Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b)
of the Act:
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g)
of the Act: NONE
Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to
Section 15(d) of the Act: NONE
Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s
classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report: 121,784,619. (as of August 31, 2017)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned
issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check
mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ☐
Yes
x
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.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically
and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted 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 and post such files).
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated
filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated
filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☒
Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant
has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:
U.S. GAAP ☐
International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting
Standards Board ☒
If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous
question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the Company has elected to follow.
If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether
the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). ☐
Yes ☒ No
Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors Concerning Estimates
of Mineral Resources
All references to dollar amounts are expressed in the lawful currency
of Canada, unless otherwise specifically stated.
PART I
|
|
Item 1.
|
Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers
|
A. Directors and Senior Management
:
Not applicable.
B. Advisers
Not applicable.
|
|
Item 2.
|
Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable
|
Not applicable.
A. Selected Financial Data
The audited financial statements for the Company’s fiscal
years ended August 31, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014 and 2013 are prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards
(“
IFRS
”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board. The following selected financial
data is based on financial statements prepared in accordance with IFRS and is presented for the five most recent financial years.
Unless stated otherwise, reference to dollar amounts shall mean Canadian dollars.
For each of the years in the five year periods ended August 31,
the information in the tables was extracted from the more detailed audited financial statements of the Company.
The selected financial data should be read in conjunction with Item
5, “
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
” and in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements
of the Company and the notes thereto contained elsewhere in this Annual Report. The Company’s fiscal period ends on August
31 of each year.
The following is a summary of certain selected financial information
for the Company’s five most recently completed fiscal years (in Canadian dollars, except number of shares):
|
|
|
2017($)
|
|
|
2016($)
|
|
|
2015($)
|
|
|
2014($)
|
|
|
2013($)
|
|
|
Operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
--
|
|
|
$
|
--
|
|
|
$
|
--
|
|
|
$
|
--
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(6,434,112
|
)
|
|
|
(12,781,902
|
)
|
|
|
(8,995,697
|
)
|
|
|
(2,416,265
|
)
|
|
|
(3,225,998
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
|
(0.12
|
)
|
|
|
(0.09
|
)
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Balance sheet:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working Capital (deficiency)
|
|
|
(6,552,376
|
)
|
|
|
(11,836,214
|
)
|
|
|
(4,684,253
|
)
|
|
|
1,325,667
|
|
|
|
5,416,104
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
|
51,353,088
|
|
|
|
49,885,545
|
|
|
|
53,108,859
|
|
|
|
52,792,901
|
|
|
|
58,193,340
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Assets
|
|
|
36,254,043
|
|
|
|
35,156,483
|
|
|
|
46,072,190
|
|
|
|
51,503,996
|
|
|
|
52,319,699
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share Capital
|
|
|
125,174,377
|
|
|
|
122,380,723
|
|
|
|
120,532,634
|
|
|
|
117,153,440
|
|
|
|
115,614,202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
121,784,619
|
|
|
|
109,068,492
|
|
|
|
107,853,554
|
|
|
|
101,325,880
|
|
|
|
100,922,582
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
96,566,577
|
|
|
|
90,600,819
|
|
|
|
77,970,955
|
|
|
|
69,095,649
|
|
|
|
67,117,263
|
|
Exchange Rates
The following table sets forth information as to the period end,
average, the high and the low exchange rate for Canadian Dollars (“
CDN
”) and U.S. Dollars for the periods
indicated based on the noon buying rate in New York City for cable transfers in Canadian Dollars as certified for customs purposes
by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Canadian dollar = US$1):
Year Ended:
August 31
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Period End
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
1.3205
|
|
|
|
1.2535
|
|
|
|
1.3726
|
|
|
|
1.2471
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
1.3261
|
|
|
|
1.3122
|
|
|
|
1.4592
|
|
|
|
1.2544
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
1.2109
|
|
|
|
1.3223
|
|
|
|
1.3301
|
|
|
|
1.0862
|
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
1.0777
|
|
|
|
1.0858
|
|
|
|
1.1251
|
|
|
|
1.0237
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
|
1.011
|
|
|
|
1.0554
|
|
|
|
1.0578
|
|
|
|
0.971
|
|
The following table sets forth the high and low exchange rate for
the past six months. As of August 31, 2017, the exchange rate was CDN $1.2535 for each US$1.00.
|
Month
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
October 2017
|
|
|
1.2893
|
|
|
|
1.2472
|
|
|
September 2017
|
|
|
1.2480
|
|
|
|
1.2128
|
|
|
August 2017
|
|
|
1.2755
|
|
|
|
1.2482
|
|
|
July 2017
|
|
|
1.2982
|
|
|
|
1.2447
|
|
|
June 2017
|
|
|
1.3504
|
|
|
|
1.2977
|
|
|
May 2017
|
|
|
1.3743
|
|
|
|
1.3446
|
|
B. Capitalization and Indebtedness
Not applicable.
C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds
Not applicable.
D. Risk Factors
An investment in the Company’s
common shares involves a high degree of risk and should be considered speculative. You should carefully consider the following
risks set out below and other information before investing in the Company’s common shares. If any event arising from these
risks occurs, the Company’s business, prospects, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be adversely
affected, the trading price of common shares could decline and all or part of any investment may be lost.
The operations of the Company
are highly speculative due to the high-risk nature of its business, which include the acquisition, financing, exploration and,
if warranted, development of mineral properties. The risks and uncertainties set out below are not the only ones facing the Company.
Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to the Company, or that the
Company
currently deems immaterial, may also impair the Company’s operations. If any of the risks actually occur, the Company’s
business, financial condition and operating results could be adversely affected. As a result, the trading price of the Company’s
common shares could decline and investors could lose part or all of their investment. The Company’s business is subject to
significant risks and past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
Risks relating to the Company
Risks Relating to the Company
The Company has decided to begin production at the Buckreef
Project after preparing an NI43-101 compliant Mining Feasibility Report published in April 2017. The production plans contained
therein include process plant schedule and financial analysis projections for the Buckreef encompassing the Buckreef Main, South,
Eastern Porphyry, Bingwa and Tembo deposits. Management has recommended immediate implementation of the mining and processing plan
once the renewal certificate has been received from the Ministry of Mines. The Mining Feasibility report as published is the bankable
feasibility study that may be subject to future unforeseen risks.
The Company has decided to begin production at the Buckreef Project
based on the latest and comprehensive pit-design optimized mining feasibility study or bankable feasibility study, which is a more
common practice within the mining industry, and therefore may subject it to some unforeseen business risks. The Company’s
decision to begin production at the Buckreef Project was based on prior historical and current information, drilling programs,
modeling, and positive metallurgical testing. Therefore, its decision to begin production at the Buckreef Project was based
on detailed information which may or may not be representative of information regarding the mine based on the latest independent
and comprehensive study results that were published in April 2017. In addition, basing its decision to begin production on
this updated information may make the Company susceptible to risks, including:
-
certain difficulties in obtaining expected metallurgical recoveries
when scaling up to production scale;
-
the preliminary nature of mine plans and processing concepts and
applying them to full scale production;
-
determining operating/capital costs estimates and possible variance
associated with constructing, commissioning and operating the Buckreef facilities based on limited information;
-
that metallurgical testing is always in development and may not
be representative of results of all the deposits that make up the Buckreef Project; and
-
that the Company may have underestimated capital and operating
costs despite the independent and comprehensive bankable mining feasibility study.
The Company has incurred
net losses since its inception and expects losses to continue.
The Company has not been profitable since its
inception. For the fiscal year ended August 31, 2017, the Company had a net loss of $6,434,112 and an accumulated deficit on August
31, 2017 of $96,566,577. The Company has never generated revenues and does not expect to
generate
revenues from operations until one or more of its properties are placed in production. There is a risk that none of the Company’s
properties will be placed in production.
The Company’s exploration
activities are highly speculative and involve substantial risks.
All of the Company’s properties are in the
exploration stage and no proven mineral reserves have been established. The Company’s exploration work may not result in
the discovery of mineable deposits of ore in a commercially economical manner. There may be limited availability of water, which
is essential to milling operations, and interruptions may be caused by adverse weather conditions. The Company’s future operations,
if any, are subject to a variety of existing laws and regulations relating to exploration and development, permitting procedures,
safety precautions, property reclamation, employee
health
and safety, air quality standards,
pollution and other environmental protection controls.
The Company has uninsurable
risks.
The Company may be subject to unforeseen hazards
such as unusual or unexpected formations and other conditions. The Company may become subject to liability for pollution, cave-ins
or hazards against which it cannot insure or against which it may elect not to insure. The payment of such liabilities may have
a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position.
The Company depends on key
management personnel.
The success of the operations and activities of
the Company is dependent to a significant extent on the efforts and abilities of its management including James E. Sinclair, President
and Director, former Chief Executive Officer. Investors must be willing to rely to a significant extent on their discretion and
judgment. The Company does not have employment contracts with the President and Chief Executive Officer. The Company maintains
key-man life insurance on the President and Chief Executive Officer.
The Company will need additional
capital.
As at August 31, 2017, the Company had cash and
cash equivalents of $1,011,293 costs to fund its plan of operations and may need to raise additional capital. Ultimately, the Company’s
ability to continue its exploration activities depends in part on the Company’s ability to commence operations and generate
revenues or to obtain financing through joint ventures, debt financing, equity financing, production sharing agreements or some
combination of these or other means. Further the raising of additional capital by the Company may dilute existing shareholders.
Substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.
Based on the Company’s current funding sources and taking
into account the working capital position and capital requirements at August 31, 2017, these factors indicate the existence of
a material uncertainty that raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern and is dependent
on the Company raising additional debt or equity financing. The Company must obtain additional funding in 2018 in order to continue
development and construction of the Buckreef Project. Furthermore, the Company is currently negotiating project financing terms
with a number of lending institutions, which the Company believes will result in the Company obtaining the project financing required
to fund the construction of the Buckreef Project. However there is no assurance that such additional funding and/or project financing
will be obtained or obtained on commercially favourable terms.
The Company has no cash flow
from operations and has historically depended on the proceeds from equity financings for its operations.
The Company’s current operations do not
generate any cash flow. Any work on the Company’s properties may require additional equity financing. If the Company
seeks
funding from existing or new joint venture partners, its project interests will be diluted. If the Company seeks additional equity
financing, the issuance of additional shares will dilute the current interests of the Company’s current shareholders. The
Company may not be able to obtain additional funding to allow the Company to fulfill its obligations on existing exploration properties.
The Company’s failure to obtain such additional financing could result in delay or indefinite postponement of further exploration
and development and the possible partial or total loss of the Company’s potential interest in certain properties or dilution
of the Company’s interest in certain properties.
The
Company’s former auditor communicated deficiencies to its Audit Committee regarding the 2015 impairment assessment and financial
statement closing process.
In
connection with the audit investigation of the Company’s 2015 financial statements, the Company’s former auditor identified
to the Audit Committee significant deficiencies in the impairment assessment and financial statement closing process. The Audit
Committee considered the auditors’ position and concluded there was no deficiency in the impairment assessment and that the
financial statement closing process for 2015 was consistent with prior year audits, and the audit opinion delivered by the auditor
on the 2015 financial statements was not qualified.
The Company may be characterized
as a passive foreign investment company.
The Company may be characterized
as a passive foreign investment company (“
PFIC
”). If it is determined to be a PFIC, its U.S. shareholders
may suffer adverse tax consequences. Under the PFIC rules, for any taxable year that the Company’s passive income or its
assets that produce passive income exceed specified levels, it will be characterized as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
This characterization could result in adverse U.S. tax consequences for the U.S. shareholders, which may include having certain
distributions on the Company’s common shares and gains realized on the sale of its common shares treated as ordinary income,
rather than as capital gains income, and having potentially punitive interest charges apply to the proceeds of sales of the Company’s
common shares and certain distributions.
Certain elections may be made
to reduce or eliminate the adverse impact of the PFIC rules for holders of the Company’s common shares, but these elections
may be detrimental to the shareholder under certain circumstances. The PFIC rules are extremely complex and U.S. investors are
urged to consult independent tax advisers regarding the potential consequences to them of our classification as a PFIC. See
“Taxation – Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations”.
Risks relating to the Mining Industry
The Company cannot accurately
predict whether commercial quantities of ores will be established.
Whether an ore body will be commercially viable
depends on a number of factors beyond the control of the Company, including the particular attributes of the deposit such as size,
grade and proximity to infrastructure, as well as mineral prices and government regulations, including regulations relating to
permitting, prices, taxes, royalties, land tenure, land use, importing and
exporting
of minerals
and environmental protection. The Company cannot accurately predict the exact effect of these factors, but the combination of these
factors may result in a mineral deposit being unprofitable. The Company has no mineral producing properties at this time. Although
the mineralized material estimates included herein have been prepared by the Company, or, in some instances have been prepared,
reviewed or verified by independent mining experts, these amounts are estimates only and there is a risk that a particular level
of recovery of gold or other minerals from mineralized material will not in fact be realized or that an identified mineralized
deposit, if any, will ever qualify as a commercially mineable or viable reserve.
The exploration for and development
of mineral deposits involves significant risks.
Mineral resource exploration is a speculative
business and involves a high degree of risk. The Company has completed a diamond drilling program on the Buckreef Project and has
been reviewing the results of the drilling program in the context of analyzing the economic significance of the deeper resources
at the Buckreef Project using current gold prices. However, the exploration for and development of mineral deposits involves significant
risks, which even a combination of careful evaluation, experience and knowledge may not eliminate. Although the discovery of a
resource may result in substantial rewards, few explored properties are ultimately developed into producing mines. Significant
expenditures may be required to locate and establish reserves, to develop metallurgical processes and to construct mining and processing
facilities at a particular site.
The Company may not be able
to establish the presence of minerals on a commercially viable basis.
The Company’s ability to generate revenues
and profits, if any, is expected to occur through exploration and development of its existing properties as well as through acquisitions
of interests in new properties. The Company will need to incur substantial expenditures in an attempt to establish the economic
feasibility of mining operations by identifying mineral deposits and establishing ore reserves through drilling and other techniques,
developing metallurgical processes to extract metals from ore, designing facilities and planning mining operations. The economic
feasibility of a project depends on numerous factors beyond the Company’s control, including the cost of mining and production
facilities required to extract the desired minerals, the total mineral deposits that can be mined using a given facility, the proximity
of the mineral deposits to a user of the minerals, and the market price of the minerals at the time of sale. The Company’s
existing or future exploration programmes or acquisitions may not result in the identification of deposits that can be mined profitably.
The Company depends on consultants
and engineers for its exploration programmes.
The Company has relied on and may continue to
rely upon
consultants
for exploration development, construction and operating expertise. Substantial
expenditures are required to construct mines, to establish ore reserves through drilling, to carry out environmental and social
impact assessments, to develop metallurgical processes to extract the metal from the ore and, in the case of new properties, to
develop the exploration infrastructure at any site chosen for exploration. The Company may not be able to discover minerals in
sufficient quantities to justify commercial operation, and the Company may not be able to obtain funds required for exploration
on a timely basis.
The Company may not have
clear title to its properties.
Acquisition of title to mineral properties is
a very detailed and time-consuming process, and the Company’s title to its properties may be affected by prior unregistered
agreements or transfers, or undetected defects. Several of the Company’s prospecting licenses are currently subject to renewal
by the Ministry of
Energy
and Minerals of Tanzania. There is a risk that the Company may not
have clear title to all its mineral property interests, or they may be subject to challenge or impugned in the future. See “
Mineral
Properties
”.
Mining exploration, development and operating
activities are inherently hazardous.
If the Company experiences mining accidents or other adverse conditions,
the Company’s mining operations could be materially adversely affected. The Company’s exploration activities may be
interrupted by any or all of the following mining accidents such as cave-ins, rock falls, rock bursts, pit wall failures, fires
or flooding. In addition, exploration activities may be reduced if unfavourable weather conditions, ground conditions or seismic
activity are encountered, ore grades are lower than expected, the physical or metallurgical characteristics of the ore are less
amenable than expected to mining or treatment, dilution increases or electrical power is interrupted. Occurrences of this nature
and other accidents, adverse conditions or operational problems in future years may result in the Company’s failure to achieve
current or future exploration and production estimates.
Development of the Company’s
projects is based on estimates and the Company cannot guarantee that its projects, if any, will be placed into production.
Any potential production and revenues based on
production from any of the Company’s properties are
estimates
only. Estimates are based
on, among other things, mining experience, resource estimates, assumptions regarding ground conditions and physical characteristics
of ores (such as hardness and presence or absence of certain metallurgical characteristics) and estimated rates and costs of mining
and processing. The Company’s actual production from the Buckreef Project, if it ever achieves production, may be lower than
its production estimates. Each of these factors also applies to future development properties not yet in production at the Company’s
other projects. In the case of mines the Company may develop in the future, it does not have the benefit of actual experience in
its estimates, and there is a greater likelihood that the actual results will vary from the estimates. In addition, development
and expansion projects are subject to unexpected construction and start-up problems and delays.
The Company’s exploration
activities are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations.
Laws and regulation govern the development, mining,
production, importing and exporting of minerals; taxes; labor standards; occupational health; waste disposal; protection of the
environment; mine safety; toxic substances; and other matters. The Company
requires
licenses
and permits to conduct exploration and mining operations. Amendments to current laws and regulations governing operations and activities
of mining companies or more stringent implementation thereof could have a substantial adverse impact on the Company. Applicable
laws and regulations will require the Company to make certain capital and operating expenditures to initiate new operations. Under
certain circumstances, the Company may be required to close an operation once it is started until a particular problem is remedied
or to undertake other remedial actions.
The Company’s mineral interests in Tanzania
are held under prospecting licenses granted pursuant to the
Mining Act, 2010
(Tanzania) for a period of up to four years,
and are renewable two times for a period of up to two years each. There are initial preparation fees and annual rental fees for
prospecting licenses based on the total area of the license. Renewals of prospecting licenses can take many months and possibly
even years to process by the regulatory authority in Tanzania and there is no guarantee that they will be granted. With each renewal
at least 50% of the licensed area, if greater than 20 square kilometres, must be relinquished and if the Company wishes to keep
the relinquished one-half portion, it must file a new application for the relinquished portion. There is no guarantee on the timing
for processing the new application and whether it will be successful.
Risks relating to the Market
The Company’s competition is intense in
all phases of the Company’s business.
The mining industry in which the Company is engaged is in general,
highly competitive. Competitors include well-capitalized mining companies, independent mining companies and other companies having
financial and other resources far greater than those of the Company. The Company competes with other mining companies in connection
with the acquisition of gold and other precious metal properties. In general, properties with a higher grade of recoverable mineral
and/or which are more readily mineable afford the owners a competitive advantage in that the cost of production of the final mineral
product is lower. Thus, a degree of competition exists between those engaged in the mining industries to acquire the most valuable
properties. As a result, the Company may eventually be unable to acquire attractive gold mining properties.
The Company is subject to the volatility of metal
and mineral prices.
The economics of developing metal and mineral properties are affected
by many factors beyond the Company’s control, including, without limitation, the cost of operations, variations in the grade
ore or resource mined, and the price of such resources. The market prices of the metals for which the Company is exploring
are highly speculative and volatile. Depending on the price of gold or other resources, the Company may determine that it
is impractical to commence or continue commercial production. Gold prices fluctuate widely and are affected by numerous factors
beyond the Company’s control, including central bank purchases and sales, producer hedging and de-hedging activities, expectations
of inflation, the relative exchange rate of the U.S. dollar with other major currencies, interest rates, global and regional demand,
political and economic conditions, production costs in major gold-producing regions, speculative positions taken by investors or
traders in gold and changes in supply, including worldwide production levels. The price of gold and other metals and minerals
may not remain stable, and such prices may not be at levels that will make it feasible to continue the Company’s exploration
activities, or commence or continue commercial production. The aggregate effect of these factors is impossible to predict with
accuracy.
The Company’s business activities are conducted
in Tanzania.
The Company’s principal exploration and
development properties are currently located in the United Republic of Tanzania, Africa. Although the Company believes that the
Tanzania government is a
stable
, multi-party democracy, there is no guarantee that this will
continue. Tanzania is surrounded by unstable countries enduring political and civil unrest, and in some cases, civil war. There
is no guarantee that the surrounding unrest will not affect the Tanzanian government and people, and therefore, the Company’s
mineral exploration activities. Any such effect is beyond the control of the Company and may materially adversely affect its business.
The Company may be affected in varying degrees
by political stability and government regulations relating to the mining industry and foreign investment in Tanzania. The government
of Tanzania may institute regulatory policies that adversely affect the exploration and development (if any) of the Company’s
properties. Any changes in regulations or shifts in political conditions in this country are beyond the control of the Company
and may materially adversely affect its business. Investors should assess the political
and
regulatory risks related to the Company’s foreign country investments. The Company’s operations in Tanzania are also
subject to various levels of economic, social and other risks and uncertainties that are different from those encountered in North
America. The Company’s operations may be affected in varying degrees by government regulations with respect to restrictions
on production, price controls, export controls, restrictions on foreign exchange and repatriation, income taxes, expropriation
of property, environmental legislation and mine safety. Other risks and uncertainties include extreme fluctuations in currency
exchange rates, high rates of inflation, labour unrest, risks of war or civil unrest, government and civil unrest, regional expropriation
and nationalization, renegotiation or nullification of existing concessions, licences, permits and contracts, artisanal mining,
corruption, hostage taking, civil war and changing political conditions and currency controls. Infectious diseases (including Ebola
virus, malaria, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis) are also major health care issues where the Company operates.
Mineral exploration in Tanzania is affected by
local climatic and economic conditions.
The Company’s properties in Tanzania have
year round access, although seasonal winter rains from December to March may result in flooding in low lying areas, which are dominated
by mbuga, a black organic rich laustrine flood soil. Further, most lowland areas are under active cultivation for corn, rice, beans
and mixed crops by subsistence farmers. As a result, the area has been deforested by local agricultural practices for many years.
The seasonal rains and deforested areas can create a muddy bog in
some
areas, which can make
access more difficult, and could impede or even prevent the transport of heavy equipment to the Company’s mineral properties
at certain times of the year between December and March.
The Company’s operations
are subject to issues relating to security and human rights.
Civil disturbances and criminal activities such
as trespass, artisanal mining, theft and vandalism may cause disruptions at the Company’s operations in Tanzania which may
result in the suspension of operations. There is no guarantee that such incidents will not occur in the future. Such incidents
may halt or delay exploration, increase operating costs, result in harm to employees or trespassers, decrease operational efficiency,
increase community tensions or result in criminal and/or civil liability for the Company or its employees and/or financial damages
or penalties. The manner in which the Company’s personnel respond to civil disturbances and criminal activities can give
rise to additional risks where those responses are not conducted in a manner that is consistent with international standards relating
to the use of force and respect for human rights. The failure to conduct security operations in accordance with these standards
can result in harm to employees or community members, increase community tensions, reputational harm to the Company and its partners
or result in criminal and/or civil liability for the Company or its employees and/or financial damages or penalties. It is not
possible to determine with certainty the future costs that the Company may incur in dealing with the issues described above at
its operations.
Risks relating to the Securities of the Company
As a foreign private issuer,
the Company is subject to different U.S. securities laws and rules than a domestic U.S. issuer, which may limit the information
publicly available to U.S. shareholders.
The Company is a foreign private issuer under
applicable U.S. federal securities laws. As a result, the Company does not file the same reports that a U.S. domestic issuer would
file with the SEC, although the Company is required to file with or furnish to the SEC the continuous disclosure documents that
the Company is required to file in Canada under Canadian securities laws. In addition, the Company’s officers, directors,
and principal shareholders are exempt from the reporting and “short swing” profit rules of Section 16 of the Exchange
Act. Therefore, shareholders may not know on as timely a basis when the Company’s officers, directors and principal shareholders
purchase or sell common shares, as the reporting dates under the corresponding Canadian insider reporting requirements are longer.
In addition, as a foreign private issuer, the Company is exempt from the proxy rules under the Exchange Act.
The Company may lose its
foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional costs and expenses.
In order to maintain the Company’s current
status as a foreign private issuer, a majority of its common shares must be either directly or indirectly owned by non-residents
of the United States, unless the Company also satisfies one of the additional requirements necessary to preserve this status. The
Company may in the future lose its foreign private issuer status if a majority of its common shares is held in the United States
and it fails to meet the additional requirements necessary to avoid loss of foreign private issuer status. The regulatory and compliance
costs under U.S. federal securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly more than the costs incurred as a Canadian
foreign private issuer eligible to use the multijurisdictional disclosure system (“
MJDS
”). If the Company
is not a foreign private issuer, it would not be eligible to use the MJDS or other foreign issuer forms and would be required to
file periodic and current reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed
and extensive than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. In addition, the Company may lose the ability to rely upon
certain exemptions from NYSE Mkt corporate governance requirements that are available to foreign private issuers.
United States investors may
not be able to obtain enforcement of civil liabilities against the Company.
The enforcement by investors of civil liabilities
under the United States federal or state securities laws may be affected adversely by the fact that the Company is governed by
the
Business Corporations Act
(Alberta), that the some of the Company’s officers and directors are residents of Canada
or otherwise reside outside the United States, and that all, or a substantial portion of their assets and a substantial portion
of the Company’s assets, are located outside the United States. It may not be possible for investors to effect service of
process within the United States on certain of the Company’s directors and officers or enforce judgments obtained in
the
United States courts against the Company, certain of its directors and officers based upon the civil liability provisions of United
States federal securities laws or the securities laws of any state of the United States.
Common Share prices will
likely be highly volatile, and investment could decline in value or the entire investment may be lost.
The market price of the common shares is likely
to be highly volatile and may fluctuate significantly in response to various factors and events, many of which the Company cannot
control. The stock market in general, and the market for mining company stocks in particular, has historically experienced significant
price and volume fluctuations. Volatility in the market price for a particular issuer’s securities has often been unrelated
or disproportionate to the operating performance of that issuer. Market and industry
factors
may depress the market price of the Company’s securities, regardless of operating performance. Volatility in the Company’s
securities price also increases the risk of securities class action litigation.
The Company’s common shares must meet the requirements
of the NYSE MKT.
The NYSE MKT rules provides that the NYSE MKT may, in its discretion,
at any time, and without notice, suspend dealings in or remove any security from listing or unlisted trading privileges, if, among
other things, where the financial condition and/or operating results of the issuer appear to be unsatisfactory or it appears that
the extent of public distribution or the aggregate market value of the security has become so reduced as to make further dealings
on the NYSE MKT inadvisable. Although the Company has received no indication or notification that its common shares may be
delisted, in light of the current per common share price, there is no assurance that the Company’s common shares will continue
to be listed on the NYSE MKT.
Offers or availability for sale of a substantial number of
common shares may cause the price of our common shares to decline.
Sales of a significant number of the Company’s common shares
in the public market could harm the market price of its common shares and make it more difficult for the Company to raise funds
through future offerings of common shares. The Company’s shareholders may sell substantial amounts of its common shares in
the public market. The availability of these common shares for resale in the public market has the potential to cause the supply
of its common shares to exceed investor demand, thereby decreasing the price of the common shares.
In addition, the fact that the Company’s shareholders can
sell substantial amounts of its common shares in the public market, whether or not sales have occurred or are occurring, could
make it more difficult for the Company to raise additional financing through the sale of equity or equity-related securities in
the future at a time and price that it deems reasonable or appropriate.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Information on the Company
|
A. History and Development of the Company
The Company was originally incorporated under the name “
424547
Alberta Ltd
.” in the Province of Alberta on July 5, 1990, under the
Business Corporations Act
(Alberta). The name
was changed to “
Tan Range Exploration Corporation
” on August 13, 1991. The name of the Company was again changed
to
“Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation”
on February 28, 2006. The Company is also registered in the Province
of British Columbia as an extra-provincial company under the
Business Corporations Act
(British Columbia) and in the Province
of Ontario as an extra-provincial company under the
Business Corporations Act
(Ontario).
The principal executive office of the Company is located at 82 Richmond
Street East, Toronto, Ontario, M5C 1P1, Canada, and its telephone number is (860) 355-3253.
For the year ended August 31, 2017, the Company reported a net loss
of $6,434,112. Included in the net loss is $124,717 of mineral properties and deferred exploration expenses that was written off
relating to abandoned mineral properties. The Company incurred deferred exploration expenditures of $1,242,162 during the year
ended August 31, 2017.
In connection with the Company’s disclosure of mineral resources
and the cut-off grade associated with each mineral resource, it has made certain assupmtions for mineral pricing and cost associated
with each cut-off grade to determine the reasonable prospects for economic extraction as discussed below.
Significant Acquisitions and Significant Dispositions
The Company’s principal capital expenditures and divestitures
(including interests in other companies and amounts invested) for the last three fiscal years are described as follows:
The Company awarded a contract to Venmyn Independent
Projects (Pty) Limited, a subsidiary of Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited, to undertake an update of the 21 August 2012 National Instrument
43-101 Independent Technical Report on the Buckreef Project in Tanzania. The
updated
report
is dated February 24, 2014 (the “
Updated Buckreef Technical Project
”) and it was filed on SEDAR on February
24, 2014. See “
Mineral Properties
”. Further to this, the Company awarded another contract to MaSS Resources
Pvt Ltd of Tanzania to undertake an NI43-101 Compliant updated Buckreef Pit Optimized Resource Technical Mining Feasibility Report
that was completed and published on 5
th
April 2017. Major Assumptions in the report included a gold price of $1250/oz,
an effective Tax Rate of 15.25%; a Royalty Rate of 4.3%; transport refining cost of $15.00/oz Au and discount rate of 5%.
The Company wound down the pilot heap leach and Carbon-in-Column
pilot ore processing program at its Buckreef redevelopment gold project, located in the Lake Victoria Goldfields of Tanzania in
September 2016. In addition, the Company has also completed a significant portion of the Buckreef main Pit preparation, including
grade control drill-hole marking and surveying, road detour surveys and cost estimations, Tailings Storage Facility site preparation,
installation of the process plant crusher circuit, Carbon-in-Column process plant designs and site plan designs. The Company also
produced an updated internal report on the financial projections for the Buckreef Mine Closure Conceptual Plan.
B. Business Overview
The Company is a mineral resource company with exploration stage
properties, which engages in the acquisition of interests in and the exploration of natural resource properties in the future and
the possible development of those properties where warranted. The Company commits its own resources to the initial evaluation of
mineral properties and in select situations, if and when warranted, the Company enters into joint venture agreements with other
corporations to further the exploration of such properties, in exchange for annual rental/option payments and post-production royalty
payments or with a view to direct development of a mine for the purpose of earning income from the sale of gold and other mined
materials. At present, the Company’s natural resource activities do not generate any income from production.
The Company’s main area of interest has been in the exploration
and development of gold properties, with a primary focus on exploring for and developing gold properties in Tanzania. Tanzania
remains the focus of the Company’s exploration and development activities.
In the Company’s view, its use of a joint venture and royalty
strategy in addition to its planned direct exploration and development offers investors leverage to precious and base metal prices
with lower risk and shareholder dilution. Future production royalties from any producing properties discovered by joint venture
partners would provide the Company with a direct interest in the mine’s cash flow, with exposure to any benefits from new
discoveries and production growth, but without the capital obligations, and environmental and social liabilities, associated with
direct ownership.
Plan of Operations
Exploration Activities
All of the properties in which the Company holds
an interest are in the exploration, preliminary economic assessment or extraction (pre-production) stages of mining. Mineral exploration
and extraction involves a high degree of risk and few properties, which are explored, are ultimately developed into producing mines.
There is no assurance that the Company’s mineral exploration activities will result in any discoveries of commercial bodies
of ore. The long-term profitability of the Company’s operations will be in part directly related to the cost and success
of its exploration programs, which may be affected by a number of factors beyond the control of the Company.
By way of general description of the Company’s
operating activities, the Company’s business operations involve using known or published geological and geophysical data
to locate mineral resource properties meriting further exploration or development. Once identified, the Company must stake and
apply for registration to title of the mineral properties, or negotiate the acquisition of such properties from any third party
owners. Upon registration or acquisition of title, the Company then designs a program of preliminary exploration which can involve
grid mapping, geophysical and magnetic surveying, geochemical surveying, geological mapping and sampling, grab sampling, assaying
and other forms of prospecting as circumstances may require. Based on the preliminary results, mineral properties are ranked according
to merit for further exploration work, which may involve further mapping, more detailed geophysical and geochemical surveying,
and trenching to identify potential drill targets. If mineralization is indicated which merits further investigation, drill targets
are selected and a preliminary RC drilling program commences for underground sampling and assaying. If the results are positive,
then a diamond drilling program will commence mainly to check, verify and confirm the mineralization potential of the prospect.
Based on the drilling program results, the Company
will develop models of the underlying geology and mineralized zones for more detailed testing. After further drilling, some mineralized
zones will then be modeled using relevant geological software and ultimately be classified as inferred or indicated mineral resources.
With sufficient infill drilling, these inferred or indicated mineral resources can be confirmed as a measured mineral resource,
upon which a pre-feasibility study can be prepared by a qualified, independent mining engineer or geologist to determine whether
mining activities are economic in the circumstances of the particular property. A pre-feasibility study must be completed under
the requirements of NI 43-101 in Canada in order for mineral reserves to be designated and to confirm the appropriate mining and
mineral processing method based on the geological and metallurgical studies of the ore. A final or bankable feasibility study must
be completed for the designation of reserves under the SEC’s Industry Guide 7. If the bankable feasibility study is favorable,
the Company can then use the feasibility study to seek out the necessary financing from a merchant banker or other financial institution
for mine construction and development.
The Company continued its efforts for the “farming-out”
of identified properties for royalty agreements with other mining companies, and continues to examine and review other exploration
opportunities in Tanzania.
Highlights for the year ended August 31, 2017
Financial:
|
•
|
Subsequent to the period, the Company received loans in the amount
of US$339,710 maturing in 1 year with a right to extend by 1 additional year by mutual consent, carrying an 8% interest rate payable
quarterly. The convertible loans may be repaid in cash or common shares of the Company at the option of the lender. The convertible
loan may be converted into common shares of the Company at the sole discretion of the lender at an exercise price of US$0.36 per
share. Interest is payable quarterly, either in cash or in shares at the option of the lender at a price of US$0.36 per share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
In connection with the loans, the Company paid a finder’s
fee via the issuance of an aggregate of 214,864 common shares.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
The Company also entered into extension agreements in regards to USD$1,530,000 in gold loans closed
on June 22, 2015, extending the term by one year to June 22, 2018, but modifying no other terms of the 2015 loans.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
During the year ended August 31, 2017, the Company received loans
in the amount of US$884,078 with a one year term with a right to extend by 1 additional year by mutual consent, carrying an 8%
interest rate payable quarterly. The convertible loans may be repaid in cash or common shares of the Company at the option of the
lender. The convertible loans may be converted into common shares of the Company at the sole discretion of the lender at an exercise
price of US$0.36 – US$0.38 per share. Interest is payable quarterly, either in cash or in shares at the option of the lender
at a price of US$0.34 – US$0.36 per share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with the loans, the Company paid a finder’s
fee via the issuance of an aggregate of 132,577 common shares with a value of $92,805.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
On July 19, 2017, the Company settled $63,075 (US$50,000) of principal
amount of outstanding loans through the issuance of 83,333 shares with a value of $49,166 resulting on a gain on settlement of
$13,909.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
On September 1, 2016, the Company closed the first tranche of a
$5 Million private placement of securities with Crede CG III, Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the initial round of financing, the Company privately
placed 1,840,400 shares of its common stock and warrants for US$1.25 million. The common stock issued in the first tranche of the
financing, which closed on September 1, 2016, was priced at US$0.6792 per share. The investor also received five-year warrants
to purchase 1,840,400 shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of US$0.8291 per share. The common stock issued in the first
tranche of the financing or issued upon exercise of the warrants issued in the first tranche of the financing will be restricted
until a valid registration for such common stock becomes effective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On September 26, 2016, the Company closed the second tranche
of the $5 million private placement of securities with Crede CG III, Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the second round of the financing, the Company privately
placed convertible notes and warrants for US$3.75 million. The convertible notes were issued in the principal amount of US$3.75
million, carried a coupon of 2.0% and matured on September 26, 2046. The Company immediately exercised its right to cause the conversion
of the convertible notes, resulting in the cancellation of the notes and the issuance of 5,357,143 shares of common stock to the
investor. The investor also received five-year warrants to purchase 4,017,857 shares of common stock at an exercise price of US$1.10
per share. The closing of the second tranche of the financing was conditioned upon a valid registration statement for the common
stock issued or issuable to the investor upon exercise of warrants being declared effective by the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission. The Commission declared the Company’s Form F-3 Registration Statement registering the stock effective on September
23, 2016.
|
|
|
|
|
Buckreef Project: Mine Development and Operations
Q1_2017 (September 2016 – November 2016)
-
The Company successfully completed the renewal application process
for the 12 Buckreef_Buziba project Prospecting Licenses (PLs). Renewal certificates for all 12 PLs were received after successful
payment of the annual rental fee payments for the period 2016-2017.
-
The company also successfully engaged with the Mining Commissioner
on requested additional technical information related to the renewal application for the Buckreef Special Mining License (SML04/92).
-
The company also engaged a local Tanzanian consultant group, MaSS
Resources Consulting Company who commenced the Review and Update of the Buckreef Preliminary Economic Assessment Report (published
in 2012 & 2014) by Venmyn Deloite Resource Consultants Ltd. of SA into an NI43-101 compliant Buckreef Technical Mining Feasibility
Report.
Q2_2017 (December 2016 – February 2017)
-
The Company received the Buckreef Gold Mine Company Environmental
Management Plan Upgrade certification from NEMC.
-
The company also received the Buckreef SML04/92 Special Mining
Licence Renewal offer letter from the Ministry of Energy & Minerals. Renewal period was for a further 10 years to 2027. Annual
rental fees for the SML were paid upfront to June 2018 as per regulations.
-
MaSS Resources in consultation with company qualified technical
persons, continued work on updating the Buckreef Technical Mining Feasibility Report.
