Form 10-K/A - Annual report [Section 13 and 15(d), not S-K Item 405]: [Amend]

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K/A

(Amendment No. 1)

x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

¨ TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Commission File No. 000-54653

AUGUSTA GOLD CORP.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Nevada		41-2252162
(State or Other Jurisdiction Of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

Suite 555 – 999 Canada Place Vancouver, BC, Canada		V6C 3E1
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (604) 687-1717

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock, $0.0001 par value per share

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨ No x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the issuer was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer	¨	Accelerated filer	¨

Non-accelerated filer	x	Smaller reporting company	x

		Emerging growth company	¨

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ¨

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.) Yes ¨ No x

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common stock was last sold as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter was $37,573,924.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 85,929,753 shares of common stock par value $0.0001, were outstanding on December 19, 2023.

Auditor Firm ID:

731

Auditor Name:

DAVIDSON & COMPANY LLP

Auditor Location:

Vancouver, Canada

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Augusta Gold Corp. (the “Company”) hereby files this Amendment No. 1 (the “Amended Report”) to its annual report on Form 10-K as originally filed with the SEC on March 16, 2023 (the “Original Report”) to update our mineral property disclosures in the Original Report to align with certain of the technical requirements of subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K (“S-K 1300”). This Amended Report is being filed to (i) amend “Item 2. Properties”, and (ii) file amended versions of “Exhibit 96.1 S-K 1300 Technical Report, Mineral Resource Estimate, Bullfrog Gold Project, Nye County, Nevada” and “Exhibit 96.2 Mineral Resource Estimate for the Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA”, in each case, to update only the following disclosure:

Revisions to include cutoff grades for our mineral resource estimates and related disclosure thereto;

Revisions to opinions of certain qualified persons to conform to respective requirements of S-K 1300; and

Revisions to explain with particularity, your reasons for using the selected commodity price, including the material assumptions underlying this selection

These updates do not change the conclusions, economic results, or mineral resources estimates. This Amended Report also contains updated consents of the authors of the revised technical report summary filed as exhibits hereto.

In addition, pursuant to Rule 12b-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as a result of this Form 10-K/A, the Company is refiling the certifications of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, required pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as exhibits 31.1 and 31.2 to this Form 10-K/A.

Outside of changes to the items and exhibit as noted above, the updated consents of the authors of the technical reports, and the certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, this Amended Report does not otherwise amend, supplement, update or revise any portion of the Original Report which remains unchanged since the date of its filing. Furthermore, this Amended Report does not change any previously reported financial results, nor does it reflect events occurring after the date of the Original Report. Information not affected by this Form 10-K/A remains unchanged and reflects the disclosures made at the time the Original Report was filed. Accordingly, this Form 10-K/A should be read in conjunction with the Original Report and the Company’s other filings with the SEC subsequent to the filing of the Original Report.

CAUTIONARY NOTE TO INVESTORS REGARDING ESTIMATES OF MEASURED, INDICATED AND INFERRED RESOURCES AND PROVEN AND PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and applicable Canadian securities laws, and as a result we report our mineral reserves and mineral resources according to two different standards. U.S. reporting requirements are governed by subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act (“S-K 1300”). Canadian reporting requirements for disclosure of mineral properties are governed by NI 43-101. Both sets of reporting standards have similar goals in terms of conveying an appropriate level of confidence in the disclosures being reported, but the standards embody slightly different approaches and definitions.

In our public filings in the U.S. and Canada and in certain other announcements not filed with the SEC, we disclose proven and probable reserves and measured, indicated and inferred resources, each as defined in S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. As currently reported, there are no material differences in our disclosed measured, indicated and inferred resource under each of S-K 1300 and NI 43-101. The estimation of measured resources and indicated resources involve greater uncertainty as to their existence and economic feasibility than the estimation of proven and probable reserves, and therefore investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of measured or indicated resources will ever be converted into S-K 1300-compliant or NI 43-101-compliant reserves. The estimation of inferred resources involves far greater uncertainty as to their existence and economic viability than the estimation of other categories of resources, and therefore it cannot be assumed that all or any part of inferred resources will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Therefore, investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of inferred resources exist, or that they can be mined legally or economically.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K/A and the exhibits attached hereto contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended, and “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation, collectively “forward-looking statements”. Such forward-looking statements concern our anticipated results and developments in the operations of the Company in future periods, planned exploration activities, the adequacy of the Company’s financial resources and other events or conditions that may occur in the future. Forward-looking statements are frequently, but not always, identified by words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “intends,” “estimates,” “potential,” “possible” and similar expressions, or statements that events, conditions or results “will,” “may,” “could” or “should” (or the negative and grammatical variations of any of these terms) occur or be achieved. These forward looking statements may include, but are not limited to, statements concerning:

the Company’s strategies and objectives, both generally and in respect of the Bullfrog Gold Project and Reward Gold Project;

the recommendations of the Technical Reports for the Bullfrog Gold Project and Reward Gold Project;

the Company’s decisions regarding the timing and costs of exploration programs with respect to, and the issuance of the necessary permits and authorizations required for, the Company’s exploration programs at the Bullfrog Gold Project and Reward Gold Project;

the Company’s estimates of the quality and quantity of the mineralized materials at its mineral properties;

the potential discovery and delineation of mineral deposits/reserves and any expansion thereof beyond the current estimate;

the Company’s expectation that it will become a gold producer;

the Company’s estimates of future operating and financial performance;

the Company’s potential funding requirements and sources of capital, including near-term sources of additional cash and long-term financing through the sale of equity and/or debt financings and through the exercise of stock options and warrants;

the Company’s expectation that the Company will continue to raise capital;

the Company’s expectation that the Company will continue to incur losses and will not pay dividends for the foreseeable future;

the Company’s estimates of its future cash position;

the Company’s anticipated general business and economic conditions;

the Company’s ability to meet its financial obligations as they come due, and to be able to raise the necessary funds to continue operations; and

that the Company will operate at a loss for the foreseeable future.

Such forward-looking statements reflect the Company’s current views with respect to future events and are subject to certain known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Many factors could cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements that may be expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including, among others, risks related to:

our history of losses;

negative cash flow;

our limited operating history;

increased costs affecting our financial condition;

the Bullfrog Gold Project and Reward Gold Project being in the exploration stage;

whether the Bullfrog Gold Project and Reward Gold Project are feasible;

the Bullfrog Gold Project and Reward Gold Project requiring substantial capital investment;

our inability to obtain required permits;

our status as a junior mining company;

difficulties in managing growth;

our potential loss of key persons;

risks related to the evolving novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic and health crisis and the governmental and regulatory actions taken in response thereto;

the risks of mineral exploration;

evaluation uncertainty in estimating mineralized material;

changes in estimates of mineralized material;

our exploration projects not succeeding;

price volatility of gold and silver;

environmental regulations;

challenges to title to our properties;

amendments to mining law;

supply shortages;

inability to maintain infrastructure to conduct exploration activities;

new regulation related to climate change;

relationships with communities in which we operate;

newly adopted mining disclosure regulations;

evolving corporate standards;

Canadian reporting requirements; and

The price of the shares of common stock being volatile.

Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described herein. This list of factors that may affect any of the Company’s forward-looking statements is not exhaustive. Forward-looking statements are statements about the future and are inherently uncertain, and actual achievements of the Company or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including without limitation those discussed in “Part I, Item 1A, Risk Factors”, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K as filed with the SEC on March 16, 2023, as well as other factors described elsewhere in that Annual Report, this report and the Company’s other reports filed with the SEC.

The Company’s forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A are based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management as of the date of this Annual Report. The Company does not assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements if circumstances or management’s beliefs, expectations or opinions should change, except as required by law. For the reasons set forth above, investors should not attribute undue certainty to or place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

GLOSSARY OF SELECTED MINING TERMS

Ag	Silver

Au	Gold

Breccia	Broken sedimentary and volcanic rock fragments cemented by a fine-grained matrix

Clastic Rock	Fragments, or clasts, of pre-existing minerals

Cutoff Grade	The grade (i.e., the concentration of metal or mineral in rock) that determines the destination of the material during mining. For purposes of establishing “prospects of economic extraction,” the cut-off grade is the grade that distinguishes material deemed to have no economic value (it will not be mined in underground mining or if mined in surface mining, its destination will be the waste dump) from material deemed to have economic value (its ultimate destination during mining will be a processing facility). Other terms used in similar fashion as cut-off grade include net smelter return, pay limit, and break-even stripping ratio.

Deposit	A mineralized body which has been physically delineated by sufficient drilling, trenching, and/or underground work, and found to contain a sufficient average grade of metal or metals to warrant further exploration and/or development expenditures. Such a deposit does not qualify as a commercially mineable ore body or as containing reserves or ore, unless final legal, technical and economic factors are resolved

Detachment Fault	A regionally extensive, gently dipping normal fault that is commonly associated with extension in large blocks of the earth’s crust

g/t	Grams per metric tonne

Metamorphic Rock	Rock that has transformed to another rock form after intense heat and pressure

Miocene	A geologic era that extended from 5 million to 23 million years ago

Mineralization	The concentration of metals and their chemical compounds within a body of rock

Net Smelter Royalty	A percentage payable to an owner or lessee from the production or net proceeds received by the operator from a smelter or refinery, less transportation, insurance, smelting and refining costs and penalties as set out in a royalty agreement.

Paleozoic	A geologic era extending from 230 million to 540 million years ago

Photogrammetry	The science of making measurements from photographs; the output is typically a map or a drawing

Proterozoic	A geologic era extending from 540 million years to 2,500 million years ago.

Reverse Circulation (RC)	A drilling method whereby drill cuttings are returned to the surface through the annulus between inner and outer drill rods, thereby minimizing contamination from wall rock.

Rhyolite	An igneous, volcanic extrusive rock containing more than 65% silica.

Schist	A group metamorphic rocks that contain more than 50% platy and elongated minerals such as mica.

Siliciclastic Rock	Non-carbonate sedimentary rocks that are almost exclusively silicas-bearing, either as quartz or silicate minerals.

Tertiary	A geologic era from 2.6 million to 65 million years ago.

S-K 1300 Definitions

Exploration Stage Issuer	An “exploration stage issuer” is an issuer that has no material property with mineral reserves disclosed.

Exploration Stage Property	An “exploration stage property” is a property that has no mineral reserves disclosed.

Development Stage Issuer	A “development stage issuer” is an issuer that is engaged in the preparation of mineral reserves for extraction on at least one material property.

Development Stage Property	A “development stage property” is a property that has mineral reserves disclosed, pursuant to this subpart, but no material extraction.

Indicated Mineral Resource	An “indicated mineral resource” is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with an indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because an indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource, an indicated mineral resource may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve

Inferred Mineral Resource	An “inferred mineral resource” is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. Because an inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability, an inferred mineral resource may not be considered when assessing the economic viability of a mining project, and may not be converted to a mineral reserve.

Measured Mineral Resource	A “measured mineral resource” is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because a measured mineral resource has a higher level of confidence than the level of confidence of either an indicated mineral resource or an inferred mineral resource, a measured mineral resource may be converted to a proven mineral reserve or to a probable mineral reserve.

Mineral Reserve	A “mineral reserve” is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted

Mineral Resource	A “mineral resource” is a concentration or occurrence of material of economic interest in or on the Earth's crust in such form, grade or quality, and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction. A mineral resource is a reasonable estimate of mineralization, taking into account relevant factors such as cut-off grade, likely mining dimensions, location or continuity, that, with the assumed and justifiable technical and economic conditions, is likely to, in whole or in part, become economically extractable. It is not merely an inventory of all mineralization drilled or sampled.

Modifying Factors	Modifying factors are the factors that a qualified person must apply to indicated and measured mineral resources and then evaluate in order to establish the economic viability of mineral reserves. A qualified person must apply and evaluate modifying factors to convert measured and indicated mineral resources to proven and probable mineral reserves. These factors include, but are not restricted to: Mining; processing; metallurgical; infrastructure; economic; marketing; legal; environmental compliance; plans, negotiations, or agreements with local individuals or groups; and governmental factors. The number, type and specific characteristics of the modifying factors applied will necessarily be a function of and depend upon the mineral, mine, property, or project.

Probable Reserve	A “probable mineral reserve” is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.

Production Stage Issuer	A “production stage issuer” is an issuer that is engaged in material extraction of mineral reserves on at least one material property.

Production Stage Property	A “production stage property” is a property with material extraction of mineral reserves.

Proven Reserve	A “proven mineral reserve” is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource.

USE OF NAMES

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A, unless the context otherwise requires, the terms "we", "us", "our", "Augusta Gold", "Augusta Gold Corp." or the "Company" refer to Augusta Gold Corp., a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries.

CURRENCY

References to CDN or C$ refer to Canadian currency and USD or $ to United States currency.

METRIC CONVERSION TABLE

To Convert Metric Measurement Units	To Imperial Measurement Units	Multiply by
Hectares	Acres	2.4710
Meters	Feet	3.2808
Kilometers	Miles	0.6214
Tonnes	Tons (short)	1.1023
Liters	Gallons	0.2642
Grams	Ounces (troy)	0.0322
Grams per tonne	Ounces (troy) per ton (short)	0.0292

PART I

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Technical Report Summaries

The technical report for the Bullfrog Gold Project is the technical report summary, prepared pursuant to S-K 1300, entitled “S-K 1300 Technical Report, Mineral Resource Estimate, Bullfrog Gold Project, Nye County, Nevada” with an effective date of December 31, 2021, and an issue date of March 16, 2022 (the “Bullfrog Technical Report”).

The Bullfrog Technical Report was prepared by Forte Dynamics, Inc. under the supervision of Russ Downer, P. Eng. and Adam House, MMSA QP, each of whom is a qualified person under S-K 1300 and NI 43-101.

The description of the Bullfrog Gold Project contained herein is based upon the Bullfrog Technical Report.

The technical report for the Reward Gold Project is the technical report summary, prepared pursuant to S-K 1300, entitled “Mineral Resource Estimate for the Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada” with an effective date of May 31, 2022, and an issue date of June 29, 2022 (the “Reward Technical Report”).

The Reward Technical Report was prepared by Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P. Geol., P.Geo, and Timothy D. Scott, SME, each of whom is a qualified person under S-K 1300 and NI 43-101.

The description of the Reward Gold Project contained herein is based upon the Reward Technical Report.

Summary of Mineral Properties

Augusta Gold currently has interests in four gold exploration properties located in the state of Nevada, including the Bullfrog Gold Project and the Reward Gold Project. Each of the properties are exploration stage properties with measured, indicated and inferred resources but no known mineral reserves and our primary operations are exploring these properties to move them towards a development decision.

Ownership Interests

At our Bullfrog Project, we have four option/lease/purchase agreements in place and, with the additional claims it has located, give it control of 734 unpatented lode mining claims and mill site claims, and 87 patented mining claims. The claims do not have an expiration date, as long as the fees and obligations are maintained. For additional details see “Bullfrog Gold Project, Nye County Nevada – Property Holdings” below.

At our Reward Project, the project encompasses 123 unpatented Bureau of Land Management (BLM) placer and lode mining claims and six patented placer mining claims, totalling approximately 2,333 net acres (944 hectares). Only the patented claims have been legally surveyed. Under United States mining law, claims may be renewed annually for an unlimited number of years upon a small payment per claim (currently $155 per claim due to the BLM and an aggregate $1,502 due to Nye County) and the same claim status-whether lode or placer-may be used for exploration or exploitation of the lodes or placers.

Several blocks of unpatented claims are leased by CR Reward from underlying owners, and are referred to as Connolly, Webster, Orser-McFall and Van Meeteren leases.

In total our options and leases cover 15,998 net acres in the aggregate, consisting of a mix of 93 patented mining claims, 857 unpatented mining claims either leased with option to purchase, or joint ventured, and private property leases.

Summary Mineral Resources

Summary Mineral Resources at End of Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022

	Measured mineral resources (koz)		Indicated mineral resources (koz)		Measured and indicated mineral resources (koz)		Inferred mineral resources (koz)
Gold
United States (Nevada)
Bullfrog Project		526.7		682.6		1,209.3		257.9
Reward Project		169.9		256.8		426.7		27.1
Total Gold		696.6		939.4		1636.0		285.0

Silver
United States (Nevada)
Bullfrog Project		1309.1		1557.5		2866.6		515.7
Total Silver		1309.1		1557.5		2866.6		515.7

Notes:

Bullfrog oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 82% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 20% For Ag.

Bullfrog sulphide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 50% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 12% for Ag.

Gold price and Silver price used in the Bullfrog estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices and compared to a three-year trailing average at the time of the estimates with a good correlation.

Reward oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,700/oz and a recovery of 80% for Au were utilized.

Gold price used in the Reward estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices at the time of the estimate and assumed a price of US$1,700 per oz of gold based upon a 3 year trailing average.

Bullfrog oxide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.192 g/tonne and sulphide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.315 g/tonne.

Reward Mineral Resources are reported using a 0.2 g/tonne incremental cut-off grade.

Bullfrog mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Reward mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.20/tonne

Bullfrog processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Reward processing and general and administration are US$6.06/tonne and US$0.83/tonne per tonne processed, respectively

Bullfrog Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues

Bullfrog Gold Project, Nye County, Nevada

Summary Disclosure

We hold the Bullfrog Project through our wholly-owned subsidiaries Bullfrog Mines, Rocky Mountain Minerals Corp., a Nevada corporation (“RMMC”) and Standard Gold Corp., a Nevada corporation (“SGC”).

Property Location and Access

The Bullfrog Gold Project is located in the Bullfrog Hills of Nye County, Nevada and in the southern half of the Bullfrog Mining District (Figure 1). Project properties are located in Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 35 and 36 of T11S, R46E and Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 23 of T12S, R46E, Mt. Diablo Meridian.

The Bullfrog Gold Project is accessible via a 2½ hour (120 mile) drive north of Las Vegas, Nevada on US Highway 95. Las Vegas, the largest city in Nevada, is serviced by a major international airport, and has ample equipment, supplies and services to support many of the project’s needs. The project is 4 miles west of the Town of Beatty, Nevada via a paved highway. Beatty has a population of approximately 1,000 and can provide basic housing, services, and supplies. Access around the project is by a series of reasonably good gravel roads that extend to the open pit mines and most of the significant exploration areas.

Figure 1: Location Map

Project Stage

The Bullfrog Gold Project is an exploration stage property with measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources but no known mineral reserves.

Mineral Resources Estimates

Mineral resources utilize all new drilling through the end of 2021 in addition to updated geologic models and database improvements by the Company’s staff. Three-dimensional block models for each area (Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone and Bonanza) were created using Vulcan software. Surfaces and solids representing topography, overburden, geologic units, historic stope shapes and gold mineralization were incorporated into the resource models. Resource estimates utilize drill hole, survey, analytical and bulk density information provided by the project personnel. Gold and silver values have been given null values for all material that has been historically mined by both open pit and underground methods. Bulk density has been adjusted for backfill material placed in the historical open pit and underground operations.

Mineral resources are pit constrained using reasonable cost assumptions, however detailed costing and economic evaluations have not been performed. The resources only consider mining mineralization and waste that will take place on lands controlled by the Company. Pit slope parameters are based on the existing pit wall angles and vary by geology, depth and lateral extent. Different metallurgical recoveries were assigned to oxide and sulphide material and used in the calculation of the optimized pit shells.

Mineral resources are reported inside optimized pit shells with Minemax software using high-level economic assumptions, geotechnical pit slope parameters and property boundaries. Estimated mineral resources for the Bullfrog Project are being reported for the Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone and Bonanza areas, respectively.

The following table presents the combined global gold and silver mineral resources for the three areas, Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone and Bonanza, at the Bullfrog Gold Project.

Bullfrog Gold Project - Summary of Gold and Silver Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on $1,550/oz. Gold and $20/oz. Silver

Combined Global Resources - Oxide and Sulphide
Classification	Tonnes (Mt)		Au grade (g/t)		Ag grade (g/t)		Au Contained (koz)		Ag Contained (koz)
Measured		30.13		0.544		1.35		526.68		1,309.13
Indicated		40.88		0.519		1.18		682.61		1,557.49
Measured and Indicated		71.01		0.530		1.26		1,209.29		2,866.62
Inferred		16.69		0.481		0.96		257.90		515.72

Notes:

1.	Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 82% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 20% For Ag.

2.	Sulphide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 50% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 12% for Ag. No sulphide material was reported for Montgomery-Shoshone or Bonanza.
3.	Gold price and Silver price used in the Bullfrog estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices and compared to a three-year trailing average at the time of the estimate with good correlation.
4.	Bullfrog oxide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.192 g/tonne and sulphide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.315 g/tonne..

5.	Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

6.	Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

7.	Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

8.	Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

9.	The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

The following tables present the gold and silver mineral resources for each of the three project areas, Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone and Bonanza.

Bullfrog Gold Project - Bullfrog Area, Gold and Silver Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on $1,550/oz. Gold and $20/oz. Silver

Mineral Resources - Bullfrog
Redox	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)		Au grade (g/t)		Ag grade (g/t)		Au Contained (koz)		Ag Contained (koz)
	Measured		24.50		0.537		1.28		422.77		1,010.02
	Indicated		36.32		0.515		1.14		602.02		1,332.18
Oxide	Measured and Indicated		60.82		0.524		1.20		1,024.79		2,342.20
	Inferred		14.40		0.460		0.77		213.06		358.49

	Measured		1.30		0.710		1.28		29.77		53.52
	Indicated		1.99		0.625		1.32		39.94		84.47
Sulphide	Measured and Indicated		3.29		0.659		1.30		69.72		137.99
	Inferred		1.05		0.657		1.14		22.14		38.53

	Measured		25.80		0.545		1.28		452.55		1,063.54
	Indicated		38.31		0.521		1.15		641.96		1,416.65
Total - Oxide and Sulphide	Measured and Indicated		64.12		0.531		1.20		1,094.51		2,480.19
	Inferred		15.44		0.474		0.80		235.20		397.02

Notes:

1.	Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 82% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 20% For Ag.

2.	Sulphide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 50% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 12% for Ag.
3.	Gold price and Silver price used in the Bullfrog estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices and compared to a three-year trailing average at the time of the estimate with good correlation.
4.	Bullfrog oxide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.192 g/tonne and sulphide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.315 g/tonne.

5.	Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

6.	Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

7.	Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

8.	Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

9.	The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

Bullfrog Gold Project - Montgomery-Shoshone Area, Gold and Silver Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on $1,550/oz. Gold and $20/oz. Silver

Mineral Resources - Montgomery-Shoshone
Redox	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)		Au grade (g/t)		Ag grade (g/t)		Au Contained (koz)		Ag Contained (koz)
	Measured		1.97		0.637		3.35		40.35		212.12
	Indicated		1.35		0.555		2.85		24.04		123.66
Oxide	Measured and Indicated		3.32		0.603		3.15		64.38		335.78
	Inferred		1.05		0.586		3.45		19.76		116.41

Notes:

1.	Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 82% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 20% For Ag.

2.	Sulphide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 50% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 12% for Ag. No sulphide material was reported for Montgomery-Shoshone.
3.	Gold price and Silver price used in the Bullfrog estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices and compared to a three-year trailing average at the time of the estimate with good correlation.
4.	Bullfrog oxide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.192 g/tonne and sulphide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.315 g/tonne.

5.	Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

6.	Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

7.	Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

8	Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

9.	The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

Bullfrog Gold Project - Bonanza Area, Gold and Silver Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on $1,550/oz. Gold and $20/oz. Silver

Mineral Resources - Bonanza
Redox	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)		Au grade (g/t)		Ag grade (g/t)		Au Contained (koz)		Ag Contained (koz)
	Measured		2.35		0.446		0.44		33.78		33.48
	Indicated		1.22		0.422		0.44		16.61		17.17
Oxide	Measured and Indicated		3.58		0.438		0.44		50.40		50.65
	Inferred		0.19		0.473		0.37		2.94		2.28

Notes:

1.	Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 82% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 20% For Ag.

2.	Sulphide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 50% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 12% for Ag. No sulphide material was reported for Bonanza.
3.	Gold price and Silver price used in the Bullfrog estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices and compared to a three-year trailing average at the time of the estimate with good correlation.
4.	Bullfrog oxide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.192 g/tonne and sulphide Mineral Resources are reported using a breakeven cutoff grade of 0.315 g/tonne.

5.	Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

6.	Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

7.	Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

8.	Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

9.	The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues

In each case above, Estimated Mineral Resources have not changed from December 31, 2021 to December 31, 2022 due to the fact that Bullfrog Gold Project is in the exploration stage and no new resources were added to the project through exploration activities in 2022. The material assumptions underlying mineral resources as previously disclosed at December 31, 2021 remain current in all material respects.

Property Holdings

We have four option/lease/purchase agreements in place and, with the additional claims it has located, give it control of 734 unpatented lode mining claims and mill site claims, and 87 patented mining claims. The claims do not have an expiration date, as long as the fees and obligations are maintained.

NPX Assignment of Lands

In September 2011, we issued 14.4 million shares of the Company to the shareholders of SGC to acquire 100% of SGC and its assets. SGC is a private Nevada corporation and now wholly owned by the Company. Concurrently, NPX Metals, Inc. (“NPX”) and Bull Frog Holding, Inc. (“BHI”) assigned all title and interests in 79 claims and two patents to SGC. The Company granted a production royalty of 3% NSR on the property to NPX and BHI, plus an aggregate 3% NSR cap on any acquired lands within one mile of the 2011 boundary. Thus, NPX and BHI would not receive any royalty on acquisitions having a 3% or greater NSR.

Mojave Gold Option

In March 2014, we formed RMMC, a private Nevada corporation, as a wholly owned subsidiary, specifically for holding and acquiring assets. On October 29, 2014, RMMC exercised an option to purchase from Mojave Gold Mining Co. 12 patents west and adjacent to our initial property holdings and that cover the NE half of the M-S pit. Mojave was paid 750,000 shares of our common stock plus $16,000. RMMC agreed to make annual payments totaling $180,000 over nine years to fully exercise the option, and expend as a minimum work commitment for the benefit of the Property $100,000 per year and a total of $500,000 over five years on the properties and surrounding lands within one-half mile of the 12 Mojave patents. Alternatively, RMMC can pay cash to Mojave at 50% of the difference between the minimum required and the actual expenditures. Mojave retained a sliding scale Net Smelter Return royalty ranging from 1% for gold prices below $1,200/ounce and up to 4% for gold prices above $3,200 per ounce.

Lunar Landing Lease

On July 1, 2017, RMMC entered a lease with Lunar Landing LLC on 24 patents in the Bullfrog District:

Two patents are adjacent and west of the M-S pit that could allow potential expansion of the pit down dip of the Polaris vein and stock work system.

Ten patents have provided the Company with contiguous and connecting lands between the M-S and Bullfrog pits. These patents will also allow further expansions of the Bullfrog pit to the north and east.

Four patents are within 0.5 to 1.2 miles west of the Bullfrog pit in the vicinity of the Bonanza Mountain open pit mine.

Eight patents are in an exploration target area located about 1.5 miles NW of the Bullfrog pit and where the Company has owned the Aurium patent since 2011.

The lease includes the following:

The Company paid $26,000 on signing and is scheduled to annually pay $16,000 for years 2-5, $21,000 for years 6-10, $25,000 for years 11-15, $30,000 for years 16-20, $40,000 for years 21-25 and $45,000 for years 26-30.

Production royalty of 5% net smelter returns with the right to buy-down to 2.5%.

The Company is to expend as a work commitment not less than $50,000 per year and $500,000 in total to maintain the lease.

The Company has rights to commingle ores and the flexibility to operate the Project as a logical land and mining unit.

Brown Claims

On January 29, 2018, RMMC purchased two patented claims (the “Brown Claims”), thereby eliminating minor constraints to expand the Bullfrog pit to the north. As partial consideration for the Brown Claims, RMMC granted the sellers of the Brown Claims a 5% net smelter returns royalty on the Brown Claims, of which 2.5% can be purchased by RMMC for aggregate consideration of US$37,500.

Barrick Claims

On October 26, 2020, the Company completed its acquisition of Bullfrog Mines pursuant to the MIPA with the Barrick Parties.

Pursuant to the MIPA, the Company purchased from the Barrick Parties all of the Equity Interests in Bullfrog Mines for aggregate consideration of (i) 54,600,000 units of the Company, each unit consisting of one share of common stock of the Company and one four-year warrant purchase one share of common stock of the Company at an exercise price of C$0.30 (such number of units and exercise price are set out on a pre-Consolidation basis), (ii) a 2% net smelter returns royalty (the “Barrick Royalty”) granted on all minerals produced from all of the patented and unpatented claims (subject to the adjustments set out below), pursuant to a royalty deed, dated October 26, 2020 by and among Bullfrog Mines and the Barrick Parties (the “Royalty Deed”), (iii) the Company granting indemnification to the Barrick Parties pursuant to an indemnity deed, dated October 26, 2020 by and among the Company, the Barrick Parties and Bullfrog Mines, and (iv) certain investor rights, including anti-dilution rights, pursuant to the investor rights agreement, dated October 26, 2020, among the Company, Augusta Investments Inc., and Barrick.

Through the Company’s acquisition of the Equity Interests, the Company acquired rights to the 1,500 acres of claims adjoining the Company’s Bullfrog Gold deposit.

Pursuant to the Royalty Deed, the Barrick Royalty is reduced to the extent necessary so that royalties burdening any individual parcel or claim included in the Barrick Properties on October 26, 2020, inclusive of the Barrick Royalty, would not exceed 5.5% in the aggregate, provided that the Barrick Royalty in respect of any parcel or claim would not be less than 0.5%, even if the royalties burdening a parcel or claim included in the Barrick Properties would exceed 5.5%.

Abitibi Royalties Option

On December 9, 2020, Bullfrog Mines entered into a mining option agreement with Abitibi Royalties (USA) Inc. (“Abitibi”) granting Bullfrog Mines the option (the “Abitibi Option”) to acquire forty-three unpatented lode mining claims to the south of the Bullfrog deposit. The Abitibi Option was amended on December 9, 2022, to extend the exercise deadline and to increase the last payment amount required to exercise the option. Bullfrog Mines made an initial payment to Abitibi of C$25,000 and exercised the Abitibi Option in full on January 30, 2023, by:

Paying to Abitibi C$50,000 in cash before December 9, 2021;

Paying to Abitibi C$78,750 in cash before January 30, 2023; and

Granting to Abitibi a 2% net smelter royalty on the claims subject to the Abitibi Option on January 30, 2023, of which Bullfrog Mines has the option to purchase 0.5% for C$500,000 on or before December 9, 2030.

Other Property Holding Payments

All the unpatented lode mining claims are on U.S. public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) and, therefore, are subject to exploration and development permits as required by the several current regulations. The unpatented lode mining claims require annual payments of $155 per claim to the BLM and $12 per claim to Nye County.

Infrastructure

Augusta Gold maintains sufficient surface rights to support mining operations, including areas for potential waste disposal, tailings storage, heap leach pads and potential mill sites. The Company recently located additional mining claims and is pursuing the acquisition of other lands in the area. Most claim blocks are contiguous, and the water rights that Barrick held through Bullfrog Mines were indirectly acquired by Augusta Gold as part of its acquisition of Bullfrog Mines.

The towns of Beatty, Pahrump and Tonopah in Nye County have populations that support mining operations in the area.

Valley Electric Association based in Pahrump, Nevada owns a 138 KV transmission line and a 24.9 KV distribution line that remain on-site and serviced mining at the site previously. The substation connected to the 24.9 KV line remains on-site, but the transformers and switchgear have been removed. Current monthly demand and energy rates are $3.75/kw and $0.12/kw-h, respectively.

Pumping from relatively shallow wells completed near the bottom of the Bullfrog pit is required to access deeper mineralization and could produce most of the Project water needs. Water may also be available from Barrick’s production wells located a few miles south of Highway 374, possibly from the Town of Beatty wellfield in Section 2, and to a limited extent from deepening the M-S pit.

Geological Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit Type

The Bullfrog Gold Project is in the southern Walker Lane trend within brittle upper-plate volcanic host rocks that were severely broken from dominant detachment faulting and associated dip-slip and strike-slip displacements. Epithermal solutions permeated the broken host rocks in the Montgomery-Shoshone (M-S) and Bullfrog deposits precipitating micron-sized and relatively high-grade gold (Au) within major quartz-calcite veins and disseminated gold in associated stock-work veins. The veins contain gangue minerals other than quartz, such as calcite and manganese oxides, the latter of which contributes associated silver (Ag) recoveries and gold.

The strike length of the Bullfrog mineralization is about 1,600 m, including the underground portion which accounts for about 600 m of the strike length. True widths mined in the underground, where the ore cutoff was 3.0 g/t Au, typically average 5-10 m and local zones may be as much as 15-20 m wide. The highest grades typically correlate with zones of black manganese-rich material, where much of the early manganiferous calcite has been leached out, rendering the vein a rubble zone of quartz, calcite, and wad. Veins continue up dip and down dip, but the gold grades and thicknesses diminish rapidly above and below these elevations.

As in the underground mine, the highest grades in the open pit were associated with veins and vein breccias along the MP fault and its immediate hanging wall. Higher ore grades also occurred in veins along the UP fault, but widths were generally narrow. Zones of quartz stockwork veins and breccia were developed between the MP and UP faults in intensely silicified and adularized wall rocks. The ore zone in the hanging wall of the MP fault, was termed the upper stockwork zone (Jorgensen et al., 1989). Many of the stockwork veins are subparallel in strike to the MP and UP faults, but dip more steeply. A zone of stockwork quartz veins also occurs in the footwall latite lavas (Tr1g) immediately beneath the MP fault, but here the ore zone is usually <10-15 m thick. This was termed the lower stockwork zone (Jorgensen et al., 1989). In this zone individual veins are often subparallel to the MP fault, and vein densities are typically in the range of 5-15%.

In most parts of the open pit, mineralized rock is truncated by the erosional surface and gravels. The ore zone thinned up-dip and only a modest amount of ore was probably lost to erosion. Below the open pit, ore grade values persist.

In the Bullfrog mineralization, the high-grade zones do not comprise obvious discrete plunging ore shoots. Instead high-grade ore zones are developed along the plane of the MP fault/vein, within 10-20° of the dip of the fault. The overall geometry of these zones is that of elongate lenses in the plane of the fault, with long dimensions that strike roughly north-south at a low angle of plunge. The highest gold grades roughly coincided with the oxidation-reduction boundary in the deposit and the pre-mining water table, and modest localized supergene enrichment of precious metals near this boundary is suggested.

The gold deposits of the southern Bullfrog Hills are contained in epithermal quartz-calcite veins and stockworks.

Historical Operations

In 1904 the Original Bullfrog and Montgomery-Shoshone mines were discovered by local prospectors. Prospecting activity was widespread over the Bullfrog Hills and encompassed a 200 square mile area but centered within a two-mile radius around the town of Rhyolite and included part of the Company’s property. The Montgomery-Shoshone mine reportedly produced about 67,000 ounces of gold averaging 0.47 gold opt prior to its closure in 1911. The District produced about 94,000 ounces of gold prior to 1911. Mines in the District were sporadically worked from 1911 through 1941, but the Company has no production records of such limited activities.

The Company’s Providence lode mining claim designated by the Surveyor General as Survey No. 2470 was located in October 1904, surveyed in April 1906, patented in May 1906 and recorded in Nye County Nevada in June 1908. The unpatented Lucky Queen claim is immediately east and adjacent to the Providence patent and is believed to have been located in the same time period but was not patented.

With the rise of precious metal prices in the early 1970’s, the Bullfrog District again underwent intense prospecting and exploration activity for gold as well as uranium. Companies exploring the area included Texas Gas Exploration, Inc., Phillips Uranium, Tenneco /Copper Range, U.S. Borax, Western States Minerals, Rayrock, St. Joe American and successors Bond, Lac and Barrick Minerals, Noranda, Angst Mining Company, Placer Dome, Lac-Sunshine Mining Company Joint Venture, Homestake, and others. In addition to these major companies, several junior mining companies and individuals were involved as prospectors, promoters and owners. These scientific investigations yielded a new deposit model for the gold deposits that were mined by others in the Bullfrog District. The identification and understanding of the detachment fault system led to significant changes in exploration program techniques, focus, and success.

In 1982 St. Joe American, Inc. initiated drilling in the Montgomery-Shoshone mine area. By 1986, sixty holes had been drilled and a mineral inventory was defined. Subsequent drilling outlined a reported 2.9 million ounces of gold equivalent in the Bullfrog deposit. A series of corporate takeovers transferred ownership from St. Joe, to Bond Gold, to Lac Minerals and eventually to Barrick Minerals. Production started in 1989 and recovered approximately 200,000 ounces of gold annually from a conventional, 9,000 ton/day cyanidation mill mainly fed from open pit operations and later supplemented with underground production. Barrick discontinued production operations in 1999 and completed reclamation in 2003. Thereafter several groups continued exploration on a limited basis on some of the lands currently held by the Company, but no reserves were ever defined by these companies on those portions of the Company’s lands.

Exploration and Drilling

The Company’s exploration activities to date have focused on the following:

Exploration drilling, data acquisition and geologic modeling;

Acquiring, organizing, digitizing and vetting electronic and paper data bases obtained from Barrick mainly related to drill data, metallurgy and project infrastructure; and

Maintaining and expanding the land holdings.

The project drilling includes 1,311 holes, for a total of 263,757 meters completed between 1983 and early 2021. The holes were drilled using both core and reverse circulation methods, as detailed in the drilling section of this report.

The following table summarizes project drilling by year:

Table 1: Project Drilling by Year

	Total Drilling				Coring				Reverse Circulation
Year	Holes		Meters		Holes		Meters		Holes		Meters
1983		6		975		6		975		0		0
1984		37		3,560				0		37		3,560
1985		3		303				0		3		303
1986		29		3,364				0		29		3,364
1987		163		29,479		3		732		163		28,747
1988		321		66,325		32		6,121		321		60,204
1989		71		12,285				0		71		12,285
1990		154		37,114		33		3,676		154		33,438
1991		79		22,954		42		3,627		79		19,327
1992		23		4,907				0		23		4,907
1993		9		387				0		9		387
1994		210		31,362		9		1,412		210		29,951
1995		99		22,370		3		248		99		22,122
1996		58		15,254		19		3,329		45		11,924
2020		26		4,405		1		502		25		3,903
2021		43		14,820		38		12,749		5		2,071
2022		6		2,596		6		2,596		0		0
Total		1,337		272,460		192		35,967		1,273		236,493

A total of 69 drill holes, 30 reverse circulation (RC) and 39 core holes have been drilled by Augusta from 2020-2021. The purpose of the drilling was to further define resources and the ultimate limits of the Bullfrog and Montgomery-Shoshone pits and gather data to support advanced geotechnical and metallurgical studies. The 2020 program also fulfilled a final work commitment for the Company to purchase a 100% interest in lands under lease from Barrick by mid-September 2020. Two holes were drilled at the Paradise Ridge target.

Permitting

Baseline studies necessary to advance permitting are in progress.

The following outlines the general framework for permitting a mine in Nevada and the required permits. Many of the permits discussed herein apply to the construction stage and are not currently being pursued.

Exploration activities on Federal mining claims on BLM lands requires a Notice of Intent (NOI) for exploration activities under five acres of disturbance and a Plan of Operations for larger scale exploration activities. A Plan of Operations is also required with the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP) to fulfill the State of Nevada permitting obligations on private and public lands, respectively. Reclamation bonds related to environmental liabilities need to be calculated and posted to cover activities on the Project. Additional permits and bonding will be required for developing, constructing, operating, and reclaiming the Project.

Additional Baseline Studies will be required to update the historical studies completed by Barrick. This will include geochemistry, hydrologic studies of the in-pit water and water in existing wells, plant, wildlife and threatened and endangered species surveys, meteorological information, and cultural surveys:

Water Pollution Control Permits (WPCP): The WPCP application must address the open pit, heap leach pad, mining activities and water management systems with respect to potentially degrading of the waters of Nevada. Sufficient engineering, design and modeling data must be included in the WPCP. A Tentative Permit Closure Plan must be submitted to the NDEP-BMRR in conjunction with the WPCP. A Final Permanent Closure Plan will be needed two years prior to Project closure.

Air Quality: An application for a Class II Air Quality Permit must be prepared using Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) forms. The application must include descriptions of the facilities, a detailed emission inventory, plot plans, process flow diagrams and a fugitive dust control plan for construction and operation of the Project. A Mercury Operating Permit and a Title V Operating permit will also be necessary for processing loaded carbon or electro-winning precipitates.

Water Right: Additional water rights will need to be acquired from third parties or obtained from the Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) for producing Project water.

Industrial Artificial Pond: Water storage ponds, which are part of the water management systems, will require Industrial Artificial Pond permits (IAPP) from the Nevada Department of wildlife. Approval from the Nevada State Engineer’s Office is also required if embankments exceed specified heights.

Additional minor permits will be required for the project to advance to production and are listed in Table 8.

Table 8: Additional Minor Permits Required

Notification/Permit		Agency
Mine Registry		Nevada Division of Minerals
Mine Opening Notification		State Inspector of Mines
Solid Waste Landfill		Nevada Bureau of Waste Management
Hazardous Waste Management Permit		Nevada Bureau of Waste Management
General Storm Water Permit		Nevada Bureau of Water Pollution Control
Hazardous Materials Permit		State Fire Marshall
Fire and Life Safety		State Fire Marshall
Explosives Permit		Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives
Notification of Commencement of Operation		Mine Safety and Health Administration
Radio License		Federal Communications Commission
Public Water Supply Permit		NV Division of Environmental Protection
MSHA Identification Number and MSHA Coordination		U.S. Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)
Septic Tank		NDEP-Bureau of Water Pollution Control
Petroleum Contaminated Soils		NV Division of Environmental Protection

2023 Project Exploration Plans

Subject to funding, the Company’s focus in 2023 for exploration at the Bullfrog Gold Project is drilling at the Gap Target, an epithermal lithocap at the northern end of the Bullfrog land package, as well as continued support of ongoing permitting and engineering work.

Reward Gold Project, Nye County, Nevada

Property Location and Access

The Reward Gold Project (the “Project” or “Reward Project”) is situated about 11.3 km (7 miles) south-southeast of the town of Beatty, NV about 3.2 km (2 miles) east of US Highway 95 in Nye County (Figure 1). The Project can be accessed from Beatty by paved road on Highway 95 followed by traveling two miles east on a gravel road. Several dirt roads diverge into various canyons of the Bare Mountains. The Project area lies within Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 16 of Township 13 South, Range 47 East and Sections 33, 34, and 35 of Township 12 South, Range 47 East, all referred to the Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian. The Project can be accessed from Beatty by paved road on Highway 95 followed by traveling two miles east on a gravel road. Several dirt roads diverge into various canyons of the Bare Mountains.

Project Stage

The Project is an exploration stage property with measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources but no known mineral reserves.

Mineral Resource Estimates

Mineral Resources were classified using a combination of assessment of geological confidence, data quality and grade continuity. Reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction were considered by constraining the estimate within a conceptual pit shell that used the assumptions in Table 9.

Table 9. Reward Conceptual Open Pit Parameters.

Parameter	Unit (Imperial)	Cost (Imperial)		Unit (Metric)	Cost (Metric)
Gold Price	US$/oz		1,700	US$/g		54.656
Gold Metallurgical Recovery	%		80	%		80
Pit Wall Angles	°		48-58	°		48-58
Mining Cost	US$/st		2.00	US$/tonne		2.20
Processing Rate	Mst/a		3	Mtonne/a		2.7
Processing Cost	US$/st	$	5.50	US$/tonne	$	6.06
G & A Cost	US$/st		0.75	US$/tonne		0.80
Cut-off Grade (break even)	oz/st		0.0047	g/tonne		0.158
Royalty	%		3	%		3

The Mineral Resource Estimate for the Reward Project is presented in Table 10 below.

Table 10. Reward Project Mineral Resource Estimate at December 31, 2022 Based on USD$1,700/oz. Au

Classification	Tonnage (Mt)		Average Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (koz)
Good Hope
Measured		6.19		0.86		169.9
Indicated		10.76		0.69		240.0
M&I Total		16.94		0.75		409.9
Inferred		0.29		0.56		5.3
Gold Ace
Indicated		0.83		0.63		16.8
Inferred		1.03		0.73		21.8
Reward (Combined Good Hope and Gold Ace)
Measured		6.19		0.86		169.9
Indicated		11.58		0.69		256.8
M&I Total		17.77		0.75		426.7
Inferred		1.23		0.68		27.1

Notes:

1.	Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,700/oz and a recovery of 80% for Au were utilized.
2.	Gold price used in the Reward estimated Mineral Resources were based on a review of commodity prices at the time of the estimate and assumed a price of US$1,700 per oz of gold based upon a three year trailing average.

3.	Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.20/tonne.

4.	Processing and general and administration are US$6.06/tonne and US$0.83/tonne per tonne processed, respectively.
5.	Reward Mineral Resources are reported using a 0.2 g/tonne incremental cut-off grade.

6	Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

7.	Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes and are partially diluted.

8.	The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

9.	The effective date of the Reward mineral resource estimate is December 31, 2022.

Estimated Mineral Resources have not changed from May 22, 2022 (the date estimates were initially reported to the Commission in the Company Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2022) to December 31, 2022 due to the fact that the Reward Gold Project is in the exploration stage and no new resources were added to the project through exploration activities in the remainder of 2022. The material assumptions underlying mineral resources as previously disclosed at May 31, 2022 remain current in all material respects.

Property Holdings

The Project area lies within Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 16 of Township 13 South, Range 47 East and Sections 33, 34, and 35 of Township 12 South, Range 47 East, all referred to the Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian.

Canyon Resources Corporation (Canyon Resources) holds a 100% interest in the mineral claims that form the Project. In 2008, Canyon Resources assigned all of the patented and unpatented claims comprising the Project to an entity which was subsequently converted into CR Reward.

The Project encompasses 123 unpatented Bureau of Land Management (BLM) placer and lode mining claims and six patented placer mining claims, totalling approximately 2,333 net acres (944 hectares). Only the patented claims have been legally surveyed. Under United States mining law, claims may be renewed annually for an unlimited number of years upon a small payment per claim (currently $155 per claim due to the BLM and an aggregate $1,502 due to Nye County) and the same claim status-whether lode or placer-may be used for exploration or exploitation of the lodes or placers.

Several blocks of unpatented claims are leased by CR Reward from underlying owners, and are referred to as Connolly, Webster, Orser-McFall and Van Meeteren leases.

Connolly Lease

This lease agreement (the Connolly Lease), effective as of September 28^th, 2004, covers a two-third interest in each of the Sunshine and Reward unpatented lode claims (collectively, the Connolly Claims). The Connolly Lease is for an initial term of 20 years and continues so long thereafter as the Project remains in commercial production. A 3% NSR royalty is payable on any minerals mined from the Connolly Claims, but is reduced to 2% due to the fact that CR Reward only owns a two-third interest in the Connolly Claims. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Connolly Lease in an amount equal to $10,000 per year. These annual advance minimum royalty payments shall be applied toward, credited against and fully deductible from earned mineral production royalty payments due from the Connolly Claims.

Webster Lease

This lease agreement (the Webster lease), effective as of November 9, 2004 (as amended on November 9^th, 2004 and November 8^th, 2006), covers a one-third interest in each of the Sunshine and Reward unpatented lode claims and a half interest in the Good Hope unpatented lode claim (collectively, the Webster Claims). The Webster Lease is for an initial term of 20 years and continues so long thereafter as the Project remains in commercial production. A 3% NSR royalty is payable on any minerals mined from the Webster Claims, but is (i) reduced to 1% on the Sunshine and Reward claims due to the fact that the lessee only owns a one-third interest, and (ii) reduced to 1.5% on the Good Hope claim due to the fact that CR Reward only owns a half interest in this claim. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Webster Lease in an amount equal to $7,500 per year. The annual advance minimum royalty payments paid in any given year may be applied toward, credited against and fully deductible from any earned mineral production royalty payments due on the Webster Claims during the calendar year in which such annual advance minimum royalty payments are due.

Orser-McFall Lease

This lease agreement (the Orser-McFall Lease), effective as of February 5, 2005 (as amended on August 18^th, 2005 and November 14^th, 2006), applies to 12 unpatented lode and six unpatented placer mining claims (collectively, the Orser-McFall Claims). The Orser-McFall Lease is for an initial term of 20 years and continues so long thereafter as the Project remains in commercial production. The lessors under the Orser-McFall Lease own 100% of the Orser-McFall Claims, except for the Good Hope claim, in which they own a half interest (the other half being owned by the Daniel D. Webster Living Trust and leased to CR Reward pursuant to the Webster Lease). A 3% NSR royalty is payable on minerals mined from the Orser-McFall Claims, but is reduced to 1.5% on the Good Hope claim due to the fact that the lessee only owns a half interest in that claim. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Orser-McFall Lease in an amount equal to $20,000 per year. These annual advance minimum royalty payments shall be applied toward, credited against and fully deductible from earned mineral production royalty payments due from the Orser-McFall Claims.

Van Meeteren et al Lease

This lease agreement (the Van Meeteren Lease), effect as of December 1^st, 2011 (applies to the Double RS and the Durlers Hope unpatented placer claims (the Van Meeteren Claims). The Van Meeteren Lease is for an initial term of 20 years and continues so long thereafter as the Project remains in commercial production or CR Reward is actively conducting exploration, development, reclamation or remediation operations. A 3% NSR royalty is payable on minerals mined from the Van Meeteren Claims. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Van Meeteren Lease in an amount equal to $15/acre from 2011 through 2020, for a total of $1,800 per year, and $20/acre from and after 2021, for a total of $2,400 per year. These annual advance minimum royal payments are recoupable from earned mineral production royalties. All payments described above have been timely paid by CR Reward and its predecessor and the agreements are all in good standing.

The Project area mainly consists of Federal public domain lands administered by the BLM. There are no State or private tracts within the Project area, except the six patented claims owned by CR Reward, all of which carry surface and mineral rights ownership.

The Project is not subject to any other back-in rights payments, agreements or encumbrances.

CR Reward has the right to use 391,494 m3 (317.39 acre-ft) of water annually under Application No. 61412, Certificate No. 16384 and Permit No. 76390.

The Amargosa River basin is an enclosed basin, and the water rights are thus not affected by the Colorado River Compact or other agreements.

Infrastructure

The Project is located seven miles by road southeast of Beatty, a town of approximately 1,000 people that serves as a transit hub and service centre for travellers between Las Vegas and Reno, and those going to Death Valley. Several motels and restaurants, gas stations, a post office, and several small stores provide basic services.

The Project is currently serviced by an existing 14.4/24.9 kV power line owned and operated by Valley Electric. A water well currently provides water for exploration activities.

Project employees would likely be recruited from the local area, including the communities of Beatty, Amargosa, and Pahrump, located within Nye County, and the regional urban centre of Las Vegas, located within Clark County. There is available nearby accommodation to the Project site in Beatty and other smaller communities

The Project has sufficient land area, with adjacent public-domain lands also potentially available, to allow mine development, including space for the mining operations, waste rock disposal facilities (WRDs), heap leach pads and processing plants.

Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit Type

Mineralization in the Good Hope Deposit and Golden Ace Zone can be classified as examples of a structurally controlled, locally disseminated, sediment hosted, mesothermal quartz vein gold deposit.

The Project is hosted within the Bare Mountain Complex which lies within an intricate tectonic setting of the Nevada Basin and Range Province.

The Bare Mountain Complex consist of up to 6,096 m (20,000 ft) of Upper Proterozoic to Paleozoic marine sedimentary rocks in the lower plate that have been juxtaposed against Miocene silicic volcanic sequences in the upper plate. The lower plate units were deformed through folding, thrust faulting, low and high angle normal faulting during a Mesozoic compression event, and have been metamorphosed from lower amphibolite to sub-greenschist grade. Two dominant normal fault sets have been mapped in the lower plate, including the moderately east-dipping Bare Mountain and Gold Ace faults, and shallowly southeast-dipping faults that cut or curve into east-dipping faults.

The Project is located on the southwestern flank of the Bare Mountain Complex and is underlain by moderately-deformed marine clastic and carbonate rocks of Late Proterozoic and Late Cambrian age that have been metamorphosed to greenschist grade. Tertiary and younger alluvium cover the lower slopes and the adjacent Armagosa Valley to the south and west. The east-dipping Gold Ace fault, locally termed the Good Hope fault zone, separates northeast dipping Late Proterozoic to Early Cambrian units in the footwall block from Middle to Late Cambrian units in the hanging wall block.

