It's my pleasure to welcome you to the 2024 Annual General Meeting of Peninsula Energy Ltd. My name is John Harrison. I'm the Chairman of Peninsula Energy, and I am the Chair of today's Annual General Meeting. Also in attendance here in Perth in WA are our Managing Director, Wayne Heili, Non-Executive Director, David Coyne, and our Company Secretary, Jonathan Whyte. Also present is our CFO, Willie Bezuidenhout. As we've enabled online attendance at the AGM, I'd also like to introduce you to Non-Executive Directors, Mark Wheatley, Harrison Barker, and Brian Booth, who are attending online from Sydney, the United States, and Canada respectively. I'd also like to introduce our auditors, represented in physical attendance by Mr. Glyn O'Brien from BDO, who wil l be pleased to answer any questions you may have regarding the conduct of the audit or the auditor's report.
Before we get to the formal business as set out in the notice of meeting, I'd like to say a few words. On behalf of the Board, I warmly welcome shareholders joining us both online and those here in the room with us today, and extend a heartfelt thank you for your continued investment in Peninsula Energy. Your commitment to our projects and vision sees us on the cusp of becoming a fully independent uranium producer. Over the past year, we've made great strides, including the financing and construction of the redesigned and re-engineered Lance Projects. During October, the Board visited the project, where we witnessed the rapid pace of round-the-clock 24-hour construction of the processing plant and the concurrent development of the well fields. This reinforced our confidence in the project's potential and in our readiness to achieve uranium production by the end of the calendar year as planned.
We are entering production at a pivotal moment in the uranium market, where the need for secure and reliable uranium supplies has never been more critical. Geopolitical considerations dictate that the demand for Western-produced nuclear fuel is on the rise, and uranium remains a cornerstone of the low-carbon energy transition. As the United States, in particular, looks to bolster its local supply of critical minerals, uranium has become a central focus, and Peninsula Energy is very well positioned to step into this space and provide a stable domestic supply of uranium fuel. Our long-term off-take agreements in Europe and the U.S. place us in a position to support utilities globally. With these partnerships in place, Peninsula can deliver value not only to our shareholders but to our clients and communities, offering a secure and reliable uranium supply essential to achieving their energy needs.
Our contracts with utilities reflect the regard in which our operations are held and highlight our commitment to building long-term relationships with our existing and potential new clients in a growing market. Thanks to the two capital raisings that many of you have participated in this year, we have a strong balance sheet. Our current cash holdings will support us well beyond first production. We are also preparing to consolidate our share capital, which we will shortly be waiting on. This proposed reduction in shares will provide a more appropriate capital structure to attract a wider range of investors as we look at growth opportunities beyond the current Ross and Kendrick life of mine plan at the Lance Projects. This year has also marked a renewed focus on operational resilience and environmental responsibility.
The Lance project's in-situ recovery process, in alignment with our sustainability goals, allows us to minimize environmental impact while optimizing uranium recovery. We are primed to lead with an approach that emphasizes efficiency, environmental stewardship, and responsible mining practices. We are equally excited by the continued expansion potential of the Lance project. Alongside our production ramp-up, our development and exploration teams remain focused on extending the resource base, enhancing long-term production capacity, and building value. This ongoing development potential beyond the existing Ross and Kendrick life of mine plan and into the Barber and Dagger project areas positions Peninsula as a company with the capability to scale up as demand continues to increase. Our focus on exploration and development speaks to our belief in the longevity of this project and its ability to serve as a cornerstone for Peninsula Energy's future.
Our Managing Director and Chief Executive Wayne Heili has indicated to us that, at a time in the not-too-distant future, he wishes to reduce his full-time commitment to Peninsula and step down from his executive position. This is not a matter of urgency, and Wayne has committed to making himself available to the Company in a technical advisory capacity going forward. We will not be losing him. We are particularly grateful to him for his outstanding contribution to the transformation of Peninsula from an idle alkaline ISR project into America's first operating low-pH ISR uranium mine. We are also grateful for his willingness to assist in the recruitment of a suitable successor and a constructive transition. Wayne is a notable shareholder in our Company, and our interests are completely aligned. On the operational front, we're particularly pleased with announced today the recruitment of Mr.
Frédéric Guérin as our new Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of Geology. Frédéric, who starts work at the Lance Projects on Monday, brings a deep technical knowledge following 30 years of international management experience in the uranium ISR industry and has held key roles in Canada, France, Mongolia, and Uzbekistan, including overseeing the development of new low-pH in-situ recovery projects. He holds an MSc and a PhD and has a distinguished academic and extensive operational background in geology and hydrology. He is a registered professional geoscientist in Canada and holds a PMP designation from the Project Management Institute. We welcome his arrival to further strengthen the leadership team at our flagship project.
In our annual report, shareholders may have observed that your Board of Directors has chosen the point of our upcoming graduation from developer back to producer status to change the main measurement metrics governing share-based awards under our Employee Long-Term Incentive Plan, from those dependent upon independent personal performance measures to one that will compare your total shareholding return against a comparison group of relevant peer group companies. The Board considers that this pivotal time in the Company's development is the correct moment to further align the compensation of our senior workforce with the fortunes of our shareholders. A number of Non-Executive Directors of Peninsula, including myself, have served the Company for a good few years during complex times, and I know that I speak for them all when I say that it's been a privilege to have done so.
It's not been a notably easy time, and I wish to thank all of them on your behalf. During the 2025 calendar year, we intend to conduct a staged process to recruit successors for Mr. Harrison Barker and Mr. Mark Wheatley, as well as myself. I intend to oversee this process, as well as the recruitment of Wayne's successor, before signing off. Mr. Barker also acts as a valued representative of the Company in discussions with current and potential customers, a role for which his previous professional career in the nuclear power generation industry equips him well. The Company will continue to retain Mr. Barker's services in this capacity after he steps down as Director. On behalf of the Board, I want to thank you, our shareholders, for your steadfast support throughout what has been a transformative period.
Thanks to your patience and our team's relentless dedication, we now stand ready to bring this vision to fruition, becoming the next ASX-listed uranium company to rejoin the producer ranks. As we prepare for production, our momentum is strong and our vision is clear: to build a secure and sustainable uranium supply for an energy-hungry, low-carbon future. This is a truly exciting time for Peninsula, and we are very grateful for your continued participation in this opportunity. I'll now move on to the formal business of the meeting, and at the conclusion of formal business, Wayne will make a presentation, at which time shareholders are welcome to ask questions. Of course, shareholders are also welcome to ask questions on the various resolutions as we move through these. I'll now move on to the statutory business of the meeting. At the conclusion of formal business. I'm sorry, I didn't say that right.