-
The National Audit Office of Tanzania (NAOT) team led by the Deputy
Auditor General and in the company of senior personnel from Stamico audited the Buckreef Project JV working partnership and current
status.
-
Stamico MD made a presentation to the relevant Parliamentary Committee
overseeing all government related JV projects in Tanzania to brief the government on project status.
-
Emisha Mining Solutions, a South African based consultant company
continued work on the new CIL process plant design.
Q3_2017 (March 2017 – May 2017)
-
The Company received a letter of notification requesting the presence
of Chairman and CEO to attend the official signing ceremony for the Buckreef renewal certificate issuance which was scheduled to
be held at Dodoma on 7th March 2017. Ceremony was however postponed indefinitely as the Minister was busy with other issues.
-
In addition, the company hosted a delegation of MPs that make up
the Parliamentary Mining Audit Committee (PMAC) on Energy & Minerals at Buckreef on 22nd March 2017 whose task was to assess
the Buckreef Gold project re-development progress since the signing of the Tanzam2000 and State Mining Corporation Joint Venture
Agreement in October 2011.
-
Ground-work on the Buckreef project resumed with the main activity
being marking and initial clearing of the site covered by the Buckreef main pit outline.
-
Site marking and survey pick-ups of the planned Grade Control drill-holes
commenced.
-
The company also completed and successfully published the NI43-101
Compliant updated Buckreef Pit Optimized Resource Technical Mining Feasibility Report during the quarter.
Q4_2017 (June 2017 – August 2017)
-
Tanzania suspended granting of new mining licenses and froze the
renewal of expired mining permits until further notice under their new legislative changes that seek to enable the government to
re-negotiate of Mining Developments Agreements among other things.
-
The company successfully completed ground clearing and surveying
the demarcated Buckreef mega-pit outline.
-
In addition, all the proposed Grade Control drill collars were
marked and surveyed covering the entire Buckreef mega-pit site.
-
The company also commenced ground clearing of the two sites proposed
for the construction of the tailings storage facility (TSF) for the Buckreef mining operation.
-
The company also commenced work on an updated internal report on
the financial projections for the Buckreef Mine Closure Conceptual Plan.
-
Artisanal mining activities at the Buziba, Eastern Porphyry Prospect,
Bingwa Prospect, Kihesa Area and Tembo North have persisted throughout the 4th quarter as efforts to evict the artisanal miners
from these areas have been unsuccessful and/or tied up by local government authorties to the issue of the outstanding land compensation
for house-holders within the special mining license.
Exploration
Following the Company’s decision to include mine development
to its strategy of generating maximum revenue from its extensive portfolio of properties and with the rising costs of maintaining
prospecting and other licenses in Tanzania, management decided to review, revamp and clean up the TRX PL portfolio with a view
to discard certain licenses and/or alternatively farm them out in JV packages.
A detailed in-house geological review reports on each respective
project area and its potential for discovery of gold mineralization were reviewed by the Executive Technical team and their recommendations
are now being implemented. The in-house review of all the company’s various Prospecting License (PL) holdings established
three project categories
Retention
,
Joint venture
&
Discard/Abandon
as described in the respective sections
below:
Projects/Licenses
to Retain (Mining projects)
-
Buckreef – 12 PLs & 1 SML
-
Buziba – 1 PL
-
Itetemia – 8 PLs & 1 ML (Application)
-
Kigosi – 13 PLs & 1 ML
-
Luhala – 2 PLs
Five (5) critical target projects were identified as Buckreef project,
Buziba project, Kigosi project, Itetemia project and Luhala project. The Buziba project was traditionally lumped up under Buckreef
project in previous annual reports but will now be treated as a standalone project. Brief descriptions of PL holdings and financial
obligation status for each respective project area as of 31
st
August 2017 are summarized in the sections below.
Buckreef Project
The Buckreef Project is in the Geita District of the Geita Region south of Lake Victoria,
some 110km southwest of the city of Mwanza (see Figure, overleaf). The project area can be accessed by ferry across Smiths Sound,
via tarred national road and thereafter via unpaved but well-maintained gravel roads. The Project comprises five prospects namely
Buckreef, Bingwa, Tembo, Eastern Porphyry and Buziba. The Buckreef prospect encompasses three ore zones namely Buckreef South,
Buckreef Main and Buckreef North. The Project is fully-licensed for mining and extraction of gold.
The following cumulative work was completed up to 31st August 2017:
-
No mining or ore processing activities conducted at the Buckreef
project during the year. Status of the project for the year-ended 31
st
August 2017 is still care and maintenance while
we wait for the issuance of the renewed SML certificate.
-
Historical cumulative total ore mined from the Buckreef South pilot
pit as of 31
st
August 2017 remains at
119,725.59t
averaging
1.86g/t Au
with total contained metal ounces
of
7,161.24
.
-
The disposition of the Ore stockpiled as of 31
st
August
2017, remains as follows:
ROMPAD:
72,315.66t @1.39g/t Au
(
3,237.96 Ozs);
Pad#1:
20,931.75t @2.29g/t Au
(
1,541.77 Ozs);
Pad#2:
12,943.78t @2.78g/t Au
(
1,155.55 Ozs);
Pad#3:
9,237.90t @ 3.85g/t Au (1,143.49 Ozs)
&
Crusher Pad
: 4,245t @ 3.86 g/t Au (526.62 Ozs).
-
An NI43-101 Compliant updated Buckreef Pit Optimized Resource Technical
Mining Feasibility Report was completed and published. Major Assumptions in the report included a gold price of $1250/oz, an effective
Tax Rate of 15.25%; a Royalty Rate of 4.3%; transport refining cost of $15.00/oz Au and discount rate of 5%.
The Study results reflect the continued refinement of pit optimized
mining reserves, mine production schedule, process plant ore feed schedule and financial projections & analysis based on comprehensive
cost estimations for process plant (design, fabrication, construction and operation) and mining (equipment purchase and mine production)
on the Buckreef Project. Major highlights are:
|
|
•
|
Conventional open pit mining methods selected in pit designs.
|
|
|
•
|
Over LoM, a total of 17.49Mt of ore with a strip ratio of 8.1:1 will be mined.
|
|
|
•
|
Pre-existing stockpile (ROMPAD) ore totaling 119,726t grading 1.89g/t to be used for process
plant commissioning.
|
|
|
•
|
1.064Moz of gold mined over the life of the project.
|
|
|
•
|
Recoveries of 89% for primary ore and 93%for saprolite ore, utilizing a simple EDS comminution,
flotation and leaching process with gravity recovery circuit for free Au component collection.
|
|
|
•
|
0.91Moz of gold will be produced over the life of the project.
|
|
|
•
|
Initial capital cost outlay estimated at US 32.5 Million with a Life of mine cost over the three
phases of $59.6 million and sustaining capital, excluding closure costs.
|
|
|
•
|
Cash operating costs of $696/oz produced equivalent US $35.95 per tonne milled.
|
|
|
•
|
Generation of a positive NPV of $243 million at a 5% discount rate and an IRR of 53.7%
|
Buziba Project
The Buziba Project comprises a single prospecting license (PL6545/2010)
located some 25km east of the Buckreef project in the Geita district (see Figure, overleaf). The project area can be accessed from
Buckreef via unpaved and poorly maintained gravel roads. The Project is a pre-development stage medium grade gold deposit and principal
host lithologies include basalt, co-magmatic dolerite and a suite of intrusive quartz-albite felsic porphyries. Gold mineralization
associated with shear-hosted vein quartz arrays in meta-basalts and as extensive stock works in the felsic porphyries. Geometry
of the mineralization is highly irregular, forming a zone 200m thick and extending E-W for at least 2,500m.
Based on an NI43-101 compliant Preliminary Economic Report published
in 2012 and subsequently in 2014, the global gold resources (Measured, Indicated & Inferred) estimated over approximately 2.5km
strike length and to a depth of 230 metres below surface amounts to 29Mt@1.04g/t containing 984,144ozs of gold.
During the reporting period, no fieldwork was conducted in the project
area.
License Holding and Status (Buckreef & Buziba)
At the end of Q4_2017, the Buckreef and Buziba projects had 13 PLs
and 1 SML covering a surface area of 95.40km2. The license status and statutory liabilities for the two projects are as shown in
the table below:
|
Book
#
|
Licence
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Granted
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
(km2)
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
288
|
Nyambale
(2) Busanda
|
PL6427/10
|
12-Mar-10
|
21-Jun-10
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-May-18
|
20-Jun-18
|
2.1
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
289
|
Mabamba
|
PL6428/10
|
12-Mar-10
|
21-Jun-10
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-May-18
|
20-Jun-18
|
3.0
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
295
|
Rwamagaza
North
|
PL6429/10
|
12-Mar-10
|
21-Jun-10
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-May-18
|
20-Jun-18
|
20.0
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
291
|
Rwamagaza
West
|
PL6430/10
|
12-Mar-10
|
21-Jun-10
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-May-18
|
20-Jun-18
|
8.9
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
290
|
Nyamalimbe
(2) Geita
|
PL6431/10
|
12-Mar-10
|
21-Jun-10
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-May-18
|
20-Jun-18
|
2.7
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
294
|
Rwamagaza
South
|
PL6432/10
|
12-Mar-10
|
21-Jun-10
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-May-18
|
20-Jun-18
|
2.0
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
293
|
Rwamagaza
South
|
PL6544/10
|
30-Mar-10
|
12-Jul-10
|
11-Jul-17
|
11-Jun-18
|
11-Jul-18
|
2.6
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
284
|
Buziba
|
PL6545/10
|
30-Mar-10
|
12-Jul-10
|
11-Jul-17
|
11-Jun-18
|
11-Jul-18
|
5.3
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
292
|
Rwamagaza
|
PL6546/10
|
30-Mar-10
|
12-Jul-10
|
11-Jul-17
|
11-Jun-18
|
11-Jul-18
|
17.4
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
285
|
Buseresere
|
PL6547/10
|
30-Mar-10
|
12-Jul-10
|
11-Jul-17
|
11-Jun-18
|
11-Jul-18
|
5.3
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
287
|
Nyambare
Boss-Reef
|
PL6548/10
|
30-Mar-10
|
12-Jul-10
|
11-Jul-17
|
11-Jun-18
|
11-Jul-18
|
1.9
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
286
|
Nyamalimbe
|
PL6549/10
|
30-Mar-10
|
12-Jul-10
|
11-Jul-17
|
11-Jun-18
|
11-Jul-18
|
2.7
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
381
|
Rwamagaza
N., Geita
|
PL9968/14
|
21-Oct-13
|
10-Jul-14
|
9-Jul-17
|
9-Jun-23
|
9-Jul-23
|
5.6
|
Active
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
296
|
Buckreef
SML
|
SML04/92
|
12-Jun-00
|
12-Jun-00
|
11-Jun-17
|
11-Jun-26
|
11-Jun-27
|
16.0
|
Active
(No SML cert)
|
Buckreef
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
Paid
up to 2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
95.38
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
95.38
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
PL and SML annual fees for 2017/2018 paid up.
|
|
|
•
|
The Buckreef Renewal Licence SML04/92 certificate issuance ceremony was postponed indefinitely
by the Ministry of Energy and Minerals (MEM) after the Minister failed to sign the document as planned on 7th March 2017.
|
Itetemia Project
The Itetemia gold deposit includes the mineral resources of the
Golden Horseshoe Reef (“
GHR
”), and is an advanced stage exploration project focusing on the development of the
GHR. A total of 9,833m of diamond core drilling (51 holes) and 8,339m of RC drilling (138 holes) was completed on the project.
Modeling and processing of assay results from both the core drilling and RC drilling so far completed over the GHR and surrounding
areas culminated in the estimation of the following Mineral Resources by CSA Australia Pty (Ltd) (“
CSA
”). The
gold resource numbers for the GHR are as at 30th May 2016 using a cut-off grade of 1.0g/t: -
The process to convert the PL covering the Horseshoe Gold Prospect
at Itetemia into a Mining License (ML) commenced on 4
th
November 2015. The Company re-submitted all documentation required
for the conversion of the Itetemia PL into a Mining License at the request of the relevant authorities in the Ministry of Mines.
A follow up on the Mining License renewal shows that the application is still under review.
As of the 31
st
August 2017, the retained portion of the
Itetemia project area has 8 active PLs and 1 ML application all covering a surface area of 41.23km
2
. The Itetemia Project
license status and statutory liabilities are as shown in the table below:
|
Book
#
|
Licence
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Granted
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
(km2)
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
|
Itetemia
ML
|
App
no/01722
|
04-Nov-15
|
|
|
|
|
4.99
|
Application
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,970.00
|
14,970.00
|
Application
under review
|
|
253
|
Itetemia
|
PL6059/2009
|
18-May-07
|
03-Dec-09
|
30-Dec-16
|
30-Nov-17
|
30-Dec-17
|
9.24
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
1,848.00
|
|
1,848.00
|
Renewal
Applic due Nov 2017
|
|
261
|
Itetemia
|
PL6520/2010
|
01-Nov-07
|
13-Aug-10
|
12-Aug-16
|
12-Jul-16
|
12-Aug-16
|
4.32
|
Pending
Renewal
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
648.00
|
|
1,148.00
|
Renewal
Applic submitted
|
|
104
|
Itetemia
|
PL8638/2012
|
02-Nov-10
|
21-Dec-12
|
20-Dec-15
|
20-Nov-16
|
20-Dec-16
|
4.21
|
Pending
Renewal
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
421.00
|
421.00
|
|
1,342.00
|
Renewal
Applic submitted
|
|
322
|
Itetemia
|
PL8661/2012
|
18-May-09
|
24-Dec-12
|
23-Dec-15
|
23-Nov-16
|
23-Dec-16
|
4.62
|
Pending
Renewal
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
462.00
|
462.00
|
|
1,424.00
|
Renewal
Applic submitted
|
|
341
|
Itetemia
|
PL8958/2013
|
14-Jun-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-16
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
2.27
|
Pending
Renewal
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
227.00
|
|
727.00
|
Renewal
Applic submitted
|
|
84
|
Itetemia
|
PL9198/2013
|
19-Sep-11
|
21-Jun-13
|
20-Jun-16
|
20-May-17
|
20-Jun-17
|
4.62
|
Active
|
Wakawaka
|
300.00
|
|
|
|
462.00
|
|
762.00
|
Renewal
Applic overdue May 2017
|
|
357
|
Itetemia
|
PL9229/2013
|
16-Jun-08
|
21-Jun-13
|
20-Jun-16
|
20-May-17
|
20-Jun-17
|
4.69
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
300.00
|
|
|
|
469.00
|
|
769.00
|
Renewal
Applic overdue May 2017
|
|
166
|
Itetemia
|
PL9374/2013
|
15-Oct-12
|
04-Oct-13
|
3-Oct-16
|
03-Sep-17
|
03-Oct-17
|
2.27
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
300.00
|
|
|
|
227.00
|
|
527.00
|
Renewal
Applic due Sept 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
41.23
|
|
|
900.00
|
2,000.00
|
0.00
|
883.00
|
4,764.00
|
14,970.00
|
22,990.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
441.50
|
2,382.00
|
|
11,495.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
41.23
|
|
|
900.00
|
2,000.00
|
0.00
|
1,324.50
|
7,146.00
|
14,970.00
|
34,485.00
|
|
-
All the Itetemia PLs nominated for retention by the company have outstanding
annual fee payments as shown above.
-
Two (2) PLs expired in June 2017 and applications for renewal are now overdue
while one (1) PL will expire in October 2017 and is now due for renewal application submission.
-
Renewal applications for 4 of the critical licenses are still being processed
and application fee payment was completed and posted online. We now await offer letters.
-
The ML application is still under review for close to 2 years now and no response
on the delayed application have been received from MEM offices. The ML application covers three (3) licenses viz 9198/2013, 9229/2013
& 9374/2013 that have now also expired or are soon to expire.
Kigosi Project
Kigosi Project area remains subject to a Game Reserve Declaration
Order. Upon repeal or amendment of that order by the Tanzanian Government, the Kigosi Mining Company will be legally entitled to
exercise its rights under the Mineral Rights and Mining Licence. The procedures for de-gazetting the Kigosi mining licence project
area from a game reserve area to a mining area on the government gazette has not been completed by government of Tanzania.
Gold Mine development plans at Kigosi continue to be shelved mainly
since under the 2010 Mining Act, only exploration and mining of energy minerals, including uranium, gas and petroleum is permitted
in any game reserve. Historical exploration on the project established a resource as shown in table below.
Kigosi Gold Project: Historical published Resource/Reserve results
The table below shows the status (as of 31
st
August 2017)
of the Kigosi Project license portfolio (identified as critical to the project) has 13 active PLs and 1 ML all covering a surface
area of 177.01km
2
. The license status and statutory liabilities are as shown in the table below:
Kigosi Gold Project PL Portfolio Status – PLs Proposed
for Retaining
|
Book
#
|
Licence
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Granted
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
(km2)
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
368
|
Kigosi
|
ML
496/2013
|
09-Nov-12
|
11-Oct-13
|
10-Oct-14
|
10-Oct-21
|
10-Oct-23
|
9.91
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,730.00
|
29,730.00
|
Paid
up?
|
|
379
|
Kigosi
|
PL
9712/2014
|
25-Feb-11
|
08-May-14
|
7-May-15
|
07-Apr-18
|
07-May-18
|
13.97
|
Active
|
Pamwe
Tutafika
|
|
|
|
2,794.00
|
2,794.00
|
2,794.00
|
8,382.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
162
|
Kigosi
|
PL10140/2014
|
22-Aug-12
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
2.49
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
498.00
|
498.00
|
498.00
|
1,494.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
382
|
Kigosi
|
PL10169/2014
|
02-May-13
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
12.16
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
2,432.00
|
2,432.00
|
2,432.00
|
7,296.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
20
|
Kigosi
|
PL10170/2014
|
15-Oct-13
|
29-Aug-14
|
29-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
14.9
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
2,980.00
|
2,980.00
|
2,980.00
|
8,940.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
385
|
Kigosi
|
PL10171/2014
|
13-Dec-13
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
22.69
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
4,538.00
|
4,538.00
|
4,538.00
|
13,614.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
216
|
Kigosi
|
PL10184/2014
|
15-Oct-13
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
19.5
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
3,900.00
|
3,900.00
|
3,900.00
|
11,700.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
159
|
Kigosi
|
PL10277/2014
|
22-Aug-12
|
25-Sep-14
|
26-Sep-15
|
24-Aug-18
|
24-Sep-18
|
21.18
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
4,236.00
|
4,236.00
|
8,472.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
45
|
Kigosi
|
PL6273/2009
|
05-Dec-08
|
31-Dec-09
|
30-Dec-14
|
30-Nov-17
|
30-Dec-17
|
5.44
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
1,088.00
|
1,088.00
|
1,088.00
|
|
3,264.00
|
Renewal
Applic due Nov 2017
|
|
264
|
Kigosi
|
PL6564/2010
|
22-Apr-08
|
13-Aug-10
|
12-Aug-15
|
12-Jul-16
|
12-Aug-16
|
20.46
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
300.00
|
500.00
|
|
4,092.00
|
4,092.00
|
|
8,984.00
|
Renewal
Applic overdue July 2016
|
|
339
|
Kigosi
|
PL8921/2013
|
22-Apr-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
2.95
|
Active-Expired
|
Tancan
|
300.00
|
500.00
|
|
590.00
|
590.00
|
|
1,980.00
|
Renewal
Applic overdue Jan 2017
|
|
338
|
Kigosi
|
PL8925/2013
|
22-Apr-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
21.65
|
Active-Expired
|
Tancan
|
300.00
|
500.00
|
|
4,330.00
|
4,330.00
|
|
9,460.00
|
Renewal
Applic overdue Jan 2017
|
|
330
|
Kigosi
|
PL8938/2013
|
22-Apr-08
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
5.51
|
Active-Expired
|
Tancan
|
300.00
|
500.00
|
|
1,102.00
|
1,102.00
|
|
3,004.00
|
Renewal
Applic overdue Jan 2017
|
|
96
|
Kigosi
|
PL9785/2014
|
01-Mar-12
|
05-Jun-14
|
4-Jun-15
|
04-May-18
|
04-Jun-18
|
4.2
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
840.00
|
840.00
|
840.00
|
2,520.00
|
Outstanding
payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
177.01
|
|
|
1,200.00
|
2,000.00
|
1,088.00
|
29,184.00
|
33,420.00
|
51,948.00
|
66,892.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,409.00
|
14,592.00
|
16,710.00
|
|
46,711.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
177.01
|
|
|
1,200.00
|
2,000.00
|
16,497.00
|
43,776.00
|
50,130.00
|
51,948.00
|
113,603.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All
the Kigosi PLs nominated for retention by the company have outstanding annual fee payments.
|
|
|
•
|
Kigosi
ML payments all up to date and the 2017/2018 annual fees are due in October 2017.
|
|
|
•
|
PLs
highlighted in red text have technically expired and no renewal application has been
submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments and prevailing uncertainty with
the new laws enacted recently with especial reference to game reserves.
|
Luhala Project
The Luhala Project is an advanced stage exploration project focusing
on the development of the Luhala gold deposit which consists of five anomalous hilltops. The mineralization is stratabound shear-zone
hosted gold mineralization (stratigraphic and structural control) within a distinct unit of felsic rocks with associated ferruginized
mafic and felsic rocks.
Drilling at the Luhala Project has been concentrated on the Luhala
Hills (Luhala Hill, Kisunge Hill, Shilalo Hill South and Shilalo Hill West). A total of 3,279m of diamond core drilling (26 holes)
and 8,665m of RC drilling (144 holes) was completed on the project. Modeling and processing of assay results from both the core
drilling and RC drilling conducted over the various deposits at Luhala, has to-date resulted in the estimation, by CSA, of the
following Mineral Resources for Luhala as at 8th March 2011 using a cut-off grade of 1.0g/t:
Luhala Gold Project: Historical published exploration results
The process of selecting a consultant to carry out feasibility study
at the Luhala gold project has been completed and once funds are available the contract to engage the consultant to carry out the
study will be signed to initiate the FS study works.
At the end of this reporting quarter critical Luhala project area
had 2 PLs covering a surface area of 17.31km
2
. The Luhala Project license status and statutory liabilities are as shown
in the table below:
Luhala Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for Retaining
|
Book
#
|
Licence
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Granted
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
(km2)
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Status
|
|
340
|
Luhala
|
PL8937/2013
|
14-Jun-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
07-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
3.45
|
Pending
Renewal
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
|
|
500.00
|
Application
submitted
|
|
102
|
Luhala
|
PL5278/2009
|
15-Jun-10
|
13-Feb-09
|
12-Feb-15
|
12-Jan-17
|
12-Feb-17
|
13.86
|
Pending
Extension
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
|
|
500.00
|
Application
submitted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
17.31
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
17.31
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
Payment of outstanding annual fees for the critical Luhala PLs was
completed as one of the conditions to submit renewal or extension applications.
|
|
|
•
|
Online renewal application for PL8937/2013 was successfully lodged
on the MEM portal. Application fee payment has been done and posted inline.
|
|
|
•
|
Response from MEM awaited.
|
As of 31
st
August 2017, the
Projects to Retain
license portfolio’s outstanding and current financial liabilities and obligations arising from unpaid rents including the
penalties are US$125,974 as summarized in the table below.
Liabilities - PLs to Retain (Mining Projects)
Projects Licenses
to Joint Venture
-
Biharamulo – 6 PLs
-
Lunguya – 8 PLs
-
Manonga – 6 PLs
-
Ushirombo – 2 PLs
Prospecting Licenses within four project areas, identified as Biharamulo
project, Lunguya project, Manonga project and Ushirombo project were selected as possible licenses to farm out in JV agreements.
Brief descriptions of PL holdings and financial obligation status for each respective project area as of 31st August 2017 are summarized
in the section below.
Biharamulo project area
No work done during the reporting period. Biharamulo Gold Prospect
is a green-fields to brown-fields stage project focusing on the defining the mineralization along a regional WNW-ESE trending shear.
Historical preliminary exploration results show a very high potential for gold mineralization associated and/or controlled by the
prominent NW-SE parallel structures over a strike length of >600m covered by the cluster of 5 contiguous PLs. Joint Venture
Partner for the Project are being sought.
The Biharamulo Project license status and statutory liabilities
are as shown in the table below:
Biharamulo Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
JV partnerships
|
Book
No
|
License
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
254
|
Biharamulo
|
PL6222/2009
|
10-May-07
|
31-Dec-09
|
30-Dec-14
|
30-Nov-17
|
30-Dec-17
|
25.6
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
5,120.00
|
5,120.00
|
5,120.00
|
|
15,360.00
|
Renewal
Applic due Nov 2016
|
|
9
|
Biharamulo
|
PL8914/2013
|
26-Mar-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
17.56
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,512.00
|
3,512.00
|
|
7,024.00
|
Expired
|
|
378
|
Biharamulo
|
PL9672/2014
|
11-May-09
|
24-Apr-14
|
23-Apr-15
|
23-Mar-18
|
23-Apr-18
|
25.61
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,122.00
|
5,122.00
|
5,122.00
|
15,366.00
|
Notice
of default received
|
|
380
|
Biharamulo
|
PL9777/2014
|
02-May-13
|
05-Jun-14
|
4-Jun-15
|
04-May-18
|
04-Jun-18
|
24.96
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,992.00
|
4,992.00
|
4,992.00
|
14,976.00
|
Notice
of default received
|
|
34
|
Biharamulo
|
PL9781/2014
|
10-Sep-13
|
05-Jun-14
|
4-Jun-15
|
04-May-18
|
04-Jun-18
|
25.59
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,118.00
|
5,118.00
|
5,118.00
|
15,354.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
119.32
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
0.00
|
5,120.00
|
23,864.00
|
23,864.00
|
15,232.00
|
68,080.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
2,560.00
|
11,932.00
|
11,932.00
|
|
26,424.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
119.32
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
7,680.00
|
35,796.00
|
35,796.00
|
15,232.00
|
94,504.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Biharamulo PLs nominated for potential JV partnerships by
the company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired on 7
th
February
2017. No renewal application was submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as still registered
to the company.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in purple expire in mid-2018 but due to non-payment
of annual fees, we have received Notice of Default letters from MEM. The licenses will forfeit to the state if no payments are
made with the statutory 3-month period.
|
Lunguya project area
No work done during the reporting period.
Based
on historical in-house exploration data, three zones were identified and are associated with extensive artisanal workings (±30
m depth), with more extensive workings at Nyamakwenge. These known gold prospects include the Nyamakwenge Reefs (NE corner of PL
6941/11); the Nyikoboko Reefs (NE corner of PL 5289/08) & NW-SE trending Shilela reef system (PLs 8940/13, 10145/14 & 9626/14).
Gold occurs principally as free gold within multiple quartz veins or stock-works, often associated with felsic intrusives.
The Lunguya Project license status and statutory liabilities are
as shown in the table below:
Lunguya Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for JV
partnerships
|
Book
No
|
License
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
183
|
Lunguya
|
PL10145/2014
|
30-Dec-12
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
8.53
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,706.00
|
1,706.00
|
1,706.00
|
5,118.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
384
|
Lunguya
|
PL10150/2014
|
28-Dec-11
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
5.68
|
Active
|
Pamwe
Tutafika
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,136.00
|
1,136.00
|
1,136.00
|
3,408.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
229
|
Lunguya
|
PL5289/2008
|
12-Mar-07
|
28-Aug-08
|
27-Aug-15
|
27-Jul-16
|
27-Aug-16
|
19.9
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,980.00
|
|
|
3,980.00
|
Expired
|
|
28
|
Lunguya
|
PL6941/2011
|
15-Aug-08
|
28-Feb-11
|
28-Aug-15
|
27-Jan-18
|
27-Feb-18
|
17.59
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,518.00
|
3,518.00
|
3,518.00
|
10,554.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
332
|
Lunguya
|
PL8940/2013
|
31-Aug-09
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
8.53
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,706.00
|
1,706.00
|
|
3,412.00
|
Expired
|
|
358
|
Lunguya
|
PL9228/2013
|
09-Aug-10
|
21-Jun-13
|
20-Jun-15
|
20-May-17
|
20-Jun-17
|
8.88
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,776.00
|
1,776.00
|
|
3,552.00
|
Expired
|
|
37
|
Lunguya
|
PL9626/2014
|
11-Jul-11
|
14-Mar-14
|
13-Mar-15
|
13-Feb-18
|
13-Mar-18
|
12.79
|
Active
|
Chomoza
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,558.00
|
2,558.00
|
2,558.00
|
7,674.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
81.90
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
16,380.00
|
12,400.00
|
8,918.00
|
37,698.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
8,190.00
|
6,200.00
|
|
18,849.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
81.90
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
24,570.00
|
18,600.00
|
8,918.00
|
56,547.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Lunguya PLs nominated for potential JV partnerships by the
company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table 11a above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications
were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
Manonga project area
No work done.
The Manonga Project licences
are located within the Nzega Greenstone Belt of the southern margin of Lake Victoria Gold Fields.
Manonga Gold Project is
a greenfield gold exploration project focusing on identification of potential Golden Pride mine type mineralization in the
Nzega
East Goldfield and the Chomachankola artisanal workings to the south. Geophysical anomalies to the North of the Resolute Golden
Pride closed mine and that at Igurubi (PL8957/2013, PL8964/13) could turn out prospective if more detailed prospecting work is
completed on the area to the east.
The Manonga Project license status and statutory liabilities are
as shown in the table below:
Manonga Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
JV partnerships
|
Book
No
|
License
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
310
|
Manonga
|
PL8458/2012
|
17-Mar-09
|
16-Nov-12
|
16-Nov-13
|
15-Oct-16
|
15-Nov-16
|
5.36
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
536.00
|
536.00
|
536.00
|
|
|
1,608.00
|
Expired
|
|
314
|
Manonga
|
PL8475/2012
|
23-Dec-08
|
10-Dec-12
|
10-Dec-14
|
09-Nov-16
|
09-Dec-16
|
2.9
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
290.00
|
290.00
|
|
|
580.00
|
Expired
|
|
312
|
Manonga
|
PL8485/2012
|
18-Jul-08
|
10-Dec-12
|
10-Dec-13
|
09-Nov-16
|
09-Dec-16
|
13.64
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
1,364.00
|
1,364.00
|
1,364.00
|
|
|
4,092.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
Manonga
|
PL8957/2013
|
19-Jul-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
|
|
07-Feb-17
|
2.37
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
237.00
|
237.00
|
237.00
|
|
|
711.00
|
Expired
|
|
347
|
Manonga
|
PL8964/2013
|
12-Jul-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
08-Feb-14
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
13.93
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
1,398.00
|
1,398.00
|
1,398.00
|
|
4,194.00
|
Expired,
default notice
|
|
355
|
Manonga
|
PL9035/2013
|
31-Dec-09
|
08-Apr-13
|
08-Apr-14
|
07-Mar-17
|
07-Apr-17
|
4.87
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
487.00
|
487.00
|
487.00
|
|
1,461.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
43.07
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
2,137.00
|
4,312.00
|
4,312.00
|
1,885.00
|
0.00
|
12,646.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,068.50
|
2,156.00
|
2,156.00
|
942.50
|
|
6,323.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
43.07
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
3,205.50
|
6,468.00
|
6,468.00
|
2,827.50
|
0.00
|
18,969.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Manonga PLs nominated for potential JV partnerships by the
company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications
were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
|
|
•
|
One of the PLs is also under a default notice and will forfeit as
the default notice period has also matured.
|
Ushirombo project area
No work done.
Ushirombo Gold Project
is a brown field stage gold project focusing on the finding of gold deposit in the 12km long x 6km wide Ushirombo Gold Corridor
in the Ushirombo area. Historical exploration work indicates that gold prospectivity in the area include anomalous au-in-soil,
RAB drilling, pit sample, grab sample localities established by BEAL and TRE previous works within the Ushirombo Gold Corridor
(UGC).
The Ushirombo Project license status and statutory liabilities are
as shown in the table below:
Ushirombo Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
JV
|
Book
No
|
License
Name
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Application
Fee (US$)
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
|
Ushirombo
|
PL8642/2012
|
19-Oct-10
|
24-Dec-12
|
23-Dec-14
|
23-Nov-16
|
23-Dec-16
|
2.37
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
|
237.00
|
237.00
|
|
|
474.00
|
Expired
|
|
359
|
Ushirombo
|
PL9227/2013
|
11-Mar-09
|
21-Jun-13
|
20-Jun-14
|
20-May-17
|
20-Jun-17
|
18.27
|
Active-in-default
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
3,654.00
|
3,654.00
|
3,654.00
|
|
10,962.00
|
Expired,
default notice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
20.64
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
3,891.00
|
3,891.00
|
3,654.00
|
0.00
|
11,436.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,945.50
|
1,945.50
|
1,827.00
|
|
5,718.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
20.64
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
5,836.50
|
5,836.50
|
5,481.00
|
0.00
|
17,154.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Ushirombo PLs nominated for potential joint venture agreements
by the company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications
were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
One of the PLs is also under a default notice and will forfeit
as the default notice period has also matured.
As of 31
st
August 2017, the
Projects to JV
license portfolio’s outstanding and current financial liabilities and obligations arising from unpaid rents including the
penalties are US$182,715 as summarized in the table below.
Liabilities - PLs to JV (Exploration Projects)
Projects Licenses
to Discard/Abandon
-
Biharamulo – 2 PLs
-
Kabanga – 2 PLs
-
Kanegele – 10 PLs & 1 Application
-
Kigosi – 19 PLs
-
Kibara – 3 PLs
-
Kongwa- 1 PL
-
Luhala – 2 PLs
-
Mwadui – 4 PLs
-
Nzega – 2 PLs
-
Nyanzaga – 2 PLs
-
Tulawaka – 4 PLs
-
Shinyanga – 1 PL
Prospecting
Licenses within the eleven (11) project areas, identified as above were selected as possible licenses to discard and surrender
back to the Ministry of Mines or respective original JV partners. Brief descriptions of PL holdings and financial obligation status
for each respective project area as of 31st August 2017 are summarized in the section below.
Biharamulo project area
No work done. Historical preliminary exploration results showed
a very low to negligent potential for gold mineralization within some of the PLs that make up the regional Biharamulo project.
Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned or returned to original owners to cut liabilities. The
license
status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as shown in the table below:
Biharamulo Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
7
|
PL8963/2013
|
24-Dec-09
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-14
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
22.15
|
Active-in
default
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
4,430.00
|
4,430.00
|
4,430.00
|
|
13,790.00
|
Expired,
default notice
|
|
366
|
PL9295/2013
|
23-Feb-09
|
02-Aug-13
|
1-Aug-14
|
01-Jul-17
|
01-Aug-17
|
19.72
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
3,944.00
|
3,944.00
|
3,944.00
|
|
12,332.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
41.87
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
8,374.00
|
8,374.00
|
8,374.00
|
0.00
|
26,122.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,187.00
|
4,187.00
|
4,187.00
|
|
13,061.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
41.87
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
12,561.00
|
12,561.00
|
12,561.00
|
0.00
|
39,183.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
The two (2) Biharamulo PLs nominated for discarding or surrender
to MEM by the company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
Both PLs have technically expired as per the dates in the table above.
No renewal applications were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to
the company.
|
Kabanga Nickel project area
No work done.
Though the Kabanga Nickel
project was abandoned some years back, two licenses have been pending surrender to the Ministry of Energy and Minerals since 2013.
The
license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as shown in the table below:
Kabanga Nickel Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
230
|
PL5290/2008
|
25-Jul-11
|
27-Aug-08
|
26-Aug-14
|
|
26-Aug-14
|
96.76
|
Pending
Surrender
|
NWBM
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
500.00
|
Expired
|
|
232
|
PL5292/2008
|
26-Jul-11
|
28-Aug-08
|
27-Aug-14
|
|
27-Aug-14
|
97.74
|
Pending
Surrender
|
NWBM
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
500.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
194.5
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
194.50
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
Surrender fees for the two remaining Kabanga PLs were never paid.
|
|
|
•
|
The two PLs have since technically expired though they still appear
under our portfolio on the MEM portal.
|
Kanegele project area
No work done.
Kanegele Gold Prospect
is a green stage exploration project that just barely got off the ground. Historical preliminary exploration results showed a very
low to negligent potential for gold mineralization within some of the PLs that make up the regional Kanegele project. Consequently,
it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned or returned to original owners to cut liabilities. However, an Australian
based company, Liontown Company that has since closed shop in Tanzania had initiated talks with TRX top management on the possible
takeover/JV of the entire project.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Kanegele Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
383
|
PL10141/2014
|
12-Oct-12
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
9.5
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
1,900.00
|
1,900.00
|
1,900.00
|
4,300.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
99
|
PL10186/2014
|
30-Mar-12
|
29-Aug-14
|
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
2.32
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
|
464.00
|
464.00
|
964.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
35
|
PL8171/2012
|
20-Oct-08
|
23-Aug-12
|
|
22-Jul-16
|
22-Aug-16
|
9.25
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
1,850.00
|
1,850.00
|
1,850.00
|
|
5,550.00
|
Expired
|
|
317
|
PL8664/2012
|
17-Sep-09
|
21-Dec-12
|
20-Dec-14
|
20-Nov-16
|
20-Dec-16
|
3.19
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
638.00
|
638.00
|
638.00
|
|
1,914.00
|
Expired
|
|
319
|
PL8666/2012
|
02-Oct-09
|
24-Dec-12
|
23-Dec-14
|
23-Nov-16
|
23-Dec-16
|
1.3
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
260.00
|
260.00
|
260.00
|
|
780.00
|
Expired
|
|
318
|
PL8676/2012
|
05-Jul-05
|
31-Dec-12
|
30-Dec-14
|
30-Nov-16
|
30-Dec-16
|
2.36
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
472.00
|
472.00
|
472.00
|
|
1,416.00
|
Expired
|
|
99
|
PL9037/2013
|
30-Nov-07
|
27-Mar-13
|
|
26-Feb-17
|
26-Mar-17
|
5.23
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
1,046.00
|
1,046.00
|
1,046.00
|
|
3,638.00
|
Expired
|
|
363
|
PL9224/2013
|
10-Mar-08
|
01-Jul-13
|
30-Jun-15
|
30-May-17
|
30-Jun-17
|
16.16
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
3,232.00
|
3,232.00
|
|
6,964.00
|
Expired
|
|
369
|
PL9361/2013
|
18-May-09
|
04-Oct-13
|
|
03-Sep-17
|
03-Oct-17
|
14.74
|
Active-in-default
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
2,948.00
|
2,948.00
|
2,948.00
|
|
9,344.00
|
Default
notice received
|
|
370
|
PL9373/2013
|
02-Oct-07
|
04-Oct-13
|
3-Oct-14
|
03-Sep-17
|
03-Oct-17
|
2.83
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
566.00
|
566.00
|
566.00
|
|
2,198.00
|
Renewal
applic due Sep 2017
|
|
373
|
PL9465/2013
|
10-Mar-08
|
01-Nov-13
|
31-Oct-14
|
30-Sep-17
|
31-Oct-17
|
12.9
|
Active-in-default
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
2,580.00
|
2,580.00
|
2,580.00
|
|
8,240.00
|
Default
notice received
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
79.78
|
|
|
0.00
|
3,500.00
|
0.00
|
10,360.00
|
15,492.00
|
15,956.00
|
2,364.00
|
45,308.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
5,180.00
|
7,746.00
|
7,978.00
|
|
20,904.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
79.78
|
|
|
0.00
|
3,500.00
|
0.00
|
15,540.00
|
23,238.00
|
23,934.00
|
2,364.00
|
66,212.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Kanegele PLs nominated for potential discard by the company
have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments.
PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
|
|
•
|
PLs highlighted in purple are active but officially notified to us as being in default. The default notice gives us 3 months
in which to pay all outstanding fees failure to do that will result in automatic forfeiture of the license.
|
Kigosi Project
Gold Mine development plans at Kigosi continue to be shelved mainly
since under the 2010 Mining Act, only exploration and mining of energy minerals, including uranium, gas and petroleum is permitted
in any game reserve. Historical preliminary exploration results showed a very low to negligent potential for gold mineralization
within some of the PLs that make up the regional Kigosi project. Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned
or returned to original owners to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Kigosi Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
18
|
PL10185/2014
|
23-Jun-11
|
29-Aug-14
|
28-Aug-15
|
28-Aug-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
8.42
|
Active
|
Chomoza
|
|
500.00
|
|
1,684.00
|
1,684.00
|
1,684.00
|
1,684.00
|
3,868.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
157
|
PL10187/2014
|
13-Apr-12
|
29-Aug-14
|
29-Aug-15
|
28-Jul-18
|
28-Aug-18
|
4.89
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
978.00
|
978.00
|
978.00
|
978.00
|
2,456.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
386
|
PL10605/2015
|
23-Feb-15
|
07-May-15
|
|
06-Apr-19
|
06-May-19
|
36.51
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
7,302.00
|
7,302.00
|
7,302.00
|
7,802.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
242
|
PL5369/2008
|
19-Feb-07
|
24-Oct-08
|
23-Oct-14
|
23-Sep-16
|
23-Oct-16
|
36.11
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
7,222.00
|
7,222.00
|
7,222.00
|
|
|
22,166.00
|
Expired
|
|
259
|
PL6455/2010
|
06-Dec-07
|
08-Jun-10
|
7-Jun-15
|
07-May-16
|
07-Jun-16
|
21.5
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
4,300.00
|
|
|
|
4,800.00
|
Expired
|
|
16
|
PL8300/2012
|
11-Sep-08
|
28-Sep-12
|
27-Sep-15
|
27-Aug-16
|
27-Sep-16
|
10.02
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
2,004.00
|
2,004.00
|
|
|
4,508.00
|
Expired
|
|
315
|
PL8476/2012
|
23-Feb-09
|
10-Dec-12
|
9-Dec-14
|
09-Nov-16
|
09-Dec-16
|
8.64
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
1,728.00
|
1,728.00
|
1,728.00
|
|
|
5,684.00
|
Expired
|
|
17
|
PL8477/2012
|
04-Oct-08
|
10-Dec-12
|
9-Dec-14
|
09-Nov-16
|
09-Dec-16
|
21.33
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
4,266.00
|
4,266.00
|
4,266.00
|
|
|
13,298.00
|
Expired
|
|
320
|
PL8663/2012
|
07-Dec-09
|
21-Dec-12
|
20-Dec-14
|
20-Nov-16
|
20-Dec-16
|
14.71
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
2,942.00
|
2,942.00
|
2,942.00
|
|
|
9,326.00
|
Expired
|
|
321
|
PL8667/2012
|
30-Oct-09
|
24-Dec-12
|
23-Dec-14
|
23-Nov-16
|
23-Dec-16
|
4.35
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
870.00
|
870.00
|
870.00
|
|
|
3,110.00
|
Expired
|
|
19
|
PL8922/2013
|
29-Mar-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-15
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
35.65
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
7,130.00
|
7,130.00
|
7,130.00
|
|
14,760.00
|
Expired
|
|
349
|
PL9030/2013
|
09-Aug-10
|
27-Mar-13
|
26-Mar-15
|
26-Feb-17
|
26-Mar-17
|
4.9
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
980.00
|
980.00
|
980.00
|
|
2,460.00
|
Expired
|
|
364
|
PL9225/2013
|
30-Oct-07
|
01-Jul-13
|
30-Jun-15
|
30-May-17
|
30-Jun-17
|
8.65
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
1,730.00
|
1,730.00
|
1,730.00
|
|
3,960.00
|
Expired
|
|
371
|
PL9338/2013
|
09-Sep-10
|
04-Oct-13
|
3-Oct-14
|
03-Sep-17
|
03-Oct-17
|
44.18
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
8,836.00
|
8,836.00
|
8,836.00
|
8,836.00
|
|
27,008.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
376
|
PL9565/2014
|
16-Apr-10
|
27-Jan-14
|
26-Jan-15
|
26-Dec-17
|
26-Jan-18
|
21.4
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
4,280.00
|
4,280.00
|
4,280.00
|
4,280.00
|
9,060.00
|
Default
notice received
|
|
244
|
PL9956/2014
|
02-May-12
|
10-Jul-14
|
9-Jul-15
|
09-Jun-18
|
09-Jul-18
|
17.06
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
3,412.00
|
3,412.00
|
3,412.00
|
3,412.00
|
7,324.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
298.32
|
|
|
0.00
|
8,000.00
|
25,864.00
|
52,362.00
|
55,364.00
|
36,332.00
|
17,656.00
|
141,590.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,932.00
|
26,181.00
|
27,682.00
|
18,166.00
|
8,828.00
|
84,961.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
298.32
|
|
|
0.00
|
8,000.00
|
38,796.00
|
78,543.00
|
83,046.00
|
54,498.00
|
26,484.00
|
226,551.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Kigosi PLs nominated for discard or surrender to MEM by the
company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PLs highlighted in blue technically expired between 7
th
June 2016 to 30
th
December 2016. No renewal applications were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments.
PLs still considered by MEM as still registered to the company.
|
|
|
·
|
PLs highlighted in red expired on 7
th
February 2017 and
26
th
March 2017 respectively.
|
|
|
·
|
PL highlighted in purple is active but officially notified to us
as being in default. The default notice gives us 3 months in which to pay all outstanding fees failure to do that will result in
automatic forfeiture of the license.
|
Kibara project area
No work done.
Kibara Gold Prospect is
a green field exploration project focusing on the finding of gold prospects like those in the Mara-Musoma belt which are mostly
located near the major NE and NW regional shear structures. Historical preliminary exploration results showed a limited potential
for gold mineralization within some of the PLs that make up the regional Kibara project. Gold prospectivity target areas on the
Kibara Project should be located within the two-major regional structural shears, namely the NE-SW shears and the NW-SE shears,
with most favorable loci where the two structures crosscut e.g. Suguti, Sirori Simba, Maji Moto and Buhemba prospects areas.
Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned
or returned to original owners to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Kibara Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
346
|
PL8920/2013
|
21-Apr-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
07-Feb-14
|
07-Feb-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
25.08
|
Active-in
default
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
5,016.00
|
5,016.00
|
5,016.00
|
|
15,048.00
|
Expired,
default note received
|
|
132
|
PL9201/2013
|
06-Sep-10
|
21-Jun-13
|
20-Jun-14
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-Jun-17
|
13.06
|
Active-in
default
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
2,612.00
|
2,612.00
|
2,612.00
|
|
7,836.00
|
Expired,
default note received
|
|
360
|
PL9231/2013
|
30-Oct-09
|
21-Jun-13
|
20-Jun-14
|
20-Jun-17
|
20-Jun-17
|
22.48
|
Active-in
default
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
4,496.00
|
4,496.00
|
4,496.00
|
|
13,488.00
|
Expired,
default note received
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
60.62
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
12,124.00
|
12,124.00
|
12,124.00
|
0.00
|
36,372.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
6,062.00
|
6,062.00
|
6,062.00
|
0.00
|
18,186.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
60.62
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
18,186.00
|
18,186.00
|
18,186.00
|
0.00
|
54,558.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Kibara PLs nominated for potential discard by the company
have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PLs highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications were submitted due to
the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
|
|
•
|
All the PLs under a default notice and will forfeit as the default notice period has also matured.
|
Kongwa Gold project area
As of 31st August 2017, Ministry of Energy and Minerals (MEM) portal
posting shows that, the single remaining Kongwa PL has forfeited to the ministry.
Luhala Project
No work done during the reporting period. Historical preliminary
exploration results showed a very low to negligent potential for gold mineralization within some of the PLs that make up the regional
Luhala project. Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned or returned to original owners to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as shown in the table below:
Luhala Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
109
|
PL6402/2010
|
11-Jul-07
|
05-May-10
|
4-May-15
|
04-Apr-16
|
04-May-16
|
10.23
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500
|
|
|
2,046.00
|
|
|
2,546.00
|
Expired
|
|
108
|
PL6759/2010
|
11-Jul-07
|
21-Oct-10
|
20-Oct-14
|
20-Sep-16
|
20-Oct-16
|
8.96
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500
|
|
1,792.00
|
1,792.00
|
|
|
4,084.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
19.19
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
1,792.00
|
3,838.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
6,630.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
896.00
|
1,919.00
|
|
|
2,815.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
19.19
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
0.00
|
2,688.00
|
5,757.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
9,445.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Luhala PLs nominated for discarding or surrender to MEM by
the company have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PLs highlighted in red technically expired between 4
th
May 2016 and 20
th
October 2016. No renewal applications were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PLs
still considered by MEM as still registered to the company.
|
Mwadui project area
No work done during the reporting period. The Mwadui Diamond Project
is a brown field exploration project that focused on the initial identification of regional-scale targets for the development of
diamondiferous kimberlite pipes in the Mwadui area kimberlite province. Preliminary drilling completed on some of the high magnetic
dipolar signatures on kimberlitic pipes along the NE & NW dykes in the Mwadui Project area resulted in the identification of
areas with potential diamondiferous gravels that could be further tested for economic kimberlite pipes.
Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned
or returned to original owners to cut liabilities. The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as shown in the
table below:
Mwadui Diamond Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
323
|
PL8671/2012
|
18-May-09
|
31-Dec-12
|
30-Dec-13
|
30-Nov-16
|
30-Dec-16
|
1.88
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
188.00
|
188.00
|
188.00
|
188.00
|
|
752.00
|
Expired
|
|
324
|
PL8673/2012
|
06-Nov-09
|
31-Dec-12
|
30-Dec-13
|
30-Nov-16
|
30-Dec-16
|
17.91
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
1,791.00
|
1,791.00
|
1,791.00
|
1,791.00
|
|
7,164.00
|
Expired
|
|
348
|
PL8947/2013
|
12-Jul-10
|
27-Mar-13
|
26-Mar-14
|
26-Feb-17
|
26-Mar-17
|
25.58
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
2,558.00
|
2,558.00
|
2,558.00
|
|
8,174.00
|
Expired,
default note received
|
|
367
|
PL9294/2013
|
20-Sep-10
|
02-Aug-13
|
1-Aug-15
|
01-Jul-17
|
01-Aug-17
|
99.28
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
500.00
|
|
|
9,928.00
|
9,928.00
|
|
20,356.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
144.65
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
1,979.00
|
4,537.00
|
14,465.00
|
14,465.00
|
0.00
|
36,446.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
989.50
|
2,268.50
|
7,232.50
|
7,232.50
|
|
17,723.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
144.65
|
|
|
0.00
|
1,000.00
|
2,968.50
|
6,805.50
|
21,697.50
|
21,697.50
|
0.00
|
54,169.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Mwadui PLs nominated for potential discard by the company
have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications
were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
|
|
•
|
One of the PLs is also under a default notice and will forfeiture as the default notice period has also matured.
|
Nzega Gold project area
No work done during the reporting period. The Nzega gold project
is a greenfield stage project focused on looking for the Golden Pride mine style of mineralization on the anomalous gold areas
defined by soils, BGC, Auger drilling and grab sampling. Historical preliminary exploration results showed a very low to negligent
potential for gold mineralization within the remaining PLs that make up the regional Nzega project. Consequently, it has been recommended
that these licenses be abandoned or returned to original owners to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Nzega Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
|
PL8480/2012
|
14-Dec-12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appilcation
recommended
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
Application
approved
|
|
325
|
PL8677/2012
|
21-Jul-09
|
31-Dec-12
|
30-Dec-13
|
30-Nov-16
|
30-Dec-16
|
20.03
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
2,103.00
|
2,103.00
|
2,103.00
|
|
|
6,309.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
20.03
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
2,103.00
|
2,103.00
|
2,103.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
6,309.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,051.50
|
1,051.50
|
1,051.50
|
|
|
3,154.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
20.03
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
3,154.50
|
3,154.50
|
3,154.50
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
9,463.50
|
|
|
|
·
|
The single Nzega PL nominated for potential discard by the company
has outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above. The PL has technically expired and no renewal applications were
submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
|
|
·
|
The renewal application for PL8480/2012 was approved by MEM but despite
Tanzam not taking up the offer, it remains on our portfolio.
|
Nyanzaga Gold project area
No work done during the reporting period. The Nyanzaga gold project
is a brownfield stage project focusing on the finding of a gold resource like the recently established Nyanzaga Mine now under
development. Historical preliminary follow-up RC drilling intercepted the potential strike extension of the regional shear zone
but the assay results returned very sporadic anomalous gold values (<1.0g/t Au). Consequently, it has been recommended that
these licenses be abandoned or returned to original owners to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Nyanzaga Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
304
|
PL8103/2012
|
18-Jul-08
|
05-Jul-12
|
04-Jul-13
|
04-Jul-16
|
04-Jul-16
|
9.1
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
910.00
|
910.00
|
910.00
|
|
|
2,730.00
|
Expired
|
|
133
|
PL8960/2013
|
19-Jul-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
07-Feb-14
|
07-Feb-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
8.99
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500.00
|
|
899.00
|
899.00
|
899.00
|
|
3,197.00
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
18.09
|
|
|
0.00
|
500.00
|
910.00
|
1,809.00
|
1,809.00
|
899.00
|
0.00
|
5,927.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
455.00
|
904.50
|
904.50
|
449.50
|
|
2,713.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
18.09
|
|
|
0.00
|
500.00
|
1,365.00
|
2,713.50
|
2,713.50
|
1,348.50
|
0.00
|
8,640.50
|
|
|
|
·
|
All the Nyanzaga PLs nominated for potential discard by the company
have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
·
|
Both PLs highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal application
were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PLs still considered by MEM as still registered to the company.
|
Shinyanga Gold project area
No work done during the reporting period. The Shinyanga gold project
is a brownfield stage project focusing on the finding of remnant greenstone slivers that could host gold deposits. Historical preliminary
exploration results showed a very low to negligent potential for gold mineralization within the remaining PLs that make up the
regional Shinyanga project. Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned or returned to original owners
to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Shinyanga Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
130
|
PL8924/2013
|
28-Apr-10
|
08-Feb-13
|
7-Feb-14
|
07-Jan-17
|
07-Feb-17
|
29.71
|
Active-in
default
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
5,942.00
|
5,942.00
|
5,942.00
|
|
17,826.00
|
Expired,
Default note received
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
29.71
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
5,942.00
|
5,942.00
|
5,942.00
|
0.00
|
17,826.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
2,971.00
|
2,971.00
|
2,971.00
|
|
8,913.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
29.71
|
|
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
8,913.00
|
8,913.00
|
8,913.00
|
0.00
|
26,739.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
The remaining Shinyanga PL nominated for potential discard by the
company has outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
The PL highlighted in purple is active but officially notified to us as being in default. The default notice gives us 3
months in which to pay all outstanding fees failure to do that will result in automatic forfeiture of the license.
|
Tulawaka Gold project area
No work done during the reporting period. The Tulawaka Gold Project
is a green stage project that was aimed at generating similar deposits to the Tulawaka Gold mine (now operated as Stamigold). Historical
preliminary exploration results showed a very low to negligent potential for gold mineralization within the remaining PLs that
make up the regional Tulawaka project. Consequently, it has been recommended that these licenses be abandoned or returned to original
owners to cut liabilities.
The license status and statutory liabilities for these PLs are as
shown in the table below:
Tulawaka Gold Project PL Portfolio Status - PLs Proposed for
Discard
|
Book
#
|
PL_ID
|
Application
Date
|
Grant
Date
|
Rent
Paid To
|
Renewal
Submission Date
|
Expiry
Date
|
Area
km2
|
Status
|
Company_ID
|
Preparation
Fee (US$)
|
Surrender
Fee (US$)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2013/14)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2014/15)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2015/16)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2016/17)
|
Annual
Rent (US$- 2017/18)
|
Total (US$)
|
Comment
|
|
|
PL10331/2014
|
06-Sep-10
|
20-Oct-14
|
|
19-Sep-18
|
19-Oct-18
|
8.85
|
Active
- In Default
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
885.00
|
885.00
|
885.00
|
885.00
|
3,540.00
|
Default
notice received
|
|
313
|
PL8478/2012
|
01-Aug-08
|
10-Dec-12
|
9-Dec-14
|
09-Nov-16
|
09-Dec-16
|
6.48
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
|
|
648.00
|
648.00
|
|
|
1,296.00
|
Expired
|
|
2
|
PL8479/2012
|
03-Oct-08
|
10-Dec-12
|
9-Dec-14
|
09-Nov-16
|
09-Dec-16
|
6.11
|
Active
|
Tanzam
|
|
|
|
611.00
|
611.00
|
|
|
1,222.00
|
Expired
|
|
131
|
PL9955/2014
|
02-Aug-10
|
22-Jul-14
|
21-Jul-15
|
21-Jun-18
|
21-Jul-18
|
6.03
|
Active
|
Tancan
|
|
500
|
|
|
603.00
|
603.00
|
603.00
|
1,706.00
|
Overdue
payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
18.62
|
|
|
0.00
|
500.00
|
0.00
|
1,259.00
|
1,862.00
|
603.00
|
603.00
|
4,224.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENALTY
(50%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
629.50
|
931.00
|
301.50
|
|
1,862.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND
TOTAL
|
18.62
|
|
|
0.00
|
500.00
|
0.00
|
1,888.50
|
2,793.00
|
904.50
|
603.00
|
6,086.00
|
|
|
|
•
|
All the Tulawaka PLs nominated for potential discard by the company
have outstanding annual fee payments as shown in the table above.
|
|
|
•
|
PL highlighted in red technically expired and no renewal applications
were submitted due to the outstanding annual fee payments. PL still considered by MEM as registered to the company.
|
All the PLs also under a default notice and will forfeit as the
default notice period has also matured.
As of 31
st
August 2017, the
Projects to Discard/Abandon
license portfolio’s outstanding and current financial liabilities and obligations arising from unpaid rents including the
penalties are US$572,841 as summarized in the table below.
Liabilities - PLs to Discard/Abandon (Exploration Projects)
License Relinquishment
Following the Company’s decision to include mine development
to its strategy of generating maximum revenue from its extensive portfolio of properties and with the rising costs of maintaining
prospecting and other licenses in Tanzania, management decided review, revamp and clean up the TRX PL portfolio with a view to
discard certain licenses and/or alternatively farm them out in JV packages.
A detailed in-house geological reviews of each respective project
area and its potential for discovery of gold mineralization was submitted to a technical team that review the merits and de-merits
of each project in Tanzania.
This exercise culminated in the establishment of all outstanding,
current and future financial liabilities and obligations arising from our total land-holdings as summarized in the above sections.
Exploration
The Company’s principal exploration properties are currently
all located in the United Republic of Tanzania, Africa. The government of Tanzania is a stable, multi-party democracy. Mineral
exploration in Tanzania is affected by local climatic, political, and economic conditions. The Company’s properties have
year round access, although seasonal summer rains from December to March may result in flooding in low lying areas, which are dominated
by mbuga (black organic rich laustrine flood soils). Further, most lowland areas are under active cultivation for corn, rice, beans
and mixed crops by subsistence farmers. As a result, the area has been deforested by local agricultural practices for many years.
The seasonal rains and deforested areas can create a muddy bog in some areas, which can make access more difficult, and could impede
or even prevent the transport of heavy equipment to the Company’s mineral properties at certain times of the year between
December and March.
Competition
The mining industry in which the Company is engaged is in general,
highly competitive. Competitors include well-capitalized mining companies, independent mining companies and other companies having
financial and other resources far greater than those of the Company. The Company competes with other mining companies in connection
with the acquisition of gold and other precious metal properties. In general, properties with a higher grade of recoverable mineral
and/or which are more readily mineable afford the owners a competitive advantage in that the cost of production of the final mineral
product is lower. Thus, a degree of competition exists between those engaged in the mining industry to acquire the most valuable
properties. As a result, the Company may eventually be unable to acquire attractive gold mining properties.
Dependence on Customers and Suppliers
The Company is not dependent upon a single or few customers or supplier
for revenues or its operations.
Governmental Regulations
As of November 1, 2010, the
Tanzania Mining Act, 2010
(“
Mining
Act, 2010
”) came into effect. The Tanzania Ministry of Energy and Minerals announced changes to fees effective July
27, 2012.
The Company’s mineral interests in Tanzania are initially
held under prospecting licenses granted pursuant to the Mining Act, 2010 for a period of up to four years, and are renewable two
times for a period of up to two years each. The Company must pay annual rental fees for its prospecting licenses based on the total
area of the license measured in square kilometres, multiplied by US$100/sq.km for the initial period, $150/sq.km for the first
renewal and $200/sq.km for the second renewal. There is also an initial one-time “preparation fee” of US$500 per license.
Upon renewal, the Company must pay a renewal fee of US$300 per license. Renewals of its prospecting licenses can take many months
and even years to process by the regulatory authority in Tanzania.
All prospecting licenses in Tanzania also require the holder to
expend funds which are set out in the Mining Act, 2010. At each renewal, at least 50% of the Company’s licensed area must
be relinquished on prospecting licences in excess of 20 square kilometres. On relinquishing the ground, the area is automatically
returned to the Mining Commissioner’s jurisdiction for a period of 4 months after which it will be declared vacant or otherwise
by the Commissioner. If the Company still has an interest in the relinquished one-half portion, it must then file a new application
in competition with other interested companies for the relinquished portion 4 months after the relinquishment date. If more than
one application is lodged on the same day at the Mining Commissioner’s office, then the Commissioner may award the ground
by tender. There is no guarantee on the timing for processing the new application and whether it will be successful.
The Company must hold a mining license or special mining licence
to carry on mining activities. Pursuant to the Mining Act, 2010 a mining license is granted for a maximum initial period of 10
years. It is renewable 6 months prior to expiry for a period the applicant will state but not exceeding 10 years. A special mining
licence is granted for the estimated life of the ore body indicated in the feasibility study report, or such period as the applicant
may request whichever period is shorter. It is renewable for a period not exceeding the estimated life of the remaining ore body.
Prospecting and special mining and mining license holders must submit
regular reports in accordance with mining regulations. Upon commercial production, the government of Tanzania imposes a royalty
on the gross value of all production at the rate of 4% of all gold produced. The applicable regulatory body in Tanzania is the
Ministry of Energy and Minerals.
An environmental impact statement and an environmental management
plan must accompany special mining license, mining license and gemstone mining license applications for mineral rights. In addition
to the establishment of environmental regulations, the Tanzanian Government has improved management procedures for effective monitoring
and enforcement of these regulations by strengthening the institutional capacity, especially in the field offices. The Government
has provided rules for the creation of reclamation funds to reinstate land to alternative uses after mining and it has developed
guidelines for mining in restricted areas, such as forest reserves, national parks, sources of water and other designated areas.
C. Organizational Structure
The Company has the following seven subsidiaries:
|
Name of Subsidiary
|
Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|
Percentage &Type of Securities Owned or Controlled by Company
|
|
Voting Securities Held
|
Non-Voting Securities
|
|
Itetemia Mining Company Limited
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
90%
(1)
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
Lunguya Mining Company Ltd.
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
60%
(2)
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
Tancan Mining Company Limited
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
100%
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
Tanzania American International Development Corporation 2000 Limited
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
100%
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
Buckreef Gold Company Limited (BGCL)
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
55%
(3)
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
Northwest Basemetals Company Limited
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
75%
(4)
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
BGCL/AGC Joint Venture
(6)
|
Republic of Tanzania, Africa
|
40%
(5)
common shares
|
N/A
|
|
(1)
|
The remaining
10% interest is held by State Mining Corporation.
|
|
(2)
|
The remaining 10% interest is held by
State Mining Corporation.
|
|
(3)
|
The remaining 40% interest is held by
Northern Mining and Consultancy Company Ltd.
|
|
(4)
|
The remaining 45% interest is held by
State Mining Corporation.
|
|
(5)
|
The remaining interest is held 15% by
State Mining Corporation and 10% by Songshan.
|
|
(6)
|
The remaining interest is held 60% by
Allied Gold Corp. of United Arab Emirates.
|
|
(7)
|
Joint venture letter of intent signed
and subject to final approval.
|
D. Property, Plant and Equipment
The Company’s business is the acquisition, exploration and
development of mineral properties, with a primary focus on exploring for gold properties in Tanzania. From 2011 onwards, the Company
also decided to morph into a junior mining company using its Buckreef project as the flagship. Historically, the Company has funded
its activities by way of the sale and issuance of its securities. The Company also obtains operating funds through sales of and
options to sell its various mineral property interests to other parties, retaining a royalty interest. The avtivities of the Company
within its properties with or without a known body of commercial ore, with or without established mineral reserves, to date have
been exploratory and developmental in nature. Feasibility studies have been compeletd and published on the Buckreef, Kigosi and
Itetemia Projects with all pertinent details.
Mineral Properties
Buckreef Project
History
The Lake Victoria Goldfields (“
LVG
”)
was discovered in 1894 by German explorers and significant exploitation began in the 1930s at the Geita Gold Mine. Several small
gold mines exploiting near surface reefs, operated throughout the Rwamagaza Greenstone Belt (“
RGB
”),
particularly near the village of Rwamagaza. By 1940, Tanzania was producing 4.5tpa of gold (Au).
Gold bearing quartz veins were reported from the
current Buckreef Mine area in 1945 and reports from the 1950s attest to ongoing production at a number of localities near Rwamagaza,
including the Buckreef area. The extent of the small scale local and colonial mining activities is evident from the numerous pits
and adits covering the entire Buckreef tenement; however, no production figures are available.
Buckreef Exploration History Synopsis
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
1959
|
Tanzania Mineral Resources Division (TMRD) & UNDP
|
UN-sponsored regional airborne geophysical survey over Rwamgaza Greenstone Belt.
|
|
1960-1965
|
Tanzania Mineral Resources Division (TMRD) & UNDP
|
Ground based geophysical surveys (magnetics, IP) follow up on regional targets. Discovery of Buckreef Quartz Vein and follow up drilling commenced. 13 diamond drill holes by UNDP (12 in current database, UNBR01-12) identified a “possible ore zone 107m long, 8m wide and extending to 122m depth
|
|
1968
|
Tanzania Mineral Resources Division (TMRD)
|
13 diamond drill holes by Tanzanian Mineral Resources Division (MRD01-13)
|
|
1972
|
Tanzania Mineral Resources Division (TMRD)
|
Tanzanian government approved investment decision and Buckreef Gold Mining Company.
|
|
Mid-1970s
|
Williamson Diamonds Ltd
|
Underground development on 30m and 61m levels by Williamson Diamonds Ltd. Indicated ore reserve of 106,000t @ 8.7g/t Au between 23m and 76m levels using minimum mining width of 1.5m
|
|
1973-79
|
Tanzania Mineral Resources Division?
|
Further underground development and 3 diamond drill holes (BGMDD01-03) by BGMC.
|
|
1973-1981
|
State Mining Corporation
|
CIP treatment plant and other facilities established with financial assistance from Swedish International Development Agency
|
|
1982-1988
|
State Mining Corpoaration
|
Gold production commenced but reached only 25-40% of forecast targets. Production figure unavailable. Review of operations by British Mining Consultants Ltd. who found Buckreef assay laboratory assays 65% higher than overseas check assays
|
|
1990
|
State Mining Corporation
|
Mining ceased and workings flooded. Total ore extracted estimated at approximately 100,000t @3-4g/t Au
|
|
1992
|
East African Mining Corporation
|
Commencement of modern exploration techniques including Aircore, RC and diamond drilling.
|
|
1994
|
East African Gold Mines Ltd
|
Signing of first Buckreef Gold Mine Re-Development agreement with State Mining Corporation. Additional surface and subsurface gold resources were identified.
|
|
1995-2010
|
East African Gold Mines Ltd / Gallery Gold / Iamgold
|
Explored 40km of contiguous strike length of the RGB encompassing geophysical surveys (IP, EM & magnetic); 52,737m of RAB & AC drilling; 80,796m RC drilling and 22,197m of Diamond drilling. Several metallurgical test-works for a CIL and/or CIC process plant conducted; Preliminary economic assessment leading to a Feasibility scoping study completed. Project returned to Stamico by IAMGOLD.
|
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
2011
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Second Buckreef Gold mine Re-Development JV Agreement signed between Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corp and Stamico. Commenced with detailed review of all historical exploration data and results for an updated NI 43-101 report supervised by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Ltd.
|
|
2008- 2009
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Continues with exploration and starts RAB, RC and DC drilling at Kigosi on the Luhwaika and Igunda Prospects. Completed drilling at Luhwaika and Igunda Prospects. 3D modelling completed and resources declared for both.
|
|
2010-2011
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Commenced RAB and RC drilling at Msonga and Commenced and subsequently ceased bulk sampling of Luhwaika quartz rubble deposit (four months later). Completed drilling at Msonga. 3D modelling completed. No resource declared on Msonga.
|
|
2012-2013
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Additional exploration and resource drilling (33,711m diamond core & 4,459m RC) conducted. Preliminary NI 43-101 report completed by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Ltd that showed a 121% increase in mineral resources. Successfully applied for extension of the Special Mining License area (from 3.4km2 to 16.04km2). Commenced NEMC EIA certification process.
|
|
2014
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Awarded NEMC Environmental EIA certification. Metallurgical testwork for heap leach and/or CIL process plant conducted. Geotechnical test-work conducted. Construction of pilot Heap leach process plant commenced. Pilot Mining on South Pit commenced late October 2014.
|
|
2015
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Pilot mining continued on South pit. Pilot heap leaching operations commenced.
|
|
2016
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Force majeure declared February 2016. First gold pour from heap leach operations. Further Metallurgical testwork for CIL process plant commenced. Buckreef process plant re-dsign into CIL system commenced. Commenced application for an initial 15yr Life of Mine extension for the Special Mining License.
|
The technical content of the following discussion regarding the
Buckreef Project in Tanzania is summarized from the Buckreef Property technical report dated February 24, 2014 entitled Updated
National Instrument 43-101 Independent Technical Report on the Buckreef Project in Tanzania for Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation
prepared by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited and compiled by Fiona Harper, D. Richards and Andrew Neil Clay (the “
Updated
Buckreef Technical Report
”). The Updated Buckreef Technical Report was filed on SEDAR on February 24, 2014. A further
updated National Instrument NI43-101 compliant Technical Report dated 27
th
April 2017 and entitled the
Updated
Independent Technical Mining Reserve Estimate and Economic Feasibility Study on the Buckreef Gold Mine Project, Tanzania, East
Africa
prepared by MaSS Resources was filed on SEDAR on April 5, 2017.
Ownership
Prior Ownership
Originally, the Buckreef Project was an advanced
exploration project held by Iamgold Tanzania (“
IAGT
”) prior to July 2009. The Agreement to Redevelop
the Buckreef Gold Mine (“
ARBGM
”) between IAGT and the Ministry for Energy and Minerals included at that
point, a single Mining Licence and 12 Prospecting Licences covering 98.19km
2
.
In July 2009, IAGT applied to surrender all licenses relating to the ARBGM, effective
October 25, 2009 and the Commissioner for Minerals withdraw all license applications relating to the ARBGM.
Current Ownership, Property and Location
In December 2010, the Company signed a binding heads of agreement
with Stamico for the Buckreef Project and on October 25, 2011 entered into a Definitive Joint Venture Agreement with Stamico for
the development of the project. Through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Tanzam, the Company will hold a 55% interest in the joint
venture company, Buckreef Gold Company Limited, with Stamico holding the remaining 45%. The agreement provided for the formation
and establishment of a joint venture company, Buckreef Gold Company Limited (“
BGC Ltd.
”). On 24
th
of October 2011, BGC Ltd. was formed and incorporated under certificate of incorporation number 86681.
The Buckreef Project is located in north central
Tanzania immediately to the south of Lake Victoria, in the Mwanza Provincial District. The Buckreef Project is situated 110km southwest
of Mwanza, in the Geita District and is accessed by ferry across Smiths Sound and then via unpaved roads and an airstrip. The Buckreef
Project comprises five gold deposits located within two geographically separated areas approximately 25km apart, termed the Buckreef
Mining Area (“
BRMA
”) and the Buziba-Busolwa Mining Area (“
BZMA
”) and the individual
gold deposits within these mining areas have been termed Prospects, as summarized below:-
-
BRMA: includes the Buckreef Prospect, the Bingwa Prospect, Eastern
Porphyry Prospect and the Tembo Prospect; and
-
BZMA: includes the Buziba Prospect
An extended mining right was granted to Tanzam
(Special Mining Licence 04/1992) encompassing the Buckreef, Bingwa, Eastern Porphyry and Tembo Prospect areas. The Buziba Prospect
is held under a prospecting licence which is in the process of being converted into either a retention licence or a special mining.
Within the BZMA small-scale miners operate under numerous primary mining licences adjacent to our main prospect.
Geology and Mineralisation
The BRMA and BZMA gold deposits are classified
as low to medium grade orogenic gold deposits hosted by mafic volcanic sequences of the eastwest trending Archaean RGB within the
L of the Tanzanian Craton. The BRMA gold deposits are hosted by a major steeply dipping, northeast-southwest trending brittle-ductile
shear zone and subsidiary shears, with an early phase of iron rich carbonate alteration, re-brecciation, felsite intrusion and
a later phase of auriferous quartz veining.
The BZMA deposit is located 25km east of the Buckreef
Prospect in the RGB. The principal host lithologies include magnesium rich basalt, co-magmatic dolerite and a suite of quartz-albite
felsic porphyries that have intruded the mafic sequence. Gold mineralisation is associated with quartz vein arrays that occur in
altered shear zones in mafic lithologies and as extensive stock works in the felsic porphyries.
Regional Geological Setting
The Buckreef Project is situated within the LVG
of northern Tanzania, which consists of a number of eastwest trending, linear, Archaean greenstone belts, which are separate granite-gneiss
terrains within the Tanzanian Craton of east Africa. The LVG is the third largest gold producing region of Africa, surpassed only
by the Witwatersrand Basin in South Africa and the Tarkwa region of Ghana. Numerous gold occurrences have been identified in the
LVG, and new discoveries continue to be made. Since 1998, when the first mine, Golden Pride was commissioned, four additional large
scale mines namely, Geita, Bulyanhulu, North Mara, and Tuluwaka have come into production.
The greenstone belts comprise mafic volcanics,
pyritic sediments, tuffs, iron formation, chert, and felsic volcanics, collectively known as the Nyanzian Group. The metamorphic
grade of the Nyanzian Group is lower to middle greenschist facies, and two major deformational episodes have been identified. Amphibolite
facies metamorphic rocks are exposed in the western portions of the belt near Tulawaka Mine, but in general higher grade metamorphic
complexes are rare.
The greenstone belt sequences have geological
and structural similarities to major gold districts in the Canadian Shield (Val d´Or, Kirkland Lake) and the Yilgarn Craton
in Western Australia (Kalgoorlie, Laverton, Leonora, Kambalda and Southern Cross).
Gold mineralisation within the LVG occurs in a
number of styles including:-
-
quartz veins within minor brittle lineaments, most commonly worked
on a small scale by artisanal workers, due to their limited extent and erratic gold distribution;
-
mineralisation within major ductile shear zones;
-
mineralisation associated with replacement of iron formation and
ferruginous sediments; and
-
Felsic (porphyry) hosted mineralisation, such as within the RGB.
Regardless of the geological environment, it is
accepted that structural control on the emplacement of the mineralisation is critical. The following structural features have proven
to be important foci of gold mineralisation:
-
structural lineaments trending at 120º;
-
flexures and splays to the 120º trend (such as at Golden Pride);
-
structural lineaments at 70º (such as at Golden Ridge); and
-
Granite-greenstone contacts (such as at the Ushirombo and RGB).
Local Geological Setting
The Buckreef Project area covers the eastern portion
of the eastwest trending RGB, which forms part of the Sukumaland Greenstone Belt. The Sukumaland Greenstone Belt is oval shaped
and is defined by two intermittently exposed belts of meta-volcanic and meta-sedimentary rocks that surround a core of granitoids
and gneisses. The inner belt comprises an older, Lower Nyanzian sequence characterised by basaltic and andesitic lavas and tuffs,
whilst the outer, younger, Upper Nyanzian succession consists of iron formation and tuffs. The understanding of the geology in
the region has been hampered by the lack of outcrop (less than 2%). Isotopic dating suggests that the sequences are approximately
2.6Ga in age and although no contact between the outer and inner belts is exposed, a general trend of younging outwards is considered
valid.