The gold mineralization in the Good Hope Deposit is spatially associated with, and along, the Good Hope fault zone, and is primarily hosted in altered and veined Wood Canyon Formation, and to a lesser extent, in the Juhl and Sutton Members of the Stirling Formation. Mineralization hosted along the contact between the Sutton and Morris Marble Members of the Stirling Formation is referred to as the Gold Ace Zone. Although there are small historic prospects along the Good Hope fault zone, most of the historic production came from the Gold Ace Zone.

Historical Operations

Historical exploration of the Project was completed by several other companies from 1976 to 2004, including Galli Exploration Associates (Galli Exploration), Teco Inc. (Teco), St. Joe Minerals Corporation (St Joe), Gexa Gold Corp (Gexa), Cloverleaf Gold Inc. (Cloverleaf), Homestake Mining Company (Homestake), Pathfinder Gold Corporation (Pathfinder), Bond Gold Exploration Inc. (Bond Gold), Barrick, US Nevada Gold Search (USNGS), Rayrock Mines, Inc (Rayrock), Glamis Gold, Ltd. (Glamis Gold), and Marigold Mining Company (Marigold Mining). Historical exploration included airborne geophysics, reverse circulation (RC) and core drilling, initial metallurgical testwork, mineral resource estimates and technical studies.

Canyon Resources acquired the Project in 2004, and together with Atna Resources Ltd. (Atna) and CR Reward, have completed data compilation and validation, ground induced polarization/resistivity geophysical surveys, RC and core drilling, mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, metallurgical testwork, permitting studies, environmental baseline studies, and technical studies. The following permits and authorizations were granted to CR Reward in 2007:

·	Plan of Operations authorized under N-82840.

·	Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP); WPCP NEV2007101.

·	General construction permit; NVR100000 CSW-17415.

·	Water rights permitted by Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) under Mining, Milling, & Domestic permit 76390.

·	Mining reclamation permit granted by the Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (BMRR) under mine site permit #0300.

·	Nevada Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) authorized Class II Air Quality permit AP1041-2492.

Permitting

The current Project area includes public and private lands within Nye County, Nevada. The Project, therefore, falls under the jurisdiction and permitting requirements of Nye County, the State of Nevada (primarily the BMRR) and the BLM.

The following permits and authorizations were granted to CR Reward:

·	Plan of Operations authorized under N-82840.

·	Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP); WPCP NEV2007101.

·	Water rights permitted by Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) under Mining, Milling, & Domestic permit 76390 and permit 89658.

·	Mining reclamation permit granted by the Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (BMRR) under mine site permit #0300.

·	Nevada Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) authorized Class II Air Quality permit AP1041-2492.

The reader is referred to Evans et al. (2019) for additional information regarding permitting considerations for mining activities at the Project. Regarding exploration activities, during early phases of exploration, when surface disturbance is generally limited, authorization from the BLM is conditionally granted under a notice (40 CFR § 3890.21). There are currently no exploration notices associated with the Project and none are likely to be granted given the Project has a mine plan of operations (MPO) that was granted in 2020.

2023 Project Exploration Plans

Subject to funding, the Company’s focus in 2023 for exploration at the Reward Project is expanding the resource down-dip, and performing infill drilling where there are gaps in the current resource model.

PART IV

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS

Documents Filed as Part of Report

Financial Statements

The following Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company were filed with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on March 16, 2023:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Davidson & Company LLP.

Consolidated Balance Sheets – As of December 31, 2022 and 2021.

Consolidated Statements of Income/(Loss) – Years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.

Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity – Years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows – Years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

See “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”.

Financial Statement Schedules

No financial statement schedules are filed as part of this report because such schedules are not applicable or the required information is shown in the Consolidated Financial Statements or notes thereto. See “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”.

Exhibits:

The exhibits, listed on the following exhibit index are filed or furnished as part of this Amended Report on Form 10-K/A. These exhibits should be read in conjunction with the exhibits in Item 15 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on February 24, 2022.

Exhibit Number		Description
31.1		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
31.2		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
96.1		Technical Report Summary for the Bullfrog Gold Project
96.2		Technical Report Summary for the Reward Gold Project

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Sections 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Date: December 20, 2023	AUGUSTA GOLD CORP.

	By:	/s/ Donald R. Taylor
		Name: Donald R. Taylor
		Title: President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

Date: December 20, 2023	AUGUSTA GOLD CORP.

	By:	/s/ Michael McClelland
		Name: Michael McClelland
		Title: Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Donald R. Taylor, certify that:

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Augusta Gold Corp.;

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Dated: December 20, 2023		/s/ Donald R. Taylor

		Donald R. Taylor,
		Chief Executive Officer

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael McClelland, certify that:

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Augusta Gold Corp.;

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Dated: December 20, 2023		/s/ Michael McClelland

		Michael McClelland,
		Chief Financial Officer

Exhibit 96.1

S-K 1300 Technical Report

Mineral Resource Estimate

Bullfrog Gold Project

Nye County, Nevada

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 31, 2021

Amended: December 18, 2023

PREPARED FOR:

Augusta Gold Corp.

Vancouver, BC

QUALIFIED PERSONS:

Forte Dynamics, Inc.

120 Commerce Drive, Units 3-4

Fort Collins, CO 80524

Augusta Gold Corp.

Date and Signature Page

This report titled “S-K 1300 Technical Report Mineral Resource Estimate on the Bullfrog Gold Project, Nye County, Nevada” is current as of December 31, 2021 and was prepared and signed by Forte Dynamics, Inc., acting as a Qualified Person Firm.

(signed and sealed)

Date: December 18, 2023

Forte Dynamics, Inc.

120 Commerce Drive, Units 3-4

Fort Collins, CO 80524

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 2 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table of Contents

1.	Executive Summary			9

	1.1	Location, Property Description and Ownership		9
	1.2	Geology and Mineralization		10
	1.3	Exploration, Drilling, Sampling and QA/QC		11
	1.3.1		Exploration	11
	1.3.2		Drilling	12
	1.3.3		Sampling	13
	1.3.4		QA/QC	14
	1.3.5		Database Improvements	14
	1.4	Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing		14
	1.5	Mineral Resource Estimates		17
	1.6	Conclusions		20
	1.6.1		Geology and Mineral Resources	20
	1.6.2		Metallurgical Test Work and Mineral Processing	21
	1.6.3		Infrastructure	22
	1.7	Recommendations		22

2.	Introduction			23

	2.1	Units of Measure		23
	2.2	Abbreviations		24
	2.3	Qualified Persons and Details of Inspection		24

3.	Property Description			25

	3.1	NPX Assignment of Lands		51
	3.2	Mojave Gold Option		51
	3.3	Barrick Bullfrog Inc. Lease and Option		51
	3.4	Lunar Landing Lease		51
	3.5	Brown Claims		52
	3.6	Barrick Claims (2020)		52
	3.7	Abitibi Royalties Option		53
	3.8	Other Property Considerations		53
	3.9	Environmental and Permitting		53
	3.10	Significant Risk Factors		54

4.	Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography			55

	4.1	Accessibility		55
	4.2	Physiography, Climate and Vegetation		55
	4.3	Local Resources and Infrastructure		56

5.	History			57

6.	Geological Setting, Mineralisation and Deposit			59

	6.1	Regional Geology		59
	6.2	Local and Property Geology		60
	6.2.1		Cenozoic Rocks	62
	6.2.2		Pre-14 Ma Rocks	62
	6.2.3		14 to 11 Ma Rocks	64
	6.2.4		Post 11 Ma to 7.6 Ma Rocks	66

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 3 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

	6.2.5		10.6-10.0 Ma Rainbow Mountain Sequence (Trm, Tr11-16 and other units)	67
	6.3	District Geology		68
	6.4	Mineralization and Veining		69
	6.4.1		Bullfrog Mineralization	69
	6.4.2		Montgomery-Shoshone Mineralization	70
	6.4.3		Bonanza Mineralization	72
	6.5	Deposit		72

7.	Exploration			74

	7.1	Bullfrog		75
	7.1.1		Mystery Hills	75
	7.1.2		Ladd Mountain	75
	7.2	Montgomery-Shoshone Area		75
	7.2.1		Polaris Vein	75
	7.2.2		East Zone	75
	7.2.3		Deep Potential	75
	7.3	Bonanza Mountain		76
	7.4	Gap		76
	7.5	Drilling		77
	7.5.1		2020 - 2021 Drilling	79
	7.5.2		2021 Additional Drilling Included in the End of Year 2021 Resource Model	89

8.	Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security			95

	8.1	Historic Data (1983 – 1996)		95
	8.2	Augusta Gold Corp. (2020-2021)		95
	8.2.1		Augusta Gold Corp. 2020	95
	8.2.2		Augusta Gold Corp 2021	97

9.	Data Verification			107

	9.1	Check Assay		108
	9.2	Qualified Person’s Opinion		111

10.	Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing			112

	10.1	St. Joe		112
	10.1.1		Large Column Leach Test	112
	10.1.2		Bottle Roll Tests on UG Samples	113
	10.1.3		Column Testing by Kappes Cassiday & Associates	113
	10.2	Pilot Testing by Barrick		114
	10.3	Column Leach Tests		115
	10.4	Conclusions for Heap Leaching		116
	10.5	Leach Pad Siting		117
	10.6	Additional Testing		118
	10.7	Qualified Person’s Opinion		119

11.	Mineral Resource Estimates			120

	11.1	Summary		120
	11.2	Database		123
	11.2.1		Vulcan Isis Drillhole Database	124
	11.2.2		Drillhole Exclusion	126
	11.3	Grade Shells		127

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 4 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

	11.4	Statistical Analyses and Capping of Outlier Values	129
	11.5	Compositing	130
	11.6	Variography	130
	11.7	Block Model	133
	11.8	Estimation Methodology	135
	11.9	Resource Estimate Classification	138
	11.10	Density Data	138
	11.11	Pit Slopes	140
	11.12	Reblocking	141
	11.13	Pit Shell Optimization	142

12.	Mineral Reserve Estimates		145

13.	Mining Methods		145

14.	Process and Recovery Methods		145

15.	Infrastructure		145

16.	Market Studies		145

17.	Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups		145

18.	Capital and Operating Costs		145

19.	Economic Analysis		145

20.	Adjacent Properties		146

21.	Other Relevant Data and Information		147

22.	Interpretation and Conclusions		148

	22.1	Geology and Mineral Resources	148
	22.2	Metallurgical Test Work and Mineral Processing	149
	22.3	Infrastructure	149

23.	Recommendations		150

	23.1	Exploration	150
	23.2	Baseline Studies	150
	23.3	Additional Studies	150
	23.4	Estimated Costs	150

24.	References		152

25.	Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant		158

26.	Appendix 1		159

	26.1	Statistical Analysis of Drillhole Data for Gold Assays	159
	26.2	Statistical Analysis of Drillhole Data for Silver Assays	166
	26.3	Swath Plots	173

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 5 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

List Of Tables

Table 1-1: Location and Depth of 2020 - 2021 Holes	12
Table 1-2: 1994 Leach Test Results	14
Table 1-3: 1995 Pilot Heap Leach Test Results	15
Table 1-4: 2018 Column Leach Test Results	15
Table 1-5: 2019 Column Leach Test Results	16
Table 1-6: 2020 Bottle Roll Test Results	17
Table 1-7: Bullfrog Mineral Resources	18
Table 1-8: Montgomery-Shoshone Mineral Resources	19
Table 1-9: Bonanza Mineral Resources	19
Table 1-10: Combined Mineral Resources	20
Table 3-1: Lands Under the Control of Augusta Gold Corp.	26
Table 3-2: Additional Minor Permits Required	54
Table 5-1: Bullfrog Project Production	57
Table 7-1: Drilling Totals by Type	78
Table 7-2: Active Years by Operator	79
Table 7-3: Location and Depth of 2020 - 2021 Holes	81
Table 7-4: Drilling Results from the 2020 - 2021 Program	84
Table 7-5: Location and Depth of Additional 2021 Holes	90
Table 7-6: Drilling Results from Additional Drilling in 2021 Program	91
Table 8-1: CRM Expected Values	96
Table 8-2: Summary of Gold in CRM’s	96
Table 8-3: CRM Expected Values	96
Table 8-4: Blank Failure Threshold	97
Table 8-5: Duplicate Sample Results	97
Table 8-6: CRM Expected Values	104
Table 8-7: Summary of Gold in CRMs	105
Table 8-8: Blank Failure Threshold	105
Table 9-1: Check Assay Gold Statistics	110
Table 10-1: Typical Processing Statistics from 1989-1999	112
Table 10-2: Leach Test Results	113
Table 10-3: Heap Leach Pilot Tests – Barrick	114
Table 10-4: Column Leach Test Results (2018)	115
Table 10-5: Column Leach Test Results (2019)	116
Table 10-6: Estimated Heap Leach Recovery	116
Table 10-7: Summary Metallurgical Results – Bottle Roll Tests	118
Table 11-1: Bullfrog Mineral Resources	121
Table 11-2: Montgomery-Shoshone Mineral Resources	122
Table 11-3: Bonanza Mineral Resources	122
Table 11-4: Combined Property Mineral Resources	123
Table 11-5: Drillhole Exclusion for Bullfrog Deposit	126
Table 11-6: Drillhole Exclusion for Montgomery-Shoshone Deposit	127
Table 11-7: DOMAIN Codes and Corresponding Grade Shell Triangulations	129
Table 11-8: Capping Values and Statistics for Gold Assays	130
Table 11-9: Capping Values and Statistics for Silver Assays	130
Table 11-10: Block Model Extents	133

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 6 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-11: Block Estimation Parameters	136
Table 11-12: Block Estimation Parameters	138
Table 11-13: Density Assignments for Mineralized Domains	139
Table 11-14: Density Assignments for Unmineralized Domains	139
Table 11-15: Density Assignments for Dump, Fill and Alluvium	139
Table 11-16: LG Pit Optimization Parameters	142
Table 23-1: Land Positions of the Bullfrog Project and Adjacent Properties	151

List Of Figures

Figure 1-1: Location Map	10
Figure 1-2: District Geology Map	11
Figure 3-1: Location Map	25
Figure 3-2: Property Map of the Bullfrog Project	50
Figure 4-1: Photo of Bullfrog Hills at Rhyolite	55
Figure 6-1: Regional Setting of the Bullfrog Mine (Eng et al., 1996)	59
Figure 6-2: Bullfrog District – Stratigraphy and Mineralization	61
Figure 6-3: Cross Section of the Bullfrog Project Area	62
Figure 6-4: District Geology Map — Each Section is 1.6 km, or 1 Mile Square	69
Figure 7-1: Exploration and Mining Targets at the Bullfrog Project	74
Figure 7-2: Plan Map of Drill Hole Collars	80
Figure 7-3: Drilling in the Montgomery-Shoshone Area from the 2020 - 2021 Drill Campaign	83
Figure 7-4: Drilling in the Bullfrog Area from the 2020 - 2021 Drill Campaign	83
Figure 8-1: Truck Mounted Core Rig	98
Figure 8-2: Laydown Yard and Sample Storage	98
Figure 8-3: Logging Laptop	99
Figure 8-4: Core Shed and Quick Log Station	100
Figure 8-5: Logging Facility	101
Figure 8-6: Core Saw	102
Figure 8-7: Sampling Tables	102
Figure 8-8: Core Cutting Facility	103
Figure 8-9: Sample Pick Up Area	104
Figure 8-10: Gold Pulp Comparison	106
Figure 9-1: Check Assay Gold Comparison	109
Figure 9-2: Check Assay Gold - Percent Difference	110
Figure 9-3: Silver Check Assay Comparison	111
Figure 10-1: Leach Test Results	114
Figure 10-2: Potential Leach Pad Sites & Approximate Capacities	117
Figure 11-1: Drillhole Collar Locations	125
Figure 11-2: Grade Shell (DOMAIN) Triangulations	128
Figure 11-3: Variogram for Bullfrog Low Grade Domain (11)	131
Figure 11-4: Variogram for Bullfrog High Grade Vein Domain (12)	131
Figure 11-5: Variogram for Montgomery-Shoshone Low Grade Domain (21)	132
Figure 11-6: Variogram for Bonanza Low Grade Domain (31)	132
Figure 11-7: Bullfrog Underground Stope Shapes	134
Figure 11-8: Bullfrog 8620N Cross-Section Showing Gold Blocks and Composites	137
Figure 11-9: Oxide and Sulfide Coding – Bullfrog Section 8600N	138

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 7 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-10: Bullfrog Pit Slope Angles and Slope Sector Assignments	140
Figure 11-11: Bonanza Pit Slope Angles and Slope Sector Assignments	141
Figure 11-12: Montgomery-Shoshone Pit Slope Angles and Slope Sector Assignments	141
Figure 11-13: Bullfrog	143
Figure 11-14: Montgomery-Shoshone	143
Figure 11-15: Bonanza	144
Figure 20-1: Land Positions of the Bullfrog Project and Adjacent Properties	146

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 8 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

1.	Executive Summary

This report has been updated from the Technical Report Summary submitted on July 14, 2023.

PP11.1 – Added a paragraph to the report describing the cut off grade selection. Added the oxide and sulfide cutoff grades to the tables.

Break-even cutoff grades, which consider mining cost and can identify blocks have a positive net value, including mining costs. Mineral resources are reported at break-even cutoffs of 0.192g/t for oxide-leach and 0.315 g/t for sulfide-leach.

PP9.2 - The qualified person has reviewed these data and believes that they are sufficient and appropriate for use in this report to determine the mineral resource estimate.

PP10.7 – “The qualified person has reviewed these data and believes that they are sufficient and appropriate for use in this report to determine the mineral resource estimate.”

PP11.1 – “The comparable pricing for gold of $1,550 compares well with the three-year trailing average of $1,558/oz Au in June 2021, an accepted method for a mineral resource reporting price. The $20/oz silver price compares to a three-year average of $19.07 and was typical of other similar reports.”

This technical report has been prepared for Augusta Gold Corp. (Augusta, Augusta Gold, or the Company) by Forte Dynamics for the Bullfrog Gold Project (Project, project, or Bullfrog Project) in Nye County, Nevada. This is a Technical Report Summary (TRS) summarizing an Initial Assessment of Mineral Resources aligned with Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-K subpart 1300 (S-K 1300).

This report was prepared for the purpose of producing an updated mineral resource statement for the project that includes new drilling information, and geologic modeling associated with the work that was completed through 2021.

New resource models were completed for the three deposits at Bullfrog (Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone, Bonanza) and mineral resource estimates were calculated within optimized pit shells for the Bullfrog area, Montgomery-Shoshone area and the Bonanza area. Previously, resources were reported from earlier models in an August 2021 NI 43-101 technical report.

1.1

Location, Property Description and Ownership

The Company’s wholly owned Bullfrog Gold Project is located in the Bullfrog Hills of Nye County, Nevada and in the southern half of the Bullfrog Mining District (Figure 1-1). Basic amenities are available in the town of Beatty, which is situated 6.5 km east of the Project. Las Vegas is the largest regional city with full services and is a 260 km drive to the site. Project properties are located in Sections 25, 26, 35 and 36 of T11S, R46E and Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 23 of T12S, R46E, Mt. Diablo Meridian. The location of the property is shown in Figure 1-1.

The Company has four option/lease/purchase agreements in place and has located 61 claims that give it control of 439 unpatented lode mining claims and mill site claims, and 86 patented. The claims do not have an expiration date, as long as the fees and obligations are maintained.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 9 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 1-1: Location Map

1.2

Geology and Mineralization

The Project is in the southern Walker Lane trend within brittle upper-plate volcanic host rocks that were severely deformed from dominant detachment faulting and associated dip-slip and strike-slip displacements. Epithermal solutions permeated the broken host rocks in the Bullfrog Montgomery-Shoshone (M-S) and Bonanza areas precipitating micron-sized and relatively high-grade gold (Au) within major quartz-calcite veins and disseminated gold in associated stock-works. The veins contain gangue minerals other than quartz, such as calcite and manganese oxides, the latter of which contributes associated silver (Ag) recoveries and gold. The district geology map is shown below in Figure 1-2.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 10 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 1-2: District Geology Map

1.3

Exploration, Drilling, Sampling and QA/QC

1.3.1

Exploration

The Company’s exploration activities to date have focused on the following:

●

Exploration drilling, data acquisition and geologic modeling;

●

Acquiring, organizing, digitizing and vetting electronic and paper data bases obtained from Barrick mainly related to drill data, metallurgy and project infrastructure; and

●

Maintaining and expanding the land holdings.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 11 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

1.3.2

Drilling

Table 1-1: Location and Depth of 2020 - 2021 Holes

Year	Total Drilling		Coring		Reverse Circulation
Year	Holes	Meters	Holes	Meters	Holes	Meters
1983	6	975	6	975	0	0
1984	37	3,560		0	37	3,560
1985	3	303		0	3	303
1986	29	3,364		0	29	3,364
1987	163	29,479	3	732	163	28,747
1988	321	66,325	32	6,121	321	60,204
1989	71	12,285		0	71	12,285
1990	154	37,114	33	3,676	154	33,438
1991	79	22,954	42	3,627	79	19,327
1992	23	4,907		0	23	4,907
1993	9	387		0	9	387
1994	210	31,362	9	1,412	210	29,951
1995	99	22,370	3	248	99	22,122
1996	58	15,254	19	3,329	45	11,924
2020	26	4,405	1	502	25	3,903
2021	43	14,820	38	12,749	5	2,071
Total	1,331	269,864	186	33,371	1,273	236,493

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 12 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

1.3.3

Sampling

1.3.3.1

Historic (1983-1986)

Historic drilling and coring information used in this resource estimate was obtained from several drill programs that began in 1983 with St. Joe Minerals, continued with Bond Gold and Lac Minerals, and ended by Barrick in late 1996. Of 1,262 total holes drilled in the area, 147 holes included core and 1,243 holes were drilled using reverse circulation methods. Most of the cored holes included intervals of core plus RC segments. Percent recovery and RQD measurements were made on all core intervals. An assessment was made of the quality of the orientation data and the core was marked accordingly. The core was then logged, recording lithological, alteration, mineralization, and structural information including the orientation of faults, fault lineation’s, fractures, veins, and bedding. With few exceptions, the entire lengths of the holes were sampled. Sample intervals were 5 feet and occasionally based on the geological logging, separating different lithologies and styles of mineralization and alteration. Samples were marked and tagged in the core box before being photographed, after which the core was sawed in half, with one half sent for assay and one half retained for future reference. Each sample interval was bagged separately and shipped to the lab for analysis.

Cuttings from nearly all reverse circulation drill programs were divided into two streams, one was sampled and the other was disposed during the reclamation of each drill site. Using a Jones splitter, the sample stream was further divided into two sample bags, one designated for assaying and the second duplicate designated as a field reject. Samples were collected at five-foot intervals and bagged at the drill site. Each five-foot sample was sealed at the drill site and not opened until it reached the analytical lab. At each 20-foot rod connection, the hole was blown clean to eliminate material that had fallen into the hole during the connection. The designated assay samples for each five-foot interval were collected by the site geologist and moved to a secure sample collection area for shipment to accredited laboratories off site. When duplicate samples were collected, they were retained at the drill site as a reference sample, if needed. If the duplicate samples were not used, they were blended with site materials during site reclamation.

1.3.3.2

Augusta Gold Corp (2020-2021)

Augusta Gold Corporation (Augusta Gold) commenced exploration on the Bullfrog Gold Project in 2020, continuing through the second quarter of 2021. Work performed consisted of oriented diamond core drilling, conventional Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling and reconnaissance mapping and surface sampling for drill target generation. A digital, Access based database (GeoSpark) has been maintained by Augusta Gold, including all assays from drill samples and geochemical analysis from surface rock chip samples, completed on the project.

Oriented diamond core drilling (HQ3) was performed using two track-mounted LF-90 drills and one truck mounted LF-90 drill. Core orientation was collected using Reflex ACTIII tooling, overseen by staff geologists and verified by a third-party contractor. All drill core was logged, photographed, split, and sampled on-site.

Conventional Reverse Circulation drilling was performed using a single Atlas Copco RD 10+, with a hole diameter of 6.75 inches. All RC samples were logged and sampled on-site. Samples were air dried, sealed in bulk bags on-site. Additionally, surface rock chip samples were collected during field reconnaissance. These samples were collected, described, and geolocated in the field before being in sealed rice bags for transport.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 13 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

1.3.4

QA/QC

The sampling QA/QC program was originally established by St. Joe Minerals. Subsequent owners followed the procedures with any necessary updates to meet quality assurance standards of the time. The standard practices included the supervision of drilling, logging of core, as well as in-stream sample submittal for blanks, certified standards, and duplicate testing to ensure laboratory performance. All assay testing was completed by outside, fully accredited laboratories, such as Skyline, Legend, Iron King, Barringer, American Assay, Chemex, ALS and Paragon Geochemical. Assay certificates are available and have been electronically scanned to complete the project drilling database.

1.3.5

Database Improvements

During the later half of 2021, Augusta Gold Corp. staff conducted an in-depth review and update of legacy data in the Bullfrog drilling database. During the process, previously missing assay information was found on old assay certificates, was verified against drill logs, and added to the database. Additionally, assay grades were checked throughout the legacy data set and consistent conversions from imperial to metric grade units were updated where needed. During the process, it was discovered that some series of older drillholes had improper imperial-metric grade conversions and were subsequently updated, resulting in grade increases for the majority of affected drillholes. Forte Dynamics requested and received assay certificate and logging data for approximately 10% of the relevant legacy drillholes in the economically important portions of gold deposits and has verified the accuracy of the database for those drillholes.

1.4	Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

Metallurgical testing programs that are relevant to the development plans of the Project are summarized below.

In 1986 St. Joe American performed two large column tests on composites of M-S samples and recovered 56% of the gold after 59 days of leaching material grading 0.034 opt and crushed to -19 mm (-3/4 inch). The other column recovered 49% of the gold after 59 days of leaching minus 304.8 mm (-12-inch) material grading 0.037 opt. Projected 90-day recoveries were 61% and 54% respectively.

Results from leach tests performed in 1994 by Kappes Cassiday of Reno, Nevada on 250 kg of sub-grade material from the Bullfrog mine are shown below:

Table 1-2: 1994 Leach Test Results

	Bottle	Column	Column
Size, mesh, & mm (inch)	-100 mesh	-38 mm (-1.5”)	-9.5 mm (-3/8”)
Calc. Head, opt Au	0.029	0.035	0.029
Rec %	96.6	71.4	75.9
Leach time, days	2.0	41	41
NaCN, kg/t (lb/short ton)	0.5 (0.1)	0.385 (0.77)	5.35 (10.7)
Lime, kg/t (lb/short ton	1.0 (2.0)	0.155 (0.31)	1.75 (0.35)

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 14 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

In 1995 Barrick performed pilot heap leach tests on 765 t (844 short tons) of BF subgrade material and 730 t (805 short tons) from the M-S pit. Both composites were crushed to 12.7 mm (-1/2 inch). Results are shown in Table 1-3 below.

Table 1-3: 1995 Pilot Heap Leach Test Results

	BF Low-Grade	M-S Mineralization
Calc. Head, opt Au	0.019	0.048
Calc. Head, opt Ag	0.108	0.380
Projected Au Rec %	67	74
Projected Ag Rec %	9	32
Leach Time, days	41	37
NaCN, kg/t (lb/short ton)	0.10 (0.20)	0.125 (0.25)
Lime, kg/t (lb/short ton)	Nil (Nil)	Nil (Nil)

Table 1-4: 2018 Column Leach Test Results

Feed Size	Crush Method	Test	Time	Au Recovery, %
9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	60 days	58
9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Bottle Roll	4 days	59
1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	60 days	77
1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Bottle Roll	4 days	70
150µm	Conventional/Grind	Bottle Roll	4 days	89

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 15 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 1-5: 2019 Column Leach Test Results

Sample	Feed Size	Crush Method	Test	Time	Au Rec., %
Composite E	9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	151 days	75
Composite E	6.3mm (1/4”)	HPGR	Column	122 days	77
Composite E	1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	102 days	89
MS-M-1	9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	108 days	66
MS-M-1	6.3mm (1/4”)	HPGR	Column	108 days	77
MS-M-1	1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	89 days	85
MH-M-2	9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	109 days	83
MH-M-2	6.3mm (1/4”)	HPGR	Column	105 days	88
MH-M-2	1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	86 days	91

In 2020, cyanidation bottle rolls tests were conducted on 14 variability composites from the Bullfrog project. Details of this testing can be found in Section 10 of this report. The Bullfrog variability composites generally were amenable to agitated cyanidation treatment at a nominal 1.7 mm feed size. The samples were not crushed with an HPGR. Gold recovery ranged from 38.7% to 86.8% and averaged 68.0%. Recovery was 58.1% or greater for 12 of the 14 composites. Gold recovery was not correlated to gold head grades for these 14 composites. Gold recovery consistently decreased with increasing sulfide sulfur content. Results from the bottle roll test are shown below in Table 1-6.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 16 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 1-6: 2020 Bottle Roll Test Results

Composite	Drillhole						REAGENT REQUIREMENTS
		Interval (ft)		Au Rec.	Head Grade Au g/tonne		kg/tonne mineralized material
		From	To	%	Calculated	Assayed	NaCN Cons.	Lime Added
4594-001	BM-20-1	0	40	67.8	0.59	0.80	0.15	1.1
4594-002	BM-50-1	40	75	67.2	0.58	0.50	0.11	1.2
4594-003	BM-20-4	280	335	44.4	0.27	0.26	0.12	1.7
4594-004	BM-20-4	335	390	38.7	0.31	0.30	0.17	1.5
4594-005	BM-20-6	295	395	66.7	0.27	0.29	0.11	1.4
4594-006	BM-20-6	395	485	58.5	1.06	0.86	0.11	1.6
4594-007	BM-20-11	95	185	72.7	0.22	0.18	<0.07	1.1
4594-008	BM-20-14	0	45	58.1	0.31	0.27	<0.07	1.8
4594-009	BM-20-14	90	135	80.0	0.15	0.13	0.14	1.5
4594-010	BM-20-14	170	235	84.2	0.19	0.21	0.14	1.2
4594-011	BM-20-14	235	260	86.8	0.53	0.57	0.09	1.2
4594-012	BM-20-15	35	130	72.3	0.47	0.46	0.17	1.4
4594-013	BM-20-19	0	115	73.3	0.30	0.27	0.08	1.4
4594-014	BM-20-22	305	385	81.0	0.63	0.67	0.09	1.6

1.5	Mineral Resource Estimates

Mineral resources were updated based on technical information as of December 31, 2021, by Forte Dynamics for the Bullfrog project. The update utilizes all new drilling through the end of 2021 in addition to updated geologic models and database improvements by Augusta Gold Corp. staff. Three-dimensional block models for each area (Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone and Bonanza) were created using Vulcan software. Surfaces and solids representing topography, overburden, geologic units, historic stope shapes and gold mineralization were incorporated into the resource models. Resource estimates utilize drill hole, survey, analytical and bulk density information provided by the project personnel. Gold and silver values have been given null values for all material that has been historically mined by both open pit and underground methods. Bulk density has been adjusted for backfill material placed in the historical open pit and underground operations.

Mineral resources are pit constrained using reasonable cost assumptions, however detailed costing and economic evaluations have not been performed. The resources only consider mining mineralization and waste that will take place on lands controlled by Augusta Gold Corp. Pit slope parameters are based on the existing pit wall angles and vary by geology, depth and lateral extent. Different metallurgical recoveries were assigned to oxide and sulphide material and used in the calculation of the optimized pit shells.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 17 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 1-7: Bullfrog Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Bullfrog
Redox/ Cutoff	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Oxide/ 0.192 g/t	Measured	24.50	0.537	1.28	422.77	1,010.02
	Indicated	36.32	0.515	1.14	602.02	1,332.18
	Measured and Indicated	60.82	0.524	1.20	1,024.79	2,342.20
	Inferred	14.40	0.460	0.77	213.06	358.49

Sulfide/ 0.315g/t	Measured	1.30	0.710	1.28	29.77	53.52
	Indicated	1.99	0.625	1.32	39.94	84.47
	Measured and Indicated	3.29	0.659	1.30	69.72	137.99
	Inferred	1.05	0.657	1.14	22.14	38.53

Total - Oxide and Sulfide	Measured	25.80	0.545	1.28	452.55	1,063.54
	Indicated	38.31	0.521	1.15	641.96	1,416.65
	Measured and Indicated	64.12	0.531	1.20	1,094.51	2,480.19
	Inferred	15.44	0.474	0.80	235.20	397.02

Notes:

Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 82% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 20% For Ag.

Sulphide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,550/oz and a recovery of 50% for Au and silver price of US$20/oz and a recovery of 12% for Ag.

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 18 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 1-8: Montgomery-Shoshone Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Montgomery-Shoshone
Redox/ Cutoff	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Oxide/ 0.192 g/t	Measured	1.97	0.637	3.35	40.35	212.12
	Indicated	1.35	0.555	2.85	24.04	123.66
	Measured and Indicated	3.32	0.603	3.15	64.38	335.78
	Inferred	1.05	0.586	3.45	19.76	116.41

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

Table 1-9: Bonanza Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Bonanza
Redox/ Cutoff	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Oxide/ 0.192 g/t	Measured	2.35	0.446	0.44	33.78	33.48
	Indicated	1.22	0.422	0.44	16.61	17.17
	Measured and Indicated	3.58	0.438	0.44	50.40	50.65
	Inferred	0.19	0.473	0.37	2.94	2.28

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 19 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 1-10: Combined Mineral Resources

Combined Global Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Oxide and Sulphide
Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Measured	30.13	0.544	1.35	526.68	1,309.13
Indicated	40.88	0.519	1.18	682.61	1,557.49
Measured and Indicated	71.01	0.530	1.26	1,209.29	2,866.62
Inferred	16.69	0.481	0.96	257.90	515.72

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

Combined Mineral Resources presented in this report have increased over those reported in the June 2021 Bullfrog NI 43-101 technical report. Measured and Indicated Resources increased by 18.7 million tonnes, 329,500 gold ounces, and 476,000 silver ounces. Inferred Resources increased by 7.6 million tonnes, 127,900 gold ounces, and 272,200 silver ounces. The changes are primarily due to new drilling, database improvements, and the updated geological controls that have led to greater continuity of higher-grade material in lower portions of the Bullfrog pit resulting in a more robust pit optimization.

1.6	Conclusions

This report is based on all technical and scientific data as of December 31, 2021, the effective date of this report. Mineral resources are considered by the QP to meet the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction. Analytical data has been collected and analyzed using industry standard methods at the time they were collected. Geologic data has been interpreted and modeled using historic maps, reports, field mapping, drillhole logging and three-dimensional computer modeling. Resource block models were developed using the geologic and analytical data to best represent the mineralization within each of the areas and accounts for historic mining of the resource by open pit and underground methods. Lerch-Grossman optimized pit shells have been generated for each area using representative costs, metal recoveries and slope angles and resources have been summarized within those pit shells.

1.6.1

Geology and Mineral Resources

●

The exploration potential within the district is high and recent drilling has shown that mineralized structures and features continue both laterally and vertically along the known mineralized trends in and near all three major areas. Specific areas for additional exploration drilling and interpretation include Ladd Mountain and Mystery Hills near the Bullfrog pit; the Polaris vein and related disseminated mineralization near the Montgomery-Shoshone pit; along strike and beneath Bonanza Mountain near the Bonanza pit; and in the structurally prospective Gap area in the northern portion of the property.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 20 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

●

Considerable effort has been placed on verifying historic assays and surveys by checking against historic drill logs and assay certificates. The database has been updated to include additional assay certificate data that was recently discovered. Problems with imperial-metric grade conversions in a porting of the legacy data have been corrected.

●

Forte Dynamics completed a review of the drilling database for Bullfrog and has verified assay data against lab certificates for approximately 10% of drillholes in the economically important portions of the deposits.

●

The recent assay data has been collected in a manner appropriate for the deposit type and mineralization style. Assay QA/QC analyses have been taken to ensure that assays are of a quality suitable for the estimation of mineral resources.

●

The level of understanding of the geology is very good. A district wide geologic model has been constructed using historic maps, geology reports and field mapping. Drillhole logs are used in the interpretation, when possible, but more effort should be placed on utilizing the downhole logging data to help refine the geologic models.

●

Drillholes excluded from resource estimation have been reviewed and the list has been updated. Some holes now have assay data and have been removed from the exclusion list. A few additional RC drillholes with downhole contamination have been added to the exclusion list. Location and downhole survey issues for a few holes have also been identified.

●

Historical production data, blastholes, pit maps, underground maps, stope surveys should be extracted from the historical archives and digitized into a format that can aid in the interpretation of the geologic model and resource block model. The historic data can be used to calibrate the resource model and provide a validation check.

●

The treatment of outlier assays in the database is appropriate and reasonable. The block grade interpretations have been carried out using conventional methods consistent with common industry practice.

●

Block model grades have been zeroed out in areas of historic underground and open pit mining. Block model grades were also zeroed out within geologic units known to be barren. Backfilled areas within the open pit and underground mines have been accounted for in the volume and tonnage to be mined.

●

Mining and processing costs based on similar Nevada operations have been applied in the pit optimization. The existing pit walls remain very stable with steep overall slope angles on a majority of the pit walls. The existing wall angles have been measured and applied in the pit optimization.

1.6.2

Metallurgical Test Work and Mineral Processing

Metallurgical testing performed to date indicates reasonable gold recovery at small particle sizes. The column leach tests on HPGR fine crushed materials suggest gold recovery could exceed 85% on 10 mesh material; however, further testing is required to properly characterize the recovery potential for each mineralized zone.

The metallurgical test program should be comprehensive, and include the following (at a minimum):

●

Full characterization of composite samples – Au/Ag content, carbon and sulfur speciation, typical Geochem including Hg, solids specific gravity

●

Crushing work index testing

●

Abrasion index testing

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 21 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

●

Column leach testing at various HPGR crush sizes, including comparative bottle roll tests and size fraction recovery analysis

●

Agglomeration testing

●

Compacted permeability testing

●

Any required environmental tests on column test residues measured

1.6.3

Infrastructure

●

The project is in a jurisdiction that is amenable to mining.

●

The project site is near the town of Beatty, Nevada which has adequate amenities and services.

●

The project was open pit and underground mined from 1989-1999 and has remaining infrastructure that includes power lines on site, a paved highway to site and a network of roads across the district.

●

Availability of adequate power through the local utility, as well as available water and water rights to support operations require further evaluation.

1.7	Recommendations

The current estimation of mineral resources indicate the potential for further work to advance the project to a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA).

Additional exploration drilling and delineation drilling should be carried out to expand the resource base and to further refine the geologic models and resource block models.

Metallurgical testing performed to date indicates gold recovery is reasonable at small particle sizes. The column leach tests on HPGR fine crushed materials suggest gold recovery could exceed 85% on 10 mesh material; however, further testing is required to properly characterize the recovery potential for each mineralized zone.

Baseline study work across a range of activities can be started to support permitting activities for future study stages.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 22 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

2.	Introduction

This report has been prepared for Augusta Gold Corp. for the Bullfrog Gold Project in Nevada with the purpose of updating and reporting mineral resources utilizing the most recent drilling and geologic models. The drillhole and geologic information has been used to generate a three-dimensional block model of the mineralized areas and optimized pit shells have been developed from those block models to report mineral resources.

Technical information, including locations, orientations, mapping, and analytical data has been supplied by Augusta Gold Corp. Information pertaining to title, environment, permitting and access has also been supplied by Augusta Gold Corp. Introductory summaries pertaining to infrastructure, location, geology, and mineralization have been primarily sourced from the historical reports from past producers and by Augusta Gold Corp.

The project site was inspected by Forte on December 14, 2021.

2.1	Units of Measure

All references to dollars in this report are to U.S. dollars (US$) unless otherwise noted. Distances, areas, volumes, and masses are expressed in the metric system unless indicated otherwise. Historic data is expressed in English units, such as feet and tons.

For the purpose of this report, common measurements are given in metric units. All tonnages shown are in Tonnes (t) of 1,000 kilograms, and precious metal grade values are given in grams per tonne (g/t), precious metal quantity values are given in troy ounces (toz). To convert to English units, the following factors should be used:

●

1 short ton = 0.907 tonne (T)

●

1 troy ounce = 31.1035 grams (g)

●

1 troy ounce/short ton = 34.286 grams per tonne (g/t)

●

1 foot = 30.48 centimeters (cm) = 0.3048 meters (m)

●

1 mile = 1.61 kilometer (km)

●

1 acre = 0.405 hectare (ha)

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 23 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

2.2	Abbreviations

The following is a list of the abbreviations used in this report:

Abbreviation	Unit or Term
2D	two-dimensional
3D	three-dimensional
Ag	silver
Au	gold
cm	centimeter
cm³	cubic centimeters
g	gram
g/t	grams per tonne
g/cm³	grams per cubic centimeter
ha	hectare
kg	kilogram
km	kilometer
km²	square kilometers
km/h	kilometers per hour
kw-h	kilowatt per hour
m	meter
M	million
Mm	millimeter
mm/yr	millimeters per year
Mya	million years before present
NDEP	Nevada Department of Environmental Projection
NI 43-101	Canadian Securities Administrators’ National Instrument 43-101
NSR	Net Smelting Return
Pb	lead
PEA	Preliminary Economic Assessment
ppm	parts per million
QA/QC	quality assurance/quality control
T	metric ton
toz	Troy ounces
T/d	Tonnes per day
US$	United States dollars

2.3	Qualified Persons and Details of Inspection

Forte is acting as a Qualified Person firm consisting of mining experts to prepare the report. Below is a list of details of the QPs inspection of the property.

A Forte QP conducted a site visit of the property on December 14, 2021, where he was able to review infrastructure, existing pits, waste dumps, roads, and the observable geologic features of the site. The exploration program had been completed earlier so logging and sample preparation were not directly reviewed, although the sampling and logging procedures were reviewed. The Forte team did receive a thorough geologic review of the site by the project geologist.

Information contained in the report is current as of December 31, 2021.

The reports and documents listed in Chapter 24 and Chapter 25 of this Report were used to support Report preparation.

Augusta Gold has not previously filed a technical report summary on the Project.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 24 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

3.	Property Description

The Project is located in the Bullfrog Hills of Nye County, Nevada (Figure 3-1). Bullfrog Mine’s property covers approximately 3,157 hectares of patented and unpatented lode mining claims in Sections 25, 26, 35 and 36 of T11S, R46E and Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 23 of T12S, R46E, Mt. Diablo Meridian. The Project is accessible via a 2¼ hour (260 km) drive north of Las Vegas, Nevada along US Highway 95. Las Vegas is serviced by a major international airport and is the closest major hub for providing equipment, supplies, services, and other support to the Project. The Project lies 4 miles west of the Town of Beatty, Nevada, which has a population of approximately 1,000 and contains most basic services, including motels, gasoline stations, schools, and a variety of stores and services. Access around the Project is provided by a series of reasonably good gravel roads that extend to the existing mines and important exploration areas.

Figure 3-1: Location Map

Augusta Gold has four option/lease/purchase agreements in place and has located 61 claims that give it control of 439 unpatented lode mining claims and mill site claims, and 86 patented. These lands are listed in Table 3-1. A property map with the locations shown in detail can be seen in Figure 3-2. The claims do not have an expiration date, as long as the fees and obligations are maintained.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 25 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 3-1: Lands Under the Control of Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Standard Gold
Patent Name	Mineral Survey No.
Providence	2470
Aurium	2654

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Mojave Gold Mining
Patent Name	Mineral Survey No.
Polaris Fraction	2426
Inaugural Fraction	2426
Three Peaches	2426
Little Fraction	2471A
Indian Johnnie	2471A
Shoshone	2471A
Del Monte Fraction	2501A
Shoshone Two	2471A
Shoshone Three	2471A
Oro Grande	2470
Shoshone Extension	2470
Greenhorn	2470

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 26 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Brown Claims
Patent Name	Mineral Survey No.
Crystal	2418
Oliver	2340

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Lunar Landing Claims
Patent Name	Mineral Survey No.
Elkhorn	2736
Red Bluff	2540
Black Bull	2425
Bell Boy Fraction	2425
South Fraction	2425
Lookout	2461
Molly Gibson #1	3043
Molly Gibson # 2	3043
Molly Gibson #3	3043
Molly Gibson #4	3043
Molly Gibson #5	3043
Rand	2784
Rand #1	2784
Rand #2	2784
Rand #3	2784
Rand Fraction	2784
Early Bird	2491

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 27 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Lunar Landing Claims
Patent Name	Mineral Survey No.
Unexpected	2735
Scorpion	2411
St. Anthony	2734
Eva Bell	2576
Gem Fraction	2377
Quartzsite Fraction	2422
Annex	2715

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 1	NMC1147851
BFGC 2	NMC1147852
BFGC 3	NMC1147853
BFGC 4	NMC1147854
BFGC 5	NMC1147855
BFGC 6	NMC1147856
BFGC 8	NMC1147857
BFGC 9	NMC1147858
BFGC 10	NMC1147859
BFGC 11	NMC1147860
BFGC 12	NMC1147861
BFGC 13	NMC1147862
BFGC 14	NMC1147863

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 28 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 15	NMC1147864
BFGC 16	NMC1147865
BFGC 17	NMC1147866
BFGC 18	NMC1147867
BFGC 19	NMC1147868
BFGC 20	NMC1147869
BFGC 21	NMC1147870
BFGC 22	NMC1147871
BFGC 23	NMC1147872
BFGC 24	NMC1147873
BFGC 25	NMC1147874
BFGC 26	NMC1147875
BFGC 27	NMC1147876
BFGC 28	NMC1147877
BFGC 29	NMC1147878
BFGC 30	NMC1147879
BFGC 31	NMC1147880
BFGC 32	NMC1147881
BFGC 33	NMC1147882
BFGC 34	NMC1147883
BFGC 35	NMC1147884
BFGC 36	NMC1147885
BFGC 37	NMC1147886
BFGC 38	NMC1147887

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 29 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 39	NMC1147888
BFGC 40	NMC1147889
BFGC 41	NMC1147890
BFGC 42	NMC1147891
BFGC 43	NMC1147892
BFGC 44	NMC1147893
BFGC 45	NMC1147894
BFGC 46	NMC1147895
BFGC 47	NMC1147896
BFGC 48	NMC1147897
BFGC 49	NMC1147898
BFGC 50	NMC1147899
BFGC 51	NMC1147900
BFGC 52	NMC1147901
BFGC 53	NMC1147902
BFGC 54	NMC1147903
BFGC 55	NMC1147904
BFGC 56	NMC1147905
BFGC 57	NMC1147906
BFGC 58	NMC1147907
BFGC 59	NMC1147908
BFGC 60	NMC1147909
BFGC 61	NMC1147910
BFGC 62	NMC1147911

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 30 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 7	NMC1154057
BFGC 63	NMC1154058
BFGC 64	NMC1154059
BFGC 65	NMC1154060
BFGC 66	NMC1154061
BFGC 67	NMC1154062
BFGC 68	NMC1154063
BFGC 69	NMC1154064
BFGC 70	NMC1154065
BFGC 71	NMC1154066
BFGC 72	NMC1154067
BFGC 73	NMC1154068
BFGC 74	NMC1154069
BFGC 75	NMC1154070
BFGC 76	NMC1154071
BFGC 77	NMC1154072
BFGC 78	NMC1154073
BFGC 79	NMC1154074
BFGC 80	NMC1154075
BFGC 81	NMC1154076
BFGC 82	NMC1154077
BFGC 83	NMC1154078
BFGC 84	NMC1154079
BFGC 85	NMC1154080

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 31 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 86	NMC1154081
BFGC 87	NMC1154082
BFGC 88	NMC1154083
BFGC 89	NMC1177609
BFGC 90	NMC1177610
BFGC 91	NMC1177611
BFGC 92	NMC1177612
BFGC 93	NMC1177613
BFGC 94	NMC1177614
BFGC 95	NMC1177615
BFGC 96	NMC1177616
BFGC 97	NMC1177617
BFGC 98	NMC1177618
BFGC 99	NMC1177619
BFGC 100	NMC1177620
BFGC 101	NMC1177621
BFGC 102	NMC1177622
BFGC 103	NMC1177623
BFGC 104	NMC1177624
BFGC 105	NMC1177625
BFGC 106	NMC1177626
BFGC 107	NMC1177627
BFGC 108	NMC1177628
BFGC 109	NMC1177629

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 32 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 110	NMC1177630
BFGC 111	NMC1177631
BFGC 112	NMC1185280
BFGC 113	NMC1185281
BFGC 114	NMC1185282
BFGC 115	NMC1185283
BFGC 116	NMC1185284
BFGC 117	NMC1185285
BFGC 118	NMC1185286
BFGC 119	NMC1185287
BFGC 120	NMC1185288
BFGC 121	NMC1185289
BFGC 122	NMC1185290
BFGC 123	NMC1185291
BFGC 124	NMC1185292
BFGC 125	NMC1185293
BFGC 126	NMC1185294
BFGC 127	NMC1185295
BFGC 128	NMC1185296
BFGC 129	NMC1185297
BFGC 130	NMC1185298
BFGC 131	NMC1185299
BFGC 132	NMC1185300
BFGC 133	NMC1185301

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 33 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFGC 134	NMC1185302
BEATTY CON # 1	NMC109662
LUCKY QUEEN	NMC109667
BC # 8 BABINGTON	NMC109697
BC # 9 CORNELL	NMC109698
BC # 10 FLIN FLON 2	NMC109699
BVD 6	NMC987963
BVD 5	NMC987964
BVD 324	NMC987965
BVD 323	NMC987966
BVD 322	NMC987967
BVD 321	NMC987968
BVD 317	NMC987969
BVD 316	NMC987970
BVD 315	NMC987971
BVD 314	NMC987972
BVD 303	NMC987973
BVD 302	NMC987974
BVD 301	NMC987975
BVD 300	NMC987976
BVD 207	NMC987977
BVD 206	NMC987978
BVD 205	NMC987979
BVD 204	NMC987980

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 34 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BVD 203	NMC987981
BVD 202	NMC987982
BVD 201	NMC987983
BVD 200	NMC987984
BVD 107	NMC987985
BVD 106	NMC987986
BVD 105	NMC987987
BVD 41	NMC987988
BVD 40	NMC987989
BVD 32	NMC987990
BVD 31	NMC987991
BVD 30	NMC987992
BVD 29	NMC987993
BVD 36	NMC987994
BVD 35	NMC987995
BVD 34	NMC987996
BVD 33	NMC987997
BVD 28	NMC987998
BVD 27	NMC987999
BVD 26	NMC988000
BVD 25	NMC988001
BVD 19	NMC988002
BVD 18	NMC988003
BVD 17	NMC988004

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 35 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BVD 16	NMC988005
BVD 24	NMC988006
BVD 23	NMC988007
BVD 22	NMC988008
BVD 21	NMC988009
BVD 20	NMC988010
BVD 15	NMC988011
BVD 14	NMC988012
BVD 13	NMC988013
BVD 12	NMC988014
BVD 11	NMC988015
BVD 39	NMC988016
BVD 38	NMC988017
BVD 37	NMC988018
BVD 10	NMC988019
BVD 9	NMC988020
BVD 8	NMC988021
BVD 7	NMC988022
BVD 4	NMC988023
BVD 3	NMC988024
BVD 2	NMC988025
BVD 1	NMC988026
BVD 401	NMC992989
BVD 402	NMC992990

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 36 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BVD 403	NMC992991
BVD 404	NMC992992
BVD 405	NMC992993
BVD 406	NMC992994
BVD 407	NMC992995
BVD 408	NMC992996
BVD 409	NMC992997
BVD 410	NMC992998
BFG 135	NV105225834
BFG 136	NV105225835
BFG 137	NV105225836
BFG 138	NV105225837

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Abitibi Option
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
AR 1	1209019
AR 2	1209020
AR 3	1209021
AR 4	1209022
AR 5	1209023
AR 6	1209024
AR 7	1209025
AR 8	1209026

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 37 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Abitibi Option
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
AR 9	1209027
AR 10	1209028
AR 11	1209029
AR 12	1209030
AR 13	1209031
AR 14	1209032
AR 15	1209033
AR 16	1209034
AR 17	1209035
AR 18	1209036
AR 19	1209037
AR 20	1209038
AR 21	1209039
AR 22	1209040
AR 23	1209041
AR 24	1209042
AR 25	1209043
AR 26	1209044
AR 27	1209045
AR 28	1209046
AR 29	1209047
AR 30	1209048
AR 31	1209049