It's now time for the meeting to begin, and I declare the meeting open for business. Once we get to today's business, each resolution will be open for discussion prior to putting the motion to the floor. To maximize shareholder participation in the meeting, we are again offering shareholders the ability to attend online and participate in the meeting virtually, to submit questions to the chairperson of the meeting in real time, and directly vote at the meeting using the virtual meeting platform. To ask a question online, please click on the Ask a Question button, select the relevant resolution, and type your question. Note you will need your security holder reference number or holder identification number and your registered postcode. As noted earlier, the floor will also be open for discussion at the conclusion of ordinary and special business in Wayne's presentation.
Questions are to be directed to me as chair of the meeting. I'll now continue with the proceedings of the meeting. Under the Company's constitution, a quorum of three voting shareholders must be present in person or by proxy, attorney, or representative at the annual general meeting. I note that a quorum is present. Proxies have been inspected, and all those validly lodged have been accepted. The register of proxies is available at the registration desk should any shareholder physically present wish to inspect it. All undirected proxies given in favor of the Chairman will be voted by the Chairman in favor of all resolutions, with the exception of Resolution Two being a conditional special resolution, which will be voted against the resolution.
I would ask all shareholders, proxy holders, and guests physically present to ensure that they've registered their attendance at the registration desk located at the entrance of this room. A copy of the notice convening this meeting has previously been sent to all shareholders and sets out in detail the nature and purpose of the resolutions. An addendum to the notice of annual general meeting was also issued. Does anyone require me to read the notice of the meeting or the addendum? Unless any member does require the notice to be read, I've proposed to take the notice and addendum as read. In accordance with the Fourth Edition of the ASX Corporate Governance Council Recommendations, all resolutions will be decided by poll. If you're physically present, for your reference, please refer to the handout of the proxy votes exercise.
For those in attendance physically, the persons entitled to vote on this poll are all shareholders, representatives, and attorneys of shareholders and proxy holders who hold a yellow voting card. If you're here in person in more than one of these capacities, you will have been issued with as many yellow voting cards as you have separate capacities. You must mark either the for or against box for each resolution for your vote to count. If you wish to cast some of your votes for the resolution and some of your votes against the resolution, write in the for box the actual number of votes you are casting for the resolution, and then in the against box, the actual number of votes you are casting against the resolution. The sum of the votes cast for or against the resolution must not exceed your voting entitlement.
If you are a proxy holder, a summary of the votes to which you are entitled has been provided with the yellow voting card. If you only have directed votes, you need to do nothing other than submit the voting card. Votes at your discretion or open votes are shown in the column titled Votes Open on your proxy summary and can be cast at your discretion by marking either the for or against box. Once you've finished marking your card, please place it in one of the ballot boxes circulating the room after all resolutions have been read. Please do not hesitate to ask the Link staff who will be circulating the room with the ballot box after all resolutions are read, should you have any questions. For those attending online, click on the Get a Voting Card and select your vote for each resolution and select Submit.
Please refer to the virtual meeting online guide on the platform should you require assistance. The 2024 annual report was mailed on the 18th of October 2024 to those members that specifically requested it and has been held by members for a time that more than meets the statutory period. I trust that all shareholders that requested a copy of the annual report received it. There are also spare copies available today at the registration desk, and shareholders may also view the annual report on the Company website at www.pel.net.au. The financial statements and the reports of the directors and the auditors are now laid before the meeting. Formal shareholder approval of the contents of the annual report is not required under the Corporations Act, and hence I will not move a motion to have them adopted. Are there any questions from the floor on the 2024 annual report?
Are there any questions online on the 2024 annual report? There are none. If there are no further questions, I'll move on to the next item of business. On screen will be a summary of the proxy voting results over three slides, I believe. We now move on to the individual resolutions. Resolution One is the adoption of the remuneration report. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment the following resolution as a non-binding resolution. That for the purpose of Section 250R(2) of the Corporations Act and for all other purposes, approval is given for the adoption of the remuneration report as contained in the Company's annual report for the financial year ending 30th of June 2024. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution?
We have a question online from Stephen Mayne. What is the history of proxy advisory firms covering us, and did any of them issue reports ahead of today's meeting? If so, were there any recommendations against, and on what grounds? Were proxy advisors a part of last year's remuneration for a strike, and has there been material against votes on the remuneration report today? Thank you for that. Taking the last one first, you should be able to see, I hope you can see online, but you can certainly see in the meeting on the screen the proxy voting proportions in connection with the remuneration report. And if somebody can see the screen, which I can't, they can help me. So I believe that the proxy voting, Stephen, shows that there is a majority in favor of the remuneration report. It has not reached 75% in favor.
Therefore, the Company has received a strike on this remuneration report. And in response to your questions about proxy advisory firms, yes, Glass Lewis and ISS did provide reports to their customers in respect of the remuneration report. And Glass Lewis advised their customers to vote in favor of the remuneration report, and ISS advised their customers to vote against it. The Company sent to all their customers of ISS a detailed response to the ISS points, and the proxy votes that you see on the screen are the result of the reports and our responses. I hope that's an adequate reply to that question. Now, I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies that have been appointed, but note the proxy vote voting shows the vote in favor.
While the proxy vote is in favor, the resolution has not reached 75% in favor, and the Company has therefore received a strike on the remuneration report. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution Two is a conditional spill resolution. This resolution is being considered at this meeting because more than 25% of the proxy votes cast on Resolution One are cast against the adoption of the remuneration report for the financial year ending 30th of June 2024. If you do not want a stall meeting as defined below to take place, you should vote against Resolution Two. If you do wish for a stall meeting to take place, you should vote for Resolution Two. So the resolution itself to consider, and if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment the following resolution as an ordinary resolution.
That, subject to and conditional on at least 25% of the votes validly cast on Resolution One to adopt the Company's remuneration report for the financial year ending 30th of June 2024 being cast against that resolution, an extraordinary general meeting of the Company, a spill meeting, should be held within 90 days of this resolution passing, at which all of the directors who were directors of the Company when the resolution to [adopt] the remuneration report for the financial year ending 30th of June 2024 was passed and who remain in office at the time of the spill meeting cease to hold office immediately before the end of the spill meeting. And resolutions to appoint persons to offices that will be appointed immediately before the end of the spill meeting be put to the vote at the spill meeting.
Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? There are. I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote well against. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution Three is the re-election of Mr. Harrison Barker as a director. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment the following as an ordinary resolution. That Mr. Harrison Barker, being a director who retired by rotation in accordance with Article 47 of the Company's Constitution and ASX Listing Rule 14.5, and being eligible for re-election, be re-elected as a director of the Company. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution?
Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? This from Stephen Mayne. Hello, Stephen. Again. We seem to be struggling to retain our leadership team with the CEO wanting to go part-time, sorry, badly read, wanting to go part-time, and multiple directors planning their exit. In this context, would it make sense to put the Company up for sale and roll our efforts in with Paladin, Deep Yellow, Lotus Resources, or one of the other ASX-listed uranium players? As a soon-to-be departing director, what does re-election candidate Harrison Barker think of this idea? Would it make sense to wait until we de-risk and commence production? Stephen, I don't think it's easy for Harrison Barker to answer that himself whilst he's dialed in online, but I will take the liberty of asking for him.