Within the Sukumaland Greenstone Belt, the RGB
consists of a sequence of eastwest trending, poorly outcropping basaltic flows and overall the RGB varies in width from 5km to
10km. The mafic sequences consist of komatiitic basalts to the south and tholeitic basalts in the north, separated by the Rwamagaza
Shear Zone. The basalts display well preserved volcanic features such as varioles, pillows, and flow top breccias Aeromagnetic
data and minor outcrop, indicate the presence of a number of elongate discontinuous, serpentinised, sheared ultramafic bodies which
parallel the flow stratigraphy and which could represent either intrusive bodies or the cumulate portions of thick, magnesium rich
basaltic lava flows.
Two main clusters of felsic intrusions occur throughout
the region and comprise large batholithic granites and porphyry intrusions. The RBG could possibly form part of a much larger mafic
belt that has been dissected by the intrusion of large batholithic granites. Aeromagnetic surveys over the Project area indicate
the presence of granites at depth. The RBG mafic-ultramafic sequence is strained to varying degrees, with the highest strain occurring
in the central area of the Buckreef Prospect tenements, where the belt is thinnest. In this area, the dominant rock type is mafic
schist. Toward the thicker (less attenuated) eastern and western parts, the schists form thinner more discrete zones of high strain
separating areas of relatively unstrained ultramafic lithologies. The granitoids are generally unstrained and hence assumed to
be post peak deformation. A large portion of the basalts to the southeast of Nyarugusu are hornfelsed, suggesting the presence
of granite at shallow depths beneath them.
The tectonic evolution of the RGB is very poorly
understood. Aeromagnetic data reveals several generations of crosscutting, late stage, brittle-ductile faults and shears, which
offset flow stratigraphy and have locally been intruded by the felsic porphyries and by a late stage dolerite dykes. Early formed
ductile structures are not easily defined in aeromagnetic data and there is evidence of shear zones that parallel the stratigraphy.
The Project host rocks comprise meta-basalt, which is generally un-deformed but metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies grades.
At Buckreef Prospect interflow units of predominantly pelitic and cherty sediments occur, as well as a variety of porphyritic textured,
dyke and vein like felsic intrusions along crosscutting structures or sub-parallel to flow stratigraphy.
The RGB has been subjected to a phase of laterite
development, with formation of predominantly iron rich ferricrete caps, which were subsequently extensively eroded and only isolated
remnants of laterite remain in situ. The high rainfall and sub-tropical climate has resulted in deep laterisation and although
there is evidence of localised gold enrichment in the shallow oxidation profiles in both BRMA or BZMA areas, major zones of supergene
gold enrichment are not developed in either area. The RGB in general is covered by a thin layer of elluvial regolith, which is
amenable to standard soil sampling techniques.
A non-penetrative deformation fabric is developed
at Buziba, which dips steeply to the south, sub-parallel to the stratigraphy. Individual zones in which this fabric is well developed
cannot be traced for distances of more than a few hundred metres on drill sections, but a number of such zones occur throughout
the 200m of thickness of stratigraphy, which hosts the mineralisation.
Exploration Status
The Buckreef Gold Mine was an underground mine
operated by the Tanzanian State during the late 1980s. Apart from the state, several previous owners of the project undertook numerous
exploration programmes including aeromagnetic, helicopter borne IP, ground magnetic and soil geochemistry surveys, as well as extensive
RC, Air Circulation (“
AC
”) and diamond drilling programmes. Iamgold, the most recent historic owner of
the project, verified the historic drilling data, undertook additional exploration and defined JORC compliant Mineral Resources
in 2006. In total, the exploration programme included approximately 30,000 soil samples, 202,000m of RC drilling, 124,000m of AC
drilling and 28,000m of diamond core drilling.
The Company acquired the rights to the Buckreef Project early in
2011 and results of the current metallurgical and geotechnical diamond drilling programs, as well as detailed RC and diamond mineral
resource drilling programs, are incorporated in the Updated Buckreef Technical Report. To date, additional mineralisation has been
intersected on Buckreef Prospect Main Zone in a wide zone between 150m and 250m vertical depth with assay results of 4.5g/t Au
over 26m and 10.58g/t Au over 19m. Additional near surface mineralisation at less than 200m depth, from Buckreef North includes
a mineralised zone 46m wide at 2.31g/t Au. Gold mineralisation has also been identified in the Eastern Porphyry deposit 800m east
of Buckreef Main Zone, over 500m of strike length with near surface mineralisation ranging between 1.25g/tAu to 6.3g/tAu over widths
of 2.25m to 10.5m.
Historic metallurgical testwork programs were
undertaken on both the BRMA and BZMA mineralisation types. The testwork on BMRA material indicated that oxide and transitional
material are amenable to treatment using typical carbon-in-leach (“
CIL
”) processing techniques and fresh
material may benefit from flotation and a finer grind with recoveries anticipated to be in the low 90%s. The testwork results for
BZMA mineralisation indicated that it is amenable to treatment using gravity and CIL processing techniques. Metallurgical recoveries
for BZMA mineralisation were anticipated to be in the low to mid 90%s. Heap leaching testwork indicated that, at a 25mm to 50mm
crushing size fraction in oxide mineralisation, a 75% recovery could be anticipated, whilst transitional and fresh mineralisation
recoveries were lower, at 35% to 50%.
Recent heap leach metallurgical testwork indicate
positive results from column leach test for the oxide ore resources, at a 6mm crushing size fraction in oxide mineralization, up
to 71% recovery was achieved on agglomerated ores during the testing. Testwork on the sulphide and transition resource indicate
a recovery of 58% using a 12.5mm crush size and agglomeration using 4kg/t of lime and 3kg/t of cement.
Current (2016) metallurgical testwork indicate positive results
from carbon-in-column leach test for all three (3) resources types, oxide; transition and sulphide resources. For the oxide and
transition resources overall recovery achieved is in the low 90s while for sulphide resources, recoveries are in the upper 80s.
Previous Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve
Estimates
Hellman & Schofield (Pty) Ltd (“
Hellman
and Schofield
”) was retained by the Company to undertake the Mineral Resource estimation for the Buckreef Project
reported in the technical report effective June 30, 2011 entitled “
National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report on Tanzanian
Royalty Exploration Corporation’s Buckreef Gold Project in Tanzania
” prepared by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited and
compiled by Fiona Harper, Andrew Neil Clay and Nicholas J. Johnson (the “
Buckreef Technical Report
”).
The Mineral Resource estimates were based partially on a historic
dataset that has been verified and deemed suitable for Mineral Resource estimation (Hellman and Schofield 2007), as well as Iamgold
exploration data, which is similarly of a standard compliant with National Instrument and JORC reporting requirements. The Mineral
Resources were estimated using Multiple Indicator Kriging techniques in GS3 software produced by Hellman and Schofield. The model
estimates resources into panels, which approximate the drillhole sample spacing throughout the majority of the study area. The
Mineral Resource estimates within each panel were classified according to the distribution of sampling in the kriging neighbourhood
and took into account the uncertainty in the estimates related to the proximity and distribution of the informing composites.
Summary of Mineral Resources of the Buckreef Project (Cut-Off 0.5g/t Au) - Dec 2011
|
DEPOSIT
|
MEASURED
|
INDICATED
|
INFERRED
|
MEASURED & INDICATED
|
|
|
Tonnes (Mt)
|
Au Grade (g/t)
|
Contained Au (Mcz)
|
Tonnes (Mt)
|
Au Grade (g/t)
|
Contained Au (Moz)
|
Tonnes (Mt)
|
Au Grade (g/t)
|
Contained Au (Moz)
|
Tonnes (Mt)
|
Au Grade (g/t)
|
Contained Au (Moz)
|
|
Buckreef
|
5.176
|
2.05
|
0.341
|
3.706
|
1.86
|
0.222
|
7.158
|
1.89
|
0.435
|
8.882
|
1.97
|
0.563
|
|
Buziba-Busolwa
|
|
|
|
35.270
|
1.04
|
1.179
|
14.350
|
0.90
|
0.415
|
35.27
|
1.04
|
1.179
|
|
Bingwa
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.120
|
2.4
|
0.086
|
|
|
|
|
Tembo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.725
|
2.18
|
0.051
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
5.17
|
2.05
|
0.34
|
38.97
|
1.12
|
1.40
|
23.35
|
1.32
|
0.98
|
44.15
|
1.23
|
1.74
|
Source: Hellman and Schofield 2007, 2011; Venmyn 2011.
Mineral Resources inclusive of Mineral Reserves.
Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not
have demonstrated economic viability
Estimates over variable widths of 3m to 40m
Bulk Density ranges from 2.0g/cm
3
to 2.8g/cm
3
Inconsistencies in totals are due to rounding down
55% attributable to the Company
Cut-off grade 0.5g/t Au
Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates:
Venymn 2014
A Mineral Resource estimate was completed on the BRMA based on the
geological models supplied by CAE Mining. The Mineral Resource estimate was informed by both the diamond drilling and reverse circulation
drilling results and a Mineral Resource block model was confined by wireframed interpretations of the volumes of the individual
prospects as developed by CAE Mining using Datamine™ Studio 3 (version 3.21.7164). Venmyn Deloitte carried out the grade
estimation using Ordinary Kriging (OK), using Datamine™ Studio 3 (version 3.20.5321).
The Buckreef Project was modelled for gold grade only using the
shell of the wireframe models as hard boundaries. Only data within the wireframes were used in the estimate. The variograms ranges
were used to define the search ellipse and each domain was estimated separately. The definition of narrow mineralised stringers
which frequently change strike direction posed a difficulty to the estimation process but this issue was solved by the use of local
anisotropy Kriging (LAK) for the stringers implemented through Datamine™'s dynamic anisotropy functions. Specific Gravity
values from all prospects and the three alteration zones namely; fresh, transitional and oxide are sufficient for the estimation
purposes. Topographic surface models were provided by the Company.
NI 43-101 Compliant Mineral Resource Estimate for BRMA as at
29 November 2013
|
PROSPECT
|
MEASURED
|
INDICATED
|
INFERRED
|
EXPLORATION
TARGETS - Unclassified
|
|
Volume
(Mm3)
|
SG
|
Tonnes
(Mt)
|
Grade
(g/t)
|
Contained
Gold
(oz Au)
|
Volume
(Mm3)
|
SG
|
Tonnes
(Mt)
|
Grade
(g/t)
|
Contained
Gold
(oz Au)
|
Volume
(Mm3)
|
SG
|
Tonnes
(Mt)
|
Grade
(g/t)
|
Contained
Gold
(oz Au)
|
Volume
(Mm3)
|
SG
|
Tonnes
(Mt)
|
Grade
(g/t)
|
Contained
Gold
(oz Au)
|
|
Buckreef
Prospect
|
|
Sub-total
|
3.260
|
2.73
|
8.902
|
1.72
|
491,529
|
4.764
|
2.75
|
13.100
|
1.41
|
594,456
|
2.710
|
2.78
|
7.528
|
1.33
|
322,902
|
1.577
|
2.78
|
4.385
|
1.10
|
155,321
|
|
Eastern
Porphyry
|
|
Sub-total
|
0.032
|
2.69
|
0.087
|
1.20
|
3,366
|
0.381
|
2.66
|
1.016
|
1.17
|
38,355
|
0.474
|
2.61
|
1.239
|
1.39
|
55,476
|
0.508
|
2.61
|
1.324
|
1.14
|
48,664
|
|
Tembo
Prospect
|
|
Sub-total
|
0.006
|
2.70
|
0.017
|
0.99
|
531
|
0.074
|
2.50
|
0.185
|
1.77
|
10,518
|
0.109
|
2.45
|
0.267
|
1.93
|
16,521
|
0.042
|
2.28
|
0.095
|
1.12
|
3,429
|
|
Bingwa
Prospect
|
|
Sub-total
|
0.387
|
2.34
|
0.906
|
2.83
|
82,387
|
0.232
|
2.45
|
0.569
|
1.38
|
25,274
|
0.122
|
2.57
|
0.312
|
1.29
|
12,922
|
0.019
|
2.56
|
0.049
|
1.25
|
1.982
|
|
Total
|
3.685
|
2.69
|
9.912
|
1.81
|
577,813
|
5.452
|
2.73
|
14.870
|
1.40
|
668,602
|
3.416
|
2.74
|
9.345
|
1.36
|
407,821
|
2.146
|
2.73
|
5.853
|
1.11
|
209,397
|
|
TOTAL
|
3.68
|
2.69
|
9.91
|
1.81
|
578,000
|
5.45
|
2.73
|
14.87
|
1.40
|
669,000
|
3.42
|
2.74
|
9.35
|
1.36
|
408,000
|
2.15
|
2.73
|
5.85
|
1.11
|
209,000
|
Source: Venmyn Deloitte 2013, CAE Mining 2013 and TRX 2013
Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not
have demonstrated economic viability
Mineral Resources reported inclusive of Mineral Reserves
(although no Mineral Reserves are reported)
Cut-off Grade 0.5 g/t Au
Estimates over variable widths to 1m to 40m
Specific Gravity ranges 2.0 to 2.8
Inconsistencies in totals are due to rounding
55% attributable to TRX
The Company has incurred total net costs (after
recoveries, if any) of $3,064,543 on the Buckreef Project for the year ended August 31, 2017.
The cut-off grade calculations for the Buckreef Project were based
on costs from the Buckreef Project PEA and at the June 2011 gold spot price of approximately USD1,500/oz and a three year trailing
average of USD1,024/oz. The economic cut-off grade thus calculated ranges from 0.39g/t Au to 0.6g/t Au which shows that reasonable
prospects for economic extraction are possible from grade of 0.39g/t and above. TRX made a strategic decision to publish the Mineral
Resource estimate at an average of 0.5g/t Au cut-off as a reasonably conservative position.
The Exploration Target estimate column contained in the foregoing
chart was prepared in accordance to the NI 43-101 guidelines of the Canadian securities administrators. It should be noted that
Exploration Targets are conceptual in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define them as Mineral Resources, and,
while reasonable potential may exist, it is uncertain whether further exploration will result in the determination of a Mineral
Resource under NI 43-101. The Exploration Target stated above is not being reported as part of any Mineral Resource or Mineral
Reserve.
New Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates: MaSS Resources 2017
MaSS Resources (Pvt.) Ltd was commissioned by Tanzam2000, a subsidiary
to Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation to produce an independent NI43-101 compliant mine design and costing Feasibility Study
on the Buckreef Gold Mine Project located in the Lake Victoria Goldfields, Geita District, in North Central Tanzania. This report
provides a technical updated reserve estimate, open pit mine design and financial model Feasibility Study on the gold mineralization
at the Buckreef Project, incorporating historical recommendations from previous studies as well as current and future projected
economic considerations. This study was completed during November 2016 to April 2017.
The scope of work for this study included the following:
|
|
•
|
Estimation of Mineral Reserves
|
|
|
•
|
Mining Method Analysis and Selection
|
|
|
•
|
Development and Production Scheduling with Specialized Mining Software
|
|
|
•
|
Optimization of Production rate and Sequencing
|
|
|
•
|
Estimation of Equipment and manpower requirements
|
|
|
•
|
Mining logistics and infrastructure design
|
|
|
•
|
Capital and Operating cost estimation
|
|
|
•
|
Benchmarking against current operations
|
|
|
•
|
Financial analysis modeling and valuation
|
|
|
•
|
Identification of opportunities, risks and risk mitigation
|
This technical mining study is based on the 2014 mineral resource estimate as published
by Venymn Deloitte. Mass Resources essentially overhauled and improved on the original overall mining philosophy previously expounded
in the 2012 PEA report. This essentially consists of several conventional open pit layouts with access to the orebodies provided
via a series of ramps into the pits.
The reserves for Buckreef project as developed by MaSS Resources are NI43-101 compliant.
Reserves were calculated by first optimizing pit shells using preliminary economic parameters and then utilizing the optimized
pits as templates for design of pit phases and the ultimate pit. Reserves were calculated using Measured and Indicated resources
contained inside of the pit designs. Full Grade Ore cut-off grade (FGO) calculations rely on inputs from this study and other sections
of the Buckreef Feasibility study. Reserves were based on $1100/oz-Au; 0.59g/t & 0.63g/t-Au FGO was used for reserve calculation.
MaSS established that, at the 0.59 g/t cut-off base case, the geological resource model
yields a global pit design optimized reserve of 17.6Mt grading at 1.89g/t including the existing mined stockpile and containing
1,070,012 troy ounce gold as summarized in the table below.
NI 43-101 Compliant Pit Optimized Mineral Reserve Estimate for
BRMA as at 31st August 2017
|
Scheduled
Resereves Catergories - Pit Design
|
|
Description
|
|
Measured
|
Indicated
|
Inferred
|
Total
|
|
Buckreef
|
Tonnes
(T)
|
t
|
12,005,727
|
3,099,442
|
461,390
|
15,566,560
|
|
Mt
|
t
|
12.01
|
3.10
|
0.46
|
16
|
|
Au
g/t
|
g/t
|
1.76
|
2.08
|
2.02
|
1.83
|
|
Au_g
|
g
|
21,093,208
|
6,460,682
|
932,098
|
28,485,988
|
|
Au
kg
|
kg
|
21.09
|
6.46
|
0.93
|
28
|
|
Au
oz
|
Oz
|
678,162
|
207,716
|
29,968
|
915,846
|
|
|
|
Eastern
Porphyry
|
Tonnes
(T)
|
t
|
26,003
|
309,902
|
379,818
|
715,723
|
|
Mt
|
t
|
0.03
|
0.31
|
0.38
|
0.72
|
|
Au
g/t
|
g/t
|
2.38
|
1.86
|
1.79
|
1.85
|
|
Au_g
|
g
|
61,827
|
577,794
|
681,069
|
1,320,690
|
|
Au
kg
|
kg
|
0.06
|
0.58
|
0.68
|
1.32
|
|
Au
oz
|
Oz
|
1,988
|
18,577
|
21,897
|
42,461
|
|
|
|
Tembo
|
Tonnes
(T)
|
t
|
-
|
270,846
|
31,657
|
302,502
|
|
Mt
|
t
|
0.00
|
0.27
|
0.03
|
0.30
|
|
Au
g/t
|
g/t
|
0.00
|
2.22
|
1.86
|
2.19
|
|
Au_g
|
g
|
-
|
602,301
|
58,794
|
661,096
|
|
Au
kg
|
kg
|
-
|
0.60
|
0.06
|
0.66
|
|
Au
oz
|
Oz
|
-
|
19,364
|
1,890
|
21,255
|
|
|
|
Bingwa
|
Tonnes
(T)
|
t
|
218,126
|
576,341
|
111,846
|
906,312
|
|
Mt
|
t
|
0.22
|
0.58
|
0.11
|
0.91
|
|
Au
g/t
|
g/t
|
3.14
|
2.80
|
2.59
|
2.86
|
|
Au_g
|
g
|
684,864
|
1,616,218
|
289,547
|
2,590,630
|
|
Au
kg
|
kg
|
0.68
|
1.62
|
0.29
|
3
|
|
Au
oz
|
Oz
|
22,019
|
51,963
|
9,309
|
83,291
|
|
|
|
Total
|
Tonnes
(T)
|
t
|
12,249,856
|
4,256,531
|
984,710
|
17,491,098
|
|
Mt
|
t
|
12.25
|
4.26
|
0.98
|
17
|
|
Au
g/t
|
g/t
|
1.78
|
2.17
|
1.99
|
1.89
|
|
Au_g
|
g
|
21,839,900
|
9,256,995
|
1,961,509
|
33,058,404
|
|
Au
kg
|
kg
|
21.84
|
9.26
|
1.96
|
33
|
|
Au
oz
|
Oz
|
702,169
|
297,619
|
63,064
|
1,062,852
|
|
|
|
Total-:
Stockpile Included
|
Tonnes
(T)
|
t
|
12,369,528
|
4,256,531
|
984,710
|
17,610,824
|
|
Mt
|
t
|
12.37
|
4.26
|
0.98
|
17.61
|
|
Au
g/t
|
g/t
|
1.78
|
2.17
|
1.99
|
1.89
|
|
Au_g
|
g
|
22,062,590
|
9,256,995
|
1,961,509
|
33,281,094
|
|
Au
kg
|
kg
|
22.06
|
9.26
|
1.96
|
33.28
|
|
Au
oz
|
Oz
|
709,329
|
297,619
|
63,064
|
1,070,012
|
Source:
MaSS Resources 2017
Mineral
Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability
Mineral
Resources reported inclusive of Mineral Reserves
Cut-off
Grade 0.59 g/t Au
Estimates
over variable widths to 1m to 40m
Specific
Gravity ranges 2.0 to 2.8
Inconsistencies
in totals are due to rounding
55%
attributable to TRX
The major highlights from the Tchnical Mining Feasibility report
include the following:
|
|
•
|
Conventional open pit mining methods selected in pit designs.
|
|
|
•
|
Over LoM, a total of 17.49Mt of ore with a strip ratio of 8.1:1 will be mined.
|
|
|
•
|
Pre-existing stockpile (ROMPAD) ore totaling 119,726t grading 1.89g/t to be used for process plant
commissioning.
|
|
|
•
|
1.064Moz of gold mined over the life of the project.
|
|
|
•
|
Recoveries of 89% for primary ore and 93%for saprolite ore, utilizing a simple EDS comminution,
flotation and leaching process with gravity recovery circuit for free Au component collection.
|
|
|
•
|
0.91Moz of gold will be produced over the life of the project.
|
|
|
•
|
Initial capital cost outlay estimated at US 32.5 Million with a Life of mine cost over the three
phases of $59.6 million and sustaining capital, excluding closure costs.
|
|
|
•
|
Cash operating costs of $696/oz produced equivalent US $35.95 per tonne milled.
|
|
|
•
|
Generation of a positive NPV of $243 million at a 5% discount rate and an IRR of 53.7%
|
The Company has incurred total net costs (after
recoveries, if any) of $3,064,543 on the Buckreef Project for the year ended August 31, 2017.
Kigosi Project
Property Description and Location
The Kigosi Project area is principally located within the Kigosi
Game Reserve controlled area. Through prospecting and mining option agreements, the Company has options to acquire interests in
several Kigosi prospecting licenses. A comprehensive report summarizing exploration work done and results to date was submitted
to the Director of Wildlife and Nature Conservation as part of the requisite and mandatory requirements for an application to renew
the Kigosi game reserve access permit. It is a statutory requirement to have an access permit to conduct any exploration activities
in an area designated as a forest and/or game reserve. On May 31
st
, 2012, the Company was granted a two year permit
from the Ministry of Wildlife and Nature Conservation to enter the Kigosi Game Reserve and continue with exploration activities.
The Company is evaluating various alternatives for advancing the Kigosi Project by focusing on an area of near surface mineralization.
In December 2012, the Kigosi Access Agreement between the Company
(through its subsidiary Tanzam) and the Director of Wildlife, Wildlife Division, Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism was
signed, and in February 23, 2013, the Company (through Tanzam), was awarded the Environmental Impact Assessment Certificate for
the Kigosi gold project. Stamico has a 15% carried interest in the Kigosi Project.
On May 30, 2013 the Company announced it had been granted a Mineral
Rights and Mining Licence through its wholly owned subsidiary, Tanzam. The Mineral Rights and Mining Licence covers the entire
area applied for of 9.91 square kilometres of the Kigosi Project. The area remains subject to a Game Reserve Declaration Order.
Upon repeal or amendment of that order by the Tanzanian government, the Company will be legally entitled to exercise its rights
under the Mineral Rights and Mining Licence.
Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography
The property is accessed via air from the city of Dar Es Salaam
on the Indian Ocean coast to the city of Mwanza on the southern shoreline of Lake Victoria. From Mwanza, a moderately maintained
tar road accesses the town of Ushirombo, via the towns of Shinyanga and Kahama, around the southern part of the Lake, referred
to as Smith Sound. This trip is approximately 400 km and takes some 5 hours. From the town of Ushirombo one keeps heading east
along the main Burundi tar road for approximately 6 km, where a dirt track allows access into the Kigosi Game Reserve.
The southern bulk of the Kigosi Project area is wholly located within
the northern sector of the Kigosi game reserve with a third of the licenses being located in the adjacent Nikonga-Ushirombo Forestry
reserves further north. As per legal and mandatory requirements, the Company acquired respective renewable permits from the Departments
of Game Reserves and Forestry Reserves of the Ministry of Wildlife and Tourism to conduct exploration activities in both the game
and forestry reservation areas throughout the year. Access to the main Kigosi exploration camp via the dirt track has been substantially
improved by the Company to allow access by four wheel drive vehicles during the rainy season.
The exploration camp at Kigosi is predominantly a tented facility
with larger semi-permanent structures employed for offices and storage facilities. Recent construction included the installation
of metal containers which will be utilized as living and office quarters. Communications at the camp are via satellite, internet
and telephone.
The access track passes over the Shiperenge River, a tributary to
the Nikonga River and both are perennial rivers, typically dry in the winter months and overflowing during the October-May rainy
season. Three (3) large ponds located on the Nikonga River were the only close source of water until recently when the company
drilled a highly productive water borehole located some 5km northwest of the camp. Drinking water for the camp is pumped via pipeline
from the borehole to the camp. The Nikonga and Shiperenge rivers have played a major part in structuring the physiographic landscape
in the area. These rivers drain southwards into the Moyowosi and Njingwe Swamps. Small undulating granite hills form the topographic
highs, and generally trend northwest. These hills make up approximately 5% of the project area. The climate is typical of an African
tropical climate, being hot during the day and cooling down in the evenings. Winters are very mild, but a blanket is needed in
the early hours of the mornings. Kigosi falls within a malaria area, and precautions are necessary. Tsetse flies are also present
in some parts of the project area. The region is heavily forested, but has only limited wildlife, chiefly small gazelle and baboons.
Geology and Mineralization
The Kigosi-Miyabi granite-greenstone belt and the Ushirombo greenstone
belt, form part of two of the greenstone belts within the Nyanzian Archaean greenstone terrain in northwestern Tanzania. These
belts host small-scale artisanal workings at Luhwaika and Igunda within the core project area at Kigosi and further to the southeast.
The Ushirombo Greenstone Belt has been extensively explored by geologists and small scale miners over the past decade. It consists
predominantly of mafic volcanics with lesser meta-sedimentary rocks across an east-west trending belt some 50 kilometres in strike.
Gold mineralization generally occurs in narrow quartz veins. The Kigosi-Miyabi Greenstone Belt has been less explored, mainly because
of the location within the Kigosi Game Reserve.
Several prominent regional scale NW trending structural lineaments,
interpreted as regional shear zones, appear to be the major conduits and controls for the localization of gold mineralization in
the Kigosi area. There is also a prominent NNW trending set of regional scale lineaments that are believed to be deep seated sources
of the gold bearing fluids.
The Company previously discovered three previously undocumented
shear-zone hosted gold mineralized targets and it has also established the presence of a surface to sub-surface horizon of unconsolidated
residual in-situ auriferous vein quartz rubble on the Kigosi Property, forming a part of the Company’s Lake Victoria Goldfield
Properties held through its subsidiary, Tanzam.
The Company received an updated NI 43-101 technical report dated
September 1, 2011 from Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited of South Africa (the “
Kigosi Technical Report
”). A quartz
rubble area of mineralization has been identified which is of particular interest due to its tabular extent and unconsolidated
nature. The 43-101 Technical Report has defined a surface area of 3.36km
2
and an average thickness of 1.15m which contains
an Indicated Mineral Resource of 3.89 million tons at an in-situ grade of 0.83g/t Au and an Inferred Mineral Resource of 6.30 million
tons at a grade of 0.34g/t Au.
The Kigosi Mineral Resource estimate September 2009 includes Mineral
Resources from several prospects each with primary mineralisation in shears and secondary mineralisation in alluvial gravels. No
cut-off grade was applied to the shear hosted mineralisation and a cut-off of 0.1g/t Au was applied in the case of the gravels
just as nominal indicator of the presence of mineralisation. The Kigosi prospect is an early exploration project and no specific
costing exercises have been yet been conducted that could be used in an economic cut-off grade calculation. Nonetheless, the effect
of introducing and changing cut-off grades was provided in the document as an indicative exercise. The parameters pertaining to
prospects for economic extraction in the Victoria Goldfields are well known, and the grades and style of mineralisation reported
for the Kigosi prospect were considered relative to this benchmark.
For additional information regarding the Kigosi Property see the
Technical Report entitled “
National Instrument 43-101F Technical Report on the Kigosi Project in the Lake Victoria Greenstone
Belt, Tanzania
” prepared for Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited and compiled by C.A.
Telfer, N. McKenna, J. Glanvill and R.M. Tayelor dated September 1, 2011 and filed on SEDAR December 13, 2011.
Luhwaika Quartz Rubble Deposit
A brief summary of the work done on the Luhwaika Quartz Rubble Deposit
and the Msonga Prospect during the year are briefly summarized. Historical summaries for Luhwaika and Igunda Prospects are also
briefly described.
During a previous detailed vertical RC-drilling program on the Luhwaika
Prospect, the company established the presence of a consistent and sizeable near-surface quartz-rubble bed with a potentially significant
economic potential. The Luhwaika Prospect is host to a potentially economic quartz rubble deposit which is likely a direct result
of surface collapse and erosion of the Luhwaika Main and West reefs. Artisanal mining activity has concentrated on this loose quartz
rubble deposit which is easily accessible for mining. High grade quartz rubble has so far been identified in three areas: the Luhwaika
West reef, the Luhwaika Main reef and the Luhwaika East area.
The Company completed a detailed bulk sampling program on this potentially
economic quartz rubble bed.
Bulk Sampling Program
The Company initiated a pit bulk sampling campaign between September
2010 and February 2011. The nature of this exploration was the collection of composite channel sampling from the pit side walls
as a way of providing an indication of the in-situ grade. The bulk sample itself was fed through a mobile modular gravity separation
plant located at the main camp. The extent of the exploration was on a small scale and included 43 excavated and channel sampled
pit bulk samples. Only 18 of these pit bulk samples underwent the full excavation, channel sampling and pilot plant testing within
the four month period. The objective of the pit bulk sampling campaign was to provide confidence in the gold grades for the already
finalised resource model for the quartz rubble deposit and to ascertain the free gold recoverability using a rudimentary pilot
plant as a low cost exercise.
The Company utilised an in-house geologist and field assistants
to carry out the pit bulk sampling. Excavation was conducted with a small excavator and a single dump truck. Excavation was monitored
by the geologist to ensure uniformity of the excavation and to stop the hole once the mottled zone had been reached. The mottled
zone was also dug out as part of the bulk sample to a further depth of ~0.5m below the quartz rubble.
The location of the bulk sampling pits was defined by the then Senior
VP, Mr. R. Van Der Westhuizen, based on the earlier RAB drilling and various other requirements. The pit co-ordinates were emailed
to the field geologist who then located the pit using a hand-held GPS and staked the limits on an east-west orientation. A 5.0m
x 2.5m x 2.5m pit was measured out with tape and staked. The sizing of each pit was targeted to yield approximately 80t of bulk
sample. No specific grid size or spacing was used for the pit location.
Luhwaika Prospect
Gold mineralization at the Luhwaika Prospect occurs in a series
of sub-parallel and variably auriferous shear zones. The geological setting of the Luhwaika Gold Prospect shows many characteristics
that are typical of classic mesothermal lode gold deposits.
At Luhwaika, two principal shear zones have been identified: the
Luhwaika Main and Luhwaika West reefs. These reefs carry significant gold mineralization as evidenced by strike extensive small-scale
mining and exploration shafts, and more recent drill results. The gold mineralization in the Luhwaika Main reef is structurally
controlled, consisting mostly of lodes of laminated quartz veins impregnated in strongly sheared and altered quartz sericite schist
with occasional massive tabular whitish-grey quartz vein blow-outs. These veins are shear hosted, with lesser extensional veins
noted in outcrop in the granite host rock.
The Luhwaika West reef, located 100-200m in the hanging-wall and
sub-parallel to the Luhwaika Main reef, consists mainly of shear-zone hosted tabular quartz veins that often contain irregular
hematite filled fracture surfaces.
Igunda Prospect
The structural setting of the Igunda Gold Prospect is similar to
that of the Luhwaika Prospect with the exception that the former is hosted in mafic greenstone rocks intruded by lenses of felsic
granitoids including quartz-feldspar porphyry. At Igunda, two principal shear zones have been identified: the Igunda A and B reefs.
Closely associated with the reefs are sub parallel quartz feldspar porphyry units.
Gold mineralization is structurally controlled and the Igunda Reefs
are localized in two sub-vertical dipping northwest striking shear zones, dipping steeply (75º – 85º) to the northeast.
Gold mineralization also occurs in the host wall rock up to over a meter and is not confined to the veins.
Msonga Prospect
Drilling
The Msonga Prospect is situated in the far northeast of the Kigosi
license area. The earlier geochemical and structural studies covering this area had identified the presence of a substantial (7
km long) Au-in-soil anomaly hosted in mafic greenstone rocks. Dominant regional structures in the area (Ushirombo greenstone belt)
generally trend east-west and are associated with the development of swarms of auriferous quartz veins such as those being currently
mined by small-scale miners in the Katente area at Ushirombo. The Msonga Prospect is located ~3-5km along strike from these artisanal
workings, and as such it was considered conceivable that the Msonga Prospect represented a similar setting to the Igunda Prospect
(i.e., a greenstone and shear zone hosted gold deposit).
During the period mid-2009 to early-2011, the Company conducted
a single phase of widely spaced RAB drilling covering the 7km-long Au-in-soil anomaly outline. From early 2010 to June 2011, the
Company conducted two phases of RC drilling. The first phase of RC drilling comprised short vertical RC drill-holes mainly investigating
the area’s potential for gold mineralization in a distinctive auriferous surficial lateritic quartz rubble deposit. The second
phase of RC drilling comprised inclined RC drill-holes to mainly investigate the east-west strike extension of the auriferous quartz
veins associated with the nearby Katente Prospect. A total of 148 inclined RC holes were drilled on the Msonga Prospect.
Subsequent modelling and krigging was conducted on the deposit.
However, no mineral resources could be declared for Msonga Prospect due to the very low average grade, the paucity of sampling
and a lack of geological control for mineralisation. The current targets at Msonga prospect are therefore, classified as minor
gold occurrences only.
Kigosi Exploration History
The exploration history of the Kigosi Property from 2006 to 2017
is summarized as follows:
Kigosi Exploration History Synopsis
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
1990
|
Barth
|
Production of the regional geological map of granite-greenstone belt south of Lake Victoria
|
|
Early 1990s
|
Pangea Goldfields Inc/ Iscor
|
Rotary Air Blast (RAB) drilling in Msonga prospect area (Kigosi North). No records available
|
|
Early 1990s
|
Artisinal Miners
|
First evidence of artisanal working in the Kigosi area. No records available for gold extracted by the artisanals.
|
|
1994
|
Tan Range
|
Acquires gold properties for exploration in Tanzania.
|
|
1998
|
AngloGold
|
Acquired rights to nine licenses associated with the Kigosi area.
|
|
1999
|
Geodass
|
Conducted regional geophysical survey (airborne magnetics, radiometric and VLF-EM) over Ushirombo greenstone belt, including the Kigosi area.
|
|
1999
|
Tan Range
|
Helicopter visit to Luhwaika and Igunda artisanal workings. Signed option agreement with Anglo for the Kigosi North Property.
|
|
2003
|
Geoscientific and Explora
Services Ltd (Geoscientific)
|
Conducted a regional LandSat interpretation on the Kigosi Project area.
|
|
2003
|
J Klein (Independent Consultant
|
Reviewed and interpreted 1999 geophysical survey data
|
|
2003
|
AngloGold Ashanti
|
Detailed regional airborne geophysical survey and soil sampling survey
|
|
2004
|
AngloGold Ashanti & Tan Range
|
Follow up of anomalies with soil and termite mound sampling. Identification of Msonga, Bungoni, Luhwaika and Igunda Prospect area. Geological and regolith mapping conducted. Limited sampling from pits, streams and trenches.
|
|
2005-2006
|
AngloGold Ashanti & Tan Range
|
Temporary suspension of exploration activities due to permitting issues for access into Kigosi Game reserve area. JV arrangement maintained.
|
|
2007
|
Tan Range/ Tanzania Royalty
|
JV agreement with AngloGold Ashanti terminated & Tan Range changes name to Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corp. Commenced with exploration at Kigosi in September. Exploration included biogeochemistry and induced polarisation surveys.
|
|
2008- 2009
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Continues with exploration and starts RAB, RC and DC drilling at Kigosi on the Luhwaika and Igunda Prospects. Completed drilling at Luhwaika and Igunda Prospects. 3D modelling completed and resources declared for both.
|
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
2010-2011
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Commenced RAB and RC drilling at Msonga and Commenced and subsequently ceased bulk sampling of Luhwaika quartz rubble deposit (four months later). Completed drilling at Msonga. 3D modelling completed. No resource declared on Msonga.
|
|
2012
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
NI 43-101 report prepared by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Ltd. Significant resource defined for Luhwaika and Igunda prospects.
|
|
2013
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Applied for and granted Mining License (ML496/2013) covering Luhwaika and Igunda Prospects
|
|
2014-2016
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Kigosi game reserve access permitting issues forced a stop to all activities on the project.
|
The Company has incurred total net costs (after recoveries, if any)
of $87,507 on the Kigosi Project for the year ended August 31, 2017.
Lunguya Project Area
Property Description and Location
The Lunguya Property is located in the Kahama District of Tanzania.
The Lunguya Property is situated in the Lake Victoria Greenstone Belts, approximately 100 kms by air to the southwest of Mwanza
and about 15 kms south of Bulyanhulu. With respect to Lunguya PL 1766/01 in January, 2003, a Shareholder’s Agreement was
entered into wherein a new company, Lunguya Mining Company Limited (“
LMC
”), was created to form a joint
venture between Northern Mining and Consultancy Company Limited (“
NMCCL
”), Tanzam and LMC. Tanzam has
a 60% shareholding and NMCCL has the remaining 40% shareholding in LMC.