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 38 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Abitibi Option
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
AR 32	1209050
AR 33	1209051
AR 34	1209052
AR 35	1209053
AR 36	1209054
AR 37	1209055
AR 38	1209056
AR 39	1209057
AR 40	1209058
AR 41	1209059
AR 42	1209060
AR 43	1209061

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	Patent Number
EMERALD	44862
RUBY	44862
NORTHSTAR	45830
LOUISVILLE	35256
DENVER FRACTION	45316
TRAMP NO. 2	46191
SIDEWINDER	45387

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 39 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	Patent Number
TIGER	45387
TRAMP EXTENSION	46171
TRAMP NO. 1	46171
HOBO	45253
VIRGINIA	529024
DIAMOND HITCH	46187
COMET	46182
LE ROI	46181
UGLY DUCKLING	46180
LE ROI FRACTION	46179
DEL MONTE	46173
POLARIS	46173
DENVER NO. 2	45348
VENTURE	45348
DENVER NO. 3	77975
SUNSET NO. 1	45371
SUNSET NO. 2	45371
CHIEF	45815
PRINCE	45815
S.L.	46223
SPEARHEAD	46223
SUMMIT	46223
AURORA	47481

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 40 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Patented Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	Patent Number
GRAND PRIZE	47481
QUARTETTE	47481
H071 TRACT 37 PATENT
BULL FROG NO. 2	44644
BULLFROG	44644
BULLFROG FRACTION LODE	45120
DELAWARE NO. 1	46263
ETHEL	46263
JUMBO	46263
NEVADA	88070
ROOSEVELT	88070
TEDDY	88070
TEDDY FRACTION	88070
PACIFIC PLACER	952102
NEVADA PLACER	952102
PARIAN PLACER	952102

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Barrick Claims
*Mine Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
Shorty 1	NMC 1058705
Shorty 2	NMC 1058706

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 41 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Barrick Claims
*Mine Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
Shorty 3	NMC 1058707
Shorty 4	NMC 1058708
Shorty 5	NMC 1058709
Shorty 6	NMC 1058710
Shorty 7	NMC 1058711
Shorty 8	NMC 1058712
Shorty 10	NMC 1058713
Shorty 11	NMC 1058714
Shorty 12	NMC 1058715
ACE NUMBER 1	NMC 112229
ACE NO. 2*	NMC 112230
ACE NO. 3*	NMC 112231
RHYOLITE NO. 1	NMC 128702
RHYOLITE NO. 5	NMC 128705
WEST SIDE RHYOLITE	NMC 128708
EAST SIDE	NMC 128709
YANKEE GIRL # 2	NMC 128710
FROG EXTENSION	NMC 128711
FROG NO. 1	NMC 128712
BOLIVAR NO. 1	NMC 128713
CASH BOY	NMC 128714
GOLDEN EAGLE # 2*	NMC 298788

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 42 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Barrick Claims
*Mine Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
GOLDEN EAGLE # 3*	NMC 298789
GOLDEN AGE # 1*	NMC 298790
GOLDEN AGE # 2*	NMC 298791
GOLDEN AGE # 3*	NMC 298792
GOLDEN AGE # 4*	NMC 298793
GOLDEN AGE # 5*	NMC 298794
GOLDEN AGE # 15*	NMC 298802
GOLDEN AGE # 16*	NMC 298803
BEV # 43	NMC 350754
BEV # 44	NMC 350755
BEV # 45	NMC 350756
BEV # 46	NMC 350757
BEV # 53	NMC 350764
BEV # 54	NMC 350765
BEV # 65	NMC 350776
BEV # 73	NMC 350784
RACHAEL # 3	NMC 400293
RACHAEL # 4	NMC 400294
RACHAEL # 5	NMC 400295
MIKE 9	NMC 415141
MIKE 10	NMC 415142
IRBF # 5	NMC 418634

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 43 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Barrick Claims
*Mine Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
IRBF # 6	NMC 418635
IRBF # 8	NMC 418637
IRISH EYES # 2	NMC 436850
CHERYL MARIE # 3	NMC 436852
GOLDEN SLIVER	NMC 436855
TOTO # 1	NMC 436856
TOTO # 2	NMC 436857
TOTO # 3	NMC 436858
TOTO # 4	NMC 436859
TOTO # 5	NMC 436860
TOTO # 6	NMC 436861
TOTO # 7	NMC 436862
OVERSIGHT	NMC 436870
ERICA ANN # 1	NMC 436876
DINY F	NMC 443898
DOUG’S DESPAIR # 1	NMC 453427
LITTLE BEV # 7	NMC 462038
BEV NO. 17	NMC 507261
BEV NO. 18	NMC 507262
BEV NO. 19	NMC 507263
BEV NO. 20	NMC 507264
BEV NO. 55	NMC 507277

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 44 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Unpatented Claims*
Barrick Claims
*Mine Claims*
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BEV NO. 66	NMC 507287
BEV NO. 67	NMC 507288
LITTLE BEV # 9	NMC 523201
BROTHER 1	NMC 551789
BROTHER 2	NMC 551790
GOLDEN AGE # 6	NMC 583381
GOLDEN AGE # 7*	NMC 583382
GOLDEN AGE # 8*	NMC 583383
GOLDEN AGE # 9*	NMC 583384
GOLDEN AGE # 12*	NMC 583385
GOLDEN AGE # 13*	NMC 583386
GOLDEN AGE # 14*	NMC 583387
GOLDEN AGE # 17*	NMC 583388
BEV 47 A	NMC 819978
BEV 48 A	NMC 819979

*Augusta Gold Corp. Millsite Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFMS NO. 1	NMC 519933
BFMS NO. 2	NMC 519934
BFMS NO. 3	NMC 519935

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 45 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Millsite Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFMS NO. 4	NMC 519936
BFMS NO. 5	NMC 519937
BFMS NO. 6	NMC 519938
BFMS NO. 7	NMC 519939
BFMS NO. 8	NMC 519940
BFMS NO. 9	NMC 519941
BFMS NO. 10	NMC 519942
BFMS 11	NMC 519943
BFMS NO. 12	NMC 519944
BFMS NO. 13	NMC 519945
BFMS NO. 14	NMC 519946
BFMS NO. 15	NMC 519947
BFMS NO. 16	NMC 519948
BFMS NO. 17	NMC 519949
BFMS NO. 18	NMC 519950
BFMS NO. 19	NMC 519951
BFMS NO. 20	NMC 519952
BFMS NO. 21	NMC 519953
BFMS NO. 22	NMC 519954
BFMS NO. 23	NMC 519955
BFMS NO. 24	NMC 519956
BFMS NO. 25	NMC 519957
BFMS NO. 26	NMC 519958

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 46 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Millsite Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFMS NO. 27	NMC 519959
BFMS NO. 28	NMC 519960
BFMS NO. 29	NMC 519961
BFMS NO. 30	NMC 519962
BFMS NO. 31	NMC 519963
BFMS NO. 32	NMC 519964
BFMS NO. 33	NMC 519965
BFMS NO. 36	NMC 519968
BFMS NO. 37	NMC 519969
BFMS NO. 38	NMC 519970
BFMS 41	NMC 519973
BFMS NO. 42	NMC 519974
BFMS NO. 43	NMC 519975
BFMS NO. 46	NMC 519978
BFMS NO. 48	NMC 519980
BFMS NO. 49	NMC 519981
BFMS NO. 50	NMC 519982
BFMS NO. 51	NMC 519983
BFMS NO. 52	NMC 519984
BFMS NO. 53	NMC 519985
BFMS NO. 56	NMC 519988
BFMS NO. 57	NMC 519989
BFMS NO. 58	NMC 519990

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 47 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Millsite Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFMS NO. 59	NMC 519991
BFMS NO. 60	NMC 519992
BFMS NO. 61	NMC 519993
BFMS NO. 63	NMC 519995
BFMS NO. 64	NMC 519996
BFMS NO. 65	NMC 519997
BFMS NO. 66	NMC 519998
BFMS NO. 67	NMC 519999
BFMS NO. 71	NMC 528590
BFMS 72	NMC 528591
BFMS NO. 73	NMC 528592
BFMS NO. 92	NMC 528611
BFMS NO. 93	NMC 528612
BFMS NO. 94	NMC 528613
BFMS NO. 95	NMC 528614
BFMS NO. 96	NMC 528615
BFMS NO. 97	NMC 528616
BFMS NO. 98	NMC 528617
BFMS NO. 101	NMC 528620
BFMS NO. 104	NMC 528623
BFMS NO. 105	NMC 528624
BFMS NO. 106	NMC 528625
BFMS NO. 107	NMC 528626

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 48 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Millsite Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFMS NO. 110	NMC 528629
BFMS NO. 111	NMC 528630
BFMS NO. 114	NMC 528633
BFMS NO. 115	NMC 528634
BFMS NO. 116	NMC 528635
BFMS NO. 119	NMC 528638
BFMS NO. 205	NMC 528724
BFMS NO. 206	NMC 528725
BFMS NO. 207	NMC 528726
BFMS NO. 208	NMC 528727
BFMS NO. 209	NMC 528728
BFMS NO. 250	NMC 528769
BFMS NO. 251	NMC 528770
BFMS NO. 252	NMC 528771
BFMS NO. 253	NMC 528772
BFMS NO. 254	NMC 528773
BFMS NO. 255	NMC 528774
BFMS NO. 256	NMC 528775
BFMS 257	NMC 528776
BGMW NO. 1	NMC 551064
BGMW NO. 3	NMC 551065
BGMW NO. 11	NMC 551066
BGMW NO. 13	NMC 551067

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 49 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

*Augusta Gold Corp. Millsite Claims*
Barrick Claims
Claim Name	BLM Serial Number
BFMS 47 A	NMC 817723

Figure 3-2: Property Map of the Bullfrog Project

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 50 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

3.1	NPX Assignment of Lands

In September 2011, the Company issued 14.4 million shares of the Company to the shareholders of Standard Gold Corp. (SGC) to acquire 100% of SGC and its assets. SGC is a private Nevada corporation and now wholly owned by the Company. Concurrently, NPX Metals, Inc. (NPX) and Bull Frog Holding, Inc. (BHI) assigned all title and interests in 79 claims and two patents to SGC. The Company granted a production royalty of 3% NSR on the property to NPX and BHI, plus an aggregate 3% NSR cap on any acquired lands within one mile of the 2011 boundary. Thus, NPX and BHI would not receive any royalty on acquisitions having a 3% or greater NSR.

3.2	Mojave Gold Option

In March 2014, the Company formed Rocky Mountain Minerals Corp. (RMMC), a private Nevada corporation, as a wholly owned subsidiary specifically for holding and acquiring assets. On October 29, 2014, RMMC exercised an option to purchase from Mojave Gold Mining Co. 12 patents west and adjacent to the Company’s initial property and that cover the NE half of the M-S pit. Mojave was paid 750,000 shares of BFGC plus $16,000. RMMC agreed to make annual payments totaling $180,000 over nine years to fully exercise the option and expend as a minimum work commitment for the benefit of the Property $100,000 per year and a total of $500,000 over five years on the Properties and surrounding lands within one-half mile of the 12 Mojave patents. Alternatively, RMMC can pay cash to Mojave at 50% of the difference between the minimum required and the actual expenditures. Mojave retained a sliding scale Net Smelter Return royalty ranging from 1% for gold prices below $1,200/ounce and up to 4% for gold prices above $3,200 per ounce. For reference, Barrick terminated a lease on the 12 Mojave patents in mid-2000 (then known as the Dees group) and all residual access rights in 2010.

3.3	Barrick Bullfrog Inc. Lease and Option

On March 23, 2015, Bullfrog Mines LLC (Bullfrog Mines), the successor by conversion of Barrick Bullfrog Inc., and RMMC, among others, entered into a lease and option to purchase agreement (the Lease and Option Agreement) dated March 23, 2015, for RMMC to acquire six patents, 20 unpatented claims, and eight mill site claims from Bullfrog Mines. The Lease and Option Agreement terminated upon execution of the Membership Interest Purchase Agreement (MIPA).

3.4	Lunar Landing Lease

On July 1, 2017, RMMC entered a lease with Lunar Landing LLC on 24 patents in the Bullfrog District:

●

Two patents are adjacent and west of the M-S pit that could allow potential expansion of the pit down dip of the Polaris vein and stock work system.

●

Four patents are within 0.5 to 1.2 miles west of the Bullfrog pit in the vicinity of the Bonanza Mountain open pit mine.

●

Eight patents are in an exploration target area located about 1.5 miles NW of the Bullfrog pit and where the Company has owned the Aurium patent since 2011.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 51 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

The lease includes the following:

●

Production royalty of 5% net smelter returns with the right to buy-down to 2.5%.

●

The Company is to expend as a work commitment not less than $50,000 per year and $500,000 in total to maintain the lease.

●

The Company has rights to commingle mineralization and the flexibility to operate the Project as a logical land and mining unit.

3.5	Brown Claims

On January 29, 2018, RMMC purchased the two patented claims, thereby eliminating minor constraints to expand the Bullfrog pit to the north. As partial consideration for the Brown Claims, RMMC granted the sellers of the Brown Claims a 5% net smelter returns royalty on the Brown Claims, of which 2.5% can be purchased by RMMC for aggregate consideration of US$37,500.

3.6	Barrick Claims (2020)

On October 26, 2020, the Company completed its acquisition of Bullfrog Mines pursuant to the MIPA with Homestake Mining Company of California (Homestake) and Lac Minerals (USA) LLC (Lac Minerals and together with Homestake, the Barrick Parties).

Pursuant to the MIPA, the Company purchased from the Barrick Parties all of the equity interests (the Equity Interests) in Bullfrog Mines for aggregate consideration of (i) 54,600,000 units of the Company, each unit consisting of one share of common stock of the Company and one four-year warrant purchase one share of common stock of the Company at an exercise price of C$0.30, (ii) a 2% net smelter returns royalty (the Barrick Royalty) granted on all minerals produced from all of the patented and unpatented claims (subject to the adjustments set out below), pursuant to a royalty deed, dated October 26, 2020 by and among Bullfrog Mines and the Barrick Parties (the Royalty Deed), (iii) the Company granting indemnification to the Barrick Parties pursuant to an indemnity deed, dated October 26, 2020 by and among the Company, the Barrick Parties and Bullfrog Mines, and (iv) certain investor rights, including anti-dilution rights, pursuant to the investor rights agreement, dated October 26, 2020, by and among the Company, Augusta Investments Inc., and Barrick.

Through the Company’s acquisition of the Equity Interests, the Company acquired rights to the 1,500 acres of claims adjoining the Company’s Bullfrog Gold deposit.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 52 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

3.7	Abitibi Royalties Option

On December 9, 2020, Bullfrog Mines entered into a mining option agreement with Abitibi Royalties (USA) Inc. (Abitibi) granting Bullfrog Mines the option (the Abitibi Option) to acquire forty-three unpatented lode mining claims to the south of the Bullfrog deposit. Bullfrog Mines made an initial payment to Abitibi of C$25,000 and can exercise the Abitibi Option by:

●

Paying to Abitibi C$50,000 in cash or shares of Company common stock by December 9, 2021;

●

Paying to Abitibi C$75,000 in cash or shares of Company common stock by December 9, 2022; and

●

Granting to Abitibi a 2% net smelter royalty on the claims subject to the Abitibi Option by December 9, 2022, of which Bullfrog Mines would have the option to purchase 0.5% for C$500,000 on or before December 9, 2030.

In order to exercise the Abitibi Option, Bullfrog Mines is also required to keep the underlying claims in good standing.

3.8	Other Property Considerations

Total fees paid in 2020 for the lode and mill site claims was $26,739. Nye County property taxes paid in 2020 was approximately $1,781.

In summary, the lands controlled by Augusta Gold Corp. are in good standing with no significant liens, encumbrances, or title adversities.

3.9	Environmental and Permitting

The author is not aware of any outstanding environmental, reclamation or permitting issues that would impact future exploration work. Future exploration work will require a Plan of Operations to be filed with the BLM and the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 53 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Major permits, not inclusive of the Plan of Operations above, that will be required include:

●

Water Right: Additional water rights will need to be acquired from third parties or obtained from the Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) for producing Project water.

●

Additional minor permits will be required for the project to advance to production and are listed in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2: Additional Minor Permits Required

Notification/Permit	Agency
Mine Registry	Nevada Division of Minerals
Mine Opening Notification	State Inspector of Mines
Solid Waste Landfill	Nevada Bureau of Waste Management
Hazardous Waste Management Permit	Nevada Bureau of Waste Management
General Storm Water Permit	Nevada Bureau of Water Pollution Control
Hazardous Materials Permit	State Fire Marshall
Fire and Life Safety	State Fire Marshall
Explosives Permit	Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives
Notification of Commencement of Operation	Mine Safety and Health Administration
Radio License	Federal Communications Commission
Public Water Supply Permit	NV Division of Environmental Protection
MSHA Identification Number and MSHA Coordination	U.S. Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)
Septic Tank	NDEP-Bureau of Water Pollution Control
Petroleum Contaminated Soils	NV Division of Environmental Protection

3.10	Significant Risk Factors

The author is not aware of any outstanding environmental, reclamation or permitting issues that would impact future exploration work.

The author is unaware of any other significant risk factors that may affect access, title, or right or ability to perform work on the property.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 54 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

4.	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

4.1	Accessibility

The Bullfrog Project is accessible via a 2½ hour (120 mile) drive north of Las Vegas, Nevada on US Highway 95. Las Vegas, the largest city in Nevada, is serviced by a major international airport, and has ample equipment, supplies and services to support many of the Project’s needs. The Project is 4 miles west of the Town of Beatty, Nevada via a paved highway. Beatty has a population of approximately 1,000 and can provide basic housing, services, and supplies. Access around the Project is by a series of reasonably good gravel roads that extend to the open pit mines and most of the significant exploration areas.

4.2	Physiography, Climate and Vegetation

Figure 4-1: Photo of Bullfrog Hills at Rhyolite

The Bullfrog Project is in Western Nevada’s high desert, which receives about 15 cm of precipitation per year, mostly as modest snowfall in the winter and thunderstorms in the summer. Temperatures typically range from -12°C (10°F) in winter to 43.3°C (110°F) in the summer. Due to the relatively mild climate at the Project, the operating season is year-round.

The hills at the Project are covered with sparse low brush including creosote, four-wing saltbush, rabbit brush, and Nevada ephedra. The Project is in the Basin and Range province, but the local topographic relief is only a few hundred feet. Elevations in the main Project areas range from 1,035 m in the valleys to 1,270 m at the peak of Ladd Mountain and 1,320 m at the peak of Montgomery Mountain. Most of the Project is characterized by low hills separated by modest width valleys. Although the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has designated the area as habitat for desert tortoise—a threatened and endangered species—Barrick and others have successfully coped with this designation, and the rough terrain is not conducive for these species. Additional studies may be required to meet requirements regarding the tortoise habitat.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 55 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

4.3	Local Resources and Infrastructure

Augusta Gold Corp. maintains sufficient surface rights to support mining operations, including areas for potential waste disposal, tailings storage, heap leach pads and potential mill sites. The Company recently located additional mining claims and is pursuing the acquisition of other lands in the area. Most claim blocks are contiguous, and the water rights that Barrick held through Bullfrog Mines were indirectly acquired by Augusta Gold Corp. as part of its acquisition of Bullfrog Mines.

The towns of Beatty, Pahrump and Tonopah in Nye County have populations that support mining operations in the area.

Pumping from wells completed near the bottom of the Bullfrog pit is required to access deeper mineralization and could produce most of the Project water needs. Water may also be available from Barrick’s production wells located a few miles south of Highway 374, possibly from the Town of Beatty wellfield, and to a limited extent from deepening the M-S pit.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 56 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

HISTORY

The original Bullfrog deposit was discovered in 1904 by Frank “Shorty” Harris and Ernest Cross. This deposit is located 3.5 miles WSW of the Montgomery Shoshone (M-S) mine and initially had un-recorded but minor production. In 1904 the M-S deposit was discovered, and an underground mine was developed to the 700-foot level. A 300-tpd cyanidation mill was constructed for processing the mined material. The M-S operation recovered 67,000 gold equivalent ounces from 141,000 tons or 0.48 gold ounce/ton (opt) during the period 1907 to 1911. The mine was shut down in late 1910 due to declining grades and operating issues at depth. The adjacent Polaris mine produced 4,900 ounces of gold from 9,500 tons, or an average recovery of 0.52 gold opt.

Through 1911 the District produced 94,000 ounces of gold, but thereafter only minor exploration, development, and production activities occurred until St. Joe American successfully initiated modern exploration programs in 1982. In July 1987, Bond International Gold acquired St. Joe and constructed a nominal 9,000-tpd cyanidation mill in July 1989. In November 1989, Lac Minerals acquired Bond’s interest. In September 1994, Lac was acquired by Barrick. Recorded Project gold production from 1989 to 1999 is summarized in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Bullfrog Project Production

Year	Mined Tons	Gold Rec. OPT	Gold Rec. Oz	Silver Rec. Oz	Source Report
1989	1,025,000	0.060	56,771	35,752	Bond Gold
1990	3,036,000	0.080	220,192	228,647	Bond Gold
1991	2,988,000	0.073	198,863	188,824	Lac Min.
1992	3,173,000	0.111	323,825	313,100	Lac Min.
1993	3,080,000	0.125	354,900	469,899	Lac Min.
1994	3,093,000	0.105	301,000	NR	Barrick
1995	3,110,100	0.062	176,307	NR	Barrick
1996	3,008,600	0.073	205,300	NR	Barrick
1997	3,070,700	0.073	206,571	NR	Barrick
1998	3,213,000	0.070	208,123	NR	Barrick
1999	From Stockpiles		77,000	NR	NV G.S.
Total/Avg.	28,797,400	0.081	2,328,852	2,493,591 est.
	Mine	Mineralized Material Tonnes	g Gold/T Mineralization	Gold Oz Rec.	Years Mined
	BF Pit	18,428,840	2.44	1,346,852	1989 – 1994
	BF UG	2,782,077	8.30	690,000	1992 – 1998
	M-S Pit	3,504,309	2.10	220,000	1994 – 1997
	Bonanza Pit	1,416,715	1.70	72,000	1995 – 1996
		26,131,942	2.98	2,328,852

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 57 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Open pit mine production began in 1989 and underground mine production started in 1992 in the Bullfrog deposit. Bullfrog pit operations were terminated in late 1994, with the underground mine scheduled to produce the remaining Bullfrog reserves. The M-S deposit was open pit mined between 1994 and 1997, during which time the Bonanza Mountain deposit was also mined. Underground operations were shut down in late 1998 due to adverse economic conditions and depletion of remaining reserves. During the last years of mill operations, all remaining low- and high-grade stockpiles, grading +0.5 gold g/t, were blended with underground ores. For reference, gold prices averaged less than $290 per ounce during 1998 and 1999 and hit a multi-year low of $252/oz in August 1999.

By December 2000 Barrick completed all major reclamation and closure requirements, and subsequently removed all mine and processing equipment and buildings. Per Barrick’s permit requirements, the deep north part of the Bullfrog pit has now been backfilled with alluvium to an elevation of 927 meters to cover the gradually rising water table, which currently is at an elevation of 906 m. There has been no backfilling in the M-S pit since it is above the water table. Since 2000 no significant activities in the south half of the Bullfrog Mining District have been performed, other than reclamation by Barrick.

Notably, on October 26, 2020, Augusta acquired Bullfrog Mines LLC (the successor by conversion of Barrick Bullfrog Inc.) from certain wholly owned subsidiaries of Barrick Gold Corporation.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 58 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.	Geological Setting, Mineralisation and Deposit

The following Geological Setting and Mineralization section was in large measure excerpted with permission from a paper presented at the Geological Society of Nevada Symposium “Geology and Ore Deposits of the American Cordillera”, April 10-13, 1995, titled “Geology and Mineralization of the Bullfrog Mine and Vicinity Nye County, Nevada.”

6.1	Regional Geology

Figure 6-1: Regional Setting of the Bullfrog Mine (Eng et al., 1996)

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 59 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

The Bullfrog Project lies in the southwestern portion of the Great Basin along the southern part of the Walker Lane structural belt (Stewart, 1988) and in the southwestern part of the southwestern Nevada Volcanic Field (Noble et al., 1991). The Walker Lane lies along the western margin of the Great Basin and is bounded to the west by the Sierra Nevada province (Figure 6-1). Stewart (1988) divided the north-trending Walker Lane belt into nine blocks characterized by different structural fabric and development. The boundaries between blocks are commonly major strike slip faults or ill-defined transitions of structural fabric. The Bullfrog District lies near the southwestern margin of the Goldfield block. This block shows a general lack of strike slip faults but has locally substantial large-scale Late Tertiary extension faults notably in the Mineral Ridge Weepah Hills area to the north and detachment type faulting in the Bullfrog Hills, and Bare Mountain area to the south.

The Goldfield block is bounded on the west by the northwest-striking right-lateral Death Valley-Furnace Creek fault zone, which is one of the largest strike-slip faults in the Walker Lane with approximately 40-100 km of right-lateral displacement (cf. Stewart, 1967; McKee, 1968), and on the north and south by the east-northeast striking, left-lateral Coaldale fault zone and Mine Mountain-Rock Valley fault zones, respectively. The eastern boundary of the Goldfield block is less well defined; it lies buried under alluvium of Cactus Flat and is further obscured by volcanic centers of the southwest Nevada volcanic field.

The Bullfrog Hills are in the western part of the south-western Nevada volcanic field (Figure 6-1) which encompasses a complex of nested and overlapping calderas that developed between about 15 - 11 Ma (see Byers et al., 1989; Sawyer et al., 1994 and references therein). Two additional volcanic centers formed to the northwest at 9.4 Ma and 7.5 Ma (Noble et al., 1984). Many of the Tertiary volcanic rocks in the Bullfrog Hills came from these volcanic centers which collectively erupted >13,500 km³ of magma. Source areas for some of the older volcanic units (>14 Ma) in the Bullfrog Hills are less well known, whereas the younger small-volume tuffs and lavas (11-10 Ma) appear derived mainly from flow domes within the Bullfrog Hills (Noble et al., 1991; Connors, 1995; Weiss et al., 1995).

Large-scale extension of the Bullfrog Hills in the mid- to late-Miocene led to moderate to steep eastward tilting of rocks along listric normal faults in the hanging wall of a major low angle fault zone, recently referred to as a “detachment fault” (e.g., Hamilton, 1988, Maldonado 1990a, b). Most of the extensional faulting and tilting in the Bullfrog Hills temporally overlapped with volcanism in the southwestern Nevada volcanic field and with eruption of local tuffs and lavas in the Bullfrog Hills. Precious metal mineralization in the southern Bullfrog Hills occurred during the final episodes of large-scale extension and tilting.

6.2	Local and Property Geology

Rocks in the southern Bullfrog Hills consist of lower- and upper-Proterozoic metamorphic rocks, Paleozoic marine sedimentary rocks, and Cenozoic volcanic and sedimentary rocks; Mesozoic sedimentary rocks are absent. Tertiary volcanic and less abundant sedimentary rocks are exceptionally well exposed and record an episode of major crustal extension and volcanism and are the principal hosts to precious metal deposits. The Proterozoic and Paleozoic rocks are only exposed locally, and because they have limited potential for hosting economic precious metal deposits in the area they were not studied in detail and are only discussed briefly here.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 60 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 6-2: Bullfrog District – Stratigraphy and Mineralization

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 61 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 6-3: Cross Section of the Bullfrog Project Area

6.2.1

Cenozoic Rocks

The Tertiary section in the southern Bullfrog Hills is dominated by volcanic rocks, in particular ash-flow tuffs, and subordinate interbedded volcaniclastic and epiclastic sedimentary rocks. These rocks range in age from >14 Ma to about 7.5 Ma in the southern Bullfrog Hills.

6.2.2

Pre-14 Ma Rocks

Pre-14 Ma rocks are a heterogeneous assemblage of variably welded crystal-poor to crystal-rich ash-flow tuffs, conglomerate and fanglomerate, pumiceous gritstones, tuffaceous sedimentary shales (locally carbonaceous and calcareous), and a capping sequence of porphyritic lava flows and associated ruffs. This group of rocks comprises almost half of the Tertiary section (approximately 2.5 km aggregate thickness) and is the least understood because of abrupt facies changes, several nondescript units, and widespread alteration.

6.2.2.1

Basal Fanglomerate and Breccia

The unit is discontinuously exposed along the southwest foot of Ransome Ridge, where it forms a clast-supported fanglomerate or breccia, including cobble- to boulder-size clasts of Paleozoic limestone, quartzite, phyllitic shale, and lesser Tertiary porphyritic volcanic rocks. A coarse-grained feldspathic-lithic sandstone comprises the matrix. The unit is interpreted to mark a basal Tertiary fanglomerate shed from nearby highlands underlain mostly by Paleozoic rocks.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 62 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.2.2.2

Tuffs and Tuffaceous Sedimentary Rocks of Buck Spring

These rocks are the oldest clearly volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks in the district and are exposed in the immediate footwall of the Ransome fault. Overlying these lower units is a compound cooling unit consisting of a lower poorly to moderately welded crystal-lithic ash-flow tuff overlain by a thick densely welded crystal-rich ash-flow tuff. Total thickness of this unit is about 175 m.

6.2.2.3

Tuffs and Tuffaceous Sedimentary Rocks of Sawtooth Mountain

This is also a heterogeneous sequence of rocks, subdivided into the lower and upper tuffs of Sawtooth Mountain following terminology of Maldonado and Hausback (1990). Good outcrops of these rocks are exposed on Ransome Ridge (Figure 6-3) and on Sawtooth Mountain 3 km to the north where the combined thickness is approximately 1 km. The rocks also crop out on the east side of Beatty, but drilling suggests that the units probably thin to the east. The lower tuff of Sawtooth Mountain is dominated by variably reworked crystal-lithic ruffs and interbedded lacustrine and volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks that have an aggregate thickness of 370 m to 550 m. The upper tuff of Sawtooth Mountain underlies much of Ransome Ridge and is approximately 500 m thick. It has a 10-15 m thick poorly welded base that grades abruptly into densely welded ash-flow tuff. The unit is characterized by hackly fracture and is widely bleached and weakly silicified.

6.2.2.4

Thin-Bedded Calcareous to Carbonaceous Shales

These variably carbonaceous to calcareous shales and siltstones are also locally exposed in the footwall of the Bullfrog deposit. The contact with the underlying tuffs of Sawtooth Mountain is poorly exposed; it appears to be an angular unconformity.

6.2.2.5

Latitic Flows and Associated Tuffs and Volcaniclastic Rocks (Tr1g)

This sequence of rocks is best exposed in central Box Canyon and in the foot-wall of the mineralized vein zone at the Bullfrog deposit. This unit consists predominantly of porphyritic lava; variably reworked tuff occurs at the base and middle of the unit. The sequence which has an exposed aggregate thickness of about 400 m, is collectively termed Tr1g by exploration staff at the Bullfrog mine following an earlier stratigraphic division of rhyolite unit one of Ransome et al. (1910). The rock has been mapped and described as quartz latite (Maldonado and Hausback, 1990). The sequence of latitic lavas and associated tuffs rests conformably on underlying carbonaceous shales in Box Canyon. Soft sediment deformation in the shales is common in proximity to the contact. At the Bullfrog mine, carbonaceous shales are locally interbedded with flows of latite.

6.2.2.6

Intrusive Rocks

Intrusive rocks of this age group consist of diabase/diorite dikes, silicic porphyry dikes, and porphyritic quartz latite. The diabase/diorite dikes intrude Proterozoic gneiss and schist south and southwest of the Original Bullfrog mine. They consist of fine- to medium-grained, generally equigranular pyroxene-hornblende diabase or diorite. Unlike the rocks they intrude, the diabase dikes are un-foliated and postdate probable Cretaceous age metamorphism (Hoisch et al., in press). The diabase dikes have not been observed to intrude Tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Silicic porphyry dikes consist of a quartz porphyry and feldspar porphyry. Both rock types contain about 25% phenocrysts of mostly plagioclase and (or) quartz. The dikes are exposed on Ransome Ridge where they intrude the lower tuff of Sawtooth Mountain. The quartz porphyry dikes are typically moderately to strongly propylitized, whereas the feldspar porphyry dikes are relatively fresh suggesting that they may be younger. Porphyritic quartz latite forms dikes that fill faults and small plugs. The rock is only observed intruding porphyritic latite lavas at the top of the pre-14-Ma age group of rocks in central Box Canyon. The rock is lithologically like the intruded latite lavas, but it contains several percent quartz phenocrysts. It may represent the eroded parts of flow domes that fed the latite lavas.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 63 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.2.3

14 to 11 Ma Rocks

This age group consists of rocks ranging from the 14.0-Ma Lithic Ridge Tuff to the 11.45-Ma Ammonia Tanks Tuff. Most of the rocks of this age group are units of rhyolite ash flow tuff erupted from calderas in the southwestern Nevada volcanic field and have a total thickness of approximately 1.5 km in the southern Bullfrog Hills.

6.2.3.1

14.0-Ma Lithic Ridge Tuff (Tr2) and Basalt Flow One (Tbl)

The Lithic Ridge Tuff is prominently exposed in the hills north of Ransome Ridge and on Bullfrog Mountain, where the total thickness is about 270 m. Most of the unit consists of poorly to moderately welded, crystal-lithic rhyolite ash-flow ruff, containing as much as 20% lithic clasts of mainly intermediate to mafic volcanic rocks.

6.2.3.2

Bullfrog Tuff (Tr3)

The Bullfrog Tuff is exposed on Bullfrog Mountain, and more locally on the lower southwest flank of Ladd Mountain and in the Bullfrog open pit. The Bullfrog Tuff is the middle unit of the Crater Flat Group, and is the principal unit exposed in the southern Bullfrog Hills; it corresponds to what Ransome et al. (1910) mapped as rhyolite three. Radiometric age (⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar) for the Bullfrog Tuff is 13.25 ± 0.04 Ma (Sawyer et al., 1994).

6.2.3.3

Tuffs of the Paintbrush Group (Tr4, Tr5)

The Topopah Spring (Tr4) and overlying Tiva Canyon (Tr5) Tuffs comprise the Paintbrush Group in the southern Bullfrog Hills. These tuffs have ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar ages of 12.8 ± 0.03 Ma and 12.7 Ma ± 0.03 Ma, respectively (Sawyer et al., 1994) and broadly correlate with rhyolite units four and five of Ransome et al. (1910). The Topopah Spring Tuff thickens eastward from 25 m on Bullfrog Mountain, to 110 m on the lower western flank of Ladd Mountain. Lithologically, it is a densely welded fine-grained, very crystal-poor ash-flow tuff. The unit contains 1% crystals of feldspar, except in the uppermost 3-5 m where the crystal content increases to 5%. The unit is also shard-rich and fiamme-poor. In many places, the Topopah Spring Tuff is characterized by a vuggy to knobby or pimply appearance due to pronounced spherulitic or lithophysal devitrification.

The Tiva Canyon Tuff (Tr5) is exposed over a wide area from Bullfrog Mountain on the west to Ladd Mountain on the east. It is separated from the underlying Topopah Spring Tuff by a thin layer (<1 m) of reworked tuff. Total thickness of the Tiva Canyon Tuff ranges from about 215 m on Bullfrog Mountain to approximately 120 m along the west side of Ladd Mountain. The Tiva Canyon Tuff consists of two mappable subunits. The lower subunit (Tr5a) consists of a 5 m thick poorly welded devitrified zone that grades upward into densely welded tuff containing dark grey wavy lenticles in its lower part. The lower subunit contains 3-5% crystals of sanidine, and ranges in thickness from about 100 m on Ladd Mountain to 150 m at Bullfrog and Bonanza Mountains. The contact between the lower and upper subunits is marked by a thin (<1.0 m) laterally persistent horizon of spherulitic devitrification. The upper subunit (Tr5b), for most of its extent, forms a lithological distinctive caprock distinguished by 10- 15% crystals of feldspar and conspicuous biotite. The upper subunit of Tr5 ranges in thickness from 70-75 m on Bullfrog Mountain to about 15 m on the west side of Ladd Mountain.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 64 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.2.3.4

Monolithic (Paintbrush Group) Scarp Breccia (Tr5c)

Overlying the upper subunit of the Tiva Canyon Tuff is a newly identified, a restricted avalanche or scarp breccia (Tr5). The unit is locally exposed in the hanging wall of the Rush fault in Box Canyon (Figure 6-3), where it ranges in thickness from 0-30 m and consists of lenses of mostly monolithic clast supported fragments of Topopah Spring and Tiva Canyon Tuffs.

6.2.3.5

Bedded Tuffs and Local Debris Breccias (Tr6)

This distinct unit consists mostly of an interbedded mixture of light-colored, poorly welded crystal-lithic rhyolite ash-flow tuff and tuffaceous sedimentary rocks. Sanidine from an ash-flow tuff layer at the base of the sequence (Huysken et al., 1994) indicating that deposition of these rocks began almost immediately after eruption of the 12.7-Ma Tiva Canyon Tuff. The unit is about 40-50 m thick on Bonanza and Ladd Mountains but thickens rapidly eastward to as much as 200 m in the southwest portion of the Bullfrog open pit. West of Box Canyon, however, Tr6 pinches out and it is absent on Bullfrog Mountain.

6.2.3.6

Basalt Flow Number Two (Tb2)

This basalt flow is exposed on Sutherland Mountain (located between Bonanza Mountain and Box Canyon) where it forms the conspicuous dark layer below the summit. The unit is restricted in area as evidenced by its discontinuous presence just to the east on Bonanza Mountain, and its general absence on Ladd Mountain and in the Bullfrog pit Thickness ranges from 0-18 m.

6.2.3.7

Tuffs of the Timber Mountain Group (Tr7, 8, 9, 10)

This sequence consists of the Rainier Mesa and Ammonia Tanks Tuffs, which have ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar ages of 11.6 Ma ± 0.03 and 11.45 ± 0.03 Ma, respectively (Sawyer et al., 1994). They are well exposed throughout the southern Bullfrog Hills and have an aggregate thickness of about 600 m. The Rainier Mesa Tuff (Tr7, Tr8) consists of a salmon-pink, poorly to moderately welded base (Tr7) that grades upward into a brown purple, densely welded interior that comprises the bulk of the tuff (Tr8). The main densely welded part of the Rainier Mesa Tuff can be sub-divided, in many places, into three subunits—a lower subunit of moderately welded fiamme-rich quartzose tuff, a middle subunit of densely welded quartzose tuff containing 15-20% crystals, and a capping subunit marked by noticeable increase in biotite (l.0-1.5%). Lithics are sparse throughout. The Rainier Mesa Tuff is about 400 m thick on Ladd Mountain and is a main host for mineralization at the Bullfrog deposit.

In most places the Rainier Mesa Tuff is overlain by a massive to vesicular flow of basalt (Tb3). The basalt forms subdued outcrops but is well exposed in the north wall of the Bullfrog open pit, where the unit is 20-25 m thick. At the Montgomery-Shoshone deposit, the basalt flow is generally absent, and a 1-3 m thick basaltic, chlorite-bearing gritstone and reworked tuff horizon is present.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 65 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

The Ammonia Tanks Tuff consists of a poorly welded base (Tr9) that grades upward into light grayish, moderately to densely welded tuff that comprises most of the tuff (Tr10). In and near the Montgomery-Shoshone deposit, a distinctive light green to dark gray vitrophyre is present near the base and is about 5 m thick. The Ammonia Tanks Tuff has a maximum exposed thickness of about 250 m.

6.2.3.8

Intrusive Rocks

Intrusive rocks of this age group are volumetrically minor in the southern Bullfrog Hills and consist of crystal-poor rhyolite and basalt dikes. The rhyolite occurs as small bodies intruding latite lava (Tr1g) and the Topopah Spring Tuff (Tr4) near Box Canyon. The rhyolite is crystal-poor to aphyric and is typically finely flow laminated. Dikes of basalt are the most widespread intrusive rock.

6.2.4

Post 11 Ma to 7.6 Ma Rocks

This age group includes a basal flow of basalt overlain by epiclastic breccias and conglomerates, a thick sequence of tuffs and lavas, and locally capping gravels and intercalated ash- flow tuff. The thick sections of tuffs and lavas have been referred to as the tuffs and lavas of the Bullfrog Hills (Noble et al., 1991; Connors, 1995; Weiss et al., 1995) and as the rhyolite tuffs and lavas of Rainbow Mountain (Maldonado and Hausback 1990).

6.2.4.1

Basalt Flow Number Four (Tb4)

This basalt forms subdued exposures north and south of highway 374 south of Burton Mountain (Figure 6-2). There, the basalt has an exposed true thickness of about 200 m, but it is thinner elsewhere. A K-Ar age of 10.3 ± 0.4 Ma is reported for this unit (Marvin et al., 1989; Maldonado and Hausback, 1990). A lithological similar basalt flow at the same stratigraphic position in Fluorspar Canyon east of Beatty yielded a K-Ar age of 10.7 ± 0.2 Ma (Monsen et al., 1992). In the southern Bullfrog Hills, angular discordance between the basalt and underlying Ammonia Tanks Tuff (Tr10) is probably minor (<5°).

6.2.4.2

Epiclastic Rocks and Breccias

This unit overlies basalt Tb4 and is best exposed north of highway 374 about 1.5 km west of Beatty. These rocks weather into conspicuous pale green to reddish pink northwest-trending hogbacks. Ransome et al. (1910) designated this sequence as tuff unit one (t1), and Maldonado and Hausback (1990) mapped the unit as sedimentary rocks and tuff. The unit thins to the northwest and is absent along the west base of Rainbow Mountain. Near the Mayflower and Pioneer mines in the northern Bullfrog Hills, this sedimentological diverse section of rocks was mapped as an early phase of a debris flow sequence (Conners et al., in Conners, 1995). In areas west of Beatty, the unit is comprised of thinly bedded tuffaceous shale, siltstone, and local pebbly conglomerate, coarse fanglomerates, and mega-breccia slide blocks. Dips of bedding decrease upward through the unit from 45-50° at the base to about 30-35° at the top. Breccia deposits in the unit are heterolytic to monolithic with clasts ranging from <1 m to several meters across. In some breccia deposits, clasts rest in a muddy matrix suggesting deposition into a shallow lake from nearby over-steepened slopes. Stratigraphically lower breccia deposits contain clasts derived from underlying basalt flow four, whereas higher breccia deposits contain clasts from the Rainier Mesa and Ammonia Tanks Tuffs. A megalithic block (-100 m long) of a portion of the Rainier Mesa Tuff and underlying bedded tuffs (Tr6) occurs near the top of the unit just north of highway 374. The upward change of breccia clasts in the unit suggests progressive uplift and erosion of the source rocks from which the breccia deposits were derived.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 66 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.2.5

10.6-10.0 Ma Rainbow Mountain Sequence (Trm, Tr11-16 and other units)

This sequence is well exposed on Rainbow Mountain and nearby Black Peak. Total thickness of section exposed in these areas is about 760 m. New ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar ages from this study indicate most of the sequence was deposited between 10.6 and 10.3 Ma. Unlike the ash-flow tuffs of the 14-11 Ma group which came from calderas to the east, these deposits are locally derived from scattered plugs and volcanic domes in the Bullfrog Hills.

6.2.5.1

Basalt, Gravels of Sober-up Gulch, and Stonewall Flat Tuff

These rocks are exposed mainly in the east-central and northern Bullfrog Hills and are essentially flat lying. The gravels of Sober-up Gulch are loosely consolidated alluvial deposits containing well-rounded pebbles and boulders of pre· dominantly locally derived Tertiary volcanic rocks. The Spearhead Member of the Stonewall Flat Tuff is locally interbedded with the gravels of Sober-up Gulch (Noble et al., 1991) and has a ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar age of 7.61 ± 0.3 Ma (Hausback et al., 1990).

6.2.5.2

Intrusive Rocks

Few intrusive rocks of this age group occur in the southern Bullfrog Hills. However, rhyolitic plugs and domes are common in the central and northern Bullfrog Hills where they appear to mark the sources of the flows and ash-flow tuffs of the Rainbow Mountain sequence (Maldonado and Hausback, 1990; Noble et al., 1991; Weiss et al., 1995). They are sparsely to moderately porphyritic and contain phenocrysts of quartz, plagioclase, sanidine, and accessory biotite.

6.2.5.3

Timing of Tertiary Deformational Events

The oldest Tertiary structural event is recorded by the basal Tertiary fanglomerate and breccia, which consists of mainly Paleozoic clasts, but also includes Tertiary volcanic rocks. Uplift and erosion that produced these localized deposits of fanglomerate and breccia took place prior to 15 Ma as indicated from previously discussed stratigraphic relationships. Continued episodic structural events between about 15 Ma and 14 Ma are indicated by local angular unconformities, and by variable thicknesses and abrupt lateral fades changes of rock units laid down during this time. East of the district on the lower northeast flank of Bare Mountain, Fridrich, 1999 documents a major angular unconformity between a round stone conglomerate and overlying carbonaceous sedimentary rocks of Joshua Hollow (Monsen et al., 1992), indicating that tectonic activity was widespread in the region prior to 14 Ma.

A significant episode of faulting occurred at about 12.7 Ma as evidenced by (1) fault scarp breccia and coarse conglomerate that directly overlies the 12.7 Ma Tiva Canyon Tuff and underlies the inferred 12.7 Ma base of Tr6 in the hanging wall of the Rush fault, (2) absence of Tonopah Spring and Tiva Canyon Tuffs in the Bullfrog pit and presence instead of volcaniclastic debris breccia whose clasts consist of those units and of older rocks, and (3) a modest angular unconformity (10-20°) between the Tiva Canyon Tuff and overlying bedded tuffs in the lower and middle parts of Tr6 on the west side of Ladd Mountain. This episode of faulting appears to have been quite widespread as evidenced by a major angular unconformity between the Paintbrush and Timber Mountain Groups in upper Fluorspar Canyon (Monsen et al., 1992) and by the presence of landslide breccias intersected in drill holes along the west side of Crater Flat (the valley east of Bare Mountain) that lie between the Paintbrush and Timber Mountain Groups in the hanging wall of the Bare Mountain fault (Fredrich, 1999). The next episode of faulting in the southern Bullfrog Hills is chronicled by a syntectonic sedimentary unit that lies between a 10.7-Ma basalt flow (Tb4) and the lowest part of the Rainbow Mountain sequence dated at 10.56 Ma. During this time 15-20° of eastward tilting occurred. Most of the Rainbow Mountain sequence is tilted uniformly about 30° east. Although negligible differences in tilting are evident, episodes of faulting are recorded by intercalated lenses of fanglomerate and breccia that punctuate the Rainbow Mountain sequence. Between the latite, dated at 10.33 Ma, and the capping quartz-bearing latite, the tilt decreases 10-15° indicating a renewed phase of tilting between 10.3 and about 10 Ma. The final 15° of tilting occurred between about 10 Ma and the time of deposition of an un-tilted basalt dated at 8.1 Ma in the western Bullfrog Hills (Marvin et al., 1989).

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 67 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.3	District Geology

The District is located in the southern Walker Lane trend within brittle upper plate volcanic host rocks that were severely broken from dominant detachment faulting and associated dip-slip and strike-slip displacements. Epithermal solutions permeating the broken host rocks in the Bullfrog, M-S and Bonanza areas precipitated micron-sized but relatively high-grade gold within major quartz-calcite veins and disseminated gold in associated stock works. The veins contain very little gangue minerals other than quartz, calcite and manganese oxides, the latter of which contributes to low silver recoveries. The Montgomery system occurs on the east side of the M-S pit, strikes northerly and dips 70-85° west. The Polaris fault occurs on the west side of the pit, strikes nearly due north and dips 50-60° west.

Detachment-related structures and mineral trends are projected to extend onto the Company’s lands to the north and east of the M-S open pit and deep drill holes intercepted thick zones of lower-grade mineralization that are 300 meters below the existing pit. Prior to oxidation the veins contained less than 2% sulfides, the low content of which is favorable with respect to processing and environmental concerns. Surface geology is shown in Figure 6-4.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 68 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 6-4: District Geology Map — Each Section is 1.6 km, or 1 Mile Square

6.4	Mineralization and Veining

The gold mineralization of the southern Bullfrog Hills is contained in epithermal quartz-calcite veins and stockworks. The main host rocks are middle Miocene volcanic rocks ranging from latite lavas (Tr1g, >14 Ma) to rhyolitic Ammonia Tanks Tuff (Tr10, 11.45 Ma).

6.4.1

Bullfrog Mineralization

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 69 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

In the Bullfrog mineralization, the high-grade zones do not comprise obvious discrete plunging ore shoots. Instead, high-grade ore zones are developed along the plane of the MP fault/vein, within 10-20° of the dip of the fault. The overall geometry of these zones is that of elongate lenses in the plane of the fault, with long dimensions that strike roughly north-south at a low angle of plunge. The highest gold grades roughly coincided with the oxidation-reduction boundary in the deposit and the pre-mining water table, and modest localized supergene enrichment of precious metals near this boundary is suggested.

6.4.1.1

Ore Controls

The zoning patterns of ore grades, veins, and altered rock indicate that the MP-UP fault system was the main ore control and fluid pathway for the Bullfrog mineralization. Minor local changes in the strike and (or) dip of these faults created dilatant zones aiding deposition of gold, particularly some of the higher-grade ore. Northeast-trending faults were also an important control, acting as secondary fluid pathways and providing additional ground preparation. This is indicated by changes in ore character and geometry where these faults intersect the MP-UP fault system. As in most epithermal systems, physicochemical conditions limit precious metal ore deposition to a particular vertical interval. In the case of the Bullfrog mineralization, the apparent maximum extent is 250-300 m, between about 1,075 and 775 m in elevation. Supergene and (or) hypogene oxidation may have also aided in local enrichment of ore and is supported by the location of higher gold grades near the redox boundary and the pre-mining water table. The common occurrence of visible gold (electrum) in limonitic pyrite casts is also evidence for the concentration of gold during oxidation. However, unlike porphyry copper deposits, the enrichment and redeposition of precious metals was probably over the scale of millimeters or micrometers (Castor and Sjoberg, 1993).

6.4.2

Montgomery-Shoshone Mineralization

The main host for the Montgomery-Shoshone deposit is the lowermost part of unit Tr10 (Ammonia Tanks Tuff, 11.45 Ma). The uppermost portion of unit Tr8 (Rainier Mesa Tuff, 11.6 Ma) is a less important host, along with Tb3, basalt dikes, and (or) unit Tb4. Basalt flow Tb4 appears to have acted as a barrier to ore fluids (Jorgensen et al., 1989), as virtually no mineralized rock occurs stratigraphically above unit Tr10 in the rhyolite tuffs and lavas of the Rainbow Mountain sequence, even though these rocks are all pre-mineral in age. The best marker bed is Tb3, which at Montgomery-Shoshone consists mainly of a 1-3 m thick irregular zone of basaltic, chlorite-bearing volcanic gritstone and re-worked tuff; a thin irregular basalt flow is less common at this horizon. The base of Tr10 is often a useful marker and consists of a light greenish or dark gray zone of more densely welded and vitrophyric tuff; the vitrophyric portion is usually less than 5-6 m thick.

Altered rocks are similar to those at the Bullfrog deposit, although rocks are more strongly clay altered and oxidized at Montgomery-Shoshone. Unlike at Bullfrog, carbon-pyrite is absent at depth. In the hanging wall of the deposit, rocks of the Rainbow Mountain sequence are argillized and bleached and contain 1-2% fine-grained disseminated pyrite. Wall rocks adjacent to veins and stockwork zones are typically flooded with silica-adularia, especially in Tr8 (Rainier Mesa Tuff) in the footwall of the deposit. Such silicified and adularized rock is absent, however, in the Rainbow Mountain sequence. Basalts of Tb4 in the hanging wall of the deposit are mostly unaltered, except along their margins near faults where they are argillized and clay altered.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 70 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

There are two key structures for controlling mineralization at M-S: the Montgomery and Polaris faults. At the northern end of the deposit, these faults are about 100-150m apart. The Montgomery fault occurs on the east and strikes northerly and dips 10-85 degrees west. In the southern part of the deposit the fault strikes about N30-40 degrees east. The Montgomery is actually composed of a series of several subparallel faults developed over a width of about 25-35 meters, which collectively has about 70-80 meters of normal displacement. The Polaris fault strikes almost due north for most of its extent (about 500 m), and dips about 50-60 degrees west, and has slightly less displacement than the Montgomery.