I'd like to make it clear, if it hasn't been made clear already, that neither I nor the three directors who are mentioned in my address and in our announcement last week, none of them is going now. We have a policy at Peninsula of disclosing matters that we consider to be pertinent as soon as we become aware of them. And we are aware that Wayne Heili wishes to reduce his everyday workload. This is not part of your question, but I'm saying it anyway. We'll come back to it later. That Wayne is not going. We will continue to have access to Wayne over a long period of time, and nor is he stepping down from his job as Chief Executive Officer in a hurry. When we say the fullness of time, we mean that. This is a managed process.
Also, more pertinent to your question in respect of Harrison Barker and Mark Wheatley and myself, we are simply saying that the older members of the board who've been on the board for some time are planning to get themselves replaced, and this is a steady process over a period of time. We're not pushing off that, and whilst we, in respect of your questions about would it be better to put the Company up for sale, that's not what we're doing. We're not putting the Company up for sale. That is, in the view of the board, a strategically stupid thing to do. If another company wishes to bid for the shares of Peninsula Energy, then, of course, we would welcome their attentions, but we would only welcome their attentions on conditions that would suit you as a shareholder, not limping into some transaction that we instigate ourselves.
That is very definitely not our attitude to life. I hope that answers your question. Any others? No. So I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote well in favor. And this is in respect of Mr. Harrison Barker's re-election. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution Four is the election of Mr. David Coyne, who is present physically at this meeting, and it is to consider and, if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment the following as an ordinary resolution. That Mr.
David Coyne, who was appointed to fill a casual vacancy on the 1st of May 2024 in accordance with Article 46 of the Company's Constitution, Listing Rule 14.4, and for all other purposes, retires and being eligible for re-election, be elected as a director of the Company. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? Stephen. Could new director David Coyne and the chair comment on the recruitment process that led to his appointment to the board? Was a headhunter involved? Did the full board interview David as a group, and did they interview any other candidates? Did David know any of our directors before engaging with the recruitment process? I'm going to go first. David, I'm sure will respond because we're fortunate that he - yeah.
Stephen, David Coyne was the finance director of this company in the past, and he's more familiar than almost anybody else with the affairs of this company. I think I'm right in saying that at that stage, all the directors of the Company, with the exception of Brian Booth, knew David pretty well. And David, having been away from the Company for a number of years, we consider him to be independent, and we considered him to be an ideal candidate. We did not go through the headhunter process. We were entirely confident, all were entirely confident, that he would be an appropriate person to appoint to the board. And in our experience, so it has occurred since then. David, did you know any of the directors before engaging with the recruitment process? Well, please speak to us.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there, John.
Yes, I certainly. From my previous executive directorship role at the Company, knew everyone on the board, Brian. Also knew a member of the management team in Wyoming. That knowledge and familiarity with the Company was actually a key decision-making process when the invitation came to rejoin the board. That was good timing given my previous role was wrapping up following a merger of the two gold companies. From my perspective, having been involved with the project back in 2013, 2014, 2015 when we did the original construction and ramp-up, and then through some of the challenges that now under Wayne's leadership, changing the chemical composition there to, in essence, reinvigorate the project, something about back into production, I'm glad to be involved in that story and with the team.
Thank you, David.
It's a matter of public record that David, since his appointment, has subscribed for shares more than once in the Company. I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed. I'm sorry. Was that the only question you were expecting? Yeah. Okay. I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote well in favor. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution Five is the approval of 10% Placement Capacity shares. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment following special resolution.
That for the purpose of ASX Listing Rule 7.1A and for all other purposes, approval is given to the Company for the issue of equity securities totaling up to 10% of the issued capital of the Company at the time of issue, calculated in accordance with the formula prescribed in ASX Listing Rule 7.1A.2 and on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? Yes. This question's from Stephen Mayne. There have been many big protest votes against resolutions seeking an extra 10% placement capacity this AGM season.
Why are we doing this when it is not good practice to rely on the board to selectively place up to 20%, 25% of the Company shares to anyone they like over a 12-month period, diluting existing shareholders without compensation for their lost property rights? What is our group's history of seeking this authority, and what is the approach going forward? From my point of view, you should never request it again, and I voted against it. Thank you, Stephen. As you pointed out yourself, this is a totally usual mechanism for listed companies to achieve the ability to issue shares to new subscribers.
Companies in the sort of condition, early stage companies that are not yet in production and companies that are in justifiable expansion mode that have got assets that they wish to exploit and which require capitalization have always exercised the wish to obtain a 25% share authority. Now, alongside that, certainly in the 10 years that I've been involved in the Company, I believe I'm right in saying that we have never raised equity capital without offering shareholders the opportunity to participate on the same or similar basis. We've either had issued under entitlement placements, security rights issues, or shareholder participation plans, the ability for investors to follow their rights. We are unabashed in our desire to have the opportunity to act in as low a cost manner as possible to raise capital for this business should the need arise. I emphasize that should the need arise.
But thank you for your views, Stephen, and I cannot say to you that we would never request it again. Any other questions? I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note that the proxy voting shows the vote in favor. However, as this is a special resolution, it requires 75% of the vote in favor in order to carry. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution Six is the ratification of placement shares. And it is to consider and, if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment the following resolution as an ordinary resolution. That pursuant to and in accordance with Listing Rule 7.4 and for all other purposes, shareholders ratify the issue of 528,538,693 ordinary shares on the terms and conditions in the explanatory memorandum.
Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? Here's a question from Stephen Mayne. Recipients of placement shares are not allowed to vote on this placement refresh resolution. What process did we go through to ensure that the exclusions were comprehensively identified? I would have to put that question, Jonathan, to the share register.
Yeah, we provide a list. We identify the exclusions and provide a list to the share registry. Yes, this is a process that our registrars go through, Stephen, which is a process that's common to every listed company in making sure that the exclusions are validly complied with. Where did I go to? Any further questions online? I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote well in favour.
This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution Seven is the approval of the long-term incentive plan and issue of securities. And to consider, if thought fit, to pass with or without amendment the following resolution as an ordinary resolution. That for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 7.2, Exception 13, and Sections 259(b)(2) and 260(c)(4) of the Corporations Act 2001, and for all other purposes, and on the terms described in the explanatory statement of the Company and formal documents. Notice: Approval is hereby given for the Company to approve the long-term incentive plan and for the issue of up to a maximum of 159,350,891 securities, representing 5% of current shares on issue under the long-term incentive plan. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? No, I'm not.
I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favour. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. As with Resolution Eight, it is in relation to myself. I shall temporarily hand over the chairing of the meeting to Non-Executive Director David Coyne.