In February 2010, the Company entered into an Option and Royalty
Agreement with Joseph Magunila and Partners (“
JMP
”) over an area in the Kahama District of the Shinyanga
Region in Tanzania 100% owned by JMP. The agreement grants the Company an option to acquire up to 90% of JMP’s interest and/or,
at the sole discretion of the Company, to enter into a mining and exploration services agreement. The Company paid US$90,000 for
this option.
In late 2015, the Option and Royalty Agreement between Joseph Magunila
and the company became null and void as the Company relinquished its interest in the Primary Mining Licenses.
Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and
Physiography
The Lunguya Property can be reached by plane from Mwanza to an airstrip
accommodating Bulyanhulu or by road via Geita up to the Bulyanhulu/Kahama road intersection. From Kahama, the property is located
approximately 8 kms to the south, toward Lunguya village. Secondary roads and trails traverse the property. The Nyamakwenge Reef,
located in the northeastern part of the property, can be accessed using a 12 kms dirt tract passing to the north of the property.
Climate and elevation are similar to the Luhala Property.
Very little outcrop (less than 1%) has been identified at Lunguya.
The entire property is flat and covered largely by granitic sands and grey orange laterities derived from granitic sources. Like
Luhala, Lunguya is actively cultivated, but also is being actively mined by a few score artisanal miners along the trend of the
Nyamakwenge Reefs. No significant infrastructure, power or water is available on site. However, the entire infrastructure of the
region including electricity, air transport, health clinics, schools, and improved road networks, have been greatly improved due
to the proximity to Barrick’s Bulyanhulu mine, some 20 kms to the north.
History
Lunguya Exploration History Synopsis
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
1999-2001
|
Tan Range
|
Acquire prospecting licenses. Review of regional aeromagnetic data as part of regional prosctive target identification
|
|
2002
|
Tan Range
|
Regional scale soil surveys. 4 regional anomalies identified
|
|
2003-2004
|
Tan Range
|
Follow up detailed soil surveys, ground IP surveys, Biogeochemistry (BGC) surveys identified Luhawika North (Bulynhulu replica?) Shilela, Nyikoboko & Nyaamakwenge prospects.
|
|
2005-2006
|
Tan Range
|
Phase 1 auger drilling, RAB/RC/Core drilling on selected targets on 3 of the 4 prospects.
|
|
2007-2008
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Conducted detailed ground magnetics and IP surveys on Shilela, Nyamakwenge & Nyikoboko prospects
|
|
2009
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Signed Option & Royalty Agreement on Primary Mining Licenses covering the Nyamakwenge prospect
|
|
2010-2012
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
Detailed RC and diamond core drilling on Nyamakwenge prospect (Reef and gravel resource definition-internal report). Lost main license over Luhwaika North (Buly-type?) prospect inadvertently.
|
|
2013-2015
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
No field work conducted. JV agreement on Nyamakwenge terminated in late 2015.
|
|
2016
|
Tanzanian Royalty
|
No field work done. Review of project conducted internally.
|
Geology
The very limited outcrop exposures on the Lunguya concession necessitate
development of a geological and interpretive environment largely based on geophysical interpretations.
Regionally, Lunguya is located near the eastern terminus of the
inner volcanic arc, lower Nyanzian, of the Sukumaland Greenstone belt. The succession is dominated by tholeiitic volcanic rocks
containing lesser felsic tuffaceous rocks and argillaceous horizons cut by thin quartz porphyry dykes and sills. The thick, banded
iron formation and felsic flows characteristic of the outer arc Upper Nyanzian sequence are absent. Most of the map scale granite
– greenstone contacts strike north-south. No information is available with respect to the orientation of sub-surface contacts.
At Lunguya, all currently known, auriferous structural zones track
at an oblique angle, the eastern granodiorite-mafic volcanic contact. Auriferous veins strike at 020
°
to 030
°
with the dominant intrusive volcanic contact trending at approximately 360
°
.
On the property scale, two 330
°
trending fault structures are interpreted to offset
the Lunguya vein into two fault repeated vein segments, having strike lengths of approximately 180 and 300 m. A few score artisanal
miners have exploited these veins to a depth not exceeding 30 verticalm subsurface. A second set of auriferous reefs, the Nyikoboko
Reefs, are located 12 kilometres to the south. This area is associated with a smaller set of largely inactive artisanal dumps and
workings.
Based on the aeromagnetic data a model has been proposed whereby
a large NS trending shear zone is believed to exist below a thick black cotton soil (mbuga) cover. The thin veins associated with
the Nyikoboko and Nyamakwengwe reefs probably represent secondary structures from the main shear. This idea has been tested using
biogeochemistry.
Mineralization
Lunguya is a mineralized brittle ductile strain zone, developing
internal to a major granite-greenstone contact. Gold is associated with one fault offset vein which is likely broken into two segments,
the Western and Eastern reefs. Lesser veins are also present. Initial sampling of artisanal vein waste dumps indicated the presence
of well mineralized dump samples. The site contained greater than 200 of these small pits-shafts ranging from 1 to 20m deep.
Diamond drill and RC programs at Lunguya have demonstrated geological
continuity of the Nyamakwenge West and East Reefs but weaker continuity of grade. The difficulty in obtaining representative gold
grades from small core samples of vein material containing coarse particulate gold is a well documented phenomenon. Widths in these
boreholes are approximately true widths and the boreholes have been collared roughly perpendicular to the strike and dip of the
mineralized structural zones.
Exploration
In November 2010, the Company announced positive results from laboratory
test work on surface quartz rubble collected from its Lunguya Primary Mining Licenses (PMLs) in northern Tanzania. The laboratory
test work was intended to establish the mineralogical (physical) characteristics of gold contained within an extensive auriferous
(gold bearing) quartz rubble bed identified at Lunguya, along with suitable gravity-based recovery methods to extract gold from
the quartz rubble which is essentially broken and fractured surface rock.
Chemical analysis of sample material returned values of 3.58g/t,
5.75g/t, 2.33g/t and 3.31g/t, giving an average "head grade" for gold of 3.74g/t. (The "head grade" refers
to the average grade of the material submitted for processing and analysis).
Bulk samples were collected from random pits within the Lunguya
PML in February 2010. RC drilling began at Lunguya in June 2011. The program was intended to confirm evidence of reef mineralization
identified during the 2002 RC and diamond drilling program in the area. A total of 14 drill holes consisting of 1,247m were
completed during the month. A number of narrow, parallel, moderate dipping shear structures hosted in granite were intersected.
The shears are possibly related to those hosting gold mineralization in the area.
The RC drilling program continued at Lunguya in August 2011, demonstrating
the continuity of Nyamakwenge reefs to the southwest of the prospect. Two sets of quartz vein in sheared granite were identified
during the drilling program in 2002, with their thickness ranging from 1 – 8m thick. During 2011 RC program another two sets
of quartz reefs were identified, with their thickness ranging from 2 to 20m. These two new sets of quartz reef have similar characteristics
with the first sets of quartz veins identified.
A study was completed for the Lunguya project. For additional information
regarding the Lunguya Property the reader is referred to the complete text of a technical report prepared in accordance with the
requirements of NI 43-101 dated February 8, 2010, entitled, “
Report on the Lunguya Mineral Exploration Property of Tanzanian
Royalty Exploration Corporation in the Kahama District, Shinyanga Region of the United Republic of Tanzania, East Africa
”
by Martin J. Taylor, P.Geo. The Preliminary Lunguya Report is available online at
www.sedar.com
, filed on February
16, 2010 under the heading, “
Technical Report (NI 43-101)
”.
During the period ended August 31, 2017, no direct property work
was conducted on the Lunguya property.
The Lunguya Property is without known mineral reserves and any
exploration program is an exploratory search for ore.
Itetemia Property
Property Description and Location
The Itetemia Property is located in the Mwanza Region of the Lake
Victoria Greenstone Region, Tanzania, approximately 90 kilometres by air southwest of the city of Mwanza, situated on the south
shore of Lake Victoria.
Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography
The property is accessed via local roads from Geita or by plane
from Mwanza to an airstrip accommodating the neighbouring Bulyanhulu Mine, owned by Barrick. The Barrick airstrip is 3.75 km west
of the western boundary of the Itetemia prospecting license, and approximately 4 km northeast of the Nyamykonze village. Local
resources are available at Mwanza, located on the southern shore of Lake Victoria.
The topography in the region and on the property consists of large
flat-lying areas surrounded by numerous small hills. The hills have elevations of up to 100 m above local terrain. The hills are
thickly vegetated and access is only possible along cut lines. Little outcrop exists on the property. The climate is similar to
the rest of the region. The rainy season starts in November and lasts to the middle of April, but precipitation is irregular from
one season to another. The dry seasons are usually hot. Mwanza, located along the southern shore of Lake Victoria, can, and has,
provided limited supplies for mining and exploration operations in the area. Dwellers in the area of the Itetemia Project, such
as the neighbouring Nyamykonze village, are traditionally subsistence farmers and ranchers, and have limited mining experience
from the Bulyanhulu operation and numerous small scale activities. Water for the purpose of mining and processing is not readily
available in the region; however, a pipeline from Lake Victoria built by Barrick for its Bulyanhulu Mine, provides an adequate
supply.
The large, relatively flat terrain surrounding the known gold mineralization
may be suitable for potential tailings and waste rock storage and for heap leach pads and a potential processing plant. Electric
power is available via the national grid within 5 km; due to the unreliability of such power, alternative forms of residual or
back-up power would be necessary for mining or processing operations, such as diesel power generation used by Barrick at its Bulyanhulu
mine.
Ownership
Prior Ownership
With respect to one Itetemia prospecting license, the interest of
the Company was acquired from Stamico pursuant to a joint venture agreement dated July 12, 1994 (the “
Stamico Venture
Agreement
”). The Stamico Venture Agreement obligated the Company to make two initial payments of TSh$1,000,000 and
US$7,200 to Stamico, both of which were satisfied.
The Company’s Interest
Through prospecting and mining option agreements, the Company has
options to acquire interests in several Itetemia Property prospecting licenses. The prospecting licenses comprising the Itetemia
Property are indirectly held by the Company through the Company’s subsidiaries, Tancan or Tanzam. In the case of one prospecting
license, Tancan acquired its interest pursuant to the Stamico Venture Agreement, as amended June 18, 2001 and July 2005, which
provides, among other things, that:
|
|
1.
|
Tancan had to pay Stamico, on execution of the Stamico Venture Agreement, the sum of US$7,200 (as
an advance against the 2% gross revenue royalty) and TSh1,000,000.
|
|
|
2.
|
Tancan and Stamico were to form a joint venture company for the purpose of holding the prospecting
license that shall be held 10% by Stamico (with no obligation to contribute) and 90% by Tancan, which was effected through the
formation of Itetemia Mining Co.
|
|
|
3.
|
Stamico is entitled to acquire an additional 20% interest in the joint venture company by paying
a sum equal to 20% of the cost of placing the property into commercial production based on the feasibility study, if and when submitted
to the Government of Tanzania for such purpose.
|
|
|
4.
|
Tancan shall assist Stamico in raising the required capital to exercise the right referred to in
(3) above.
|
|
|
5.
|
Tancan was to expend the sum of US$25,000 in the first year and US$50,000 annually thereafter in
relation to the training of Tanzanian personnel.
|
|
|
6.
|
Upon commencement of commercial production, Stamico shall receive a 2% gross revenue royalty, which
shall be increased to a 2.5% gross revenue royalty should a mine on the Itetemia prospecting license produce recoverable gold in
excess of 12 grams per tonne.
|
|
|
7.
|
Tancan shall pay to Stamico, as an advance against the 2% gross revenue royalty, the sum of US$7,200
on or before every anniversary of the Stamico Venture Agreement up until the development phase, upon and after which the annual
sum of US$10,000 shall be paid as an advance against such royalty.
|
|
|
8.
|
Tancan shall show preference to Stamico for the provision of local materials and services during
the period of mining operations.
|
|
|
9.
|
As amended July 2005, Tancan had to pay to Stamico the sum of US$15,000 on or before July 12 of
2006 and 2007, and ending upon commercial production, provided that commercial production commences by December 31, 2007, failing
which the aforementioned payment shall be revisited. As expected, commercial production did not commence by December 31, 2007.
In 2008, the annual option fee was renegotiated to US$25,000 per annum until commercial production.
|
|
|
10.
|
Tancan may assign its rights under the agreement, subject to the prior written consent of Stamico.
|
The Itetemia prospecting licences are adjacent
to Barrick’s Bulyanhulu gold mine.
History
The exploration history of the Itetemia Property from 2006 to 2015
is summarized as follows:
Itetemia Exploration History Synopsis
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
2006
|
Tancan
|
In-house evaluation. 4-hole diamond drill program
|
|
2007
|
Sloane
|
Planned 2000 m RC drill program and 3000 m infill diamond drilling program.
|
|
2008
|
Sloane
|
First phase drill program consisted of 10 Reverse Circulation (RC) aggregating 1,489m. Eight diamond drill holes were drilled totalling 2,286.5m.
|
|
2009
|
Sloane
|
Data analysis
|
|
2010
|
Sloane
|
Data analysis
|
|
2011-2012
|
Company
|
NI 43-101 report prepared by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Ltd.
|
|
2013
|
Company
|
In-house evaluation
|
|
2014
|
Company
|
Digital Terrain Model (DTM) survey pickups using GPS to create topographical survey over the resource area for resource modelling, completion of study, which was contracted to MaSS Resources Company Ltd., submission of the Final Itetemia Gold Project (IGP) Study by MaSS Resources company, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study on the Itetemia Gold Project (IGP), which was contracted to Efficient Consultants environmental experts. The EIA study is ongoing and completed activities include - Visit to site, conducting consultative meetings with stake holders, consultation with OSHA officials & Lake zone mines officer, project registration with NEMC, submission of brief project report to NEMC for project screening, preparation of Scoping Project Report and Terms of Reference (ToR) for management approval before submission and the submission of the Scoping Report to NEMC for approval.
|
|
2015
|
Company
|
EIA study report approved and ESIA certificate issued. Application to convert PL into Mining License procedures have commenced
|
|
2016
|
Company
|
Itetemia Mining License Application no/01722 submitted on 4
th
November 2015 still under review by the Ministry of Enenrgy and Minerals. No fieldwork conducted pending resolution on application.
|
Geology
The Lake Victoria area contains 12 Archean Nyanzian greenstone belts
which are surrounded by and have been interrupted by numerous granitic intrusions. The Nyanzian belts comprise a volcano-sedimentary
sequence composed of mafic to felsic volcanics (lavas and tuffs), BIF and shales. The greenstone belts have been grouped into locally
distinct geographic regions. One of these regions is the Southwest Mwanza Region which includes a large area south of the town
of Mwanza, located on the south shore of Lake Victoria. There are five greenstone belts in the Southwest Mwanza Region, one of
which is the Ushirombo belt. The Ushirombo belt is an east-west trending belt, the eastern end of which is located approximately
25 km west of the southern end of Smith Sound on Lake Victoria. The eastern end of the belt is arcuate in shape and trends northerly
tangential to the northwestern flank of the Siga Hills.
The Itetemia Property is underlain by the northerly trending eastern
portion of the Ushirombo Nyanzian greenstone belt. Granite underlies the eastern and northern portions of the property. The greenstone/granite
contact trends northerly through the east-central portion of the Itetemia prospecting license and through the central portion of
the Itetemia East prospecting license onto the Itetemia Village license; at which point, the contract tends westerly through the
Mwingilo license cutting the northeast corner of the Ngula license. Sixty percent of the Itetemia, Itetemia North and Ngula licenses
are underlain by the Nyanzian greenstone belt. The remaining 40% is underlain by granite. Granite variably underlies 90 to 100%
of the Itetemia East, Itetemia Village and Mwingilo prospecting licenses. The Mbuga soil covers 10 to 40% of the property.
Mineralization
The sulphide mineralization encountered on the Itetemia Property
comprises massive to semi-massive, stringers, veins and veinlets, disseminated and nodular mineralization. The types of mineralization
are (i) sulphides associated with volcanism activity; (ii) remobilized sulphides associated with deformation (shear hosted); and
(iii) sulphides associated with sedimentation. The gold and metallic contents associated with this mineralization are variable
and the relation between the grades and the mineralized type is not well known at this stage.
The massive to semi-massive sulphide mineralization seems to be
related to volcanism. It occurs in two areas on the Property. One area is located in the northern part of the licenses and has
been intersected by the hole ITDD-06. More than 30 m. of sulphides were intersected at the contact between a QFP and an argillite
horizon separating two pillowed basalts. The sulphide content ranges from 10 to 90% pyrrhotite, 2 to 5% pyrite, trace to 5% sphalerite,
trace to 1% copper.
The Golden Horseshoe Reef mineralization occurs as massive sulphide
veins locally ranging from 15-30 cm wide. Sulphides dominantly appear in veins/veinlets less than 5 cm wide in felsic volcanic
rocks. Five to thirty percent pyrite-pyrrhotite is common over sections of 1 to 15 m along the holes. They are sub-concordant and
parallel to the schistosity. The strong shearing at the Golden Horseshoe Reef probably represents a remobilization of the sulphides.
Exploration
The majority of the exploration work in 2007 consisted of RC and
diamond drilling, along with limited ground geophysics. Exploration crews were mobilized to the Itetemia Project in August 2007
and drilling commenced in mid-September. The first phase drill program completed 10 RC holes aggregating 1,489m and eight diamond
drill holes totaling 2,286.5m. The drill program targeted the shallowest part of the previously established Golden Horseshoe Reef
with a view to developing an open pit resource with a notional floor level of 200m below surface. In support of preparation of
a resource estimate, drill holes were sited to provide data at grid points at or below 50 x 50m spacing. A number of deeper holes
were also sited to test the extent of the mineralized body at depth and along strike.
The Company is reviewing various alternatives for advancing its
Itetemia project. Previous studies have indicated that the Golden Horseshoe Reef (GHR) represents a small, yet robust, medium-grade,
near surface gold deposit that warrants further feasibility investigations. A Technical Report dated January 31, 2012 (the “
Itetemia
and Luhala Technical Report
”) shows the potential of a small opencast operation, at high gold prices. At lower gold
prices, studies show some potential for toll treating the GHR material at the neighbouring Bulyanhulu Mine.
The Itetemia and Luhala Technical Report also includes a Resource
Summary for the GHR. Based on a 1.0g/t Au cut-off grade, Itetemia has an Indicated Mineral Resource of 2.80 million tons @ 2.96g/t
Au containing 266,000 ounces of gold.
The Itetemia Project concept study positively demonstrated that
the chosen cut-off grade of 0.5g/t Au supports not just reasonable but actual, prospects for economic extraction. The original
Mineral Resource estimate was published at 1.0g/t Au but this included areas of lower grade which had to be mined in order to access
the entire orebody. By lowering the cut-off grade to 0.5g/t Au, it has become possible to incorporate this material into both the
Indicated and Inferred categories, effectively making the orebody more continuous and practical to mine. Comparison with the previous
Mineral Resource statement indicates a 5% increase in the total tonnage at a 4% reduction in mean grade, resulting in an overall
1% increase in the contained gold. The prospects for economic extraction at 1.0g/t Au and 0.5g/t Au were clearly demonstrated by
the concept study.
For additional information regarding the Itetemia Property see the
Technical Report entitled “National Instrument 43-101F on the Itetemia and Luhala Gold Projects in the Lake Victoria Greenstone
Belt, Tanzania” prepared for the Company by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited and compiled by A.N. Clay, N. McKenna, and R.M. Tayelor
dated January 31, 2012 and filed on SEDAR February 1, 2012.
During the period ended August 31, 2017, no direct property work
was conducted on the Itetemia property.
The Company has incurred total net costs (after any recoveries and
write offs) of $17,738 and written off $nil of expenditure on the Itetemia Property for the year ended August 31, 2017.
Luhala Property
Property Description and Location
The Luhala property is located in Misungwi District of Mwanza Region
of Tanzania. It lies approximately 70 kilometres south of the city of Mwanza. The Luhala prospecting licenses are in good standing
with respect to required filings and payments with the Government of Tanzania.
The target on the Luhala property is gold stockwork mineralization
associated with felsic rock units in dilatational structures.
Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and
Physiography
Access to the Luhala Property is via the main Mwanza – Shinyanga
road, which is a single lane, good to excellent quality, asphalt highway. To access the property, one drives approximately 45km
to the south of Mwanza, where a dirt road from a junction at the settlement of Manawa, leads southwest to the town of Misasi. The
property has year round access, although seasonal winter rains, December to March, may result in flooding in low lying areas which
are dominated by mbuga (black organic rich laustrine flood soils). Most lowland areas are under active cultivation, corn, rice,
beans and mixed crops, by subsistence farmers. Low scrub and thorn bushes cover the small hills. The area has been, for many years,
deforested by local agricultural practices.
At Luhala, the mean elevation is approximately 1,200 m above sea
level, with a series of small sub-rounded hills, rising up to one hundred meters above the surrounding plain. These hills are typically
formed by either resistive iron formations or felsic volcanic rocks. Mafic volcanic rocks weather recessively and are typically
only exposed in trenches through well formed laterite profiles. Laterite development is extensive with brick-red laterites overlying
weak mottled zones and saprolites at a depth of approximately 3-5m. Deep weathering penetrates 45 - 60m vertically within the subsurface.
An enthusiastic and competent labor force is available through the
surrounding villages, and local people have been routinely hired during the trenching, drilling and soil sampling programs conducted
on this property. However, no other significant infrastructure is available.
History
Luhala has had a significantly more protracted exploration history
than Lunguya, beginning with the initial exploration by the then Tanganyikan Geological Survey in 1947. The exploration history
of Luhala since 2006 to 2015 is summarized as:
LUHALA EXPLORATION HISTORY SYNOPSIS
|
Year
|
Operator
|
Work Performed
|
|
2006
|
Tancan
|
Diamond drilling, RC drilling
|
|
2007
|
Sloane
|
Follow-up exploration planning
|
|
2008
|
Sloane
|
Data analysis
|
|
2009
|
Sloane
|
Data analysis
|
|
2010
|
Sloane
|
Data analysis
|
|
2011-2012
|
Company
|
NI 43-101 report prepared by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Ltd.
|
|
2013
|
Company
|
In-house evaluation
|
|
2014
|
Company
|
Continued in-house evaluation
|
|
2015
|
Company
|
Continued in-house evaluation/property maintenance
|
|
2016
|
Company
|
No fieldwork conducted. Property maintenance
observed.
|
Geology
Luhala is found within the eastern portion of the Buhungukira Belt,
a local place name assigned to one of the eight greenstone belts in the Lake Victoria District. These rocks are believed to be
the eastern continuation of the Geita Greenstone Belt and consist of dominantly Upper Nyanzian rock sequences.
In the Luhala area, the predominant structural grain is dominated
by an early deformational event which has deformed all supracrustal rocks into tight, south to southwest plunging, west overturned,
synforms and antiforms. The short limbs of these folds may have east-west strikes and modest, 40 degree south dips. The long limbs
of these folds have north to northeast strikes and generally much steeper, 60 – 80 degree, and east dips.
At Luhala, three principal mineralized zones have been identified.
These include Kisunge Hill, Shilalo South, and Shilalo West. All of the three principal mineralized areas are linked by a common
southwest plunging antiform, the limbs of which are separated by 500 to 800m and converge just south of Line 6200 E and 3800 N.
Mineralization to Kisunge Hill is associated with a chert – felsic volcanic contact. As Shilalo South, structurally
controlled gold mineralization closely tracks the position of a massive to locally well-bedded chert or cherty iron formation.
The results of diamond drilling in Shilalo West strongly outline the importance of the felsic volcanic - chert –
structural sites and gold association. For example, borehole LSD – 08A is collared in the hangingwall to the Shilalo West
mineralized zone, traverses the host rhyolite-chert lithology, and terminates in the footwall. This borehole intersected significant
gold mineralization of 3.55 g/t Au over 5 m near the hangingwall contact of the felsic volcanic rocks, and is mineralized repeatedly
at over one gram ranges throughout much of the felsic host interval, which in this borehole is over 35m thick.
The felsic volcanic rock package at Shilalo West once again presents
an excellent structural site for the development of dilatant sites and gold mineralization. As of Shilalo South, a well defined
planar, brittle-ductile structural zone was not identified at Shilalo West. Gold distribution is likely related to the presence
of extensional and shears extensional veinlets, which are developed within the felsic volcanic rocks at or near, the felsic volcanic
“red tuff” contact.
Exploration
During the period ended August 31, 2017, no site-based exploration
work was conducted on the Luhala Property.
At Luhala, three principal mineralized zones have been identified:
Kisunge Hill, Shilalo South, and Shilalo West. Gold mineralization is associated with zones of diffuse silicification, localized
around small scale fractures within competent chert and felsic volcanic rock units.
Mineralization
At Luhala, gold mineralization is associated with zones of diffuse
silicification, localized around small cm and mm scale fractures within competent chert and felsic volcanic rock units. Major discordant
vein structures are not identified and planar high strain zones are absent.
No specific gravity data have been calculated for any of the rocks
cored in these intervals and without strong cross sectional control, no reliable resource estimates for any of the principal mineralized
zones at Kisunge, Shilalo South and Shilalo West may be calculated.
Historical Drilling
The Phase 7 drill program at Luhala was completed in August 2006
and consisted of nine diamond drill holes aggregating 991m. All the holes tested the eastern limb of the Kisunge Main Zone. Among
the better intercepts reported from this program was 3.07m @ 6.87 g/t. Within this intercept was a 1.44m interval averaging 10.95
g/t. Invaluable structural information was obtained from the Phase 7 diamond drilling program which will be utilized in the planning
process for follow-up exploration.
For additional information regarding the Luhala Property see the
Technical Report entitled “National Instrument 43-101F on the Itetemia and Luhala Gold Projects in the Lake Victoria Greenstone
Belt, Tanzania” prepared for the Company by Venmyn Rand (Pty) Limited and compiled by A.N. Clay, N. McKenna, and R.M. Tayelor
dated January 31, 2012 and filed on SEDAR February 1, 2012 (the “Itetemia and Luhala Technical Report”).
The Company has incurred total net costs of $5,988 and written off
$nil of expenditures on the Luhala Property for the year ended August 31, 2017.
The Luhala Property is without known mineral reserves and any
exploration program is an exploratory search for ore.
|
|
Item 4A.
|
Unresolved Staff Comments
|
None
|
|
Item 5.
|
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
|
This discussion and analysis of the operating results and the financial
position of the Company for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016, and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements and the related notes attached hereto.
Critical Accounting Policies
Mineral Properties
All direct costs related to the acquisition and exploration and
development of specific properties are capitalized as incurred. If a property is brought into production, these costs will be amortized
against the income generated from the property. If a property is abandoned, sold or impaired, an appropriate charge will be made
to the statement of comprehensive loss at the date of such impairment. Discretionary option payments arising on the acquisition
of mining properties are only recognized when paid. Amounts received from other parties to earn an interest in the Company's mining
properties are applied as a reduction of the mining property and deferred exploration and development costs until all capitalized
costs are recovered at which time additional reimbursements are recorded in the statement of comprehensive loss, except for administrative
reimbursements which are credited to operations.
Consequential revenue from the sale of metals, extracted during
the Company's test mining activities, is recognized on the date the mineral concentrate level is agreed upon by the Company and
customer, as this coincides with the transfer of title, the risk of ownership, the determination of the amount due under the terms
of settlement contracts the Company has with its customer, and collection is reasonably assured. Revenues from properties earned
prior to the commercial production stage are deducted from capitalized costs.
The amounts shown for mining claims and related deferred costs represent
costs incurred to date, less amounts expensed or written off, reimbursements and revenue, and do not necessarily reflect present
or future values of the particular properties. The recoverability of these costs is dependent upon discovery of economically recoverable
reserves and future production or proceeds from the disposition thereof.
The Company reviews the carrying value of a mineral exploration
property when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. If the carrying value
of the property exceeds its fair value, the property will be written down to fair value with the provision charged against operations
in the year of impairment. An impairment is also recorded when management determines that it will discontinue exploration or development
on a property or when exploration rights or permits expire.
Ownership in mineral properties involves certain risks due to the
difficulties in determining the validity of certain claims as well as the potential for problems arising from the frequently ambiguous
conveyance history characteristic of many mineral interests. The Company has investigated the ownership of its mineral properties
and, to the best of its knowledge, ownership of its interests are in good standing.
Capitalized mineral property exploration costs are those directly
attributable costs related to the search for, and evaluation of mineral resources that are incurred after the Company has obtained
legal rights to explore a mineral property and before the technical feasibility and commercial viability of a mineral reserve are
demonstrable. Any costs incurred prior to obtaining the legal right to explore a mineral property are expensed as incurred. Field
overhead costs directly related to exploration are capitalized and allocated to mineral properties explored. All other overhead
and administration costs are expensed as incurred.
Once an economically viable reserve has been determined for a property
and a decision has been made to proceed with development has been approved, acquisition, exploration and development costs previously
capitalized to the mineral property are first tested for impairment and then classified as property, plant and equipment under
construction.
Impairment of Long-lived Assets
At each date of the statement of financial position, the Company
reviews the carrying amounts of its tangible and intangible assets to determine whether there is an indication that those assets
have suffered an impairment loss. If any such indication exists, the recoverable amount of the asset is estimated in order to determine
the extent of the impairment loss (if any). Where it is not possible to estimate the recoverable amount of an individual asset,
the Company estimates the recoverable amount of the cash-generating unit to which the assets belong.
Recoverable amount is the higher of fair value less costs to sell
and value in use. In assessing value in use, the estimated future cash flows are discounted to their present value using a pre-tax
discount rate that reflects current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the asset.
If the recoverable amount of an asset (or cash-generating unit)
is estimated to be less than its carrying amount, the carrying amount of the asset (or cash-generating unit) is reduced to its
recoverable amount. An impairment loss is recognized immediately in the statement of comprehensive loss.
Where an impairment loss subsequently reverses, the carrying amount
of the asset (cash-generating unit) is increased to the revised estimate of its recoverable amount, but so that the increased carrying
amount does not exceed the carrying amount that would have been determined had no impairment loss been recognized for the asset
(or cash-generating unit) in prior years.
The Company’s most critical accounting estimate relates to
the impairment of mineral properties and deferred exploration costs. During the year ended August 31, 2017, the Company wrote off
$124,717 of costs related to its mineral properties (2016 – $3,516,268). Management assesses impairment of its exploration
prospects quarterly. If an impairment results, the capitalized costs associated with the related project or area of interest are
charged to expense.
Asset Retirement Obligations
The Company recognizes liabilities for statutory, contractual, constructive
or legal obligations, including those associated with the reclamation of mineral properties and property, plant and equipment,
when those obligations result from the acquisition, construction, development or normal operation of the assets. Initially, a liability
for an asset retirement obligation is recognized at its fair value in the period in which it is incurred. Upon initial recognition
of the liability, the corresponding asset retirement obligation is added to the carrying amount of the related asset and the cost
is amortized as an expense over the economic life of the asset using either the unit-of-production method or the straight-line
method, as appropriate. Following the initial recognition of the asset retirement obligation, the carrying amount of the liability
is increased for the passage of time and adjusted for changes to the current market-based discount rate, amount or timing of the
underlying cash flows needed to settle the obligation.
A. Operating Results
The following discussion and analysis of the financial condition
and operating results of the Company for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 should be read in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements and related notes to the financial statements which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS.
Overall Performance
As at August 31, 2017, the Company had current assets of $1,922,088,
compared to $1,032,319 on August 31, 2016. The increase is mainly due to the cash inflow of $5,589,501 (2016 - $nil) in connection
with the proceeds of the private placements, net of issue costs, closed during September 2016 as well as inflows from proceeds
of convertible loans issued of $1,181,993 (2016 - $221,115). This was offset by outflows in regards to expenditures on exploration
of $1,568,614 (2016 - $688,296) and cash used in operations of $4,283,489 (2016 - $1,914,495). Mineral properties and deferred
exploration assets were $46,920,303 as at August 31, 2017, compared to $45,802,858 at August 31, 2016.
Net loss for the year ended August 31, 2017 was $6,434,112, compared
to a net loss of $12,781,902 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. The main difference in net loss between the two periods
is due to the following fluctuations:
|
|
-
|
An increase in consulting fees for the year ended August 31, 2017 to $805,943, compared to $432,316
in the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. Consulting expenses increased during the current period as the Company hired consultants
in an effort to advance its Buckreef project. The consultants were hired to advise in regards to the status of the processing plant
and any modifications and changes to the operational process, and many were hired in replacement of salaried management and personnel
that resigned or were let go during the course of the last year resulting in a decrease in salaries and benefits expense amounting
to $458,700 for the year ended August 31, 2017 as compared to $623,716 for comparable period in 2016.
|
|
|
-
|
An increase in professional fees expense to $754,738 for the year ended August 31, 2017, compared
to $387,177 for the year ended August 31, 2016. Professional fees increased mainly due to various work surrounding the adoption
of the stock option plan as well as continuing legal fees from the resolution of the Force Majeure matters.
|
|
|
-
|
Higher share based payment expense of $1,772,663 during the year ended August 31, 2017, as compared
to a recovery of $38,996 during the year ended August 31, 2016. The increase is due to the Company adopting a stock option plan
during the period and issuing 3,750,000 options (2016 – nil) with a value of $1,725,000 (2016 - $nil) offset by the number
of RSU’s forfeited during the current period resulting in a recovery of RSU expense (see note 6 of the audited consolidated
financial statements for the year ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 for details of RSU’s and stock options issued).
|
|
|
-
|
A decrease in the loss on the revaluation of derivative liability and change in value of warrant
liability to $nil and $nil respectively for the
year ended August 31, 2017 as compared to
a loss
of $3,905,000 and $946,600 respectively for the year ended August 31, 2016. During the
year ended August 31, 2017, as a
result of the change in functional currency, gains and losses on derivative instruments are no longer recognized.
|
|
|
-
|
A decrease in write offs of mineral properties to $124,717 during the year ended August 31, 2017,
compared to $3,516,268 during the year ended August 31, 2016. See details in note 4 of the audited consolidated financial statements
for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 for details.
|
The remainder of the expenses primarily decreased in comparison
to the prior period as the Company looked to be more cost effective as it worked towards securing additional financing and moving
its Buckreef project into production. These variances are further discussed below.
Share Capital:
During the year ended August 31, 2017, the Company issued 695,991
shares (2016 – 50,000 shares) pursuant to the RSU plan with a value of $1,040,990 (2016 - $120,500). The Company issued 814,089
(2016 – 536,137) shares with a value of $542,447 (2016 - $372,130) in connection with interest payments related to the bullion
loans outstanding. The Company issued 458,329 and 187,321 shares with a value of $288,747 and $131,998 respectively for settlement
of various leases and amounts due to related parties, respectively. The Company also completed its private placement financing
in September 2016 issuing 7,197,543 shares for proceeds, net of issue costs, of $5,589,501 (2016 - $nil). In connection with the
private placement closed in September 2016, the Company also issued 3,146,944 (2016 – 233,258) shares pursuant to cashless
exercise of warrants issued on the private placement. In the current period, capital was utilized for the Buckreef Gold Project
development, property acquisition, exploration, capital equipment purchases and general operating expenses as tabulated below.
The remaining funds/cash liquid assets, when available, are invested in interest bearing investments, which are highly liquid.
|
|
|
C$
(000)
|
|
Funds available August 31, 2016
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
Proceeds from private placements, net of issue costs
|
|
|
5,590
|
|
|
Net proceeds from convertible loans
|
|
|
1,182
|
|
|
Net proceeds (repayments) from loans from related parties
|
|
|
(33)
|
|
|
Mineral property expenditures including licences, environmental and exploration, net of recoveries
|
|
|
(1,568)
|
|
|
General corporate expenses
|
|
|
(4,245)
|
|
|
Funds available August 31, 2017
|
|
|
$1,011
|
|
At August 31, 2017, the Company had a working capital deficiency
of $6,552,376 (August 31, 2016 – $11,836,214 working capital deficiency), had not yet achieved profitable operations, has
accumulated losses of $96,566,577 (August 31, 2016 – $90,600,819) and expects to incur further losses in the development
of its business. The Company will require additional financing in order to conduct its planned work programs on mineral properties,
meet its ongoing levels of corporate overhead and discharge its future liabilities as they come due.
Based on the Company’s current funding sources and taking
into account the working capital position and capital requirements at August 31, 2017, these factors indicate the existence of
a material uncertainty that raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern and is dependent
on the Company raising additional debt or equity financing. In September 2016, the Company raised US$5 Million financing. The
Company must obtain additional funding in order to continue development and construction of the Buckreef Project. The Company
presently does not have adequate resources to maintain its core activities for the next fiscal year or sufficient working capital
to fund all of its planned activities. The Company is continuing to pursue additional financing to fund the construction of the
Buckreef Project and additional projects. However there is no assurance that such additional funding and/or project financing
will be obtained or obtained on commercially favourable terms.
Additional funding may be derived from revenues generated in the
future from anticipated completion and operation of its Buckreef mine currently under development. Management continues to explore
alternative financing sources in the form of equity, debt or a combination thereof; however, the current economic uncertainty and
financial market volatility make it difficult to predict success. Risk factors potentially influencing the Company’s ability
to raise equity or debt financing include: the outcome of the feasibility study at the Buckreef Project, mineral prices, the risk
of operating in a foreign country, including, without limitation, risks relating to permitting, and the buoyancy of the credit
and equity markets.
Due to the current low interest rate environment and lack of funds,
interest income is not expected to be a significant source of income or cash flow. Management intends to monitor spending and assess
results on an ongoing basis and will make appropriate changes as required.
TRENDS
-
There are significant uncertainties regarding the prices of precious
and base metals and other minerals and the availability of equity and debt financing for the purposes of mineral exploration and
development. The prices of precious and base metals have been subject to extreme volatility over recent periods, as such the Company
remains cautious;
-
The Company’s future performance is largely tied to development
of the Buckreef project and other main projects and outcome of future drilling results; and
-
Current financial markets are likely to be volatile in Canada and
the United States for the remainder of the fiscal year, reflecting ongoing concerns about the stability of the global economy.
