Chidliak

Canadas Next Diamond Development

Preliminary Economic Assessment

July 2016 Investor Update

 Forward-looking statements
This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation. All statements, other than
statements of historical fact, that address activities, events or developments that the Company believes, expects or anticipates will or may
occur in the future including, without limitation, statements relating to the PEA and its realization, estimates of Chidliak Phase One
Diamond Project economics, proposed exploration and development programs, funding availability, anticipated exploration results, grade
of diamonds and tonnage of material, resource estimates, diamond valuation estimates and future exploration and operating plans are
forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements reflect the current expectations or beliefs of the Company based on
information currently available to the Company. Forward-looking statements are made based upon certain assumptions by the Company
and other important factors that, if untrue, could cause the actual results, performances or achievements of the Company to be materially
different from future results, performances or achievements expressed or implied by such statements. Such statements and information
are based on numerous assumptions regarding present and future business strategies and the environment in which the Company will
operate in the future, including assumptions regarding the economics of the PEA, the price of diamonds, anticipated costs and ability to
achieve goals. Certain important factors that could cause actual results, performances or achievements to differ materially from those in
the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: receipt of regulatory approvals; availability of funding; anticipated timelines
for community consultations and the impact of those consultations on the regulatory approval process; market prices for rough diamonds
and the potential impact on the Chidliak Project; and future exploration plans and objectives. Forward-looking statements are subject to a
number of risks and uncertainties that may cause the actual results of the Company to differ materially from those discussed in the
forward-looking statements and, even if such actual results are realized or substantially realized, there can be no assurance that they will
have the expected consequences to, or effects on, the Company. Factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from
current expectations include, among other things, uncertainties relating to the Companys ability to achieve the PEA, availability and cost
of funds, timing and content of work programs, results of exploration activities, interpretation of drilling results and other geological data,
risks relating to variations in the diamond grade and kimberlite lithologies; variations in rates of recovery and breakage; estimates of grade
and quality of diamonds, variations in diamond valuations and future diamond prices; the state of world diamond markets, reliability of
mineral property titles, changes to regulations affecting the Companys activities, delays in obtaining or failure to obtain required project
approvals, operational and infrastructure risk and other risks involved in the diamond exploration and development business. Any forward-
looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made and, except as may be required by applicable securities laws, the
Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events
or results or otherwise. Although the Company believes that the assumptions inherent in the forward-looking statements are reasonable,
forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and accordingly undue reliance should not be put on such
statements due to their inherent uncertainty.

2
 Key investment highlights

After Tax IRR 29.8%

NPV C$471 million
Payback 2 years
Operating Margin 72%

Chidliak Diamonds recovered from CH-6

One of the highest margin diamond development projects

in Canada since the discovery of the Lac de Gras district.

Significant resource expansion potential.

Experienced board and management team with strong

shareholder support.
The Chidliak 2016 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.
3
 Corporate overview
TSX listed diamond exploration and Hercules Transport Aircraft at Chidliak March 2015
development company with
operations in:
Canada
Botswana
Capitalization
Issued : 339,075,905
Current market capitalization : C$98M
Chidliak Diamonds recovered from CH-6
Options outstanding : 25,238,500
Warrants : NA
Debt : NA
Est Working Capital ; C$5.7M
Major shareholders
Robert Friedland ~25%
Eric Friedland ~21%

4
Location

Chidliak
Iqaluit

Churchill

Vancouver

Montreal

5
Chidliak overview

Southern Priority Area has seven kimberlites with economic potential. 6

Nunavuts permitting history

Nunavut governments mineral development strategy

is clear
The Mineral Exploration and Mining Strategy is the
plan of the Government of Nunavut to create
opportunities for the future self-reliance of Nunavut
and Nunavummiut through the sustainable
development of our mineral resources.
The goal of the strategy is: To create the conditions
Meadowbank for a strong and sustainable minerals industry that
contributes to a high and sustainable quality of life for
1998 all Nunavummiut.
A track record of careful consideration and approval
Doris Lake Since 2004, a total of 9 proposed mine
2006 developments have been reviewed.
5 have been recommended by NIRB and received
Minister approval.
2 have not received a positive recommendation from
NIRB are awaiting Ministers Decision.
1 was rejected by NIRB and the Minister.
1 was voluntarily withdrawn.

