driving towards a mining license

January 2020

DRIVING TOWARDSA MINING LICENSE

TSXV: RTHrathdowneyresources.com

JANUARY 2020

DRIVING TOWARDS A MINING LICENSEJanuary 2020

CAUTIONARY & FORWARD LOOK ING INFORMATION

This presentation includes certain statements that may be deemed "forward-looking statements". All information contained in this presentation relating to thecontents of the Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) of the Olza zinc-lead project (Project Olza) in Poland, including but not limited to statements of theProject Olza's potential and information are "forward looking statements". Although Rathdowney (RTH) believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments maydiffer materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Assumptions used by RTH to develop forward-looking statements include the following: ProjectOlza will obtain all required environmental and other permits and all land use and other licenses, studies and development of the Project Olza will continue tobe positive, and no geological or technical problems will occur. Additional information on assumptions for the PEA is available in the Technical Report.

The PEA was prepared to broadly quantify the project's capital and operating cost parameters and to provide guidance on the type and scale of future projectengineering and development work that will be needed to ultimately define the project's likelihood of feasibility and optimal production rate. The followingare the principal risk factors and uncertainties which, in management's opinion, are likely to most directly affect the conclusions of the PEA and the ultimatefeasibility of the project. The PEA is based on the inferred resources estimated by Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (HDSI) and audited by SRK Consulting (UK) Ltd(SRK). Additional exploration, process tests and other engineering and geological work will be required to estimate indicated or measured mineral resources atProject Olza and if an economically exploitable reserve can be established. Final feasibility work has not been completed to confirm the underground design,mining methods, and processing methods assumed in the PEA. Final feasibility could determine that the assumed underground design, mining methods, andprocessing methods are not correct. Construction and operation of the mine and processing facilities depends on securing environmental and other permitson a timely basis. No permits have been applied for and there can be no assurance that required permits can be secured or secured on a timely basis. Data isincomplete and cost estimates have been developed in part based on the expertise of the individuals participating in the preparation of the PEA and on costsat projects believed to be comparable, and not based on firm price quotes. Costs, including design, procurement, construction, and on-going operating costsand metal recoveries could be materially different from those contained in the PEA. There can be no assurance that mining can be conducted at the rates andgrades assumed in the PEA. Energy risks include the potential for significant increases in the cost of fuel and electricity. The PEA assumes specified, long-termprices levels for zinc and lead. Prices for these commodities are historically volatile, and RTH has no control of or influence on those prices, all of which aredetermined in international markets. Prices for zinc and lead have been below the price ranges assumed in PEA at times during the past ten years, and forextended periods of time. There can be no assurance that the prices of these commodities will continue at current levels or that they will not decline belowthe prices assumed in the PEA. The project will require major financing, probably a combination of debt and equity financing. Interest rates are at historicallylow levels. There can be no assurance that debt and/or equity financing will be available on acceptable terms. A significant increase in costs of capital couldmaterially and adversely affect the value and feasibility of constructing the project. Other general risks include continuity of mineralization, those ordinary tolarge construction projects including the general uncertainties inherent in engineering and construction cost, the need to comply with generally increasingenvironmental obligations, and accommodation of local and community concerns, potential environmental issues or liabilities associated with exploration,development and mining activities, exploitation and exploration successes, delays due to third party opposition, and changes in government policies regardingmining and natural resource exploration and exploitation. RTH is also subject to the specific risks inherent in the mining business, as well as general economicand business conditions. For more information on RTH, investors should review RTH’s filings that are available at www.sedar.com.

Technical information in this presentation has been reviewed and approved by David Copeland, PEng, a qualified person not independent of RTH.

2


PROJECT OLZA : ZINC, LEAD & SILVER IN UPPER SILESIA, POLAND Investment Highlights

PROJECTECONOMICS

Preliminary Economic Assessment1

Post-tax NPV8% US$170 million Post-tax NPV @ 5% discount rate US$219 millionAfter Tax IRR 30%Payback 2.4 yearsProduction Costs (all On Site Costs & TC/RC’s) 2 US$0.57/lbFree Cash Flow in the first 3 years of full production US$375 million (Average: US$125 million per year)