Thanks, John. Apologies for those online. My voice sounds a little bit raspy or a bit rattling. I've had for a week and a half, so hopefully it will. Resolution Eight, approval for the issue of service rights to Mr. John Harrison. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution: that for purposes of ASX Listing Rule 10.11, Chapter 2B, Corporations Act, and for all other purposes, approval is hereby given for the Company to issue 1,422,887 service rights to Mr.
John Harrison or his nominee on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor on this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? No. I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favor. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. I will now hand back the chairing of the meeting to Chairman John Harrison.
Thank you, David. Resolution Nine is the approval for the issue of service rights to Mr. Harrison Barker. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution.
That for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 10.11, Chapter 2E of the Corporations Act, and for all other purposes, approval is hereby given for the Company to issue 1,138,310 service rights to Mr. Harrison Barker or his nominee on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? No, I'm not. I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favour. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution 10 is for the approval for the issue of service rights to Mr. Mark Wheatley. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution.
That for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 10.11, Chapter 2E of the Corporations Act, and for all other purposes, approval is hereby given for the Company to issue 1,138,310 service rights to Mr. Mark Wheatley or his nominee on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? No, I'm not. I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favor. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution 11 is the approval for the issue of service rights to Mr. David Coyne, and it is to consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution.
That for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 10.11, Chapter 2E of the Corporations Act, and for all other purposes, approval is hereby given for the Company to issue 1,138,310 service rights to Mr. David Coyne or his nominee on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? No, I'm not. I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favour. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution 12 is the approval for the issue of service rights to Mr. Brian Booth. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution.
That for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 10.11, Chapter 2E of the Corporations Act, and for all other purposes, approval is hereby given for the Company to issue 1,138,310 service rights to Mr. Brian Booth or his nominee on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? And this is from Stephen Mayne. There are consistent 40% protest votes on the proxies on all these remuneration items today. We've identified ISS is recommending against, but do you know the identity of the actual shareholders who caused the second strike, defeated the 10% placement expansion, and generally given you a solid belting today? Corporate voting is not a secret ballot, so you shouldn't be across this.
Is it the big US index funds, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, which tend to follow ISS advice? Stephen, I have to say I don't know the answer to the voting intentions or the voting actions of BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street because I'm not aware that they're on the register. If they are, then they've not been recognised. Do we know the identity of the actual shareholders who caused the second strike? We probably do. Yes. The Company Secretary tells me that it's or suggests that it's confidential information. Stephen, I think what I'd like to do is to get back to you separately on this question when we've actually verified the correctness of our answer. So please bear with me on that. But thank you for the question.
As to whether there are consistent 40% protest votes, I think I'd have to look at the numbers to see whether that's right or wrong. Thank you. No. So I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all other no further questions. No further questions. Sorry. I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favour. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution 13 is the approval for the issue of restricted share units to Mr. Wayne Heili under the long-term incentive plan. It is to consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following as an ordinary resolution.
That for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 10.14, and for all other purposes, approval is hereby given for the Company to issue 1,992,295 restricted share units to Mr. Wayne Heili under the long-term incentive plan on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? Sorry, Stephen. Me again. It's you again. Yeah, I'm going to consult with the Company Secretary on the nature of your question. You're asking basically questions about the history of incentive grant vesting and share trading in our stock, and I think that's something that I've got to discuss the appropriateness of disclosing individual share trading records.
I mean, the only thing I would say in relation to this question, because I'm afraid I've sped already, Stephen, is that when individuals are awarded stock-related units and they experience personal taxation on those awards, those non-cash awards, we've always enabled those individuals to sell shares in the quantity necessary to discharge their personal tax obligations. And I'm not entirely sure whether that's what you're getting to with your question. But again, I undertake to revert to you when we get your contact details on that question. Thank you. Any further questions? No. I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote in favor. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business.
Resolution 14 concerns share consolidation, and it is to consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution. That for the purposes of Section 254H(1) of the Corporations Act, Rule 8B of the Company's Constitution, and for all other purposes, approval is given for the Company to consolidate its issued share capital on a 20-for-1 basis such that every 20 shares be consolidated into one share, with any resulting fractions of a share rounded up to the next whole number of shares, with the consolidation to take effect in accordance with the timetable and otherwise on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement that forms part of this notice of meeting. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution?
Okay, so the question is this is from Stephen Mayne. Well, it starts with a comment. Well done for putting up this 20-for-1 share consolidation. Thank you, Stephen. It's amazing how many small caps, especially resource-based, that keep tracking along with billions of shares on issue and a share price below one cent. Look no further than, I think. I'm not sure we're going to draw attention to other companies, honestly, Stephen. I don't think that's really appropriate for me to do. Did you have any opposition from shareholders to this sensible move? So we'll move on, Stephen. Try not to. There's a suggestion that we set aside the consolidation until the shares are on an upward trajectory, and that's from Stephen McNamee, who I see as a very long-term substantial private shareholder of the company.
So, Steve, you and I met face-to-face the other day, and we discussed this. And so I looked into this with the Company Secretary and with our advisors. And this is, I've said I'm not going to read out the proxy votes, etc., at the end of this resolution, but it is by far the most popular resolution that's being put up today. And we can't see, having committed to this course of action, published it and put a timetable in the explanatory notes, we cannot see a route to going against the validly expressed wishes of a very, very strong majority of the shareholders. So we don't see a route open to us to, if we wanted to, we don't see a route open to us to put aside, either temporarily or permanently, this consolidation. But thank you very much for the question. Is there another one? No.
Stephen's come in with another comment emphasizing that he considers it to be the wrong time to be doing this, and Stephen, your comments are noted and analyzed, and thank you very much, as ever, for your thoughts, so I hope I haven't preempted this bit too much. I'll not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed, but note the proxy voting shows the vote well in favor. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of ordinary business. Resolution. Don't lose heart. We're on the last resolution. Resolution 15 is the approval of change of auditor, and I'd emphasize that it's not a change of auditor per se, it's a change of name and entity within the group. To consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution.
But for the purposes of Section 327(b) of the Corporations Act and for all other purposes, BDO Audit Pty Ltd. having consented in writing to act as auditor of the company is appointed as auditor of the company with effect from the conclusion of this meeting. Are there any questions from the floor in relation to this resolution? Are there any questions online in relation to this resolution? No. I will not be reading the proxy votes exercisable for all proxies validly appointed. Note the proxy voting shows the vote well in favor. This resolution will be decided by poll at the conclusion of the ordinary business. I've just been told that we have another question on consolidation, and we haven't gone yet to a poll, so let's take that. I'm reading this without previous analysis. Today, PEN has recorded a 52-week low.