7
 Chidliak environmental context

Image from Draft Nunavut Land

Use Plan June, 2014 Draft Nunavut Land Use Plan considerations
Chidliak is within a designated Section 167
High Mineral Potential.
Proposed Chidliak Access corridor has been designated Proposed
Transportation
Corridor Transportation Corridor Proposed Road for
Chidliak Diamond Project.
Water use
Pipes outcrop, no requirement to drain lakes.
Wildlife considerations
Minimal impact on fisheries.
No known significant bird nesting areas within
high priority area.
No major caribou herd in area.
Peregrine has completed twelve helicopter
supported caribou surveys since 2009.
A total of thirteen caribou have been observed in
the eight year period from 2009.

8
 What makes Chidliak so special?

Location
Canada stable investment environment.
Community support for the project.
Recent government announcement of
commitment to develop port facility at Iqaluit.
High margin
CH-6 has rock value of +US$500/tonne
Chidliak Diamonds recovered from CH-6
compared to global average of US$216/tonne.
Fully controlled asset
100% owned.
All diamond marketing and sales rights held.
No encumbrances.

*CH-6 rock value based on 2014 independent diamond valuations provided by WWW International Diamond Consultants.

9
 2015 Resource Development Program
outcomes
CH-6
25
Added 1.32Mt 40% increase
2.2m
CH-6 2.7m Added 2.82Mct 33%
carats
20 and increase
CH-7
Identified new HG Zone 4.16
Carats (millions)

3.4m - 5.4m TFFE

carats cpt
15
4.2 M 2016 Resource CH-7
carats 4.2 M carats
4.99 Mt
10 4.23 Mct

2016 Resource
Average grade 0.85 cpt
8.6 11.4
m M
5 carats
carats
33% increase in Future resource development
contained carats opportunities
Both pipes open at depth
0
CH-6 Inferred at CH-7
CH-7Inferred
Inferredat
at CH-6 and CH-7
2.45 cpt 0.85
0.85cpt
cpt TFFE
Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral
reserves. The potential quantity and grade of the TFFE estimates are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain
if further exploration will result in the remainder of CH-6 or CH-7 being delineated as a mineral resource. Inferred Resource and TFFE tonnage estimates by Mineral Services 10
Canada Inc.
Phase 1 Resource CH-6 / CH-7

11.39 Mct 4.23 Mct

Inferred Inferred
9.3 Mct
2.5 Mct
Extracted
Extracted
in PEA
in PEA

CH-6 TFFE
CH-7 TFFE
2.15Mt3.49Mt
0.9Mt2.36Mt

Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral
reserves. The potential quantity and grade of the TFFE estimates are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain
if further exploration will result in the remainder of CH-6 or CH-7 being delineated as a mineral resource. Inferred Resource and TFFE tonnage estimates by Mineral Services 11
Canada Inc.
CH-6 diamond parcel 2013 bulk sample

US$213/ct
Feb. 2014

227 carats, largest diamond

is 8.87 carats

294 carats, largest diamond

is 3.54 carats
+9 DTC CH-6 diamond parcel from the 404.24 t
2013 bulk sample prior to cleaning

12
Chidliak diamonds are high value

5.83 ct
US$20,143 4.62 ct
US$3,455/ct US$13,569
US$2,591/ct

8.87 ct
US$36,158
US$4,076/ct 4.11 ct
US$10,650
US$2,591/ct

Chidliak Diamonds recovered from CH-6

13
CH-7 diamond parcel KIM-4

5.33 ct
US$16,555
US$3106/ct

14
CH-7 diamond parcel KIM-2

All diamonds larger than 0.11 ct

(+9 DTC sieve), 441 stones,
171.51 carats

Largest stone is 4.21 carats

15
Preliminary Economic Assessment inputs

CDN/USD exchange rate

0.78c
Comparables SWY .74c (16), DDC .75c (16) KAM .78c (14), SBB .80c (15)