MINING A ND INFRA STRUCTURE

Established mining districtUnderground, 6,000 tpd, zinc-lead, Room and Pillar mine with conventional flotation, producing low Fe, high grade and high recoveries zinc and lead concentrates.Adjacent to 7,000 tpd ZGHB Pomorzany zinc-lead, room and pillar mine which has been operating over 40 yearsConnected by rail and port to local ZGHB Smelter and international smelters

JURISDICTIONMember of the European Union

Structured, clear & transparent mine permitting processFirst world, European Union, high sovereign credit ratings

STA K EHOLDERSCommunity Engagement

Ongoing engagement with all levels government, residents & other stakeholders since 20112150 meetings held to date

ZINC SUPPLY GA PLong Term Outlook For Zinc Supply

Rapidly depleting global supply over medium and long-termOver 20-30% of demand requires new supply sources by 2026

NEA R TERM DEVELOPMENT

Pathway to Development TARGETED COMPLETIONZoning Application Q3 2020Environmental Impact Assessment Q2 2021Polish Development Plan (“PZZ”) Q3 2021Mining License Q4 2021

3

1 Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA), effective date December 31, 2014. see cautionary, Page 2. 2 Zinc costs per pound on by-product basis (average first three years of full production): C1 US$0.30/lb, C2 US$0.56/lb and C3 US$0.57/lb. Figures are based on the Company’s NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment (December 2014) with updates for a) TC/RCs:

Market costing projections of $120/t for Zn and $120/t for Pb, b) Freight costs updated to reflect current market conditions and c) Metal prices: LT US$1.10/lb for Zn and LT US$1.00/lb for Pb.


SHARE CAPITAL

4

Common shares outstanding1 161.7 million Options outstanding1 9.284 millionWarrants1 0.833 millionDSU’s1 1.562 millionFULLY DILUTED 173,380,889 MILLIONMarket capitalization2 C$17.8 million

1 Denoted figures are as at July 31, 2019 2 As at close July 31, 2019 (based on common shares outstanding)

Analyst CoverageParadigm Capital Inc. Dave Davidson

SIGNIFICANT VALUE-ADD ITEMS

LegalRTH has not been involved in any litigation proceedings since it acquired Project Olza. This is a reflection of the professional and consultative approach that RTH has taken in Poland and at the Olza project site.

Tax-Loss Carry ForwardRTH has C$30 million in unused tax pools which have not been included in the PEA economics.These tax pools will enhance the overall project economics (after-tax IRR & after-tax NPV) and reduce the capital pay back period.

January 2020

KEY METRICS &INDUSTRY COMPARABLES

5


0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

LONG TERM

US$

/Lb

PEAKEY COSTS & CASH FLOW METRICS

6

HIGH OPERATING MARGIN

1. Zn cost per pound (by-product basis). 2. Paradigm Capital 2019 Zinc price (US$/lb) forecast.

1

US$1.35/LB ZN

OPERATING MARGINUS$0.78/LB ZN

2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1 2 3

FREE

CA

SH F

LOW

(u

s$M

)

YEAR (FULL PRODUCTION)

FREE CASH FLOW FOR OLZA IN THE FIRST 3 YEARS

OF FULL PRODUCTION

• Figures are based on the Company’s NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment (December 2014) with updates for a) TC/RCs: Market costing projections of $120/t for Zn and $120/t for Pb, b) Freight costs updated to reflect current market conditions and c) Metal prices: LT US$1.10/lb for Zn and LT US$1.00/lb for Pb.

CASH COSTSUS$0.57/LB ZN

1

FIRST 3 YEAR TOTAL US$375 MILLION

AVERAGE: US$125 MILLION/YEAR


SIGNIFICANT STOCK RE-RATING OPPORTUNITY

7

1. P/NAV calculated based on the respective company’s market capitalization as at March 2019 vs. project DCF per publicly published information (reports, filings and presentations)2. Calculations based on the respective publicly published information (reports, filings and presentations)3. Calculations based on the respective publicly published information (reports, filings and presentations) as at March 2019

