Thank you. Today's discussion includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws.

Forward-looking statements are based on management's current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. We don't undertake to update or revise any forward-looking statements except as required by law.

Slide 2 contains disclaimers that relate to forward-looking statements, risk factors, and projections, and cautionary notes to investors. Please consider these carefully along with the risk factors in our annual report on Form 10-K that was filed on March 10th, 2026.

I'll now turn the call over to our CEO and President, Matt Gili.

Thank you, Alex. Thank you, everyone, for joining us today.

Slide 1. As many of I joined Ur-Energy midway through 2025.

From my perspective, it was a year of strong execution and meaningful progress. Across our operations, development pipeline, and financial position, we delivered tangible improvements that position the company for production growth in 2026.

Slide 2 disclaimer. As Alex mentioned, we will likely make forward-looking statements today.

Please read the disclaimer at your leisure. On to Lost Creek, slide 3.

At Lost Creek, our focus on operational execution translated into significant year-over-year gains. We ended the year with 406,000 pounds of product in inventory, an increase of 21% over 2024.

We increased pounds drummed in 2025 by 65% over 2024. We also improved wellfield flow rates, increased pounds captured by 40%, and increased our profit per pound sold by more than $12.

Our average cash cost per pound sold, including severance and ad valorem taxes, was $42.89. These results reflect stronger wellfield performance, improved plant throughput, and disciplined operating focus.

Slide 4. Ongoing drilling at Lost Creek continues to create value.

As detailed in our updated SK-1300 technical report, the measured and indicated resource is now estimated at 11.9 million pounds, and the inferred resource is at 10.4 million pounds. The estimated mine life at Lost Creek was extended by nearly 3 years, and the post-tax net cash flow increased to $442 million, roughly 45% more than the previous estimate.

The NPV with an 8% discount rate is now estimated at $244 million, with an internal rate of return of almost 66%. On slide 5, we still only drilled a portion of the more than 35,000 contiguous acres at the Lost Creek property.

As our Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Steve Hatten, said in yesterday's press release, "Every time we drill at Lost Creek, we've been fortunate to increase the resource base."

This underscores Lost Creek's scale, longevity, and long-term growth potential. On to slide 6 and Shirley Basin.

At our Shirley Basin project, we made substantial progress towards bringing our second ISR production facility online. The initial processing plant construction is nearing completion, with all the ion-exchange columns installed and key tanks in place.

To support start-up of operation, we've drilled 469 injection and production wells. In Mine Unit 1, header house 1 is ready to begin initial injection and recovery from the wellfield pending approval from the state environmental department.

They began their pre-operational inspections in late February and are looking at our wellfield data package, so that process is underway. The March 2024 technical report for Shirley Basin estimated a 9-year mine life and 8.8 million pounds of resource in the measured and indicated categories.

The estimated post-tax net cash flow is $119 million. The NPV with an 8% discount rate is $83 million, with an internal rate of return of 69%.

The estimated all-in cost is $50 per pound. During 2025, we grew our Ur-Energy workforce by 55% and welcomed 56 new team members.

The majority of those were added to support Shirley Basin, but we also strengthened our operational, technical, and corporate teams across the company. We're proud of the team we're building.

Slide 7. From a financial perspective, we ended the year with $123.9 million in cash, driven largely by the successful closing of our 4.75% convertible senior notes.

Our cash position as of March 4th, 2026, was $115.3 million. That doesn't include $18.5 million that we will receive this month for 24.7 24.7 million warrants that were exercised last month for about 12.3 million of our common shares.

All of our outstanding warrants were exercised over the last few months, except for an insignificant number that expired. The strength of our balance sheet gives us the flexibility to fund Shirley Basin commissioning, continue ramp-up at Lost Creek, and disciplined resource growth.

While we're not taking any victory laps just yet, it's worth pointing out that we finished the year with a positive gross profit of $74,000, a modest number, but an encouraging milestone as operations and production continue to improve. On slide 8, at our Lost Soldier project, we installed 18 aquifer test wells in late 2025 to support the evaluation of the potential for ISR development.