The Contact fault is a major structure that bounds the mineralization on the north side of the deposit. The fault is composed of a series of splays developed over a width of 100-200 meters, which has an average strike of N60 degrees E and dips of 60 degrees NW. Net stratigraphic offset across the Contact fault zone is on the order of 400-600 meters. In the upper portion of the deposit (above 1200m), the Contact fault is postmineral in age, as both the Polaris and Montgomery zones are clearly terminated, and fault gouge and breccia contain clasts of crushed vein. In the lower portion of the deposit the, Ransome (1910) described and mapped the “contact vein” which is developed along the fault as well as narrow veins in the footwall. Based on these observations, the Contact fault is interpreted to be pre-mineral in age but was later reactivated.

6.4.2.1

Mineralization

Mineralized zones at Montgomery-Shoshone consists mainly of stockwork quartz-calcite veins forming 5-35% of the rock, with less abundant narrow irregular quartz-calcite-Mn oxide veins generally <1-3 m wide. Many of the textures that typify the high-grade veins at the Bullfrog deposit—such as strong banding and chaotic vein breccia—are absent, and it appears that the main-stage event was not as well developed. The widest zones of mineralization developed are along the Montgomery zone north of about 9,900N, and may locally be as much as 60-80 m wide. However, individual mineralized zones with >0.5 - 1 g/t Au in many portions of the deposit are commonly only 10-30 m wide, and the continuity of mineralization down dip and along strike is relatively poor.

Ransome (1910) noted that most of the higher-grade veins were localized within about 45 m of the basalt (Tb4) at the Contact fault, and that the veins decreased in grade and thickness below the 300 level (1,170 m). The veins were explored in these workings to about 1,050 m in elevation (700 level). The structures and veins continue below the 1,125 m elevation level, but as at the Bullfrog deposit, the grade and thickness of the mineralized zones uniformly diminish, with much of the rock containing only 0.1-0.5 g/t Au. However, deep exploration drilling encountered thick intervals of mineralized rock about 200-250 m in elevation below the current pit; the controls for this mineralized zone are unclear and further evaluation continues.

The veins generally increase in calcite content along strike to the south, as well as down dip, and this corresponds to a general decrease in the grade of mineralized rock; a similar change was noted by Ransome (1910). The Polaris vein zone exposed in the south pit high wall, consists of friable and leached, gray-brown quartz pseudomorphs after calcite, with minor Mn oxides. These types of veins characterize much of the southern half of the deposit and are uniformly of low grade or below pit cutoff (0.50 g/t Au).

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 71 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

6.4.3

Bonanza Mineralization

Primary host rocks for mineralization at Bonanza Mountain are unites Tr5b (upper most Tiva Canyon Tuff), Tr6 and Tr7 (lower most Rainier Mesa Tuff). The majority (>60%) of the mineralization is between the contact of Tr5b and Tr6, which suggests some stratigraphic control, with fluid migration outward from the main mineralized faults along this permeable horizon. The wall rocks in the vicinity of the deposit are silica flooded and adularized, especially Tr6 and Tr5a.

The rocks at Bonanza Mountain are cut by a complex series of normal faults, all with relative minor displacements. The two primary structures are the Hobo and Scepter faults, which together define a narrow, northerly-trending graben structure 700-100 meters wide. The Hobo fault defines the east side of the graben, is better mineralized and dips 55 degrees west. Displacement on the Hobo is as much as 90-100 meters. The Scepter bounds the west side of the graben and has as much as 50-100 meters of displacement. The Scepter dips mainly east at about 75-85 degrees.

6.4.3.1

Mineralization

Mineralization at Bonanza Mountain consists of irregular quartz-calcite-Mn veins and stockworks emplaced along faults. The veins are usually less than 5-10 meters wid. By volume, the bulk of the mineralization (<75%) is contained in stockwork with an average vein density between 5-20 percent. The quartz is typically fine-grained and may be locally interlayered with medium-grained calcite. Overall, the veins are similar to those of the Bullfrog mineralization, although cockscomb and drusy quartz, replacement of bladed calcite by quartz and banded quartz are less common.

Fine-grained gold as much as 0.1-0.2 mm has been observed in some of the highest-grade historic drill cuttings and was associated with limonite after pyrite. Very local high-grade values (15-30 g/t) were found in a few historic drill holes but are difficult to correlate. The higher grades at Bonanza extend for a strike length of 300 meters. Two to three discrete sub-parallel mineralized zones are associated with the Hobo and Scepter structures, these individual zones are as much as 15-20 meters wide in true thickness. Veins and continuity of mineralization grades are very erratic – hence the area was historically drilled on 25-meter centers.

The Bonanza Mountain and Bullfrog areas are geochemically similar. Bonanza Mountain has a very low Ag:Au ratio averaging around 1:1. Epithermal Au pathfinder elements are also very low, although similar to Bullfrog and Montgomery-Shoshone, preliminary data suggest that As and Mo may be weekly anomalous in the silica-adularia flooded wall rocks adjacent to the veins. The age of mineralization at Bonanza Mountain is probably about 10 Ma on adularia-gold mineralization from the Rush fault, about 1 km northwest of Bonanza Mountain.

6.5

Deposit

The gold deposits of the southern Bullfrog Hills are contained in epithermal quartz-calcite veins and stockworks. The main host rocks are middle Miocene volcanic rocks ranging from latite lavas (Tr1g, >14 Ma) to rhyolitic Ammonia Tanks Tuff (Tr10, 11.45 Ma). The veins contain little gangue other than quartz, calcite, and manganese oxides; adularia is present in trace to minor amounts, but it is usually microscopic. Fluorite and barite were noted during the development of the Bullfrog deposit (Jorgensen et al., 1989), but these minerals were only rarely observed during mining. The veins are commonly banded and crustiform, and although now mostly oxidized, originally contained minor amounts (<1-2%) of sulfide minerals, principally pyrite. The deposits fit the “adularia-sericite” type classification of Heald et al. (1987), although adularia and sericite (or illite) are only minor or trace constituents in the veins.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 72 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

The deposits would also fit the “low-sulfidation” or “low-sulfur” classification (Sillitoe, 1993; Bonham, 1988) due to the impoverishment of sulfides and sulfates. The veins and stockworks fill open spaces and are often sheeted. They are hosted and controlled by northerly striking normal faults with modest to large displacements (50-1000 m), and moderate to steep dips (35-85°). Northeast-striking faults are also locally important but are generally less mineralized. Within and adjacent to the veins and stockworks, the volcanic wall rocks are pervasively replaced by very-fine-grained hydrothermal quartz and adularia, and, where unoxidized, may contain 1-3% disseminated pyrite. In proximity to the deposits, clay minerals are not especially pronounced, except in poorly welded portions of the ash-flow tuffs, and in post- mineral fault gouge or oxidized zones.

Latite lavas (Tr1g) in the footwall of the orebody are altered to a propylitic alteration assemblage, characterized in hand specimen by thin fracture fillings or coatings of chlorite, calcite, and quartz, with disseminated or fracture filling pyrite. Petrographic and lithogeochemical data indicate that these rocks become strongly hydrothermally altered as the orebody is approached, with additions of potassium, silica, and rubidium; secondary albite also replaces plagioclase phenocrysts (Lac unpublished data; Weiss et al., 1995). Carbon-pyrite is also present in the footwall lavas; the carbon usually occurs as sooty coatings on fractures, but also locally occurs as glassy carbon in cavities. Laboratory studies show that the carbon is an organic, amorphous phase between bitumen and graphite (Allison, 1993), and it was probably remobilized by hydrothermal solutions from underlying carbonaceous Tertiary sedimentary or Paleozoic rocks.

Stratigraphic offset across the MP and UP fault zone decreases from about 1,000 m at the north end of the pit where the two faults converge, to about 600-800 m at the south end of the pit. As the Southern Bullfrog Hills fault is approached, offset decreases to about 500 m or less; farther south, the faults flatten and merge into or are cut off by the Southern Bullfrog Hills fault. Deep drilling on the southwest flank of Ladd Mountain indicates that the MP-UP faults become listric down dip, flattening to about 25°. Drilling in this area also suggests that the faults merge into or are cut off by the Southern Bullfrog Hills fault. Overall, the MP-UP fault system appears to have a scissored normal displacement, steepening to the north away from the Southern Bullfrog Hills fault, with generally increasing amounts of displacement as far north as the Montgomery South faults.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 73 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

7.	Exploration

Despite the long history of drilling and mining at the Bullfrog Project, there is still significant exploration potential. Mineralized zones remain open at the three historically mined areas and there are several unexplored areas within the property that exhibit hydrothermal alteration and structural setting to host high-grade deposits. Figure 7-1 highlights the primary exploration targets on the property.

Figure 7-1: Exploration and Mining Targets at the Bullfrog Project

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 74 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

7.1

Bullfrog

The Bullfrog area has two primary target areas; Mystery Hills and Ladd Mountain.

7.1.1

Mystery Hills

Mystery Hills is located on the east side of the Bullfrog deposit in the footwall of the Middle Plate Fault (MP) which is the main mineralizing structure. The MP fault appears to be the source of epithermal solutions that mineralized the MHF. The extensions of the MH mineralized fault down-dip and along strike have good potential for adding a large volume of low-grade mineralization to the project. Drilling in the target area has intercepted broad zones of mineralization (>100 meters grading 0.3 g/t) which outcrops on surface and extends at depth several hundred meters. This zone was targeted in 2020 and 2021 drilling conducted by Augusta Gold. The zone remains open along strike and at depth and warrants additional drilling. (See Figure 7-1)

7.1.2

Ladd Mountain

Historic drilling suggests there are multiple mineralized structures east and along strike of the existing open pit. These mineralized structures have the potential to host narrow HG veins with adjacent low-grade zones of stockwork mineralization. Discovery and delineation of mineralized material under Ladd Mountain has the potential to add a significant volume of mineralized material to the current resource and lower the strip ratio.

7.2	Montgomery-Shoshone Area

The M-S area has three discernible target areas that have the potential to add additional resources to the area.

7.2.1

Polaris Vein

The Polaris vein and associated stockwork is one of the two primary hosts of mineralization at M-S. Historically, the northern portion of the vein was extensively drilled and mined but the southern portion remains open along strike and down-dip. Augusta Gold drilling in 2021 targeted the southern extension confirming the mineralization extents to the south. Additional drilling will be required to further delineate the mineralization. Highlights from the 2021 drilling are shown in Table 7-4.

7.2.2

East Zone

East of the M-S pit is an area that is 700 meters by 1,300 meters and only has one shallow historic hole for which no data is available. Only a portion of this area may be prospective, but additional study and exploration drilling is warranted. Lac’s 1994 map shows a hole south of this area that had anomalous mineralization (BB-9 with no data available), but holes edh-18 and -19 appear to have tested this to the south.

7.2.3

Deep Potential

Deep intercepts were encountered in four of ten deep angle holes drilled by Barrick below the M-S pit. The depths and grades of these intercepts are not foreseeably economic, but they demonstrate that additional gold occurs in a potentially large epithermal system with the potential for expansion and possible high-grade discovery. In this regard, there is no deep drilling northwest of holes RDH-733, 717, 734 and 778, and no drilling south of holes RDH-732, 777 and 779.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 75 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

These deep intercepts could be part of a feeder zone that created the upper M-S mineralization and may range from a limited area, or possibly extend along strike as well as up- and down-dip. A potential mineral inventory cannot be estimated in the deep zone based on the limited amount of drilling completed to date. Three of the deep holes also had significant shallow intercepts in the Polaris vein/stock-works (52 meters of 1.35 g/t, 12 m of 1.14 g/t and 4.6 m of 6.03 g/t).

Holes RDH-779 and RDH-777 were barren below 900 meters elevation, thereby limiting the down-dip extension of mineralization in RDH-732, but there are not enough holes to fully assess this deep zone.

7.3	Bonanza Mountain

The Bonanza Mountain pit area is located 2 km west of the Bullfrog deposit. Historically the area likely produced about 10,000 ounces in the early 1900’s from several underground mines. Barrick’s open pit mining began in late 1995 with a resource of 1.3 million tonnes averaging 1.8 g/t, based on a 0.5 g/t cutoff grade and a strip ratio of 4:1. Most of the mineralization occurs in the Hobo, Lester and Sceptre veins, which had limited widths of adjacent mineralization. Notwithstanding, the Bonanza Mountain area has several veins that have not been thoroughly drilled to the north and south. An estimate of mineralization around the Bonanza pit was not prepared for this report. The Company recently leased three patents and staked two claims to cover an exploration target in the west Bonanza Mountain area; further study is required before a drill program can be proposed.

7.4

Gap

The Gap area is located approximately 2.5 km northeast of the M-S pit. This area has been vastly under explored and has a prospective structural setting with a strong alteration signature. There are multiple areas of interest at the Gap.

The main splays of the Donovan fault skirt around the Gap on the western side. Proceeding east from the Donovan fault, which forms the western boundary of the Gap area, the rocks are cut by several steep north-south trending faults with minor offset. Silicification is locally strong along these faults, and small stockworks of translucent banded quartz +/- pyrite are rarely present. These faults are commonly strongly oxidized, with significant hematite, and locally moderate manganese oxide present. A large damage zone, with pervasive clay alteration and “pods” of strongly silicified rock is present within the tuff sequence. This damage zone has a roughly linear trend to the northwest.

A second target area is roughly centered on the Contact fault to the north-east and comprises a wide fault zone. This target area is a north-south trending strip of land roughly paralleling the Contact fault. The Contact fault is a major district scale structure. It is strongly brecciated in places, and pervasively silicified along its eastern side. In general, there are three structural trends identified in this area: major north-south trending steeply dipping normal faults which host some small quartz veins, minor east-west trending normal faults which host some small quartz veins, and moderately sized northwest-southeast trending moderately dipping normal faults that appear to bridge the Donovan and Contact faults. Faults are weakly to moderately stained with hematite and pyrolusite and can host discontinuous flow-banded quartz veins with colloform texture.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 76 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Overall, the Gap target demonstrates strong oxidization, clay alteration, hydrothermally breccia and pervasive silicification, with some ashy beds within the tuffs being entirely altered to chalcedony. Flow banded rhyolites exhibit strong chalcedonic silica alteration. Local patches of tuffs appear to have been particularly susceptible to silicification due to porosity and have locally been altered to residual vuggy silica.

7.5

Drilling

Between 1983 and 1996, 1,262 reverse circulation (RC) and core holes totaling 253,255 meters were drilled in the Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone, and Bonanza areas by Barrick and three predecessor companies who conducted sampling and assaying using customary industry standards. Between 2020 and early 2021, Augusta drilled 30 RC holes and 39 core holes for a total of 19,225 meters, average core recovery for Augusta drilling in 2020 – 2021 was 89%. These drill statistics are summarized in Table 7-1 and operators are listed in Table 7-2. Tom John, Geological Consultant to Augusta Gold, and Barrick Bullfrog’s former Exploration Manager from 1995 through 1997, has presented information on the quality control of the data collected under his supervision as well as the data obtained from the exploration departments of St. Joe, Bond International Gold, and Lac Minerals.

Augusta Goldinitially obtained a partial electronic/digital drill hole database, but eventually scanned Barrick’s complete paper drill-hole database stored in Elko, Nevada. These scanned files included assay certificates, geologic logs, surface and down-hole survey data and notes, and maps prepared by site geologists. The data missing from the partial electronic/digital files was used to create a complete digital data on 1,262 holes in the Bullfrog area.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 77 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 7-1: Drilling Totals by Type

Year	Total Drilling		Coring		Reverse Circulation
Year	Holes	Meters	Holes	Meters	Holes	Meters
1983	6	975	6	975	0	0
1984	37	3,560		0	37	3,560
1985	3	303		0	3	303
1986	29	3,364		0	29	3,364
1987	163	29,479	3	732	163	28,747
1988	321	66,325	32	6,121	321	60,204
1989	71	12,285		0	71	12,285
1990	154	37,114	33	3,676	154	33,438
1991	79	22,954	42	3,627	79	19,327
1992	23	4,907		0	23	4,907
1993	9	387		0	9	387
1994	210	31,362	9	1,412	210	29,951
1995	99	22,370	3	248	99	22,122
1996	58	15,254	19	3,329	45	11,924
2020	26	4,405	1	502	25	3,903
2021	43	14,820	38	12,749	5	2,071
Total	1,331	269,864	186	33,371	1,273	236,493

* NOTE: Many core holes were pre-collared using RC drilling and a few included deeper RC intervals.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 78 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 7-2: Active Years by Operator

Operator	Years Active
St. Joe American	August 1983 - July 1987
Bond International Gold	July 1987 - November 1989
Lac Minerals	November 1989 - September 1994
Barrick Bullfrog Inc.	September 1994 - 1999

7.5.1

2020 - 2021 Drilling

Twenty-seven RC holes and twenty-two core holes were drilled by Augusta Gold in 2020 – early 2021 and were available for inclusion in the June resource model update. An additional three RC holes and seventeen core holes were drilled later in 2021 and were available for the end-of-year model update presented in this technical report. The purpose of this drilling program was to further define resources and ultimate limits of the Bullfrog and Montgomery-Shoshone pits. Two holes were drilled at the Paradise Ridge Target. Table 7-3 lists the location, azimuth, dip, and total depth of each of the 2020 – 2021 holes and Figure 7-2 through Figure 7-4 show the location of the holes drilled by Augusta Gold.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 79 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 7-2: Plan Map of Drill Hole Collars

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 80 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 7-3: Location and Depth of 2020 - 2021 Holes

Hole ID	Easting	Northing	Elevation	Azimuth	Dip	Total Depth
BM-20-1	10,040	9,995	1,117	135	-70	68.58
BM-20-2	9,979	9,967	1,120	100	-57	89.92
BM-20-3	9,823	9,868	1,139	130	-53	120.4
BH-20-4	9,450	8,910	1,143	90	-60	190.49
BH-20-5	9,431	8,875	1,144	90	-60	220.98
BH-20-6	9,409	8,839	1,138	90	-60	227.08
BH-20-7	9,419	8,790	1,128	90	-60	71.63
BH-20-7A	9,416	8,787	1,128	90	-65	71.63
BH-20-8	9,560	8,864	1,128	90	-57	141.73
BH-20-9	9,491	8,764	1,119	90	-80	193.55
BH-20-10	9,449	8,723	1,116	90	-60	199.64
BH-20-11	9,530	8,764	1,127	90	-60	199.64
BH-20-12	9,575	8,737	1,127	120	-60	138.68
BH-20-13	9,580	8,613	1,110	285	-70	169.16
BH-20-14	9,584	8,615	1,111	50	-54	120.4
BH-20-15	9,552	8,703	1,117	0	-90	163.07
BH-20-16	9,609	8,797	1,123	90	-60	120.4
BH-20-17	9,656	8,768	1,122	90	-60	114.3
BH-20-18	9,611	8,548	1,109	0	-90	105.16
BH-20-19	9,682	8,494	1,104	90	-60	105.16
BM-20-20	9,805	10,048	1,223	135	-58	211.84
BM-20-21	9,952	10,103	1,226	155	-60	217.93
BM-20-22	10,026	10,122	1,226	155	-57	187.45
BP-20-23	11,560	8,102	1,110	65	-60	187.45
BP-20-24	11,560	8,099	1,110	135	-60	266.7
BFG20-MS01	9,858	10,072	1,223	114	-55	502.01
BFG21-MS02	9,858	10,072	1,223	114	-70	626.06

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 81 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Hole ID	Easting	Northing	Elevation	Azimuth	Dip	Total Depth
BFG21-MS03	9,783	9,851	1,143	115	-80	245.67
BFG21-MS04	9,954	9,632	1,270	115	-57	498.96
BFG21-MS05	10,139	10,142	1,226	114	-60	648.61
BFG21-MS06	9,954	9,632	1,270	115	-45	449.88
BFG21-MS07	10,139	10,142	1,226	114	-85	558.09
BFG21-MS08	9,936	9,581	1,273	115	-65	432.21
BFG21-MS09	9,792	9,644	1,247	115	-45	392.28
BFG21-MS10	10,054	10,132	1,228	114	-85	572.11
BFG21-MS11	9,792	9,644	1,247	115	-65	161.24
BFG21-MS12	9,670	9,707	1,201	115	-45	295.05
BFG21-MS13	9,714	9,927	1,205	114	-45	350.22
BFG21-MS14	9,669	9,708	1,201	115	-65	230.43
BFG21-MS15	9,738	9,558	1,266	115	-45	258.47
BFG21-MS16	9,714	9,927	1,205	114	-65	299.92
BFG21-MH17	9,670	8,496	1,104	90	-45	204.83
BFG21-MS18	10,016	9,983	1,117	90	-45	373.38
BFG21-MS19	9,816	10,017	1,214	114	-70	365.15
BFG21-MS20	9,725	9,609	1,259	115	-45	288.95
BFG21-MH21	9,608	8,555	1,110	90	-65	346.86
BFG21-MS22	9,959	9,943	1,123	114	-45	373.38
BFG21-MS23	9,948	10,099	1,219	155	-70	360.58
BFG21-MS24	9,751	9,729	1,218	115	-45	380.39

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 82 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 7-3: Drilling in the Montgomery-Shoshone Area from the 2020 - 2021 Drill Campaign

Figure 7-4: Drilling in the Bullfrog Area from the 2020 - 2021 Drill Campaign

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 83 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 7-4: Drilling Results from the 2020 - 2021 Program

Hole ID	Interval in meters			Au	Ag	Zone
Hole ID	From	To	Length	g/t	g/t	Zone
BM-20-1	0	41	41	0.42	2.26	MS Vein Zone
includes	0	23	23	0.55	1.95	MS Vein Zone

BM-20-2	0	26	26	0.33	1.04	MS Vein Zone
includes	0	20	20	0.37	1.15	MS Vein Zone

BM-20-3	49	59	11	0.26	0.33	MS Vein Zone

BH-20-4	76	81	5	0.35	1.54	Mystery Hills
BH-20-4	85	119	34	0.27	0.6	Mystery Hills
BH-20-4	157	184	27	0.32	0.93	Mystery Hills

BH-20-5	101	108	8	0.26	1.22	Mystery Hills
BH-20-5	117	168	50	0.24	0.49	Mystery Hills
BH-20-5	175	209	34	0.58	0.82	Mystery Hills

BH-20-6	90	200	110	0.41	0.61	Mystery Hills
includes	120	146	26	0.91	0.91	Mystery Hills

BH-20-7	46	53	8	3.23	3.36	Mystery Hills

BH-20-8	35	40	5	1.13	0.21	Mystery Hills
BH-20-8	47	53	6	0.38	0.25	Mystery Hills

BH-20-9	23	29	6	0.53	0.91	Mystery Hills
BH-20-9	37	43	6	0.31	0.45	Mystery Hills

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 84 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BH-20-9	46	53	8	0.31	0.33	Mystery Hills
BH-20-9	104	195	91	0.33	0.32	Mystery Hills

BH-20-10	41	55	14	2.42	2.19	Mystery Hills
includes	41	47	6	4.89	4.14	Mystery Hills
BH-20-10	104	110	6	0.58	0.26	Mystery Hills

BH-20-11	27	40	12	0.3	0.2	Mystery Hills
BH-20-11	49	56	8	0.31	0.08	Mystery Hills
BH-20-11	67	91	24	0.35	0.18	Mystery Hills
BH-20-11	128	139	11	0.2	0.34	Mystery Hills

BH-20-12	32	52	20	0.35	0.33	Mystery Hills
BH-20-12	79	91	12	0.45	0.18	Mystery Hills

BH-20-13	0	21	21	0.24	0.28	Mystery Hills
BH-20-13	38	50	12	0.44	0.34	Mystery Hills
BH-20-13	94	140	46	0.3	0.2	Mystery Hills

BH-20-14	0	12	12	0.22	0.3	Mystery Hills
BH-20-14	23	29	6	0.3	0.21	Mystery Hills
BH-20-14	49	55	6	0.28	0.2	Mystery Hills
BH-20-14	67	79	12	0.44	0.47	Mystery Hills
BH-20-14	84	93	9	0.4	0.16	Mystery Hills
BH-20-14	116	122	6	0.24	0.46	Mystery Hills

BH-20-15	11	40	29	0.29	0.26	Mystery Hills
BH-20-15	96	111	15	0.26	0.19	Mystery Hills
BH-20-15	120	165	44	0.31	0.39	Mystery Hills

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 85 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.


BH-20-18	5	11	6	0.23	0.21	Mystery Hills
BH-20-18	40	69	29	0.22	0.16	Mystery Hills
BH-20-18	75	96	21	0.24	0	Mystery Hills

BH-20-19	0	35	35	0.44	0.3	Mystery Hills
includes	2	17	15	0.64	0.31	Mystery Hills
BH-20-19	43	59	17	0.27	0.25	Mystery Hills
BH-20-19	70	78	8	0.21	0.09	Mystery Hills

BM-20-20	171	184	12	0.3	0.76	MS Vein Zone

BFG20-MS01	114.77	154.35	39.58	0.34	2.82	MS Vein Zone
BFG20-MS01	246.21	259.37	13.16	1.30	2.79	MS Vein Zone
BFG20-MS01	275.23	284.77	9.54	0.89	5.60	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS02	125.56	166.62	41.06	0.35	1.39	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS02	229.73	254.04	24.31	0.31	0.23	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS02	298.31	310.53	12.22	0.22	0.55	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS03	105.19	115.39	10.20	0.49	0.37	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MS04	121.15	122.67	1.52	0.60	0.50	Other

BFG21-MS05	99.95	102.99	3.04	0.39	0.35	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS06	NSV					Other

BFG21-MS07	149.96	151.49	1.53	0.29	1.50	MS Vein Zone

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 86 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BFG21-MS07	175.87	177.32	1.45	0.35	0.10	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS08	NSV					Other

BFG21-MS09	81.82	109.12	27.30	0.42	5.03	Polaris Vein
including	93.88	98.50	4.62	1.10	13.22	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS09	133.50	141.07	7.57	0.19	0.94	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS09	163.98	168.16	4.18	0.27	0.10	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS09	179.70	185.32	5.62	0.39	0.27	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MS10	203.00	229.21	26.21	0.52	3.29	MS Vein Zone
including	216.52	219.50	2.98	1.38	5.34	MS Vein Zone
and including	224.00	229.21	5.21	0.90	8.66	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS11	79.75	84.31	4.56	0.23	0.33	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS11	99.30	160.00	60.70	0.35	2.12	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MS12	170.08	184.52	14.44	0.26	0.44	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MS13	105.45	116.33	10.88	0.39	0.55	MS Vein Zone
including	105.94	108.20	2.26	0.91	0.75	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS13	179.22	211.75	32.53	0.88	1.58	Polaris Vein
including	183.79	192.40	8.61	2.32	4.61	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MS14	179.30	189.89	10.59	0.17	0.11	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MS15	135.33	138.38	3.05	0.32	5.38	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS15	153.62	161.22	7.60	0.52	0.72	Polaris Vein

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 87 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BFG21-MS16	178.00	205.18	27.18	0.26	0.32	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MH17	0.00	36.88	36.88	0.27	0.12	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH17	47.55	99.61	52.06	0.19	0.25	Mystery Hills

BFG21-MS18	0.00	51.82	51.82	0.33	2.02	MS Vein Zone
including	0.00	4.57	4.57	0.73	3.29	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS19	145.00	157.80	12.80	0.48	1.08	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS19	188.06	205.44	17.38	0.33	0.56	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS19	211.56	217.68	6.12	0.41	0.15	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS20	151.18	197.51	46.33	0.42	0.98	Polaris Vein
including	159.71	163.07	3.36	1.58	4.39	Polaris Vein

BFG21-MH21	7.46	10.05	2.59	0.20	0.10	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH21	54.25	62.00	7.75	0.22	0.10	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH21	73.76	76.81	3.05	0.19	0.10	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH21	95.11	101.96	6.85	0.35	0.25	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH21	128.38	131.20	2.82	0.24	0.30	Mystery Hills

BFG21-MS22	15.24	16.76	1.52	0.45	0.30	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS22	94.49	96.01	1.52	0.23	0.50	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS23	93.68	163.98	70.30	0.32	4.12	MS Vein Zone
including	94.94	106.07	11.13	0.63	16.04	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS23	229.10	238.05	8.95	0.75	2.36	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS23	257.27	298.65	41.38	0.36	0.51	MS Vein Zone
including	276.75	286.54	9.79	0.89	0.91	MS Vein Zone

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 88 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BFG21-MS23	325.87	331.96	6.09	0.27	0.17	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS24	123.58	157.08	33.50	0.34	1.63	Polaris Vein
including	144.86	147.90	3.04	0.82	2.25	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS24	166.13	173.73	7.60	0.23	1.24	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS24	191.00	195.22	4.22	0.27	0.61	Polaris Vein

7.5.2

2021 Additional Drilling Included in the End of Year 2021 Resource Model

Twenty new core and RC drillholes were unavailable when the model was completed in June 2021 and have since been drilled and added to this report Drillhole collar coordinates, depths, and orientations are listed below. *RC drillhole.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 89 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 7-5: Location and Depth of Additional 2021 Holes

Hole ID	Easting	Northing	Elevation	Azimuth	Dip	Total Depth
BFG21-MH25	9,438	8,908	1,142	90	-70	419.1
*BFG21-IS26	11,782	12,882	1,189	90	-45	470.9
BFG21-MS27	9,947	10,101	1,224	155	-60	380.4
BFG21-MH28	9,437	8,908	1,142	90	-85	353.3
BFG21-MS29	9,836	9,695	1,237	117	-50	258.5
BFG21-IS30	10,667	12,927	1,219	45	-45	639.2
BFG21-MH31	9,411	8,786	1,127	90	-45	358.8
*BFG21-IS32	11,391	13,286	1,211	90	-45	449.6
*BFG21-IS33	11,641	14,190	1,304	115	-45	403.9
BFG21-MH34	9,411	8,786	1,127	90	-65	394.7
BFG21-MS35	10,012	9,985	1,116	90	-45	179.2
BFG21-MS36	9,868	9,718	1,231	115	-45	224.9
BFG21-MH37	9,411	8,786	1,127	90	-85	346.6
BFG21-IS38	10,666	12,926	1,219	45	-70	328.6
BFG21-IS39	10,668	12,930	1,219	90	-45	403.9
BFG21-MS40	9,847	9,550	1,267	115	-45	180.8
BFG21-BF41	9,063	8,728	1,135	90	-45	343.1
BFG21-BF42	9,071	8,788	1,135	90	-50	349.5
BFG21-BF45	9,072	8,788	1,135	90	-75	505.4
BFG21-BF44	9,065	8,728	1,135	90	-75	999.0
BFG21-MH25	9,438	8,908	1,142	90	-70	419.1

Results from the new drilling available since the June resource model are listed below.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 90 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 7-6: Drilling Results from Additional Drilling in 2021 Program

Hole ID	Interval in meters			Au	Ag	Zone
Hole ID	From	To	Length	g/t	g/t	Zone
BFG21-MH25	80.40	175.20	94.80	0.27	0.44	BF Vein
BFG21-MH25	236.17	242.25	6.08	0.61	2.42	Mystery Hills

BFG21-IS26	138.68	146.30	7.62	0.36	0.84	Indian Springs

BFG21-MS27	90.19	143.71	53.52	0.97	8.24	MS Vein Zone
includes	139.15	143.71	4.56	7.02	39.70	MS Vein Zone
BFG21-MS27	224.60	235.24	10.64	1.39	1.31	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MH28	92.24	114.00	21.76	1.04	1.00	BF Vein
includes	93.73	96.72	2.99	5.73	5.86	BF Vein
BFG21-MH28	217.62	223.72	6.10	0.34	0.10	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH28	241.30	249.85	8.55	0.31	0.10	Mystery Hills

BFG21-MS29	61.86	80.16	18.30	0.60	5.48	Polaris Vein
includes	70.40	74.98	4.58	1.43	8.02	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS29	85.95	87.78	1.83	0.72	5.50	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS29	123.00	124.21	1.21	0.85	3.50	Polaris Vein

BFG21-IS30	274.89	276.45	1.56	0.83	0.30	Indian Springs - Main Gap

BFG21-MH31	75.44	87.22	11.78	1.62	3.38	BF Vein
BFG21-MH31	125.54	197.55	72.01	0.24	0.13	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH31	203.04	207.70	4.66	0.26	0.10	Mystery Hills

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 91 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BFG21-MH31	223.42	233.69	10.27	0.23	0.15	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH31	256.66	278.09	21.43	0.22	0.10	Mystery Hills

BFG21-IS30	NSV					Indian Springs South
BFG21-IS33	NSV					Indian Springs South

BFG21-MH34	77.88	221.00	143.12	0.32	0.57	Mystery Hills

BFG21-MS35	1.83	54.50	52.67	0.39	1.60	MS Vein Zone
includes	3.30	7.92	4.62	1.13	3.30	MS Vein Zone

BFG21-MS36	64.61	80.97	16.36	0.34	3.27	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MS36	112.60	115.09	2.49	0.21	0.15	Polaris Vein
BFG21-MH37
BFG21-MH37	85.04	134.72	49.68	0.57	6.65	BF Vein
includes	92.35	100.42	8.07	2.54	5.25	BF Vein
BFG21-MH37	147.55	178.19	30.64	0.20	0.11	Mystery Hills
BFG21-MH37	205.44	221.74	16.30	0.32	0.17	Mystery Hills

BFG21-IS38	NSV					Indian Springs - Main Gap

BFG21-IS39	250.50	251.52	1.02	1.74	0.50	Indian Springs - Main Gap

BFG21-MS40	NSV					Other

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 92 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BFG21-BF41	177.76	182.60	4.84	0.39	1.44	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF41	296.53	324.78	28.25	0.25	2.99	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF41	329.79	339.55	9.76	0.59	2.80	BF Vein
includes	329.79	332.72	2.93	1.29	2.70	BF Vein

BFG21-BF42	129.13	140.40	11.27	0.82	17.38	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF42	163.21	176.17	12.96	0.21	0.23	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF42	232.56	329.78	97.22	0.41	2.45	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF42	335.00	340.77	5.77	13.55	33.17	BF Vein
BFG21-BF42	346.25	349.45	3.20	0.50	5.39	BF Foot Wall

BFG21-BF44	213.97	217.21	3.24	0.49	1.26	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF44	274.93	282.30	7.37	0.20	0.78	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF44	290.96	313.42	22.46	0.26	1.32	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF44	325.67	338.94	13.27	0.26	0.79	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF44	344.13	353.40	9.27	0.27	0.70	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF44	357.17	371.25	14.08	0.29	0.94	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF44	371.25	376.28	5.03	2.11	5.07	BF Vein
BFG21-BF44	376.28	390.29	14.01	0.26	0.67	BF Foot Wall

BFG21-BF45	137.92	144.00	6.08	0.37	8.72	BF Hanging Wall

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 93 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

BFG21-BF45	160.93	177.82	16.89	0.33	0.36	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF45	303.06	308.90	5.84	0.24	0.56	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF45	325.22	335.98	10.76	0.64	0.96	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF45	340.77	369.57	28.80	0.53	1.96	BF Hanging Wall
includes	350.58	353.66	3.08	1.47	1.70	BF Hanging Wall
BFG21-BF45	375.80	382.57	6.77	1.54	4.55	BF Vein

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 94 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

8.1

Historic Data (1983 – 1996)

Drilling and coring information used in this resource estimate was obtained from several drill programs that began in 1983 with St. Joe Minerals, continued with Bond Gold and Lac Minerals, and continued with Barrick in late 1996. Of 1,262 total holes drilled in the area, 147 holes included core and 1,243 holes were drilled using reverse circulation methods. Most of the cored holes included intervals of core plus RC segments. Percent recovery and RQD measurements were made on all core intervals. An assessment was made of the quality of the orientation data and the core was marked accordingly. The core was then logged, recording lithological, alteration, mineralization, and structural information including the orientation of faults, fault lineation’s, fractures, veins, and bedding. With few exceptions, the entire lengths of the holes were sampled. Sample intervals were 5 feet and occasionally based on the geological logging, separating different lithologies and styles of mineralization and alteration. Samples were marked and tagged in the core box before being photographed, after which the core was sawed in half, with one half sent for assay and one half retained for future reference. Each sample interval was bagged separately and shipped to the lab for analysis.

8.2

Augusta Gold Corp. (2020-2021)

8.2.1

Augusta Gold Corp. 2020

The 2020 drilling program drilled 25 reverse circulation holes. To ensure reliable sample results, Augusta has a QA/QC program in place that monitors the chain-of-custody of samples and includes the insertion of blanks and certified reference materials (CRMs). Barren coarse-grained blanks (“blanks”) were inserted at lithology changes. Three CRMs with variations in gold grade were inserted at the end of each batch by random selection. The following QA/QC program was followed for the 2020 drilling. All testing for the 2020 program was done by American Assay Laboratories (AAL), an independent ISO/IEC 17025 certified laboratory in Sparks, Nevada.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 95 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

8.2.1.1

Standards

A74383, B74110, and C73909 standards were purchased from Legend, a wholesale distributor for mining products. The standards were made by KLEN International, a Western Australian company that specializes in the manufacture and supply of fire assay fluxes. A total of 8 A74383, 8 B74110, and 8 C73909 were inserted with RC drill samples. Expected values for each CRM are listed in Table 8-1 through Table 8-3.

Table 8-1: CRM Expected Values

CRM	Au (ppm)	Ag (ppm)
A 74383	4.93	47.6
B 74110	0.237	No certified value
C 73909	0.778	No certified value

Table 8-2: Summary of Gold in CRM's

RM	N	Outliers Excluded	Failures Excluded	Au ppm		Observed Au ppm		Percent of Accepted
RM	N	Outliers Excluded	Failures Excluded	Accepted	Std. Dev.	Average	Std. Dev.	Percent of Accepted
C 73909	8	-	-	0.778	0.023	0.775	0.018	99.6%
B 74110	8	-	-	0.237	0.009	0.240	0.005	101.2%
A 74383	7	1	-	4.930	0.080	4.913	0.074	99.7%
Total	23						Weighted Average	100.2%

Table 8-3: CRM Expected Values

RM	N	Outliers Excluded	Failures Excluded	Ag ppm		Observed Ag ppm		Percent of Accepted
RM	N	Outliers Excluded	Failures Excluded	Accepted	Std. Dev.	Average	Std. Dev.	Percent of Accepted
A 74383	4	1	3	47.600	1.200	45.329	0.878	95.2%
Total	4						Weighted Average	95.2%

8.2.1.2

Blanks

Barren coarse-grained blanks were submitted with samples to determine if there has been contamination or sample cross-contamination. Three types of blanks were used with sample submission. BM-20-1 and BM-20-2 used material from an outcrop nearby, BP-20-23 and BP-20-24 used garden pumice obtained from Home Depot, and the remainder of the holes used Black Basalt Cinders provided by AAL. Certificate of Analysis’ with Au and Ag thresholds for blank materials used are not available.

A total of 108 blanks were inserted with RC chip samples, blank materials are determined to have failed if the values exceed the maximum threshold of the analyte. Maximum threshold values are listed in Table 8-4.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 96 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 8-4: Blank Failure Threshold

Blank	Gold (ppm)	Silver (ppm)
Blank (ASL)	0.03	2

8.2.1.3

Duplicates

Duplicates were inserted into the sample sequence every 100-ft. RC chip samples were split at the drill rig. The second half of a RC sample is assayed to determine if the reproducibility of assays for different chips, and if there is any sampling bias. A total of 115 duplicates were submitted with sample submissions. Only duplicate pairs above 10 times the lower detection are considered significant and are included in calculations. 65% or 75 pairs are considered significant for gold, and 2.61% or 3 pairs are considered significant for silver. Duplicate sample results (Table 8-5) show that 100% of the duplicates agree within +/-5% for gold and silver.

Table 8-5: Duplicate Sample Results

		% of Sample Pairs (>10x d.l.) Reporting Within
Analyte	# of Pairs above 10x d.l.	±5
Au	75	100%
Ag	3	100%

8.2.2

Augusta Gold Corp 2021

8.2.2.1

Sample Preparation and Security

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 97 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-1: Truck Mounted Core Rig

Figure 8-2: Laydown Yard and Sample Storage

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 98 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

All surface rock chip samples collected were described in the field and located using hand-held global positioning system (GPS) methods. Sample descriptions were completed either in field notebooks or using a tablet computer. Hard copy notes were digitized for archive, and field notebooks were retained. All sample descriptions were compiled into a master Excel spreadsheet before being imported into the GeoSpark database maintained by Augusta Gold. Samples were bagged and stored in a secure building before being shipped to the lab.

Drill core was transported from the rig to the logging facility daily by staff geologists, where washing, logging, photographing, and sampling were completed. Logging data was recorded directly into the GeoSpark database on laptop computers. All core logs and digital core photos were backed up on Microsoft Teams.

Figure 8-3: Logging Laptop

Rock chip samples from RC drilling were transported from the rig to the logging facility daily by staff geologists, where they were air-dried and placed in sealed bulk bags for transport. A geologist was present at the drill rig during all drilling operations, where they oversaw sample collection, built chip trays with representative material, and logged chips on-site. Bulk reject bags were stacked out adjacent to the drill pad and were retained until lab results were received and checked.

Surface Rock Chip Sampling: Grab samples were collected from outcrop or rubble crop. These were spot samples taken from well-mineralized or altered rock. Float samples represent transported rock of uncertain origin. All rock samples were located in the field using GPS methods and field descriptions and notes were entered into a master digital database at the end of each field day.

Diamond Drill Core Processing: Drill core was transported by pickup truck from the drill site to the logging facility located eight miles north of Beatty, Nevada, proximal to the project area. Upon arrival at the core shack, core was laid out on outdoor quick-logging tables where it was washed, and RQD and recovery measurements were collected. Core was then brought indoors and laid out on tables for detailed geologic logging.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 99 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-4: Core Shed and Quick Log Station

First, the quality of orientation marks and lines were checked, and any necessary corrections were made. Core was then marked up using china markers and permanent marking pens to identify important features for logging and recording in photographs. Oriented structural measurements were recorded using the Reflex IQ logger where possible, and manual protractor methods when rock quality precluded the use of the logging device. Sample tags were stapled inside the wax-impregnated cardboard core boxes at geologically determined intervals by the geologist, leaving every fifteenth sample tag available for either a blank or a standard.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 100 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-5: Logging Facility

Core was cut using Husqvarna masonry saws, and core techs were instructed to cut core along the orientation line. Split core was then placed back in the core boxes until it was sampled. During sampling, one half of the split core from each sample interval was placed in a cloth bag with the sample number written on it. A corresponding barcode sample tag was placed in each bag, and the bag was tied closed. Sample bags were then stacked in 1-ton super sacks, sealed, and stored in the core yard while waiting for shipment to the lab.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 101 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-6: Core Saw

The remnant half core was retained in the core boxes, which were palletized and tarped for storage in the core yard at the logging facility. Significant intercepts and holes of interest were stored in locked shipping containers at the logging facility.

Figure 8-7: Sampling Tables

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 102 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-8: Core Cutting Facility

Reverse Circulation Chip-Sample Processing: Samples were collected from a rotary splitter mounted to the cyclone discharge on the drill rig. The rotary splitter was adjusted to provide a sample with a nominal weight of 15 lbs (6.8 kg). A small split was collected in a mesh screen for populating chip trays for geologic logging, and the remaining sample reject was bagged separately and stacked next to the drill pad to be retained until laboratory results had been received and quality checked. Chips collected in the screen were washed and put into chip trays, which were labelled with the corresponding interval footage. The chips were quick-logged at the drill rig by a geologist using a hand lens, and were then transported back to the logging facility at the end of each day for detailed logging under a binocular microscope.

RC samples were collected in cloth bags with the sample number and footage interval written on them and a corresponding sample tag inside. As with diamond core samples, every fifteenth sample number was reserved for either a blank or a standard. Samples were transported to the logging facility by pickup truck each day, where they were stacked outside on metal trays for airdrying. Once deemed sufficiently dry, the sample bags were stacked in 1-ton super sacks, sealed, and stored in the core yard while waiting for shipment to the lab.

All samples collected during the 2020-2021 exploration program at the Bullfrog Project were stored at the logging facility until being transported directly to Paragon Geochemical in Reno, Nevada. A chain-of-custody form was signed by on-site staff at the time of sample pickup by the laboratory courier service.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 103 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-9: Sample Pick Up Area

8.2.2.2

Standards

The company used three standards; OREAS 250, OREAS-250b, and OREAS 253. These reference materials were purchased from OREAS North America. The reference materials are high quality and were analyzed at more than fifteen laboratories to determine expected values and tolerances. The materials are matrix-matched for the Bullfrog Project mineral style and were prepared from a blend of gold-bearing Wilber Lode oxide ore from the Andy Well Gold Project and barren basaltic saprolite and siltstone (OREAS-250 and OREAS-250b) and basaltic scoria (OREAS-253) sourced from quarries north of Melbourne, Australia.

OREAS-250b was ordered as the replacement for OREAS-250, both being nearly identical low grade gold standards. This report contains data from both CRMs. Expected values for the CRMs are based on aqua regia digest inductively coupled plasma analyses for silver and fire assay for gold and are available in Table 8-6. Summary statistics of CRMs performance during the exploration program are summarized in Table 8-7.

Table 8-6: CRM Expected Values

CRM	Gold (ppm)	Silver (ppm)
OREAS-250	0.309	0.258
OREAS-250b	0.332	0.073
OREAS-253	1.22	-

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 104 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 8-7: Summary of Gold in CRMs

RM	N	Outliers Excluded	Failures Excluded	Au ppm		Observed Au ppm		Percent of Accepted
RM	N	Outliers Excluded	Failures Excluded	Accepted	Std. Dev.	Average	Std. Dev.	Percent of Accepted
OREAS-253	110	-	2	1.220	0.045	1.236	0.041	101.3%
OREAS-250b	12	-	1	0.332	0.011	0.322	0.012	96.9%
OREAS-250	94	-	2	0.309	0.013	0.320	0.013	103.7%
Total	216						Weighted Average	102.1%

8.2.2.3

Blanks

Barren coarse-grained blanks were submitted with samples to determine if there has been contamination or sample cross-contamination. Elevated values for blanks may also indicate sources of contamination in the analytical procedure (contaminated reagents or test tubes) or sample solution carry-over during instrumental finish. A total of 220 blanks were inserted with samples and blank materials are determined to have failed if the values exceed the maximum threshold of the analyte. Maximum threshold values are listed in Table 8-8.

Table 8-8: Blank Failure Threshold

Blank	Gold (ppm)	Silver (ppm)
Blank	0.03	2

8.2.2.4

Pulp Duplicates

Based on 42 pairs of pulp duplicates above 0.005 ppm gold, 76% duplicates agree within 20% of the original assay. 10 pairs were outside of the limits being 20% above or below the original. The comparison is shown in Figure 8-10.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 105 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 8-10: Gold Pulp Comparison

8.2.2.5

Summary

Two mislabels were identified and changed in the database. As a result, sampling procedures were updated in Q1 2021 to avoid mislabels.

Five failures were flagged. Four are a result of two consecutive failures outside two standard deviations. One failure reported outside three standard deviations. These were corrected.

Silver values were only evaluated for blanks and not standards in this report due to very low values reporting below or close to analytical detection limits.

Standard OREAS-250 was replaced by OREAS-250b; data from both standards are included in this report.

Pulp duplicates performed as expected with 76% of pairs reporting within 20%.

Check assay analysis determined that Paragon reported higher gold values than SGS for 70% of the 80 sample pulps with gold greater than 0.5 g/t Au.

QC analysis indicates that the CRMs performed well with only 2% of CRMs reporting outside of expectations, the blanks indicate that no instances of contamination occurred.

In the author’s opinion, the security, sampling and analytical procedures are appropriate and consistent with common industry practice.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 106 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Data Verification

The data for this mineral resource estimate comes from historical exploration and operations. The original laboratory certificates were available for most of the drilling. Data collected by previous operators has in part been verified by the corroborating data in the original laboratory certifications, as well as existing physical and digital records. Blind entry spot checks were run against the database and the laboratory certificates to ensure the quality of the database. No additional exploration drilling has been performed since the closure of the Bullfrog Mine, until the program carried out by Augusta in 2020. QA/QC protocols were followed and reviewed for the 2020 drilling program, including blanks, standards, and duplicates. Lab certificates were available for the 2020 drilling program.

A site visit was performed by Patrick Garretson in June 2021 with the purpose of observing and reviewing the site infrastructure, exploration drilling program, core logging and sample preparation facilities. All three existing pits were observed from the highwall or from within the pit. Special attention was given to pit limit boundaries, pit highwall integrity, waste dump placement and pit backfill areas. Infrastructure in terms of roads, claim boundaries and previous site infrastructure were observed and cross-referenced with available property maps and diagrams. The geology of each area was discussed with the project geologists and important geologic features such as faults, veins and lithologic contacts were observed in the exposed pit walls or on surface outcrops.

The core storage, sample preparation area and logging facility were visited and site personnel were observed while performing these activities. The facilities have recently been built and the area was very clean and well organized. The core logging facility was well lit and core tables were constructed to allow personnel to log core in an ergonomic position. The core boxes and core within were properly marked for downhole measurements. Geologic data was being logged via laptop computers using a logging program (GeoSpark) with dropdown fields for the selection of geologic features. Sample preparation, bagging and labeling took place in a separate area to avoid cross-contamination. Samples were properly bagged, labeled and prepared for transport to the assay lab. A large whiteboard posted in the logging facility was used to track the progress of a drillhole from the time it was received at the facility to the time it was bagged and ready for transport. A procedure and process for measuring specific gravity via the wax and water immersion process was in place.

Core and chip trays from the pre-2020 drilling are no longer available.

In order to verify the updated database, Forte Dynamics requested and received assay certificate and logging data for approximately 10% of the relevant legacy drillholes in the economically important portions of the three gold deposits at Bullfrog. Although there were a few random, single assay discrepancies, most of the drillholes had all their assays match between the new database and assay certificates. Some of the drillholes checked were ones earlier identified with problematic imperial-metric grade conversions and those now match certificate grades and now have correct converted metric grades. Legacy drillholes with newly found assay data were also checked against scans of the assay certificates and they were correct in the new database. Some of the drillholes that were selected for verification had missing runs of assay data and it was verified from the logs and certificates that there were data gaps for those drillholes.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 107 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

9.1

Check Assay

The Company submitted 148 core pulps to SGS for multi-element check assays. Samples that are below detection limits are not included in the graphs. The comparison between Paragon and SGS for gold and silver are shown in Figures 9-1 to 9-3.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 108 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 9-1: Check Assay Gold Comparison

Of the 147 pulps, 68 pairs agree within 20% for gold. Figure 9.2 shows the relative percent different (Paragon less SGS divided by the Paragon result) vs. the Paragon result. There are more cases with positive differences showing that Paragon tends to report higher than SGS.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 109 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 9-2: Check Assay Gold - Percent Difference

Table 9-1: Check Assay Gold Statistics

Grade	N	# with Paragon>SGS	# with Paragon <SGS	Average Bias*
0.1 - 0.5 g/t	30	17	13	6
>0.5 g/t	80	56	24	19

There is better agreement between Paragon and SGS results for assays less than 0.5 g/t Au. For these samples, there is a nearly even number of cases with positive and negative differences. For samples with assays greater than 0.5 g/t Au, Paragon reports higher assays for more than twice the cases compared to SGS reporting higher than Paragon.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 110 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 9-3: Silver Check Assay Comparison

There are 19 pulps where silver values are above detection limit in both labs and results are compared in Figure 9.2. The detection limit for silver at SGS is 1 ppm and due to the poor precision of the method, good agreement below 5 ppm is not expected. The silver values greater than 5 ppm show good agreement.

In summary, Paragon reported higher gold values than SGS for 70% of the 80 sample pulps with gold greater than 0.5 g/t Au. Given that there were no certified reference materials assayed by SGS, it is not possible to determine which laboratory is more accurate. Paragon performed reasonably well on CRMs and there is no other indication of high bias. The mean of the relative differences is 0.064 with a 0.16 standard deviation. A T-test on the two sets of samples shows that there is no significant difference between the labs.

Additional check assays are recommended perhaps at a different lab than SGS, and care should be taken in handling and splitting duplicate samples.

9.2

Qualified Person’s Opinion

The qualified person has reviewed these data and believes that they are sufficient and appropriate for use in this report to determine the mineral resource estimate.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 111 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

10.