Diamond price escalation

2.5% p.a. LOM
Comparables SWY 2.5% (2016), DDC 2.5% (16) MPV 1.5% above US CPI

Discount rate
7.5%
Comparables SWY 7% (16), DDC 7% (16), MPV 10% (14), KAM 5% (16),
SBB 5% (16),

16
 Preliminary Economic Assessment
Base case study outcomes
Pre-Tax NPV(7.5) / IRR C$ M / % 743 / 38.1
After Tax NPV(7.5) / IRR C$ M / % 471 / 29.8
Pay Back years 2
Mill Through Put tpd 2,000
Average Grade Recovered carat / tonne 1.67
Life of Mine years 10
Average Production M carats / year 1.2
Total Recovered Carats carats 11.6
LOM CH-6 Average Price US$ / carat 178*
LOM CH-7 Average Price US$ / carat 153
Initial CapEx C$ M 434.9**
LOM OpEx C$ / tonne 94.4
LOM OpEx C$ / carat 57.7
LOM Net Revenue C$ M 2462
Operating Margin % 72
The Chidliak 2016 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. *Price updated to 2016 price as per WWW **Includes 15% contigency
17
How does Chidliak compare?
Operating Margin, current mines and developments

90%
80% Chidliak Phase 1 72%

70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Snap Lake
Cullinan
Finsch
Renard

Karowe

Aikhal
Jwaneng

Letseng

Williamson
Montepuez
Namdeb (Marine)

Severalmaz

Diavik

Udachny
Chidliak
Venetia

Nyurba

Kagem
Gahcho Kue

Mirny

Koffiefontein

Liqhobong

Victor

Gaghoo
Orapa

Almazy Anabara
Kimberley

Namdeb (Land)
Ekati
Nizhne-Lenskoye

Macquarie Research, March 2016

Mountain Province Diamonds, Corporate Presentation, AGM 2016

The Chidliak 2016 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.
18
Construction access

Iqaluit

Churchill

Vancouver

Montreal

19
 Pre Production Capital costs

Capital Costs Pre-Prod (C$M) Pre-Stripping

Pre-Stripping 3.2 Owners Costs
1%
6%
Mining Equipment 28.4 Mining
Mining Infrastructure/Ancillary 21.0 EPCM Equipment Mining
Site Development and Roadworks 107.3 7% 7% Infrastructure/Anc
Process Facilities 65.0 illary
6%
Utilities 25.9
Indirect Costs
Ancillary Facilities 27.2 14%
Indirect Costs 51.7
EPCM 27.3
Owners Costs 21.1
Subtotal Capital Costs 378.2
Contingency 15% 56.7 Ancillary
Total Pre Production Capital 434.9 Facilities
7%
Utilities Site
7% Development
and Roadworks
Comparables Pre-Prod (C$M) 28%
Process
Renard 752 Facilities
Jay 829 17%
Gahcho Kue 859
Back River 415

The Chidliak 2016 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.
20
Site access trade off study outcomes

Key project infrastructure

Critical for both construction and operation
Not Lac de Gras
LdG 85% ice, Chidliak 29%
LdG 8-10 week operating window
Chidliak 6-8 week operating window
Financial Analysis
Pre-Tax
AWR EWR
Variance

CAPITAL C$M 422 396 -26
Pre-Tax Results
NPV (@7.5%) C$M 743.7 710.9 -32.8
IRR % 38.1 39.4 1.4
Payback Yrs 1.8 1.7 0.0
After-Tax
Results
NPV (@7.5%) C$M 471.2 451.3 -19.9
IRR % 29.8 30.9 1.0
Payback Yrs 2.0 1.9 0.0