I beg your pardon, it's from Robert Small. Hello, Robert. Today, PEN has recorded a 52-week low of AUD 0.055, which has not performed positively like other uranium stocks, I think, over the last 12 months, even though we keep hearing how good the uranium market is. Peninsula shareholder capital has been destroyed. My question is, what makes you confident that the 20-to-1 will end any better than the 40-to-1, which has been done before? Robert, the intention of the share consolidation is to make the shares recognizable to an institutional voting fraternity who, in general, do not invest in what is collectively known as penny stocks. We consider this might sound a bit trite to you, but we consider this as a big company masquerading as a small company at the moment.
You will be, I hope, entirely aware of the potential of this business and the fact that we consider it very much an appropriate stock for investment by professional investors. And that is the whole purpose of this consolidation. And I cannot really say any more to answer your question. But thank you very much for it. Thanks. Yes, there's a question from Luke Ridley, which is really a question which I'm going to ask Wayne to answer as part of his later presentation, and for him to take his question after his presentation, as he might imagine far better equipped to answer that than I am. But let's have a look at just one more question from Stephen Mayne. As a retail shareholder who's participated in hundreds of capital raisings, I was disappointed by the structure deployed in May 2024.
The AUD 52.9 million placement was too large, and it was unfair to restrict your 13,000 retail shareholders to oversubscription of just 50% of entitlement in the accompanying one-for-four non-renounceable to raise AUD 60.1 million. This led to a AUD 39.8 million retail campaign falling AUD 22.7 million short. There was also no disclosure of the oversubscription entitlement split or retail participation. How many retail shareholders took up the offer? Stephen, you're going to get bored by me because I need to do some analysis to even begin to answer some of those questions. I would say, just as a general answer, we did absolutely everything that was available to us to ensure a fair and reasonable participation on the part of our retail shareholders in that placement.
And it was a time, it was a wonderful time when we were being inundated by investor and professional investor appetite for the company. And as you would probably know, it's not universally popular among professional investors to have what they consider to be their good offer of investment diluted by retail shareholders. Now, that's not the way we see it, and we made every effort to make participation available in very reasonable quantities, I think, in proportion to the overall placing. But Stephen, again, we will go through your list of questions and make every effort to reply to you directly on those that I've not replied to today. And thank you, as ever, for the question. Anything else? Okay, so I now call a poll. Please complete your voting cards as instructed. Those attending online will see a two-minute countdown, which should be happening now.
I've been told that you're not actually seeing a countdown, but I'll take to tell you when two minutes is up. I think the representatives are kindly circulating the room with a bell. If all persons who intend to vote have now voted, then the voting process has been completed, and I therefore declare the poll closed. Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to advise the formal business of the meeting is now concluded. The results of the poll will be released to the ASX as soon as practicable today. I will now formally close the meeting, and I will hand over to your Managing Director, Wayne Heili, who will present to shareholders on Peninsula's progress since the last AGM. We will invite questions at the conclusion of Wayne's presentation.
Thank you, John, and thank you to everyone who's in attendance today, both online and in person.
I'm pleased to provide to you a comprehensive review of our construction and operational progress at the Lance Projects over the past 12 months. I do have a little bit of a prepared couple of remarks, but before I do that, I'm going to go off script and address the elephant in the room, which is the question of my decision to step down in the future. Today is not the day to say goodbye. It's the project, and I have advised the board and the chairman of my desire, when the time is right and when we can, effect an orderly transition to a new CEO, to step down and take on a new chapter of my professional life. I appreciate that the transparency and the disclosure of my intentions is important to the shareholders of the company, and that word was necessary to share with you.
I want you to know that personally, I am committed to the success of this project. I, like the chairman, desire to continue to have an affiliation with this great company and this great project that we have. That's where the world really stands in my mind. I just wanted to share that with you before moving into my prepared remarks. Today, we are entering into the final stages of the preparation of a production restart. First, before discussing that, I think it's a rather fundamental thing for an operationally oriented person to share these thoughts. We pride ourselves on maintaining our strong safety record. The last few months have seen around-the-clock construction with a large contract workforce. We prioritize the well-being of every individual on site through rigorous safety training, comprehensive hazard assessments, and enforcement of industry-leading safety protocols.
By fostering a culture of safety and accountability, we ensure that all workers, whether full-time or contract-based, are equipped with the knowledge and resources to work safely in a challenging work environment. Our commitment to the continuous improvement and proactive risk management has resulted in a sustained track record of seven consecutive years with no employee lost time incidents. For the third year in a row now, we have been awarded the Wyoming Governor's Safety Award. We view this as a testament to our dedication to protecting the health and safety of our workforce, and I wanted to share that with you. Safety is a priority for this company, as it should be.
So before diving into the rest of my presentation, I wanted to emphasize that our journey to a production restart at Lance has been driven by a strategic, well-considered, and carefully executed construction plan led by our committed on-the-ground team. Over the past year, we've made tremendous strides, advancing key elements across the plant and well fields that are critical to bringing the project online. Each step has been approached with the highest standards of safety, efficiency, and environmental responsibility, ensuring that when we begin production, we do so in a sustainable and a robust way. One of the most gratifying aspects of this project is seeing the dedication of our on-site team. Our workforce, composed of both local talent and experienced professionals, has shown exceptional skill and commitment to every aspect of the Lance Project's construction and readiness.
The team's expertise and careful management of this complex phase have not only kept the project on schedule but have added value through their insights and hands-on experience. As we move into the final stages of the preparation, the production team is conducting rigorous testing and assessments to make sure every unit operation is fully optimized. We're expecting to meet our timeline for a safe and smooth production startup, providing tremendous achievement for the company, particularly as the uranium market continues to grow and evolve. Peninsula Energy is positioned to be a critical domestic supplier at a time when the importance of secure, reliable uranium production has really never been clearer. Our journey to production has been one of resilience, careful planning, and hard work. Today, we stand on the brink of delivering on this commitment to our shareholders, clients, and stakeholders.
This would not have been possible without the dedication of our team and the trust and support of our shareholders. On behalf of the team, I want to thank you, the shareholders, for your enduring support. With that, it's my intention to share with you a new presentation prepared specifically for this event and to really give you a little bit of a review of the last 12 months at the Lance Projects so that you have a greater appreciation, perhaps at the end of the day, of all the hard work and all the accomplishments that have come through. If you don't mind, the next slide, please. It's important. Yeah, I do this. Forward-looking statements, you're going to get some. You shouldn't use that in your investment decisions. Please read the cautionary statements and disclaimers. It's very important that you understand them. Next slide, please. Apologies.
My monitor is not keeping up, and I guess that's probably the case with many of the people who are listening online. This is background. The Lance Projects, the project that we're working so hard on, is an absolutely premier uranium project in the United States. There's no other singular project under development today that has a resource base of as much as 58 million pounds. That really does truly make this stand apart as one of the largest uranium development projects in the U.S. We have subdivided the project into three areas: the Ross Area, the Kendrick Area, and the Barber Area. Ross is fully licensed for production and holds close to a little over six million pounds remaining. This is where our first wellfields were. This is where the plant facility resides, and this is where we will resume operations in the Ross Area.