Aquifer testing will begin this month, followed by baseline environmental studies for potential permitting. Lost Soldier is just 17 miles from the Lost Creek processing plant, which could mean an opportunity to develop it as a satellite operation using our existing infrastructure.

We've also started work on a technical report for the project that we expect to complete by the end of this year. At our North Hasto project in the Great Divide Basin, drilling continues to deliver very encouraging early results.

Through the end of February, we drilled 32 wide-spaced holes totaling 33,000 feet. Seven of those intersected significant uranium mineralization, including 13 intercepts exceeding our Lost Creek cut-off grade.

These results suggest multiple stacked roll front horizons with grade and thicknesses comparable to Lost Creek, supporting the potential for future ISR development. The results include two standout holes about 1.5 miles apart that intersected significant stacked mineralization at similar depths, giving us some early confidence in the potential scale of the system.

North Hasto is only 18 miles from Lost Creek. Once we wrap up the 50-hole program at North Hasto, we'll move the rigs over to our Lost Creek South project this summer.

Lost Creek South is located adjacent to Lost Creek, and we're planning a 120-hole drill program there this year. These exploration programs are critical to expanding our development pipeline, growing our resource base, and diversifying potential future production across multiple projects.

Slide 9, wrapping up. As we enter 2026, we continue to optimize our operations at Lost Creek, while our second ISR facility at Shirley Basin is making significant progress towards start-up.

Our combined estimated mineral resource totals 21 million pounds in the measured and indicated categories and 10.4 million pounds in the inferred category as of December 31st, 2025, providing a strong resource base for our production. We have contracted for sales of 1.3 million pounds in 2026.

We plan to cover those sales with pounds in inventory and new pounds that we produce at Lost Creek and Shirley Basin. On March 4th, we had 379,000 pounds in conversion facility inventory.

With our growing resource base and strong balance sheet, we believe Ur-Energy is well positioned to benefit from positive uranium market fundamentals and increased demand for secure US uranium supply. With that, I'll turn it back to the operator and open it up for questions and answers.

Thank you.

Thank you. Hi, Matt.

Thanks for taking my question and congratulations on the quarter. I just have two questions.

Starting with the 1.5 million commitments, including the 250,000 loan repayment, with current inventory levels, can you help us understand what gives the confidence in meeting these deliveries and increasing utilization from the current levels to 50-60% range?

Certainly, Soundarya, and thanks for the question. Look, when you talk about what gives us that confidence, it's what we're seeing now with the current ramp-up of operations at Lost Creek combined with the positive progress on construction at Shirley Basin.

We do our mine planning. We do our analysis of risks and opportunities.

As we go through this year, our plan, which is a very solid plan that we've gone through very carefully, shows that we're able to make our deliveries of 1.3 million contractual sales for the year from the existing inventory as well as the new production that we will be bringing on during the year. There's a lot of different parts there.

What we're seeing is a continued ramp-up of operations at Lost Creek. We're seeing the wellfields continue to produce high-quality uranium in solution.

The improvements in the plant are really taking shape. The team at the Lost Creek plant is expanding.

We've got a very strong business improvement program in place there. We brought on key individuals, as well as we're going to be adding sand filters to the front of the Lost Creek plant over the next several months.

These are the parts from Lost Creek that give us the confidence. Shirley Basin is the positive construction.

We're on track to be able to start moving solution through the plant this month, and we're on track to begin shipping resin deliveries in the second quarter. That's all coming together nicely.

We still require pending environmental approvals from the state of Wyoming. Those are all on track, and they seem clear.

We can't always predict when we will get those, but everything seems on track, and very confident in our abilities this year.

Thank you, Matt. Thank you for that update.

I'll turn it over.

All right. Thanks, Soundarya.

Good afternoon, Matt and team. Thanks for taking my questions.

Just curious on the product loans that you have outstanding. Given your cash balance, when should we expect that this might get repaid?

Would it be sort of by the deadline in November? Would you settle it earlier?

