# Myriad Uranium Corp (CSE:M)

> Myriad Uranium Corp.

## About

Myriad Uranium Corp. (CSE: M, OTCQB: MYRUF, FSE: C3Q) is focused on uranium exploration and development in the United States, particularly in Wyoming and New Mexico. The company aims to strengthen domestic energy security by increasing uranium production, leveraging its projects that include the Copper Mountain Project, which has significant historical resource estimates and potential for over 100 million pounds of uranium.

## Key facts

- **Cash position:** Not Available
- **Shares outstanding:** 105,215,748
- **Fully diluted shares:** 161,129,800
- **Warrants:** 6,440,000
- **Options:** 1,425,000
- **Mineral resource:** The estimates completed by Fluor Mining and Metals Inc. (Fluor), May 20, 1980 are cited in several reports post-dating the estimate, including the most recent reference in a NI 43-101 Technical Report by Carter, G.S. (August 20, 2008) titled “Technical Report on the Uranium Resources at The Copper Mountain Project, Fremont County, Wyoming, U.S.A., on behalf of Neutron Energy Inc.” issued by Broad Oak Associates. The estimates for the Gem deposit and past-producing Arrowhead uranium mine deposits were completed by Rocky Mountain Energy Corp. in 1977 and cited in report titled “Copper Mountain Exploration Project Report by Southard, G.G., Morton, D.K., Gordon. J.H. and Schledewitz, D.C., RMEC (December 1979). The historical estimates are based on data and reports prepared by previous operators. This included data from over 900,000 feet of hammer tool and core drilling. The descriptions of core drilling and core handling procedures, sample preparation and analysis, and procedures for statistical correlation of various assay methods are all presented in the reports and are considered appropriate. Based on the amount and quality of historic work completed, the information is considered relevant and reliable. This view is supported by earlier reviewers of the data and methodology, including David S. Robertson & Associates Inc. (1978) and Golder Associates (1979), who concluded that the core and sample handling techniques from the field through the sample preparation facility were in “accordance with good engineering practice”. However, the resultant gamma logs and core assays that supported the estimations and associated technical work were not available to the Qualified Person, therefore a complete and thorough review of the data has not been possible. Earlier estimates by Rocky Mountain Energy Corp. (1977) used the polygonal estimation method based on ten-foot composite thicknesses and 0.010% U 0 cut-off using gamma probe grades with a tonnage factor 12 cubic ft/ton. During an estimate update (most recent), Fluor (1980) investigated various resource estimation techniques, including polygonal methods, cross-sectional methods, ordinary kriging, and a method using conditional lognormal probability distributions, which was the chosen method. The key difference between the earlier RMEC estimates and those of Fluor was the use of core-equivalent Delayed Fission Neutron (DFN) grades using a correction formula derived from comparison between probe grades and DFN grades, that were accepted by RMEC as the most accurate determination of grade at the time. At the time of reporting, RMEC and Fluor used the U.S. Bureau of Mines resource categories, which were classified as follows: Measured Resources – projected one-half the distance toward the nearest control (i.e. another drill hole) or a maximum of 15 metres (50 feet), whichever occurred first. If correlateable mineral was not in the adjacent control or no adjacent control existed, a maximum of 7.5 metres (25 feet) of projection was allowed (a variance of 1.5 to 3.0 metres (5 to 10 feet) between controls above the maximum was excepted in a few cases). Indicated Resources – any mineral intercept at or above the cut-offs stated was considered to be at least of Indicated categorization. Isolated holes (i.e. those positioned greater than 30 metres (100 feet) from adjacent holes) were allowed a maximum projection of 7.5 metres (25 feet) to the center of the side of a square (a maximum area of influence = 25 ft. x 25 ft. or 625 square feet.). Between drill control, where correlations were feasible, but limits exceeded those for Measured categorization, Indicated Resources were extended and projected one-half of the remaining distance or 7.5 metres (25 feet) beyond Measured if correlation to adjacent control was not feasible. Inferred Resources – mineralization projected beyond the Measured and Indicated resource limits in areas bounded by surrounding drill control were categorized as Inferred. Grades and thicknesses of these areas were determined by averaging the intercepts from surrounding control. Inferred resources were projected to distances ranging from 7.5 to 365 metres (25 to 1200 feet). These categories, or the application thereof, are not necessarily compatible with current definitions. The “most likely mineable reserves” estimated by RMEC at the time would be categorized as Indicated and Inferred resources, in accordance