Western Utah Copper Evaluation

AN EVALUATION OF WESTERN UTAH COPPER CORPORATION’S COPPER DEPOSIT HOLDINGS IN BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH by Roger C. Steininger, Ph.D. CPG 7417 May 8, 2007

INTRODUCTION Western Utah Copper Corporation (WUCC) controls about 82,000 acres of mining claims and state leases in Beaver County, Utah that contain several copper deposits and the potential for discovery of additional copper deposits (the attached map outlines the general area of WUCC’s claims). This document supplies an overview of copper mineralization on these holdings and summarizes the copper resources that WUCC owns. This summary was developed from a thorough evaluation of numerous reports about the area and several field visits to various sites on the property. If detail is needed beyond this summary the reader is referred to the several reports listed at the end of this summary report. EXPLORATION PROGRAM The Beaver County Copper Belt, aka the Milford Mineral Belt, contains several types of copper deposits and possibly a large classical porphyry copper deposit or deposits. The possibility of discovery of large porphyry copper deposits will only be discussed here briefly. WUCC is conducting exploration for a large porphyry copper deposit (or deposits) in the district. While a porphyry copper deposit has yet to be discovered drilling has encountered extremely favorable geologic features suggesting that the property could contain a deposit, or deposits, similar to those known in the Western United States. Very widespread drilling by WUCC encountered intrusive rocks, alteration, copper mineralization, and associated mineralization that can be interpreted as the outer margins of a porphyry copper system, or systems. Additional drilling is planned to continue the exploration program, but since this is currently in the conceptual stage this aspect of the WUCC program will not be addressed further. I have been involved in much of this exploration and can attest to it being conducted in a disciplined, measured and professional manner. KNOWN COPPER DEPOSITS The Beaver County Copper Belt lies within an east-trending zone of altered granodiorites to quartz monzonites that intrude Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary rocks, and Tertiary volcanic rocks. Relatively young volcanic rocks cover portions of this geology. Mineralization is dated at Cretaceous through late Tertiary and regional controls on mineralization are thought to be deep-seated crustal structures. The area is on the eastern leading edge of the Late Mesozoic to Early Tertiary Sevier thrust system. The geology of the Beaver County Copper Belt is structurally complex, as it has been subjected to compression and later extension from the Mesozoic Period through the Tertiary Period. The basement complex consists of Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary rocks, many of which are carbonates that served as hosts of skarn development. Oligocene volcanic rocks consisting of andesite flows and pyroclastic rocks were extruded over much of the area, and these rocks were intruded by a series of Oligocene multistage stocks with compositions in the granodiorite to quartz monzonite range. Numerous dikes

that cut the sedimentary and volcanic sequences suggest that there are also intrusive complexes at depth. Known copper deposits in the Beaver County Copper Belt occur as four distinct types: Type 1 copper deposits occur as pipe-shaped deposits entirely contained in silicified quartz monzonite or granodiorite; the best examples of this type are the OK deposit and the Cactus mine. Nearby on trend is the Mary I deposit which is similar though less silicified. Chalcopyrite, chalcocite, and bornite occur with minor molybdenite. About 75% of the sulfide minerals have been oxidized to tenorite, chrysocolla, malachite and azurite. Gold and silver are present and can be recovered in milling operations, but are not economically significant when acid leaching is used to recover the copper. This Type 1 deposit is known to occur in the district only at the OK mine, Mary I, and Cactus mine deposits. Of these, only the OK and Cactus deposits are covered in this report. Type 2 copper deposits occur in bodies of garnet-magnetite skarn adjacent to intrusives. These deposits form tabular zones of different orientations. Deposits of this type include the Hidden Treasure, Maria, and Copper Ranch deposits and are subjects of this report. Type 3 deposits consist of remobilized copper occurring in sediments, and associated with calcite. Currently the Sunrise deposit is the only known example of this type. The Sunrise deposit may be related to skarn mineralization but is low in magnetite. Type 4 deposits, which are currently of no apparent economic importance, are iron deposits consisting of magnetite skarn with minor associated copper. DEPOSITS Of immediate importance to WUCC’s operation are the Type 2 deposits. These are fairly typical copper skarn type deposits and the principal subject of Mine Development Associates’ (MDA) resource analyses found in the 1998 Western States feasibility study. MDA presents a discussion of the reliability of the historic data which will not be repeated here. They also present a discussion of the approach to determining resource size and grade by block modeling. Again, that discussion will not be repeated here. Since the MDA study, WUCC in 2004-05 drilled three holes in the Maria and three holes in the Hidden Treasure deposits. These holes were drilled to confirm grades and to supply cuttings for metallurgical studies. Assays from these holes were consistent with grades predicted by Joralemon and MDA. The MDA resources for the Hidden Treasure, Maria, and Copper Ranch deposits are tabulated in Table 1 (note, the OK deposit is included in this table but will be discussed below). Recently WUCC drilled the extension of the Hidden Treasure and extensively drilled the Candy B (both of which are discussed below).