Then maybe on the settlement, does that have to be settled by replacing the physical, or could it be cash settled as well? Thanks.

All right, Anthony, good questions. We have a 250,000-pound loan with a trading entity that is due in November of this year.

As you kind of pointed out in your question, Anthony, we have multiple options on how and when we repay this loan. With our cash balance, we could always have the opportunity to pay back that loan by buying pounds on spot.

The loan is to be repaid in physicals. That's not necessarily our physicals, but the loan is to be repaid in physicals.

We're not going to pin down exactly how we're looking at that. What we are doing, Anthony, is we're looking at our opportunities.

If we were to see a short-term decrease in spot price, that could give us an opportunity to just get that loan off of our books for a very very favorable price. Other than that, we look at other opportunities.

We haven't pinned down, and we're not projecting a certain path on that. We do know that loan is outstanding.

It's due in November, and we have the contingency plans in place to fulfill that loan.

Great. Thanks.

That's very clear. Maybe just as a follow-up, how should we think about the cadence of realized prices through 2026?

Do you expect sort of a ramp in prices to stay fairly consistent? How should we be thinking about that?

Look, we haven't given specifically a price per pound for 2026, but you can see in our 10-K the detail there that shows we are contracted to deliver 1.3 million pounds for proceeds of up to $82 million. Those contracts are all different stages and different prices throughout the year, there's not a ramp-up through the year.

Those were all contracts that were signed multiple years ago for delivery in 2026. You can do the math and come out with the average price per pound.

You should just think of it as an average because of the way that the contracts come in and the way that we deliver onto those contracts, it's not a ramp-up, but it is a series of different prices at different blocks.

Thanks, Matt. I will pass on.

Afternoon, Matt. Thanks for the time.

Hey, Jeff.

Was curious at Lost Creek, given we're a couple months plus into the quarter, any commentary you can share on how production is trending thus far in Q1 relative to Q4 levels and maybe how you're expecting that asset to ramp throughout the year? Thanks.

Jeff,

good question again. I'm going to be hesitant to be too specific because I want to keep everything nice and tight as far as disclosures.

Certainly the ramp-up continues at Lost Creek. I will say in December we had a significant weather event of 11 days of power disruption from a wind storm that came through Wyoming with winds well over 100 miles an hour.

The plant delivered beautifully through December, and the teams responded to that power outage and really really did a fantastic job of stripping resin and drumming uranium. January was rough as we reloaded the resin.

We're back on track for February. March looks on track for very positive.

The ramp-up continues, Jeff. I'm being very coy in giving you real specifics yet, but you'll get those numbers as soon as they're available.

Look, we see the steady path for ramp-up at Lost Creek and the stability with Shirley Basin to deliver into that 1.3 million pounds. That's kind of our standard answer there, Jeff, and that's what we're committed to.

Fair enough. We'll stay tuned.

For my follow-up on the cost side of the equation, any thoughts on kind of where cash costs go in '26? Should we expect as Lost Creek kind of ramps up, we see some downward pressure on the cost side, and how might the introduction of Shirley Basin pounds impact some of that arithmetic?

Sure. Again, we're not giving cost guidance, but I will tell you that in an ISR operation, your costs are incredibly fixed.

It's really a function of pounds drummed, or I guess pounds sold. More pounds you sell, lower your cost per pound.

It really is incredibly fixed cost structure. The wells are the wells.

The electricity is the electricity. The same number of people are there regardless of how many pounds you drum.

The costs of the lixiviants is really just oxygen and carbon dioxide, and they're relatively minor in the big scheme of things. It is quite a linear relationship there between pounds drummed and sold and cost per pound.

Got it. Okay.

Thank you. I'll turn it back.

Hey, Matt. Thanks for taking the questions.

I guess most of mine have been answered, but on the regulatory front, some of your peers have kind of noted that because there's a rush to get production up across the industry, that there's been regulatory processing delays. Is that kind of what you're dealing with at Shirley Basin, and then on that note, do you guys have a timeline on when you'll get regulatory approval there to get started with production?

Yes. Joe, thanks for the question.