As well, concern about global growth may lead to future drops in the commodity markets. Uncertainty in the credit markets has also
led to increased difficulties in borrowing or raising funds. Companies worldwide have been negatively affected by these trends.
As a result, the Company may have difficulties raising equity and debt financing for the purposes of base and precious metals exploration
and development.
These trends may limit the Company’s ability to discover and
develop an economically viable mineral deposit.
Results of operations
Fiscal year ended August 31, 2017 compared to fiscal year
ended August 31, 2016
Net additions to mineral properties and deferred exploration costs
for the year ended August 31, 2017 were $1,242,162 compared to $1,168,935 for the year ended August 31, 2016. The amount has increased
as compared with the prior year due primarily to additions of $1,900,000 in connection with accrued amounts owing in connection
with the Buckreef joint venture, offset by $1,933,614 (2016 - $nil) representing a decrease due to foreign exchange in the current
period stemming from the change in functional currency from Canadian dollars to US dollars as of September 1, 2016. The increase
excluding these amounts saw expenditures of $1,425,776 year ended August 31, 2017 compared to $1,168,935 during 2016 is due to
the Company’s recently closed private placement financing out of which resources were allocated to license fees and other
costs to keep properties in good standing and advance them towards production.
Net loss for the year ended August 31, 2017 was $6,434,112, compared
to a net loss of $12,781,902 for the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. For the three month period ended August 31, 2017 and
2016, there was a net loss of $1,307,313 compared to a net loss of $5,509,566, respectively. The main difference in net loss between
the comparable periods ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 is mainly due to the variances discussed above.
Variances in the remaining expenditures is set out below:
For the year ended August 31, 2017, depreciation expense was $421,984,
compared to $478,699 for the year ended August 31, 2016. The decrease of $56,715 is due to a lower overall capital assets base
as there were no additions during the period and prior fiscal year.
Consulting fees for the year ended August 31, 2017 were $805,943,
compared to $432,316 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. Consulting expenses increased during the current period as the
Company hired consultants in an effort to advance its Buckreef project. The consultants were hired to advise in regards to the
status of the processing plant and any modifications and changes to the operational process, and many were hired in replacement
of salaried management and personnel that resigned or were let go during the course of the last year resulting in a decrease in
salaries and benefits expenses discussed below. Consulting fees for the three months ended August 31, 2017 were $272,597 compared
to $204,446 in the comparable period ended August 31, 2016. The reason for the increase for the three month period is the same
as above.
Directors’ fees for the year ended August 31, 2017 were $186,826,
compared to $285,188 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. The amount decreased as compared to the same period in the prior
year due to director resignations during the year as well as lower RSU expense in the current period, driven by lower stock prices
for most of the year and a reduction of RSU issuances in favour of the newly adopted stock option plan. For the three month period
ended August 31, 2017, director fees amounted to $27,907 (2016 - $54,890). The reason for the decrease for the three month period
is the same as above.
Office and general expenses for the year ended August 31, 2017 were
$197,456, compared to $246,938 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. Office and general costs decreased between the comparable
periods due to continued cost reduction measures across all areas of the Company. For the three month period ended August 31, 2017,
office and general expenses were $44,777 compared to $87,752 in the comparable period ended August 31, 2016. The reason for the
decrease for the three month period is the same as above.
Shareholder information costs for the year ended August 31, 2017
increased to $476,285 from $249,645 for the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. The amounts increased due to higher spending
in the current fiscal year on investor relations as the Company hired new investor relations consultants. For the three month period
ended August 31, 2017, shareholder information costs were $113,838 compared to $99,299 for the three month period ended August
31, 2016. Shareholder information costs were comparable between the two periods.
Professional fees increased by $367,561 for the year ended August
31, 2017 to $754,738 from $387,177 for the year ended August 31, 2016. Professional fees increased mainly due to various work surrounding
the adoption of the stock option plan as well as continuing legal fees from the resolution of the Force Majeure matters. For the
three month period ended August 31, 2017 professional fees went from $127,180 for the year ended August 31, 2016 to $17,001. The
decrease is due to various costs incurred in the last quarter of fiscal 2016 as the Company prepared for the financing closed in
September 2016.
Salaries and benefits expense decreased to $458,700 for the year
ended August 31, 2017 from $623,716 for the year ended August 31, 2016. Salaries and benefits decreased as the Company moved towards
using consultants in the place of salaried employees which carries a lower cost than having salaried employees as well as the Company
reducing its workforce wherever possible in an effort to minimize costs. The expenses for the corresponding three month period
ending August 31, 2017 and 2016 were $116,309 and $57,788 respectively and increased in the current period as the third and fourth
quarters of the prior year saw the largest staffing cuts as the Company was under Force Majeure during the period leading up.
Share based payments for the year ended August 31, 2017 were $1,772,663,
compared to a recovery of $38,996 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2016. The increase is due to the Company adopting a stock
option plan during the period and issuing 3,750,000 options (2016 – nil) with a value of $1,725,000 (2016 - $nil) offset
by the number of RSU’s forfeited during the current period resulting in a recovery of RSU expense (see note 6 of the audited
consolidated financial statements for the three and years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 for details of RSU’s and stock options
issued).
For the year ended August 31, 2017, travel and accommodation expense
decreased by $30,414 from $61,881 in 2016 to $31,267. For the three months ended August 31, 2017 and 2016, travel and accommodation
expense decreased by $43,876 from $39,773 in 2016 to $(4,103). Travel and accommodation expense decreased in comparison to the
comparable period as various personnel took trips to Tanzania to assess the development of the Buckreef project during the last
quarter in 2016 as well as refunds on travel overpayments in the current quarter.
For the year ended August 31, 2017, the foreign exchange gain was
$161,593 compared to an exchange gain of $111,352 for the same year ended August 31, 2016. The primary reason is the US Dollar
exchange rate decreasing from 1.312 at August 31, 2016 to 1.258 at August 31, 2017.
The interest accretion expense for the year ended August 31, 2017
was $725,696, compared to $1,028,568 for the year ended August 31, 2016. Interest accretion decreases as loans approach their maturity
date.
A loss of $nil (2016 – $3,905,000 loss) was recognized during
the year ended August 31, 2017, in connection with the revaluation of the derivative liability and $nil (2016 – $946,600
loss) was recognized during the year ended August 31, 2017, in connection with the revaluation of the warrant liability. The derivative
and warrant liabilities are revalued at every reporting period using the Black-Scholes model. On September 1, 2016, upon the change
in functional currency to the U.S. dollar, these derivative liabilities were no longer classified as derivatives and reclassified
to reserve for share based payments.
A decrease in write offs of mineral properties to $124,717 during
the year ended August 31, 2017, compared to $3,516,268 during the year ended August 31, 2016. See details in note 4 of the audited
consolidated financial statements for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 for details.
Fiscal year ended August 31, 2016 compared to fiscal year
ended August 31, 2015
Net additions to mineral properties and deferred exploration costs
for the year ended August 31, 2016 were $1,168,935, net of recoveries from the sale of gold of $279,203, compared to $3,331,566
for the year ended August 31, 2015. The amount has decreased as compared with the prior year as the Company has had to allocate
limited resources on core and crucial activities at the Buckreef property and other properties to keep the properties in good standing
due to the limited financial resources as a result of difficult market conditions. During the comparable period, the Company was
in the process of actively bringing the Buckreef into production and as such incurred higher additions as compared to the current
period once the financial difficulties hit the Company beginning with the second quarter in 2015. As the Company was under Force
Majeure on its Buckreef Project for much of the year, only limited expenditures to keep the project ongoing were incurred.
The Company also incurred property, plant and equipment additions
of $157,862 (2015 - $668,005). The amount was higher during the comparative period as the Company continued to finalize construction
of the heap leach pads and processing plant which began during the year ended August 31, 2014. Exploration activities have reduced
as the Company was under Force Majeure on its Buckreef project for much of the year, and is working to continue towards the commencement
of production and continue exploration work on other projects in its portfolio and at the same time is conscious about conserving
its cash in the current economic downturn.
Net loss for the year ended August 31, 2016 was $12,781,902, compared
to a net loss of $8,995,697 for the comparable year ended August 31, 2015. For the three month period ended August 31, 2016 and
2015, there was a net loss of $5,509,566 compared to a net loss of $2,030,188, respectively. The main difference in net loss between
the comparable periods ended August 31, 2016 and 2015 is mainly due to the variances discussed above.
Variances in the remaining expenditures is set out below:
For the year ended August 31, 2016, depreciation expense was $478,699,
compared to $384,708 for the year ended August 31, 2015. The increase of $93,991 is due to additions to property, plant and equipment
over last year resulting in higher amounts of depreciation on overall capital assets. The capital expenditure for the year ended
August 31, 2016 was $157,862 as compared to $668,005 in the year ended August 31, 2015. Capital expenditures were higher in the
comparable period and commencing from the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014 due to construction of the heap leach pads and processing
plant. The processing plant is currently not yet being depreciated as it is currently still under testing and commissioning.
Consulting fees for the year ended August 31, 2016 were $432,316,
compared to $246,147 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2015. Consulting expenses increased during the current period as the
Company hired consultants in an effort to advance its Buckreef project. The consultants were hired to advise in regards to the
status of the processing plant and any modifications and changes to the operational process. Consulting fees for the three months
ended August 31, 2016 were $204,446 compared to $98,337 in the comparable period ended August 31, 2015. The expense for the three
month period increased due to the same reason as the increase for the year.
Directors’ fees for the year ended August 31, 2016 were $285,188,
compared to $367,524 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2015. For the three month period ended August 31, 2016, director fees
amounted to $54,890 (2015 - $129,702). The amount decreased as compared to the same period in the prior year due to director resignations
during the year as well as lower RSU expense in the current period, driven by lower stock prices for most of the year.
Office and general expenses for the year ended August 31, 2016 were
$246,938, compared to $326,088 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2015. Office and general costs decreased between the comparable
periods due to cost reduction measures across all areas of the Company in light of the current economic conditions and resources
available to the Company. For the three month period ended August 31, 2016, office and general expenses were $87,752 compared to
$128,983 in the comparable period ended August 31, 2015. The expense for the three month period increased due to the same reason
as the increase for the year.
Shareholder information costs for the year ended August 31, 2016
decreased to $249,645 from $361,265 for the comparable year ended August 31, 2015. The decrease is due to the additional reporting
requirements in connection with the convertible senior note financing and operational updates during the comparable quarter. For
the three month period ended August 31, 2016, shareholder information costs were $99,299 compared to $17,167 for the three month
period ended August 31, 2015. The reason for the increase for the three month period is due to various filings and activity close
to the end of the year as the Company lifted force majeure and worked towards the financings closed subsequent to year end.
Professional fees decreased by $292,871 for the year ended August
31, 2016 to $387,177 from $680,048 for the year ended August 31, 2015. Professional fees were higher during the comparable quarter
as the Company dealt with tax litigation in Tanzania, increased accounting costs surrounding the convertible senior note financing
transaction and various business consulting fees on strategy regarding financings. For the three month period ended August 31,
2016 professional fees went from $244,297 for the three month period ended August 31, 2015 to $127,180. The expense for the three
month period decreased due to the same reason as the decrease for the year.
Salaries and benefits expense decreased to $623,716 for the year
ended August 31, 2016 from $1,053,364 for the year ended August 31, 2015. Salaries and benefits decreased as the Company moved
towards using consultants in the place of salaried employees which carries a lower cost than having salaried employees as well
as the Company reducing its workforce wherever possible in an effort to minimize costs. The expenses for the corresponding three
month period ending August 31, 2016 and 2015 were $57,778 and $279,072 respectively.
Share based payments for the year ended August 31, 2016 resulted
in a recovery of $38,996, compared to an expense of $506,747 in the comparable year ended August 31, 2015. Share based payments
vary depending on the number of equity based compensation options issued and vesting. See note 6 of the audited consolidated financial
statements for the years ended August 31, 2016 and 2015 for details. The decrease is mainly due to RSUs forfeited during the year.
Director fee RSU expense was $157,813 and $192,468 respectively for the years ended August 31, 2016 and 2015.
For the year ended August 31, 2016, travel and accommodation expense
increased by $3,174 from $58,507 in 2015 to $61,681. For the three months ended August 31, 2016 and 2015, travel and accommodation
expense increased by $664 from $22,562 in 2015 to $39,773. Travel and accommodation expense increased in the fourth quarter due
to timing of travel during the year but remained consistent overall with the previous year.
For the year ended August 31, 2016, the foreign exchange gain was
$111,352 compared to an exchange gain of $390,459 for the same year ended August 31, 2015. The Tanzanian Shilling exchange rate
increased from 1,587 at August 31, 2015 to 1,635 at August 31, 2016. The US Dollar exchange rate increased from 1.3157 at August
31, 2015 to 1.312 at August 31, 2016.
The interest accretion expense for the year ended August 31, 2016
was $1,028,568, compared to $738,134 for the year ended August 31, 2015. Interest accretion in the current period represent interest
in connection with the gold loan bullion loans, which increased as compared to the year ended August 31, 2015. Interest accretion
in the comparative period mainly represent interest in connection with the convertible senior notes, which were fully converted
during the year ended August 31, 2015.
During the nine month period ended May 31, 2016, the Company agreed
to abandon and wrote off $3,516,268 in expenses in various project areas (2015 – wrote off $2,233,843) (see note 4 of the
audited consolidated financial statements for the three and years ended August 31, 2016 and 2015 for details). The Company is continuously
evaluating its mineral properties Licenses and Carry Forward Balances and makes adjustments as deemed necessary to reflect current
plans to explore and develop licenses into the future.
A loss of $946,600 (2015 – gain of $324,000) was recognized
during the year ended August 31, 2016 in connection with the revaluation of the warrant liability. Warrant liability is revalued
at every reporting period using the Black-Scholes model. See note 6 of the audited consolidated financial statements for the years
ended August 31, 2016 and 2015 for details.
A loss of $3,905,000 (2015 – $150,000 gain) was recognized
during the year ended August 31, 2016, in connection with the revaluation of the derivative liability. The derivative liability
is revalued at every reporting period using the Black-Scholes model. See note 19 and 22 of the audited consolidated financial statements
for the years ended August 31, 2016 and 2015 for details.
A loss on the amendment of the convertible senior note financing
resulting from the amendment of the terms of the financing on March 25, 2015 as described earlier which resulted in a loss of $nil
(2015 - $2,057,506) for the year ended August 31, 2016.
Inflation
Historically, inflation has not affected the Company’s business
in the current locations where it is doing business and the Company does not expect it to affect the Company’s operations
in the future.
Foreign Exchange
The Company is exposed to the financial risk related to the fluctuation
of foreign exchange rates. The Company has offices in Canada, USA, and Tanzania, but holds cash mainly in Canadian and United States
currencies. A significant change in the currency exchange rates between the Canadian dollar relative to US dollar and Tanzanian
shillings could have an effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial position, or cash flows. At August 31,
2017, the Company had no hedging agreements in place with respect to foreign exchange rates. As a majority of the funds of the
Company are held in Canadian currencies, the foreign currency risk associated with US dollar and Tanzanian Shilling financial instruments
is not considered significant at August 31, 2017.
B. Liquidity and Capital Resources
The Company manages liquidity risk by maintaining adequate cash
balances in order to meet short term business requirements. Because the Company does not currently derive any production revenue
from operations, its ability to conduct exploration and development work on its properties is largely based upon its ability to
raise capital by equity funding. Previously, the Company obtained funding via private placements, public offering and various sources,
including the Company’s President and former CEO.
Based on the Company’s current funding sources and taking
into account the working capital position and capital requirements at August 31, 2017, these factors indicate the existence of
a material uncertainty that raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern and is dependent
on the Company raising additional debt or equity financing. The Company must obtain additional funding in order to continue development
and construction of the Buckreef Project. The Company is continuing to pursue additional financing to fund the construction of
the Buckreef Project and additional projects. However there is no assurance that such additional funding and/or project financing
will be obtained or obtained on commercially favourable terms. These consolidated financial statements do not give effect to any
adjustment which would be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern and, therefore, be required to
realize its assets and discharge its liabilities in other than the normal course of business and at amounts different from those
reflected in the consolidated financial statements.
At August 31, 2017 the Company had a working capital deficiency
of $6,552,376 (August 31, 2016 – $11,836,214 working capital deficiency), had not yet achieved profitable operations, has
accumulated losses of $96,566,577 (August 31, 2016 – $90,600,819) and expects to incur further losses in the development
of its business. The Company will require additional financing in order to conduct its planned work programs on mineral properties,
meet its ongoing levels of corporate overhead and discharge its future liabilities as they come due.
Some of the Company’s mineral properties are being acquired
over time by way of option payments. It is at the Company’s option as to whether to continue with the acquisition of the
mineral properties and to incur these option payments.
Mineral Property Projects
As of August 31, 2017, amounts capitalized in respect of mineral
properties were $46,920,303, being an increase from August 31, 2016 when the balance was $45,802,858.
During the fiscal year ended August 31, 2017, the Company capitalized
mineral property exploration costs of $1,242,162 on its mineral resource properties, compared to fiscal 2016 when the Company capitalized
mineral property exploration costs of $1,168,935.
For information on the Company’s commitments for property
and rental payments, refer to Item 4.
C. Research and Development, Patents and
License, etc.
Not applicable.
D. Trend Information
No known trend.
E. Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
The Company has no material off balance sheet arrangements that
have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on the Company’s financial condition.
F. Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations
The Company has no contractual obligations as of the latest fiscal
year end.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Directors, Senior Management and Employees
|
A. Directors and Senior Management
Directors and
Senior Management
A. Directors and Senior Management
The following is a list of the Company’s current directors
and officers. The directors named below were elected or re-elected by the Company’s shareholders on March 16, 2016. There
are no family relationships between the directors and officers.
|
Name, Municipality of Residence and Position With the Company
|
Principal occupation or employment and, if not a previously elected director, occupation during the past 5 years
|
Served as a Director Continuously Since
|
Jeffrey Duval
Sharon, Connecticut
Acting Chief Executive Officer
|
Acting CEO of the Company
|
Officer only
|
James E. Sinclair
Sharon, Connecticut
President and Director
|
President and Director, former CEO of the Company
|
April 30, 2002
|
Dr. Norman Betts
Fredericton, New Brunswick
Director
|
Associate Professor, Faculty of Business Administration, University of New Brunswick and a Chartered Professional Accountant
|
January 4, 2005
|
William Harvey
Sharon, Connecticut
Director
|
Psychologist
|
April 30, 2002
|
Rosalind Morrow
Toronto, Ontario
Director
|
Lawyer; Partner, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
|
October 20, 2003
|
Ulrich E. Rath
Toronto, Ontario
Director
|
Formerly President and CEO and Director of Chariot Resources Ltd.
|
October 7, 2003
|
Marco Guidi
Toronto, Ontario
Chief Financial Officer
|
Chartered Professional Accountant, currently serving as Chief Financial Officer, Controller and Accountant for a number of junior mining companies.
|
Officer only
|
Donna M. Moroney
Vancouver, BC
Corporate Secretary
|
President and Owner of Wiklow Corporate Services Inc.
|
Officer only
|
Directors and Senior Management
James E. Sinclair
,
President and Director, former Chief
Executive Officer
Mr. Sinclair is the President and Directror, former CEO of the Company.
Mr. Sinclair, age 74, devotes his full time to the business and affairs of the Company.
Mr. Sinclair is a precious metals specialist, commodities and foreign
currency trader, and a respected minerals industry executive. He founded the Sinclair Group of Companies in 1977 which offered
full brokerage services in stocks, bonds, and other investment vehicles. The companies, which operated branches in New York, Kansas
City, Toronto, Chicago, London and Geneva, were sold in 1983. From 1981 to 1984, Mr. Sinclair served as a Precious Metals Advisor
to Hunt Oil and the Hunt family for the liquidation of their silver position as a prerequisite for a $1 billion loan arranged by
the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker. He was also a General Partner and Member of the Executive Committee of two New
York Stock Exchange firms and President of Sinclair Global Clearing Corporation and Global Arbitrage, a derivative dealer in metals
and currencies.
Mr. Sinclair has authored numerous magazine articles and three books
dealing with a variety of investment subjects including precious metals, trading strategies and geopolitical events, and their
relationship to world economics and the markets. He maintains a high public profile and his commentary on gold and other financial
issues garners extensive media attention at home and abroad. Mr. Sinclair is Executive Chairman of the Advisory Board to the Singapore
Precious Metals Exchange, a physical metal exchange.
Jeffrey Duval
,
Acting Chief Executive Officer
Jeffrey Duval, Mr. Duval is a licensed General Engineering Contractor with over a quarter-century
of experience working with several construction firms in the US south-west. His experience in corporate executive management, project
development, project estimation and management, time-management, excavation, movement of material, earthworks, and related skills
is a valuable asset to the Company as it aggressively moves to monetize the in-ground assets on its various licenses. Mr. Duval’s
management skills, efforts and involvement were instrumental in the Company furthering its planned objectives over the past 12
months. Mr. Duval age 55 devotes 100% of his time in the roll of Acting Chief Executive Officer for the Company.
Dr. Norman Betts
, Ph.D.,
Director
Dr. Betts is an associate professor, Faculty of Business Administration,
University of New Brunswick (UNB) and a Chartered Accountant Fellow (FCA). Dr. Betts serves as a Chair of the board of directors
of Starfield Resources Inc. and as a director and member of the audit committees of Tembec Inc., New Brunswick Power Corporation,
Export Development Canada and Adex Mining Inc. In June, Dr. Betts was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Bank of Canada.
He is also a co-chair of the board of trustees of the UNB Pension Plan for Academic Employees. He is a former Finance Minister
and Minister of Business New Brunswick with the Province of New Brunswick. He was awarded a PhD in Management from the School of
Business at Queen’s University in 1992. Dr. Betts, age 61, devotes approximately 10% of his time to the business and affairs
of the Company.
Dr. William Harvey
, B.A., Ph.D.,
Director
Dr. Harvey is a Clinical Psychologist, who for over thirty years
has served as a consultant and technical expert on matters relating to substance abuse prevention and mental health promotion to
a wide variety of private and governmental programs and agencies in the United States. These include the National Institute of
Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, the Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention,
and the National Mental Health Association. He was an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Sociology at Washington University,
and a Senior Research Scientist at the Missouri Institute of Mental Health, University of Missouri. He continues to be involved
in the formulation of new programs and policies aimed at the betterment of society. Dr. Harvey will continue to expand the
role which the Company has at the local level to ensure that stakeholder interests are addressed. Dr. Harvey, age 82, devotes
approximately 10% of his time to the business and affairs of the Company.
Rosalind Morrow
, B.A., B.Ed., A.R.C.T, LL.B.,
Director
A graduate of Trinity College, Toronto, the Royal Conservatory of
Music of Toronto and the University of Toronto Law School, Ms. Morrow specializes in corporate and securities law with a particular
emphasis on financings, including government and structured finance, corporate governance and mergers and acquisitions. She has
advised Canadian and international corporations on a number of major projects in the financial, communications and resource sectors.
Ms. Morrow is a former member of the Securities Advisory Committee to the Ontario Securities Commission. Since the inception of
the program in 2001, Ms. Morrow has been lead external counsel to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation on over $250 billion
in fully underwritten global bond issuances under its Canada Mortgage Bond Program, and since 2008 has represented the Canadian
federal government on its $125 billion Insured Mortgage Purchase Program, the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. TARP Program. A past
president of the Women’s Law Association of Ontario and recipient of its President’s Award, Ms. Morrow currently serves
on the Board of Governors of Trent University
where she is a member of its Executive Committee
and Chair of its Nominating and Governance Committee
. She is also Chair of The Living City Foundation, the charitable arm
of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, one of the largest environmental organizations in North America, dedicated to
the preservation of a green environment in the Toronto region. Ms. Morrow, age 61, devotes approximately 10% of her time to the
business and affairs of the Company.
Ulrich E. Rath
,
Director
Mr. Rath has a wide range of experience in the mining industry,
and has specific experience in North America, South America including Argentina, Chile and Peru and in South Africa. Mr. Rath was
the President and CEO and Director of Chariot Resources Ltd., a junior resource company focused on the exploration, acquisition
and development of copper and precious metal mineral deposits in the Andes region of Latin America. In June 2010, Mr. Rath
facilitated the sale of Chariot Resources following a global auction. The sale was approved by over 98% of the shareholders
of Chariot Resources. As the former President, CEO and Director of Chimera Gold Corp.
(previously
known as EAGC Ventures),
Ulrich Rath was responsible for facilitating the $US67 million acquisition of gold operations in
the East Rand region of South Africa that now produce more than 200,000 ounces gold per annum. Subsequently, the Board of Chimera
agreed to a 1:1 merger with Bema Gold Corp. He was formerly CEO and director of Compania Minera Milpo,
a
medium sized Peruvian zinc mining company.
Mr. Rath was also formerly Vice-President, Corporate Development,
for Rio Algom Ltd. from December 1992 to October 1998. Rio Algom Ltd. was a U.S. reporting issuer, whose common shares were
listed on the American Stock Exchange. Mr. Rath, age 69, devotes approximately 10% of his time to the business and affairs
of the Company.
Marco Guidi, B.Com (Hons), CPA, CA
,
Chief Financial Officer
Mr. Guidi is a Chartered Professional Accountant and holds an Honours
Bachelor degree in Business Administration from Wilfrid Laurier University. Mr. Guidi began his career with an accounting firm
where he was as an audit supervisor specializing in serving the audit and tax needs of clients in a variety of industries. He has
worked with publicly listed junior mining companies, technology companies, and privately-owned and entrepreneurial companies. In
2010, Mr. Guidi transitioned out of public accounting and is currently serving as Chief Financial Officer, Controller and Accountant
for a number of junior mining companies. Mr. Guidi, age 31, devotes 30% of his time to the business and affairs of the Company.
Donna M. Moroney
,
Corporate Secretary
:
Ms. Moroney has over 30 years of experience in regulatory and corporate
compliance in both Canada and the United States, and as a senior officer of various public companies. As President and owner of
Wiklow Corporate Services Inc. since 2008, she assists companies in the resource, financial and technology sectors in maintaining
the securities and exchange demands on public companies, as well as keeping them up-to-date on relevant issues, policies and working
practices. Ms. Moroney also assists companies reporting in the U.S. in preparing registration statements, quarterly and annual
financial filings and other various facets of meeting U.S. securities requirements. She also leads workshops that provide a practical
guide for public companies in meeting their securities regulatory compliance requirements. She currently serves as a director or
senior officer for seven public companies. Ms. Moroney, age 55, devotes 30% of her time to the business and affairs of the Company.
Cease Trade Orders
No director or executive officer of the Company (or any personal
holding corporation of such persons) is, or was within the ten years prior to the date hereof, a director, chief executive officer
or chief financial officer of any company, including the Company, that:
|
|
(i)
|
was subject to an order (as defined below) that was issued while the director or executive officer
was acting in the capacity as director, chief executive officer, or chief financial officer; or
|
|
|
(ii)
|
was subject to an order (as defined below) that was issued after the director or executive officer
ceased to be a director, chief executive officer or chief financial officer and which resulted from an event that occurred while
that person was acting in the capacity as director, chief executive officer, or chief financial officer.
|
For the purposes of the above disclosure, “order” means:
|
|
(ii)
|
an order similar to a cease trade order; or
|
|
|
(iii)
|
an order that denied the relevant company access to any exemption under securities legislation;
|
that was in effect for a period of more than thirty consecutive
days.
Penalties or Sanctions
Within the past 10 years no directors or executive officers of the
Company, or a shareholder holding a sufficient number of securities of the Company to affect materially the control of the Company
(or any personal holding corporation of such persons), has been subject to:
|
|
(a)
|
any penalties or sanctions imposed by a court relating to Canadian securities legislation or by
a Canadian securities regulatory authority or has entered into a settlement agreement with a Canadian securities regulatory authority;
or
|
|
|
(b)
|
any other penalties or sanctions imposed by a court or regulatory body that would likely be considered
important to a reasonable investor in making an investment decision.
|
Personal Bankruptcies
No director or executive officer of the Company, or a shareholder
holding a sufficient number of securities of the Company to materially affect control of the Company (or any personal holding corporation
of such persons):
|
|
(i)
|
is at the date hereof, or has been within the last ten years, a director or executive officer of
any company that while the person was acting in that capacity, or within a year of that person ceasing to act in that capacity,
became bankrupt, made a proposal under any legislation relating to bankruptcy or insolvency or was subject to or instituted any
proceedings, arrangement, or compromise with creditors, or had a receiver, receiver manager or trustee appointed to hold its assets;
or
|
|
|
(ii)
|
has, within the last ten years, become bankrupt, made a proposal under any legislation relating
to bankruptcy or insolvency, or become subject to or instituted any proceedings, arrangement, or compromise with creditors, or
had a receiver, receiver manager or trustee appointed to hold the assets of the director, executive officer or shareholder
|
Conflicts of Interest
There is no existing material conflict of interest between the Company
or its subsidiaries and a director or executive officer of the Company or its subsidiaries. However, certain directors and officers
of the Company are and may continue to be involved in the mining and mineral exploration industry through their direct and indirect
participation in corporations, partnerships or joint ventures which are potential competitors. Situations may arise in connection
with potential acquisitions and investments where the other interests of these directors and officers may conflict with the interests
of the Company. As required by law, each of the directors of the Company is required to act honestly, in good faith and in the
best interests of the Company. Any conflicts which arise shall be disclosed by the directors and officers in accordance with the
Business Corporations Act
(Alberta) and they will govern themselves in respect thereof to the best of their ability in accordance
with the obligations imposed on them by law.
B. Executive Compensation
Compensation Discussion and Analysis
The adequacy and form of director and officer compensation is reviewed
on an annual basis by the Audit and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (the “
Board
”) of
the Company. The Audit and Compensation Committee recommends to the Board any adjustments to the compensation payable to directors,
officers, and senior staff. The Audit and Compensation Committee is comprised of three directors: Norman Betts (Chair), William
Harvey and Ulrich Rath, all of whom are independent for the purposes of National Instrument 58-101
– Corporate Governance
.
The Audit and Compensation Committee meet to discuss salary matters
as required. Its recommendations are reached primarily by comparison of the remuneration paid by the Company with publicly available
information on remuneration paid by other reporting issuers that the Audit and Compensation Committee feels are similarly placed
within the same stage of business development as the Company. No consultant or advisor has been retained by the Company to assist
in determining compensation.
In assessing the compensation of its executive officers, the Company
does not have in place any formal objectives, criteria or analysis; instead, it relies mainly on the recommendations of the Audit
and Compensation Committee and Board discussion. The Company’s executive compensation program has three principal components:
base salary, incentive bonus plan, and equity compensation plans.
Base salaries for all employees of the Company are established for
each position based on market information obtained through the recruitment process from recruitment consultants and candidates
on an ad hoc basis. The Audit and Compensation Committee familiarizes itself with this market information, but does not employ
a statistical or formal benchmarking approach in making its compensation recommendations. Individual qualifications and experience,
together with the Company’s pay scale and any market information obtained, are considered in determining base compensation
levels.
Equity compensation plans are designed to provide an incentive to
the directors, officers, employees and consultants of the Company to achieve the longer-term objectives of the Company; to give
suitable recognition to the ability and industry of such persons who contribute materially to the success of the Company; and to
attract and retain persons of experience and ability, by providing them with the opportunity to acquire an increased proprietary
interest in the Company. The Company awards equity based compensation to its executive officers and employees, based upon the Board’s
review of the recommendations of the Audit and Compensation Committee. Previous awards of such equity compensation are taken into
account when considering new grants. The Company does not currently have an incentive stock option plan and none is contemplated.
Implementation of a new incentive equity based compensation plans
and amendments to the existing plans are the responsibility of the Company’s Board. The Company’s equity compensation
plans are discussed in more detail below, under the sub-headings, “
Restricted Stock Unit Plan
” and “
Employee
Share Ownership Plan
”.
The Company's Code of Ethics and Business Conduct prohibits directors
and NEOs (defined below) from entering into transactions to hedge or offset a decrease or protect the value of equity securities
of the Company granted as compensation or otherwise directly or indirectly held.
The Company has no other forms of compensation, although payments
may be made from time to time to individuals or companies they control for the provision of consulting services. Such consulting
services are paid for by the Company at competitive industry rates for work of a similar nature by reputable arm’s length
services providers.
The Company is required, under applicable securities legislation
in Canada to disclose to its shareholders details of compensation paid to its named executive officers (a “
named executive
officer
” or “
NEO
”). A named executive officer as defined in Form 51-102F6 –
Statement
of Executive Compensation
, prescribed by National Instrument 51-102 -
Continuous Disclosure Obligations
, means an individual
who, at any time during the year, was:
|
|
(a)
|
the Company’s chief executive officer (“
CEO
”);
|
|
|
(b)
|
the Company’s chief financial officer (“
CFO
”);
|
|
|
(c)
|
each of the Company’s three most highly compensated executive officers, or the three most
highly compensated individuals acting in a similar capacity, other than the CEO and CFO, at the end of the most recently completed
financial year and whose total compensation will be, individually, more than $150,000 for that financial year; and
|
|
|
(d)
|
each individual who would be a NEO under paragraph (c) but for the fact that the individual was
neither an executive officer of the Company, nor acting in a similar capacity, at the end of the most recently completed financial
year.
|
Based on the foregoing definition, the Company had six NEOs
for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2017: Jeffrey Duval, Acting CEO, James E. Sinclair, President and Director,
former CEO; Joseph Kahama, former Chairman and COO (Tanzania); Marco Guidi, CFO, Corporate Accountant, Peter Zizhou, General
Manager and Donna M. Moroney, Corporate Secretary.
The following tables set forth particulars concerning the compensation
of the named executive officers for the Company’s last three fiscal years ended August 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Summary Compensation Table
Name and Principal
Position
|
Year
|
Salary
($)
|
Share-based awards
($)
|
Option-
based
awards
($)
|
Non-
equity
incentive
plan
compen-
sation
($)
|
Pension
Value
($)
|
All other
compen-
sation
($)
|
Total
compen-
sation
($)
|
|
Annual
incentive
plans
(RSU)
|
Long
term
incen-
tive
plans
(ESOP)
|
Jeffrey Duval
,
Acting CEO
|
2017
2016
2015
|
222,378
(1)
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
460,000
(12)
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
682,378
Nil
Nil
|
James Sinclair
,
President and Director, former CEO
|
2017
2016
2015
|
167,624
(1)
104,987
(2)
94,395
(3)
|
Nil
Nil
206,123
(5)
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
138,000
12)
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
167,624
104,987
300,518
|
|
Joseph Kahama
,
(6)
Former Chairman and COO (Tanzania)
|
2017
2016
2015
|
Nil
65,975
(2)
125,323
(3)
|
Nil
Nil
206,123
(7)
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
65,975
331,446
|
Marco Guidi
,
(9)
CFO
|
2017
2016
2015
|
75,000
75,000
77,375
|
Nil
Nil
N/A
|
Nil
Nil
N/A
|
27,600
12)
Nil
N/A
|
Nil
Nil
N/A
|
Nil
Nil
N/A
|
Nil
Nil
N/A
|
102,500
75,000
77,375
|
Donna M. Moroney
,
Corporate Secretary
|
2017
2016
2015
|
60,000
60,000
60,000
|
Nil
24,100
(10)
N/A
|
Nil
Nil
N/A
|
13,800
12)
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
60,000
84,100
60,000
|
Peter Zizhou
,
(11)
General Manager
|
2017
2016
2015
|
213,746
214,958
(2)
88,017
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
Nil
N/A
N/A
|
213,746
214,958
88,017
|
|
(1)
|
US$ exchange average for the
year = $1.3205.
|
|
(2)
|
US$ exchange average for the year = $1.3269.
|
|
(3)
|
US$ exchange average for the year = $1.2092.
|
|
(4)
|
US$ exchange = 1.00.
|
|
(5)
|
Valued at $4.89 per RSU granted on April
11, 2012.
|
|
(6)
|
Mr. Kahama resigned as a director, Chairman
and COO (Tanzania) on February 6, 2016.
|
|
(7)
|
Valued at $6.28 per RSU granted on May
6, 2011.
|
|
(8)
|
Valued at $2.72 per RSU granted on July
3, 2013.
|
|
(9)
|
Marco Guidi was appointed as CFO on December
31, 2014.
|
|
(10)
|
Valued at $2.41 per RSU granted on September
5, 2014.
|
|
(11)
|
Peter Zizhou was appointed as General
Manager on March 21, 2015.
|
|
(12)
|
Valued using the Black-Scholes model with
the following variables: volatility – 84%,, life – 9 years, risk free rate – 0.95%, dividend yield –
0%.
|
Compensation is determined by the Audit and Compensation Committee
as set out under “
Compensation Discussion and Analysis
”. Salary compensation is not tied to a named executive
officer’s individual performance, however the grant of restricted share units (“
RSUs
”) may be.
The grant date fair value of RSUs is based on the closing price of the Company’s shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange (the
“
TSX
”) on the date of grant. All Employee Share Ownership Plan (“
ESOP
”) share
purchases are at market prices at the time of each monthly purchase, through the facilities of the TSX using registered representatives.
See “
Restricted Stock Unit Plan
” and “
Employee Share Ownership Plan
” below for more information.