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

INZI

NC

RATH

DOW

NEY

FORA

N

NEW

CEN

TURY

AQU

ILA

NO

RZIN

C

CON

SAN

TIN

E

AEO

N M

ETAL

S

ASCE

NDA

NT

p/n

av

MEDIAN 0.17X

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

RATH

DOW

NEY

TIN

KA

CON

SAN

TIN

E

KARM

IN

TREV

ALI

TERR

AMIN

HER

ON

SIER

RA

Usc

/lb

zn

eq

EV / TOTAL RESOURCES2P/NAV1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

RATH

DOW

NEY

CON

STAT

INE

KARM

IN

TIN

KA

HER

ON

TERR

AMIN

TREV

ALI

SIER

RA

Ma

rk

et C

apit

ali

za

tio

nU

S$

DEVELOPERS & PRODUCERS RE-RATEMARKET CAPITALIZATION3

STEP 1:DEVELOPERS MEDIAN $51

DEVELOPER

PRODUCER

STEP 2:PRODUCERS MEDIAN $240


LOW CASH COSTS ON A GLOBAL SCALE

8

2018 MODELED ZINC COST AND PRODUCTION1 (CO-PRODUCT BASIS)

. Source: Paradigm Capital

2018 MODELED ZINC COST AND PRODUCTION1 (CO-PRODUCT BASIS)

PEA projected operating costs place the Olza Project in the lowest quartile

of global zinc production


ZINC SUPPLY GAP EXPECTED TO GROW RAPIDLY AFTER 2021

9

MM

TZN

CO

NTA

INED

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

PRODUCING AND FULLY COMMITTED PROJECTS UNCOMMITTED PROJECTS

Forecasted Zn Demand (1.8%)

GLOBAL ZINC PRODUCTION AND DEMAND

Almost 5 million tonnes required from new projects by 2027

Source: Paradigm Capital

OVER 20-30% OF DEMAND NOT

ACCOUNTED FOR

January 2020

POLAND

10


POLAND – OPEN TO FOREIGN INVESTMENT

11

Well established mining industry with a long history of operating mines

8th largest economy in the European Union (EU)

Well defined legal framework and permitting process for mining

Low corporate income tax (19%)

38-million consumer market, one of Europe’s largestContinuous GDP growth since 1992 2017 growth = 3.3%; 2018 = 5.2%

Poland Sovereign Credit Risk:Moody’s: A2 StableS&P: Foreign Currency Rating upgraded from: BBB+ to A-

Local Currency Rating upgraded from: A- to A

Warsaw

Pomorzany mine


MINING LICENSEGranted upon approval of PZZ

POLISH PERMITTING PROCESSA STRAIGHTFORWARD AND CLEAR PROCESS

12

STEP 1

STEP 2

STEP 3

STEP 4

STEP 5

Polish Geological DocumentationConfers ownership of concessions

ZoningSpatial plan and local land use amendments

Environmental Impact AssessmentConcurrent process with zoning

PZZ (Polish Project Development Plan)Approval subject to Zoning & EIA approval

Underway

Approved 2014

January 2020

Olza projectreview

13


LOCATION AND MARK ET OPTIONS

14

Excellent access to international ports and smelters

Potential to supply local ZGHB Smelter replacing imported Zn-Pb concentrates from Canada


EXCELLENT INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS

15

Dramatic positive effect on CAPEX and OPEX

High quality infrastructure:PowerWaterRoads, Rail lines and Ports to target smelters

Adjacent to 7,000 tpdRoom & Pillar Zn-Pb Pomorzany Mine

Geological setting comparableto Pomorzany Mine

Opportunity to supply ZGHB Smelter - Keeping the Value Chain in Poland

Mine supply - and supplier – network is well established supplying nearby Pomorzany Zn-Pb mine


COMPARISON BETWEEN OLZA AND POMORZANY MINE

16

Pomorzany Olza1

Production Rate (tpd) 7,000 6,000

Grade (ZnEq) 3-4% 7.02%

Mine Life Years 2 - 4 8.4

Mining Method/Groundwater Room & Pillar /High

Room & Pillar /Low

Milling Method Concentrator (Crush Grind Float)

Concentrator (Crush Grind Float)

Tailings Storage Surface Surface(With U/Ground being investigated)

Concentrate Production Zn:Pb:

40,000t2

9,000t289,000t26,900t

Market ZGHB Smelter International MarketZGHB Smelter

1 Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA), effective date December 31, 2014. see cautionary, Page 2. 2 2016 Estimate


OLZA GEOLOGY – UNCOMPLICATED STRATIFORM, MISSISSIPPI VALLEY GEOLOGY

17

CROSS SECTION BASED ON HISTORICAL DRILL HOLES AT ROKITNO

400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2600 2800 3200


POLISH RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

ZGHB: The operator of the Pomorzany Mine has released a resource estimate for its Laski 1 deposit as follows:

