liability contained in the Company’s financial statements. History The Mill was originally constructed and owned by Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. (“ EFN ”) and its affiliates (no relation to the Company). It was licensed by the NRC and commenced operations in June 1980. In 1984, EFN transferred a 70% interest in the Mill to UMETCO Minerals Corp., a subsidiary of Union Carbide Corporation (“ UMETCO ”). UMETCO became the operator of the Mill in 1984 and continued to be the operator until 1994, at which time UMETCO transferred its interest in the Mill back to EFN and its affiliates. The Mill was acquired by Denison Mines Corp. (“ Denison ”), then named International Uranium Corporation (“ IUC ”) and its affiliates in 1997 and was operated by Denison until it was acquired by the Company in June 2012. From the original commissioning in 1980 through December 31, 2021, the Mill has recovered a total of approximately 40 million pounds of U 3 O 8 and 46 million pounds of vanadium. In late 2006, Denison began a program to refurbish the Mill. The refurbishment program included the purchase of mobile equipment, restoration of the vanadium roasting, fusion and packaging circuits, replacement of major pumps and component drives, modernization of the Mill’s instrumentation and process control systems, and completion of relining tailings Cell 4A. The total cost of the refurbishment program was approximately $31.0 million and was completed in 2008. The Mill has historically operated on a campaign basis. In 2008, the Mill began processing uranium/vanadium conventional mined material, extracting uranium concentrate in the form of U 3 O 8 , and vanadium in the form of V 2 O 5 . Mineral processing continued through the end of March 2009, at which time maintenance activities were performed at the Mill. Mineral processing recommenced near the end of April 2009 but was discontinued due to a decline in uranium prices at the time. The Mill began mineral processing again in March 2010 and continued through June 2011. Conventional processing recommenced in November 2011 and continued until early March 2012, at which time it ceased for routine maintenance. Conventional mineral processing recommenced at the Mill in August 2012 and continued until early June 2013. Mineral processing began again in May 2014 and continued through August 2014. The alternate feed circuit processed materials from January through December 2014 and continued processing Alternate Feed Materials through December 2015. In 2016, the Company continued processing several Alternate Feed Materials and processed 45,057 tons of mineralized material from its Pinenut mine. In 2017 and 2018, the Mill continued processing Alternate Feed Materials as well as the recovery of uranium from tailings pond solutions at the site. In 2020, Mill activities focused solely on processing Alternate Feed Materials and uranium and vanadium recovery from tailings pond solutions at the site. In 2021, Mill activities focused solely on processing monazite from heavy mineral sands operation for the recovery of U 3 O 8 and rare earth elements. Energy Fuels acquired the Mill from Denison Mines Corp. on June 29, 2012. All mineral processing after that date has been for the account of Energy Fuels. Recovery History (1) Project or Source 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 Alternate Feed Materials (2) Tons (000) --- NA (2) NA (2) NA (2) NA (2) Ave. % U 3 O 8 --- NA (2) NA (2) NA (2 18.86% Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) --- 144 (3) --- 561 (3) 1,004 (3) Tailings Solution Recycle & In-Circuit Material (4) Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) --- 47 --- 216 308 Recovered Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) --- 67 1,807 --- --- Recovered Metric Tons Total Rare Earth Oxide (TREO) 166 --- --- --- --- Conventional Feed Materials 84 Tons (000) --- --- --- --- --- Contained Grade % U 3 O 8 --- --- --- --- --- Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) --- --- --- --- --- Recovered Pounds V 2 O 5 (000) --- --- --- --- --- Recovered Metric Tons Total Rare Earth Oxide (TREO) 120 --- --- --- --- Nichols Ranch (5) Recovered Pounds U 3 O 8 (000) 0.5 6 70 140 259 Alta Mesa Recovered Pounds (000) --- --- --- --- --- Total Pounds of U 3 O 8 Recovered (000) --- 197 70 917 1,571 Total Pounds of V 2 O 5 Recovered (000) --- 67 1,807 --- --- Total Metric Tons of TREO Recovered 120 --- --- --- --- Notes: (1) Mineralized material is shown as being processed and pounds recovered during the year in which the materials were processed at the Mill or at the Nichols Ranch Plant, which is not necessarily the year in which the materials were extracted from the project facilities. (2) All Alternate Feed Materials were processed at the Mill. A number of different Alternate Feed Materials were processed during the period 2017 – 2021. The table shows the average uranium grades and the total pounds recovered from all Alternate Feed Materials processed at the Mill during each of the years in that period. Because of the variability in uranium grades, pounds recovered is considered to be the relevant metric and tons fed is not considered to be relevant. (3) The 144,000 pounds recovered in 2020 include nil pounds recovered for the accounts of third parties. The 561,000 pounds recovered in 2018 from Alternate Feed Materials include 424,000 pounds recovered for the accounts of third parties. The 1,004,000 pounds recovered in 2017 include 952,000 pounds recovered for the accounts of third parties. (4) Pounds