Incentive Plan Awards
Outstanding share-based awards and option-based
awards
|
Option-based Awards
|
Share-based Awards
|
|
Name
|
Year
|
Number of securities underlying unexercised options
|
Option exercise price
|
Option expiration date
|
Value of unexercised in-the-money RSUs
|
Number of shares or units of shares that have not vested
|
Market or payout value of share-based awards that have not vested
|
|
(#)
|
($)
|
($)
|
(#)
|
($)
|
|
Jeffrey Duval
,
|
2017
|
1,000,000
|
$0.71
|
Nov. 28, 2025
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
Acting CEO
|
2016
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
|
2015
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
36,750
(1)
|
75,000
|
36,750
|
|
James Sinclair
,
|
2017
|
300,000
|
$0.71
|
Nov. 28, 2025
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
President and Director,
|
2016
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
former
CEO
|
2015
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
36,750
(1)
|
75,000
|
36,750
|
|
Joseph Kahama
,
|
2017
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
Former Chairman and
|
2016
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
COO
(Tanzania)
|
2015
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
36,750
(1)
|
75,000
|
36,750
|
|
Marco Guidi,
|
2017
|
60,000
|
$0.71
|
Nov. 28, 2025
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
CFO
|
2016
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
|
2015
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
24,500
|
50,000
|
24,500
|
|
Donna M. Moroney
,
|
2017
|
30,000
|
$0.71
|
Nov. 28, 2025
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
Corporate Secretary
|
2016
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
|
2015
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
4,900
|
10,000
|
4,900
|
|
Peter Zizhou,
|
2017
|
Nil
|
|
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
General Manager
|
2016
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Nil
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
|
2015
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
24,500
|
50,000
|
24,500
|
(1)
Valued at $0.49 per RSU granted on April 8, 2015.
Incentive plan awards – Value vested
or earned during the year
|
Name
|
Option-based awards – Value vested during the year
($)
|
Share-based awards – Value vested during the year
($)
|
Non-equity incentive plan compensation – Value earned during
the year
($)
|
Jeffrey
Duval
,
Acting CEO
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
James Sinclair
,
President and Director, former CEO
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Joseph Kahama
,
Former Chairman and COO (Tanzania)
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Marco Guidi
CFO
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Donna M. Moroney
,
Corporate Secretary
|
Nil
|
24,100
|
Nil
|
Peter Zizhou,
General Manager
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Long Term Incentive Plan Awards to NEOs
The Company has made long-term incentive plan awards during the
fiscal year ended August 31, 2017 to NEOs of the Company. See “
Restricted Stock Unit Plan
” and “
Employee
Share Ownership Plan
” below.
Restricted Stock Unit Plan
The Restricted Stock Unit Plan (“
RSU Plan
”)
is intended to enhance the Company’s and its affiliates’ abilities to attract and retain highly qualified officers,
directors, key employees and other persons, and to motivate such officers, directors, key employees and other persons to serve
the Company and its affiliates and to expend maximum effort to improve the business results and earnings of the Company, by providing
to such persons an opportunity to acquire or increase a direct proprietary interest in the operations and future success of the
Company. To this end, the RSU Plan provides for the grant of RSUs. Each RSU represents an entitlement to one common share of the
Company, upon vesting.
Any of these awards of RSUs may, but need not, be made as performance
incentives to reward attainment of annual or long-term performance goals in accordance with the terms of the RSU Plan. Any such
performance goals are specified in the agreement between the Company and the recipient governing the award. The Board implemented
the RSU Plan under which employees and directors are compensated for their services to the Company. See “
Director Compensation
.”
On April 26, 2011, the Company’s
RSU Plan was amended as the RSU Plan expressly excluded the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company from participating
in the RSU Plan. As the joint office of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company no longer exists, and was replaced
by two new positions, being President and Chief Executive Officer and Chairman and Chief Operating Officer (Tanzania), the Board
determined that it would be in keeping with the objects of the RSU Plan and in the best interests of the Company that
each
of the offices of President and Chief Executive Officer and Chairman and Chief Operating Officer (Tanzania) be unambiguously included
in the category of Service Providers eligible to receive awards of RSUs under the RSU Plan, and that the wording of the RSU Plan
be amended as required to effect such result (as so amended, the “
Amended RSU Plan
”). The Amended RSU
Plan was presented to shareholders and approved at the Company’s annual general and special
meeting held on March 1, 2012.
As of November 9, 2012, the Board resolved to suspend 1,500,000
common shares of the 2,500,000 common shares previously authorized for issuance under the RSU Plan, such that a maximum of 1,000,000
shares shall be authorized for issuance under the RSU Plan, until such suspension may be lifted or further amended. Subsequently,
on January 9, 2014, the Board resolved to decrease the number of common shares suspended to 1,200,000 common shares and on September
29, 2015 the number of RSUs suspended was decreased to 800,000 so that a maximum of 1,700,000 common shares be authorized for issuance
under the RSU Plan.
RSUs Granted to Directors and Named Executive Officers During the Fiscal Year Ended
August 31, 2017:
There were no RSUs granted to directors and Named Executive Officers during the fiscal
year ended August 31, 2017.
The following RSUs granted to directors and officers during the
fiscal years ended August 31, 2015, August 31, 2014 and August 31, 2013 vested during fiscal year ended August 31, 2017:
|
Name
|
Date of Grant
|
No. of Shares
|
Cash Compensation Election
|
Vesting Period
|
Expiration Date
|
|
Rosalind Morrow
|
April 8, 2015
|
168,367
(1)
|
$82,500
|
3 years
|
April 8, 2018
|
|
Ulrich Rath
|
April 8, 2015
|
77,168
(1)
|
$37,812
|
3 years
|
April 8, 2018
|
|
Norman Betts
|
April 8, 2015
|
87,883
(1)
|
$43,063
|
3 years
|
April 8, 2018
|
|
William Harvey
|
April 8, 2015
|
77,168
(1)
|
$37,812
|
3 years
|
April 8, 2018
|
|
Norman Betts
|
April 9, 2014
|
15,949
(2)
|
$43,062
|
3 years
|
April 9, 2017
|
|
William Harvey
|
April 9, 2014
|
14,004
(2)
|
$37,811
|
3 years
|
April 9, 2017
|
|
James Sinclair
|
April 9, 2014
|
76,296
(2)
|
$205,999
|
3 years
|
April 9, 2017
|
|
Rosalind Morrow
|
April 9, 2014
|
12,731
(2)
|
$34,374
|
3 years
|
April 9, 2017
|
|
James Sinclair
|
April 10, 2013
|
57,577
(3)
|
$206,126
|
3 years
|
April 10, 2016
|
|
Rosalind Morrow
|
April 10, 2013
|
9,602
(3)
|
$34,375
|
3 years
|
April 10, 2016
|
|
Norman Betts
|
April 10, 2013
|
11,470
(3)
|
$41,063
|
3 years
|
April 10, 2016
|
|
|
(1)
|
Valued
at $0.49 per RSU
|
|
|
(2)
|
Valued
at $2.70 per RSU
|
|
|
(3)
|
Valued
at $3.58 per RSU
|
RSUs Granted to Directors and Named Executive Officers During the Fiscal Year Ended
August 31, 2016:
There were no RSUs granted to directors and Named Executive Officers during the fiscal
year ended August 31, 2016.
The following RSUs granted to directors and officers during the
fiscal year ended August 31, 2013 vested during fiscal year ended August 31, 2016:
|
Name
|
Date of Grant
|
No. of Shares
(1)
|
Cash Compensation Election
|
Vesting Period
|
Expiration Date
|
|
Rosalind Morrow
|
April 10, 2013
|
9,602
|
$34,375
|
3 years
|
April 10, 2016
|
|
Norman Betts
|
April 10, 2013
|
11,470
|
$38,000
|
3 years
|
April 10, 2016
|
|
|
(4)
|
Valued
at $3.58 per RSU
|
The following RSUs granted to directors and officers during the
fiscal year ended August 31, 2015 vested during fiscal year ended August 31, 2016 (shares have not yet been issued):
|
Name
|
Date of Grant
|
No. of Shares
(1)
|
Cash Compensation Election
|
Vesting Period
|
Expiration Date
|
|
Ulrich Rath
|
April 8, 2015
|
77,168
|
$37,812
|
1 year
|
April 8, 2016
|
|
Rosalind Morrow
|
April 8, 2015
|
168,367
|
$Nil
|
1 year
|
April 8, 2016
|
|
|
(5)
|
Valued
at $0.49 per RSU
|
Outstanding RSUs
RSUs granted to directors and executive officers during fiscal year
2015 are outstanding as of August 31, 2017.
Employee Share Ownership Plan
By an agreement dated May 1, 2003, the Company appointed Computershare
Trust Company (formerly Olympia Trust Company), as trustee (the “
Trustee
”) to manage and administer the
Company’s ESOP. Under the ESOP, eligible employees, directors, and consultants can elect to contribute up to 30% of their
salary or compensation on a monthly basis for investment by the Trustee in shares of the Company. The Company will contribute funds
equal to 100% of the employee’s contribution up to an amount equal to 5% or less of the employee’s salary. The Company
will contribute funds equal to 50% of the employee’s contribution for the next 6% to 30% inclusive of the employee’s
salary. All share purchases are at market prices at the time of purchase, through the facilities of the TSX using registered representatives.
Due to market conditions and the resultant decline in the Company’s share price, all contributions to the ESOP were suspended
as of October 1, 2014.
Pension Plan Benefits
The Company has not set aside or accrued
any funds for pension, retirement or similar benefits.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information regarding compensation
plans under which securities of the Company are authorized for issuance in effect as of the end of the Company’s most recently
completed financial year end:
|
|
Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding RSUs
|
Weighted average exercise price of outstanding RSUs
|
Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a))
|
|
Plan Category
|
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders (Restricted Stock Unit Plan)
|
520,000
|
$0.49
|
0
|
|
Total
|
520,000
|
$0.49
|
0
|
Director Compensation
Director Compensation Table
The following table sets forth the value of all compensation provided
to directors not including those directors who are also NEOs, for the Company’s most recently completed financial year:
|
Name
|
Fees Earned
($)
|
RSUs granted
(1)
(#)
|
Cash Compensation Election
($)
|
All Other Compensation
($)
|
Total
($)
|
|
Norman Betts
|
36,000
|
Nil
|
36,000
|
46,000
|
82,000
|
|
William Harvey
|
37,813
|
Nil
|
37,813
|
46,000
|
83,813
|
|
Rosalind Morrow
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
46,000
|
46,000
|
|
Abdulkarim Mruma
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Ulrich Rath
|
37,813
|
Nil
|
37,813
|
460,000
|
497,813
|
Directors who are also members of management do not receive any
additional cash compensation for serving on the Board. All directors are granted RSUs as compensation for serving on the Company’s
Board. Please see the table entitled “
RSUs Granted to Directors and Named Executive Officers During the Fiscal Year Ended
August 31, 2015
” under “
Restricted Stock Unit Plan
” above.
Annual compensation for outside directors is $68,750 per year, plus
$6,875 per year for serving on Committees, plus $3,437.50 per year for serving as Chair of a Committee. On April 11, 2012, the
Board approved that at the election of each individual director, up to one half of the annual compensation may be received in cash,
paid quarterly. The remainder of the director’s annual compensation (at least one half and up to 100%) will be awarded as
RSUs in accordance with the terms of the RSU Plan and shall vest within a minimum of one year and a maximum of three years, at
the election of the director, subject to the conditions of the Amended RSU Plan with respect to earlier vesting. In 2016, outside
directors had the option to elect to receive 100% of their compensation in RSUs. If 100% compensation in RSUs is elected, the compensation
on which the number of RSUs granted in excess of the required one half shall be increased by 20%.
There were no RSUs granted to the directors under the Amended RSU
Plan during the fiscal year ended August 31, 2017.
Termination and Change of Control Benefits
There are currently no contracts for outside management services.
There are currently no employment contracts in place whereby any person is entitled to termination or change of control benefits.
C. Board Practices
The directors of the Company serve a one year term and are elected
at the annual general meeting of shareholders. At the last annual general meeting, held on March 16, 2016, the shareholders elected
James Sinclair, William Harvey, Rosalind Morrow, Norman Betts and Ulrich Rath as directors. The officers of the Company are elected
by the Board and serve at the pleasure of the Board.
The Company has an audit committee consisting of Ulrich Rath, William
Harvey and Norman Betts. The roles and responsibilities of the audit committee have been specifically defined as described below
under Audit Committee Information, and include responsibilities for overseeing management reporting on internal control. The
audit committee has direct communication channels with the external auditors.
The Company also has a compensation committee. The audit committee
and compensation committee is collectively referred to as the “
Audit and Compensation Committee
”.
The adequacy and form of director and officer compensation is reviewed
on an annual basis by the Audit and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company. The Audit and Compensation
Committee recommends to the Board any adjustments to the compensation payable to directors, officers, and senior staff. The Audit
and Compensation Committee is comprised of three directors: Norman Betts (Chair), William Harvey and Ulrich Rath, all of whom are
independent for the purposes of National Instrument 58-101
– Corporate Governance
. The Audit and Compensation Committee
meet to discuss salary matters as required. Its recommendations are reached primarily by comparison of the remuneration paid by
the Company with publicly available information on remuneration paid by other reporting issuers that the Audit and Compensation
Committee feels are similarly placed within the same stage of business development as the Company.
The Company also has a nominating committee (the “
Nominating
Committee
”) comprised of Ulrich Rath, William Harvey and Norman Betts. The Nominating Committee considers the size
of the Board each year when it considers the number of directors to recommend to shareholders for election at the annual meeting
of shareholders, taking into account the number required to carry out the Board’s duties effectively and to maintain a diversity
of view and experience. When a vacancy on the Board arises, the independent directors of the Nominating Committee will be encouraged
to bring forward any potential nominees that have the necessary skills and knowledge to serve on the Company’s Board.
The Company has a technical committee (“
Technical Committee
”)
currently comprised of Ulrich Rath, Peter Zizhou and Jeff Duval. The Technical Committee has approved a Technical Committee Manual
defining Composition and Terms of Reference. Among other things, the Technical Committee reviews with management any exploration,
geological, mining, metallurgical and other technical issues and reviews technical and financial issues associated with new and
existing projects that require Board approval with respect to their technical and financial impact on the Company. The Technical
Committee reports directly to the Board of Directors.
AUDIT COMMITTEE INFORMATION
Under National Instrument 52-110 – Audit Committees (“
NI
52-110
”) reporting issuers are required to provide disclosure with respect to its Audit Committee including the text
of the Audit Committee’s Charter, composition of the Committee, and the fees paid to the external auditor. Accordingly, the
Company provides the following disclosure with respect to its Audit Committee:
|
|
1.
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee’s Charter
|
|
|
1.0
|
Purpose of the Committee
|
|
|
1.1
|
The purpose of the Audit and Compensation Committee is to assist the Board in its oversight
of the integrity of the Company's financial statements and other relevant public disclosures, the Company's compliance with legal
and regulatory requirements relating to financial reporting, the external auditors' qualifications and independence and the performance
of the internal audit function and the external auditors.
|
|
|
2.1
|
The adequacy and form of director and officer compensation is reviewed on an annual basis by
the Board. The Audit and Compensation Committee recommends to the Board any adjustments to the compensation payable to directors,
officers, and senior staff. The Audit and Compensation Committee meet to discuss salary and bonus incentive matters as required.
|
|
|
3.0
|
Members of the Audit and Compensation Committee
|
|
|
3.1
|
All of the members of the Audit and Compensation Committee must be "financially literate"
as defined under NI 52-110, Audit Committees, having sufficient accounting or related financial management expertise to read and
understand a set of financial statements, including the related notes, that present a breadth and level of complexity of the accounting
issues that are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of the issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by
the Company's financial statements.
|
|
|
3.2
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee shall consist of no less than three Directors.
|
|
|
3.3
|
All of the members of the Audit and Compensation Committee shall be "independent"
as defined under NI 52-110.
|
|
|
4.0
|
Relationship with External Auditors
|
|
|
4.1
|
The external auditors are the independent representatives of the shareholders, but the external
auditors are also accountable to the Board of Directors and the Audit and Compensation Committee.
|
|
|
4.2
|
The external auditors must be able to complete their audit procedures and reviews with professional
independence, free from any undue interference from the management or directors.
|
|
|
4.3
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee must direct and ensure that the management fully co-operates
with the external auditors in the course of carrying out their professional duties.
|
|
|
4.4
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will have direct communications access at all times with
the external auditors.
|
|
|
4.5
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will ensure the rotation of the lead (or coordinating)
audit partner having primary responsibility for the audit and the audit partner responsible for reviewing the audit as required
by law.
|
|
|
4.6
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will recommend to the Board of Directors policies for the
Company’s hiring of employees or former employees of the external auditors who participated in any capacity in the audit
of the Company.
|
|
|
5.1
|
The external auditors are prohibited from providing any non-audit services to the Company, without
the express written consent of the Audit and Compensation Committee. In determining whether the external auditors will be granted
permission to provide non-audit services to the Company, the Audit and Compensation Committee must consider that the benefits to
the Company from the provision of such services, outweighs the risk of any compromise to or loss of the independence of the external
auditors in carrying out their auditing mandate.
|
|
|
5.2
|
Notwithstanding section 5.1, the external auditors are prohibited at all times from carrying
out any of the following services, while they are appointed the external auditors of the Company:
|
|
|
(i)
|
acting as an agent of the Company for the sale of all or substantially all of the undertaking
of the Company; and
|
|
|
(ii)
|
performing any non-audit consulting work for any director or senior officer of the Company in
their personal capacity, but not as a director, officer or insider of any other entity not associated or related to the Company.
|
|
|
6.0
|
Appointment of Auditors
|
|
|
6.1
|
The external auditors will be appointed each year by the shareholders of the Company at the
annual general meeting of the shareholders.
|
|
|
6.2
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will nominate the external auditors for appointment, such
nomination to be approved by the Board of Directors.
|
|
|
7.0
|
Evaluation of Auditors
|
|
|
7.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will review the performance of the external auditors on
at least an annual basis, and notify the Board and the external auditors in writing of any concerns in regards to the performance
of the external auditors, or the accounting or auditing methods, procedures, standards, or principles applied by the external auditors,
or any other accounting or auditing issues which come to the attention of the Audit and Compensation Committee.
|
|
|
8.0
|
Remuneration of the Auditors
|
|
|
8.1
|
The remuneration of the external auditors will be determined by the Board of Directors, upon
the annual authorization of the shareholders at each general meeting of the shareholders.
|
|
|
8.2
|
The remuneration of the external auditors will be determined based on the time required to complete
the audit and preparation of the audited financial statements, and the difficulty of the audit and performance of the standard
auditing procedures under generally accepted auditing standards and generally accepted accounting principles of Canada.
|
|
|
9.0
|
Termination of the Auditors
|
|
|
9.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee has the power to terminate the services of the external
auditors, with or without the approval of the Board of Directors, acting reasonably.
|
|
|
10.0
|
Funding of Auditing and Consulting Services
|
|
|
10.1
|
Auditing expenses will be funded by the Company. The auditors must not perform any other consulting
services for the Company, which could impair or interfere with their role as the independent auditors of the Company.
|
|
|
11.0
|
Role and Responsibilities of the Internal Auditor
|
|
|
11.1
|
At this time, due to the Company's size and limited financial resources, the Chief Financial
Officer of the Company shall be responsible for implementing internal controls and performing the role as the internal auditor
to ensure that such controls are adequate.
|
|
|
12.0
|
Oversight of Internal Controls
|
|
|
12.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will have the oversight responsibility for ensuring that
the internal controls are implemented and monitored, and that such internal controls are effective.
|
|
|
13.0
|
Continuous Disclosure Requirements
|
|
|
13.1
|
At this time, due to the Company's size and limited financial resources, the Chief Financial
Officer of the Company is responsible for ensuring that the Company's continuous reporting requirements are met and in compliance
with applicable regulatory requirements.
|
|
|
14.0
|
Other Auditing Matters
|
|
|
14.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee may meet with the Auditors independently of the management
of the Company at any time, acting reasonably.
|
|
|
14.2
|
The Auditors are authorized and directed to respond to all enquiries from the Audit and Compensation
Committee in a thorough and timely fashion, without reporting these enquiries or actions to the Board of Directors or the management
of the Company.
|
|
|
15.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee Charter will be reviewed annually by the Board of Directors
and the Audit and Compensation Committee to assess the adequacy of this Charter.
|
|
|
16.0
|
Independent Advisers
|
|
|
16.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee shall have the power to retain legal, accounting or other
advisors to assist the Committee.
|
|
|
17.0
|
Reports of Fraud and Misconduct
|
|
|
17.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will review, investigate and evaluate all reports of fraud
and misconduct. Refer to the Company’s Whistle Blower Policy and Procedures.
|
|
|
18.0
|
Changes in Accounting Policies
|
|
|
18.1
|
The Audit and Compensation Committee will review and maintain Accounting Policies including
the selection, documentation and changes in Accounting Policies.
|
|
|
19.0
|
Nominating Committee
|
|
|
19.1
|
The Nominating Committee considers the size of the Board of Directors each year when it considers
the number of directors to recommend to shareholders for election at the annual meeting of shareholders, taking into account the
number required to carry out the Board’s duties effectively and to maintain a diversity of view and experience. When a vacancy
on the Board arises, the independent directors of the Nominating Committee will be encouraged to bring forward any potential nominees
that have the necessary skills and knowledge to serve on the Company’s Board.
|
2. Composition of the Audit and Compensation
Committee
Following are the members of the Audit and Compensation Committee:
|
|
Norman Betts (Chair)
|
Independent
(1)
|
Financial expert
(3)
|
|
|
Ulrich Rath
|
Independent
(1)
|
Financially literate
(2)
|
|
|
William Harvey
|
Independent
(1)
|
Financially literate
(2)
|
|
|
(1)
|
A
member of an audit committee is independent if the member has no direct or indirect material
relationship with the Company, which could, in the view of the Board of Directors, reasonably
interfere with the exercise of a member’s independent judgment.
|
|
|
(2)
|
An
individual is financially literate if he has the ability to read and understand a set
of financial statements that present a breadth of complexity of accounting issues that
are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of the issues that can reasonably
be expected to be raised by the Company’s financial statements.
|
|
|
(3)
|
An
Audit Committee Financial Expert must possess five attributes: (i) an understanding of
GAAP and financial statements; (ii) the ability to assess the general application of
such principles in connection with the accounting for estimates, accruals and reserves;
(iii) experience preparing auditing, analyzing or evaluating financial statements that
present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are generally comparable
to the breadth and complexity of issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised
by the registrant’s financial statements, or experience actively supervising one
or more persons engaged in such activities; (iv) an understanding of internal controls
and procedures for financial reporting; and (v) an understanding of audit committee functions.
|
3. Relevant Education
and Experience
Dr. Betts is the Chair of the Committee. He is the former Minister
of Finance of New Brunswick and current Associate Professor of Business Administration, University of New Brunswick; Mr. Rath was
the President and CEO of a Canadian resource company; and Dr. William Harvey is a psychologist and businessman.
4.6. Reliance on Certain
Exemptions
At no time since the commencement of the Company’s most recently
completed financial year has the Company relied on the exemption in Section 2.4 of NI 52-110 (De Minimis Non-audit Services), Section
3.3(2) (Controlled Companies), Section 3.6 (Temporary Exemption for Limited and Exceptional Circumstances), or an exemption from
NI 52-110, in whole or in part, granted under Part 8 of National Instrument 52-110. Nor has the Company relied on Section 3.8 (Acquisition
of Financial Literacy) of NI 52-110.
7. Audit and Compensation
Committee Oversight
At no time since the commencement of the Company’s most recently
completed financial year was a recommendation of the Audit and Compensation Committee to nominate or compensate an external auditor
not adopted by the Board of Directors.
8. Pre-Approval Policies
and Procedures
The Audit and Compensation Committee is authorized by the Board
of Directors to review the performance of the Company’s external auditors and approve in advance the provision of services
other than auditing and to consider the independence of the external auditors, including a review of the range of services provided
in the context of all consulting services bought by the Company. The Audit and Compensation Committee is authorized to approve
in writing any non-audit services or additional work which the Chairman of the Audit and Compensation Committee deems is necessary,
and the Chairman will notify the other members of the Audit and Compensation Committee of such non-audit or additional work and
the reasons for such non-audit work for the Committee’s consideration, and if thought fit, approval in writing.
9. External Auditor
Service Fees
The fees billed by the Company’s external auditors in each
of the last two fiscal years for audit and non-audit related services provided to the Company or its subsidiaries are as follows:
|
Financial Year Ending August 31
|
Audit Fees
|
Audit Related Fees
|
Tax Fees
|
All Other Fees
|
|
2017
|
Canada – $80,000
Tanzania - $15,000
|
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
|
|
2016
|
Canada – $88,000
Tanzania - $14,265
|
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
|
Nil
Nil
|
D. Employees
The Company has 3 full time employee located in Sherman, Connecticut,
11 full time employees located in Buckreef, Tanzania, and 1 full time employees located in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
.
The Company also hires employees on a part time or temporary basis
as dictated by the exploration activities on its properties. The full time and temporary employees and consultants of the Company
can be grouped according to main category of activity and geographic location as follows:
|
Location
|
Category
|
Full Time Employees
|
Temporary Employees
|
Full Time Consultants
|
Part Time Consultants
|
|
Buckreef , Tanzania
|
Administration
|
5
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Exploration
|
7
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
|
Administration
|
1
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Exploration
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Connecticut
|
Administration
|
3
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
E. Share Ownership
The following table sets forth the share ownership of our directors
and named executive officers, held by such persons as of August 31, 2017.
|
Name of Owner
|
Number of Shares Owned
|
Percentage
(1)
|
|
Betts, Norman
|
125,799
|
<0.01%
|
|
Guidi, Marco
|
0
|
N/A
|
|
Harvey, William
|
310,424
|
0.25%
|
|
Moroney, Donna
|
12,427
|
<0.01%
|
|
Morrow, Rosalind
|
669,784
|
0.55%
|
|
Rath, Ulrich E.
|
172,003
|
0.14%
|
|
Sinclair, James E.
|
1,987,397
|
1.63%
|
|
All directors and named executive officers as a group
|
3,277,834
|
2.69%
|
|
(1)
|
Calculation
based on 121,784,619 shares of common stock outstanding as of August 31, 2017.
|
The voting rights attached to the common shares owned by our officers
and directors do not differ from those voting rights attached to shares owned by people who are not officers or directors of our
Company.
|
|
Item 7.
|
Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions
|
A. Major Shareholders
As far as it is known to the Company, it is not directly or indirectly
owned or controlled by any other Company or by the Canadian Government, or any foreign government. The Company has no knowledge
of any arrangements which at a subsequent date would result in a change of control. All of the Company’s issued common shares
rank equally as to voting rights, dividends, and any distribution of assets on winding-up or liquidation.
As of August 31, 2017, the Company knows of one shareholder who
beneficially own more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s voting securities as set forth in the following
table:
|
Title of Class
|
Identity of Holder
(2)
|
Amount Owned
|
Percent of Class
(1)
|
|
Common Shares
|
Van Eck Associates Corporation
|
7,486,737
|
6.44%
|
|
|
(1)
|
Based
on the issued and outstanding shares of the Company of 121,784,619 shares as at August
31, 2017.
|
|
|
(2)
|
As
per information provided pursuant to sec. 2.2 of NI 62-103 an Alternative Monthly Report
filed on SEDAR on January 9, 2015.
|
The following table sets out the portion of common shares of the
Company held by registered shareholders in Canada, the United States of America, and all other countries by total number of holders,
total shareholdings, percentage of total issued shares, and percentage of total holders as of August 31, 2017:
|
Jurisdiction of Shareholders of Record
|
Number of Shareholders
|
Number of Common Shares
|
Percentage of Total Issued Shares
|
Percentage of Total Holders
|
|
United States
|
1,438
|
59,159,900
|
48.58%
|
81.52%
|
|
Canada
|
214
|
60,488,060
|
49.67%
|
12.13%
|
|
Other Countries
|
112
|
2,136,659
|
1.75%
|
6.35%
|
|
TOTAL
|
1,764
|
121,784,619
|
100.00%
|
100.00%
|
B. Related Party Transactions
Related parties include the Board of Directors and officers, close
family members and enterprises that are controlled by these individuals as well as certain consultants performing similar functions.
(a) Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation entered into the following
transactions with related parties:
|
Years ended,
|
|
|
Notes
|
|
|
|
August 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
August 31, 2016
|
|
|
Legal services
|
|
|
(i)
|
|
|
$
|
82,455
|
|
|
$
|
10,363
|
|
|
Rent
|
|
|
(ii)
|
|
|
|
$Nil
|
|
|
$
|
15,199
|
|
|
Consulting
|
|
|
(iii)
|
|
|
$
|
203,274
|
|
|
$
|
157,637
|
|
|
Consulting
|
|
|
(iv)
|
|
|
$
|
172,330
|
|
|
$
|
33,838
|
|
(i) The Company engages a legal firm for professional services in
which one of the Company’s directors is a partner. During the year ended August 31, 2017, the legal expense charged by the
firm was $82,455 (2016 - $10,363). As at August 31, 2017, $370,940 remains payable (August 31, 2016 - $327,766).
(ii) During the year ended August 31, 2017, $nil (2016 - $15,199)
was paid to a company associated with the Company’s former Chairman and COO and his spouse for office rental.
(iii) During the year ended August 31, 2017, $203,274 (2016 - $157,637)
was paid for heap leach construction consulting and website/data back-up services to companies controlled by individuals associated
with the former CEO and current director.
(iv) During the year ended August 31, 2017, $172,330 (2016 - $33,838)
was paid for grade control drilling, license fees and other consulting services to Stamico, the Company’s joint venture partner
on the Buckreef Gold Project.
As at August 31, 2017, the Company has a receivable of $37,247 (August
31, 2016 - $3,903) from an organization associated with the Company’s President and former CEO and current director and from
current officers and directors.
As at August 31, 2017, the Company has a receivable of $nil (August
31, 2016 - $5,541) from the former general manager of the Company for amounts advanced on his behalf.
During the year ended August 31, 2015, the Company sold automotive
and mining equipment in the amount of $243,805 to directors of the Company and $333,700 to the Company’s former CEO and current
director for total proceeds of $577,505 as described in Note 5. Pursuant to the agreements, the Company entered into 1-year lease
agreements on the automotive and mining equipment with effective dates in May 2015. Per the terms of the leases, the Company agrees
to purchase back the automotive and mining equipment at the end of the lease periods for a lump sum payment of USD$74,848. The
initial base payments vary between the agreements and range between $3,500 and $8,000 payable monthly. The effective interest rate
on the capital lease obligation outstanding is between 20% and 30%.
On December 1, 2016, the Company entered into settlement agreements
whereby a total of $343,623 in principal and accrued interest was settled through the issuance of 458,329 shares issued
at
an average price of $0.63 per share for total issued value of $288,747, resulting in a gain on settlement of debt of $54,876 for
the year ended August 31, 2017.
As at August 31, 2017, the remaining balance outstanding under finance
lease obligations after the settlements described above is $56,631 (August 31, 2016 - $370,103) and is repayable within 1 year,
as such, the finance lease obligation is classified as a current liability.
(b) Remuneration of Directors and key management personnel (being
the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer) of the Company was as follows:
|
Year ended,
|
|
|
August 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
August 31, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees,
salaries
and
benefits (1)
|
|
|
|
Share
based
payments (2),
(3), (4)
|
|
|
|
Fees,
salaries and
benefits (1)
|
|
|
|
Share
based
payments
(2), (3)
|
|
|
Management
|
|
$
|
525,102
|
|
|
$
|
1,175,439
|
|
|
$
|
245,962
|
|
|
$
|
130,873
|
|
|
Directors
|
|
|
111,625
|
|
|
|
673,200
|
|
|
|
127,375
|
|
|
|
157,813
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
636,727
|
|
|
$
|
1,848,639
|
|
|
$
|
373,337
|
|
|
$
|
288,686
|
|
(1)
Salaries and benefits
include director fees. The board of directors do not have employment or service contracts with the Company. Directors are entitled
to director fees and RSU’s for their services and officers are entitled to cash remuneration and RSU’s for their services.
(2)
Compensation shares
may carry restrictive legends.
(3)
All RSU share based
compensation is based on the accounting expense recorded in the year.
(4)
All stock option
share based compensation is based on the accounting expense recorded in the year.
As at August 31, 2017, included in trade and other payables is $638,000
(August 31, 2016 - $576,000) due to these key management personnel with no specific terms of repayment.
The Company’s former CEO and current director provided various
loans to the Company totaling $133,632. On December 1, 2016, the Company entered into settlement agreements whereby the remaining
balance of $136,519 was settled through the issuance of 187,321 shares issued
at
an average price of $0.705 per share for total issued value of $131,998, resulting in a gain on settlement of debt of $4,521 for
the year ended August 31, 2017.
As at August 31, 2017 $nil (August 31, 2016 - $86,000) is outstanding. The balance is payable
on demand, interest free, and unsecured.
C. Interests of Experts and Counsel
Not applicable.
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial Statements
|
A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial
Information
This Form 20-FAnnual Report contains the audited consolidated financial
statements of the Company for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 with the Report of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm, comprised of:
|
|
(a)
|
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position as of August 31, 2017 and 2016;
|
|
|
(b)
|
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016;
|
|
|
(c)
|
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016;
|
|
|
(d)
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016; and
|
|
|
(e)
|
Notes to
the consolidated financial statements.
|
Dividend Policy
The Company has never paid dividends and does not intend to in the
near future.
Legal Proceedings
The Company is not a party to any material legal proceedings.
B. Significant Changes
None.
|
|
Item 9.
|
The Offering and Listing
|
A. Offering and Listing Details
The common shares of the Company are listed on the
TSX
under
the symbol “TNX”. The common shares of the Company are also listed on the NYSE MKT LLC (“
NYSE MKT
”)
under the symbol “TRX”
As of August 31, 2017, there were 1,438 registered shareholders
in the United States holding 48.58% of the Company’s outstanding common shares, representing approximately 81.52% of the
total number of registered shareholders. The Company’s common shares are issued in registered form and the percentage of
shares reported to be held by registered holders in the United States is taken from the records of the Computershare Trust Company,
the registrar and transfer agent for the Company’s common shares.
The number of registered shareholders resident in the United States
is attributed as to 0.21% to directors and officers of the Company who are United States residents; a further 0.20% held by United
States residents who are immediate family members of a director and officer of the Company; and the balance of 42.80% are
United States residents who have purchased shares in the secondary market, through the facilities of the TSX or NYSE MKT.
The following sets forth the high and low prices
expressed in U.S. Dollars on the NYSE MKT and in Canadian Dollars on the TSX for the past full six months and through August 31,
2017, for each quarter for the past two fiscal years and for the past five years.
|
|
|
NYSE MKT
|
|
TSX
|
|
|
|
(United States Dollars)
|
|
(Canadian Dollars)
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
Last Six Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2017
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
0.33
|
|
|
September 2017
|
|
|
0.33
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.42
|
|
|
|
0.34
|
|
|
August 2017
|
|
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
0.56
|
|
|
|
0.41
|
|
|
July 2017
|
|
|
0.48
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
0.47
|
|
|
June 2017
|
|
|
0.56
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.69
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
May 2017
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Fiscal Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 31, 2017
|
|
|
0.56
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.47
|
|
|
May 31, 2017
|
|
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
|
February 28, 2017
|
|
|
0.63
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.84
|
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
November 30, 2017
|
|
|
1.13
|
|
|
|
0.46
|
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 31, 201
|
|
|
1.49
|
|
|
|
0.39
|
|
|
|
1.95
|
|
|
|
0.51
|
|
|
May 31, 201
|
|
|
0.57
|
|
|
|
0.21
|
|
|
|
0.76
|
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
|
February 29, 201
|
|
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
0.17
|
|
|
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
November 30, 201
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.35
|
|
|
August 31, 201
|
|
|
0.47
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.61
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 31, 2017
|
|
|
1.13
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
|
0.47
|
|
|
August 31, 2016
|
|
|
1.49
|
|
|
|
0.17
|
|
|
|
1.95
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
August 31, 2015
|
|
|
2.45
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
August 31, 2014
|
|
|
4.06
|
|
|
|
1.63
|
|
|
|
4.14
|
|
|
|
1.75
|
|
|
August 31, 2013
|
|
|
5.34
|
|
|
|
2.14
|
|
|
|
5.21
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
B. Plan of Distribution
Not applicable.
C. Markets
The Company’s common shares are listed on the TSX under the
trading symbol “TNX” and on the NYSE MKT under the trading symbol “TRX”.
D. Selling Shareholders
Not applicable.
E. Dilution
Not applicable.
F. Expenses of the Issue
Not applicable.
|
|
Item 10.
|
Additional Information
|
A. Share Capital
The Company’s Restated Articles of Incorporation
authorize the Company to issue an unlimited number of common shares. On December 8, 2014, the Board resolved that the Company authorize
for issuance up to a maximum of 155,000,000 common shares, subject to further resolutions of the Company’s Board of Directors.
As of August 31, 2017, there were 121,784,619 shares common shares issued and outstanding.
Each common share has equal dividend, liquidation and voting rights.
Voters of common shares are entitled to one vote per share on all matters that may be brought before them. Holders of common shares
are entitled to receive dividends when declared by the Board from funds legally available therefor. The common shares are not redeemable,
have no conversion rights and carry no pre-emptive or other rights to subscribe for additional shares. The outstanding common shares
are fully paid and non-assessable.
The following table reconciles the total number of common shares
outstanding for the last three fiscal years:
|
|
No. of Shares
|
$ Amount
|
|
Total Outstanding as of August 31, 2014
|
101,325,880
|
117,153,437
|
|
Add:
Issued pursuant to Restricted Share Unit Plan
|
174,608
|
729,699
|
|
Finders fee on convertible senior note financing
|
400,000
|
264,000
|
|
Shares issued on amendment of convertible senior note financing
|
500,000
|
250,000
|
|
Redemption of convertible senior notes
|
5,010,518
|
1,958,397
|
|
Finder’s fee on loan agreement
|
442,548
|
177,019
|
|
Total Outstanding as of August 31, 2015
|
107,853,554
|
120,532,634
|
|
Add:
Issued pursuant to Restricted Share Unit Plan
|
50,000
|
120,500
|
|
Interest shares on gold loans
|
536,137
|
477,609
|
|
Finder’s fee on loan agreement
|
320,543
|
372,130
|
|
Bonus shares
|
75,000
|
26,250
|
|
Cashless exercise of warrants
|
233,258
|
851,600
|
|
Total Outstanding as of August 31, 2016
|
109,068,492
|
122,380,723
|
|
Add:
Issued for private placements, net of warrants
|
7,197,543
|
(1,094,499)
|
|
Issued pursuant to Restricted Share Unit Plan
|
695,991
|
1,040,990
|
|
Shares issued for interest on gold loans
|
814,089
|
542,447
|
|
Finders fees on convertible loans
|
132,577
|
92,805
|
|
Shares issued for settlement of lease obligations
|
458,329
|
288,747
|
|
Shares issued for amounts due to related parties
|
187,321
|
131,998
|
|
Shares issued for settlement of convertible loans
|
83,333
|
49,166
|
|
Cashless exercise of warrants
|
3,146,944
|
1,742,000
|
|
Total Outstanding as of August 31, 2017
|
121,784,619
|
$ 128,787,377
|
Shares are issued by the Company with the regulatory acceptance
of the Toronto Stock Exchange and NYSE MKT, upon resolution of the Board of Directors of the Company. As of August 31, 2017, there
are a total of 121,784,619 common shares issued and a further 520,000 common shares reserved for issuance under outstanding RSUs,
3,750,000 common shares reserved for issuance under outstanding share purchase options and 4,562,901 reserved for issuance under
share purchase warrants.