I'll start off with the answer, then I'm going to hand over to Ryan. He's our VP for Regulatory Affairs.

I'm going to start off with the comment I think that commentary that you're hearing about the delays in the process from the increase in activity is fairly focused on Texas, but nonetheless, there is a growing amount of activity across the industry and that does impact everyone. With regards to the timing of the regulatory approvals, we certainly anticipate those to be approved in this month, but I'm going to pass this over to Ryan for some more color.

Ryan, do you mind answering Joe's question?

Absolutely. The one thing that I would just add is Ur-Energy, we have an excellent working relationship with our regulators in the state of Wyoming.

We work very closely with them in partnership to come to those approvals. As Matt said, all indications are that we are under timely review for those wellfield data packages and approvals to start Shirley Basin.

There's nothing that causes us or points us to likely delays. We are working with the state, but a concern that you have mentioned is as there's more activity, those resources at the state do get stretched, and we are aware of those, and we monitor those, and we work with the state as we try to overcome those delays.

As far as Shirley Basin is concerned, everything is on track. We are working closely with the regulators and anticipate receiving those approvals soon.

Okay. Then just as a quick follow-up, if you guys had the regulatory approval in normal course, when would have that header house started production?

I realize it's ready now, but how long ago was it ready?

Oh, I'm sorry to mislead you in my commentary, Joe. We're building the plant.

We're on track. We have the well house ready for production on schedule.

We have it ahead of schedule of the production plant, just because that's good planning. We will be mechanically ready for the plant to receive solution on Monday of next week, and that's when we're going to be loading the first resin tank.

Then that will be when any delays past then would be due to waiting for regulatory.

Okay. All right.

Thanks for the clarity on that and the color in general. I'll turn it over.

Yeah. Good afternoon, Matt.

Thanks for hosting the call. It's been a while since you guys have done an earnings call, I appreciate it.

Most of my questions have been answered already. I had one kind of housekeeping type one left, though.

Just that I noticed there was a large discrepancy between pounds drummed and pounds captured at Lost Creek in Q4, much wider than any other quarter I can recall. Could you just give some detail on what drove that in Q4, and should I just expect that to kind of mean revert in Q1?

Thanks.

Okay. Mike, good question.

Mr. Steve Hatten, this is a COO question.

Sure. Hello, Mike.

This is Steve Hatten. The biggest difference is you had heard Matt talk about issues we've had with not environmental, but with the environment, where we had some power down.

At these facilities, we run the plant on generator power, and the wellfield is all on line power. If we have a major power outage, that can affect the production that we see coming in versus what we can do in the plant.

Any variance for instance, if you see production lagging coming in from the wellfield, that gives the plant a chance to still process material. Vice versa, if the plant is doing maintenance for whatever reason, you'll see the wellfield captured come up versus the plant go down.

Okay. That makes sense.

That's very helpful. I appreciate it, Steve and Matt.

I'll revert back, and best of luck on the Shirley Basin ramp-up this year.

All right. Thanks, Mike.

Hi, thanks, operator. Thanks, Matt, for hosting the call.

My first one is just on maybe getting a sense of milestones through the year in terms of ramping up towards that 1.3 million pounds delivered. Let's leave aside moving the loan around for a sec.

What would you like to see at each operation, I guess, when we speak at this time next quarter, at Lost Creek maybe to get a bit more granular in terms of mine units and header houses, and at Shirley Creek if you could provide similar detail, that'd be really helpful. All right.

Thank you, Justin. Thanks for the question.

The first thing I'm going to do, I'm going to answer general and I'm going to turn over to Steve to give you some more color on the number of header houses and in very granular details there, Justin. When we talk about milestones for the year, for the entire Lost Creek ramp-up for this year is fairly linear.

The Shirley Basin, what the milestones there you're seeing that we're looking for is the delivery of solution into the plant in March, and then the loading of resin and the shipping of resin to initiate in the second quarter to the Lost Creek facility. The mine unit at Lost Creek, the ramp-up is fairly linear.