Category C1+C2 resources: 10.76 million tonnes Zn-Pb424,860 tonnes of Zn67,810 tonnes of Pb

ZGHB are following the same specified approval process to secure a mining license for the Laski 1 deposit as Rathdowney is for the Olza ProjectLaski 1 is a potential replacement for the Pomorzany Mine which is likely to be closed in the coming years

The Polish mineral resource classification system1 uses 5 resource categories: A+B, C1, C2, P1, & P2+P3

A comparison between Polish resource classification terminology and Canadian Institute of Mining Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) terminology is shown at right1

OLZA RESOURCE ESTIMATES BY THE POLISH GEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE2

The PGI estimate for Olza is 77Mt @ 6.15% Zn+Pb in the C1 and C2 categories. This estimate is classified as “historical” under 43-101

EXAMPLE OF CURRENT POLISH RESOURCE SYSTEM ESTIMATE3

1 Comparison of Pre-2000 Polish Resource Terminology with CIM Definitions (CSAG 2010, after Henley, 2004). Prior to 2007, the estimates were categorized, based on distance from a drill hole or mine working as follows: A: exploitation stage where the resource is estimated by underground workings; B: very detailed: drill holes spaced 75 to 150 m; C-1: detailed: drill holes spaced 150 to 200 m; C-2: moderately detailed: drill holes spaced 200 to 300 m; and P1, P2, and P3: least detailed where drill holes are spaced approximately 500 m.

3 https://www.wnp.pl/gornictwo/zgh-boleslaw-o-krok-blizej-zloz,352758_1_0_0.html

18

2 Historical estimate by the Polish State Geological Institute (PSGI) from PSGI 1992 report based on the Polish resource classification system, which is very similar to the Soviet classification system but are different from the classification purposes of NI 43-101. Although results to date are confirmatory, a Qualified Person has not done sufficient work to these historical estimates to classify the estimate as current mineral resources under NI 43-101. The Company is not treating the estimate as current resources. Significant additional drilling and related work would be required to make the estimate a current mineral resource under 43-101.


Confirming validity of earlier Polish State Geological Institute work24.4 MT at 5.53% Zn, 1.49% Pb – 7.02% CombinedImportant Ag content as well – not included in economics to dateThe resource below for 30% of the area of Polish Geological Institute resources core drilling

43-101 MINERAL RESOURCE

19

1 Contained metal based on 100% recovery. David Gaunt, PGeo., Vice President Resource and Database for Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (HDSI), a qualified person (QP) who is not independent of the Company is responsible for the estimate. The effective date of the estimate is July 2014. Estimate at 2% Zn cut-off audited and verified by independent QP - L. Roberts, MAusIMM(CP) of SRK for the Preliminary Economic Assessment.

Inferred Mineral Resources1

CutoffZn% Tonnes (millions) Zn

(%)Pb(%)

Zn+Pb(%)

Contained Zn (millions lb)

Contained Pb (millions lb)

2.0 24.4 5.53 1.49 7.02 2,975 802

3.0 18.8 6.43 1.59 8.02 2,660 658

4.0 14.1 7.42 1.70 9.12 2,304 528

5.0 10.4 8.44 1.81 10.25 1,944 417

A 2019 43-101 compliant Exploration Target Range geostatistical study indicated an estimated target resource2

potential of:54 – 92 MtZn grade – 3.9-5.2%Pb grade – 1.0-1.3%

This Exploration Target Range is on the 70% of the Polish Geological Institutes drilling area not covered by RTH’s drilling and is in addition to the current Inferred Resources outlined.

43-101 EXPLORATION TARGET RESOURCE ESTIMATE

2 This Exploration Target Range is conceptual in nature and is not a mineral resource estimate. There is no guarantee that future drilling will be done, or that, if further drilling is done, that it will lead to a resource estimate in this range or at these grades. Srivastiva, R. Mohan, and Gaunt, David. (2019). “Olza Project Exploration target Range (ETR) Study”, unpublished internal report”. Mr Srivastiva is an independent qualified person and Mr Gaunt is a qualified person that is not independent of the company.