21
 Site access trade off study outcomes

OPEX AWR EWR Difference

LOM C$M 245.8 245.8 -

Mining C$/t 34.74 34.7 -
C$/carat 21.24 21.2 -
LOM C$M 121.4 121.4 -
Processing C$/t 17.16 17.2 -
C$/carat 10.49 10.5 -
LOM C$M 104.3 200.9 96.6
Freight/Logistics C$/t 14.74 28.4 13.7
C$/carat 9.01 17.4 8.4
LOM C$M 68.2 75.3 7.1
Site Services C$/t 9.65 10.6 1.0
C$/carat 5.90 6.5 0.6
LOM C$M 128.1 128.1 -
G&A C$/t 18.11 18.1 -
C$/carat 11.07 11.1 -
LOM C$M 667.7 771.4 103.7
TOTAL C$/t 94.39 109.05 14.66
C$/carat 57.72 66.68 8.96
The Chidliak 2016 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.
22
 Site access trade off study outcomes
Access risk impacts heavily in AWRs favor
Peak Construction Year
1,460 cargo loads
6ML fuel
Additional $8M / $2M for
mobilization of freight / fuel
25% EWR Mid-to-moderate risk of
Loss development schedule extension
(<6 months) due to inability to
mobilize large loads (beyond
capacity of Hercules)
Additional $16M / $4M for
mobilization of freight / fuel
50% EWR Near certain development schedule
Loss extension (>6 months) due to
inability to mobilize large loads
(beyond capacity of Hercules)
Certain one year delay to project
100% EWR Approx. $50M cost impact (carrying
Loss cost), plus discount of entire NPV
project by one year.
Blizzard, Winter 2013
Operating Year
300 cargo loads
17ML fuel (386 loads)
Additional $2M / $5M for mobilization
of freight / fuel
Minor operational risk, due to the
inability to mobilize large
maintenance freight (somewhat
sheltered by small size of operation)
Additional $4M / $9M for mobilization
of freight / fuel
Moderate operational risk, due to the
inability to mobilize large
maintenance freight (somewhat
sheltered by small size of operation)
High potential to moderately reduce
project revenues for one year.
Additional $7M / $17M for
mobilization of freight/fuel
Major operational risk, would require
3-4 Hercules flights every day to
maintain operation. Extended
weather events and the ability to
secure aircraft now have significant
impacts due to their criticality.
Very high potential to shut down or
significantly reduce revenues for one
year.
23
 Operating costs

C$/t
Operating Cost C$/t mined C$/carat
processed LOM C$M
Mining 4.22 34.74 21.24 245.8
Processing 2.08 17.16 10.49 121.4
Freight 1.79 14.74 9.01 104.3 Site Services
Site 13%
Services 1.17 9.65 5.90 68.2
G&A 2.20 18.11 11.07 128.1
Total OPEX 11.46 94.39 57.72 667.7 Freight Mining
19% 46%

Processing
C$/t 22%
Comparables C$/carat
processed
Renard 56.20 84.37
Jay 77 44
Gahcho Kue 72.50 48
Back River 114.58 NA

The Chidliak 2016 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.
24
 LOM cash flow / carats recovered

Annual Pre-Tax Cash Flow

$1,000 $1,400

Cumulative Cash Flow (C$M)

$1,200
$800
$1,000
Cash Flow (C$M)

$600 $800
$400 $600
$400
$200 $200
$0 $0
-4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 -$200
-$200
-$400
-$400 -$600
Pre-Tax Cash Flow Cumulative Pre-Tax Cash Flow

Diamonds Recovered
2.0 14.0

Cumulative Carats (Millions)

1.8
12.0
Carats (Millions)

1.6
1.4 10.0
1.2 8.0
1.0
0.8 6.0
0.6 4.0
0.4
2.0
0.2
0.0 0.0
-4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Diamonds Recovered Cumulative Diamonds Recovered