The plant itself is going to have a lot more loaded resin delivered to it, and so we're anticipating the plant at Lost Creek to have a ramp-up that's not linear, but that really peaks in the third quarter. We get initial deliveries coming in in the second quarter, and then you see a large jump in the third and fourth quarters for the amount of pounds that are drummed at the Lost Creek facility.

Steve, did you want to give any clarity on header houses?

Sure. One of the big things is, and as you're very aware, this is stepwise production at any ISR facility.

You've got to get the drilling ahead first, and then that focuses on so much of ore determination and pattern layouts. Then we get those patterns installed, and they go into surface construction, and then that turns into flow into the plant.

One of the things is that we have really stretched ourselves out on over the last year or so is to develop those new areas. We are out actively developing Mine Unit 5, getting that monitor ring going there so we can get it tested and be in production later this year on that.

Mine Unit 1 Phase 2 has been very productive from a construction standpoint. The rigs spent a lot of last year and are focused heavily this year on getting that done.

We have already seen header house 14 come on, header house 15 is in recirc mode to bring grade up, and 16 is in the pipeline next. That continues on throughout the course of this year, as Matt said, in a linear fashion to bring up both production, flow, and grade, okay, the two components that make up production.

All of those are the main components for the header houses. I think Matt hit it spot on on Shirley.

We have our targets for initial lixiviant movement in the wellfield in the month of March, and then we expect in the second quarter to bring that into realized capture, true, significant capture on resin. That means shipping over to Lost Creek and getting that turned into drummed production.

Does that help?

That was fantastic. Thank you, Matt and Steve.

Maybe just one last one. I led the witness a little bit on the question, but I guess to hit your targets, maybe more holistically, is it a case of deployment of wellfield development, header houses, or is also on the plant side of things, are there improvements you'd like to see there in order to hit those numbers?

I guess what are the keys to hitting those targets this year?

I'm going to continue answering, and then Matt can stop me if he wants to. What we'd like to see at Lost Creek, you're typically at a million-pound-a-year production rate, you're looking about 8 to 10 header houses a year for construction, drilling construction readiness.

At Shirley, as you have seen in our previous press releases, we are anticipating much higher flow rates there. We will determine how that plays out during the first year of operations.

We're going to go pretty heavy there initially and try and get 6 to 8 header houses on this year. Then depending on how that production grade curve goes and the flow comes in from each area, then I think you're going to see us possibly, that's one of those forward-looking statements, but possibly scaling back to 6, maybe 8 header houses here over there.

What we have seen over there initially from our first drilling is it's been very very good for us. We've been very happy with the pounds that they're showing up under pattern there, but that's still early on.

Justin, does that give you the color you're looking for?

That was fantastic. Thanks, Matt and Steve.

Maybe just one last one. I led the witness a little bit on the question, but I guess to hit your targets, maybe more holistically, is it a case of deployment of wellfield development and header houses, or is also on the plant side of things, are there improvements you'd like to see there in order to hit those numbers?

I guess what are the keys to hitting those targets this year?

The key business improvement initiatives right now are focused on the plant. The Lost Creek wellfield just delivers, and we're well ahead on the drilling there.

We've deployed a lot of drills at Lost Creek over the last two years, and we're well advanced on the drilling of header houses and in patterns at Lost Creek. Shirley Basin is in the same mode.

The wellfield there is well developed and it's on track, it's on schedule, and that's going well. The key business improvements for this year are focused on the plant, and if you then drive down into a subset of that, it's on fines management and what we're doing there to remove fines coming into the plant so that it reduces just the complications that fines in the plant cause with the resin tanks.

That's where the key focus is on right now. You'll see in our 10-K that we are dedicating some fairly significant capital towards upgrading the water treatment at Lost Creek, and that is both on the front end with the fines and sand filters in front of the plant, as well as on the back end with the reverse osmosis and water treatment for delivery of the water back into the shallow aquifer and/or surface discharge.

Thanks, Matt. Is that more of an IX issue going into the IX plants, or just to clarify?

Yes, IX issue. Fines in the IX columns just cause inefficiencies, right?