contained in tailings solutions containing previously unrecovered uranium and vanadium, together with in-circuit mineralized material from previous conventional mine material processing, were recovered at the Mill, though tons and grade are not available because they cannot be tied to any specific source. (5) Uranium recovery commenced at the Nichols Ranch Project on April 17, 2014. Because the Nichols Ranch Project uses ISR instead of conventional extraction methods, grade and tons of mineralized material are inapplicable to the Nichols Ranch Project. Present Condition of the Property Planned Operations and Maintenance In 2017 and 2018, the Mill processed only Alternate Feed Materials and recovered uranium from tailings pond solutions at the site. The Mill recovered no pounds of U 3 O 8 during 2019, and operations focused solely on vanadium recovery from dissolved vanadium in the Mill’s tailings management system not recovered from previous processing activities (“ Pond Return ”). The Mill recovered approximately 67,000 pounds of V 2 O 5 in 2020 from Pond Return. Of these 67,000 pounds of V 2 O 5 , all were for the account of the Company. During 2020, the Company recovered approximately 190,000 pounds of U 3 O 8 from the processing of Alternate Feed Materials and Pond Return. The Company also recovered approximately 68,000 pounds of V 2 O 5 from Pond Returns. In 2020, the Company also began processing an REE feed at a pilot scale. The Company produced approximately 4 metric tons of RE Carbonate. In 2021, the Mill processed 400 tons of monazite and produced 120 tonnes of TREO in the form of RE Carbonate. The Mill operations registered zero lost time accidents in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021. Environmental Matters Prior to Energy Fuels’ acquisition of the Mill from Denison, chloroform in the shallow aquifer at the Mill site was discovered. The chloroform appears to have resulted from the operation of a temporary laboratory facility that was located at the site prior to and during the construction of the Mill, and from septic drain fields that were used for laboratory and sanitary wastes prior to 85 construction of the Mill’s Tailings Management System (“ TMS ”). In April 2003, Denison commenced an interim remedial program of pumping the chloroform affected water from the groundwater to the Mill’s TMS. This action enabled Energy Fuels to begin cleanup of the affected areas and to take a further step towards resolution of this outstanding issue. Pumping from the wells continued through 2015. On September 14, 2015, the State of Utah approved a long-term Corrective Action Plan (“ CAP ”) for cleanup of the chloroform, which involves additional pumping wells and continued pumping of the affected water to the Mill’s TMS. While the investigations to date indicate that this chloroform appears to be contained in a manageable area, the scope and costs of final remediation have not yet been determined and could be significant. Prior to Energy Fuels’ acquisition of the Mill from Denison, elevated concentrations of nitrate and chloride were observed in some of the monitoring wells at the Mill site in 2008, a number of which are upgradient of the Mill’s TMS. Pursuant to a Stipulated Consent Agreement with UDEQ, Denison retained INTERA, Inc., an independent professional engineering firm, to investigate these elevated concentrations and to prepare a Contamination Investigation Report for submittal to UDEQ. The investigation was completed in 2009, and the Contamination Investigation Report was submitted to UDEQ in January 2010. INTERA concluded in the Report that: (1) the nitrate and chloride are co-extensive and appear to originally come from the same source; and (2) the source is upgradient of the Mill property and is not the result of Mill activities. UDEQ reviewed the Report and concluded that further investigations were required before it could determine the source of the contamination and the responsibility for cleanup. Such investigations were performed in 2010 and 2011 but were considered inconclusive by UDEQ. As a result, after the investigations, it was determined that there are site conditions that make it difficult to ascertain the source(s) of contamination at the site, and that it was not possible at that time to determine the source(s), causes(s), attribution, magnitude(s) of contribution, and proportion(s) of the local nitrate and chloride in groundwater. For those reasons, UDEQ decided that it could not eliminate Mill activities as a potential cause, either in full or in part, of the contamination. The Company and UDEQ have therefore agreed that resources are better spent in developing and implementing a CAP, rather than continuing with further investigations as to the source(s) and attribution of the groundwater contamination. Pursuant to a revised Stipulated Consent Agreement, Denison submitted a draft CAP for remediation of the contamination to UDEQ in November 2011. The CAP proposed a program of pumping the nitrate contaminated groundwater to the Mill’s tailings cells, similar to the chloroform remedial program. On December 12, 2012, DWMRC signed the Stipulation and Consent Order (“ SCO ”), Docket Number UGW12-04, which approved the Mill’s CAP dated May 7, 2012 and required the Mill to fully implement all elements of it. In accordance with the CAP, in 2013 the Company commenced pumping nitrate/chloride contaminated water from four monitoring wells for use in Mill processing or discharge into the Mill’s process or TMS. In December 2017 the Mill