The Kendrick development area will soon become the Kendrick production area as we're in the final phases of completing the licensing approval to add Kendrick to the Ross production licenses. Indeed, today, the state of Wyoming is conducting an open public comment period for the Kendrick project and final license approvals. The state itself has done the technical review and recommended approval of the license amendments, and if things continue to go well, we could have that complete before the end of the year. Kendrick will add over or close to 20 million additional pounds into our license area, and between Ross and Kendrick, we'll have the next 10 years of uranium production under license. The Barber Exploration Area is the larger area you see in green, and it holds up to 32 million pounds of additional resource.
This is where we can expand our efforts and grow our footprint over the life of the mine beyond the first 10 years of production. And this is really one of the more exciting aspects: continuous mineral right holding. This company has these 58 million pounds, but that's not the end of the story. Next slide, please. Because we have significant exploration upside at the project. The geological team has put an exploration target of between 104 and 163 million pounds of Uranium underground at the project. That's in addition to the already identified 58 million pounds. Huge forward-looking statement, and I always put it that way. If we are able to realize the exploration potential at this project, we have 200 million pounds available to the company for the future. This is more than enough to build a mining company that can produce at sustainable high levels for decades.
But we didn't stop there. A little over a year ago, we added the Dagger Project, a project that's about 20 kilometers to the northeast of the Lance Projects. And the Dagger Project has a really interesting characteristic. The uranium ore grade there is about twice the grade of the average grade at the Lance Projects. Makes it a very attractive location for developing a satellite plant facility, something like we started with at the beginning of this year at Lance. We could bring resins loaded from production at the Dagger site down to the Lance Projects and perhaps add another million pounds a year to our production footprint from Dagger. It's another project that would need to be permitted over time and to enhance the JORC quality from inferred resource up to measured and indicated.
We intend to do a drill program probably early in 2025 at Dagger to do confirmatory drilling, which would allow us to increase the resource quality from inferred up to measured and indicated. So that's another exciting aspect of our project. Next slide, please. It isn't working for me. You can tell I'm not working with the script, but I know these slides. The project, what we've endeavored to do. This is just probably one of the last pieces of background. We're transitioning this project from an alkaline in-situ recovery facility to a low pH in-situ recovery. Low pH is the way that Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Australia and all the world leaders in uranium production recover uranium. It's highly efficient, and it's a very attractive way to dissolve uranium.
We tested and demonstrated that we would get higher uranium recoveries in a short period of time if we transitioned the project to alkaline chemistry. We have done that on the plant facilities and the existing two well fields, Mine Unit 1 and Mine Unit 2. We've completed the transition there so that they're capable of being operated in a low pH capacity. What we've also had to do since July of 2023 is add the central processing plant. We called that phase two, but add the ability to take the loaded resins and produce a final yellowcake product. So we're adding dilution circuit, precipitation circuit, filtration, and product drying circuits. So phase two plant expansion has been our focal point for the last really six-to-eight months and really was a need that was identified in the middle of 2023.
That work is nearly done, and when that work is done and the circuits are available to us, we will pull the trigger. We'll start operating, and we'll bring solutions into the plant and start capturing uranium and sequentially commissioning those circuits. So that's the game plan going forward. Michael, could you advance the next slide, please? Thanks. So this is really the presentation that I wanted to share with you as we came from last year's AGM to now. December a year ago, we closed the placement of about AUD 50 million. We had about four drill rigs working in Mine Unit 3 at that time. That's the level of activity. We had 20-25 employees, four drill rigs working, starting to develop a new mine unit, and we were doing some other technical work, but nothing of major significance. Next slide, please.
Come January, though, we completed and opened up an oversubscribed SPP share purchase plan and filled out an additional AUD 10 million worth of funding through an SPP. Thank you for your support. We completed in January the installation of the bulk acid storage and distribution facilities for that old satellite plant facility, but that also serves the new well fields. And that was a big part of the transition to low pH chemistry. Next slide. In February, one of the big accomplishments for the month of February was we announced the signing of a new sales contract for another 1.2 million pounds spread over six years. That sales agreement is worth between $88 million and $117 million for the sale of those products. The reason we give a range here is because a portion of that sales is priced on market-based pricing.
As for floors and ceilings, if we only realize the floor, it'll be $88 million. If we always realize the ceiling, it'll be $117 million. Good bet it'll be somewhere in between over time. The price of uranium does indeed fluctuate. We also undertook some really important technical work for the project. We started flowing from the well fields, the existing well fields, mining at one, into our existing plant facility, into a pilot facility, and started capturing and producing uranium. We put together pilot-scale circuits so that we could learn the elution, precipitation, and the water and characteristics of our site. We did pilot testing, pilot-scale testing, actual well field generated solutions to learn if we had any questions or technical concerns with impurities or other process things.
Our operators were learning the unit operations that they were going to be asked to do in a commercial plant later. That's really important in preparing yourselves to become good operators. Next slide, please. By March, we were getting wellfield Header House 11, which is the first area of wellfield three ready to go. We had people working in the shop fabricating components for the Header House. We had the Header House itself in the shop being fabricated, welders and the like working on things. Things were really starting to get going because we now have the funding to really commit to building the plant and getting the new wellfields built because of the closure of the funding in December and in January. Next slide, please, Michael. By April, we had appointed Samuel Engineering as an EPC contractor.
They do engineering procurement and construction for us, and Samuel mobilised to the site, so this marks the month that we really got serious about the phase two plant construction. Samuel was awarded the contract. We recognised an increase in price between the time that we estimated our pricing and what Samuel bid, but we relied on Samuel's bid pricing, recognising that we would likely see an increase in price or overall cost. We also, by that point in time, had been ramping up our well field development drilling, and we've gone from four to six drill rigs. Next slide, please. By May, earthworks commenced on the construction of the new phase two plant facility, which is really tripling the footprint of the plant. We had long lead time items identified and ordered for the plant construction.
Significantly, we increased our JORC resource in the Ross and Kendrick areas by almost 20%. Previous drilling and recent drilling indicated that we had found some additional uranium resource and were able to upgrade our resource considerably. This does give a good indication in my mind of the validity of the exploration potential that we speak about in this presentation and in others. Continued drilling, I expect, will continue to identify and increase resources at Lance. And finally, in May, we undertook the $106 million fully underwritten placement, and that was intended then that way to give us funding that takes us well down the road, not just to complete plant construction, but to be able to ramp up and fund our sustaining capital requirements as we started producing to the point in which we had consistent uranium sales generating revenue for the company. Next slide, please.