It's about keeping the fines out of the resin columns. The resin columns act as a sand filter.

They're essentially a sand filter. If you put fines into them, then you create a fines layer on top of the resin, and it just makes it inefficient.

You have to clean that out, and so that's what we're working on is improving that part of the system.

Understood clearly. It's essentially fines clog it up.

Fines are bad. They're kind of actually good for us in that a significant portion of our uranium is in the fines, fines are making uranium.

How about this, removing fines from the solution before it enters the plant, that's the real win.

Understood. Thanks a lot.

That was really useful color. I'll free up the line.

Hello, Matthew.

Sorry about that. Good afternoon, everyone.

Thanks for taking my questions. I want to ask a little bit about future sales commitments, and whether you guys are working on or if it's possible to fold in some incremental commitments in 2027, 2028, or are thoughts at this point mostly for 2029 and out at this point?

Matthew, thanks for the question. Our talks right now are mostly for 2029 and beyond.

That's really where we're focusing. We're comfortable with our sales book right now.

As many of our peers have done, we don't see the necessity to have our book completely committed several years in advance. We're looking for opportunity.

Of course we are. We're a uranium miner, but we're very optimistic and bullish on the uranium price.

We like the idea of having some pounds in inventory that we can place opportunistically when the time is right.

Got it. That makes sense.

Just a broad one for me, most of my questions were asked, but just how are you thinking about M&A in the current environment? Any targets out there that could potentially be compelling, or do you see the need for mergers in this space right now?

When you say the need for M&A, we don't necessarily say there's a need for M&A. What we do say is that adding more resource base to Ur-Energy will have a very valuable contribution to the company.

We recognize that more resource is going to help this company a lot, and it's going to provide us with what we need to continue to advance. How we get those extra pounds, you heard us talk this morning, we're very focused on exploration, both in the Great Divide Basin in general as well as adjacent to Lost Creek.

Lost Creek has a lot of open on almost all sides. It's open for expansion and exploration.

When it comes to M&A specifically, we're going to always answer like every corporation answers when they're asked that question. What I also say is that part of the catalyst for the convert issue at the end of last year was so that we would have funding available such that an opportunity were to arise, we could act on that opportunity.

That was part of the catalyst of why we went for that convert raise, and those funds are available for our use in a very prudent and disciplined manner. Got it.

That's very clear. I appreciate all the color and best of luck.

Hey there. Thanks for taking my questions.

Hey, Heiko.

Just following up on Matthew Key's question a little bit there. Can you just walk me through what you're seeing with the demand for longer-term pricing as opposed to spot?

How desperate are the buyers, and just are they pushing towards longer-term contracts and what kind of pricing structures are they guiding towards?

All right, Heiko, thanks for the question. I was wondering who was going to ask that question.

Desperate, okay, I'm not going to use the adjective desperate, but I am going to say that the interest in securing uranium supplies for use in the nuclear industry is growing and is vibrant. We get a lot of requests for proposals.

We are careful in what we look at. Again, we kind of touched on before, we're not interested in over-obligating in the near term.

We kind of have a curve going in front of us of our commitments. We have a kind of a model that we've built on what we're looking for committing of our forecasted production in every year ahead of us, and it kind of peters out after 6 years, and then of course each year the wave moves forward.

If you've got a lot of RFPs coming in, you know how that affects prices. What you're seeing right now is that pricing certainly has a market-related component.

That market-related component is becoming more meaningful and the majority of the way that pounds are being sold going forward. I don't think I'm telling you anything unique to Ur-Energy at all.

That's certainly the same commentary you're hearing from other producers, but the industry is moving more towards market-related contracts and less certainly de-emphasizing term with escalation.

What are you seeing with geopolitical demand factors as things are progressing here, especially given what happened the last couple of weeks?

On the geopolitical standpoint, Heiko, from the U3O8 standpoint, geopolitical doesn't come in as much as you would think. Kazakhstan is still the world's major producer and still feeds into the market.

You see a lot of geopolitical coming from the enriched side of things. From our standpoint in producing U3O8, we don't see the geopolitical is as far as the world market.