The Chidliak 2016 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.
25
 Sensitivities pre-tax

Discount Rate Sensitivity

$1,400
$1310
$1,200
Pre-Tax NPV (C$M)

$1,000
$800
$527
$600
$400
$200
$0
0% 5% 8% 10% 12%

F/X Rate Sensitivity

$1,000
$900 $926
Pre-Tax NPV (C$M)

$800
$700
$600
$500
$400
$392
$300
$200
$100
$0
0.7 0.75 0.8 0.9 1.00

The Chidliak 2016 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.
26
 Sensitivities pre-tax

Pre-Tax Sensitivity

$1,000

$900

$800

$700
Pre-Tax NPV $CM

$600

$500

$400

$300

$200

$100

$0
0.85 1.00 1.15

Diamond Price Diamond Grade CAPEX OPEX

The Chidliak 2016 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.
27
Opportunities
Resource expansion CH-6 / CH-7

CH-6 TFFE CH-7 TFFE

2.15Mt3.49Mt .9Mt2.36Mt

Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral
reserves. The potential quantity and grade of the TFFE estimates are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain
if further exploration will result in the remainder of CH-6 or CH-7 being delineated as a mineral resource. Inferred Resource and TFFE estimates by Mineral Services Canada Inc. 28
 Opportunities
Optimization - CH-6
KIM-C
Not included in resource
statement
OB
wKIM-L TFFE tonnage up to 250K
tonnes
KIM-L Pit Optimization
Whittle optimized shell leaves
WASTE ~ 13% of carats

KIM-C Pit angles conservative-

Shell HGKIM-L
TFFE overall 35o to 48o
#19
Current pit design minimizes
waste at expense of
RF1 maximizing early production
Shell #30 from HGKIM-L
260m pit
depth

Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral
reserves. The potential quantity and grade of the TFFE estimates are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain
if further exploration will result in the remainder of CH-6 or CH-7 being delineated as a mineral resource. Inferred Resource and TFFE estimates by Mineral Services Canada Inc. 29
 Opportunities
Optimization - CH-7
Grade and Diamond Valuation
Breakage in the 2015 bulk
sample.
Impacts both recovered
OB grade and diamond
KIM valuation.
5
Pit Optimization
R
S Whittle optimized shell
WASTE
leaves ~ 35% of carats.
Shell KIM KIM
#19
Pit angles conservative-
2 3
overall 35o to 48o
Units R and S conservative
RF1 grade
Shell #30 180m
pit Assigned KIM2 grade of 0.76
depth cpt.
KIM
4

Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral
reserves. The potential quantity and grade of the TFFE estimates are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain
if further exploration will result in the remainder of CH-6 or CH-7 being delineated as a mineral resource. Inferred Resource and TFFE estimates by Mineral Services Canada Inc. 30
Resource expansion - brownfield

31
 Opportunities
Resource expansion CH-44 and beyond

1 Mt - 2 Mt
@ est 1 cpt

The potential quantity and grade of the TFFE estimates are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain if further
exploration will result in CH-44 being delineated as a mineral resource. TFFE estimates by Ms. Darrell Farrow, of Geostrat Consultants Inc.
32
Opportunities
Capital Expenditure
Road
Currently assumed 100% of cost.
Opportunity to access Federal
Infrastructure funding.
Opportunity to share with 3rd party