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

Most of the metallurgical tests on the Project were conducted on high-grade ores using conventional milling and agitated leaching methods. Typical processing statistics from 1989 into 1999 are shown in Table 10-1.

Table 10-1: Typical Processing Statistics from 1989-1999

Gold Recovery	91%
Silver Recovery	65%
Leach Time	48 hours
Grind	80% -150 mesh
Rod Consumption	2.3 lbs/ tonne
Ball Consumption	2.1 lbs/ tonne
Cyanide Consumption	0.5 lbs/ tonne
Lime Consumption	1.2 lbs/ tonne

Barrick’s mill recoveries were good for gold, but silver recoveries were lower mainly due to its refractory association with manganese. As a result, the 26 million tonnes of tailings stored south of NV Hwy 374 currently have little value.

10.1

St. Joe

10.1.1

Large Column Leach Test

Reports by St. Joe Minerals provide detailed information on two large column tests on bulk samples of the M-S area. The test facility included a carbon adsorption plant and two concrete columns 24-feet high with inside diameters of 5.5 feet.

An area surrounding reverse circulation hole RDH-20 in the M-S area was drilled and blasted to produce 250 tons of bulk sample. The mined sample was split to produce 20 tons of uncrushed or run-of-mine column feed and 22 tons of crushed column feed. The columns were then loaded with efforts to minimize compaction and size sorting of the sample. Solution was applied at a rate of 0.004 gpm/sq. ft. Results after 59 days of leaching are shown below. A 90-day projected recovery was 61% Au on 19 mm (3/4”) crushed ore and 54% on 305 mm (12”) run-of-mine ore. Previous bottle roll tests on drill cuttings in this area averaged 78% gold and 33% silver.

Screen analyses of the -19 mm (-3/4”) leached residue shows that the -65 mesh and -10 to + 65 mesh fractions yielded gold recoveries 96% and 86% for respective head assays of 0.074 and 0.057 oz/ton gold. The screen analyses also show that the loss of fines from a sample (which did occur) will not only depress the apparent gold grade but will also cause an even greater depression in the apparent gold recovery.

St. Joe came to the following conclusions:

M-S mineral is permeable and readily heap leachable. Cyanide and lime consumptions were reported as “average”, but not quantified.

Fine fractions yield the highest recovery, and if lost will depress gold recovery.

Evidence suggests many fines were lost during handling and the recoveries were deemed minimum or conservative.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 112 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

There appeared to be little correlation between recovery and grade.

There were no observable chemical or percolation problems with the sample.

10.1.2

Bottle Roll Tests on UG Samples

Bottle roll tests on 39 underground sample composites obtained from the glory hole and 200 and 300 levels of the M-S mine recovered 78% of the gold from material averaging 0.16 opt and crushed to -8 mesh. Recoveries ranged from 52% to 98% with no obvious correlation between grade and recovery. St. Joe concluded that bottle roll test (presumably for 24 hours) on material crushed to -8 mesh provides good representation as to what may be achieved in a column test sized at 19 mm (3/4-inch).

10.1.3

Column Testing by Kappes Cassiday & Associates

Results from leach tests performed in 1994 by Kappes Cassiday & Associates (KCA) from a 250-kg composite of low-grade material from the Bullfrog mine are shown below:

Table 10-2: Leach Test Results

	Bottle	Column	Column
Size, mesh, & mm (inch)	-100 mesh	-38 mm (-1.5”)	-9.5 mm (-3/8”)
Calc. Head, opt Au	0.029	0.035	0.029
Rec %	96.6	71.4	75.9
Leach time, days	2.0	41	41
NaCN, kg/t (lb/short ton)	0.5 (0.1)	0.385 (0.77)	5.35 (10.7)
Lime, kg/t ( lb/short ton)	1.0 (2.0)	0.155 (0.31)	1.75 (0.35)

Two 45 kg samples were crushed and loaded into 6-inch diameter columns to heights of five feet. Leach solution was applied at a rate ranging from 0.004 to 0.006 gpm/sq ft and initially contained 1.0 g NaCN/l and 0.5 g/l lime. Input solutions were 0.4 to 0.6 g/l NaCN while maintaining a pH of 9.5 to 10.5. The initial solution was clear and bright yellow, and the final solution was clear and colorless. Column tailings retained 6% to 7.5% moisture after drain down, and each were screened and assayed for size fractions. The leach recovery curves are shown below in Figure 10-1.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 113 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 10-1: Leach Test Results

The recovery in the coarse crush (-38.1 mm [-1.5”]) was a 2-stage crush size and was 4.5% less than the fine crush (-9.5mm [-3/8”]), which would require 3-stage crushing. The 41-day leach periods are also short and ultimate heap leach recoveries may be greater.

10.2

Pilot Testing by Barrick

In 1995, Barrick performed pilot heap leach tests on 844 tons of low-grade material from the Bullfrog pit and 805 tons of typical material from the M-S pit. Both materials were crushed to -1/2 inch and leached at an application rate of 0.006 gpm/sq ft. Lift heights were 12 feet. Results are listed below:

Table 10-3: Heap Leach Pilot Tests – Barrick

	BF Low-Grade	M-S Mineralization
Calc. Head, opt Au	0.019	0.048
Calc. Head, opt Ag	0.108	0.380
Projected Au Rec %	67	74
Projected Ag Rec %	9	32
Leach Time, days	41	37
NaCN, kg/t (lb/short ton)	0.10 (0.20)	0.125 (0.25)
Lime, kg/t ( lb/short ton)	Nil (Nil)	Nil (Nil)

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 114 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Low-grade material was stockpiled during pit operations and ranged from a cutoff of 0.5 g/t gold and Barrick’s operating mill cutoff of 0.85 g/t. These stockpiles were later blended with underground ore and milled during 1998 and early 1999. All pit material below 0.5 g/t was dumped as waste rock. Based on the source and grade of this material, it is representative of the mineralization remaining in the Bullfrog deposit. The M-S sample represented ore that was in large measure mined by Barrick after this pilot test, but the information on reagent consumption is applicable to remaining mineralization and the recovery has reference value.

Acceptable solution grades at the end of the tests and leaching beyond 41 days at lower solution application rates could result in higher ultimate recoveries. Lime and cyanide consumptions were low. The test heap also did not reach maximum recovery due to poor solution distribution in the first couple of feet, which could be recovered from multiple lifts in a production scenario and improved solution distribution.

10.3

Column Leach Tests

In 2018 and 2019, standard column leach tests were performed on materials from the Bullfrog property by McClelland Laboratories, located in Reno, NV. The sample tested in 2018 was a composite sample created from a bulk sample representing “Brecciated Vein Ore Type”. The exact location (or locations) of the sample is not known, and it is unclear whether these samples can be considered representative of the entire deposit. The results of the 2018 program are summarized in Table 10-4 below.

Table 10-4: Column Leach Test Results (2018)

Feed Size	Crush Method	Test	Time	Au Recovery, %
9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	60 days	58
9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Bottle Roll	4 days	59
1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	60 days	77
1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Bottle Roll	4 days	70
150µm	Conventional/Grind	Bottle Roll	4 days	89

The 2018 column leach test results suggest a crush size dependency where HPGR crushing (high pressure grinding rolls) may have the potential to significantly improve recovery. The lime requirement for protective alkalinity was low and cyanide consumption was moderate. The samples tested in 2019 were prepared from three (3) bulk samples. The exact location (or locations) of these samples is not known, and it is unclear whether these samples can be considered representative of the entire deposit. The results of the 2019 program are summarized in Table 10-5 below.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 115 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 10-5: Column Leach Test Results (2019)

Sample	Feed Size	Crush Method	Test	Time	Au Rec., %
Composite E	9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	151 days	75
Composite E	6.3mm (1/4”)	HPGR	Column	122 days	77
Composite E	1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	102 days	89
MS-M-1	9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	108 days	66
MS-M-1	6.3mm (1/4”)	HPGR	Column	108 days	77
MS-M-1	1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	89 days	85
MH-M-2	9.5mm (3/8”)	Conventional	Column	109 days	83
MH-M-2	6.3mm (1/4”)	HPGR	Column	105 days	88
MH-M-2	1.7mm (10 mesh)	HPGR	Column	86 days	91

The 2019 column leach test results further highlight the size dependency on recovery and suggest that HPGR crushing may have the potential to significantly improve gold recovery. The cement required for agglomeration of the samples was adequate for maintaining protective alkalinity. The cyanide consumption was low. Based on these test programs, Bullfrog mineralization types appear amenable to heap leach recovery methods. Further testing is required to properly assess the benefit of HPGR crushing and better define the optimal particle size for heap leaching.

10.4

Conclusions for Heap Leaching

Based on the test work completed to-date that is applicable to the remaining mineralization in the BF and M-S pits, preliminary ultimate heap leach recoveries are projected as follows:

Table 10-6: Estimated Heap Leach Recovery

Leach Size

80% - 9.5 mm

(3/8 inch)

ROM

Low Grade

Estimated Recovery

70%

50%

* Silver Recovery is estimated at 1.07 x gold recovered ounces, which is the typical recovery attained by Barrick.

All mineralization known to-date would be heap leached and the pregnant solutions would be processed through a carbon ADR plant to be constructed on site.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 116 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

The Bullfrog and M-S deposits originally contained less than 2% sulfide minerals that were thoroughly oxidized below existing and proposed mining depths, including the current water table and virtually all deep drill holes. The historic water table was much lower in the geologic past, and the detachment and associated faults allowed epithermal solutions to oxidize the host and adjacent wall rocks to great depths. There is a small volume of mineralization in the footwall stock-works or east side of the central Bullfrog area near section 8148 north that contains carbon-pyrite alteration with attendant reductions in leach recoveries. This area needs to be researched further as to extent and recovery. Additional leach tests are needed to optimize performance versus crush size, as well as better understand silver recovery, agglomeration, permeability, and potential impacts from sulfides or organic carbon.

10.5

Leach Pad Siting

There are seven areas that potentially could serve as leach pad sites within reasonable trucking or conveying distances from the Bullfrog and M-S pits as described below in Figure 10-2.

Figure 10-2: Potential Leach Pad Sites & Approximate Capacities

						Comments
	Criteria:	Stacked Density:	1.8	t/m3		Swell factor of 35% for in place density of 2.45
		Heap Height :	30	m		As crushed material percolates well with minimum fines and
		Min.Pad Slope:	3%			clay, heights likely could be higher subject to confirmation
		Max. Pad Slope:	Site & Design Dependent			testing.
Priority

1	South Rainbow Mtn.			360,000	m2	Has the shortests conveying/trucking distances and lowest
	West of M-S pit and N of Rhyolite			10,800,000	m3	operating costs, but expansion is limited. M-S waste dump is
	Area: 600 x 600	Typ. Slope	5%	19,440,000	tonnes	on NE side of area.

2	South Paradise Mtn.			270,000	m2	Second shortest convey/truck distance. Could be used after
	1200 m east BF pit & 1600 m SE MS pit			8,100,000	m3	No. 1 is filled.
	Area: 450 x 600	Typ. Slope	7%	14,580,000	tonnes

3	South Burton Mtn.			975,000	m2
	2300 m NE BF pit & 2000 m E MS pit			29,250,000	m3
	Area: 1300 x 750	Typ. Slope	5%	52,650,000	tonnes

4	NE Barrick Tail Pond			3,600,000	m2	Requires a conveyor or truck bridge over Hwy 374. This area
	S of Hwy 374			108,000,000	m3	could be substantially expanded, but this not foreseeably
	Area:1800 x 2000	Typ. Slope	4%	194,400,000	tonnes	needed.

5	Barrick Tail Pond			1,000,000	m2	Requires a conveyor or truck bridge over Hwy 374 and
	S. of Hwy 374. Contains 26 mm tonnes			30,000,000	m3	geotech studies on tailings. Lining this pad would be easy
	Area:1000 x 1000	Typ. Slope	1%	54,000,000	tonnes	easy, but obtaining a 3+% slope requires earthworks.

6	West Plantsite			4,410,000	m2	Requires a conveyor/truck bridge to cross the road
	West of road to Rhyolite and a cemetary			132,300,000	m3	to Rhyolite. Cannot be easily expanded but this
	Area: 2100 x 2100	Typ. Slope	4%	238,140,000	tonnes	is not foreseeably needed.

7	Indian Springs			2,560,000	m2	Long haul from Buffrog and M-S pits. M-S pit impairs
	3300 m NE BF pit & 2300 m NE MS pit			76,800,000	m3	direct route
	Area:1600 x 1600	Typ. Slope	4%	138,240,000	tonnes

In all cases, additional drilling is required to adequately explore or condemn these areas, and considerable technical and economic studies are needed to select any site.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 117 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

10.6

Additional Testing

In 2020 a new test program was completed, and this information is summarized below.

Cyanidation bottle rolls tests were conducted on 14 variability composites from the Bullfrog project. The samples are considered representative of the various types and styles of mineralization. The composites were generated from coarse assay rejects from a reverse circulation drilling program. Composite gold grades ranged from 0.14 to 0.91 Au g/tonne, with an average grade of 0.42 Au g/tonne. A nominal crush size of 1.7 mm was used for the test work. The samples were not crushed using an HPGR. Summary bottle roll testing results are showed in Table 10-7.

Table 10-7: Summary Metallurgical Results – Bottle Roll Tests

Composite	Drillhole						REAGENT REQUIREMENTS
		Interval (ft)		Au Rec.	Head Grade Au g/tonne		kg/tonne mineralized material
		From	To	%	Calculated	Assayed	NaCN Cons.	Lime Added
4594-001	BM-20-1	0	40	67.8	0.59	0.80	0.15	1.1
4594-002	BM-50-1	40	75	67.2	0.58	0.50	0.11	1.2
4594-003	BM-20-4	280	335	44.4	0.27	0.26	0.12	1.7
4594-004	BM-20-4	335	390	38.7	0.31	0.30	0.17	1.5
4594-005	BM-20-6	295	395	66.7	0.27	0.29	0.11	1.4
4594-006	BM-20-6	395	485	58.5	1.06	0.86	0.11	1.6
4594-007	BM-20-11	95	185	72.7	0.22	0.18	<0.07	1.1
4594-008	BM-20-14	0	45	58.1	0.31	0.27	<0.07	1.8
4594-009	BM-20-14	90	135	80.0	0.15	0.13	0.14	1.5
4594-010	BM-20-14	170	235	84.2	0.19	0.21	0.14	1.2
4594-011	BM-20-14	235	260	86.8	0.53	0.57	0.09	1.2
4594-012	BM-20-15	35	130	72.3	0.47	0.46	0.17	1.4
4594-013	BM-20-19	0	115	73.3	0.30	0.27	0.08	1.4
4594-014	BM-20-22	305	385	81.0	0.63	0.67	0.09	1.6

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 118 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

The Bullfrog variability composites generally were amenable to agitated cyanidation treatment at a nominal 1.7 mm feed size. Gold recovery ranged from 38.7% to 86.8% and averaged 68.0%. Recovery was 58.1% or greater for 12 of the 14 composites. Gold recovery rates were moderate, and generally, gold extraction was substantially complete in 24 hours of leaching. Gold recovery was not correlated to gold head grades for these 14 composites. Gold recovery consistently decreased with increasing sulfide sulfur content.

Silver extractions were 1.4 Ag g/tonne or less for all composites. Silver composite extraction ranged from 14.3% to 66.7%.

Bottle roll test cyanide consumption was consistently low and was 0.17 kg NaCN/tonne mineralized material or less for all 14 composites. Lime requirements for pH control were also low and were 1.8 kg/tonne mineralized material or less.

There are no additional relevant processing factors that the author of this report is aware of that could materially affect the mineral resource estimate presented in this technical report.

10.7

Qualified Person’s Opinion

The qualified person has reviewed these data and believes that they are sufficient and appropriate for use in this report to determine the mineral resource estimate.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 119 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.

Mineral Resource Estimates

11.1

Summary

Mineral resources were updated based on technical information as of December 31, 2021, by Forte Dynamics.for the Bullfrog project. The update utilizes all new drilling through the end of 2021 in addition to updated geologic models and database improvements by Augusta Gold Corp. staff. The mineral resources were estimated utilizing conventional 3D computer block modeling based on most current drillhole database, grade shells, vein shapes, geologic constraints, current topography, as-built underground solids and as-built open pit surfaces. The grade shells and the vein shapes were constructed using Leapfrog software and follow the dominant structural and mineralized trends within each geologic setting. Geologic constraints were applied to the block model to prevent grade estimation into barren rock types. The underground as-built solids were expanded by 1m in all directions and mined out in the block model. Open pit as-built surfaces accounted for post-mining backfill that has been placed as part of the site reclamation practices. The resource block models were estimated in Vulcan software using ordinary kriging and multiple estimation passes with expanding search distances and varying composite selection criteria.

Lerch-Grossman pit optimizations were done in Minemax software. Assumptions for gold price, silver price, metallurgical recovery, pit slopes, mining costs, processing costs and G&A costs were selected based on data that was available and comparing to other comparable operations. The optimized pits were limited to the property boundaries. The comparable pricing for gold of $1,550 compares well with the three-year trailing average of $1,558/ozAu in June 2021, an accepted method for a mineral resource reporting price. The $20/oz silver price compares to a three-year average of $19.07 and was typical of other similar reports.

The open pit Mineral Resources for each area (Bullfrog, Montgomery-Shoshone and Bonanza) were calculated inside the pit shell and only blocks with a positive net value (revenue minus costs) were reported as mineral resource. The Mineral Resources are presented in the following tables.

Incremental cutoff grades are automatically calculated by the Minemax software, and silver adds some additional value. The incremental cutoff considers process, G&A, and refining costs, but not mining with assumption it is simply deciding whether already mined material will have greater in an ore destination or as waste. The incremental gold cutoff grades are 0.137 g/tonne for oxide-leach and 0.224 g/tonne for sulfide leach.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 120 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-1: Bullfrog Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Bullfrog
Redox/ Cutoff	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Oxide/ 0.192 g/t	Measured	24.50	0.537	1.28	422.77	1,010.02
	Indicated	36.32	0.515	1.14	602.02	1,332.18
	Measured and Indicated	60.82	0.524	1.20	1,024.79	2,342.20
	Inferred	14.40	0.460	0.77	213.06	358.49

Sulfide/ 0.315g/t	Measured	1.30	0.710	1.28	29.77	53.52
	Indicated	1.99	0.625	1.32	39.94	84.47
	Measured and Indicated	3.29	0.659	1.30	69.72	137.99
	Inferred	1.05	0.657	1.14	22.14	38.53

Total - Oxide and Sulfide	Measured	25.80	0.545	1.28	452.55	1,063.54
	Indicated	38.31	0.521	1.15	641.96	1,416.65
	Measured and Indicated	64.12	0.531	1.20	1,094.51	2,480.19
	Inferred	15.44	0.474	0.80	235.20	397.02

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 121 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-2: Montgomery-Shoshone Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Montgomery-Shoshone
Redox/ Cutoff	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Oxide/ 0.192 g/t	Measured	1.97	0.637	3.35	40.35	212.12
	Indicated	1.35	0.555	2.85	24.04	123.66
	Measured and Indicated	3.32	0.603	3.15	64.38	335.78
	Inferred	1.05	0.586	3.45	19.76	116.41

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

Table 11-3: Bonanza Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Bonanza
Redox/ Cutoff/	Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Oxide 0.192 g/t	Measured	2.35	0.446	0.44	33.78	33.48
	Indicated	1.22	0.422	0.44	16.61	17.17
	Measured and Indicated	3.58	0.438	0.44	50.40	50.65
	Inferred	0.19	0.473	0.37	2.94	2.28

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 122 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-4: Combined Property Mineral Resources

Combined Global Resources as of December 31, 2021 - Oxide and Sulphide
Classification	Tonnes (Mt)	Au grade (g/t)	Ag grade (g/t)	Au Contained (koz)	Ag Contained (koz)
Measured	30.13	0.544	1.35	526.68	1,309.13
Indicated	40.88	0.519	1.18	682.61	1,557.49
Measured and Indicated	71.01	0.530	1.26	1,209.29	2,866.62
Inferred	16.69	0.481	0.96	257.90	515.72

Notes:

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.25/tonne.

Processing, general and administration, and refining costs are US$5.00/tonne, US$0.50/tonne, and US$0.05/tonne respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

11.2

Database

The drillhole database was provided as an Excel spreadsheet with multiple data tabs for collar, downhole survey, assay, and lithologic information (AGC Master Export_20220204.xls). Additionally, the spreadsheet tabs included notes and other meta-data to help discern data quality. The primary collar, survey, and assay tabs were exported to individual spreadsheets for the data types (AGC_Master_collar_20220204_LS1.xls, AGC_Master_survey_20220204_LS1.xls, AGC_Master_assay_20220204_LS1.xls).

The three spreadsheets, which include extra meta-data were compared with logging and available certificate data and against each other to determine match-ability between the three basic data types used to import into the Vulcan software. Each of the three include tabs for final sorted data to be exported to csv.

A common scenario for many drillholes was to have a second collar name with a “C”, “c”, “A”, or “a” after it to identify that portion of a drillhole as a second drillhole, or a core tail of an RC drillhole (example is RDH-373 and RDH-373C). However, the dh-survey, collar coordinate, or assay data were not always synchronised into a single common drillhole name for both the core and core tail. The data for export in each spreadsheet was synchronized to common HoleID’s and holes with missing assay or collar data were removed. The final database consisted of 1,322 collar records, 6,082 survey records and 173,509 assay interval records. The final number of valid drillholes is less than the previous data set from June 2021 due to duplicate collar with different spellings being removed.

A major difference between the most recent database provided by Augusta Gold and the database for June, 2021 was the treatment of missing assay data. In the old data, many missing intervals had 0 or near-0 grades applied. The newest database had no record at all and the resulting drillhole data in Vulcan has missing portions of the drillhole trace. These are treated as no-grade in the estimation process while the 0’s or near-0’s in the old database tended to lower grades in the gold estimation process. It is generally excepted that missing intervals be treated as null or missing intervals instead of 0’s as the lack of sample could be due to poor sample recovery or lost assay data.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 123 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.2.1

Vulcan Isis Drillhole Database

The three primary drillhole data spreadsheets were saved as csv files and were imported into an Isis drillhole database in Vulcan. The the Isis database was setup with 18 fields including:

HOLEID, FROM, TO, FROM_FT, TO_FT, SAMPLETYPE, SAMPLE_KG, REJECT, AU_RES, AG_RES, AUPPM, AGPPM, AUCAP, AGCAP, AREA, DOMAIN, LITH_A, LITH_N

These include new fields that are not in the original database to aid in data usage, domaining, and estimation. The feet version of downhole intervals aids in comparing to legacy drill logs, were in feet. The sample_kg field helps with sample recovery where available. The reject field was setup in the Excel assay spreadsheet and was coded there to identify rejected drillholes in Vulcan after import. The AUPPM, AU_RES, and AU_CAP fields (and similar AG fields) are a hierarchy of initial imported gold grade, the gold grade considered for estimation and is of resource quality, and a capped version of that grade. The RES grades usually equal AUPPM, except where the interval is rejected. The rejections include both entire rejected drillhole and portions of drillholes were assay grades are not to be used. The AU_CAP is set with a capping script later on.

Figure 11-1 shows the drillhole collars and traces within the respective model boundaries for each of the block models.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 124 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-1: Drillhole Collar Locations

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 125 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.2.2

Drillhole Exclusion

Drillholes excluded from estimation are listed below. At Bullfrog, 25 holes have been excluded from resource estimation due primarily to downhole contamination and a few location and downhole survey issues. Several drillholes were re-instated compared to last year due primarily to newly available data. At Montgomery-Shoshone 21 drillholes now have numerous data gaps with unknown grades in the new database and are inappropriate for local mineral estimation.

Table 11-5: Drillhole Exclusion for Bullfrog Deposit

HoleID	Rejected 2022	Rejected 2021	Notes:
CRDH-5A	Yes	No	Downhole contamination
CRDH-7A	Yes	No	Downhole contamination
DDH-041	Yes	No	Underground collar in unlikely location
RDH-105	Yes	No	Downhole contamination and conflicts with two other close drillholes
RDH-148	Yes	No	Downhole contamination and conflicts with core hole nearby
RDH-195	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-244	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-330	Yes	No	Downhole contamination
RDH-359	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-375	Yes	No	No downhole surveys and poor match with nearby drillholes
RDH-832	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-855	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-856	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-857	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-859	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-868	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-882C	Yes	Yes	RC portion is rejected due to downhole contamination, Core tail unrejected
RDH-891	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-898	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-912	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-924	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-927	Yes	Yes	Downhole contamination
RDH-966	Yes	No	Location shift of 100 meters in new data causing conflict with other drillhole data
RDH-817C	Yes	No	Survey data causes unlikely hole kink and moves highgrade intercept outside of highgrade structure
RDH-827	Yes	No	Survey data causes unlikely hole kink and moves highgrade intercept outside of highgrade structure
DDH-014	No	Yes	Unrejected - Core hole with good data
DDH-016	No	Yes	Unrejected - Core hole with good data
DDH-017	No	Yes	Unrejected - Core hole with good data
EDH-008	No	Yes	Unrejected - Now has assay data
ES-002	No	Yes	Unrejected - Now has assay data
RDH-108	No	Yes	Unrejected - Now has assay data
RDH-185	No	Yes	Unrejected - Now has assay data
RDH-495	No	Yes	Unrejected - Has no assay data anyway and doesn't export from database
RDH-921	No	Yes	Unrejected - Now has assay data

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 126 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-6: Drillhole Exclusion for Montgomery-Shoshone Deposit

HoleID	Rejected 2022	Rejected 2021	Notes:
MS-94-1	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MS-94-2	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MS-94-3	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MS-94-4	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-1	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-2	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-3	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-4	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-6	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-7	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-8	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
MSDH-9	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-027	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-028	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-034	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-036	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-057	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-058	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-568A	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-581	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals
RDH-577	Yes	No	Sporadic, discontinuous, short assay intervals

11.3

Grade Shells

Grade shells representing an 0.18 g/t gold value were developed for each area in Leapfrog software and exported to Vulcan. The grade shells were developed using 3 meter composites and modeled using the principal structural or mineralized trend in each of the respective areas. The Bullfrog area also contained a vein solid to represent the high grade vein. The vein solid was constructed using the hanging wall and footwall of the historic underground stope shapes combined with the drillhole logging information. The vein shape approximates a 3.0 g/t gold value. The Leapfrog triangulations were filtered to eliminate extraneous solids that were constructed on limited drillhole data and didn’t represent continuous mineralization based on multiple drillhole intercepts.

The drillhole data was flagged using the grade shells that were provided and the integer values for the DOMAIN field are shown in Table 11-7.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 127 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-2: Grade Shell (DOMAIN) Triangulations

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 128 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-7: DOMAIN Codes and Corresponding Grade Shell Triangulations

DOMAIN Code	Area	Triangulation Name	Description
10	Bullfrog	Modlim_BF.00t	Background
11	Bullfrog	AU_GPT_INDICATOR_0_18_BULLFROG_trim.00t	Low Grade Shell
12	Bullfrog	GM_RESDOMS_-_BF_MAIN_PART1.00t	Vein Shape
20	Montgomery-Shoshone	Modlim_MS.00t	Background
21	Montgomery-Shoshone	AU_GPT_INDICATOR_0_18_MS_-_INSI_PART1.00t	Low Grade Shell
30	Bonanza	Modlim_BZ.00t	Background
31	Bonanza	AU_GPT_INDICATOR_0_18_BONANZA_-_PART1	Low Grade Shell

11.4

Statistical Analyses and Capping of Outlier Values

All raw drillhole intervals available in mid-2021 were analyzed utilizing histograms, cumulative distribution plots and summary statistics to check the overall distribution of assays and provide guidance for grade capping. Gold and Silver assays were capped for each grade domain utilizing a combination of cumulative distribution plots, total metal lost and coefficient of variation (CV). Breaks or inflections in the cumulative distribution plots were used as the first set of criteria for choosing a capping value followed by limiting the total metal lost between 5% and 10% and/or maintaining a CV less than 2.0. Histograms, cumulative distribution plots and summary statistics for gold and silver assays are listed in Appendix 1.

Separate database fields were generated for the capped Gold and Silver assays and a script was used to set the capped values in the drillhole database. Tables 11-8 and 11-9 summarize the capping statistics for Gold and Silver assays.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 129 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-8: Capping Values and Statistics for Gold Assays

DOMAIN	Au Min (g/t)	Au Max (g/t)	Au Avg (g/t)	Au Cap Value	Percentile (%)	Total GT Lost (%)	CV (capped)	Samples Capped
10	0.000	23.800	0.074	11.000	99.94	3.36	4.67	4
11	0.000	141.748	0.534	12.500	99.77	5.87	1.87	40
12	0.000	135.000	4.387	60.000	99.65	2.78	1.58	12
20	0.000	7.080	0.040	1.900	99.85	2.84	1.89	6
21	0.000	44.460	0.679	7.000	99.42	5.41	1.32	42
30	0.000	57.910	0.065	2.000	99.78	11.17	1.63	21
31	0.000	52.800	0.675	10.000	99.16	11.30	1.85	32

Table 11-9: Capping Values and Statistics for Silver Assays

DOMAIN	Ag Min (g/t)	Ag Max (g/t)	Ag Avg (g/t)	Ag Cap Value	Percentile (%)	Total GT Lost (%)	CV (capped)	Samples Capped
10	0.000	180.000	0.352	13.000	99.83	6.75	1.89	36
11	0.000	179.000	1.325	30.000	99.79	2.96	1.64	41
12	0.000	503.203	7.911	100.000	99.60	5.03	1.43	13
20	0.000	100.000	0.349	10.000	98.90	12.17	1.35	36
21	0.000	867.000	4.655	100.000	99.78	6.15	1.76	18
30	0.000	59.440	0.527	4.300	99.54	2.00	1.32	58
31	0.000	86.000	1.246	25.000	99.55	6.38	1.84	18

11.5

Compositing

The capped assay intervals for gold and silver were composited on 3.0-meter down-hole lengths and broken on DOMAIN boundaries. The 3.0-meter composite length corresponds to the 3.0-meter sub-block size in the resource block model and aligns with the anticipated 9.0-meter bench height to be used in the mining of the mineral resource.

11.6

Variography

Variograms were generated in Vulcan Analyzer for the composited data contained within the low-grade domains for the three areas and also within the high grade vein shape at Bullfrog. This variography study was completed for the June 2021 resource model update.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 130 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-3: Variogram for Bullfrog Low Grade Domain (11)

Figure 11-4: Variogram for Bullfrog High Grade Vein Domain (12)

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 131 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-5: Variogram for Montgomery-Shoshone Low Grade Domain (21)

Figure 11-6: Variogram for Bonanza Low Grade Domain (31)

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 132 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.7

Block Model

Three separate block models were generated for the mineralized areas. The origin and extents of the models were based on the extents of the geologic models, drillhole density and potential open pit extents. A 9m x 9m x 9m parent block size was chosen to best match historic mining benches in each of the pit areas and a 3m x 3m x 3m sub-block size was chosen to provide increased resolution along topographic, geologic and grade shell boundaries. Table 11-10 lists the block model coordinates and extents.

Table 11-10: Block Model Extents

	Bullfrog (BF)	Montgomery- Shoshone (MS)	Bonanza (BZ)
Minimum Easting (m)	8,695	9,150	7,100
Maximum Easting (m)	9,901	10,806	8,000
Minimum Northing (m)	7,280	9,250	7,700
Maximum Northing (m)	9,323	10,753	8,807
Minimum Elevation (m)	701	739	600
Maximum Elevation (m)	1,304	1,468	1,401
Block Size X (Parent, Sub)	9 meters, 3 meters	9 meters, 3 meters	9 meters, 3 meters
Block Size Y (Parent, Sub)	9 meters, 3 meters	9 meters, 3 meters	9 meters, 3 meters
Block Size Z (Parent, Sub)	9 meters, 3 meters	9 meters, 3 meters	9 meters, 3 meters
Number Blocks X	134	184	100
Number Blocks Y	227	167	123
Number Blocks Z	67	81	89
Easting Extents (m)	1,206	1,656	900
Northing Extents (m)	2,043	1,503	1,107
Elevation Extents (m)	603	729	801

The topographic surfaces used to construct the block models at Bullfrog include a combination of surfaces created from 10-meter contour intervals and detailed high-resolution DEM surfaces create from flyover data. The high-resolution DEM surfaces were used inside the current pit while the contour surfaces were used for the overall project area. The bottom of the Bullfrog pit, which has recently been backfilled during the reclamation process, has been captured by a deepest mining surface in the project data that was created from toe-crest-ramp as-builts information.

Triangulated solids that represent surface waste dump material were generated from aerial photo data, current topographic surfaces and the drillhole collar locations prior to placement of the waste dumps. Sub-blocks were created along all topographic surfaces and a topo percentage field was calculated to quantify the percentage of a given block below the topographic surface.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 133 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Solids that represent the historic underground stope shapes in the Bullfrog area were provided. These solids were analyzed in context with the Bullfrog vein shape and were expanded by 1m in all directions to account for differences between the vein shape and underground stope shapes. The expansion of the stopes also provides a buffer to account for potential collapse along the stope boundaries that could result in increased dilution and mineralization loss. Sub-blocks were created along all underground stope boundaries. Figure 11-7 displays an East-West cross-section showing the original stope shape (as-built) with the 1 meter expanded stope shape. The modeled Bullfrog vein shape is displayed as reference.

Figure 11-7: Bullfrog Underground Stope Shapes

The same grade shell solids used to flag the DOMAIN field in the drillhole and composite files were used to flag the DOMAIN field in the block models. Sub-blocks were created along all grade shell boundaries.

Block model fields were created to capture gold values, silver values, distance to nearest composite, number of composites and number of drillholes used in the block estimation. A lithology field was flagged using the lithologic solids and used to assign rock density. Block tonnes and block ounce fields were calculated based on block volume, topo percent, density and estimated gold and silver grades. These fields were used in the subsequent re-blocking of the model to a regularized 9m x 9m x 9m block model for pit optimization work.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 134 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.8

Estimation Methodology

Gold and silver grades were ordinary kriged using multiple-pass estimation runs based on estimation domain and expanding search distances. The first three estimation passes were set at a search distance equivalent to the variogram range corresponding to 50%, 80% and 90% of the variogram sill generated from 9 meter gold composites, respectively. A fourth estimation pass was done at longer search ranges to generate mineral inventory. Composite selection criteria were also varied by estimation pass in terms of the minimum/maximum samples required and number of samples per drillhole. Gold and silver grades were estimated using the same estimation parameters. A nearest-neighbor estimate and an inverse-distance estimate were also completed for each of the models and used for block model validation purposes. The variogram models used in the estimation were taken from the variograms presented in Section 11.6. Table 11-11 summarizes the major estimation parameters used in the estimation runs.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 135 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-11: Block Estimation Parameters

Area	Pass	Domain	Bearing	Dip	Plunge	Major Axis (m)	Semi- Major Axis (m)	Minor Axis (m)	Max Samples/ DH	Samples Min	Samples Max
BF	1	11 - LG	170	-45	0	10	10	10	3	9	2
BF	2	11 - LG	170	-45	0	50	50	20	6	18	3
BF	3	11 - LG	170	-45	0	75	75	20	6	18	3
BF	4	11 - LG	170	-45	0	100	100	30	6	18	3
BF	1	12 - Vein	170	-45	0	10	10	10	3	9	2
BF	2	12 - Vein	170	-45	0	50	50	20	6	18	3
BF	3	12 - Vein	170	-45	0	75	75	20	6	18	3
BF	4	12 - Vein	170	-45	0	100	100	30	6	18	3
MS	1	21 - LG	45	45	0	10	10	10	3	9	2
MS	2	21 - LG	45	45	0	30	30	15	6	18	3
MS	3	21- LG	45	45	0	55	55	28	6	18	3
MS	4	21 - LG	45	45	0	100	100	50	6	18	3
MS	1	22 - Polaris	0	60	0	10	10	10	3	9	2
MS	2	22 - Polaris	0	60	0	30	30	15	6	18	3
MS	3	22 - Polaris	0	60	0	55	55	28	6	18	3
MS	4	22 - Polaris	0	60	0	150	150	75	6	18	3
BZ	1	31 - LG	170	-60	0	10	10	10	3	9	2
BZ	2	31 - LG	170	-60	0	40	40	20	6	18	3
BZ	3	31 - LG	170	-60	0	60	60	30	6	18	3
BZ	4	31 - LG	170	-60	0	100	100	30	6	18	3

A soft boundary approach was used within the low grade estimation domains to allow the estimation to use drillhole composites from outside of the domain. A 50m x 50m x 25m soft boundary search was used for Bullfrog while a 25m x 25m x 10m soft boundary search was used for Bonanza.

Visual validations between drillhole composites and estimated blocks were done on sections and plans. An example cross-section is shown in Figure 11-8.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 136 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-8: Bullfrog 8620N Cross-Section Showing Gold Blocks and Composites

The kriged estimates were validated using statistical comparisons between the nearest-neighbor estimate and the inverse-distance estimate. Swath plots between the kriged estimate and the nearest neighbor estimate were generated on Easting, Northing and Elevation. The swath plots can be found in Appendix 1.

The estimated gold and silver grades were copied to new variables (Au_use, Ag_use) within the block model and post-estimation calculations were performed on those variables. All gold and silver grades were set to zero inside the 1 meter expanded stope shape, dump shapes and pit fill shapes. The unmineralized and barrenTB3 basalt unit was also assigned null values for gold and silver. All blocks above the mined-out topography were set to zero.

A triangulation representing oxide mineralization was provided and coded to the block model as oxide. All material in the hanging wall of the MP Fault is also considered to be oxide. All remaining blocks were coded as sulfide.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 137 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-9: Oxide and Sulfide Coding – Bullfrog Section 8600N

11.9

Resource Estimate Classification

Resource classification was based on the distance to the nearest composite and the number of holes used in the block estimate. The distances and number of drillholes used were based on geologic continuity as observed by the project geologist. Also, the ranges associated with 50%, 80% and 90% of the variogram sill were used as a guide in selecting the appropriate distances. Table 11-12 shows the parameters used in the assignment of classification.

Table 11-12: Block Estimation Parameters

	Distance to Nearest Composite	Number of Drillholes used in Estimate	Classification Assignment
Measured	<= 15 meters	>= 3 drillholes	CATEG = 1
Indicated	<= 50 meters	>= 3 drillholes	CATEG = 2
Inferred	<= 75 meters	>= 2 drillholes	CATEG = 3

All blocks estimated in Pass 4 were not classified.

11.10

Density Data

Specific gravity was assigned to the block model based on approximately 280 density measurements recently taken in mineralized rock and unmineralized rock. Further delineation of the density values in the unmineralized rock were done using the assigned lithology. Tables 11-13 to 11-15 summarize the assignment of density values to the block model.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 138 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 11-13: Density Assignments for Mineralized Domains

Mineralized Rock
Area	Mineralized Domain	SG Assignment
BF	Low Grade (11)	2.52
BF	Vein (12)	2.71
MS	Low Grade (21)	2.52
MS	Low Grade, Polaris (22)	2.52
BZ	Low Grade (31)	2.52

Table 11-14: Density Assignments for Unmineralized Domains

Unmineralized Rock
Area	Unmineralized DOMAIN	Lithology (LITH)	SG Assignment (SG)
BF, MS & BZ	Unmineralized (10, 20, 30)	1, 2	2.38
BF, MS & BZ	Unmineralized (10, 20, 30)	3, 4, 5, 6	2.36
BF, MS & BZ	Unmineralized (10, 20, 30)	7	2.25
BF, MS & BZ	Unmineralized (10, 20, 30)	8	2.42
BF, MS & BZ	Unmineralized (10, 20, 30)	9, 10	2.26
BF, MS & BZ	Unmineralized (10, 20, 30)	20, 30	2.60

Table 11-15: Density Assignments for Dump, Fill and Alluvium

Special Assignments
Area	Description	SG Assignment
BF, MS & BZ	Waste Dump	2.05
BF, MS & BZ	Pit Backfill	2.05
BF, MS & BZ	UG Stope Backfill/Pastefill	2.00
BF, MS & BZ	Alluvium	2.21

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 139 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.11

Pit Slopes

The pit slopes were reviewed and measured using recent topography, aerial photos and observations of the current pit highwalls. Pit slope angles were estimated by measuring the overall slope angle (toe to crest) of the existing pit walls. Measurements were taken along the pit walls where noticeable pit slope changes occur both laterally and vertically. Triangulations were generated from the pit slope measurements and fault surfaces to represent the slope sectors and assign overall slope angles for use during the pit shell optimization. The following figures show the pit slope measurements, slope sector triangulations and overall slope angle assignment for each slope sector.

Figure 11-10: Bullfrog Pit Slope Angles and Slope Sector Assignments

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 140 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-11: Bonanza Pit Slope Angles and Slope Sector Assignments

Figure 11-12: Montgomery-Shoshone Pit Slope Angles and Slope Sector Assignments

11.12

Reblocking

The sub-blocked model was re-blocked to a regularized size of 9m x 9m x 9m for use in the Minemax LG optimization software. Tonnes per block were calculated for the sub-blocked model by multiplying the block volume, specific gravity and percentage below topography. Gold and silver ounces were then calculated for each block by multiplying the block tonnage and the gold and silver grades. The block regularization exercise in Vulcan summed the sub-block tonnes and the sub-block ounces during the re-blocking to the 9m x 9m x 9m regularized blocks. Resource classification used the majority code assignment during re-blocking.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 141 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

11.13

Pit Shell Optimization

Lerch Grossman pit shell optimizations in Minemax software were performed on the re-blocked models using the parameters in Table 11-16.

Table 11-16: LG Pit Optimization Parameters

Parameter:	Input	Unit
Gold Price	1,550.00	US$/oz
Silver Price	20.00	US$/oz

Mining Cost Mineralized Material and Waste	2.25	US$/tonne
Processing Cost	5.00	US$/tonne
General and Administrative (G&A)	0.50	US$/tonne
Refining Cost	0.05	US$/tonne
Selling Cost	10.00	US$/oz

Gold Recovery (Oxide Material)	82.0	%
Gold Recovery (Sulphide Material)	50.0	%
Silver Recovery (Oxide Material)	20.0	%
Silver Recovery (Sulphide Material)	12.0	%

Pit optimization in Minemax implies an incremental cutoff grade block by block counting costs and revenues from the estimated block parameters. For reporting, the incremental gold cutoff grades used are 0.137 g/tonne for oxide-leach and 0.224 g/tonne for sulphide leach. Break-even cutoff grades, which consider mining cost and can identify blocks with overall positive net value, are 0.192 for oxide-leach and 0.315 for sulphide-leach.

Property boundaries were observed during the pit optimization and no mineralized material or waste mining was allowed to occur outside of the property boundaries. Figures 11-13 to 11-15 represent the results of the pit optimization and the bounding surfaces for which mineral resources have been calculated within.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 142 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-13: Bullfrog

Figure 11-14: Montgomery-Shoshone

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 143 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Figure 11-15: Bonanza

In addition to the surfaces, a csv version of the block model is exported from Minemax with additional pitshell and destination fields. The “pitshell” field with a code of 1 represents all blocks within the optimized pit. Additionally, a “destination” field with a code of 1 represents blocks with positive net values using both gold and silver values and economic parameters. These two fields are imported into the regularized Vulcan resource model and are used directly for tabulating resources.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 144 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

12.

Mineral Reserve Estimates

N/A

13.

Mining Methods

N/A

14.

Process and Recovery Methods

N/A

15.

Infrastructure

N/A

16.

Market Studies

N/A

17.

Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

N/A

18.

Capital and Operating Costs

N/A

19.

Economic Analysis

N/A

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 145 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

20.

Adjacent Properties

Corvus Gold Corp (Corvus) controls most of the northern half of the Bullfrog Mining District. Corvus’ North Bullfrog southern land boundary is 2.4 km (1.5 miles) north of the Company’s northern land boundary, or 8 km (5 miles) north of the M-S pit. Corvus also controls the Mother Lode property approximately 3.8 km from Bullfrog’s eastern property boundary to the western boundary of Mother Lode. Corvus released results in two technical reports titled “Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment for Biox Mill and Heap Leach Processing At The Mother Lode Project, Bullfrog Mining District, Nye County, Nevada”, and “Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment for Gravity Milling and Heap Leach Processing at the North Bullfrog Project, Bullfrog Mining District, Nye County Nevada, both with an effective date of October 7, 2020. The QP has been unable to verify the information in the foregoing technical report and the information is not necessarily indicative of the mineralization at the Bullfrog Gold Project.

Figure 20-1 below shows the land positions of Augusta, Corvus and other properties in the area.

Figure 20-1: Land Positions of the Bullfrog Project and Adjacent Properties

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 146 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

21.

Other Relevant Data and Information

Relevant data and information have been included within the respective sections.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 147 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

22.

Interpretation and Conclusions

22.1

Geology and Mineral Resources

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 148 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

22.2

Metallurgical Test Work and Mineral Processing

The metallurgical test program should be comprehensive, and include the following (at a minimum):

Full characterization of composite samples – Au/Ag content, carbon and sulfur speciation, typical Geochem including Hg, solids specific gravity

Crushing work index testing

Abrasion index testing

Column leach testing at various HPGR crush sizes, including comparative bottle roll tests and size fraction recovery analysis

Agglomeration testing

Compacted permeability testing

Any required environmental tests on column test residues measured

22.3

Infrastructure

The project is in a jurisdiction that is amenable to mining.

The project site is near the town of Beatty, Nevada which has adequate amenities and services.

The project was open pit and underground mined from 1989-1999 and has remaining infrastructure that includes power lines on site, a paved highway to site and a network of roads across the district.

Availability of adequate power through the local utility, as well as available water and water rights to support operations require further evaluation.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 149 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

23.

Recommendations

23.1

Exploration

Further exploration through drilling, geophysics and mapping should continue throughout the district in order to define the current resource around the known mineralization, but also to test potential greenfield exploration targets. Geologic models representing structure, lithology, alteration and mineralization should continue to be developed utilizing historic data combined with new information. Historic mining information including open pit production data, blasthole data, pit mapping, underground production data, underground mapping and underground sampling should be extracted from the historic data sets and made available in a format that can be used in future geologic and resource modeling.

23.2

Baseline Studies

Baseline study work needs to be completed in the following areas to provide additional information to support permitting activities and social-cultural work prior to pre-feasibility, feasibility and mining operations.

Geochemical characterization of waste rock

Hydrologic data collection and modeling to develop district-wide hydrology model

Geotechnical data collection and modeling to determine pit slope parameters

Plant and wildlife surveys with emphasis on Desert Tortoise and Bat habitats

Cultural/Archeological surveys

Meteorological data collection

Water balance study

23.3

Additional Studies

A Preliminary Economic Assessment should be completed for the project taking into account detailed mine designs, production scheduling, process designs and detailed operating and capital cost estimates. The advancement to Pre-Feasibility stage will require the baseline studies listed in Section 26.2 to be developed and initiated. Further drilling, data acquisition and modeling will be required across all future study stages and a technical framework including QAQC, geologic modeling, resource modeling, mine planning and process planning should be put in place to ensure all data and work meets industry standard guidelines. The database should be thoroughly reviewed.

23.4

Estimated Costs

The cost estimates associated with further exploration drilling, baseline studies and additional studies to advance the project are listed in Table 23-1.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 150 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Table 23-1: Land Positions of the Bullfrog Project and Adjacent Properties

Task	Cost (USD)
Exploration/Delineation Drilling (11,000 meters)	$5,000,000
Metallurgical Studies	$500,000
Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA)	$250,000
Permitting	$2,000,000
Total	$7,750,000

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 151 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

24.

References

Allison, A., 1993, Geology of the Bullfrog gold deposit, Nye County, Nevada: unpublished abstract for Lac Bullfrog mine.

Applegate, J.D.R., Walker, J.D., and Hodges, K.V., 1992, Late Cretaceous extensional unroofing in the Funeral Mountains metamorphic core complex: Geology, v. 20, p. 519-522.

Arnold, T.D., 1996, Underground Mining: A Challenge to Established Open Pit Mining, Mining Engineering, p. 25-29.

Arnold, T.D., 2011-present. Former Barrick Bullfrog UG Mine Supt., personal communications and meetings, Ashley, R.P., 1990, The Goldfield gold district, Esmeralda and Nye Counties, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Bulletin 1857-H, Hl-H7.

Beane, R.E., 1991, Results of geochemical studies in the Bullfrog district: unpub. company report, Lac Minerals, 31 p.

Beling, D.C., 2017, Bullfrog Project Report & Corporate Evaluation, internal confidential report, Bullfrog Gold Corp., 137 p.

Bonham, H.F., Jr., 1988, Models for volcanic-hosted precious metal deposits: A review, in Schafer, R.W., Cooper, J.J. and Vikre, P.O., eds., Bulk Mineable Precious Metal Deposits of the Western United States: Geological Society of Nevada, p. 259-271.

Bonham, H.F., Jr., and Garside, L.J., 1979, Geology of the Tonopah, Lone Mountain, Klondike, and northern Mud Lake quadrangles, Nevada: Nevada Bur. Mines Geol. Bull. 92, 142 p.

Bonham, H.F., Jr., and Hess RH., 1995, The Nevada Mineral industry, 1995: Nevada Bur. Mines Geol., Spec. Pub. MI-1995.

Buchanan, L.J., 1981; Precious metal deposits associated with volcanic environments in the southwest, in Dickinson, W.R., and Payne, W.D. eds., Relations of tectonics to ore deposits in the southern Cordillera: Arizona Geol. Soc. Digest, v. XIV, p. 237-262.

Byers, F.M., Jr., Carr, W.J., and Orkild, P.P., 1989, Volcanic Centers of Southwestern Nevada-Evolution of understanding, 1960-1988: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 94, p. 5908-5924.

Capps, R.C., and Moore, J.A., 1991, Geologic setting of mid-Miocene gold deposits in the Castle Mountains, San Bernardino County, California and Clark County, Nevada, in Raines, G.L., Lisle, R.E., Schafer, R.W., and Wilkinson, W.H., eds., Geology and Ore Deposits of the Great Basin, Symposium Proceedings, Geol. Soc. Nevada, Reno/Sparks, p. 1195-1219.

Carr, W.J., Byers, F.M., Jr., and Orkild, P.P., 1986, Stratigraphic and volcano-tectonic relations of the Crater Flat Tuff and some older volcanic units: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 1323, 28 p.

Carr, M.D., and Monsen, S.A., 1988, A field trip guide to the geology of Bare Mountain, in Weide, D.L., and Faber, M.L, eds. This extended Geological journeys in the southern Basin and Range: Geol. Soc. America, Cordilleran Section, Field Trip Guidebook, p. 50·57.

Castor, S.B., and Weiss, S.I., 1992, Contrasting styles of epithermal precious-metal mineralization in the southwestern Nevada volcanic field, USA: Ore Geology Reviews, v. 7, p. 193-223.

Castor, S.B., and Sjoberg, J.J., 1993, Uytenbogaardtite, Ag3AuS2, in the Bullfrog mining district, Nevada: Canadian Mineralogist, v. 31, p. 89-98.

Connors, K.A., 1995, Studies of silicic volcanic geology and geo-chemistry in the Great Basin of western North America: Part I Geology of the western margin of the Timber Mountain caldera complex and Post-Timber Mountain syntectonic volcanism in the Bullfrog Hills Oasis Valley area, southwestern Nevada volcanic field; Part II Initial gold contents of silicic volcanic rocks: Implication for behavior of gold in magmatic systems and significance in evaluating source materials for gold deposits: unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Nevada, Reno, 216 p.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 152 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Conrad, J.E., and McKee, E.H., 1995, High precision ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar ages of rhyolitic host rock at Sleeper deposit, Humboldt County, Nevada: in Geology and Ore Deposits of the American Cordillera, Reno/Sparks, Nevada, Geological Society of Nevada, Abstracts with Programs, p. 20-21 (updated data presented at meeting).

Cornwall, H.R., and Kleinhampl, F.J., 1964, Geology of the Bullfrog quadrangle and ore deposits related to the Bullfrog Hills caldera, Nye County, Nevada, and Inyo County, California: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 454-J, 25 p.

Couch, B.F. and Carpenter, J.A., 1943, Nevada's metal and mineral production (1859-1940): Univ. Nevada Bull., V. 37, 159 p.

Crowe, D.E., Mitchell, T.L, and Capps, R.C., 1995, Geology and stable isotope geochemistry of the Jumbo gold deposit, California: An example of an unusual magmatic fluid-dominated adularia-sericite gold system: Geology and Ore Deposits of the American Cordillera, Reno/Sparks, Nevada, Geological Society of Nevada, Abstracts with Programs, p. 21-22.