with definitions of the CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves (2014). The portions of the “reserves” (approximately 20 to 60%) that were drilled on 15 to 30 metre (50 to 100 foot) centres, and normally would be classified as Measured resources, are equated to Indicated resources, because of the nature of the mineralization, uncertainty regarding the grades and the lack of established economic viability of the deposits at the time. The remaining portions of the “reserves” drilled on 30 to 60 metre (100 to 200 foot) centers, are classified as Inferred resources. An attempt to separate the indicated from the inferred resources was not possible from the available information. Also, while the Copper Mountain Project area contains all or most of each deposit referred to, some of the resources referred to may be located outside the current Copper Mountain Project area. There are no more recent estimates reported. In order to verify the historical resources and potentially re-state them as current resources, a program of digitization of data is required (to the extent possible), followed by re-logging and/or re-drilling to generate new data that is comparable with the original data that can be used to establish the correlation and continuity of geology and grades between boreholes with sufficient confidence to estimate mineral resources. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves; and Myriad Uranium is not treating the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves.
- **Projects:** ["Copper Mountain, Wyoming, USA\n\nLocated in America’s leading uranium jurisdiction\n- Wyoming hosts the largest-known uranium ore reserves in the United States.\n- The state accounts for 69% of U.S. production from 5 operating mines.\n\nTIER-ONE JURISDICTION WITH EXCELLENT ACCESS TO INFRASTRUCTURE\n\nOne of the largest uranium projects in Wyoming.\n- Myriad to acquire 100% of Copper Mtn from Rush Rare Metals by way of announced merger. Ownership currently at 75%.\n- 18,000+ acre land package with 7 historic deposits, 15 prospects targeted for expansion, and many new targets.\n- Myriad the first to consolidate ownership of the Copper Mountain District in over 50 years.\n- Comprehensive U.S. Dept. of Energy report (Bendix, 1982) estimated the potential uranium endowment of the “Control Area” (see figure) at 245 Mlbs uranium to depth of 600 feet – Myriad controls 80% of this area. Larger “Assessment Area’s” potential endowment estimated at 655 Mlbs to 600 feet – Myriad controls 62% of this area.\n- Access to infrastructure – the project is located within 5 km of regional rail, highway, and power lines.\n\n* This estimate is historical in nature and does not represent current mineral resource, reserve or exploration target estimates under the category definitions provided by NI 43-101. It represents potential a mineral endowment that would require exploration work and drilling to verify. The key assumptions, parameters, and methods used to prepare the historical estimates are described in this document. There are no more recent estimates of this type. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves. Myriad and Rush are not treating the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves.\n\nCopper Mountain, Wyoming\n\nLOOKING NORTH AT COPPER MOUNTAIN\n\nLOOKING SOUTH FROM THE CANNING DEPOSIT\n\nRESOURCE EXPANSION\n\nHistoric work provides a launchpad for rapid project advancement.\n\n1950s-1960s\nLegendary geologist and Myriad technical advisor Jim Davis discovers the Arrowhead Mine which, according to publicly available production records (United States Department of the Interior), produced ~500 klbs of uranium in the 1950’s and 1960’s.\n\n1970s\n**Union Pacific** drilled 2,000 boreholes discovering 7 deposits during the 70’s.\n- They envisioned a conventional hub & spoke, 6-pit mine plan centered on the Canning deposit.\n- They had designed a leach pad and had plans to commence mining in 1983, but dropped those plans in ~1980 after prices plummeted following Three Mile Island incident.\n- Union Pacific estimated the potential of the 6-pit mine plan and additional targets (estimated and speculated) to be far higher.\n\n**Anaconda Copper** drilled 19 boreholes into the Railroad Target area adjacent to Union Pacific’s Copper Mountain project.\n- Intersected elevated mineralization at depth. Crucially tested for deeper mineralization associated with thrust faults.\n\n1990s\n**Anaconda Uranium** (no relation to Anaconda Copper) acquired all the historical data in the early 90’s and spent several years analyzing the data.\n- They focused on an “Area of interest” at the Canning deposit.\n- Two review reports (1991 and 1997) confirmed that Copper Mountain has substantial uranium mineralization with heap leach potential, and possibly an ISR option (not tested).\n- Both recommended bulk sampling and testing as part of further work.\n\n2006-2012\n**Neutron Energy & Strathmore** both held parts of the Copper Mtn Project. Their ownership had divided Canning Deposit and most of the entire district.