MINING – CONVENTIONAL ROOM AND PILLAR OPERATION

20

Typical Bulk Room & Pillar MineRoom Size: varies, generally 5m x 5mPillar Size: varies, generally 7m x 7mExtraction Ratio: 73%

16 single boom and twin boom jumbos9x 72 LHD loaders9x 40t underground trucks


PROCESSING – CONVENTIONAL CRUSHING, GRINDING AND FLOTATION

21

Standard SAG Mill, Ball Mill, flotation process

89% LOM zinc recovery producing 56% zinc concentrate

88.5% LOM lead recovery producing 70% lead concentrate

Low Fe content will significantly enhance marketability of concentrates


SCHEMATIC LAYOUT OF SURFACE AND UNDERGROUND FACILITIES

22

A number of sites are under consideration

Compact surface facilities layout

All potential sites adjacent to all necessary infrastructure

Paved highways, power supply and rail lines

Ready access to equipment suppliers


Developed effective stakeholder relations based on international best practices. 2150 meetings to date

Each local community is visited every month by Company staff hosting regular update Town Hall meetings.Active engagement with all governments (local and national) and other key stakeholders continuously since 2011Community Activities:

• Door to door visits Community meetings Open houses • Local events Site visits Meetings with local officials

Support/sponsor a variety of initiatives and activitiesKey feedback items:• When is the mine going to open?• When can I apply for a job?• How will the mine affect my community?

5,400 direct and indirect jobs created1

450 direct employees estimated2

STAK EHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS

23

1 Source: Operators 2018 Report; Impact analysis of the OLZA Project on the budget revenues level2 Source: December 2014 PEA study

January 2020

2020/2021 corporate Goals

24


2019/2020 GOALS – ADVANCEMENT TOWARDS A MINING LICENSE

25

2019/2020

2020

Q32020Zoning1 6-8

monthsIn

process

EnvironmentalImpact

Assessment1

7-12months

In process

PZZ1 2-4months

In process

Receipt of mining license1

2-4months

In process

Q22021

Q32021

Q42021

19-32 months2Total elapsed time:1 Preliminary timeline estimates are included in PEA, pg. 264: updated with recent consultant estimates2 Estimated elapsed time from start of “Zoning” to receipt of Mining License

January 2020

Why invest in Rathdowney

26


WHY INVEST IN RATHDOWNEY

27

Rock-solid project fundamentals Excellent project upside potential

Strong management

• Uncomplicated stratiform geology• Large Resource: 24Mt @ 7.02% Zn +Pb• Room and Pillar Mining; Ball Mill, Floatation

Processing• Exact replica of local Pomorzany Mine• High recovery, high grade low Fe

concentrates – Premium Grade• Excellent infrastructure• First world mining jurisdiction

and permitting process• Excellent pool of

local employees

• Excellent resource base• High probability infill drilling to convert PSGI

resources• Additional advanced drilling completed since PEA

produced• Silver by-product credit to be added

• Simplified design and capital synergies accrued since PEA

• Opportunity to supply ZGHBsmelter as replacement for

Pomorzany concentrate• Higher Zn and Pb

prices than used in PEA

• Management team with experience in mine permitting, construction and operations

• Excellent local management and technical team• First-tier consultants assisting with project evaluation, permitting & mine license application

HEAVILY UNDERVALUED STOCK WITH SIGNIFICANT

RE-RATING POTENTIAL UPON RECEIPT OF MINING LICENSE

January 2020

Appendices

28


PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT (PEA)

29

Qualified Person Company Professional Designation Sections of the Report

Christopher Bray BEng, MAusIMM(CP)Project Management and

Mining

Dr Lucy RobertsBSc (Hons), MSc, PhD, MAusIMM

(CP)Mineral Resource

Dr Christopher Bonson PhD EurGeol, P.Geo Geology, Sampling and QAQC

Kris Czajewski P.Eng, APEGBC Tailings

Dr Houcyne El Idrysy MSc, CGeol FGS Water Management

Lawrence Melis P.EngMetallurgy and Mineral

Processing


PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC ASSESSMENTDECEMBER 2014

30

Project ScopeConventional 6,000 tpd bulk room & pillar mine with decline access

Standard SAG and fine grinding

Conventional flotation

Zn + Pb concentrates

Two very clean, low iron, highly marketable concentrates

Key Results1 (US dollars / metric units)

Robust returns and low production costs

$233.8M initial capital cost

$55.6M sustaining capital

$0.57/lb total cash cost1 Notes on the PEA:

• Based on median consensus metal prices: $1.00-1.10/lb for zinc; $0.95-1.00/lb for lead,• PEA study by international engineering specialists: SRK Consulting (UK) Ltd, Melis Engineering Ltd.