B. Articles of Association and Bylaws
The Company was originally incorporated under the corporate name
“
424547 Alberta Ltd
.” on July 5, 1990, under the
Business Corporations Act
(Alberta).
The Articles of
424547 Alberta Ltd.
were amended on August
13, 1991, as follows:
|
|
•
|
the name of the Company was changed to “
Tan Range Exploration Corporation”;
|
|
|
•
|
the restriction on the transfer of shares was removed; and
|
|
|
•
|
a new paragraph regarding the appointment of additional directors was added as follows:
|
|
|
“(b)
|
The Directors, may, between annual general meetings, appoint one or more additional directors
of the Company to serve until the next annual general meeting, but the number of additional Directors shall not at any time exceed
one-third (1/3) of the number of Directors who held office at the expiration of the last annual meeting of the corporation.”
|
The Company was registered in the Province of British Columbia as
an extra provincial company under the
Company Act
(British Columbia) on August 5, 1994.
The Articles of the Company were further amended on February 15,
1996, as follows:
|
|
•
|
the provisions of the Articles authorizing the issue of Class “B” Voting shares, Class
“C” Non-Voting shares and Class “D” Preferred shares were deleted;
|
|
|
•
|
Class “A” voting shares were redesignated as common shares; and
|
|
|
•
|
a provision was added to allow meetings of shareholders to be held outside Alberta in either of
the cities of Vancouver, British Columbia or Toronto, Ontario.
|
The Articles of the Company were further amended on February 28,
2006, as follows:
|
|
•
|
the name of the Company was changed to its present name, “
Tanzanian Royalty Exploration
Corporation”.
|
The Articles of the Company were further amended on February 29, 2008 as follows:
|
|
•
|
Pursuant to Section 173(1)(l) of the
Business Corporations Act
(Alberta), Item 5 of the Articles of the Company was
amended by changing the maximum number of directors from 9 to 11.
|
Common Shares
All issued and outstanding common shares are fully paid and non-assessable.
Each holder of record of common shares is entitled to one vote for each common share so held on all matters requiring a vote of
shareholders, including the election of directors. The holders of common shares will be entitled to dividends on a pro-rata basis,
if and when as declared by the board of directors. There are no preferences, conversion rights, preemptive rights, subscription
rights, or restrictions or transfers attached to the common shares. In the event of liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of
the Company, the holders of common shares are entitled to participate in the assets of the Company available for distribution after
satisfaction of the claims of creditors.
The rights of shareholders cannot be changed without a special resolution
of at least 2/3 of the votes cast by the shareholders who voted in respect of the resolution, and separate classes of shareholders
are entitled to separate class votes. Any such alteration of shareholder’s rights would also require the regulatory acceptance
of the TSX. There are no provisions of the Company’s Articles or Bylaws that would have the effect of delaying, deferring,
or preventing a change of control of the Company, and that would operate only with respect to a merger, acquisition, or corporate
restructuring involving the Company (or any of its subsidiaries).
2% Convertible Notes and Warrants
On September 1, 2016, we entered into a Securities
Purchase Agreement with Crede, the selling shareholder, pursuant to which we may sell Notes in the aggregate principal amount of
up to $3,750,000 and Series B Warrants to purchase our common shares. Pursuant to this agreement, we sold $1,250,000 common shares
and Series A Warrants to purchase 1,840,400 common shares at an exercise price of $0.8291 per common share for an aggregate purchase
price of $1,250,000.
Notes.
The Notes bear interest at the rate
of 2.0% per annum on the outstanding principal amount, with interest-only payments due monthly and all principal and interest due
ten years from the issuance date.
Prepayment.
The Company may not prepay
any portion of the principal amount of the Note without the prior written consent of the holder.
Conversion.
The Notes, and, at the election
of the holder, interest thereon, are convertible into our common shares at the election of the holder thereof at a conversion price
equal to (a) the lower of: (i) the closing bid price of the common shares on the day prior to the date of the Securities Purchase
Agreement, or (ii) the closing bid price of the common shares on the day prior to the Effective Date of this Registration Statement,
(b) less five cents per share, subject to anti-dilution provisions, including stock dividends and stock splits, subsequent rights
offerings, pro rata distributions, a fundamental transaction and in certain limited instances for a period of ninety (90) days
following the Effective Date of this Registration Statement, the issuance of common shares or common share equivalents at a price,
or exercise or conversion price, at less than the then current Note conversion price. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Notes
held by a particular holder will not be convertible to the extent that such conversion would result in such holder owning more
than (i) 9.9% of the number of common shares outstanding after giving effect to the issuance of common shares issuable upon conversion
of the Notes calculated in accordance with Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act; or (ii) 9.9% of the number of common shares outstanding
after giving effect to the common shares issuable upon the conversion of the Note calculated in accordance with Section 102 and
102.1 of Part XX of the Securities Act (Ontario). Notwithstanding anything in the Notes to the contrary, the total number of common
shares issuable to the holder, including the common shares issuable upon conversion of the Note and all other common shares issued
to the holder by virtue of any conversion or exercise or exchange of convertible or exercisable or exchangeable securities into
common shares, when aggregated (as calculated pursuant to Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act and Rule 13d-3 promulgated thereunder)
shall be limited to 21,704,630 common shares, which was 19.9% of the issued and outstanding common shares as of the date of the
Securities Purchase Agreement.
Redemption.
Upon a change in control, the
holder of the Note may require us to redeem the Note for the outstanding principal balance payable in cash or, at the holder’s
option, common shares at the then conversion price. The Company’s right to elect to redeem the Notes with common shares is
subject to the satisfaction of certain equity conditions, including the effectiveness of a registration statement covering the
resale of such shares, the listing of such shares on a trading market, the holder’s lack of material non-public information
about the Company, and no event of default.
Warrants.
In connection with the Securities
Purchase Agreement for the common shares and the Notes, the Company issued to the selling shareholder initial Series A Warrants
to purchase 1,840,400 common shares and in connection with the purchase of the Notes, Series B Warrants to purchase 3,609,934 common
shares. The Series A Warrants and Series B Warrants are exercisable immediately for a period of five years from the date of their
issuance for cash, at their respective exercise prices, or if the exercise price exceeds the market price for the common shares,
on a cashless exercise basis, based on a formula in the Warrants, subject to adjustment in the event of stock dividends and splits,
or sales or grants of common shares. The holder shall not have the ability to exercise the Warrants in the event that upon the
exercise, the Warrants, the holder and its affiliates would exceed the Beneficial Ownership Limitations.
Powers and Duties of Directors
The directors shall manage or supervise the management of the affairs
and business of the Company and shall have authority to exercise all such powers of the Company as are not, by the
Business
Corporations Act
(Alberta) or by the Articles or Bylaws, required to be exercised by the Company in a general meeting.
Directors will serve as such until the next annual meeting. In general,
a director who is, in any way, directly or indirectly interested in an existing or proposed contract or transaction with the Company
whereby a duty or interest might be created to conflict with his duty or interest director, shall declare the nature and extent
of his interest in such contract or transaction or the conflict or potential conflict with his duty and interest as a director.
Such director shall not vote in respect of any such contract or transaction with the Company in which he is interested and if he
shall do so, his vote shall not be counted, but he shall be counted in the quorum present at the meeting at which such vote is
taken. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, directors shall have the right to vote on determining the remuneration of the directors.
The directors may from time to time on behalf of the Company: (a)
borrow money in such manner and amount from such sources and upon such terms and conditions as they think fit; (b) issue bonds,
debentures and other debt obligations; or (c) mortgage, charge or give other security on the whole or any part of the property
and assets of the Company.
At least one-quarter of the directors of the Company should be persons
ordinarily resident in Canada and all must be at least 18 years of age. There is no minimum share ownership to be a director. No
person shall be a director of the Company who is not capable of managing their own affairs; is an undischarged bankrupt or who
is a person who is not an individual.
Shareholders
An annual general meeting shall be held once in every calendar year
at such time and place as may be determined by the directors. A quorum at an annual general meeting and special meeting shall be
two shareholders or one or more proxy holder representing two shareholders, or one shareholder and a proxy holder representing
another shareholder. There is no limitation imposed by the laws of Canada or by the charter or other constituent documents of the
Company on the right of a non-resident to hold or vote the common shares, other than as provided in
the Investment Canada Act
,
(the “
Investment Act
”) discussed below under “
Item 10. Additional Information, D. Exchange Controls
.”
In accordance with Alberta law, directors shall be elected by an
“ordinary resolution” which means (a) a resolution passed by the shareholders of the Company in general meeting by
a simple majority of the votes cast in person or by proxy, or (b) a resolution that has been signed by all shareholders entitled
to vote on the resolution.
Under Alberta law certain items such as an amendment to the Company’s
articles or entering into a merger, requires approval by a special resolution, which means (a) a resolution passed by a majority
of not less than 2/3 of the votes cast by the shareholders of the Company who, being entitled to do so, vote in person or by proxy
at a general meeting of the company (b) a resolution consented to in writing by every shareholder of the Company who would have
been entitled to vote in person or by proxy at a general meeting of the Company, and a resolution so consented to is deemed to
be a special resolution passed at a general meeting of the Company.
C. Material Contracts
The following are the material contracts of the Company (other than
contracts in the ordinary course of business) entered into within the last two years:
|
Date
|
Names of Parties
|
Description of General Nature of the Contract
|
Consideration Paid; Terms and Conditions
|
|
June 1, 2017
|
New Direction IRA
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US $340,210.88 for one year term
|
|
June 1, 2017
|
Wilt Family Trust
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US $433,301.99 for one year
|
|
March 31, 2017
|
Witt Family Trust
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US $150,000 for one year term
|
|
March 31, 2017
|
New Direction IRA (F. Graziano)
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US $100,000 for one year term
|
|
March 31, 2017
|
William Holter
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US $100,000 for one year term
|
|
March 31, 2017
|
Structural Logistics
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US $100,000 for one year term
|
|
May 16, 2016
|
Structural Logistics, LLC
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US$104,540 for one year term, and renewable for one year
|
|
October 19, 2016
|
David Ponelli
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US$500,000 for three year term, and renewable for one year
|
|
October 19, 2016
|
Edward F. Marin Family LLC
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US$500,000 for three year term, and renewable for one year
|
|
June 22, 2015
|
Hoffman Heritage Ranches LLC
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US$1,015,000 in gold for a term of one year, maturing on June 22, 2016
|
|
June 22, 2015
|
William L. Holter
|
Secured Gold Loan Agreement
|
US$515,000 in gold for a term of one year, maturing on June 22, 2016
|
|
December 9, 2014
|
JGB (Cayman) Weston Ltd.
|
Securities Purchase Agreement
|
8% Original Issue Discount Senior Convertible Debenture in the principal sum of up to US$15 Million
|
|
December 9, 2014
|
JGB (Cayman) Weston Ltd.
|
Registration Rights Agreement
|
Obligation to file Registration Statement in the US covering the resale of securities under the Securities Purchase Agreement
|
|
December 9, 2014
|
JGB (Cayman) Weston Ltd.
|
8% Original Issue Discount Senior Convertible Debenture due December 9, 2016
|
Principal Sum of up to $15 Million
|
|
December 9, 2014
|
JGB (Cayman) Weston Ltd. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
|
Escrow Agreement
|
Deposit of US$9,115,000 in escrow pursuant to Securities Purchase Agreement
|
|
December 9, 2014
|
JGB (Cayman) Weston Ltd.
|
Common Stock Purchase Warrant
|
To purchase up to 982,143 common shares at a price of US$0.98 per share, on or before December 9, 2019
|
|
December 9, 2014
|
JGB (Cayman) Weston Ltd.
|
Continuing Guaranty
|
For Itetemia Mining Company Limited, Lunguya Mining Company Ltd., Tancan Mining Company Limited, Tanzania American International Development Corporation 2000 Limited, Buckreef Gold Company Limited and Northwest Basemetals Company Limited
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Exchange Controls
Canada
There is no law, governmental decree or regulation in Canada that
restricts the export or import of capital or affects the remittance of dividends, interest or other payments to a non-resident
holder of common shares other than withholding tax requirements. Any such remittances to United States residents are subject to
withholding tax. See “
Taxation
.”
There is no limitation imposed by the laws of Canada or by the charter
or other constituent documents of the Company on the right of a non-resident to hold or vote the common shares, other than as provided
in the Investment Act. The following discussion summarizes the principal features of the Investment Act for a non-resident who
proposes to acquire the common shares.
The Investment Act generally prohibits implementation of a reviewable
investment by an individual, government or agency thereof, corporation, partnership, trust or joint venture (each an “
entity
”)
that is not a “Canadian” as defined in the Investment Act (a “
non-Canadian
”), unless after
review, the Director of Investments appointed by the minister responsible for the Investment Act is satisfied that the investment
is likely to be of net benefit to Canada. An investment in the common shares by a non-Canadian other than a “WTO Investor”
(as that term is defined by the Investment Act, and which term includes entities which are nationals of or are controlled by nationals
of member states of the World Trade Organization) when the Company was not controlled by a WTO Investor, would be reviewable under
the Investment Act if it was an investment to acquire control of the Company and the value of the assets of the Company, as determined
in accordance with the regulations promulgated under the Investment Act, was $5,000,000 or more, or if an order for review was
made by the federal cabinet on the grounds that the investment related to Canada’s cultural heritage or national identity,
regardless of the value of the assets of the Company. An investment in the common shares by a WTO Investor, or by a non-Canadian
when the Company was controlled by a WTO Investor, would be reviewable under the Investment Act if it was an investment to acquire
control of the Company and the value of the assets of the Company, as determined in accordance with the regulations promulgated
under the Investment Act was not less than a specified amount, which as specified in 2014 was any amount in excess of $354 million.
A non-Canadian would acquire control of the Company for the purposes of the Investment Act if the non-Canadian acquired a majority
of the common shares. The acquisition of one third or more, but less than a majority of the common shares would be presumed to
be an acquisition of control of the Company unless it could be established that, on the acquisition, the Company was not controlled
in fact by the acquirer through the ownership of the common shares.
Certain transactions relating to the common shares would be exempt
from the Investment Act, including: (a) an acquisition of the common shares by a person in the ordinary course of that person’s
business as a trader or dealer in securities; (b) an acquisition of control of the Company in connection with the realization of
security granted for a loan or other financial assistance and not for a purpose related to the provisions of the Investment Act;
and (c) an acquisition of control of the Company by reason of an amalgamation, merger, consolidation or corporate reorganization
following which the ultimate direct or indirect control in fact of the Company, through the ownership of the common shares, remained
unchanged.
Foreign Investments and Exchange in Tanzania
The Tanzania Investment Centre (TIC) issues certificates of Approval
to Foreign and Local Companies wishing to invest in Tanzania. Possession of Certificate of Approval entitles the investor to the
following Tax Incentives under the Income Tax Act.
|
|
(i)
|
maximum Corporate Tax Rate of 30% (Residents and Non Residents)
|
|
|
(ii)
|
Withholding Tax on Dividends = 10%
|
|
|
(iii)
|
Withholding Tax on Interest = 10%
|
|
|
(iv)
|
Carry forward of losses for unlimited period of time.
|
In 1992, the stringent foreign exchange legislation was repealed
and the restriction on foreign commercial banks abolished. Any person whether resident or not may establish foreign currency accounts
with any of the commercial banks and transfer foreign currency outside Tanzania without restriction. The Bank of Tanzania
regulates commercial banks and approves the establishment of offshore foreign currency accounts by residents. There are no controls
on foreign exchange rates or interest rate on loans and overdrafts.
E. Taxation
Material Canadian Federal Income
Tax Considerations
The following
is a summary of the principal Canadian federal income tax considerations of the purchase, ownership and disposition of the common
shares offered hereunder generally applicable to purchasers of common shares of the Company who, at all relevant times, are residents
of the U.S. for the purposes of the Canada-United States Tax Convention (1980), as amended (the “
Convention
”),
are not resident in Canada or deemed to be resident in Canada for purposes of the
Income Tax Act
(Canada), as amended to
the date hereof (the “
Canadian Tax Act
”), deal at arm’s length with and are not affiliated with the Company
for the purposes of the Canadian Tax Act, and do not use or hold and are not deemed to use or hold such common shares in the course
of carrying on or being deemed to be carrying on business in Canada (“
U.S. Resident Holders
”). Special rules,
which are not discussed in this summary, may apply to a U.S. Resident Holder that is an insurer carrying on business in Canada
and elsewhere.
This summary
is based upon the current provisions of the Canadian Tax Act, the regulations thereunder, all specific proposals to amend the Canadian
Tax Act and regulations thereunder publicly announced by or on behalf of the Minister of Finance of Canada prior to the date hereof
(the “
Proposals
”), the provisions of the Convention as in effect on the date hereof, and an understanding, based
on publicly available published materials, of the current administrative policies and assessing practices of the Canada Revenue
Agency in force as of the date hereof. Other than the Proposals, this summary does not take into account or anticipate any changes
in law or in the administrative policies or assessing practices of the Canada Revenue Agency, whether by legislative, governmental
or judicial action, nor does it take into account tax laws of any province or territory of Canada or of any jurisdiction outside
Canada which may differ significantly from those discussed herein. The summary assumes that the Proposals will be enacted substantially
as proposed, but there can be no assurance that the Proposals will be enacted as proposed or at all.
This summary
is of a general nature only and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed to be, legal or tax advice to any particular
U.S. Resident Holder, and no representation with respect to the tax consequences to any particular U.S. Resident Holder is made.
The tax liability of a U.S. Resident Holder will depend on the holder’s particular circumstances. Accordingly, U.S. Resident
Holders should consult with their own tax advisors for advice with respect to their own particular circumstances.
For purposes
of the Canadian Tax Act, all amounts relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of the common shares must be expressed
in Canadian dollars using the rate of exchange quoted by the Bank of Canada at noon on the day the amount first arose, or such
other rate of exchange as is acceptable to the Canada Revenue Agency.
Dividends
Dividends
paid or credited or deemed under the Canadian Tax Act to be paid or credited to a U.S. Resident Holder on the common shares are
subject to Canadian withholding tax equal to 25% of the gross amount of such dividends. Under the Convention and subject to the
provisions thereof, the rate of Canadian withholding tax which would apply to dividends paid on the common Shares to a U.S. Resident
Holder that beneficially owns such dividends and is fully entitled to the benefits under the Convention is generally 15%, unless
the beneficial owner is a company which owns at least 10% of the voting shares of the Company at that time, in which case the rate
of Canadian withholding tax is reduced to 5%.
Dispositions
A U.S. Resident
Holder will not be subject to tax under the Canadian Tax Act on any capital gain realized by the holder on a disposition or deemed
disposition of common shares, provided that the shares do not constitute “taxable Canadian property” of the U.S. Resident
Holder for purposes of the Canadian Tax Act. The common shares will generally not constitute taxable Canadian property of a U.S.
Resident Holder at the time of disposition provided that the common shares are listed on a designated stock exchange (which includes
the TSX and the NYSE MKT) at that time unless at any time during the 60-month period immediately preceding the disposition the
following two conditions are met concurrently: (i) the U.S. Resident Holder, persons with whom the U.S. Resident Holder did not
deal at arm’s length and partnerships whose members include, either directly or indirectly through one or more partnerships,
the U.S. Resident Holder or persons that do not deal at arm's length with the U.S. Resident Holder, or the U.S. Resident Holder
together with all such persons owned 25% or more of the issued shares of any class of the capital stock of the Company, and (ii)
more than 50% of the fair market value of such shares was derived directly or indirectly from Canadian real estate, “Canadian
resources properties” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act), “timber resource property” (as defined in the Canadian
Tax Act) or an option, an interest or right in such property, whether or not such property exists. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
the common shares may otherwise be deemed to be taxable Canadian property to a U.S. Resident Holder for purposes of the Canadian
Tax Act in particular circumstances. U.S. Resident Holders to whom common shares constitute taxable Canadian property should consult
with their own tax advisors as to the Canadian income tax consequences of a disposition of the common shares.
Material United States Federal
Income Tax Considerations
The following
summary describes certain material U.S. federal income tax considerations generally applicable to U.S. Holders (as defined below)
with respect to the ownership and disposition of the Company’s common shares. It addresses only U.S. Holders that hold common
shares as capital assets within the meaning of Section 1221 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “
Code
”)
(generally, assets held for investment purposes). The following summary does not purport to be a complete analysis of all of the
potential U.S. federal income tax considerations that may be relevant to particular U.S. Holders in light of their particular circumstances,
nor does it deal with persons that are subject to special tax rules, such as brokers, dealers in securities or currencies, financial
institutions, mutual funds, insurance companies, tax-exempt entities, qualified retirement plans, U.S. Holders that own stock constituting
10% or more of the Company’s voting power (whether such stock is directly, indirectly or constructively owned), regulated
investment companies, common trust funds, U.S. Holders subject to the alternative minimum tax, U.S. Holders holding common shares
as part of a straddle, hedge or conversion transaction or as part of a synthetic security or other integrated transaction, traders
in securities that elect to use a mark-to-market method of accounting for their securities holdings, U.S. Holders that have a “functional
currency” other than the U.S. dollar, U.S. expatriates, and persons that acquired common shares as part of a compensation
transaction. In addition, this summary does not address persons that hold an interest in a partnership or other pass-through entity
that holds common shares, or tax considerations arising under the laws of any state, local or non-U.S. jurisdiction or other U.S.
federal tax considerations (e.g., estate or gift tax) other than those pertaining to the income tax. Furthermore, this summary
does not address the U.S. federal income tax considerations that may be relevant to non-U.S. Holders of common shares.
The following
is based on the Code, Treasury regulations promulgated thereunder (“
Treasury Regulations
”), and administrative
rulings and court decisions, in each case as in effect on the date hereof, all of which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive
effect.
As used
herein, the term “U.S. Holder” means a beneficial owner of common shares that is (i) a citizen or individual resident
of the U.S., (ii) a corporation (or an entity classified as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes) created or organized
in or under the laws of the U.S. or any political subdivision thereof, (iii) an estate, the income of which is subject to U.S.
federal income taxation regardless of its source, or (iv) a trust if (A) a U.S. court is able to exercise primary supervision over
its administration and one or more U.S. persons, within the meaning of Section 7701(a)(30) of the Code, have authority to control
all of its substantial decisions or (B) it has properly elected under applicable Treasury Regulations to be treated as a U.S. person.
The tax
treatment of a partner in a partnership (or other entity classified as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes) may
depend on both the partner’s and the partnership’s status and the activities of such partnership. Partnerships that
are beneficial owners of the Company’s common shares, and partners in such partnerships, should consult their own tax advisors
regarding the U.S. federal, state, local and non-U.S. tax considerations applicable to them with respect to the ownership and disposition
of common shares.
This summary
is of a general nature only. It is not intended to constitute, and should not be construed to constitute, a legal or tax opinion
or legal or tax advice to any particular U.S. Holder. U.S. Holders should consult their own tax advisors as to the tax considerations
applicable to them in their particular circumstances.
Ownership and Disposition
of Our Common Shares
Distributions.
Subject to the discussion below under “Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations — Passive Foreign Investment
Company Rules,” distributions made with respect to the Company’s common shares (including any Canadian taxes withheld
from such distributions) generally will be included in the gross income of a U.S. Holder as dividend income to the extent of the
Company’s current and accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. A corporate
U.S. Holder will not be entitled to a dividends received deduction that is otherwise generally available upon the receipt of dividends
distributed by U.S. corporations.
If any dividends
are paid in Canadian dollars, the amount includible in gross income will be the U.S. dollar value of such dividend, calculated
by reference to the exchange rate in effect on the date of actual or constructive receipt of the payment, regardless of whether
the payment is actually converted into U.S. dollars. If any Canadian dollars actually or constructively received by a U.S. Holder
are later converted into U.S. dollars, such U.S. Holder may recognize currency gain or loss on the conversion, which will be treated
as ordinary gain or loss. Such gain or loss generally will be treated as gain or loss from sources within the U.S. for U.S. foreign
tax credit purposes.
A U.S. Holder
may be entitled to deduct or claim a credit for Canadian withholding taxes, subject to applicable limitations in the Code. Dividends
paid on common shares are expected to be treated as income from sources outside the U.S. and generally will be “passive category
income” for U.S. foreign tax credit limitation purposes. The rules governing the foreign tax credit are complex and the availability
of the credit is subject to limitations. U.S. Holders should consult their own tax advisors regarding the availability of the foreign
tax credit in their particular circumstances.
Distributions
in excess of the Company’s current and accumulated earnings and profits, if made with respect to the Company’s common
shares, will be treated as a return of capital to the extent of the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in such common shares,
and thereafter as capital gain recognized on a sale or exchange.
The Company
does not anticipate paying distributions on its common shares in the near future.
Dispositions.
Subject to the discussion below under “Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations — Passive Foreign Investment
Company Rules,” upon the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of the Company’s common shares, a U.S. Holder
generally will recognize capital gain or loss equal to the difference between (i) the amount of cash and the fair market value
of any other property received upon the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition and (ii) the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax
basis in such common shares. Capital gain or loss recognized upon a sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of the common shares
will generally be long-term capital gain or loss if the U.S. Holder’s holding period with respect to such common shares disposed
of is more than one year at the time of the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition. The deductibility of capital loss is subject
to limitations. For U.S. foreign tax credit purposes, any capital gain or loss generally will be treated as gain or loss from sources
within the U.S.
Tax Filing Requirements
. The ownership
of the Company’s common shares may require a U.S. Holder to file certain Internal Revenue Service forms including but not
limited to Form 8938.
Passive Foreign Investment
Company Rules
Certain
U.S. federal income tax rules generally apply to a U.S. person that owns or disposes of stock in a non-U.S. corporation that is
treated as a passive foreign investment company (a “
PFIC
”). The Company would be a PFIC for U.S. federal income
tax purposes in any taxable year if 75% or more of its gross income would be passive income, or on average at least 50% of the
gross value of its assets is held for the production of, or produces, passive income. For these purposes, passive income generally
includes dividends, interest, certain rents and royalties, and the excess of gains over losses from certain commodities transactions
and cash is considered a passive asset. Because the Company generates no revenue, and because of its cash balance, it may be characterized
as a PFIC.
If we are
a PFIC, and you are a U.S. Holder, then unless you make one of the elections described below, you generally will be subject to
special rules with respect to (a) any gain realized on the sale or other disposition of the common shares and (b) any “excess
distribution” by us to the U.S. Holder in respect of the common shares (generally, your ratable portion of distributions
in any year which are greater than 125% of the average annual distribution received by you in the shorter of the three preceding
years or your holding period for the common shares). Under the PFIC rules: (i) the gain or excess distribution would be allocated
ratably over the U.S. Holder’s holding period for the common shares, (ii) the amount allocated to the taxable year in which
the gain or excess distribution was realized or to any year before the Company became a PFIC would be taxable as ordinary income
and (iii) the amount allocated to each other taxable year would be subject to tax at the highest tax rate in effect in that year
and an interest charge generally applicable to underpayments of tax would be imposed in respect of the tax attributable to each
such year. In addition, dividend distributions made to you will not qualify for the lower rates of taxation applicable to long-term
capital gains under U.S. tax rules. Because a U.S. Holder that is a direct (and in certain cases indirect) shareholder of a PFIC
is deemed to own its proportionate share of interests in any lower-tier PFICs, U.S. Holders should be subject to the foregoing
rules with respect to any of the Company’s subsidiaries characterized as PFICs, if it was deemed a PFIC.
A U.S. Holder
may be able to avoid many of these adverse tax consequences if it elects to mark the common shares to market on an annual basis.
However, any such mark-to-market election would not be available for a lower-tier PFIC. If a U.S. Holder makes the mark-to-market
election, the U.S. Holder generally will recognize as ordinary income any excess of the fair market value of the common shares
at the end of each taxable year over their adjusted tax basis, and will recognize an ordinary loss in respect of any excess of
the adjusted tax basis of the common shares over their fair market value at the end of the taxable year (but only to the extent
of the net amount of income previously included as a result of the mark-to-market election). If a U.S. Holder makes the election,
the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in the common shares will be adjusted to reflect these income or loss amounts. Any gain recognized
on the sale or other disposition of common shares in a year when the Company is a PFIC will be treated as ordinary income and any
loss will be treated as an ordinary loss (but only to the extent of the net amount of income previously included as a result of
the mark-to-market election). The mark-to-market election is available only if the Company is a PFIC and the common shares are
“regularly traded” on a “qualified exchange.” The common shares will be treated as “regularly traded”
in any calendar year in which more than a de minimis quantity of the common shares are traded on a qualified exchange on at least
15 days during each calendar quarter (subject to the rule that trades that have as one of their principal purposes the meeting
of the trading requirement as disregarded). The NYSE MKT is a qualified exchange for this purpose and, consequently, if the common
shares are regularly traded, the mark-to-market election will be available to a U.S. holder. U.S. Holders are urged to consult
their tax advisors with respect to the availability and tax consequences of a mark-to-market election with respect to the Company’s
common shares.
If the Company
is deemed to be a PFIC, it does not currently intend to provide the information necessary for U.S. Holders to make qualified electing
fund elections if it was treated as a PFIC for any taxable year. U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors to determine whether
any of these elections would be available and if so, what the consequences of the alternative treatments would be in their particular
circumstances.
A U.S. Holder
will be required to file Internal Revenue Service Form 8621 if such U.S. Holder owns common shares in any year in which the Company
is classified as a PFIC. This filing requirement is in addition to the U.S. Holder’s obligation to file other Internal Revenue
Service forms with respect to the Company’s common shares, including Form 8938.
The U.S.
federal income tax rules relating to PFICs are complex. Prospective U.S. investors are urged to consult their own tax advisers
with respect to the acquisition, ownership and disposition of the common shares, the consequences to them of an investment in a
PFIC, any elections available with respect to the common shares and the IRS information reporting obligations with respect to the
acquisition, ownership and disposition of the common shares.
Information Reporting
and Backup Withholding Tax
In general,
information reporting will apply to dividends in respect of the Company’s common shares and the proceeds from the sale, exchange
or redemption of the common shares that are paid to a U.S. Holder within the United States (and in certain cases, outside the United
States), unless such U.S. Holder is an exempt recipient. A backup withholding tax may apply to such payments if such U.S. Holder
fails to provide a taxpayer identification number or certification of other exempt status or fails to report in full dividend and
interest income. Backup withholding tax is not an additional tax. A U.S. Holder subject to the backup withholding tax rules will
be allowed a credit of the amount withheld against such U.S. Holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability or, if backup withholding
results in an overpayment of U.S. federal income tax, such U.S. Holder may be entitled to a refund, provided that, in each case,
the requisite information is correctly furnished to the Internal Revenue Service in a timely manner. U.S. Holders should consult
their own tax advisors as to the information reporting and backup withholding tax rules.
Tanzania
Taxation
Tax in Tanzania is levied based on residence and source. Resident
persons are taxed on worldwide income whilst non-residents are only taxed on income sourced in Tanzania. An individual is considered
to be Tanzanian resident if he has a permanent home in Tanzania and is present during any part of the year, he was resident in
Tanzania during the year of income for periods amounting in aggregate to 183 days or more; or if he was in the United Republic
in that year of income and each of the two preceding years of income for periods averaging more than 122 days in each such year
of income.
The minimum annual income tax threshold is TShs. 2,040,000 or TShs.
170,000 per month. Income Tax Rates vary from Nil up to 30%. Prevailing corporate income tax rate is 30%.
Value Added Tax (“
VAT
”)
|
Taxable Supplies
|
Rate
|
|
Supply of goods and services in Mainland Tanzania
|
18%
|
|
Import of goods and services in Mainland Tanzania
|
18%
|
|
Export of goods and services from Mainland Tanzania
|
0%
|
|
Special relief to some entities/items
|
10%
|
VAT registrable threshold is TShs. 40 Million (or about US$25,000
at prevailing exchange rates).
Withholding Tax
Withholding tax is charged at the rates specified below:
|
|
Resident
|
Non-Resident
|
|
Dividend
|
10%
|
10%
|
|
Dividend from listed on the Dar es Salaam Stock Exchange
|
5%
|
5%
|
|
Interest
|
10%
|
10%
|
|
Royalties
|
0%
|
15%
|
|
Management Fees
|
5%
|
15%
|
|
Professional Fees
|
5%
|
15%
|
|
Rent, Premium for Use of Property
|
10%
|
15%
|
|
Pension/Retirement Annuity
|
10%
|
15%
|
|
Service fee
|
5%
|
15%
|
|
Insurance premium
|
0
|
5%
|
Special Rates for Persons Engaged in “Mining Operations”
Rates
|
|
Resident
|
Non-Resident
|
|
Technical Services to Mining Operations
|
5%
|
15%
|
|
Management Fee
|
0%
|
15%
|
Capital Gains Taxation
0% applies to capital gains on the sale of shares listed at the
DSM Stock Exchange. Normal pay as you earn rates with a marginal rate of 30% applies to capital gains by resident individuals,
30% applies to capital gains by corporations.
Thin capitalisation
For exempt controlled entities, the interest expense that is allowable
for tax purposes is restricted to debt and equity ratio of 7 to 3. Debts and equity are defined terms in the legislation. Any interest
expense relating to debts exceeding this ratio is permanently disallowed.
Stamp duty
Stamp duty is chargeable on various legal documents and agreements
(e.g. transfer of shares, issue of shares, etc.) generally at ad valorem rates of up to 1%.
Customs Duty
There are three import duty rates: 0% for capital goods and raw
materials, 10% for semi – finished goods and 25% for finished final consumer goods.
Mining Sector
The Tax Incentives and Investment allowances are designed to encourage
industrial growth and attract foreign investments. They are granted for capital expenditure on hotels and manufacturing and mining
operations. The allowance is a deduction in computing taxable income.
For companies investing in the Mining Industries (Mineral mining
Rights Holders) specific tax incentives are applicable to their investments. These are:-
|
|
(i)
|
Indefinite carry forward of losses.
|
|
|
(iii)
|
15% additional Capital Expenditure on unredeemed qualifying Capital Expenditure for Mining Operators
who had entered into Agreement with the Government before 1
st
July 2001, under the Mining Acts.
|
The government of Tanzania also imposes a royalty on the gross value
of all production equal to 5% for diamonds and 4% for metallic minerals (including copper, silver, gold and platinum group minerals).
Double Taxation Agreement
Tanzania has tax treaties to prevent double taxation with Canada,
Denmark, Finland, India, Italy, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and Zambia. Tanzania is also in the process of negotiating treaties
with several countries including Belgium, Burundi, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mauritius, Pakistan, and Rwanda.
F. Dividends and Paying Agents
Not applicable.
G. Statement by Experts
Not applicable.
H. Documents on Display
The Company files annual reports and other information with the
SEC. You may read and copy any document that it files at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for more information about the Public Reference Rooms. The SEC also maintains
a website, www.sec.gov, where you may obtain our reports. The Company also files certain reports with the Canadian Securities Administrators
that you may obtain through access of the SEDAR website, www.sedar.com.
Copies of the Company’s material contracts are kept in the
Company’s principal executive office.
I. Subsidiary Information
Not applicable.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
The Company is exposed to market risk, primarily related to foreign
exchange and metals prices (gold in particular). The Company uses the Canadian dollar as its reporting currency, but the Company
converts Canadian dollars to U.S. dollars, and then U.S. dollars to Tanzanian schillings. The Company is therefore exposed to foreign
exchange movements in Tanzania where the Company is incurring costs in conducting exploration activities. Most of the Company’s
exploration work is conducted in U.S. dollars; however, some general and administrative expenses are paid in Tanzanian schillings.
The following table sets forth the percentage of the Company's administrative
expense by currency for the year ended August 31, 2017.
By Currency
|
|
2017
|
|
Canadian Dollar
|
20%
|
|
U.S. Dollar
|
25%
|
|
Tanzanian Shilling
|
55%
|
|
Total:
|
100%
|
Such administrative expense by currency may change from time to
time, but it has been roughly the same year to year. Further, the Company incurred net exploration costs of $(507,838) and
$1,168,935 for the years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016 respectively, which are primarily paid in U.S. dollars.
The Company has not entered into any material foreign exchange contracts
to minimize or mitigate the effects of foreign exchange fluctuations on the Company's operations. Based on prior years, the Company
does not believe that it is subject to material foreign exchange fluctuations. However, no assurance can be given that this will
continue to be true in the future.
The market prices of most precious metals, including gold, have
generally increased over the past three years, but are subject to market fluctuations based primarily on supply and demand.
The following table sets out the cumulative average prices of gold
for the past five years, based on the London Metals Market afternoon price fix in U.S. dollars:
|
2017
(Average to November 30)
|
2016
|
2015
|
2014
|
2013
|
|
$1,256.31
|
1,250.74
|
1,160.06
|
1,266.40
|
1,411.23
|
|
|
Item 12.
|
Description of Securities Other than Equity Securities
|
The 2016 Incentive Stock Option Plan of the Company was approved
by shareholders at the Annual and Special Meeting of the Company on February 16, 2017.