\n**Neutron Energy** brought back geologist Jim Davis and re-evaluated all the historical data which was summarized in a 2008 technical report.\n- Suggested the equivalent uranium grades used in the histori estimation were conservative and noted that fluorometric analyses suggested higher grades but were disregarded (Davis & Wilton, 2010).\n- Myriad’s Phase I drilling results support this. Recommended various programs targeting several styles of mineralization.\n\nMANY IMPORTANT GRANITE-RELATED DEPOSITS WORLDWIDE\n\nImportance\n- Historic drilling at Copper Mtn. mainly targeted granite-related mineralization (e.g. North Canning).\n- Uranium mineralization hosted in faults and fractures.\n- Similar deposits mined historically in Europe:\n– Over 300,000 tU mined in France, Germany and Czech Republic 1\n- Currently mined on large scale in China:\n– 20 economical U deposits with recoverable reserves of 20,000 tU2\n\n1. René, M. (2018). History of Uranium Mining 1 in Central Europe.\n2. Zhong, F., Zhang, X., Wang, K., Wu, B., Liu, J., Pan, J. and Xia, F. (2023). Genesis of the Mianhuakeng granite-related uranium deposit, South China: Insights from cathodoluminescence imaging, fluid inclusions, and trace elements composition of hydrothermal quartz. Ore Geology Reviews 154 (2023) 105308.\n\nCOMPELLING GEOLOGY INCLUDING ISR POTENTIAL AT COPPER MTN.\n\nMultiple Deposit Types\n- Historic drilling mainly targeted granite-related mineralization down to 600 feet (e.g. North Canning).\n- But there is associated sedimentary mineralization (e.g. Arrowhead).\n- And the possibility of roll-front mineralization in Tertiary sediments (e.g. Cedar Ridge).\n- And also the possibility of deeper thrust/unconformityrelated mineralization (e.g. Railroad).\n\nPHASE 1 DRILL PROGRAM CANNING DEPOSIT\n\nLOOKING SOUTH FROM THE CANNING DEPOSIT AT COPPER MOUNTAIN, WYOMING\n\nHistorical Drilling\n- ~820 holes were drilled in the Canning deposit by Union Pacific, generally to a maximum depths of around 180 m.\n- Contains bulk of historic mineralization identified by Union Pacific.\n- Priority area contains higher average grades than the overall mineralized area.\n\nMyriad’s Phase 1 Drilling\n- Focused on the priority target area, known to contain higher grades.\n- 34 holes completed (RC and DD).\n- Best grade interval: 5,337 ppm over 1.28 m from 68.7 m (CAN0004).\n- Best GT interval: 4,361 ppm over 2.29 m from 80.9 m (CAN0006).\n\nFault Mineralising Model\n\nCopper Mtn Uranium Project – Core Shed: Riverton, WY\n\nASSAYS\n\nAssays from 34 holes have now been compared to the initial results from the spectral gamma probe, and the assays confirm much higher grades. In the 1970s, Union Pacific only used probe data to estimate resources and plan the mine.\n- Union Pacific relied on DFN probe data, which was considered conservative.\n- 1970s fluorometric assays indicated that DFN probe could be underestimating grades, but the results were disregarded in favor of DFN probe data.\n- Reported ICP-MS assay results show chemical grades superior to spectral gamma probe equivalents, and gaps may also contain significant unreported uranium mineralization.\n\nAssays across the 34 boreholes to date show the following relative to probe equivalent results:\n- Assay grades 60% higher than eU O at 3 8 1,000 ppm cut-off.\n- Assay grades 50% higher than eU3O8 at 500 ppm cut-off.\n- Assay grades 20% higher than eU3O8 at 200 ppm cut-off.\n- CAN0034 had a >250% improvement in grade from 344 ppm eU3O8 to 833 ppm U3O8 over 0.5 m at 454 m depth.\n\nHIGHER GRADES AND DEEPER MINERALIZATION\n\nRED BASIN URANIUM PROJECT\n\nMyriad owns 100% of the Red Basin Uranium Project in New Mexico, USA\n- Historical drilling in the district confirms that the Red Basin Project contains high-grade uranium minersalisation of 0.17%-0.31% that is near surface with signigicant potential for associated vanadium up to 1.64% V2O5.\n- The mineralisation is in thick sections of rollfront deposits hosted in permeable sandstones from surface to depths of less than 450 feet.\n- The broader Datil Mountains – Pietown area could contain 40 Mlbs or more of high-grade uranium with much of it potentially amenable to ISR.\n\nThe information on this slide is historical and not NI 43-101 compliant. See the final slide 12 of this presentation for further information respecting historical estimates."]
- **Leadership:** Thomas Lamb (CEO, Board Member, Technical Committee), George van der Walt (Senior Geologist / Qualified Person, Technical Committee), Nelson Lamb (CFO), Simon Clarke (Board Member, Chairman, Mr. Clarke brings close to 30 years’ experience building companies and implementing successful capital markets and growth strategies focused on mining, energy, and energy technology.), Fred Bonner (Board Member / Technical Committee), Tom Lee (Board Member), Marvin Singer (Board Member), RON HALAS (Technical Committee, Ron Halas is a Canadian Mining Engineer with over 35 years of mining industry experience in Operations, Project Development and Studies for both open pit and underground mines.), Jim Davis (Technical Committee), Eduards Smirnovs (Advisor), Eric Miller (Strategic Advisor)