DeWitt, E., Thorson, J.P., and Smith, R.C., 1991, Geology and gold deposits of the Oatman District, northwestern Arizona, in Geology and Resources of Gold in the United States, U.S. Geol. Survey Bull., 1857-1, p. 11-128.

Drobeck, P.A., Hillemeyer, F.L., Frost, E.G., and Liebler, G.S., 1986, The Picacho mine: a gold mineralized detachment in southeastern California, in Beatty, B., and Wilkinson, P.A.K., eds., Frontiers in Geology and Ore Deposits of Arizona and the Southwest: Arizona Geol. Soc. Digest, v. 16, p. 187-221.

Dubendorfer, E.M., and Simpson, D.A, 1994, Kinematics and timing of Tertiary extension in the western Lake Mead region, Nevada: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 106, p. 1057-1073.

Eng, T., Boden, D.R., Reischman, M.R., and Biggs, J.O., 1996, Geology and Mineralization of the Bullfrog Mine and vicinity, Nye County, Nevada, in Coyner, A.R., Fahey, P.L., eds., Geology and Ore Deposits of the American Cordillera, Symposium proceedings, Reno, Geological Society of Nevada, vol. I, pp. 353-399.

Eng, T., 2011 – present. Former Bullfrog Exploration Manager – Lac Minerals. Personal communications and meetings.

Fridrich, C.J., Tectonic evolution of the Crater Flat basin, Yucca Mountain region, Nevada, in Wright, L, and Troxel, B., eds., Cenozoic Basins of the Death Valley Region, California and Nevada: Geol. Soc. America Spec. Paper.

Goldstrand, P., 1996, Analysis of sedimentary rocks from drill holes in the southern Bullfrog Hills: unpublished consulting report for Barrick Bullfrog Mine, Inc.

Greybeck, J.D., and Wallace, A.B., 1991, Gold mineralization at Fluorspar Canyon near Beatty, Nye County, Nevada, in Raines, G.L, Lisle, R.E., Schafer, R.W., and Wilkinson, W.H., eds., Geology and Ore Deposits of the Great Basin, Symposium Proceedings, Geol. Soc. Nevada, Reno, Nevada, p. 935-946.

Haas, J.L, 1971, The effect of salinity on the maximum thermal gradient of a hydrothermal system at hydrostatic pressure: Economic Geology v. 66, p. 940-946.

Hamilton, W.B., 1988, Detachment faulting in the Death Valley region, California, and Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1790, p. 51-85.

Hausback, B.P., Deino, A.L, Turrin, B.T., McKee, E.H., Frizzell, V.A., Jr., Noble, D.C., and Weiss, S.I., 1990, New ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar ages for the Spearhead and Civet Cat Canyon Members of the Stonewall Flat Tuff, Nye County, Nevada: Evidence for systematic errors in standard K-Ar age determination on sanidine: Isochron/West, no. 56, p. 3-7.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 153 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Heald, P., Foley, J.K. and Hayba, D.0., 1987, Comparative anatomy of volcanic-hosted epithermal deposits: acid-sulfate and adularia-sericite types: Econ. Geol., v. 82, p. 1-26.

Hedenquist, J.W., and Henley, R.W., 1985, Hydrothermal eruptions in the Waiotapu geothermal system, New Zealand: Their origin, associated breccias, and relation to precious metal mineralization: Econ. Geol., v. 80, p. 1640-1668.

Henry, C.D., Castor, S.B., and Elson, H.B., 1996, Geology and ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar geochronology of volcanism and mineralization at Round Mountain, Nevada, in Coyner A., ed., Geology and Ore Deposits of the American Cordillera, Reno/Sparks, Nevada, Geological Society of Nevada.

Hinrichs, E.N., 1968, Geologic map of the Camp Desert quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Map GQ-726, scale 1:24,000.

Hoisch, T.D., Heizler, M.T., and Zartman, R.E., Timing of detachment faulting in the Bullfrog Hills and Bare Mountain, southwest Nevada: Inferences from ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar1 K-Ar, U-Pb, and fission-track thermochronology: J. of Geophysics Res.

Hoisch, T.D., and Simpson, 1993, Rise and tilt of metamorphic rocks in the lower plate of a detachment fault in the Funeral Mountain, Death Valley, California: J. of Geophysics Res. v. 98, p. 6805-6827.

Huysken, K.T., Vogel, T.A., and Layer, P.W., 1994, Incremental growth of a large volume, chemically zoned magma body: a study of tephra sequence beneath the Rainier Mesa ash flow sheet of the Tiber Mountain Tuff: Bulletin Volcanology, v. 56, p. 377-385.

John, T.W., 2011-present. Former Barrick Bullfrog Exploration Manager, personal communications and meetings

Jorgensen, D.K., Rankin, J.W., and Wilkins, J. Jr., 1989, The geology, alteration and mineralogy of the Bullfrog gold deposit, Nye County, Nevada: AIME Preprint 89-135, 13 p.

Jorgensen, D.K., Tillman, T.D. and Benedict, J.F., Montgomery-Shoshone Project summary report, St. Joe American Corp. 1986, 80 p.

Kappes, Cassiday & Assoc., Bullfrog Project, Column Leach test Report-Subgrade Sample, 1995

Kral, V.E., 1951, Mineral Resources of Nye County, Nevada: Univ. of Nevada, Reno Bull. v. 45, no. 3, 223 p.

Kump, Dan, 2001, Backfill – Whatever it takes, Mining Engineering, p. 50-52.

Liebler, G.S., 1988, Geology and gold mineralization at the Picachu mine, Imperial County, California, in Schafer, R.W., Cooper, J.J., and Vikre, P.G., eds., Bulk Mineable Precious Metal Deposits of the Western United States, Symposium Proceedings, Geol. Sue. Nevada, Reno/Sparks, Nevada, p. 453-472.

Lincoln, F.C., 1923, Mining districts and mineral resources of Nevada: Reno, Nevada Newsletter Publishing Co., 296 p.

Mahmoud, S.H., 1993, Geochemistry, mineralogy, and genesis of the Copperstone gold deposit, La Paz, County, Arizona: Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 206 p.

Maldonado, F., 1990a, Structural geology of the upper plate of the Bullfrog Hills detachment system: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 102, p. 992-1006.

Maldonado, F., 1990b, Geologic map of the northwest quarter of the Bullfrog 15-minute quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Invest. Map I-1985, scale 1:24,000.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 154 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Maldonado, F., and Hausback, B.P., 1990, Geologic map of the northeast quarter of the Bullfrog 15-minute quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Invest. Map I-2049, scale 1:24,000.

Manske, S.L, Matlack, W.F., Springett, M.W., Strakele, A.E. Jr., Watowich, S.N., Yeomans, B., and E. Yeomans, 1988, Geology of the Mesquite deposit, Imperial County, California: Mining Engineering, v. 40, p. 439-444.

Marvin, R.F., and Mehnert, H.H., and Naeser, C.W., 1989, U.S. Geologic Survey radiometric ages compilation "C", part 3: California and Nevada: Isochron/West, no. 52, p. 3-11.

McKee, E.H., 1968, Age and rate of movement of the northern part of the Death Valley-Furnace Creek fault zone, California: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 29, p. 509-512.

McKee, E.H., 1983, Reset K-Ar ages-Evidence for three metamorphic cure complexes, western Nevada: Isochron/West, p. 38, p. 17-20.

Minor, S.A., Sawyer, D.A., Wahl, R.R., Frizzell, V.A., Jr., Schilling, S.P., Warren, R.G., Orkild, P.P., Coe, J.A., Hudson, M.R., Fleck, R.J., Lanphere, M.A., Swadley, W.C., and Coe, J.C., 1993, Preliminary geologic map of the Pahute Mesa 30' x 60' quadrangle, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Open-File Rept. 93-299.

Monsen, S.A., Carr, M.D., Reheis, M.C., and Orkild, P.P., 1992, Geologic map of Bare Mountain, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Invest. Map I-2201, scale 1:24,000.

Morton, J.L, Silberman, M.L, Bonham, H.F., Garside, L.J., and Noble, D.C., 1977, K-Ar ages of volcanic rocks, plutonic rocks, and ore deposits in Nevada and eastern California: lsochron/West, no. 20, p. 19-29.

Nash, J.T., Utterback, W.C., and Trudel, W.S., 1995, Geology and geochemistry of Tertiary volcanic host rocks, Sleeper gold-silver deposit, Humboldt County, Nevada: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 2090, 63 p.

Noble, D.C., Vogel, T.A., Weiss, S.I., Erwin, J.W., McKee, E.H., and Younker, L.W., 1984, Stratigraphic relations and source areas of ash flow sheets of the Black Mountain and Stonewall volcanic centers, Nevada: J. of Geophysics Res., v. 89, p. 8593-8602.

Noble, D.C., Weiss, S.I., and McKee, E.H., 1991, Magmatic and hydrothermal activity, caldera geology, and regional extension in the western part of the southwestern Nevada volcanic field, in Raines, G.L, Lisle, R.E., Shafer, R.W., and Wilkinson, W.H. eds., Geology and Ore Deposits of the Great Basin, Symposium Proceedings: Reno, Nevada, Geological Society of Nevada, p. 913-934.

Odt, D.A., 1983, Geology and geochemistry of the Sterling gold deposit, Nye County, Nevada: Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Univ. Nevada, Reno, 100 p.

Peterson, M.A., and Ahler, B.A., 1990, Geology of the Bullfrog gold deposit, Nye County, Nevada (Abs): Geological Society of Nevada, November monthly meeting newsletter.

Polovina, J.S., 1984, Origin and structural evolution of gold-silver-copper-bearing hydrothermal breccias in the Stedman district, southeastern California, in Wilkins, J. ed., Gold and Silver Deposits of the Basin and Range Province, Western USA: Arizona Geol. Soc. Digest, v. 15, p. 159-166.

Proffett, J., 1994, Notes on the geology and exploration potential of the Bullfrog district, southern Nevada: unpub. consulting report. for Lac Minerals, 20 p.

Ransome, F.L, Garrey, G.H., and Emmons, W.H., 1910, Geology and ore deposits of the Bullfrog district: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 407, 130 p.

Ray, H.M., Morrissey, J.C., IV, Montgomery-Shoshone Gold Project Onsite Large Column Test Results, St. Joe Minerals Corp., 1986, 31 p.

Reynolds, M.W., 1969, Stratigraphy and structural geology of the Titus and Titanothere Canyons area, Death Valley, California: unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, California, 310 p.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 155 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Richard, S.M., Spencer, J.E., and Haxel, G.B., 1996, Geologic constraints on gold mineralization in the Picacho mine area, southeast California: Soc. of Mining and Exploration Technical Program with Abstracts, p. 131-132.

Ristorcelli, S.J., and Ernst, D.R., 1991, Summary report: USNGS exploration 1990-1991, Nye County, Nevada: unpublished company report, U.S. Nevada Gold Search Joint Venture, Carson City, 104 p.

Sander, M.V., and Einaudi, M.T., 1990, Epithermal deposition of gold during transition from propylitic to potassic alteration at Round Mountain, Nevada: Econ. Geol. v. 85, p. 285-311.

Sawyer, D.A., Fleck, R.J., Lanphere, M.A., Warren, R.G., Broxton, D.E., and Hudson, M.R., 1994, Episodic caldera volcanism in the Miocene southwestern Nevada volcanic field: Revised stratigraphic framework, ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar geochronology, and implications for magmatism and extension: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 106, p. 1304-1318.

Sherlock, R.L., Tosdal, R.M., Lehrman, N.J., Graney, J.R., Losh, S., Jowett, E.C.1 and Kesler, S.E., 1995, Origin of the McLaughlin mine sheeted vein complex: Metal zoning, fluid inclusion, and isotopic evidence: Econ. Geol. v. 90, n. 8, p. 2156- 2181.

Sillitoe, R.H., 1993, Epithermal models: Genetic types, geometrical controls and shallow features, in Kirkham, R.V., Sinclair, W.D., Thorpe, R.L. and Duke, J.M. eds., Mineral Deposit Modeling: Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 40, p. 403-417.

Spencer, J.E., and Welty, J.W., 1986, Possible controls of base-and precious metal mineralization with Tertiary detachment fault in the lower Colorado River trough, Arizona, and California: Geology, v. 14, p. 195-198.

Spencer, J.E., Duncan, J.T., and Burton, W.D., 1988, The Copper-stone mine: Arizona's new gold producer: Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, Field notes, v. 18, no. 2, p. 1-3.

Stewart, J.H., 1967, Possible large right-lateral displacement along fault and shear zones in Death Valley Las Vegas area, California, and Nevada: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 78, p. 131-142.

Stewart, J.H., 1988, Tectonics of the Walker Lane belt, western Great Basin: Mesozoic and Cenozoic deformation in a zone of shear, in Ernst, W.G., Metamorphism and Crustal Evolution of the Western United States, Rubey Volume VII: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, p. 683-713.

Stock, C., and Bode, F.D., 1935, Occurrence of lower Oligocene mammal-bearing beds near Death Valley, California: Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, v. 21, n. 10, p. 571-579.

Tetra Tech, 2017, NI 43-101 Technical Report Mineral Resource Estimate Bullfrog Gold Project Nye County, Nevada.

Tingley, J.V., 1984, Trace element associations in mineral deposits, Bare Mountain (Fluorine) mining district, southern Nye County, Nevada: Nevada Bur. Mines Geol. Report 39, 28 p.

Weiss, S.I., Noble, D.C., Worthington, J.E., and McKee, E.H., 1993, Neogene tectonism form the southern Nevada volcanic field to the White Mountains, California, Part I. Miocene volcanic stratigraphy, paleo topography, extensional faulting and uplift between northern Death Valley and Pahute Mesa, in Lahren, M.M., Trexler, J.H., Jr., and Spinosa, C., eds., Crustal Evolution of the Great Basin and Sierra Nevada: Cordilleran/Rocky Mountain Sectional Mtg., Geol. Soc. America Guidebook, Dept. of Geol. Sci., University of Nevada, Reno, p. 353-382.

Weiss, S.I., Noble, D.C., McKee, E.H., Connors, K.A, and Jackson, M.R., 1995, Multiple episodes of hydrothermal activity and epithermal mineralization in the southwestern Nevada volcanic field and their relations to magmatic activity, volcanism, and regional extension. Appendix B, in Weiss, S.I., Noble, D.C., and Larson, L.T., 1995, Task 3: Evaluation of mineral resource potential, caldera geology and volcano-tectonic frame-work at and near Yucca Mountain; report for October, 1994 September, 1995: Center for Neotectonics’ Studies, University of Nevada, Reno, 44 p. plus appendices.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 156 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

Weiss, S.I., 1996, Hydrothermal activity, epithermal mineralization, and regional extension in the southwestern Nevada volcanic field: Unpublished PhD. dissertation, Univ. Nevada, Reno, 212 p.

White, D.E., 1981, Active geothermal systems and hydrothermal ore deposits: Econ. Geol., 75th Anniversary Volume, p. 393-423.

Willis, G.F., and Tosdal, R.M., 1992, Formation of gold veins and breccias during dextral strike-slip faulting in the Mesquite mining district, southeastern California: Econ. Geol., v. 87, p. 2002- 2022.

Worthington, J.E., IV, 1992, Neogene structural and volcanic geology of the Gold Mountain-Slate Ridge area, Esmeralda County, Nevada: unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Nevada, Reno, 76 p.

Yopps, S., and Manning, K.L. Pilot Heap Leach Tests for Lac Bullfrog “Sub-Grade” Ore Evaluation. 1995, 10 p.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 157 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

25.	Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

The QPs opinion contained herein are based on information provided by Augusta Gold Corp. and others throughout the course of the update. The QPs have taken responsible measures to confirm information provided by others and take responsibility for the information.

To the extent permitted, the QPs disclaim responsibility for the relevant section(s) of the Technical Report.

The following disclosure is made in respect to the Expert

Tom Ladner, Vice President, Legal, Augusta Gold Corp., Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Report, opinion, or statement(s) relied upon:

Legal Information on mineral tenure and status, title, royalty obligations and surface access, provided on or about the date hereof and as set out herein.

Extent of reliance: Full reliance following a review by the QP.

Portion of the Technical Report to which disclaimer applies: Section 3.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 158 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

26.	Appendix 1

26.1	Statistical Analysis of Drillhole Data for Gold Assays

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 159 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 160 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 161 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 162 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 163 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 164 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 165 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

26.2	Statistical Analysis of Drillhole Data for Silver Assays

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 166 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 167 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 168 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 169 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 170 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 171 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 172 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

26.3	Swath Plots

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 173 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 174 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 175 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 176 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 177 of 178

December 2023

Augusta Gold Corp.

FORTE DYNAMICS, INC
120 Commerce Drive., Units 3 & 4, Fort Collins, CO 80524

P a g e | 178 of 178

December 2023

Exhibit 96.2

MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE FOR THE

REWARD PROJECT, NYE COUNTY, NEVADA, USA

A picture containing outdoor, sky, mountain, nature

Description automatically generated

Prepared For:	CR Reward LLC & Augusta Gold Corp. Suite 555 – 999, Canada Place Vancouver, BC V6C 3E1 Canada

Prepared by:	APEX Geoscience Ltd. #100, 11450-160^th Street NW Edmonton AB T5M 3Y7 Canada

	Kappes, Cassiday & Associates 7950 Security Circle Reno, NV USA 89506

Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P. Geol., P.Geo.

Timothy D. Scott, BA.Sc., RM SME

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Signing Date: June 29^th, 2022

Amended Date: December 18, 2023

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Contents

1	Summary			1
	1.1	Issuer and Purpose		1
	1.2	Authors, Contributors and Site Inspection		1
	1.3	Project Setting		2
	1.4	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements		2
	1.5	Geology and Mineralization		4
	1.6	History		5
	1.7	Drilling and Sampling		5
	1.8	Data Verification		6
	1.9	Metallurgical Testing		7
	1.10	Current Mineral Resource		7
	1.11	Conclusions		10
	1.12	Recommendations		10
2	Introduction			11
	2.1	Issuer and Purpose		11
	2.2	Authors, Contributors and Site Inspection		12
	2.3	Sources of Information		14
	2.4	Units of Measure		14
3	Reliance on Other Experts			15
4	Property Description and Location			15
	4.1	Description and Location		15
	4.2	Property and Title in Nevada		15
		4.2.1	Mineral Title	15
		4.2.2	Surface Rights	16
		4.2.3	Environmental Regulations	18
		4.2.4	Water Rights	18
	4.3	Ownership		18
	4.4	Mineral Properties		19
		4.4.1	Claim Status	19
		4.4.2	Claim Retention Obligations	19
		4.4.3	Encumbrances	25
	4.5	Mineral Lease Agreements		25
		4.5.1	Connolly Lease	25
		4.5.2	Webster Lease	25
		4.5.3	Orser–McFall Lease	26
		4.5.4	Van Meeteren et al Lease	26
	4.6	Encumbrances		26
	4.7	Surface Ownership		26
	4.8	Water Rights		27
	4.9	Permitting Considerations		27
	4.10	Environmental Considerations		27
	4.11	Comments on Property Description and Location		28
5	Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography			28
	5.1	Accessibility		28

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

	5.2	Site Topography, Elevation and Vegetation		28
	5.3	Climate		29
	5.4	Local Resources and Infrastructure		29
6	History			30
	6.1	Exploration History		30
	6.2	Production History		30
7	Geological Setting and Mineralization			33
	7.1	Regional Geology		33
	7.2	Local Geology		34
	7.3	Stratigraphy		37
		7.3.1	Late Proterozoic	38
		7.3.2	Proterozoic-Cambrian	40
		7.3.3	Cambrian	40
	7.4	Structure		41
		7.4.1	Good Hope Fault Zone	41
	7.5	Alteration		44
	7.6	Oxidation (Redox)		44
	7.7	Mineralization		45
		7.7.1	Description of Mineralization: Good Hope Deposit	45
		7.7.2	Description of Mineralization: Gold Ace Mineralized Zone	47
		7.7.3	Description of Mineralization: Exploration Update	49
8	Deposit Types			50
9	Exploration			51
	9.1	Introduction		51
	9.2	CR Reward Exploration (2015-Present)		51
10	Drilling			52
	10.1	Drill Methods, Logging and Surveys		55
		10.1.1	Gexa (1987)	55
		10.1.2	Pathfinder (1991)	55
		10.1.3	Barrick (1995-1996) and Glamis (1998-2000)	55
		10.1.4	Canyon (2006-2007)	56
		10.1.5	Atna (2011-2013)	56
	10.2	CR Reward Core Drilling Program (2017-2018)		56
	10.3	Twin Holes		59
	10.4	Comments on Drilling		60
11	Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security			60
	11.1	Pre-CR Reward Drill Sampling, Analysis and Security		60
		11.1.1	Gexa (1987)	60
		11.1.2	Barrick (1995-1996)	61
		11.1.3	Glamis (1998-2000)	61
		11.1.4	Canyon (2006-2007)	61
		11.1.5	Atna (2011-2013)	62
	11.2	CR Reward Sampling, Analysis and Security (2017-2018)		63
		11.2.1	Diamond Drill Core Sample Preparation and Analysis	64
	11.3	CR Reward QAQC Results (2017-2018)		66
		11.3.1	Blanks	66

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

		11.3.2	Standard Reference Materials		67
		11.3.3	Duplicates		69
	11.4	Comments on Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security			69
12	Data Verification				70
	12.1	Verification Program			70
		12.1.1	Protocols and Error Tracking of Pre-CR Reward Drill Holes		70
	12.2	Collar Data Verification			71
	12.3	Down-Hole Survey Data Verification			72
	12.4	Assay Verification			72
	12.5	Author and QP Site Visits			73
13	Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing				78
	13.1	1998 Rayrock Column Tests – Drill Core			78
	13.2	1998 Rayrock Column Tests – Trench Samples			79
	13.3	2007 McClelland Bottle Roll Tests			79
	13.4	McClelland 2008 Column Test Campaign			80
		13.4.1	2008 Column Test Results		82
		13.4.2	2008 Bottle Roll Test Results at Crush Size and at 200 Mesh		82
		13.4.3	2008 Bottle Roll Size versus Recovery on Composite 5		84
		13.4.4	Drain-Down Data		84
		13.4.5	Conclusions from 2008 McClelland Program		84
	13.5	2018 Kappes Cassidy Associates Test Program			84
		13.5.1	2018 KCA Composite Generation		86
		13.5.2	2018 Physical Characterization		86
		13.5.3	2018 KCA Pulverized Bottle Roll Tests		88
		13.5.4	KCA 2018 Column Leach Tests		97
		13.5.5	2018 KCA Program Conclusions		99
	13.6	Analysis and Discussion			99
		13.6.1	Crush Size and Grade versus Recovery		99
		13.6.2	Leach Cycle		101
		13.6.3	Reagent Consumptions		101
			13.6.3.1	Cyanide	101
			13.6.3.2	Lime	101
		13.6.4	Conclusions and Key Design Parameters		101
14	Mineral Resource Estimates				103
	14.1	Introduction			103
	14.2	Data			105
		14.2.1	Drill Hole Data		105
		14.2.2	APEX Micromine Database Validation		107
	14.3	Geological Model and Domains			108
		14.3.1	Good Hope Deposit		108
			14.3.1.1	Low-Grade Alteration Domain (LG)	109
			14.3.1.2	High Grade Gold Shell (HG)	109
		14.3.2	Gold Ace Zone		110
	14.4	Drill Hole Flagging and Compositing			110
		14.4.1	Sample Width Analysis		110
		14.4.2	Remnant Analysis		111

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

iii

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

	14.5	Capping		113
	14.6	Variography and Grade Continuity		116
	14.7	Bulk Density		118
	14.8	Block Model		122
		14.8.1	Block Model Parameters	122
		14.8.2	Volumetric Checks	124
	14.9	Grade Estimation		124
		14.9.1	Estimation Methodology	124
	14.10	Model Validation		128
		14.10.1	Visual Validation	128
		14.10.2	Statistical Validation	130
	14.11	Mineral Resource Classification		136
		14.11.1	2019 CIM and SK 1300 Definitions	136
		14.11.2	Classification Criteria	138
	14.12	Evaluation of Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction		138
	14.13	Mineral Resource Statement		140
	14.14	Discussion of Mineral Resources Modelling, Risks and Uncertainties		144
23	Adjacent Properties			145
	23.1	Bullfrog		145
	23.2	Sterling and Crown		146
24	Other Relevant Data and Information			147
25	Interpretation and Conclusions			147
	25.1	Introduction		147
	25.2	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties/Agreements		147
	25.3	Geology		148
	25.4	Exploration, Drilling and Analytical Data Collection in Support of Mineral Resource Estimation		149
	25.5	Metallurgical Test work		149
	25.6	Mineral Resource Estimate		150
	25.7	Risks and Uncertainties		150
	25.8	Conclusions		151
26	Recommendations			152
27	References			154
28	Date and Signature			160
29	Certificate of Author			161

Tables

Table 1.1. Reward Conceptual Open Pit Parameters	9
Table 1.2. Reward Project Mineral Resource Estimate at May 31, 2022	9
Table 1.3. Estimated budget for the recommended PFS	10
Table 4.1. Summary of the Reward Project Claims	20
Table 6.1. Project Exploration History	30
Table 7.1. Stratigraphy and Unit Thickness of the Bare Mountains Complex	37
Table 10.1. Reward Drilling Summary	53
Table 10.2. CR Reward Drill Hole Collars (2017-2018)	57

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 10.3. Results of CR Reward Drill Holes (2017-2018)	58
Table 10.4. Results of Reward Twin Holes	60
Table 11.1. Summary Results of Blank Material from the 2017-2018 Drill Program	67
Table 11.2. Summary Results of Standards from the 2017-2018 Drill Program	67
Table 12.1. Drill Hole Coordinate Comparison	74
Table 12.2. Significant Intercepts of Drill Holes Reviewed During Mr. Dufresne’s Inspection of the CR Reward Core Facility	75
Table 13.1. 1998 Rayrock Drill Core Column Tests Results	79
Table 13.2. 1998 Rayrock Surface Trench Column Test Gold Recovery	80
Table 13.3. 1998 10 Mesh Reverse Circulation Drill Holes Bottle Roll Results	80
Table 13.4. 2008 McClelland Sample/Drill Hole Composite Information	81
Table 13.5. 2008 McClelland Summary Column Test Results	83
Table 13.6. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Tests – Gold Recovery %	84
Table 13.7. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Size versus Gold Recovery – Composite 5	85
Table 13.8. 2008 McClelland Drain-Down Data from Column Tests	85
Table 13.9. 2018 KCA Composite Head Screen Analyses – Gold and Silver	88
Table 13.10. 2018 KCA Composite Head Screen Analyses – Mercury and Copper	88
Table 13.11. 2018 Hazen Bond Impact Work and Abrasion Index	88
Table 13.12. 2018 High-Grade Sample Intervals	89
Table 13.13. 2018 KCA Bottle Roll Test Results	90
Table 13.14. KCA 2018 Preliminary Agglomeration Test Work	92
Table 13.15. KCA 2018 Compacted Permeability Tests	93
Table 13.16. KCA 2018 Column Leach Tests	98
Table 14.1. Summary Statistics of Raw Gold Assays of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope and Gold Ace Estimation Domains	107
Table 14.2. Remnant Analysis comparing the Gold Statistics of Raw Assays and Uncapped Composite Samples with and without Orphans	112
Table 14.3. Summary Statistics of Gold Grade of Capped Composite Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope and Gold Ace Estimation Domains	116
Table 14.4. Gold Variogram Model Parameters	117
Table 14.5. Bulk Density Measurements, Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone	119
Table 14.6. Percentage of Blocks Flagged within each Formation for the Good Hope and Gold Ace Zones	121
Table 14.7. Project Block Model Size and Extents	123
Table 14.8. Wireframe versus Block Model Volume Comparison	124
Table 14.9. Estimation Search and Kriging Parameters	125
Table 14.10. Interpolation Search Restrictions	138
Table 14.11. Parameters for Pit Optimization for Mineral Resource Estimate	139
Table 14.12. Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement	140
Table 14.13. Inferred Mineral Resource Statement	141
Table 14.14. Sensitivity Table, Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Good Hope	141
Table 14.15. Sensitivity Table, Inferred Mineral Resources, Good Hope	142
Table 14.16. Sensitivity Table, Indicated Mineral Resources, Gold Ace	142
Table 14.17. Sensitivity Table, Inferred Mineral Resources, Gold Ace	143

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.18. Sensitivity Table, Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Good Hope and Gold Ace	143
Table 14.19. Sensitivity Table, Inferred Mineral Resources, Good Hope and Gold Ace	144
Table 25.1. Reward Project Mineral Resource Estimate at May 31, 2022	152
Table 26.1. Estimated budget for the recommended PFS	153

Figures

Figure 2.1. Project Location Map	12
Figure 4.1. Project Location Plan	17
Figure 4.2. CR Reward LLC Controller Mineral Claims at Reward Project	23
Figure 4.3. Detail of Reward Claims and Proposed Infrastructure for the Core Area	24
Figure 7.1. Simplified Geology of the Bare Mountain Area	34
Figure 7.2. Simplified Geologic Map of Project Area	35
Figure 7.3. Local Geology Map	36
Figure 7.4. 3D Geological Schematic of the Main Rock Units and Faults	37
Figure 7.5. Lower Portion of the Bare Mountains Complex Stratigraphic Column Observed at the Project	39
Figure 7.6. 3500N Geology Cross-Section	42
Figure 7.7. Photo Highlighting Vein Orientation in Outcrop	43
Figure 7.8. Gold Mineralization at Reward Intersected by Drilling	46
Figure 7.9. Mineralization along Section 5600 N Looking North	47
Figure 7.10. Mineralization along Section 4200 N Looking North	48
Figure 7.11. Mineralization along Section 4800 N, Looking North	48
Figure 7.12. Mineralization along Section 2900 N Looking North	49
Figure 9.1. Plan View of the Project Area Showing the Locations of the IP/Resistivity Survey Lines	52
Figure 10.1. Reward Drill Hole Locations	54
Figure 11.1. CR Reward Sample Flow Chart	65
Figure 11.2. Blank Results from 2017-2018 Drilling Sorted by Date Analyzed	66
Figure 11.3. CDN-GS-P6B Results from 2017-2018 Program Sorted by Date Analyzed	68
Figure 11.4. CDN-GS-2L Results from 2017-2018 Program Sorted by Date Analyzed	68
Figure 11.5. Duplicate Results from the 2017-2018 Program	69
Figure 12.1. Drill hole CRR17-009, Wood Canyon Formation Mineralized Interval of Phyllite and Oxidized Quartzite	75
Figure 12.2. Drill hole CRR18-014, Wood Canyon Formation Mineralized Interval of Brecciated/Re-healed Quartzite and Sheared and Foliated Phyllite	76
Figure 12.3. Drill Hole CRR18-024, Wood Canyon Formation Mineralized Interval of Quartzite	77
Figure 13.1. 1998 10 Mesh Bottle Roll Recovery Curves	81
Figure 13.2. 2008 McClelland Drill Hole Location Map	82
Figure 13.3. 2008 McClelland 10 Gold Recovery Curves – Column Tests	83
Figure 13.4. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Tests Recovery Curves – Splits from Column Tests	83

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.5. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Size versus Gold Recovery – Composite 5	85
Figure 13.6. 2018 KCA Metallurgical Sample Drill Hole Location Map	87
Figure 13.7. 2018 KCA Bottle Roll Test Results	91
Figure 13.8. KCA 2018 Column Leach Curves – Carbon Assays	97
Figure 13.9. KCA 2018 Column Leach Curves – Tonnes Solution per Tonne Ore	99
Figure 13.10. Size versus Recovery – 2018 KCA and 2008 McClelland Test Data	100
Figure 14.1. Mineral Resource Estimate Mineralized Domain Outlines	104
Figure 14.2. Histogram of the Raw Gold Assay Values of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope and Gold Ace Estimation Domains	106
Figure 14.3. Cumulative Frequency Plot of Raw Gold Assay Values of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope Zone Estimation Domains	106
Figure 14.4. Cumulative Frequency Plot of Raw Gold Assay Values of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Gold Ace Estimation Domain	107
Figure 14.5. Orthogonal View of LGand HG Estimation Domains, Good Hope Deposit	109
Figure 14.6. Orthogonal View of the LG Estimation Domain, Gold Ace Zone	110
Figure 14.7. Histogram of Sample Lengths within Estimation Domains for both the Good Hope and Gold Ace Zones	111
Figure 14.8. Remnant Analysis Illustrating the Gold Distribution of Calculated Composite within the Good Hope Deposit	112
Figure 14.9. Orphan Analysis Illustrating the Gold Distribution of Calculated Composite within the Gold Ace Zone	113
Figure 14.10. Probability Plot of the Composited Gold Grade at the Good Hope Zone before Capping	114
Figure 14.11. Cumulative Frequency Plots of the Composited and Capped Gold Grade within the Good Hope Zone Estimation Domains	114
Figure 14.12. Probability Plot of the Composited Gold Grade at the Gold Ace Zone before Capping	115
Figure 14.13. Cumulative Frequency Plot of the Composited and Capped Gold Grade within Gold Ace Zone Estimation Domain	115
Figure 14.14. Calculated and Modelled Semi-Variogram of Gold within the Good Hope Zone. Dip Direction and Dip for each Principle Direction is in each Subplot Title	117
Figure 14.15. Calculated and Modelled Semi-Variogram of Gold within the Gold Ace Zone. Dip Direction and Dip for each Principle Direction is in each Subplot Title	118
Figure 14.16. Bulk Density Box Plots, Good Hope Deposit	119
Figure 14.17. Bulk Density Scatter Plots Showing 3D Solids vs. Gold Grade, Good Hope Deposit	120
Figure 14.18. Bulk Density Box Plots, Gold Ace Zone	121
Figure 14.19. Bulk Density Scatter Plots Showing 3D Solids vs. Gold Grade, Gold Ace Zone	121
Figure 14.20. Cumulative Frequency Plot Illustrating the Distance from each Block Centroid to the nearest Composite Sample within the Good Hope Zone	122
Figure 14.21. Cumulative Frequency Plot Illustrating the Distance from each Block Centroid to the nearest Composite Sample within the Gold Ace Zone	123

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

vii

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.22. Gold Grade Contact Plot Analysis, Good Hope LG and HG Grade Domain Contacts	126
Figure 14.23. Contact Plot Analysis, Good Hope Grade and Waste Domain Contacts	127
Figure 14.24. Contact Analysis, Gold Ace Grade and Waste Domain Contacts	127
Figure 14.25. Cross-Section 6000N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Good Hope Deposit	128
Figure 14.26. Cross-Section 4800N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Good Hope Deposit	129
Figure 14.27. Cross-Section 4100N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Good Hope Deposit	129
Figure 14.28. Cross-Section 2700N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Gold Ace Deposit	130
Figure 14.29. Swath Plots Showing Composite versus Estimated Gold Grade, Good Hope	131
Figure 14.30. Swath Plots Showing Composite versus Estimated, Gold Grade Gold Ace	132
Figure 14.31. Volume Variance Check, Good Hope	133
Figure 14.32. Volume Variance Check, Gold Ace	134
Figure 14.33. Contact Analysis, Good Hope Grade and Waste Domain Boundary	135
Figure 14.34. Contact Analysis, Gold Ace Grade and Waste Domain Boundary	135
Figure 23.1. Adjacent Properties	146

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

viii

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Summary

1.1

Issuer and Purpose

This Technical Report (the Technical Report) was prepared by APEX Geoscience Ltd. (APEX) and Kappes, Cassiday & Associates (KCA) for CR Reward LLC (CR Reward) and Augusta Gold Corp. (Augusta or the Company). Augusta is a publicly traded company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX:G) in Canada and the OTCQB Venture Market (OTCQB:AUGG) in the United States of America (USA) focused on the exploration, advancement and development of gold properties in Nevada. CR Reward is a private Nevada limited liability company that is a wholly owned subsidiary of Augusta.

The Company engaged APEX in May, 2022 to complete an updated Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for the Reward Project under National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) and an Initial Assessment of Mineral Resources in accordance with Item 1300 of Regulation S-K under the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (SK 1300). The focus of this Technical Report is an updated MRE for the Reward Project (Reward or the Project), a gold exploration project situated in Nye County, Nevada (NV), USA. The Project is located 11.3 km (7 miles) to the southeast of the Company’s Bullfrog project within the Walker Lane Trend, a prolifically mineralized belt that is host to numerous gold deposits and current and past producing mines in south-central Nevada.

This Technical Report summarizes a NI 43-101 and SK 1300 updated MRE for the Project and provides a technical summary of the relevant location, tenure, historical and geological information, a summary of the recent exploration work conducted by CR Reward and recommendations for future exploration programs. This Technical Report summarizes the technical information available up to the effective date of May 31, 2022. This Technical Report was amended on December 18, 2023 to make certain additions to address technical compliance with SK 1300 in relation to (i) the adequecy of the metallurgical data and (ii) the reasoning for using the selected commodity prices and material assumptions in relation thereto. No updates or amendments were made to the technical information which remains as of the effective date of May 31, 2022

This Technical Report has been prepared in accordance with the Canadian Securities Administration’s (CSA’s) NI 43-101 and guidelines for technical reporting Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) “Best Practices and Reporting Guidelines” for disclosing mineral exploration and in accordance with the requirements of SK 1300. The mineral resource has been estimated using the CIM “Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines”, dated November 29, 2019, and the CIM “Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves”, amended and adopted May 10th, 2014 and in accordance with the requirements of SK 1300.

1.2

Authors, Contributors and Site Inspection

This Technical Report has been prepared by Mr. Michael B. Dufresne, M.Sc., P. Geol., P. Geo., of APEX and Mr. Timothy D. Scott, BA.Sc., RM SME, of KCA. Both authors are independent and not employed by either Augusta or CR Reward and are Qualified Persons (QPs) as defined in NI 43-101 and as defined under SK 1300. Contributors to this Technical Report include Mr. Warren Black, M.Sc., P.Geo. and Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG, all of APEX and who are independent and not employed by either Augusta or CR Reward. Neither APEX or KCA are affiliated with Augusta or CR Reward. Under the direct supervision of Mr. Dufresne, Mr. Black prepared the resource estimation statistical analysis, three-dimensional modelling, block modelling and resource estimations presented in Section 14. Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG, a QP, and APEX’s senior resource geologist performed an internal audit of the MRE presented in Section 14. Mr. Dufresne takes responsibility for the MRE reported herein.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Mr. Dufresne has visited the Project on two separate occasions in 2017 and 2019. During the site inspections, Mr. Dufresne reviewed drill core and verified the location of a number of drill collars. As a result of the site inspections, Mr. Dufresne can verify the land position, the geological setting and the mineralization that is the subject of this Technical Report. Mr. Scott visited the Project on September 22, 2018 and on May 16, 2022.

1.3

Project Setting

The Project is situated about 11.3 km (7 miles) south-southeast of the town of Beatty, NV about 3.2 km (2 miles) east of US Highway 95 in Nye County. The Project can be accessed from Beatty by paved road on Highway 95 followed by traveling two miles east on a gravel road. Several dirt roads diverge into various canyons of the Bare Mountains.

The Project is situated in the Amargosa Desert in southwestern Nevada on the southwestern flank of the Bare Mountains in the northern Amargosa Valley. The western flank of the Bare Mountains drains into the Amargosa Desert which is drained by the ephemeral Amargosa River. Beatty, on the Amargosa River, lies at 1,006 m (3,300 ft) elevation. Elevations in the Project area range from about 1,160 to 1,310 m (3,800 ft to 4,300 ft). Vegetation is sparse. The climate is typical of middle-elevation desert. Operations are planned to be conducted year-round.

The Project is currently serviced by an existing 14.4/24.9 kV power line owned and operated by Valley Electric. A water well provides water for exploration activities. Project employees will be recruited from the local area, including the communities of Beatty, Amargosa, and Pahrump, located within Nye County, and the regional urban centre of Las Vegas, located within Clark County.

1.4

Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

The Project encompasses 121 unpatented Bureau of Land Management (BLM) placer and lode mining claims and six patented placer mining claims, totalling approximately 2,333 net acres (944 hectares). Only the patented claims have been legally surveyed. Under United States mining law, claims may be renewed annually for an unlimited number of years upon a small payment per claim (currently $155 per claim due to the BLM and an aggregate $1,502 due to Nye County) and the same claim status—whether lode or placer—may be used for exploration or exploitation of the lodes or placers.

Several blocks of unpatented claims are leased by CR Reward from underlying owners, and are referred to as Connolly, Webster, Orser–McFall and Van Meeteren leases. These have the following royalties payable:

•

A 3% Net Smelter Return (NSR) royalty is payable on any minerals mined from the Connolly Claims, but is reduced to 2% as CR Reward only owns a two-third interest in the Connolly Claims. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Connolly Lease in an amount equal to $10,000/year.

•

A 3% NSR royalty is payable on any minerals mined from the Webster Claims but is (i) reduced to 1% on the Sunshine and Reward claims as the lessee only owns a one-third interest, and (ii) reduced to 1.5% on the Good Hope claim as CR Reward only owns a half interest in this claim. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Webster Lease in an amount equal to $7,500/ year.

•

A 3% NSR royalty is payable on minerals mined from the Orser–McFall Claims but is reduced to 1.5% on the Good Hope claim as the lessee only owns a half interest in that claim. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Orser–McFall Lease in an amount equal to $20,000/year.

•

A 3% NSR royalty is payable on minerals mined from the Van Meeteren Claims. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Van Meeteren Lease in an amount equal to $15/acre from 2011 through 2020, for a total of $1,800/year, and $20/acre from and after 2021, for a total of $2,400/year.

The Project is not subject to any other back-in rights payments, agreements or encumbrances.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Water rights have been obtained through a Water Lease agreement with Barrick Gold Corp’s (Barrick) Bullfrog mining operations. Under the Water Lease, CR Reward has the right to use 317.39 acre-ft of water annually under Application No. 61412, Certificate No. 16384 and Permit No. 76390 in exchange for paying Barrick USD$150.00/acre-ft of water per year for water actually pumped.

To the extent known to the QPs, there are no other significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the Project that have not been discussed in this Report.

1.5

Geology and Mineralization

Mineralization in the Good Hope Deposit and Golden Ace Zone can be classified as examples of a structurally controlled, locally disseminated, sediment hosted, mesothermal quartz vein gold deposit.

The Project is hosted within the Bare Mountain Complex which lies within an intricate tectonic setting of the Nevada Basin and Range Province.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

1.6

History

•

Plan of Operations authorized under N-82840.

•

Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP); WPCP NEV2007101.

•

General construction permit; NVR100000 CSW-17415.

•

Water rights permitted by Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) under Mining, Milling, & Domestic permit 76390.

•

Mining reclamation permit granted by the Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (BMRR) under mine site permit #0300.

•

Nevada Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) authorized Class II Air Quality permit AP1041-2492.

1.7

Drilling and Sampling

A total of 376 drill holes, totalling 43,729.7 m (143,470 ft) have been completed at the Project between 1987 and 2018. Of this total, 35 are core holes totalling 4,094.4 m (13,433 ft) and 341 are RC holes totalling 39,635.3 m (130,037 ft).

For CR Reward’s 2017–2018 drill program, drill hole locations were established using hand-held global positioning system (GPS) instruments and upon completion of the program, the collar locations were re-surveyed by a licensed surveyor. Down-hole surveys were completed at regular intervals, usually 7.6 m (25 ft), using an EZ-Shot system that records the magnetic heading, dip of the hole and magnetic field in the hole. A total of 398 measurements were collected for the 28 holes drilled in 2017–2018. Core recovery during the core drilling was very good, exceeding 95% on average, with losses mainly in highly shattered zones.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

There is limited documentation available detailing the sample preparation, analyses and security of historical drill sampling programs conducted from 1987 to 2000 by Homestake, Gexa, Pathfinder, Cloverleaf, USNGS and Barrick. RC drill holes completed in 2006–2007 were sampled on 1.5 m (5 ft) intervals, and cores on 0.9 m (3 ft) intervals. The 2011–2013 RC holes were also sampled at 1.5 m (5 ft) intervals.

Independent assay laboratories were used in the 2006-2007 Canyon Resources, the 2011-2013 Atna and 2017-2018 CR Reward programs, including ALS Chemex Laboratory in Sparks, Nevada (certified to ISO 9001:2000 for selected techniques), Inspectorate America Corporation (Inspectorate) in Sparks, Nevada (certified to ISO 9001:2000 for selected techniques), Florin Analytical Services (FAS) in Reno, Nevada (not certified).

The 2006–2007, 2011-2013 and the CR Reward 2017-2018 drilling programs included the submission of standard and blank materials as part of the Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) program. Assay control protocols during these modern periods of drilling included the insertion of certified standards, blanks and duplicates at acceptable insertion rates for all of the data.

The sample collection, security, transportation, preparation, insertion of geochemical standards and blanks, and analytical procedures are within industry norms and best practices. The procedures used by CR Reward personnel are considered adequate to ensure that the results disclosed are accurate within scientific limitations and are not misleading. The procedures and assay control protocols employed by CR Reward in the 2017–2018 drill program are considered reasonable and acceptable for use in Mineral Resource estimation.

1.8

Data Verification

Keith Fowlow of CR Reward performed a comprehensive data verification program in 2017 consisting of collar and down-hole survey checks, and evaluation of assay values versus laboratory certificates or geologic logs where certificates were not available. Errors identified were corrected where applicable. For non-analytical drill hole information, CR Reward employed a protocol of continuous data checking to ensure accurate data transcription, including collar and down hole surveys, and geological and geotechnical information. The procedures employed are considered reasonable and are adequate with respect to ensuring data integrity.

Mr. Dufresne reviewed all aspects of the Reward drill hole database and available non-analytical procedures for historical and the CR Reward 2017–2018 drilling programs including the verification program by Mr. Fowlow. The drill hole database was validated using Micromine 2018 and was inspected visually in Excel files and on drill section. Mr. Dufresne has reviewed the adequacy of the exploration information and the visual, physical and geological characteristics of the Project and has found no significant issues or inconsistencies that would cause one to question the validity of the data. Mr. Dufresne, the QP, considers the CR Reward drill hole database, including the historical pre-2017 data and the 2017 to 2018 data, well validated and suitable for the preparation of the MRE presented in Section 14 of this Technical Report.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

1.9

Metallurgical Testing

Metallurgical test work on the Project includes historical work completed by Rayrock Mines Inc. during 1998 and McClellend in 2007 and 2008 with confirmatory test work being performed by KCA in 2018. Metallurgical test work completed to date includes 34 bottle roll tests and 21 column tests along together with preliminary agglomeration and compacted permeability testing. Results from these tests show that the mineralization is amenable to cyanide leaching with reasonable reagent consumptions.

Metallurgical samples from historical and recent KCA test programs appear to be spatially representative for the Good Hope Deposit. Results from KCA’s 2018 test program confirmed the results from the 2007–2008 McClelland campaign with an average laboratory gold recovery of 81% for the Good Hope Deposit. The program also included bottle roll and duplicate column leach tests on the Gold Ace Zone. Results for Gold Ace show significantly lower column recoveries compared to the Good Hope Deposit.

Key design parameters from the metallurgical test work for the Good Hope Deposit include:

•

Crush size P₈₀ of ¼ inch.

•

Estimated field gold recovery of 79% including a 2% field deduction. Based on column tests, it is possible additional ounces may be realized during secondary leaching of ore from leaching upper lifts and during heap rinsing as it appears most columns were still slowly leaching at the termination of the columns.

•

Design leach cycle of 125 days.

•

Average field sodium cyanide consumption of 0.73 lb/st ore.

•

Average field lime consumption of 1.53 lb/st of material based on 100% CaO purity.

•

Cement agglomeration is not required up to heap heights of 262 ft.

No deleterious elements are known from the processing perspective.

1.9.1

Qualified Person’s Opinion

The metallurgical test work and analytical methods used followed regular mining industry accepted practice. The samples and composite samples used in the metallurgical evaluation were deemed representative for the deposit as sampled for process development. Appropriate test work in sufficient quantity has been conducted to derive the metallurgical conclusions presented.

1.10

Current Mineral Resource

This Technical Report details an updated mineral resource estimate (MRE) for the Reward Project. The 2022 MRE for Reward was completed by Mr. Warren Black, M.Sc., P.Geo., of APEX under the direct supervision of Mr. Dufresne, M.Sc., P.Geol., P.Geo. and the QP who takes responsibility for the MRE contained herein. Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG, a QP and APEX’s senior resource geologist performed an internal audit of the MRE in Section 14.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

CR Reward and Augusta provided APEX with a drill hole database that consisted of analytical, geological, density, and collar survey information, initial estimation domains for the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone, and a geological model that contained a stratigraphic and structural 3D interpretation. A block model size of 20 ft (X) by 20 ft (Y) by 20 ft (Z) was used for the gold estimation.

The assay data was examined using a combination of histograms, cumulative frequency plots, and summary statistics; this indicated gold samples generally exhibited a single assay population. Samples were composited to 10 ft lengths. Probability plots were used to evaluate grade statistics and determine whether capping was warranted. A capping level of 0.292 oz/st (10.01 grams per tonne [g/t]) Au was applied to samples in the Good Hope Deposit, and a cap level of 0.146 oz/st (5.01 g/t) Au to samples in the Gold Ace Zone. Semi-variograms for gold were modelled using the 10 ft composites flagged within the estimation domains. A bulk density of 2.59 g/cm³ was applied to all blocks in the Good Hope Deposit. As there is evidence for the need for a higher bulk density value for blocks flagged within the Morris Member in the Good Ace Zone, they were assigned a value of 2.70 g/cm³. However, as there is an insufficient number of bulk density measurements of the Sutton Member within the Gold Ace estimation domain, all other blocks at the Gold Ace Zone were assigned a bulk density of 2.59 g/cm³.

Ordinary kriging (OK) was used to estimate gold grades for those blocks that contained more than 1.56% mineralized material by volume. A block discretization of 2 (X) by 2 (Y) by 2 (Z) was applied to all blocks during estimation. A two-pass method was used. The first pass required a minimum of two drill holes, a maximum of 15 composites and no more than three composites from any one drill hole. Soft boundaries were used between the high and low-grade domains in the Good Hope Deposit, and mineralization and waste in the Good Hope Deposit and the Gold Ace Zone.

Estimation validation included visual inspection in plan view and in cross-section, examination of swath plots, review of mineralization/waste contact profiles and volume-variance effects. The estimate was found to be reasonable.

Mineral Resources were classified using a combination of assessment of geological confidence, data quality and grade continuity. Resource classification was determined using a three-pass strategy, where Measured was classified in the first run, Indicated in the second, and Inferred in the third run. A small portion of blocks at the northern (>6500 N) and southern (<2750 N) extents of the Good Hope Deposit were manually adjusted to Inferred as there is insufficient drilling density in the QP’s opinion to justify higher confidence classifications.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction were considered by constraining the estimate within a conceptual pit shell that used the assumptions in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1. Reward Conceptual Open Pit Parameters.

Parameter	Unit (Imperial)	Cost (Imperial)	Unit (Metric)	Cost (Metric)
Gold Price	US$/oz	1,700	US$/g	54.656
Gold Metallurgical Recovery	%	80	%	80
Pit Wall Angles	°	48-58	°	48-58
Mining Cost	US$/st	2.00	US$/tonne	2.20
Processing Rate	Mst/a	3	Mtonne/a	2.7
Processing Cost	US$/st	$5.50	US$/tonne	$6.06
G & A Cost	US$/st	0.75	US$/tonne	0.80
Cut-off Grade (break even)	oz/st	0.0047	g/tonne	0.158
Royalty	%	3	%	3

The MRE for the Reward Project is presented in Table 1.2 below.

Table 1.2. Reward Project Mineral Resource Estimate at May 31, 2022 Based on USD$1,700/oz. Au and a lower cutoff grade of 0.2 g/t Au.

Classification	Tonnage (Mt)	Average Grade (g/t)	Contained Au (koz)
Good Hope
Measured Indicated M&I Total	6.19 10.76 16.94	0.86 0.69 0.75	169.9 240.0 409.9
Inferred	0.29	0.56	5.3
Gold Ace
Indicated Inferred	0.83 1.03	0.63 0.73	16.8 21.8
Reward (Combined Good Hope and Gold Ace)
Measured Indicated M&I Total	6.19 11.58 17.77	0.86 0.69 0.75	169.9 256.8 426.7
Inferred	1.23	0.68	27.1

Notes:

Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,700/oz and a recovery of 80% for Au were utilized.