What we are seeing, and we've seen significantly over the last couple of months, is the idea of US-based production, not US-legal production, but US-based production. We feel this is a very forward-looking statement, but we feel like there's growing potential for US-based production to see a meaningful premium compared to US-legal production.

That's part of the reason that we're being careful with the deployment of contracts. We want to be able to keep some material available for opportunistic placements in contracts that have a premium for US-based production.

That's so helpful. I'll get back in queue.

Thank you.

Thank you, Paul. Our next question is regulatory in nature.

How confident are you in your abilities to navigate regulations that might be reinstated down the road?

Thank you, Valerie. Okay.

How confident are we in being regulations that may be reinstated down the road? I'm not necessarily sure.

I'm going to ask, Ryan, do you have an idea of the basis of that question, Ryan?

What I would say, I don't know if I entirely have a basis, but I would say we are actively monitoring all rulemakings and we are actively participating in those purposes. As part of our management of our business, we are aware of those and we keep pretty good track of any changes to regulations or policies and are responding and working with regulators appropriately to minimize risks to our operations.

Sure. Thanks, Ryan.

Do you think that question might be pointed towards some work that's being done on the ISR mining regulations? Ryan, you just want to summarize your involvement and you as a representative for Ur-Energy in that rulemaking?

Absolutely. As there is major changes to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, much of which was directed by Executive Order 14300.

In response to that, the NRC will be issuing draft rules in the coming months on ISR. We are very much involved in that process.

We have been involved with NRC commissioners, national groups, National Mining Association, Wyoming Mining Association, Nuclear Energy Institute, a number of different groups that are all watching that and we are all participating as much as we can to ensure we understand how that will affect our business and ensure that it is appropriate for the business that's been established over the last 50 years or so. I could go more in detail on why the ISR rulemaking is needed, but at this point I'll just leave it at that, Matt, unless you want me to expand further.

I think that's a great summary. Thank you very much, Ryan.

Valerie, do you feel like the question is answered?

Yes. Our next question concerns new technology.

Do you have any plans to work with new technologies of uranium productivity? For example, Lightbridge fuel or some other company looking to up the efficiency of uranium power?

All right. Thanks, Valerie, for that question.

Look, I'm relying heavily on Ryan today in this call. Ryan, we as Ur-Energy, we are quite active and I'm very proud of this.

We are very active in the advancements in the uranium industry. First, I'm going to ask Ryan to give a quick summary on what we're doing with the DOE labs for initiatives in advancing uranium.

For sure. I think overall, in our culture as a company, we are always looking to advance and to increase efficiencies and look at new technologies.

That is something that we have always participated in. To give a flavor of what Matt was talking about, we have partnered with national laboratories to look at a number of different issues.

We in essence partnered with those laboratories to say here's some struggles that we may have or that could use some efficiencies, and they're working very closely with us. It's exciting to see, and these are national labs across the United States.

It's not just a single national lab, but this is all with the Department of Energy. We have some exciting things that we're looking at.

As far as your question, as far as fuel and new fuels and things of that nature, while yes we may be a provider of the source material for those fuels, we are not actively engaging in those fuel fabrications like you mentioned Lightbridge. Does that make sense, Matt?

That makes sense. It's also stressed that the recent commitment of over $2 billion towards the advancement of the enrichment capacity of the US, we're in discussions involved with all of those parties with regards to the potential to supply them with U3O8 as they're doing their testing and as they're doing their ramp-up of their facilities and as they build those out.

We're very much involved. Look, we're a major US producer.

If you're involved in nuclear industry in the United States, you're involved with us. Is that it, Valerie?

Okay. There are no more questions.

I'll hand it back over to you for closing remarks.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

I was thrilled with the interaction, the number of questions, the interest in Ur-Energy. I'm thrilled to be here.

Couldn't be more proud of the operations and our teams. Thanks everybody for being in this call.

This was a great restart of the quarterly earnings calls, and I'm very excited about being able to talk to you in the next 3 months. Thank you.