_Verified data last updated: 2026-06-12_

## Recent filings

- 2026-06-09 — press_release — [m:cnx_2026-06-09_10-16-45.pdf](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/54829?documentId=54829)
- 2026-05-21 — press_release — [m:cnx_2026-05-21_07-40-10.pdf](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/51723?documentId=51723)
- 2026-05-19 — press_release — [m:cnx_2026-05-19_12-21-43.pdf](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/51327?documentId=51327)
- 2026-05-19 — press_release — [m:cnx_2026-05-19_06-29-18.pdf](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/51301?documentId=51301)
- 2026-04-28 — press_release — [Myriad Uranium Appoints Eric Miller as Strategic Advisor on US Critical Minerals](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/34049?documentId=34049)
- 2026-04-22 — press_release — [Myriad Uranium Corp. Presents in Red Cloud's Virtual Webinar Series](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/29706?documentId=29706)
- 2026-04-20 — press_release — [Myriad Uranium Announces Filing of Comprehensive Technical Report on Copper Mountain, Provides Details of Planned Phase II Drill Program Vancouver, British Columbia--(Newsfile Corp. - April 20, 2026) - Myriad Uranium Corp. (CSE: M) (OTCQB: MYRUF) (FSE: C3Q) ("Myriad" or the "Company") is pleased to](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/28776?documentId=28776)
- 2026-04-20 — press_release — [Myriad Uranium Announces Filing of Comprehensive Technical Report on Copper Mountain, Provides Details of Planned Phase II Drill Program](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/preview/28771?documentId=28771)

## Investor FAQ

### [Latest news?](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/faq/latest-news)

Myriad Uranium Corp. recently announced the filing of a comprehensive technical report on the Copper Mountain Project and provided details of a planned Phase II drill program. This information was disclosed in a press release dated April 20, 2026.

### [Project Overview](https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/faq/project-overview)

Myriad Uranium Corp. is focused on uranium exploration and development in the United States, particularly at the Copper Mountain Project in Wyoming. The project encompasses an 18,000+ acre land package with significant historical resource estimates and potential for over 100 million pounds of uranium, with plans for further exploration and drilling to verify these resources.

## Live AI chat

- https://ai-chat-dev-red.vercel.app/m/chat
- Investor website: https://myriaduranium.com/