Gold price used in the mineral resource estimate was based on a review of the 3 year trailing average.

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.20/tonne.

Processing and general and administration are US$6.06/tonne and US$0.83/tonne per tonne processed, respectively.

The mineral resources are reported utilizing a 0.2 g/t Au incremental lower cut-off grade.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes and are partially diluted.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

The effective date of the Reward mineral resource estimate is May 31, 2022.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

1.11

Conclusions

Based upon a review of available information, historical and recent exploration data, the authors site visits and the current MRE for the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone of the Reward Project, the authors view the Project as a property of merit prospective for the additional discovery, and future development, of potentially economic structurally-controlled, locally-disseminated, sediment-hosted, mesothermal quartz vein gold mineralization. This contention is supported by the following:

•

The favourable geological setting of the Reward Project and its position within the Walker Land Trend, a prolifically mineralized belt that is host to numerous gold deposits and current and past producing mines in south-central Nevada.

•

Historical exploration and recent work by CR Reward has delineated a large zone of gold mineralization at Good Hope and Gold Ace and led to the calculation of the current MRE.

•

Recent metallurgical testwork indicates projected gold recoveries of 81% for the Good Hope Deposit.

1.12

Recommendations

Based on the outcomes of this report and prior work conducted by CR Reward, it is recommended that CR Reward and Augusta proceed to a Preliminary Feasibility Study (PFS) for the Reward Project in order to examine opportunities to develop the Project. The PFS will be an update to a historical internal Feasibility Study (FS) prepared in 2019 on behalf of CR Reward and Waterton. The recommended PFS will incorporate current pricing for major equipment, contract mining costs, construction costs, major consumables, and labor costs.

The budget for completing a PFS for the Project is USD$1,100,000, including contingency, as summarized in Table 1.3 below.

Table 1.3. Estimated budget for the recommended PFS.

Item	Cost USD$
Primary Engineer, includes Process and Infrastructure	420,000
Mineral Resource Estimate	20,000
Mining and Mineral Reserve	40,000
Geotechnical and Earthworks	110,000
Power and Other Consulting	400,000
Contingency	110,000
Total	1,100,000

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Introduction

2.1

Issuer and Purpose

On June 13, 2022, Augusta acquired the Reward Project (Reward or the Project), from Waterton Nevada Splitter LLC (Waterton) by the purchase of CR Reward.

The Reward Project is considered to be an intermediate stage exploration project within a favourable geological setting, situated within the Walker Lane Trend, a prolifically mineralized belt this is host to numerous gold deposits and current and past producing mines in south-central Nevada. The Project is situated approximately 11.3 km (7 miles) south-southeast of the town of Beatty, NV, approximately 3.2 km (2 miles) east of US Highway 95 in Nye County (Figure 2.1). The Project encompasses 121 unpatented Bureau of Land Management (BLM) placer and lode mining claims and six patented placer mining claims, totalling approximately 2,333 net acres (944 hectares).

This Technical Report summarizes a National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) and Item 1300 of Regulation S-K of the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (SK 1300) mineral resource estimation for the Reward Project and provides a technical summary of the relevant location, tenure, historical and geological information, a summary of the recent exploration work and recommendations for future exploration programs. This Technical Report summarizes the technical information available up to the effective date of May 31^st, 2022.

This Technical Report has been prepared in accordance with the Canadian Securities Administration’s (CSA) NI 43-101 and guidelines for technical reporting Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) “Best Practices and Reporting Guidelines” for disclosing mineral exploration and in accordance with the requirements of SK 1300. The mineral resource has been estimated using the CIM “Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines” dated November 29, 2019, and the CIM “Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” amended and adopted May 10th, 2014 and in accordance with the requirements of SK 1300.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 2.1. Project Location Map (Lycopodium, 2019).

Note: Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

2.2

Authors, Contributors and Site Inspection

This Technical Report has been prepared by Mr. Michael B. Dufresne, M.Sc., P. Geol., P. Geo., of APEX and Mr. Timothy D. Scott, RM SME, of KCA. Both authors are independent and not employed by either Augusta or CR Reward and are Qualified Persons (QPs) as defined in NI 43-101 and SK 1300. The CIM and NI 43-101 defines a QP as “an individual who is a geoscientist with at least five years of experience in mineral exploration, mine development or operation or mineral project assessment, or any combination of these; has experience relevant to the subject matter of the mineral project and the technical report; and is a member or licensee in good standing of a professional association.” SK 1300 defines a QP as “an individual who is (1) a mineral industry professional with at least five years of relevant experience in the type of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and in the specific type of activity that person is undertaking on behalf of the registrant; and (2) an eligible member or licensee in good standing of a recognized professional organization at the time the technical report is prepared.”

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Mr. Dufresne, M.Sc., P.Geol., P.Geo. takes responsibility for the preparation and publication of Sections 1.1 to 1.8, 1.10 to 12, 14 to 25.4, 25.6 and 25.8 to 27 and is co-responsible for section 25.7 of this Technical Report. Mr. Dufresne is a Professional Geologist with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA; membership number 48439), a Professional Geoscientist with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (EGBC; membership number 37074) and has worked as a mineral exploration geologist for more than 35 years since his graduation from university. Mr. Dufresne has been involved in all aspects of mineral exploration and mineral resource estimations for precious and base metal mineral projects and deposits in Canada and internationally, including structurally-controlled, locally-disseminated, sediment-hosted, quartz vein gold mineralization in Nevada.

Mr. Timothy Scott, BA.Sc. Geological Engineering, takes responsibility for Sections 1.9, 13, 25.5 and is co-responsible for section 25.7 of this Technical Report. Mr. Scott visited the Project on September 22^nd, 2018 and on May 16^th, 2022. He inspected the access and associated infrastructure. Mr. Scott has worked for 35 years in all aspects of mineral processing and gold extraction; heap leaching; and design and construction of mineral processing and metals extraction facilities. He has held management positions at major mining companies as well as led the design, construction, and commissioning teams for the construction of five operating mines.

Contributors to this Technical Report include Mr. Warren Black, M.Sc., P.Geo. and Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG, of APEX. Under the direct supervision of Mr. Dufresne, Mr. Black prepared the resource estimation statistical analysis, three-dimensional modelling, block modelling and resource estimations presented in Section 14. Mr. Black has a research background in the use of multivariate simulation for probabilistic mineral prospectivity modelling and has experience with exploration for precious and base metal deposits of various deposit types in North America. Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG, QP, conducted a thorough audit of the Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) and Section 14. Mr. Nicholls is a QP, as defined in NI 43-101 and SK 1300, and has worked as a geologist for more than 20 years since his graduation from university. Mr. Nicholls is APEX’s senior resource geologist and has extensive experience with exploration/resource estimation for, and the evaluation of, gold deposits of various types, including sediment-hosted mineralization.

Mr. Dufresne has visited the Project for data verification purposes on two separate occasions in 2017 and 2019. On August 2, 2017, Mr. Dufresne visited the Property and reviewed drill core at CR Reward’s office in Reno, NV. On August 12, 2019, Mr. Dufresne visited the Property and verified the location of a number of drill collars. On August 15, 2019, Mr. Dufresne performed an inspection of the Lovelock, NV, core facility and reviewed Reward Project drill core from the 2017-2018 drill program. No material field based exploration work has occurred at the Reward Project since the 2017-2018 drill program. Therefore, Mr. Dufresne considers the most recent site visit as current. As a result of the site visits, Mr. Dufresne can verify the land position, the geological setting and the mineralization that is the subject of this Technical Report.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

2.3

Sources of Information

This Technical Report is largely based on sections derived from the 2019 Feasibility Study titled, “Reward Project Feasibility Study Report, Nevada, USA”, prepared for CR Reward by Lycopodium Minerals Canada Ltd. (Lycopodium; Lycopodium, 2019) and the 2019 Feasibility Study Technical Report titled, “Reward Project Feasibility Study, NI 43-101 Technical Report Nevada, USA,” prepared by Lycopodium and co-authored by Mr. Dufresne and Mr. Scott (Evans et al., 2019).

Additional sources of information are listed in Section 27, References. The sources of information and data used in this Technical Report are based on the compilation of proprietary and publicly available geological and geochemical data. The authors have deemed these reports, data, and information as valid contributions to the best of their knowledge.

Based on the site visits and review of the available literature and data, the authors take responsibility for the information herein.

2.4

Units of Measure

With respect to units of measure, unless otherwise stated, this Technical Report uses:

•

Abbreviated shorthand consistent with the International System of Units (International Bureau of Weights and Measures, 2006).

•

‘Bulk’ weight is presented in both United States short tons (“tons”; 2,000 lbs or 907.2 kg) and metric tonnes (“tonnes”; 1,000 kg or 2,204.6 lbs.).

•

Assay and analytical results for precious metals are quoted in parts per million (“ppm”), parts per billion (“ppb”), ounces per short ton (“opt” or ozt/st), where “ounces” refers to “troy ounces” and “ton” means “short ton”. Where ppm (also commonly referred to as grams per metric tonne [g/t]) have been converted to opt (or ozt/st), a conversion factor of 0.029166 (or 34.2857) was used.

•

Geographic coordinates are projected in the Universal Transverse Mercator (“UTM”) system relative to Zone 11 of the North American Datum (“NAD”) 1983. and,

•

Currency in United States dollars (USD$), unless otherwise specified (e.g., Canadian, CAD$.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Reliance on Other Experts

The authors are not qualified to provide an opinion or comment on issues related to legal agreements, royalties, permitting and environmental matters. Accordingly, the authors of this Technical Report disclaim portions of the Technical Report particularly in Section 4, Property Description and Location.

The authors relied entirely on background information and details regarding CR Reward’s legal ownership (in Section 4.1) as provided in title reports prepared by CR Rewards legal counsel dated April 9-12, 2022 (Jensen, 2022a,b,c,d). Permitting as well as the legal and survey validation of the claims is not in the authors’ expertise and the QPs have relied on the Company’s representatives with respect to such information.

The authors have confirmed the claims are active and in good standing as of the Effective Date of this Report using the BLM’s MLRS register. The authors have no reason to question the validity or status of the mineral claims.

Property Description and Location

4.1

Description and Location

The Project is located in Nye County, Nevada, about seven miles south–southeast of the town of Beatty as shown in Figure 4.1. The Project area lies within Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 16 of Township 13 South, Range 47 East, and Sections 33, 34, and 35 of Township 12 South, Range 47 East, all referred to the Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian (CAM, 2012).

The Project is situated at an approximate latitude and longitude corresponding to 36° 50 minutes and 116° 42 minutes, respectively (CAM, 2012). The centre of the proposed open pit is located at 1,729,330 E, 13,375,050 N (UTM coordinates, NAD27, Zone 11, US feet).

The Project area falls within the USGS Carrara Canyon 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle map.

4.2

Property and Title in Nevada

4.2.1

Mineral Title

Information in this section is sourced from Papke and Davis (2019).

Federal (30 USC and 43 CFR) and Nevada (NRS 517) laws concerning mining claims on Federal land are based on an 1872 Federal law titled “An Act to Promote the Development of Mineral Resources of the United States.” Mining claim procedures still are based on this law, but the original scope of the law has been reduced by several legislative changes.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (30 USC Chapter 3A) provided for leasing of some non-metallic materials; and the Multiple Mineral Development Act of 1954 (30 USC Chapter 12) allowed simultaneous use of public land for mining under the mining laws and for lease operation under the mineral leasing laws. Additionally, the Multiple Surface Use Act of 1955 (30 USC 611-615) made “common variety” materials non-locatable; the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 USC Chapter 23) provided for leasing of geothermal resources; and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (the BLM Organic Act, 43 USC Chapter 35) granted the Secretary of the Interior broad authority to manage public lands. Most details regarding procedures for locating claims on Federal lands have been left to individual states, providing that state laws do not conflict with Federal laws (30 USC 28; 43 CFR 3831.1).

Mineral deposits are located either by lode or placer claims (43 CFR 3840). The locator must decide whether a lode or placer claim should be used for a given material; the decision is not always easy but is critical. A lode claim is void if used to acquire a placer deposit, and a placer claim is void if used for a lode deposit. The 1872 Federal law requires a lode claim for “veins or lodes of quartz or other rock in place” (30 USC 26; 43 CFR 3841.1), and a placer claim for all “forms of deposit, excepting veins of quartz or other rock in place” (30 USC 35). The maximum size of a lode claim is 457 m (1,500 ft) in length and 183 m (600 ft) in width, whereas an individual or company can locate a placer claim as much as 8 hectares (20 acres) in area.

Claims may be patented or unpatented. A patented claim is a lode or placer claim or mill site for which a patent has been issued by the Federal Government, whereas an unpatented claim means a lode or placer claim, tunnel right or mill site located under the Federal (30 USC) act, for which a patent has not been issued.

4.2.2

Surface Rights

Information in this section is sourced from Papke and Davis (2019).

About 85% of the land in Nevada is controlled by the Federal Government; most of this land is administered by the BLM, the US Forest Service (USFS), the US Department of Energy (DOE), or the US Department of Defence (DOD). Much of the land controlled by the BLM and the USFS is open to prospecting and claim location.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 4.1. Project Location Plan.

Note: Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

Bureau of Land Management regulations regarding surface disturbance and reclamation require that a notice be submitted to the appropriate BLM Field Office for exploration activities in which five acres or fewer are proposed for disturbance (43 CFR 3809.1-1 through 3809.1-4). A Federal Plan of Operations is needed for all mining and processing activities, plus all activities exceeding five acres of proposed disturbance. A Plan of Operations is also needed for any bulk sampling in which 1,000 or more tons of presumed mineralized material are proposed for removal (43 CFR 3802.1 through 3802.6, 3809.1-4, 3809.1-5). The BLM also requires the posting of bonds for reclamation for any surface disturbance caused by more than casual use (43 CFR 3809.500 through 3809.560). The USFS has regulations regarding land disturbance in forest lands (36 CFR Subpart A). Both agencies also have regulations pertaining to land disturbance in proposed wilderness areas.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

4.2.3

Environmental Regulations

Information in this section is sourced from Papke and Davis (2019).

All surface management activities, including reclamation, must comply with all pertinent Federal laws and regulations, and all applicable State environmental laws and regulations. The fundamental requirement, implemented in 43 CFR 3809, is that all hard-rock mining under a Plan of Operations or Notice on the public lands must prevent unnecessary or undue degradation. The Plan of Operations and any modifications to the approved Plan of Operations must meet the requirement to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation.

Authorization to allow the release of effluents into the environment must be in compliance with the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and other applicable Federal and State environmental laws, consistent with BLM’s multiple-use responsibilities under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and fully reviewed in the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document.

4.2.4

Water Rights

Information in this section is sourced from the State of Nevada Water Resources and the US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation websites.

Allocation of water rights in Nevada uses two principles, prior appropriation, and beneficial use. Prior appropriation (also known as the "first in time, first in right") allows for the orderly use of the state's water resources by granting priority to senior water rights. This concept ensures that senior users are protected, even as new uses for water are allocated. Under the Revised Nevada Statutes (Chapters 533 and 534), all water can be appropriated for beneficial use. Irrigation, mining, recreation, commercial/industrial and municipal uses are examples of beneficial uses.

Water supplied by the Colorado River is managed and operated under numerous compacts, federal laws, court decisions and decrees, contracts, and regulatory guidelines collectively known as the "Law of the River." This collection of documents apportions the water and regulates the use and management of the Colorado River among the seven basin states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, California, Nevada and Arizona) and Mexico. The primary document is the 1922 Colorado River Compact.

4.3

Ownership

Canyon Resources Corporation (Canyon Resources), CR Reward’s predecessor, concluded lease agreements to four unpatented lode claims blocks from private owners in 2004 and 2005.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

In 2006, Canyon Resources completed the acquisition of six patented placer claims from Barrick Gold Corporation (Barrick). Canyon Resources also staked 99 new unpatented lode claims during 2005 and 2006.

In 2008, Canyon Resources assigned all of the patented and unpatented claims comprising the Project to CR Reward, which was subsequently converted into a Nevada limited liability company. CR Reward holds a 100% interest in the mineral claims that form the Project, including 99 unpatented lode mineral claims and 6 patented placer claims (Table 4.1). The remaining 22 unpatented lode and placer claims are held through a number of lease agreements (Table 4.1).

On June 13^th, 2022, Augusta acquired the Reward Project (Reward or the Project), from Waterton Nevada Splitter LLC (Waterton) by the purchase of CR Reward. Upon closing of the transaction, Waterton received USD$12.5 million cash and USD$15 million comprised of 7,800,000 Augusta shares, with the remaining payable at the time of Augusta’s next equity financing, in cash or shares, providing the additional amount of shares does not result in Waterton owning more than 9.99% of Augusta’s issued and outstanding shares. In addition, USD$17.5 million cash is to be paid within 90 days of closing of the transaction (Augusta Gold Corp., 2022).

4.4

Mineral Properties

4.4.1

Claim Status

The Project consists of 121 unpatented Bureau of Land Management (BLM) placer and lode mining claims and six patented placer mining claims (Jensen, 2022a,b,c,d), totalling approximately 2,333 net acres (Table 4.1). Figure 4.2 is an overview plan showing the entire package of claim locations. Figures 4.3 show details of the mineral claims in relation to the main mineralized zones at the Reward Project.

BLM and tax payments are up to date as of the effective date of this report.

Only patented claims have been legally surveyed.

4.4.2

Claim Retention Obligations

Under U.S. mining law, claims may be renewed annually for an unlimited number of years upon a small payment per claim (currently $165 per claim due to the BLM and an aggregate $1,502 due to Nye County) and the same claim status—whether lode or placer—may be used for exploration or exploitation of the lodes or placers.

State, Federal and local regulations involving environmental, mining and business activities must also be followed.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 4.1. Summary of the Reward Project Claims.

Claim Name	BLM NMC#/ Parcel #	Claim Type	Location/ Section Number	Area, Acres (nominal Number Unless patented)	Control (% owned, or name of lessor)	Year Staked or Patented	Taxes or BLM Rentals Paid Until
American	000-000-97	Patented placer	1 & 2	40	100% CR Reward LLC	1916	31 Aug 2022
Pentellic	000-000-97	Patented placer	2	20	100% CR Reward LLC	1916	31 Aug 2022
Regius	000-000-97	Patented placer	1 & 2	60	100% CR Reward LLC	1916	31 Aug 2022
Marion	000-000-97	Patented placer	2	40	100% CR Reward LLC	1916	31 Aug 2022
Valencia	000-000-97	Patented placer	2	20	100% CR Reward LLC	1923	31 Aug 2022
Trinity	000-000-97	Patented placer	1 & 2	40	100% CR Reward LLC	1925	31 Aug 2022
Sunshine	NMC27580	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	Connolly/Webster leases	1957	31 Aug 2022
Reward	NMC27581	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	20.66	Connolly/Webster leases	1957	31 Aug 2022
Hardway	NMC853089	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	Orser-McFall lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #1	NMC855150	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	12.39	Orser-McFall lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #2	NMC855151	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	12.39	Orser-McFall lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #3	NMC855152	Unpatented lode	2	11.02	Orser-McFall lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #4	NMC862531	Unpatented lode	2	11.02	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #5	NMC855153	Unpatented lode	2	4.13	Orser-McFall lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #6	NMC855154	Unpatented lode	2	13.77	Orser-McFall lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Reward South #1	NMC868938	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	20.66	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Reward South #2	NMC868939	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	20.66	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
McOrser	NMC870349	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
April Gold Ace	NMC871261	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #9	NMC871255	Unpatented placer	2	11.47	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #10	NMC871256	Unpatented placer	2	11.47	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #11	NMC871257	Unpatented placer	2	11.47	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #12	NMC871258	Unpatented placer	2 & 3	11.47	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #13	NMC871259	Unpatented placer	2, 3 & 10	11.47	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Bull Moose #14	NMC871260	Unpatented placer	2, 3, 34, 35	19.97	Orser-McFall lease	2004	31 Aug 2022
Good Hope	NMC853090	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	Orser/McFall/Webster Lease	2003	31 Aug 2022
Double RS	NMC125600	Unpatented placer	3 & 10	80	VanMeeteren et al lease	1966	31 Aug 2022
Durlers Hope	NMC124956	Unpatented placer	3	40	VanMeeteren et al lease	1966	31 Aug 2022
RP 1	NMC915581	Unpatented lode	33	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 2	NMC915582	Unpatented lode	33 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 3	NMC915583	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 4	NMC915584	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 5	NMC915585	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 6	NMC915586	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 7	NMC915587	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 8	NMC915588	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 9	NMC915589	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 10	NMC915590	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 11	NMC915591	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 12	NMC915592	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 13	NMC915593	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 14	NMC915594	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Claim Name

BLM NMC#/
Parcel #

Claim Type

Location/

Section

Number

Area, Acres

(nominal

Number

Unless

patented)

Control (% owned,

or name of lessor)

Year

Staked or

Patented

Taxes or BLM

Rentals Paid

Until

RP 15	NMC915595	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 16	NMC915596	Unpatented lode	34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 17	NMC915597	Unpatented lode	34 & 35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 18	NMC915598	Unpatented lode	34 & 35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 19	NMC915599	Unpatented lode	35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 20	NMC915600	Unpatented lode	35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 21	NMC915601	Unpatented lode	3, 4 & 33	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 22	NMC915602	Unpatented lode	3 & 4	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 23	NMC915603	Unpatented lode	3, 33,34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 24	NMC915604	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 25	NMC915605	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 26	NMC915606	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 27	NMC915607	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 28	NMC915608	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 29	NMC915609	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 30	NMC915610	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 31	NMC915611	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 32	NMC915612	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 33	NMC915613	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 34	NMC915614	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 35	NMC915615	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 36	NMC915616	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 37	NMC915617	Unpatented lode	3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 38	NMC915618	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 39	NMC915619	Unpatented lode	2, 3 & 34	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 40	NMC915620	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 41	NMC915621	Unpatented lode	2, 34,35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 42	NMC915622	Unpatented lode	2 & 35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 43	NMC915623	Unpatented lode	3 & 4	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 44	NMC915624	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 45	NMC915625	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 46	NMC915626	Unpatented lode	3 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 47	NMC915627	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 48	NMC915628	Unpatented lode	3 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 49	NMC915629	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 50	NMC915630	Unpatented lode	3 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 51	NMC915631	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 52	NMC915632	Unpatented lode	3 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 53	NMC915633	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 54	NMC915634	Unpatented lode	3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 55	NMC915635	Unpatented lode	2 & 3	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 56	NMC915636	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 57	NMC915637	Unpatented lode	3 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 58	NMC915638	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Claim Name	BLM NMC#/ Parcel #	Claim Type	Location/ Section Number	Area, Acres (nominal Number Unless patented)	Control (% owned, or name of lessor)	Year Staked or Patented	Taxes or BLM Rentals Paid Until
RP 59	NMC915639	Unpatented lode	3 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 60	NMC915640	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 61	NMC915641	Unpatented lode	2, 3, 10, 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 62	NMC915642	Unpatented lode	10 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 63	NMC915643	Unpatented lode	2 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 64	NMC915644	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 65	NMC915645	Unpatented lode	2 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 66	NMC915646	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 67	NMC915647	Unpatented lode	2 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 68	NMC915648	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 69	NMC915649	Unpatented lode	2 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 70	NMC915650	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 71	NMC915651	Unpatented lode	2 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 72	NMC915652	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 73	NMC915653	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 74	NMC915654	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 75	NMC915655	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 76	NMC915656	Unpatented lode	3	5.17	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 77	NMC915657	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 78	NMC915658	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 79	NMC915659	Unpatented lode	9 & 10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 80	NMC915660	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 81	NMC915661	Unpatented lode	9 & 16	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 82	NMC915662	Unpatented lode	9	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 83	NMC915663	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 84	NMC915664	Unpatented lode	2	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2005	31 Aug 2022
RP 85	NMC938644	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 86	NMC938645	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 87	NMC938646	Unpatented lode	10	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 88	NMC938647	Unpatented lode	10 & 11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 89	NMC938648	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 90	NMC938649	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 91	NMC938650	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 92	NMC938651	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 93	NMC938652	Unpatented lode	11	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 94	NMC938653	Unpatented lode	35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 95	NMC938654	Unpatented lode	35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 96	NMC938655	Unpatented lode	2 & 35	20.66	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 97	NMC938656	Unpatented lode	2	10.33	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 98	NMC938657	Unpatented lode	2	2.58	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022
RP 99	NMC938658	Unpatented lode	2	6.89	100% CR Reward LLC	2006	31 Aug 2022

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 4.2. CR Reward, LLC Controlled Mineral Claims at Reward Project.

Note: Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 4.3. Detail of Reward Claims and Mineralized Zones for the Core Area.

Note: Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

4.4.3

Encumbrances

No companies or entities are known that have back in or option rights on the mineral claims.

The claims listed in Table 4.1 have not been legally surveyed, except that the patented claims were legally surveyed prior to the date of patenting. The unpatented lode claims are readily identifiable and locatable in the field, due to distinctive topographic features and the near absence of vegetation (CAM, 2012).

4.5

Mineral Lease Agreements

Several blocks of unpatented claims (22 in total) are leased by CR Reward from underlying owners (refer to Table 4.1).

4.5.1

Connolly Lease

4.5.2

Webster Lease

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

4.5.3

Orser–McFall Lease

This lease agreement (the Orser–McFall Lease), effective as of February 5, 2005 (as amended on August 18^th, 2005 and November 14^th, 2006), applies to 12 unpatented lode and six unpatented placer mining claims (collectively, the Orser–McFall Claims). The Orser–McFall Lease is for an initial term of 20 years and continues so long thereafter as the Project remains in commercial production. The lessors under the Orser–McFall Lease own 100% of the Orser–McFall Claims, except for the Good Hope claim, in which they own a half interest (the other half being owned by the Daniel D. Webster Living Trust and leased to CR Reward pursuant to the Webster Lease). A 3% NSR royalty is payable on minerals mined from the Orser–McFall Claims, but is reduced to 1.5% on the Good Hope claim due to the fact that the lessee only owns a half interest in that claim. Annual advance minimum royalty payments are payable under the Orser–McFall Lease in an amount equal to $20,000 per year. These annual advance minimum royalty payments shall be applied toward, credited against and fully deductible from earned mineral production royalty payments due from the Orser-McFall Claims.

4.5.4

Van Meeteren et al Lease

4.6

Encumbrances

The Project is not subject to any other back-in rights payments, agreements or encumbrances.

4.7

Surface Ownership

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

4.8

Water Rights

CR Reward has the right to use 391,494 m³ (317.39 acre-ft) of water annually under Application No. 61412, Certificate No. 16384 and Permit No. 76390.

The Amargosa River basin is an enclosed basin, and the water rights are thus not affected by the Colorado River Compact or other agreements.

4.9

Permitting Considerations

The following permits and authorizations were granted to CR Reward:

Plan of Operations authorized under N-82840.

Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP); WPCP NEV2007101.

Water rights permitted by Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) under Mining, Milling, & Domestic permit 76390 and permit 89658.

Mining reclamation permit granted by the Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (BMRR) under mine site permit #0300.

Nevada Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) authorized Class II Air Quality permit AP1041-2492.

4.10

Environmental Considerations

Environmental, social and cultural studies were conducted by CR Reward as part of its permitting efforts.

Much of this information was provided to the BLM as part of the Reward Project Updated Plan of Operations and Reclamation Plan (BLM Case File Serial Number N-82840) and the accompanying Environmental Assessment (EA; DOI-BLM-NV-S030-2020-0006-EA).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Additional information, especially with respect to hydrogeology and geochemistry, was developed and submitted to the BMRR as part of the Nevada Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP) application. Both the EA and WPCP application include discussion of the potential impacts associated with project development, none of which were found to be significant.

Studies completed have included desktop reviews, and Project-specific data collection on the following: land status, soil surveys, air quality, cultural resources, Native American religious concerns, water resources, vegetation, wildlife and special-status species.

Additional information regarding environmental considerations at the Project is available in Evans et al. (2019).

4.11

Comments on Property Description and Location

CR Reward advised the QP that the company is not aware of any existing environmental liabilities connected with the Project, except those relating to CR Reward’s exploration and development activities, for which bonds have been posted.

There are currently no known environmental issues that could materially impact CR Reward’s ability to extract the Mineral Resources or that would impact the Mineral Resource estimates.

To the extent known, there are no other significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the Project that have not been discussed in this Report.

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography

5.1

Accessibility

The Project lies 7 miles southeast of Beatty, Nevada, about two miles east of US Highway 95 in Nye County. The Project can be accessed from Beatty by paved road on Highway 95 followed by traveling two miles east on a gravel road. Several dirt roads diverge into various canyons of the Bare Mountains.

5.2

Site Topography, Elevation and Vegetation

The Project is situated in the Amargosa Desert in southwestern Nevada on the southwestern flank of the Bare Mountains in the northern Amargosa Valley. It is located on the western flank of the rugged north–south-trending Bare Mountains. The western flank drains into the Amargosa Desert, which is drained by the ephemeral Amargosa River.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Beatty, on the Amargosa River, lies at 1,006 m (3,300 ft) elevation. Elevations in the Project area range from about 1,158 m (3,800 ft) to 1,311 m (4,300 ft).

Vegetation is sparse, consisting mainly of creosote bush, (Larrea sp.), Mormon tea, (Ephedra sp.), and low shrubs, with occasional small barrel cacti (Ferocactus sp.). A few mesquite trees (Prosopis sp.) occur within the overall Project boundary.

5.3

Climate

The climate is typical of middle-elevation desert.

The area is highly arid, with average annual precipitation of 10.4 cm (4.1 inches). During May to October, occasional thunderstorms may generate flash flooding in the region. Trace snow falls in the winter months.

Temperatures range from winter absolute lows of -12.2°C (10°F) to summer absolute highs of 43.3°C (110°F).

Operations are planned to be conducted year-round.

5.4

Local Resources and Infrastructure

The Project is currently serviced by an existing 14.4/24.9 kV power line owned and operated by Valley Electric. A water well currently provides water for exploration activities.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

History

6.1

Exploration History

Table 6.1 summarizes the Project history. A preliminary assessment was completed in 2005 (exact date is unknown), a prefeasibility study on January 26, 2006, and a feasibility study on May 25, 2007. Subsequent to the 2007 feasibility study completion, CR Reward obtained the majority of the required permits to support construction and operations. An updated feasibility study (the 2019 feasibility study; Lycopodium, 2019) and a 2019 feasibility study technical report (Evans et al., 2019) were commissioned by CR Reward and are partly the basis for this Technical Report. The authors are referring to these studies as historical; to be considered current, the studies completed in 2019 would need to incorporate current pricing for major equipment, contract mining costs, construction costs, major consumables and labor costs.

6.2

Production History

The most extensive showing within the Project is the 150 ft long Good Hope adit located near north end of the Hardway claim. A description of the Arista mine, credited with shipping 1.25 st of ore grading over 1 oz/st Au just before World War II (Kral, 1951), appears to match the Good Hope adit where a small glory hole and underlying raise were worked.

There are no formal production records from the Project area, and there has been no modern production.

Table 6.1. Project Exploration History.

Period	Owner	Operator	Work Performed
1913			Gold discovered at Gold Ace property.

pre-1942			Arista Mine (a.k.a. Good Hope?) Shipped 1.25 st of ore grading over 1 oz/st Au just before World War II.

1942–1957			District idle

1957–1962			Reward, Sunshine, Good Hope claims staked in 1957; Hardway claim staked 1962.

c. 1970s	Webster, Burt		Acquired Reward claims

1976	Webster, Burt	Galli Exploration Associates (Galli)	Galli acquired an option on the Webster-Burt land. Minor road construction and improvements.

1980	Teco Inc. (Teco)		Teco acquired the Gold Ace property.

mid-1980s	Webster, Burt	Optioned to St. Joe Minerals Corp. (St Joe)	Carried out an extensive sampling program on the Gold Ace property in tandem with their exploration program in the Bullfrog mining district.

1985	Gexa Gold Corp. (Gexa)	Gexa	Gexa, successor company to Galli Exploration Associates, staked 10 claims next to Webster, Burt claim holdings.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Period	Owner	Operator	Work Performed
1987	Teco	Homestake Mining Company (Homestake)	Homestake leased the Teco land and drilled two vertical reverse circulation (RC) holes near the northwest and southwest edges of the Webster-Burt ground as part of a 4 RC hole, 1,210 ft rotary drill program (HMC 1 to 4), which probed pediment gravels for a large-tonnage conceptual target. No anomalous results were encountered in the from the four wide-spaced drill holes.

1987–1989	Teco (1987–1991) Webster, Burt (1991–1992)	Gexa	Drilling by Gexa included 16 RC holes for a total of 3,037 ft were completed along the north-south trending Good Hope vein/fault system, much of which is within the limits of the current Good Hope resource area.

1988–1990	Teco (1987–1991) Webster, Burt (1991–1992)	Pathfinder Gold Corp. (Pathfinder)	Pathfinder optioned the Teco ground, portions of which overlay the southerly gravel-covered projection of the Reward fault, south of the Webster leased ground. Pathfinder drill-tested these fault projections and added several holes along drill fences between south Good Hope and south Gold Ace. A total of 33 RC and one partial core hole were drilled totaling 13,798 ft (excludes 43 ft due to an abandoned hole).

1990	Pathfinder	Cloverleaf Gold Inc. (Cloverleaf)	Pathfinder joint-ventured their interest in the TECO lease to Cloverleaf in 1990. Cloverleaf completed 49 shallow RC holes for 9,075 ft. All but five Cloverleaf holes were targeted on historic mine workings at Gold Ace. Cloverleaf surrendered their interest to Pathfinder in 1990.

1990	Pathfinder	Bond Gold Exploration Inc. (Bond Gold)	Airborne geophysics data collected over Gold Ace. Bond Gold acquired by Lac Minerals Ltd. (Lac Minerals). Property returned to Pathfinder.

1991	Teco	Pathfinder	In 1991, the availability of an option on the Reward property from Gexa influenced Pathfinder's decision to re-evaluate Gold Ace in conjunction with a program at Good Hope. Pathfinder proceeded to acquire the Reward property, stepped off south of the 1987-1989 Gexa drill pattern, and drilled into the present Reward gold resource south of the saddle, on the Hardway, Reward, Bullmoose #3A and #4 claims. Completed 17 holes (GA 91-1 to 91-17) for a total of 8,300 ft. Following the 1991 drill program, Pathfinder surrendered all leases and withdrew from the district.

1992	Teco	US Nevada Gold Search (USNGS)	In 1992 a joint venture consisting of Siskon Corp., N.A. Degerstrom Inc. and US Precious Metals (successor to GEXA), assumed GEXA's position at Reward. USNGS drilled 7 RC holes (R-16 to R-22) for 2,119 ft, all of which intersected mineralization along the Good Hope fault. USNGS conducted no further work on the property.

1995	Teco Webster, Burt	USNGS	USNGS sold the GEXA lode claims and assigned the Webster lease to Barrick.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Period	Owner	Operator	Work Performed
1995-1996	Barrick	Barrick	Negotiated a mining lease with Teco on the Gold Ace ground. Staked 94 lode claims along extensions of the Reward and Gold Ace zones. Completed a total of 88 RC holes and 3 core holes for 39,028 ft of drilling across the property.

1998	Barrick	Rayrock Mines Inc. (Rayrock)	Rayrock acquired Barrick’s land package and began permitting of the Reward Mining property.

1999	Rayrock	Glamis Gold Ltd. (Glamis Gold)	Glamis Gold acquired Rayrock.

1998–2000	Glamis Gold	Glamis Gold (Marigold Mining Company)	Between 1998 and 2000, 79 RC holes (RE-001 to RE-79, including RE-026A) totalling 30,535 ft were completed by Marigold Mining, an affiliate of Rayrock and Glamis Gold.

2000	Glamis Gold	Glamis	Initiated the permitting process for eventual production but falling gold prices led to project suspension.

2004–2006	Canyon Resources Corp. (Canyon)	Canyon	Acquired the core of the current Project in 2004 through three mineral leases with private owners for patented and unpatented mining claims. Acquired six patented placer claims from Barrick in 2006. Staked new unpatented lode and mill site claims between 2005 and 2007. Completed a Pre-Feasibility study in January 2006. Completed 21 RC drill holes for a total of 6,150 ft in 2006.

2007	Canyon	Canyon	Four core holes for 1,430 ft were completed. Mineral resource and mineral reserve estimate were updated. Plan of Operations authorized under N-82840. Obtained Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP); WPCP NEV2007101. Obtained general construction permit; NVR100000 CSW-17415. Water rights permitted by Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) under Mining, Milling, & Domestic permit 76390. Mining reclamation permit granted by the Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (BMRR) under mine site permit #0300. Nevada Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) authorized Class II Air Quality permit AP1041-2492

2008–2010	Canyon	Atna Resources Ltd. (Atna)	Completed a Feasibility study in February 2008. Assigned all properties to CR Reward Corporation after Canyon was acquired by Atna in March 2008. Mineral resource and mineral reserve updates were completed in 2009 and 2010. Completed Environmental Assessment (EA) in 2009; prepared “Reward Project Updated Plan of Operations and Reclamation Plan” (BLM Case File Serial Number N-82840).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Period	Owner	Operator	Work Performed
2011-2012	Atna	Atna	Completed 15 RC drill holes for a total of 15,880 ft. Completed an updated study on the Reward project that included an economic analysis. Report was published in June 2012.

2013	Atna	Atna	14 RC drill holes for 9,003 ft of drilling were completed. Mineral resource and mineral reserve updates were completed.

2016	CR Reward	CR Reward	Two geophysical induced polarization (IP)/resistivity lines; acquired on both lines using a dipole-dipole array with a dipole length of 100 m for a total of 3.9 line-km of data coverage.

2017	CR Reward	CR Reward	Property-wide data compilation and validation program. 14 core holes for 4,989 ft were completed.

2018	CR Reward	CR Reward	14 core holes for 6,307 ft were completed. Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve updates.

2019	CR Reward	CR Reward	Completed updated Feasibility study.

Geological Setting and Mineralization

The Project is hosted within the Bare Mountain Complex, which lies within the Nevada Basin and Range Province. Information in this section is summarized from Rasmussen and Keith (2015), Hoisch (1997), CAM (2006, 2012), Cornwall and Kleinhampl (1961, 1964), Eliopulos (1996), Golder (2007), Sawyer et al. (1994), Monsen et al. (1992) and Noble et al. (1991).

7.1

Regional Geology

The Bare Mountains consist of up to 6,096 m (20,000 ft) of Late Proterozoic to Paleozoic marine sedimentary rocks in the lower plate that have been juxtaposed against Miocene silicic volcanic sequences in the upper plate to the north (Figure 7.1 and Figure 7.2). The lower plate units have been deformed through folding, thrust faulting, low- and high-angle normal faulting during Mesozoic compression (Monsen et al., 1992) and have been metamorphosed from lower amphibolite to sub-greenschist grade (Hoisch, 1997). Two dominant normal fault sets have been mapped in the lower plate. These include moderately east-dipping (Bare Mountain Fault and Gold Ace fault) and shallowly southeast-dipping faults that cut or curve into east-dipping faults. A metamorphic grade discordance across the Gold Ace fault suggests displacement of >1,981 m (6,500 ft) (Hoisch, 1997).

To the north, the shallowly north-dipping Fluorspar Canyon Fault separates the lower plate from the Miocene volcanic sequences that were deposited between 14.0 and 11.5 Ma (Sawyer et al., 1994).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

7.2

Local Geology

The Project is located on the southwestern flank of the Bare Mountain Complex and is underlain by moderately deformed marine clastic and carbonate rocks of Late Proterozoic and Late Cambrian age that have been metamorphosed to greenschist grade (refer to Figure 7.2). Tertiary and younger alluvium cover the lower slopes and the adjacent Armagosa Valley to the south and west. The east dipping Gold Ace fault, that is locally termed the Good Hope fault zone, separates northeast-dipping Late Proterozoic to Early Cambrian units in the footwall block from Middle to Late Cambrian units in the hanging wall block (Figure 7.3 and Figure 7.4).

The gold mineralization in the Good Hope Deposit is spatially associated with and along the Good Hope fault zone. Mineralization associated with the Morris Marble lower contact in the footwall block is referred to as the Gold Ace mineralized zone. Although there are small historic prospects along the Good Hope fault zone, most of the historic production came from the Gold Ace Zone.

Figure 7.1. Simplified Geology of the Bare Mountain Area.

Note: B, Bullfrog detachment fault; F, Fluorspar Canyon fault; T, Tates Wash fault. From Hoisch, 1997.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.2. Simplified Geologic Map of Project Area.

Note: Gold Ace area modified after Monsen et al., 1992.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.3. Local Geology Map.

Note: Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.4. 3D Geological Schematic of the Main Rock Units and Faults.

Note: Modified from Carisey, 1989.

7.3

Stratigraphy

The sedimentary sequence of the lower portion of the Bare Mountain Complex consists of 2,911 m (9,555 ft) of moderately deformed, clastic and carbonate rocks of Late Proterozoic and Middle Cambrian age (Table 7.1, Figure 7.5). Approximately 762 m (2,500 ft) of section is exposed in the Project area. Beds dip to the northeast at moderate to high angles.

	●	The following stratigraphic descriptions at the Project are largely based on:
	●	Geologic map of Bare Mountain, Nye County, Nevada (Monsen et al., 1992).
	●	Stratigraphic descriptions from the 1989 Project Summary Report (Carisey, 1989).
	●	Drill hole data.
	●	Observations from the 2017–2018 drill program (Saunders, 2018).

Table 7.1. Stratigraphy and Unit Thickness of the Bare Mountains Complex.

Age	Formation	Member	Map Code	Thickness ft
Cambrian	Bonanza King	Papoose Lake	-Cbp	1,900
	Carrara	Upper part	-Ccu	500
		Middle part	-Ccm	325
		Lower part	-Ccl	375
	Zabriskie Quartzite		-Cz	1,125
Proterozoic-Cambrian	Wood Canyon	Upper upper	zwuu	840
		Upper lower	zwul	1,185
		Middle	Zwm	625
		Lower	Zwl	1,050
Late Proterozoic	Stirling	Juhl	Zsj	310
		Sutton	Zss	500
		Morris Marble	Zsm	325
		Beatty Schist	Zbs	470

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

7.3.1

Late Proterozoic

Stirling Formation

Beatty Schist Member (Zbs)

The Beatty Schist Member consists of greenish, moderately foliated phyllites with minor interbedded thin shale and quartzite beds. The transition zone with the overlying Morris Marble characterized by a few feet of alternating schists, limestone, and dolomite beds. Limestone lenses occur in grey siliciclastic rocks, which occasionally display schistose textures. The unit is about 152 m (500 ft) thick.

Morris Marble Member (Zsm)

The Morris Marble Member consists of massive, white to light tan-grey, weathered limestone and dolomite with dissolution textures and occasional grainy quartzite lenses. This member conformably overlies the Beatty Schist Member, and may be correlated to the lower “D” member of the Stirling Formation (Monsen et al., 1992). The Morris Marble Members hosts the gold mineralization at the Gold Ace deposit. The unit is approximately 76 m (250 ft) thick.

Sutton Member (Zss)

The Sutton Member consists of medium to thick, light brownish-grey, interbedded, fine-grained quartzite, micaceous quartzite, pale-green phyllite, and yellowish-brown dolomite. Laminations and cross-laminations are common. The Sutton Member may be correlated to the upper “D” member of the Stirling Formation (Monsen et al., 1992). The Sutton Member conformably overlies the Morris Marble Member. The Sutton Member hosts gold mineralization at the Gold Ace deposit near the lower contact with the Morris Marble Member and adjacent to vertical faults. The unit is about 152 m (500 ft) thick.

Juhl Member (Zsj)

The Juhl Member consists of white to pale yellowish-brown, medium to thickly bedded, fine-grained orthoquartzite. The orthoquartzite is silicified, brittle and highly fractured adjacent to and within the footwall of the Good Hope fault. The basal contact is gradational with the underlying Sutton Member. The Juhl Member conformably overlies the Sutton Member. Minor gold mineralization is found in the Juhl Member along the Good Hope fault, and occasionally below the Wood Canyon Formation within the Good Hope fault zone. The unit is approximately 76 m (250 ft) thick.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.5. Lower Portion of the Bare Mountains Complex Stratigraphic Column Observed at the Project.

Note: Modified after Monsen et al., 1992.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

7.3.2

Proterozoic-Cambrian

Wood Canyon Formation (Zwc)

Only 750 ft of the basal section of the Wood Canyon Formation is preserved in the Project area. The Wood Canyon Formation conformably overlies the Juhl Member of the Stirling Formation. The upper member of the Wood Canyon Formation is Cambrian in age and the middle and lower members are Late Proterozoic in age. The thicknesses of the upper, middle and lower members are around 610 m (2,000 ft), 110 m (360 ft), and 305 m (1,000 ft), respectively.

The Wood Canyon Formation is the main host for gold mineralization within the Project area. Gold is hosted in quartz veins and silicic alteration, in association with the Good Hope fault and, to a lesser extent, along the Good Fortune fault.

Three conspicuous orange to grey dolomite beds with dissolution textures define the basal section. The lower members of the basal section of the Wood Canyon Formation (Zwl) are listed below from oldest to youngest.

7.3.3

Cambrian

Zabriskie Quartzite (Cz)

The Zabriskie Quartzite is a massive, thickly bedded, commonly laminated and cross-bedded, cliff-forming orthoquartzite. Trace fossils, primarily Scolithus, are common in the lower beds of the unit (Monsen et al., 1992). The quartzite is conformable with the underlying Wood Canyon Formation. The Zabriskie Quartzite is juxtaposed against the Wood Canyon Formation along the southern portion of the Good Fortune fault. The unit is about 1, 343 m (1,125 ft) thick.

Carrara Formation (Cc)

The Carrara Formation is a heterogeneous unit of quartzite and phyllite with prominent intervals of limestone and silty limestone. The unit conformably overlies the Zabriskie Quartzite and can be divided into three parts, lower, middle and upper, that have a combined thickness of 366 m (1,200 ft.) The formation is exposed to the east of the Good Hope fault zone.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Bonanza King Formation (Cbp)

The Bonanza King Formation consists of cliff-forming, thin to thick, dark grey and white alternating limestone and dolomite beds intercalated with minor, distinct, yellowish-orange silty and sandy intervals.

The upper 20 m (65 ft) of the sequence consists of silty and sandy dolomite and limestone. The uppermost portion grades downward into medium- to thickly bedded dolomite and limestone with silty and sandy beds. The basal part typically consists of white dolomite and limestone with yellowish-orange, silty layers. The basal contact is gradational and is defined as where white, silty limestone and dolomite grade into a dark grey limestone.

The unit is exposed to the east of the Good Hope fault zone and is juxtaposed against the Wood Canyon Formation along the central to north portion of the Good Fortune fault and the main area of gold mineralization. The average unit thickness is about 640 m (2,100 ft).

7.4

Structure

The oldest deformational features include minor folds within sedimentary units that developed during the Mesozoic compressional event (Monsen et al., 1992). The known major faults are shown on Figure 7.3. A series of north-trending faults cut and offset the folded units including the east-dipping Good Hope fault zone. The Good Hope fault zone has been mapped and logged from the southern property boundary to three miles north of the northern boundary. Several faults with similar trends are also observed in the footwall and hanging wall blocks. Figure 7.6 outlines the structures visible at section 3500 N.

7.4.1

Good Hope Fault Zone

Within the Project area, the east-dipping Good Hope fault zone ranges from 15 m (50 ft) to 192 m (630 ft) in width and has a 1,585 m (5,200 ft) strike extent. The fault zone has an overall northerly trend but between 5100 N to 3000 N rotates to a north-northwest trend. The fault zone juxtaposes Bonanza King Formation in the hanging wall block, Wood Canyon Formation in the central fault zone and Late Proterozoic units in the footwall.

The fault zone comprises the Good Fortune fault that is located on the eastern or hanging-wall side (Figure 7.) and has a moderate dip, while the Good Hope fault defines the western (or footwall) extent and has a steep dip. The Good Hope fault controls the majority of the known alteration and gold mineralization.

Textures observed within the fault zone include breccias, quartz veins, elevated silicic alteration and localized clay-rich zones. Exposed quartz veins display a dominant northerly trend and secondary sigmodal veins display an east-northeast trend (Figure 7.7). Veins measurements from oriented drill core highlight two dominant vein sets with orientations that include a moderate dip to the southeast (45°→140°) and a steep dip to the northeast (70°→050°; Brown, 2018). The line of intersection for these two vein sets is moderate dip to the southeast (43°→120°).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

The Good Hope fault zone is interpreted to have undergone right lateral, strike-slip/dip-slip movement based on regional observations, historical mapping combined with structural field observations and slickensides along fault planes. Previous work has estimated at least 1,676 m (5,500 ft) of vertical displacement (west side up) and 610 m (2,000 ft) of lateral movement (Turner, 1990).

Figure 7.6. 3500N Geology Cross-Section.

Note: Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.7. Photo Highlighting Vein Orientation in Outcrop.

Note: From Barcia, 2017.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

7.5

Alteration

Four main alteration assemblages are observed across the Project: silicic, sericite, argillic, and propylitic, and these are spatially associated with the Good Hope fault zone.

Silicic alteration along the Good Hope fault laterally extends 15 m (50 ft) to 30 m (100 ft) toward the Good Fortune fault. Alteration within the central fault zone appears to have preferentially developed along moderately dipping bedding planes within the Wood Canyon Formation. Alteration intensity ranges from intense to weak and is typically associated with quartz ± adularia-calcite veins, goethite after pyrite, and local coarse adularia. Quartz veining varies in thicknesses from millimetres to meters.

Exposed quartz veins are commonly coated by manganese oxides and hematite. Massive white quartz veins are more abundant than banded veins. Prominent massive veins are exposed in the footwall block at the northern extent of the Good Hope Deposit. Colloform vein textures are observed at Ollie’s Follie target (Barcia, 2017).

The sericite assemblage is preferentially developed within mica-bearing units and is locally overprinted by silicic alteration.

Argillic alteration is locally restricted along portions of fault planes and characterized by the presence of kaolinite that was identified using quantitative evaluation of materials by scanning electron microscopy (QEMSCAN) analysis.

Propylitic alteration consists of calcite, chlorite, and ankerite. Calcite veinlets and stringers are observed throughout most units. Chlorite is preferentially developed in finer-grained units and biotite has been partially to pervasively replaced by chlorite.

7.6

Oxidation (Redox)

The redox zones within the Project area include an upper oxide and a lower transition zone. The upper oxide zone is characterized by hematite, goethite, pyrolusite and minor jarosite. Oxidation is strong within and adjacent to the Good Hope fault and decreases in intensity outward from the fault. The depth of the oxide zone ranges from 30 m (100 ft) to 152 m (500 ft) below surface (between 1,183 m (3,880 ft) to 1,027 m (3,370 ft) elevation ASL). Iron oxides comprise up to 5% of the rock mass.

The transition zone is located below the base of the oxide horizon and consists of both goethite and pyrite. In the transition zone, sulphides comprise <1% of the rock mass. The transition zone reaches the maximum depth of drilling on the Project at an elevation of 3,099 ft.

Drilling to date has not intersected a primary sulphide zone.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

7.7

Mineralization

Mineralization that supports Mineral Resource estimation is hosted in the Good Hope Deposit and the Gold Ace mineralized zone. Anomalous gold values are associated with quartz veining and/or iron-oxide-bearing, silicic-altered rocks in both areas. Pyrite and iron oxides are the dominant minerals associated with gold mineralization. Visible gold was identified on fractures in sericite-altered rocks, on quartz-adularia-coated fractures, and in hematite-filled cavities, pervasively silicic-altered rocks, goethite pseudomorphs, thin quartz veinlets, and goethite-rich fractures and cavities. Visible gold has been observed along the Gold Ace trend in surface samples and drill core, whilst it was observed only in drill core from Good Hope. Figure 7.8 shows the tenor of the gold anomalism encountered in drilling along the two mineralized trends.

7.7.1

Description of Mineralization: Good Hope Deposit

Gold mineralization at the Good Hope Deposit is primarily hosted in altered and veined Wood Canyon Formation, and to a lesser extent, in the Juhl and Sutton Members of the Stirling Formation. Gold mineralization is associated with:

	●	Silicic and/or sericite-altered rocks.
	●	Zones of increased quartz vein density.
	●	Faults, breccias, and/or highly fractured zones with abundant iron oxides.
	●	Units with high concentrations of goethite pseudomorphs after pyrite.
	●	Quartz-adularia veinlets.