By June, we had real significant construction progress. We built an auxiliary facility, which I have not yet really mentioned here, but that's a facility designed to remove fine solids from the preconditioning, the well field preconditioning streams. We can run about up to 1,000 gallons a minute through this facility. And outside of that, so here's a picture of that facility that got constructed. Outside of that, we prepared subgrade engineering and the engineering materials of the subgrade for the new central processing plant and began forming concrete foundations. We continued to accelerate Header House 11 development and continue to push towards getting new production areas up and running. In the next slide, please. In July, we started to see some significant progress with the construction of the central processing plant.
We began preconditioning well fields, mine unit one, which means lowering the pH in the well field, getting the solutions in the well field ready to be redirected to the plant. I believe that one of the questions that was directed to me during the previous segment of this meeting was, "Can we use mine unit one and mine unit two to supplement the flows from mine unit three, which were recently announced to be below our design expectations?" Absolutely. And in fact, that's what we've been preparing to do throughout. We physically transformed mine unit one and mine unit two, and we've been preconditioning well field mine unit one since July to have it ready to supplement flows. That is part of our game plan moving forward, working to operate concurrently mine units one, two, and three when we get back into production.
We also, at that point in time, revised our first year of ramp-up production profile based on the status of the project at that very moment. Where were we? What did we project that we could do? We reviewed our model, and we said, "The life of mine model that we offered over a year ago, we weren't on that timeline." That was an idealistic timeline, and shareholders are making investment decisions based on the life of mine model that we no longer said we're on that timeline on. So we revised our guidance on what the first year ramp-up would look like. So that was the purpose of that production revision in late July, early August of last year. Next slide, please. By August, you started to see the building coming up. Concrete was foundational. Concrete was poured. Slab concrete was getting put in. Equipment was being placed.
You started seeing the red iron of the building come up. You can really see on a daily basis, tremendous amounts of activity, changes in the plant. We had between 80 and 100 contractors working around the clock building that facility by that point. We had 50 full-time employees up from about double where we started the year. This was a lot of hourly employees, the labor force that supports our operations, maintenance, and construction. You really could start to see things in August that in July, you might have looked at it and said, "Really, Wayne? You're going to do that by December?" In August, you could start to see that there is some reality to what we were saying. Next slide, please. But again, the plant isn't the only part of the story. You have to develop new well fields and buys.
I think we went one too far. August. In August, we were pouring concrete. Again, not just the rebar. Oh, we did this one, didn't we? Yeah. We started pouring slabs. A lot of work was being done. In September, I'm sorry, I got off track a little bit. We completed the development and construction of Header House 11, which is the first area of mine unit three. That serves about 50 production wells out of the plant for about 150 in mine unit three. We were setting at the plant the ion exchange elution systems, permanently setting them in place and concrete grouting them. And we were also completing internal structural steel for the building. So by October, next slide, please, our building started to really take shape. This was a tripling of the size of the plant building. We were putting up the skin, the siding on the building.
The structural steel got completed. We added another additional little building where we're expanding our process laboratory there, and again, things were just really moving along. I have a couple of bullets on the next slide. I think it's important to note this is what the inside of the plant was starting to look like. I have the smiling faces of all of our directors who came and did a site visit in late October to see the progress for themselves and to confirm the things that we've been telling them, that this is really coming up fast and this is an exciting time, so the building itself, the red iron is finished. The siding was almost complete. Next slide, please. What you're getting to now is a look at what it is here in the middle of November before I left on this trip.
We got this nice shot of the building. It's fully enclosed. First snow started to fly. We were fully enclosed right before first snow. It was perfect timing for us. All of our attention is now focused to interior construction of the plant. We're doing pipe racks, cable trays, structural steel to support the piping, and we're starting plumbing and setting pumps and other equipment, the smaller equipment that you wouldn't have seen in the other pictures. We started operating Header House 11 at the beginning of November. That was part of our most recent press release is that we realized a slightly lower flow rate, a third lower than we had designed.
Because we're not getting the full flow rate that we were designing for there, we really had to, again, take a look at our status and our expectations for production in the first year because our first year production was heavily reliant on mine unit three, Header House 11. If the flow rates are slower, that means the speed that uranium comes to the plant is slower. We adjusted our production model downward a little bit. We were in a range of 700,000-900,000. We said, "Now, we think 600,000 is probably the right number for 2025." It's an impact of the pace that we can get solution in the plant from the first area. It is not a long-term flaw in the project. It's just a startup sequencing issue.
But we can recognize it and say, "In all probability, we're not going to get that 700,000 pound minimum that we had previously guided to." And it's the right thing to do to tell our shareholders, "2025 may be a little lower." We provided additional guidance on 2026 and 2027, and those years still look very good in the production model. So it's a first-year-only impact, again, reflecting the reality of the data that's coming into us live on a continuous basis. And we shared it with you. We also started commissioning the solids flotation, solids removal building. And we fixed the construction going forward at a fixed price so that we now know what should be the final construction price of the plant. The contractor is taking on the risk.
We've given them a little bit of a premium for taking on the risk, but we are no longer on the hook for cost increases. All the major equipment's been sourced and ordered. Now it's about labor and efficiency and getting the project done. Next slide, please. This is what it looks like inside the central processing plant now in the middle of November. You can see a lot of steel, a lot of tanks in place, a lot of plumbing starting to go into the pipe racks. Next slide, please. And again, well field development is equally important to the plant. The plant is the long pole in the tent. That's what we're going to wait to do. But the well fields, we've worked hard to get mine units one ready. We got Header House 11 up and running and under preconditioning, so we're adding acid to it now.
And this is what the interior of a Header House looks like. The picture up on the left is actually the collection system for all of the 50 production wells that come into the Header House. And below, you can see a picture of what Header House 11's wellfield area completed looks like. So that stuff's done. We're on to Header House 12. Drilling is to be completed in Header House 12 this week. And drilling in Header House 13, which is the next area of mine unit three should be complete before the end of the year. So then we turn the areas over from drilling to surface facility construction, and we get the Header House interiors put together, and we get the wells connected to the Header Houses, and then we start to operate them. Mine unit three is on schedule. Next slide, please.
This was our schedule. This is what we intended to do. Really, all year, we were drilling in mine unit and ramping up our rig counts. We had intended all along to start preconditioning in mine unit one and mine unit three by mid-year or somewhere in the third quarter. We did start in July with mine unit one. All along, it's been our goal to start commissioning the plant before the end of the year. I'm pleased to tell you we're on that schedule. We've had hiccups. We've had some cost overruns, but we're not off schedule. We're still doing very well in that regard. Again, we're going to continue to be developing new well fields. We're adding new drill rigs. We're now up to the rig count of 12.
We have three more signed up to come to the site when the drillers have their rigs completed and staffed. So we'll be up to 15 drill rigs somewhere close to the end of the year or early January. Next slide, please. This is the revised production guidance that we shared last week. Again, compared to the August estimate, we dropped by about 200,000 lbs from the midpoint of our previous guidance to our current guidance for the calendar year 2025. In calendar year 2026, it's about 300,000 lbs against an estimate of what was approximately 1.5 million lbs. So it's actually percentage-wise a little lower drop. Calendar year 2027, we now forecast a higher level of production than we previously did. Again, these models that we have are very dynamic. We can schedule and see where we're at and where we're going with the models.