33
 How does Chidliak compare?
Financial indicators

Parameter Units Chidliak Jay1,2 Renard4 Gahcho Kue5 Back River6

2016 PEA 2016 FS 2013 Opt 2014 FS 2015 FS
Post Tax IRR % 29.8 15.6 16.3 32.6 24.2
Post Tax NPV C$M 471(7.5) 510(7) 391(7) 1,005(10) 480
Pre-Production CapEx C$M 435 829 752 859 415
Payback years 2 NA 4.8 1.8 2.9
Operating Margin % 72 293 67 67 NA
CH-6 - 178
LOM Average Price US$ / ct 623 155 150 NA
CH-7 - 153
C$/t 114.58
OPEX 94.4 77 56.2 72.51
processed (OP/UG)
OPEX C$/carat 57.7 44 84.37 48 NA
OP - .44(.85)
LOM Average Head Grade carats/tonne 1.67(1.18) 1.8(1.0) 1.52(1.0) 6.3 g/t
UG - .75(.85)
Life of Mine years 10 13 14 12 12
LOM carats Mcarats 11.6 78.6 22.3 53.4 2.32Moz

1) Information retrieved from "Dominion Diamond Corporation, Jay Feasibility Study Results", July, 2016, all numbers on 100% basis.
2) All Jay results converted to C$ at an exchange rate of C$:US$ = .78
3) Calculated by Peregrine Diamonds based on Dominion Diamonds data
4) Information retrieved from Stornoway Diamond "Corporate Update, June 19, 2016"
5) Information retrieved from Gahcho Kue Project, 2014 Feasibility Study Report, NI 43-101 Technical Report

6) Information retrieved from Sabina Gold and Silver Corp "Back River Initial Project Feasibility Study Presentation"

The Chidliak 2016 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. 34
 What does the future look like?

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2
Infrastructure and Environmental Base Line
2015 RDP / Bulk Sampling
Inferred Resource Statement
Preliminary Economic Assessment CP1D
Pre-feasibility / Feasibility CP1D
Permitting CP1D
Construction CP1D

35
Chidliak Preliminary Economic Assessment

Gord Doerkson JDS Energy & Mining Inc. Project Management, Economic Analysis
Trevor Herd JDS Energy & Mining Inc. Project Management, Infrastructure and Logistics
Mining Methods, Inferred Resource Statements, CH-6 and
Dino Pilotto JDS Energy & Mining Inc.
CH-7
Mike Rylatt SEPRO Processing
Bruce Murphy SRK Geotech
Maritz Rykaart SRK Waste and Water Management
Tom Nowicki Mineral Services Canada Inc. Inferred Resource Statements, CH-6 and CH-7
Dr. Jennifer Pell Peregrine Diamonds Ltd. Diamond Valuations
Dr. Herman Grutter Peregrine Diamonds Ltd. Resource Development, Program Design and Execution
Cathy Fitzgerald Peregrine Diamonds Ltd. Resource Modeling
Alan O'Connor Peregrine Diamonds Ltd. Program Design, Planning and Execution

The PEA was prepared under the direction and supervision of JDS Energy and Mining.

Mineral Services Canada prepared the Inferred Resource Statements for CH-6 and CH-7.

WWW International Diamond Consultants provided CH-6 and CH-7 diamond valuations.

For information on data verification, exploration information and resource estimation procedures see the NI 43-101 technical
report entitled Mineral Resource Estimate for the Chidliak Project, Baffin Island, Nunavut and dated effective June 3, 2016.

36
The Peregrine Team

Management Team Board of Directors

Tom Peregoodoff President and CEO Eric Friedland Executive Chairman

Vice-President, Technical
Dr. Herman Grutter Robert Boyd Lead Director
Services
Dr. Jennifer Pell Chief Geologist Rick Cohen Director

Alan O'Connor Project Manager Peter Meredith Director

Cathy Fitzgerald Resource Geologist Dr. Alan Carter Director

David Willis Manager, Community Affairs Dr. Myron Goldstein Director

Greg Shenton CFO

37
 Thank you and any questions?

After Tax IRR 29.8%

NPV C$471 million
Payback 2 years
Operating Margin 72%

Chidliak Diamonds recovered from CH-6

One of the highest margin diamond development projects

in Canada since the discovery of the Lac de Gras district.

Significant resource expansion potential.

Experienced board and management team with strong

shareholder support.
The Chidliak 2016 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. 38