• The PEA is preliminary in nature and includes Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that the PEA will be realized.

NPV @ 5% discountUS$219

Million

PEA Pre-TAX1

PEA Post-TAX1

NPV8

NPV8


PEA – ANNUAL PRODUCTION SUMMARY

31

Facilities designed for 30 year life

Based on a 24.4 million tonne resource ANNUAL (Avg)1

• Total Mineralized Material Mined & Processed 2,013,000 t

• Average Recovery, Zinc 89.0 %

• Average Recovery, Lead 88.5 %

• Zinc Concentrate Produced 160,000 dmt

• Lead Concentrate Produced 38,000 dmt

• Zinc Concentrate Grade 56 %

• Lead Concentrate Grade 70 %

• Recovered Zinc 196,794,00089,452

lbtonnes

• Recovered Lead 59,133,00026,878

lbtonnes

1 Legend: t = tonnes (metric), % = percent, lb = pound


PEA – PROJECTED CAPITAL COSTS

32

1 All values in US dollars and metric units where M = Millions. Thirty percent contingency and fifteen percent EPCM applied to processing

Post-tax payback 2.4 years (8% discount rate)

Capital Cost Initial ($M) Sustaining ($M) Total LOM ($M)

• Mining 82.3 36.6 118.9

• Processing 59.7 - 59.7

• Tailings Management & Water Treatment Facilities

33.1 14.5 47.6

• Surface Facilities 15.7 - 15.7

• Contingency 23.1 - 23.1

• EPCM 13.1 - 13.1

Sub-Total 227.0 51.1 278.1

• Reclamation Security 6.8 4.5 11.3

TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 1 233.8 55.6 289.4


PEA – PROJECTED OPERATING COSTS

33

Refining & Smelting Cost1 (US$/t)

• TC / RC2 12.01

• Freight 3.47

TOTAL OFF-SITE COSTS 15.48

Operating Cost1 (US$/t)

• Mining 26.88

• Milling 11.46

• Environmental/Tailings Storage Facility

5.15

• Site General & Administration 3.93

TOTAL ON-SITE COSTS 47.42

Total cost to produce metal1

US$0.57/lb Znor

US$62.90/tprocessed

$US 0.47/lb Zinc by-product basis1 Operating costs are based on the Company’s NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment (December 2014).2 TC/RCs are based on Q1 2017 market costing projections ($120/t for zinc; $120/t for lead). 3 All values in US dollars and metric units. Total On-Site includes mining, milling and infrastructure costs incurred to produce concentrate. Total Off-Site includes TC/RCs, transportation, handling and

freight costs. Totals may not add due to rounding.


MINING LICENSE TEAM

34

Barbara Chammas Lead Environmental & Governmental Environmental Strategy (Consultant) Barbara has an advanced degree in Environmental Engineering, a certificate in Mid-Management and Business Administration and over 10 years’ experience in public consultation and water management in Poland. Barbara has provided contributions to Olza for over 7 years.SRK Consulting ConsultantAn independent, international consulting practice that provides advice and solutions to mining clients. SRK offers services through feasibility, mine planning, and production to mine closure.CEC Government Relations ConsultantLead consultant for government relations (national). AECOM Polska Sp. Z o.o. ConsultantLead consultant for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). AGH University of Science & Technology, ConsultantLead consultant for hydrogeology and engineering (PZZ).Human & Nature Foundation ConsultantLead consultant for environmental data collection (flora and fauna).Institute of Environmental Engineering Polish Academy of Sciences ConsultantLead consultant for air quality monitoring. PectorEco ConsultantLead consultant for hydrology.


GALVANIZING AND CONSTRUCTION ARE THE DOMINANT FIRST AND END USES OF ZINC

35

January 2020

DRIVING TOWARDSA MINING LICENSE

TSXV: RTHrathdowneyresources.com

Andrew Ing Chief Financial [email protected]

David J. CopelandChairman, Interim President & [email protected]

For further information please contact

CORPORATE OFFICE15th Floor – 1040 W. Georgia Street Vancouver, BC V6E 4H1 Canada604.684.6365

driving towards a mining license

Documents