Table 1-Summary of defined resources controlled by WUCC (after MDA, 1998)

Deposit Hidden Treasure

Maria

Copper Ranch

OK

TOTAL

Cutoff Cu%

Tons (000) in zones

Cu%

Total Cu Pounds (000)

0.00%

865

1.78%

30,738

0.40%

856

1.79%

30,662

0.60%

828

1.84%

30,398

1.00%

775

1.90%

29,500

0.00%

618

1.25%

15,422

0.40%

614

1.25%

15,397

0.60%

569

1.31%

14,937

1.00%

417

1.49%

12,404

0.00%

326

1.13%

7,336

0.40%

322

1.13%

7,313

0.60%

293

1.20%

7,010

1.00%

195

1.40%

5,461

0.00%

10,195

0.24%

48,936

0.40%

1,318

0.75%

19,770

0.60%

724

0.97%

14,046

1.00%

268

1.32%

7,075

0.00%

12,004

0.43%

102,432

0.40%

3,110

1.18%

73,141

0.60%

2,413

1.38%

66,390

1.00%

1,655

1.64%

54,440

Inferred

Deposit

Cutoff Cu%

Tons (000) in zones

Cu%

Total Cu Pounds (000)

Hidden Treasure

0.00%

9

1.78%

312

Maria

0.00%

25

1.25%

631

Copper Ranch

0.00%

14

1.13%

315

OK

0.00%

0

0.24%

0

TOTAL

0.00%

48

1.31%

1,259

In their study MDA did not consider several other Type 2 copper resources in the district. These include the Bawana, Candy B, Old Hickory, and Valley deposits. Resources for these deposits were tabulated in Joralemon, 1980. Joralemon calculated resource estimates using a classical cross sectional approach rather than the computerized method that MDA used, which was not in use at the time. While the two approaches differ they both used the same database, and both are valid and meet industry standards for resource estimates. MDA did not include the several other significant deposits since Nevada Star was unable to acquire these deposits and consolidate the district, which has been successfully completed by WUCC. Consolidation of the district is a key element in the WUCC program. Table 2 presents Joralemon’s resource estimates for the several deposits not included in the MDA study, except for Candy B. MDA made the following statement about the Joralemon resources, “MDA did not audit nor verify the estimates, but the methodology used should produce a rough estimate of the resource.” Joralemon considered these “reserves” however given the changes in economics since his study these must be considered resources until such time that current economics can be applied. No effort was made to classify these resources. All except for Valley are probably some combination of measured and indicated resource, while Valley is most likely inferred. Table 2-Summary of Joralemon’s resource estimates for deposits not included in the MDA study. Deposit Bawana Old Hickory Valley

Tonnage 1,207,000 4,000,000 44,564,000

Copper Grade 1.84% 0.5% 1.27%

Beyond the above resources there are possible and probable extensions to the deposits and numerous copper bearing skarns and geophysical anomalies that have not been drilled. It is likely with additional drilling in the area that resources can be expanded and new deposits discovered. An example of which are seven recently drilled holes to extend the Hidden Treasure deposit to the east, about 100 feet from the nearest historic holes. Most of these encountered significant copper mineralization as tabulated in Table 3. While this drilling is insufficient to establish a resource estimate they do

support the conclusion that extensions of the several Type 2 deposits will probably be discovered. Additional drilling is planed to fully define the extension of the Hidden Treasure deposit. Table 3-A summary of copper mineralization encountered in drill hole in the area of a probable extension of the Hidden Treasure deposit. Hole EHT-1 EHT-2 EHT-3 EHT-4 EHT-5 EHT-6 EHT-7