But they are still truly models, and we have opportunities to outperform these models equal level. Our thinking is our models should reflect an equal opportunity to outperform and an equal opportunity to underperform. So this should really be the midpoint of our production expectations next year and the years going forward. So we do have the opportunity. This is not rose-colored glasses. It's most optimistic production. This is that midpoint production expectation that so we can do our business with sensible numbers. Next slide. This is us in a nutshell. I'm going to wrap it up mercifully. Today, we stand as the next ASX-listed producer, our company to enter production. We're not just the next ASX. We're really the next company globally to enter production. This is an exciting time for the company and a lot of hard work going into it.
Site preparations continue to be on track for bringing solutions into the plant and starting to capture uranium before the end of the year. We're in a strong cash position to not only complete construction but carry us well down the road into the operations in the first half of the year. Yes, we updated production guidance. So we talked about that. And yes, we've discussed future planning for board and management succession to make sure that this company remains in good hands in the years ahead. Again, I think at the end of the day, I came on board to help the company during a technically challenging time. That's what I do. I'm going to check the box. I'm going to hand it over to somebody who can take care of the shareholders going forward. That's it. Thanks.
Wayne, thank you. Thank you very much indeed for that.
Are there any questions from the floor, from people in the room for Wayne here? Why don't you go, sir? Your name?
Steve.
Steve. Steve. Thank you very much for attending.
If your questions, I'm not sure there will be an interest to the people here. So the target start commissioning the end of the year?
Yes.
How long is allowed for the commissioning?
It will be over the course of 2025. We should be able to be sequentially bringing on the ion exchange circuit in December and maybe start eluting uranium off of resins in December. Our target is to have the product drying systems up and ready by the end of February. So first dry product should be certainly in March. I think our first shipment to the point of sale could be April. And we still are targeting having our first sales in June of this year.
That’s going to get us going. The plant is fully capable of running 5,000 gallons per minute of flow from the well fields back and forth. We won't be at that point until 2026. We have actually designed two parallel circuits for elution, precipitation, and filtration and product drying. Each circuit capable of 1 million pounds a year. The first year we need the full capacity of one of those circuits. We'll have them both ready for operation probably by March. Well, the first one by February. The second one should be done in March. We're going to have concurrent construction and operations for a period of time. The construction crews will leave, will be relieved. Then we'll just continue to ramp up well field flow into the plant and uranium production at the most rapid pace that we can.
So, product to market will be what date about?
Well, the first sale should be in June or early July.
So this is the target, June and July.
Yeah.
The design of the plant in the contract, are there penalties for quantity and quality?
The specific process design was on us. So product quality is one of our things. The contractor built the plant that we specified. But if the plant does not perform, like say, this circuit's designed to run at 100 gallons a minute and it only runs at 50, the contractor will be on with performance guarantees for the engineering. We specified the targets. They specified the equipment they're on for performance of the equipment.
And the penalties if they don't achieve it?
They will be responsible for doing additional engineering and replacement of the equipment. That is a form of penalty. It's not a fine.
It's their responsibility. It's written into the agreement that there are performance guarantees on their engineering, construction, and completion.
And the maximum capacity of the plant, what percentage of consumption of uranium, the yellowcake in the U.S.? How important is this plant?
Yeah. Well, we're building a plant capable of producing 2 million pounds a year. Last year, in the U.S., as some uranium producers got a head start on us and got going, I think the country produced less than 100,000 pounds. But we now have multiple uranium mines with the ambition of ramping up. And I would say that the capacity of the currently operating uranium mines would be on the order of 6 to 8 million pounds. So we will represent a full quarter of the uranium production in the United States if we get our project up to its full capacity.
Thank you.
Yeah. Steve.
You, Heather? I thought you were raising your hand. Any other questions over here?
Is your plant licensed to produce up to 3 million pounds a day?
That is correct. Yes.
Yeah. So why are you only producing up to 2 million pounds? And then also, in 2027, you forecast to produce about 1.5 million pounds. Is there a reason why it takes so long to?
It won't be a plant constraint or a licensing constraint. It's just the ability of us to develop new well fields and get them into the permit approved for operations. So it's just a sequential ramp-up. It takes time to get to this production level. I want to tell you, in the United States, in the history with all of the alkaline in-situ recovery plants that we've ever run, we've never produced 2 million pounds for one facility before.
We licensed this for three, and we're actually building the building and the ability to pull in that third million pounds. I assessed the cost to put another million pounds of capacity into the plant as we're building it will be less than $10 million. But again, if it's going to be multiple years before you even need that capacity, that's not a good use of money today. And one way that we can get to 3 million pounds a year is to build a satellite facility like what I discussed at Dagger or at the southern end of the Lance Projects in Barber and bring resins up to the plant that are loading the resins elsewhere. So it's not that we won't go to 3 million pounds, but right now.
This is the conference operator. We've lost connection with the speaker line.
Please hold, and the conference will resume shortly.
Would you like to comment on that, please?
I'm looking forward to proving to the market that we are worthy of investment. I think the, yeah, it's been a rough ride. We have faced hurdles and obstacles that have caused disappointment. We took those challenges on head-on. The team, the board, has an enduring commitment to making this work. I feel very confident that we will. But I think at this point in time, this company is a story of show me, and then I'll be with you. I'll be your friend when I know that you're a good, worthy man.
Could I just endorse that? I think it is a question of confidence and probability. I think because we've switched from an alkaline leach, which didn't actually suit the chemistry of the deposit very well.
But any project that's stopped, re-engineered, restarted, there's an element of, well, let's see it working. So there's a bit of that. And then disappointment. However sensibly you attempt to describe your expectations for the project, the market at the moment is very nervous, very twitchy. There are other companies that are not, shall we say, kept to expectations. I'm the only skeptical would be.
Yeah. Yeah, that's fair. I mean, that is the word. But if you look at the analysts who are covering the stock, the valuation ranges in there that are still in our minds sensitive. And it's a long way north of where we find. So the stock price, in my view, is just driven by instant sentiment rather than mathematical potential. And it's so easy to say, but I really look forward to this. Check.
And our new Chief Operating Officer producing large quantities of uranium. And then we'll see where the pricing goes. I think at this point, if I may, thank you all again for your attention, your interest. I want to offer to you that we'll be remaining here for a little longer. But thanks for your attendance. And I invite you to some refreshments in the back of the room and continue conversation. Is there anything we need to do to close the meeting? I believe that this is it. Well, we've closed the full meeting. Yes. So we're at your leisure.
Thanks, gentlemen. I'm going to get off the stand, and we'll see you about.
So you're not dead yet, right? Thank you very much indeed.