Thickness 5 feet 25 feet 80 feet None 5 feet 115 feet 50 feet

Grade 3.0% Cu 1.57% Cu 1.0% Cu None 1.11% Cu 0.41% Cu 0.33% Cu

WUCC completed 15 holes in the Candy B deposit to supplement historic drilling. Incorporating these two data sets WUCC produced a preliminary resource estimate of about 7 million tons with an average grade of about 1% Cu equivalent (Cu+Au). The one known Type 3 deposit is Sunrise. Again the only resource estimate for this deposit was produced by Joralemon at 294,000 tons of 2.72% Cu. WUCC drilled 5 holes into this deposit that support the Joralemon estimate. Additionally, these holes suggest that there are significant gold values in the deposit. There are three known Type 1 deposits on the WUCC property, the OK, Mary I, and Cactus deposits. The MDA resource estimate for the OK deposit is summarized in Table 1. The Cactus mine is another example of a breccia pipe copper deposit that had historic production of about 1.4 million tons of ore with an average grade of about 2% Cu with silver and gold credits. The mine ceased production with “ore in site” and modern exploration has encountered additional copper mineralization. WUCC developed a preliminary resource estimate for Cactus, and deposits in the immediate vicinity, of about 6.7 million tons of 1.12% Cu. CONCLUSIONS WUCC demonstrated with disciplined drilling and geological work that the known copper deposits are larger than previously reported. The Candy B deposit remains open and additional drilling is planned. WUCC Chief Geologist Dave Harstshorn identified numerous previously unrecognized undrilled copper skarn targets that will be drilled soon. This drilling could result in significant expansion of the resource base. Using the above resource estimates there are about 240,000,000 pounds of surface mine able copper in these deposits. All of the deposits have potential to be expanded.

REFERENCES Butler, B. S., 1913, Geology and Ore Deposits of the San Francisco and Adjacent Districts, Utah. U.S.G.S. Profession Paper 80 Joralemon, Peter, 1980, Copper Resources of the Rock District, Beaver County, Utah, Toledo Mining Company private report, September 15, 1980. MDA-Western States Engineering, 1998, OK Mine Project Feasibility StudyVolume 1, Nevada Star Resource Corp. private report, December 1998. DISCLAIMER This report is for the sole use of Western Utah Copper Corp. It is based upon the results of several property examinations undertaken by the writer and on published and unpublished data made available to the writer by Western Utah Copper Company., the principal documents used are referenced above. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this report the writer can not and will not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of all supporting and unpublished documentation.

Roger C. Steininger Consulting Geologist Reno, Nevada 89509 USA Telephone: 775-323-7775 Fax: 775-323-1134 Email: [email protected] CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR I, Roger C. Steininger, CPG, do hereby certify that: 1. I am a self employed Consulting Geologist doing business as: Roger C. Steininger Ph. D. Consulting Geologist 3401 San Mateo Ave. Reno, Nevada 89509 USA 2. I graduated from the following universities Western Michigan University with a Bachelor of Science in Geology in 1964 Brigham Young University with a Masters of Science in Geology in 1966 Colorado State University with a Ph. D. in Earth Resources (Geology option) in 1986 3. I am a Certified Professional Geologist with the American Institute of Professional Geologists, Certification Number 7417. In addition, I am a Member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration (SME) and a Fellow of the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG). 4. I have practiced my profession as a geologist continuously since graduation from Brigham Young University for 41 years. 5. I have read the definition of “qualified person” set out in National Instrument 43101 (“NI 43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, registration as a Certified Professional Geologist, affiliation with professional associations (as defined in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a “qualified person” for the purposes of NI43-101. 6. I am responsible for and prepared the report titles “An Evaluation of Western Utah Copper Corporation’s Copper Deposit Holdings in Beaver County, Utah”. I have visited the property on numerous occasions.

7. My involvement with the Beaver County properties is to serve in a consulting capacity to Western Utah Copper Corp. assisting with understanding the geology, planning exploration, and drilling programs. This involvement has been from August 2005 through the present. 8. I am not aware of any material fact or material changes with respect to the subject matter of this Technical Report that is not reflected in the Technical Report, the omission to disclose which makes the Technical Report misleading. 9. I am independent of Western Utah Copper Corp. applying all of the tests of section 1.5 of National Instrument 43-101. 10. I consent to Western Utah Copper Company using the above referenced report in its corporate activities. Dated this 8th Day of May, 2007

__________________________ Signed Roger C. Steininger, Ph.D., CPG 7417

__________________________ Printed name of Qualified Person