Mineralization at the Good Hope Deposit varies in width from 15 m (50 ft) to 192 m (630 ft), has a strike length of 1,585 m (5,200 ft) and has been intersected to a vertical depth of 213 m (700 ft) below surface.

North of 5100 N, mineralization is spatially associated with the sub-vertical, north-trending Good Hope fault and is up to 149 m (190 ft) wide. Section 5600 N outlines mineralization north of 5100 N (Figure 7.9).

In the central portion of the deposit between 5100 N and 3000 N, mineralization is also associated with the Good Hope fault. Mineralization extends to the east with a shallow to moderate dip towards the hanging wall of the Good Fortune fault. Mineralization has been intersected along the Good Fortune fault and appears to be sub-parallel to the dip of the fault. In this central portion, mineralization is up to 192 m (630 ft) thick and coincides with a change in fault zone strike from north to north-northwest. Sections 4200 N (Figure 7.10), and Section 4800 N (Figure 7.11) outline mineralization in the central part of the deposit.

South of 3000 N, the gold mineralization continues to be spatially associated with the sub-vertical, north-trending Good Hope fault, and is up to 55 m (180 ft) thick (Figure 7.12). However, limited drilling has occurred south of this section and therefore mineralization controls are less well constrained.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.8. Gold Mineralization at Reward Intersected by Drilling.

Note: The Good Hope Deposit is situated between the Good Hope and Good Fortune faults. The Gold Ace Zone is located near 3000 ft N and 65000 ft E. Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

7.7.2

Description of Mineralization: Gold Ace Mineralized Zone

Mineralization at Gold Ace is dominantly located along the contact between the Sutton and Morris Marble Members (Figure 7.12). At the mineralized contact, the Morris Marble Member is characterized by silicic alteration and hematite. Evidence for mineralization parallel to the contact between the Sutton and Morris Marble Members is provided by low-angle, east-dipping stopes from historical underground mining. The northwest-trending Gold Ace Zone consists of several discrete structures. The overall continuity of mineralization at Gold Ace is less well developed than at the Good Hope Deposit.

Mineralization at the Gold Ace varies in width from 1.5 m (5 ft) to 21 m (70 ft), has a strike length of 640 m (2,100 ft) and has been intersected to a vertical depth of 91 m (300 ft) below surface.

Figure 7.9. Mineralization along Section 5600 N Looking North.

Note: Mineralization along the Good Hope fault on the west side of the Good Hope fault zone. Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.10. Mineralization along Section 4200 N Looking North.

Figure 7.11. Mineralization along Section 4800 N, Looking North.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 7.12. Mineralization along Section 2900 N Looking North.

Note - Mineralization is narrow along the Good Hope fault at the Gold Ace zone, mineralization is located along the contact of the Sutton and Morris Marble members to an unnamed fault. Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

7.7.3

Description of Mineralization: Exploration Update

At the Good Hope Deposit, gold mineralization remains open to the east towards and along the Good Fortune fault and south of 3000 N. The eastern area of the deposit, most notably along the Good Fortune fault, has had limited exploration drilling. To the south of Good Hope, wide-spaced exploration drilling along the 914 m (3,000 ft) extension of the fault zone has returned several intercepts with narrow (<9.1 m (30 ft)) or low-grade (<0.017 opt) gold mineralization. The projected intersection of the Good Hope fault zone and the Gold Ace trend is another area that has had limited exploration drilling.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Deposit Types

The structural setting, alteration mineralogy and mineralization characteristics of the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone are consistent with orogenic gold deposits as defined in Moritz (2000), Goldfarb et al., (2005), Groves et al. (1998; 2003), and Johnston et al. (2015).

Orogenic gold deposits occur in variably deformed metamorphic terranes formed during Middle Archean to younger Precambrian, and continuously throughout the Phanerozoic. The host geological environments are typically volcano–plutonic or clastic sedimentary terranes, but gold deposits can be hosted by any rock type. There is a consistent spatial and temporal association with granitoids of a variety of compositions. Host rocks are metamorphosed to greenschist facies, but locally can achieve amphibolite or granulite facies conditions.

Gold deposition occurs adjacent to first-order, deep-crustal fault zones with interpreted long-lived structural controls. These first-order faults, which can be hundreds of kilometres long and kilometres wide, show complex structural histories. Economic mineralization typically formed as vein fill of second- and third-order shears and faults, particularly at jogs or changes in strike along the crustal fault zones. Mineralization styles vary from stockworks and breccias in shallow, brittle regimes, through laminated crack-seal veins and sigmoidal vein arrays in brittle-ductile crustal regions, to replacement- and disseminated-type orebodies in deeper, ductile environments. The specific style of mineralization at the Good Hope and Gold Ace deposits can be classified as both structurally controlled and locally disseminated.

Orogenic gold deposits in Nevada are situated along the Argentoro belt (Luning-Fencemaker Fold-and Thrust Belt of Wyld et al., 2000, 2001; DeCelles, 2004), a 700-km long, north-south trending belt extending from south-eastern California to the Nevada-Oregon border. The belt formed between ~100 Ma and 70 Ma synchronous with low-grade metamorphism and brittle-ductile deformation. District-scale controls consist of high-angle, N-striking strike-slip faults, while deposit-scale controls consist of NW-, EW-, and NE-striking dip-slip fracture arrays.

Johnston et at. (2015) outline that Nevada orogenic gold deposits are defined by: 1) widespread low to moderate-grade metamorphism in Mesozoic rocks, 2) low-sulphide bearing, mesothermal “bull-quartz” veins emplaced in shear zones, 3) ubiquitous quartz-sericite-pyrite alteration of wall rocks, 4) dilute CO2-rich ore fluids, 5) coarse gold in veins, 6) elevated concentrations of Ag, Sb, As, and Hg, and 7) abundant placer gold deposits. Except for placer deposits, the Good Hope and Gold Ace deposits match the criteria listed above.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Exploration

9.1

Introduction

Exploration on and around the Project area has primarily consisted of surface geological mapping, rock-chip sampling, and drilling.

Exploration conducted by parties other than CR Reward is discussed in Section 6.

9.2

CR Reward Exploration (2015-Present)

In 2016, seventeen rock chip samples were collected consisting of veins and fault zones from Gold Ace (five samples), Good Hope (nine samples) and Ollie’s Follie (three samples). Samples were submitted to ALS Global for fire assay gold (lab code Au-ICP22 and Au-GRA22) and multi-element geochemistry analyses (lab code ME-MS61). Gold values from Gold Ace ranged from 0.008 to 17.85 ppm, Good Hope ranged from below detection up to 2.10 ppm Au, and Ollie’s Follie ranged from 0.001 up to 4.90 ppm Au. Gold Ace returned elevated Ag (up to 33 ppm), Cu (up to 476 ppm), Hg (up to 5.7 ppm), Pb (up to 1,435 ppm), Sb (up to 185 ppm), and Zn (up to 3,490 ppm), whereas Good Hope and Ollie’s Follie returned weakly anomalous values.

Two geophysical IP/resistivity lines were completed by Zonge International, Inc. in August 2016. Data were acquired along two lines:

•

Line 1, oriented 045° northeast.

•

Line 2, oriented 051° northeast.

IP/resistivity data were acquired on both lines using a dipole-dipole array with a dipole length of 100 m (328 ft) for a total of 3.9 line-km (3.9 line-mi) of data coverage. Data were acquired in a non-reference, complex resistivity mode. Line locations are shown in Figure 9.1. The IP/survey shows the strongest anomaly along the Gold Ace trend, with a weaker response along the Good Hope trend. Along the Gold Ace trend, line 1 indicates lithology controls mineralization while Line 2 indicates structure controls mineralization (resistivity high). These results correlate well with the modelled location of the Gold Ace fault.

In 2017, an extensive, property-wide data compilation and validation program was completed. Subsequent east-west, hand-interpreted, paper cross-sections were created and used to generate a 3D geologic model highlighting major faults and formational contacts. The geologic model was used to support Mineral Resource estimation.

In 2018, a 28-hole core drilling program was completed and results included in an updated geological model. Cross-sectional interpretations were completed infill the 2017 cross-sections.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 9.1. Plan View of the Project Area Showing the Locations of the IP/Resistivity Survey Lines.

Drilling

The Project exploration drill hole database as of April 19^th, 2018, contains 376 drill holes (totalling 43,687 m (143,330 ft)), seven road cuts (totalling 319 m (1,045 ft)) and three trenches (totalling 82 m (270 ft)). The road cuts and trenches were removed from the database for resource estimation purposes. No records for two drill holes (GA-33 and GA-35) of the 49 holes completed by Cloverleaf were located and therefore missing from the database. All drilling in the database is summarized in Table 10.1

Drill hole collar locations for the entire property are shown on Figure 10.1.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 10.1. Reward Drilling Summary.

Operating Company	Year	Core Holes		Reverse Circulation		Total
Operating Company	Year	Number	Footage	Number	Footage	Number	Footage
Homestake	1987			4	1,210	4	1,210
Gexa	1987			16	3,037	16	3,037
Pathfinder	1988			22	9,273	22	9,273
Pathfinder	1989			11	4,525	11	4,525
Cloverleaf	1990			47	8,625	47	8,625
Pathfinder	1991			17	8,300	17	8,300
USNGS	1992			7	2,119	7	2,119
Barrick	1995	3	773	83	35,295	86	36,068
Barrick	1996			5	2,960	5	2,960
Glamis Gold	1998			42	16,590	42	16,590
Glamis Gold	1999			19	10,295	19	10,295
Glamis Gold	2000			18	3,640	18	3,640
Canyon	2006			21	6,145	21	6,145
Canyon	2007	4	1,364			4	1,364
Atna	2011			15	8,880	15	8,880
Atna	2013			14	9,003	14	9,003
CR Reward	2017	14	4,989			14	4,989
CR Reward	2018	14	6,307			14	6,307
Total		35	13,433	341	129,897	376	143,330

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 10.1. Reward Drill Hole Locations.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

10.1

Drill Methods, Logging and Surveys

Summaries of drill campaigns by Gexa, Barrick, Glamis, Canyon, Atna and CR Reward are provided below. No drilling information exists for Homestake (4 holes), 1988-1989 Pathfinder (33 holes), Cloverleaf (47 holes) and USNGS (7 holes).

Reverse circulation drilling across all campaigns was conducted using both dry (from 1987 to 2006) and wet (from 2006 onwards) drilling techniques. All drilling was completed above the water table and no material down-hole contamination was noted in the RC drilling. RC drill holes were compared to neighbouring core holes and other RC holes using an Excel Spreadsheets. A visual assessment of the length and magnitude of gold grades indicated expected similarities for a structurally controlled, epithermal gold deposit. Statistical methods reviewed decay and cyclicity of grades for the RC holes and found no significant indication for contamination.

Limited down hole surveys exist for the pre-CR Reward holes. However, most mineralised intercepts from historical drill holes were within the first 500 ft and only minor down hole deviation is expected over these short depths combined with observed minimal deviation (<2°) from the CR Reward program.

10.1.1

Gexa (1987)

Gexa RC drilling was mostly carried out by Pollocks Drilling using an CP-650WS RC rig, hole diameters were 13.3 cm (5 ¼ inches) and logging captured drill recovery, lithology, colour, vein/silica alteration, oxide intensity, sulphide percentage. Drill hole inclinations were vertical or -60° towards the west (270°).

10.1.2

Pathfinder (1991)

Pathfinder RC drilling was carried out by Hawkworth Drilling using a Schramm truck mounted RC rig, hole diameters are unknown and logging captured drill recovery, lithology, vein/silica alteration, oxide intensity, fragment shape and sulphide percentage. Drill hole inclinations were -60° towards the west (270°).

10.1.3

Barrick (1995-1996) and Glamis (1998-2000)

Both Barrick and Glamis RC drilling were carried out by Eklund Drilling using an MPD-1500 RC rig, hole diameters were 13.0 cm (5 ⅛ inches) and logging captured lithology, vein abundance, oxide intensity, sulphide percentage. The three Barrick core holes were drilled with a DMW-65 core rig (operator unknown) and logging captured core recovery, lithology, vein abundance, oxide and sulphide intensity plus percentage. Core recovery for the three HQ (7.75 cm (3.05 inches) diameter) holes ranged from 85% to 96%. Majority of the holes from both companies were drilled towards the west (270°) at inclinations ranging from -40° to -75°. In 1995, Barrick surveyed collar coordinates in the local grid, as well as completed a review of all pre-Barrick holes and updated coordinates where necessary.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

10.1.4

Canyon (2006-2007)

Canyon RC drilling was carried out by Boart-Longyear, hole diameters were 14.0 cm (5½ inches) and logging captured lithology, vein abundance, oxide intensity, sulphide percentage. The four core holes were drilled with a CS1000PL and Hagby 1000 rigs (operator was Hansen Drilling) and logging captured core recovery, lithology, vein abundance, oxide and sulphide intensity plus percentage. Core was photographed and average core recovery for the holes was >95%. Majority of the holes from both companies were drilled vertically or towards the west (270°) at inclinations ranging from -60° to -80°. Down-hole surveys for core holes were collected every 30 m (100 ft) using an Easy Shot tool. Collar coordinates were surveyed by a licensed surveyor from Triangle Surveying.

10.1.5

Atna (2011-2013)

Atna RC drilling was carried out by National Drilling using a Schramm T65WS rig, hole diameters were 14.0 cm (5 ½ inches) and logging captured lithology, vein abundance, oxide intensity, sulphide percentage. Majority of the holes from both companies were drilled vertically or towards the west (270°) at inclinations ranging from -65° to -75°. Collar coordinates were surveyed by a licensed surveyor from Great West Surveying using a differential GPS instrument.

10.2

CR Reward Core Drilling Program (2017-2018)

CR Reward’s drilling in 2017 and 2018 was designed for the main purposes of collecting metallurgical samples (5 holes), obtaining geotechnical data and samples (7 holes), increasing the number of core holes and specific gravity determinations on the project as well as resource delineation (16 holes).

The program was conducted under the supervision of CR Reward geologists and by Major Drilling as the drilling contractor. All drilling was conducted using an LF 90D Surface Core rig with HQ diameter core. A total of 27 holes were planned but 28 holes were drilled due to the abandonment of hole CRR17-002 at 148 ft due to ground conditions and was re-drilled as CRR17-002A. Drill hole collar co-ordinates are provided in Table 10.2 and shown on Figure 10.1

The CR Reward geologists completed the following activities:

●

Geotechnical data was collected by CR Reward geologists included rock quality designation (RQD), core recovery, rock hardness, and fracture density.

●

A detailed geological log was completed on the whole core by CR Reward geologists that included lithologic data, mineralization, hydrothermal alteration and structural features with respect to the core axis.

●

The whole core was digitally photographed and high-resolution digital jpeg images were archived for future reference.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Down-hole surveys were completed at regular intervals, usually 7.6 m (25 ft), using an Ezi-Shot system that records the magnetic heading, dip of the hole and magnetic field in the hole. A total of 398 measurements were collected for the 28 holes drilled.

Core recovery during the core drilling was very good, exceeding 95% on average, with losses mainly in highly shattered zones.

Table 10.2. CR Reward Drill Hole Collars (2017-2018).

Hole ID	Easting (ft)	Northing (ft)	Elevation (ft)	Azimuth (º)	Dip (º)	Drilled Length (ft)
CRR17-001	66538.0	3424.6	3844.4	325	-78	385
CRR17-002	66175.4	4329.6	3990.8	300	-60	148
CRR17-002A	66171.8	4331.5	3990.7	300	-60	274
CRR17-003	65779.0	5131.8	4180.4	310	-57	375
CRR17-004	64907.6	3467.2	3792.1	225	-80	90
CRR17-005	64429.3	3972.0	3920.4	225	-60	175
CRR17-006	64616.7	3804.4	3884.6	225	-60	175
CRR17-007	65755.2	5414.2	4288.0	74	-70	380
CRR17-008	64950.3	3345.5	3770.1	225	-75	125
CRR17-009	66819.8	4022.9	3953.9	275	-75	523
CRR17-010	66169.4	4186.8	3946.3	240	-70	420
CRR17-011	66592.0	4291.3	4008.4	16	-70	663
CRR17-012	66845.4	3847.7	3908.8	289	-75	820
CRR17-013	65699.2	4291.3	4191.9	275	-60	436
CRR18-014	66647.7	3847.7	3831.6	290	-78	730
CRR18-015	66099.0	5104.8	4207.5	55	-75	643
CRR18-016	66733.1	3180.3	3858.3	280	-66	525
CRR18-017	66897.5	4930.6	3984.5	30	-60	400
CRR18-018	64987.6	3338.1	3758.6	225	-48	100
CRR18-019	66790.2	4122.9	3879.8	104	-80	564
CRR18-020	65093.8	3288.3	3736.0	225	-75	150
CRR18-021	65328.5	3464.8	3695.9	270	-75	350
CRR18-022	66814.7	3140.7	3892.6	270	-60	650
CRR18-023	66178.2	4799.5	4165.7	270	-80	575
CRR18-024	66181.1	4619.5	4088.1	284	-57	520
CRR18-025	65270.8	2899.3	3700.3	270	-72	375
CRR18-026	66354.7	4217.5	3961.8	285	-60	350
CRR18-027	65386.9	2725.5	3694.3	270	-70	375

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

The relationship between intercept thickness and true thickness varies by hole dip and style of mineralization intercepted. Intercepts thicknesses typically represent 60% to 90% of the true mineralized thickness. The northern area of Good Hope (5200 N) has near vertical swath of mineralization approximately 18 m (60 feet) wide and 183 m (600 feet) tall. The central portion of Good Hope (4800 N) is 76 m (250 feet) thick and 131 m (430 feet) wide.

Data was compiled in Maxwell Geo Services’ Data Shed database software and exported as text files for import into a Vulcan database for resource estimation purposes. Program results are summarized in Table 10.3.

Table 10.3. Results of CR Reward Drill Holes (2017-2018).

Hole ID	From (ft)	To (ft)	Drilled Length (ft)	Au (oz/st)
CRR17-001	255	263	8	0.040
CRR17-001	273	288	15	0.111
CRR17-001	338	355	17	0.043
CRR17-002	55.5	72.8	17.3	0.155
CRR17-002	80	106.1	26.1	0.049
CRR17-002	135.5	148	12.5	0.053
CRR17-002A	53	103	50	0.071
CRR17-002A	131	140	9	0.055
CRR17-002A	176	237	61	0.033
CRR17-003	144	185.5	41.5	0.031
CRR17-004	No significant assays
CRR17-005	No significant assays
CRR17-006	No significant assays
CRR17-007	No significant assays
CRR17-008	53	63	10	0.075
CRR17-009	338	440	102	0.050
CRR17-009	455	467	12	0.028
CRR17-010	3	15	12	0.019
CRR17-010	40	60	20	0.071
CRR17-010	69	93	24	0.015
CRR17-011	297	315	18	0.034
CRR17-011	328	376	48	0.046
CRR17-011	537	546	9	0.027
CRR17-012	350	418	68	0.048
CRR17-012	464	474.5	10.5	0.023
CRR17-013	No significant assays
CRR18-014	255	264	9	0.035
CRR18-014	314	358	44	0.034

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Hole ID	From (ft)	To (ft)	Drilled Length (ft)	Au (oz/st)
CRR18-014	379	433	54	0.034
CRR18-015	16	45	29	0.044
CRR18-015	84	98	14	0.030
CRR18-015	106	121.5	15.5	0.020
CRR18-016	301	346.5	45.5	0.022
CRR18-016	441	452	11	0.028
CRR18-017	No significant assays
CRR18-018	46.1	59	12.9	0.106
CRR18-019	No significant assays
CRR18-020	No significant assays
CRR18-021	180	210	30	0.099
Includes	185	190	5	0.468
CRR18-022	352	368.5	16.5	0.037
CRR18-022	434	453	19	0.032
CRR18-022	526	537	11	0.038
CRR18-022	547	567	20	0.019
CRR18-023	70	89	19	0.030
CRR18-023	108	131	23	0.023
CRR18-024	67.5	250	182.5	0.042
CRR18-024	312	327	15	0.072
CRR18-024	421	485	64	0.023
CRR18-025	No significant assays
CRR18-026	64	117.6	53.6	0.029
CRR18-026	173.1	184.5	11.4	0.025
CRR18-026	225.2	305.4	80.2	0.044
CRR18-027	100	113	13	0.135
CRR18-027	132	150	18	0.067
CRR18-027	244	264	20	0.052
CRR18-027	274	284	10	0.017

10.3

Twin Holes

Core twin holes of RC holes were drilled by Barrick to collect metallurgical samples. The mineralised interval thickness between the original and twin hole are considered excellent (Table 10.4) and correlation of Au grades are considered good for the style of deposit. The re-drill of core hole CRR17-002 with core hole CRR17-002A also shows an excellent correlation for grade and interval thickness.

Assessment of the core and RC twin holes was conducted with Excel spreadsheets where the grade versus depth was plotted for the core hole and the RC twin on the same plot. Differences, based on thickness of the mineralized zone and magnitude of the grade, were displayed allowing for visual detection of variances in the grades. As the distance between sample pairs increased, variances in the grades were give less consideration.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 10.4. Results of Reward Twin Holes.

Original Hole ID	From (ft)	To (ft)	Interval (ft)	Au (oz/st)	Twin Hole ID	From (ft)	To (ft)	Interval (ft)	Au (oz/st)
R95-127	80.0	195.0	115.0	0.046	R95-206C	80.0	190.0	110.0	0.067
R95-130	55.0	175.0	120.0	0.049	RC95-207C	55.0	175.0	120.0	0.068
R95-130	215.0	260.0	45.0	0.013	RC95-207C	205.0	272.2	67.2	0.007
R95-167	5.0	245.0	240.0	0.049	RC95-208C	9.0	249.2	240.2	0.054
CRR17-002	7.4	148.0	140.6	0.032	CRR17-002A	7.0	144.0	137.0	0.031

10.4

Comments on Drilling

In the opinion of the QP, the quantity and quality of the lithological, alteration, mineralisation, collar and down hole survey data collected across all campaigns are sufficient to support Mineral Resource estimation as follows:

●

RC drilling was completed above the water table and no evidence of down-hole contamination has been identified.

●

RC and core logging meets industry standards for this type of deposit.

●

Collar surveys have been performed using industry-standard instrumentation.

●

Down hole surveys were performed using industry-standard instrumentation and minimal down hole deviations are observed.

●

Recovery data from core drill programs are acceptable.

Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security

11.1

Pre-CR Reward Drill Sampling, Analysis and Security

All RC drill campaigns sampled cuttings on 1.5 m (5 ft intervals). For the core holes, Barrick sampled half core on 1.5 m (5 ft) intervals, Canyon sampled half core on 3 m (10 ft) intervals and CR Reward sampled half core predominantly on 1.5 m (5 ft) intervals or shorter based on geological breaks.

No sampling and analytical information is available for the campaigns completed by Homestake, Pathfinder, Cloverleaf or USNGS.

11.1.1

Gexa (1987)

Gexa submitted Au and Ag samples to an internal lab for analysis that included a cyanide digest with atomic absorption (AA) finish. Fire assay (FA) Au samples were submitted to Bondar-Clegg and Company Ltd for analysis. No information is available for how the samples were prepared, size of the analytical samples or QAQC protocols.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

11.1.2

Barrick (1995-1996)

Barrick samples from 1995 were prepared and analyzed by Chemex Labs, Inc., Nevada. Sample preparation included 4-7 kg (8.8-15 lb) of material was crushed (Chemex code 294), followed by 200-250 g (7.1-8.8 oz) subsample was split and pulverized in a ring mill to approximately 150 mesh (Chemex code 205). Gold analytical methods included 30 g FA digest with atomic absorption finish (AA; Chemex code 99), 1 assay ton (29 g) FA with gravimetric finish for all results >0.3 oz/st Au and most results >0.18 oz/st Au (Chemex code 997). Barrick ran 30 g (1.1 oz) cold cyanide leach with AA finish (Chemex code 830) for select samples from five holes. Silver was analysed using an aqua-regia digest with AA finish (Chemex code 6). Chemex reported internal standard, duplicate and blank results but no information is available for Barrick’s internal QAQC protocols.

Barrick samples in 1996 were analyzed by Barringer Laboratories Inc., Colorado. No information is available for how the samples were prepared. Analytical methods included Au reported from a FA digest with AA and Ag reported from an aqua-regia digest with AA finish.

11.1.3

Glamis (1998-2000)

Glamis submitted samples for fire assay Au and aqua-regia Ag analyses to Rocky Mountain Geochemical of Nevada (RMGN), and for cyanide Au analysis to Marigold Mine (MMC). No information is available for how the samples were prepared, size of the analytical samples or QAQC protocols.

11.1.4

Canyon (2006-2007)

Canyon reverse circulation sampling procedure included two samples collected (one for laboratory analysis and the second retained as a duplicate) over every 1.5 m (5 ft) interval using a wet rotary splitter. Samples were collected using two 19 L (five-gallon) plastic buckets. Drill core was saw cut down the long axis of the core, sampling collected at regular 1.5 m (5 ft) intervals in a labelled sample bag. The remaining half of the core was retained for reference. All RC and core samples were stored in a locked steel transport container on site until transportation to the assay laboratory.

Sample preparation and analyses for all RC and drill core samples were submitted to the ALS Global (ALS) in Reno Nevada. ALS is an independent, accredited laboratory with ISO 9001:2000 certification. Upon receipt at the laboratory samples were dried, crushed to P₇₀ <2 mm (0.08 inch) and 200 g (7.1 oz) sample was riffle split then pulverized to P₈₅ <75 μm. Gold analysis was completed on a 30 g (1.1 oz) split using a FA digest with an atomic absorption spectroscopy (AA) finish (ALS code Au-AA23). Select intervals for metallurgical purposes from core holes MC-1, MC-3 and MC-5 were also analyzed for Au using ore grade 30 g (1.1 oz) FA with AA finish (ALS code Au-AA25) for an original and duplicate sample, a 30g (1.1 oz) cyanide leach with AA finish for Au, and a 0.4 g (.01 oz) four acid with ICP-AES or AA finish for Ag. Received sample weights were also reported on the certificate of analysis.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Canyon QAQC protocols included one certified standard inserted approximately every tenth sample. Two Rock Labs certified standards during the campaign included SK21 (0.118 oz/st Au) and SG14 (0.029 oz/st Au), and blank material used was silica sand. A total of 37 certified standards were inserted along with 1,224 RC samples and 183 core samples during the 2006 and 2007 drilling campaigns. It is unknown if any blanks or duplicates were inserted as part of the QAQC. Results from the Canyon campaigns included:

●

Majority of the standards returned low relative standard deviations of less than 6% and a low bias range of -2.7% to 0.0%. Five of the 21 SK21 standards were below the minus three standard deviations and therefore potentially represent a low bias for those intervals. All 11 results from standard SG14 were within three standard deviations.

11.1.5

Atna (2011-2013)

Atna’s reverse circulation sampling procedure included one sample collected over every 1.5 m (5 ft) interval using a wet rotary splitter and a field duplicate sample was collected every 20^th sample (or 30 m (100 ft) intervals) from a secondary rotary splitter. Samples were collected using pre-numbered cloth sample bags (labelled without reference to the drill hole interval). Standard reference material and blanks were inserted in the sample sequence by Atna prior to laboratory despatch.

The sample preparation and analytical analyses for all RC chip samples from the 2011 program were completed at Inspectorate in Sparks, Nevada. Inspectorate is an independent, accredited laboratory with ISO 9001:2000 certification. Samples submitted were dried and crushed to P₈₀ <1.7 mm then split and pulverized to P₈₅ <75 μm. Gold analysis was completed on a 1-assay ton (29 g (1 oz)) split with a FA digest and AA finish. If samples assayed >0.3 oz/st Au. (Inspectorate code Au-1AT-AA). Inspectorate completed a second 1-assay ton analysis with a fire assay digest and gravimetric finish (Inspectorate code Au-1AT-GV).

For the 2013 program, Atna submitted samples to American Assay Laboratories (AAL) in Sparks, Nevada. AAL is an independent, accredited laboratory with ISO 17025:2005 accreditation. Samples submitted were dried and crushed to P₇₀ <2mm (0.08 inch) then split and pulverized to P₈₅ <75μm. Gold analysis was completed on a 1-assay ton (29g (1 oz)) split with a fire assay digest and AA finish. If samples assayed >0.3 oz/st Au. (AAL code Au-FA30). Inspectorate completed a second 1-assay ton analysis with a FA digest and gravimetric finish (AAL code Au-GRAV). Received sample weights were also reported on the certificate of analysis.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Atna’s QAQC protocols for both campaigns included a certified standard and blank that were inserted alternatingly every approximate tenth sample. Thirteen Rock Labs standards (OxA71, OxA89, OxC102, OxE86, OxF65, OxF100, OxG99, OxH66, OxJ68, SF45, SI54, SJ53) were used with recommended values ranging from 0.0025 oz/st Au to 0.0769 oz/st Au. Blank material used was red basaltic cinder.

Atna submitted a total of 198 standards, 216 blanks and 165 field duplicate samples along with a total of 3,570 RC samples during the 2011 and 2013 drilling campaigns. QAQC results from the Atna campaigns included:

●

Five hundred and seventy-nine (579) QAQC samples were inserted, representing one QA/QC samples for every 7.2 core samples, or 14.0% of the total samples submitted.

●

A 99% pass rate for the blank material, with only two of the 101 blanks from the 2011 program above the threshold.

●

Majority of the standards returned low relative standard deviations of less than 5% and a low bias range of -3.7% to 0.3%. A total of 13 of the 198 standards were outside of three standard deviations with the nine of the failures associated with recommended standard values of <0.006 oz/st Au.

●

Sixty-two of the 165 field duplicate samples yielded mean values >0.003 oz/st and the overall variability was low (<30% coefficient of variation).

11.2

CR Reward Sampling, Analysis and Security (2017-2018)

CR Reward drilling and sampling was carried out under the supervision of CR Reward geologists. The chain custody involved from the field to the sample preparation facility was continually monitored. Drill core was collected from the drill rig by CR Reward personnel and transported to a secure logging facility in Beatty, Nevada for the first half of the drill program. For the second half of the program the drill core was shipped to the ALS laboratory facility in Reno for logging.

Subsequent to completion of core logging and photography, the sampling protocol involved:

●

The core and core box were marked for by CR Reward personnel for sample collection and sample tags were stapled to the core box at the beginning of the interval. The dominant sample interval length was 5ft with lengths adjusted based on lithological and alteration changes. The maximum sample length of 4.6 m (15 ft) and minimum of 0.2 m (0.7 ft).

●

Whole HQ-size core was cut in half (rock sawed) by ALS staff at their Reno facility. Sawed core sample intervals were recorded on daily cut core sheets for review each day.

●

Samples for geochemical analysis were collected by laboratory personnel and placed into bags. The samples comprised one half of the HQ-size core, with the remaining core for each retained in their original core boxes. Core split by ALS staff were retained in core boxes stored in secured ALS warehouses.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Standard reference material blanks and field duplicates were inserted into the sample sequence at the rate of approximately one in every 10 samples.

11.2.1

Diamond Drill Core Sample Preparation and Analysis

The 2017–2018 drill program totalled 3,443 m (11,296 ft), which included 28 core-holes, 2,330 samples, and 22 unsampled intervals due to poor or no core recovery. A total of 2,760 samples, inclusive of QA/QC samples, were submitted to ALS and Florin Analytical (FLOR) for preparation and analyses. All geochemical analyses were completed by ALS, with the exception of CRR17-004 that was analysed at FLOR. ALS is an independent, accredited laboratory with ISO 9001:2000 certification. Figure 11.1 is a flowsheet summarizing the sample preparation and analysis protocols used for the 2017–2018 drill program.

CR Reward personnel arranged shipping to the ALS facility in Reno, Nevada, for sample preparation and geochemical analysis. Samples were logged into a computer-based tracking system, weighed and dried. Samples were removed for bulk density measurements conducted using paraffin wax coated samples and a water displacement method (ALS code OA-GRA09a). Bulk density determinations were carried out at ALS’ Vancouver laboratory and these samples were not re-inserted for assaying. The entire assay sample was crushed so that +70% passes a 2 mm screen, then a 250 g (8.8 oz) split was selected and pulverized to better than P₈₅ <75 µm (ALS code PREP-31Y). Two 30 g (1.1 oz) aliquots were extracted from the pulp and one 30 g (1.1 oz) sample was analysed for gold using a fire assay fusion, digestion and with atomic absorption spectroscopy followed up with an inductively-coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) finish (ALS code Au-AA23). The second 30 g (1.1 oz) sample was analysed using a cyanide leach digest followed by a AA finish (ALS code Au-AA13). Any fire assay samples that returned >0.292 oz/st Au were re-assayed using a second fire assay fusion with a gravimetric finish (ALS code Au-GRAV21). A 0.25 g (0.0089 oz) aliquot was split off for multi-element analysis using four acid digestion (ALS code ME-MS61m) with an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) finish. All assay analyses were completed at the ALS’ Reno laboratory.

In the case of FLOR, CR Reward arranged sample shipping to the FLOR laboratory in Reno, Nevada for sample preparation and geochemical analysis. Core submitted to FLOR were intended for metallurgical test work. Upon arrival at the laboratory, the core was laid out and the marked sample intervals were removed for physical testing (comminution test work) and bulk density test work. The remaining intervals (1.5 m (5 ft) intervals or as marked by CR Reward personnel) were bagged, weighed and stage crushed to minus 25 mm (0.98 inch). From each interval a 1,000 g (35.3 oz) portion was riffle split out, weighed and dried to a constant weight at 106°C. The dried material was then crushed to -1.7 mm (0.067 inch) and a 500 g (17.6 oz) portion was split out and ring and puck pulverized to -0.15 mm (0.0059 inch). The 500 g (17.6 oz) portions were used for interval assays. Several sample intervals weighed <5 kg; for these samples only a 500 g (17.6 oz) portion was split out from the 25 mm (0.98 inch) crushed material. The 500 g (17.6 oz) portion was dried and crushed to -1.7 mm (0.067 inch) and then ring and puck pulverized to -0.15 mm (0.0059 inch). A 50 g aliquot was extracted from the pulp and was analyzed for gold using a FA fusion, digestion and with AAS finish (FLOR code 4018). Silver was analyzed using four-acid digestion with an AAS finish (FLOR code 7048). Additionally, select samples were assayed for gold, silver and copper by gold cyanidation with a 24-hour cyanide shake and AAS finish (FLOR code 6007).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 11.1. CR Reward Sample Flow Chart.

Source: Fowlow (2018a,b)

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

The sample collection, security, transportation, preparation, insertion of geochemical standards and blanks and analytical procedures are within industry norms and best practices. The procedures used by CR Reward personnel are considered adequate to ensure that the results disclosed are accurate within scientific limitations and are not misleading. The procedures and assay control protocols employed by CR Reward in the 2017 and 2018 drill program are considered reasonable and acceptable for use in Mineral Resource Estimation.

11.3

CR Reward QAQC Results (2017-2018)

Of the 2,760 samples submitted for analysis, 430 were QA/QC samples inserted by CR Reward personnel, representing one QA/QC samples for every 6.4 core samples, or 15.6% of the total samples submitted. The QC samples consisted of a total of 111 CDN standards, 92 blanks, 68 core duplicates, 79 crush duplicates and 80 pulp duplicates. APEX considers this adequate to ensure that each batch of assays included at least CR Reward-inserted blank and standard sample.

11.3.1

Blanks

A total of 92 blank samples were inserted in the sample stream by CR Reward personnel during the 2017–2018 drill program (Table 11.1). Garden marble was sourced from local hardware stores for blank material. A total of 14 of the samples returned values above the detection limit for gold (Figure 11.2); however, only one sample assayed greater than 0.0004 oz/st Au (maximum value of 0.0005 oz/st Au). The results for the blanks are considered acceptable based on a 1% fail rate.

Figure 11.2. Blank Results from 2017-2018 Drilling Sorted by Date Analyzed.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 11.1. Summary Results of Blank Material from the 2017-2018 Drill Program.

Blanks	ALS Global	Total
Count	92	92
Count >0.0004 oz/st	1	1
Percent Fail	1.1%	1.1%

11.3.2

Standard Reference Materials

A total of 111 standard reference materials (SRM) were inserted in the sample stream by CR Reward during the 2017–2018 drill program. Two standard types were sourced from CDN Resource Laboratories Ltd and had recommended values of 0.018 oz/st Au (CDN-GS-P6B) and 0.068 oz/st Au (CDN-GS-2L).

The inserted CDN-GS-P6B standard (0.018 oz/st Au) reported 14 out of 57 analyzes outside of two standard deviation, and 7 samples outside of three-standard deviation (Figure 11.3). Most of the CDN-GS-P6B SRM failures are considered marginal failures, that is, just outside the two-standard deviations boundaries and within three-standard deviations. The failures have likely resulted from a poorly homogenized standard and/or perhaps due to minor laboratory preparation or analytical errors. Results outside of three standard deviations was accepted if the standard was within a low-grade (<0.003 oz/st Au) interval. The relative standard deviation of the samples was low at 6.8% and the bias was extremely low at 0.3% (Table 11.2).

The results for the CDN-GS-2L standard returned only two of 56 samples outside of the two-standard deviation (Figure 11.4). Both failures were within the three-standard deviation threshold and are considered marginal failures. The relative standard deviation of the samples was low at 4.0% and the bias was low at 2.1% (Table 11.2).

In general, the standard reference material results are considered acceptable based on high precision (or low relative standard deviation) and low bias.

Table 11.2. Summary Results of Standards from the 2017-2018 Drill Program.

SRM

SRM Value

(oz/st Au)

SRM 1 SD

(oz/st Au)

Count

RSD%

Bias

Within 2SD

Within 3SD

CDN-GS-P6B

0.018

0.0007

6.8%

0.3%

75%

88%

CDN-GS-2L

0.068

0.0035

4.0%

2.1%

98%

100%

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 11.3. CDN-GS-P6B Results from 2017-2018 Program Sorted by Date Analyzed.

Figure 11.4. CDN-GS-2L Results from 2017-2018 Program Sorted by Date Analyzed.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

11.3.3

Duplicates

A total of 68 core field duplicates, 79 crush duplicates and 80 pulp duplicates were inserted in the sample stream by CR Reward personnel during the 2017–2018 drill program and analyzed by ALS (Figure 11.5). The core duplicates were assayed using FA with a 1 AT aliquot with an AA finish and an 1 AT aliquot cyanide leach with an AA finish. Nineteen of the field duplicates (or 28%) yielded values greater than 30% half relative difference versus the mean in samples (or 22%), whereas 12 crush duplicates (or 15%) and 11 pulp duplicates (or 11%) generated values greater than 30% half relative difference versus the mean. A similar reduction in variability from field to crush to pulp and lab duplicates was calculated with the coefficient of variation. Minor differences are observed in the results from the cyanide leach analysis near the lower detection limit, however, this is not uncharacteristic. Overall, the results from all duplicates are considered acceptable based on low variability (<30% coefficient of variation) and progressively lower variability from field to crush to pulp to lab pulp duplicate.

Figure 11.5. Duplicate Results from the 2017-2018 Program.

11.4

Comments on Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security

In the opinion of the QP, the quantity and quality of the sample procedures and analytical results follow acceptable industry standards. The data are acceptable to support Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimation.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Data Verification

The drill hole database was exported and provided to APEX from CR Reward on April 19, 2018 and consisted of 386 collar entries. Upon review by APEX personnel, it was determined that there are 376 drill hole collars and 10 road cut or trench locations/entries. The 10-road cut and trench entries were removed from the database for resource estimation purposes. APEX thoroughly reviewed the drill hole database and the validation conducted by CR Reward in 2015 to 2017.

The drill hole database used by APEX personnel for resource estimation, including the recently-completed 2017–2018 drill holes, consists of 143,330 ft in 376 drill holes. The database includes 129,897 ft in 341 pre-CR Reward reverse circulation (RC) holes, 2,137 ft in seven pre-CR Reward core holes and 11,296 ft in 28 core holes completed during late 2017 to early 2018 CR Reward. The pre-CR Reward drill holes were completed between 1987 and 2013, with 276 holes completed between 1987 and 1999, and 72 holes between 2000 and 2013. The 2017–2018 core holes combined with the pre- CR Reward core holes represent about 9.4% of the total drilling. The QP considers the proportion of core holes to RC holes to be acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation.

The assay database consists of 26,092 sample intervals, with 23,762 intervals for the historic drill holes and 2,330 intervals for the 2017–2018 core holes. The sample database contains 336 entries of -9 and 80 blank entries, (less than 1.6% of the database). Most of these entries are attributed to non-sampled intervals, especially the greater than 5 ft intervals (70 samples) and collar/overburden top of hole intervals. The remaining dominantly 5 ft intervals without samples are attributed to poor recovery or lost samples.

12.1

Verification Program

The 2017 verification program completed by CR Reward (2017), and reviewed by the QP, included the following:

Verifying collar data versus geologic logs or certificates from surveyors.

Verifying collar elevations versus recent or available topography.

Verifying down-hole survey data versus geologic logs and certificates.

Verifying assay values versus laboratory certificates or geologic logs where certificates were not available.

All collar, survey and assay data for the 28 holes drilled by CR Reward in 2017 and 2018 were verified as part of the database management process and are excluded from the following summary.

12.1.1

Protocols and Error Tracking of Pre-CR Reward Drill Holes

The database provided to APEX consisted of 348 drill holes completed by previous operators. CR Reward (2017) reported that 100% of collar and down-hole survey data were selected for verification against available geologic logs or certified surveyor reports, whereas 10% of assays were verified against certified laboratory reports. All verified data and results were provided to APEX and are captured in the Excel spreadsheet 20170215_REW_DH_Verification.xlsx. The QP reviewed the verification data and the available collar, assay, and survey data.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

12.2

Collar Data Verification

The Project has been explored by multiple companies since 1987, including Homestake Mining Company, Galli Exploration Associates (GEXA), TECO, Cloverleaf Gold, Pathfinder Gold, US Nevada Gold Search, Barrick Gold, Glamis Gold, Canyon Resources and Atna Resources. As with multiple companies and many years of drilling, many original geologic logs could not be found, and in some instances, only copies of geologic logs were available.

Collar location and total depth data was initially verified against 178 (or 51%) geologic logs by CR Reward (2017). One hundred and seventy holes (or 49%) lacked logs and could not be verified. Eleven typographic errors were observed, investigated and corrected. CR Reward (2017) observed from the geologic logs that at least two local grids were created. At least three local coordinate systems were used by previous operators, e.g. Galli Exploration in 1987, Pathfinder in 1991 and Barrick in 1995. In 2018, CR Reward generated a low distortion local grid. An Excel spreadsheet containing control points for the local coordinate grids and UTM NAD27 Z11 coordinates was generated by CR Reward. Collar locations were plotted on satellite imagery and visually checked against existing pad locations, drill roads and disturbed areas. No major errors were observed. All collar easting and northing locations were considered acceptable following the review.

CR Reward (2017) also observed a consistent elevation difference on the R95/96 and RE series drill holes in the drill logs compared to the database values. The elevation values in the logs were consistently 50 ft to 60 ft higher than the elevations in the database. This elevation discrepancy resulted in 125 quarantined collar elevation values. CR Reward (2017) completed further investigations of the quarantined values against a topographic surface with 5 ft contour intervals that was generated from an aerial topographic survey performed by Kenney Aerial on December 20, 2006 for Canyon Resources. The database values correlate well against the 2006 aerial topographic survey and with nine holes returning differences of greater than ±10 ft. The elevation value of these nine holes was corrected to the 2006 survey data. Holes with differences of less than ±10 ft were considered acceptable. It is interpreted that collar elevations in the logs were registered to a historical topographic surface. The database values superseded the log values and represent the most accurate data.

CR Reward in 2018 also completed a field check and identified six collars exposed within the main deposit areas. The collar locations were within 5 ft for northing and easting values, and within 2 ft of the elevation values.

A total of 20 errors (11 typographic and 9 elevation differences) were identified, investigated and corrected. Upon completion of these changes and the verification review, the collar database was considered acceptable by the QP for use in the resource estimation process.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

12.3

Down-Hole Survey Data Verification

The pre-CR Reward database contains 740 down-hole survey records that were verified using the geologic logs or survey sheets (CR Reward, 2017). Only five of the drill holes (one RC and four core holes) had a contractor perform the down-hole survey and only two of those holes have survey records in the geologic logs. The contractor for the four core holes was either the drillers or WellNav with an unknown gyro tool. The contractor for the RC drill hole is unknown.

All azimuths and dips in the database were compared to either the geologic logs or contractor field sheets. No certified surveyor reports were available.

A total of 416 down-hole survey records (or 56%) passed verification, 290 down-hole survey records (or 39%) were not verified due to lack of geologic log or contractor information, and 34 (or 5%) were quarantined for further investigation. Records that were quarantined were due to the following:

A total of 23 (or 5%) of 450 records with corresponding logs had typographic errors and were corrected.

The azimuth on two records (or <1%) could not be determined from the geologic log but the hole (R95-206C) is a twin of hole R95-127. Geology and assay results from both holes correlate well and data was accepted.

A total of nine surveys (or 2%) from two drill holes (MC-3 and MC-4) were collected by a contractor but field sheets or certificates were not available. Both holes had vertical dips at the collar, are less than 400 ft in depth and therefore the data was accepted.

A total of 23 errors, were investigated and corrected. Upon completion of these changes and the verification review, the survey data was considered acceptable by the QP for use in the resource estimation process.

12.4

Assay Verification

The combined historic drill hole database consists of 23,922 intervals in 348 drill holes. A total of 40 historic drill holes were verified by CR Reward (2017) for a total of 2,715 intervals (or 11.3%) of the database. Drill holes were selected using a random number generator in Excel. Mine Development Associates (MDA) were engaged in 2018 to complete independent verification work that included an additional 16 historic holes containing 1,180 intervals (or 4.9%).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Laboratories involved in RC and core assay programs included ALS Chemex, American Assay, Barringer, Inspectorate, Bondar Clegg and Rocky Mountain Laboratories. Certificates were only available for analyses completed at ALS Chemex, American Assay, Barringer and Inspectorate. Two mine laboratories were used when Glamis Gold was the operator in 1998; these were the mine laboratory at the Daisy Mine, near Beatty and the mine laboratory at the Marigold Mine, near Valmy. No assay certificates are available from these laboratories.

Results from the CR Reward assay verification include:

From a total of 2,715 assay intervals, 514 (19%) of the intervals could not be verified due to either the lack of an assay certificate, geologic log or the interval was illegible on the log.

2,201 (81%) assay intervals contained corresponding certificates or geologic logs.

2,183 assay intervals (or 99%) had no errors and were flagged as pass.

18 assay intervals (or 1%) were quarantined for further investigation due to data entry errors. Five intervals were corrected and the 13 intervals could not be fully investigated and were considered immaterial differences.

Results from the MDA assay verification include:

A total of 1,180 assay intervals were verified against both assay certificates and geologic log. Four of the 1,180 intervals (or <0.5%) contained typographic errors that were subsequently corrected.

A total of 179 sample depth intervals (depth_from and depth_to) were verified and no errors were identified.

A total of 9 (or 0.3%) out of the 3,381 assay intervals verified during the CR Reward and MDA reviews contained errors that were subsequently corrected and 13 intervals (or 0.4%) remained unresolved but had immaterial (low grade) values. Upon completion of these changes and the verification reviews, the assay data was considered acceptable by the QP for use in the resource estimation process based on the low amount of errors.

12.5

Author and QP Site Visits

Mr. Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P.Geol., P.Geo. and QP of this Technical Report, conducted a site inspection of the Project on two separate occasions in 2017 and 2019. On August 2^nd, 2017, Mr. Dufresne visited the Property and reviewed drill core at CR Reward’s office in Reno, NV. On August 12^th, 2019, Mr. Dufresne visited the Property and verified the location of a number of drill collars and on August 15^th, 2019, Mr. Dufresne performed an inspection of the Lovelock, NV, core facility and reviewed Reward Project drill core from the 2017-2018 drill program.

A total of 24 drill holes, including 18 CR Reward holes and 6 historical holes, were located by Mr. Dufresne and handheld GPS coordinates were recorded and compared to the original coordinates. Table 12.1 summarizes the verification survey results.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 12.1. Drill Hole Coordinate Comparison. Coordinates are in UTM NAD 1983 Zone 11.

Appreciating the limited precision of the handheld GPS, the check GPS coordinates were consistent with the original coordinates with an average variance of 1 m and a maximum variance of 6 m. In the opinion of the QP Mr. Dufresne, the differences are not viewed as material.

During the inspection of the core facility in Lovelock, NV, Mr. Dufresne reviewed mineralized intervals in CR Reward drill holes CRR17-09, CRR18-014 and CRR-024. Significant intercepts of drill holes CRR17-09, CRR18-014 and CRR-024 are listed in Table 12.2. Photographs taken by Mr. Dufresne of the drill core are presented in Figures 12.1 to 12.3.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 12.2. Significant Intercepts of Drill Holes Reviewed During Mr. Dufresne’s Inspection of the CR Reward Core Facility.

Figure 12.1. Drill hole CRR17-009, Wood Canyon Formation Mineralized Interval of Phyllite and Oxidized Quartzite (approximately 389 to 401 ft depth).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 12.2. Drill hole CRR18-014, Wood Canyon Formation Mineralized Interval of Brecciated/Re-healed Quartzite and Sheared and Foliated Phyllite (approximately 399 to 414 ft depth).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 12.3. Drill Hole CRR18-024, Wood Canyon Formation Mineralized Interval of Quartzite (approximately 148 to 153 ft depth).

No material field based exploration work has occurred at the Reward Project since the 2017-2018 drill program. Therefore, Mr. Dufresne considers the most recent site visit as current. As a result of the site visits, Mr. Dufresne can verify the land position, the geological setting and the mineralization that is the subject of this Technical Report.

In addition, Mr. Timothy Scott, BA.Sc. Geological Engineering and QP of this Technical Report, visited the Project on September 22^nd, 2018 and on May 16^th, 2022. He inspected the access and associated infrastructure for the Property. He found no evidence of any changes or work since the CR Reward 2017-2018 drill program.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

Metallurgical test work includes historical work completed by Rayrock Mines Inc. during 1998 and McClelland Laboratories (McClelland) in 2007 and 2008. Confirmatory test work was performed by KCA in 2018. Metallurgical test work programs include 34 bottle roll tests and 27 column tests together with preliminary agglomeration and compacted permeability testing. Results from these tests show that the Good Hope mineralization is amenable to cyanide leaching with acceptable reagent consumptions.

13.1

1998 Rayrock Column Tests – Drill Core

Core used in the 1998 test program came from the three drill hole locations represents material from the north (drill hole R95-206C), centre (R95-207C) and south (R95-208C) of the deposit.

Six column tests were leached for 20 days on original broken core. After the initial 20 days of leaching, the columns were allowed to rest for three days. Following the resting period, two of the columns were crushed to 1½ inch and all six columns were flood leached four times over a 60-day period, allowed to drip irrigate for eight days, and then rest for 30 days. During the 30-day rest period, all of the columns were drained and re-crushed to ¾ inch and restarted and allowed to leach for a further 60 days. Including rest periods, the elapsed test time was 181 days. All work was conducted at the in-house Rayrock metallurgical laboratory. The extant documentation is a short inter-office memorandum that does not provide detailed information on the tests. Available results are summarized in Table 13.1. The data suggested that some higher-grade materials may not leach as well as lower-grade material, which indicated that coarse gold was present in some of the high-grade core.

The QP notes that given the somewhat erratic program of leach and rest periods, as well as the different crush sizes introduced mid-stream, the results can only be considered as indicative. Observations from the program included (Laney, 1998a):

“That the northern most core would show the lowest recovery was expected due to the more siliceous nature of the ore as it heads to the north…the material does not produce many fines and is very competent and hard…the material was slow leaching before crushing and the leach kinetics increased after crushing.”

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.1. 1998 Rayrock Drill Core Column Tests Results.

Drill Hole	Column No. (Test No.)	Calculated Head Grade oz/st Au	Recovery % Au
R95-206-C-North	1 (1333)	0.067	50
R95-206-C-North	2(1334)**	0.110	54
R95-207-C-Central	3(1335)	0.030	83
R95-207-C-Central	4(1336)	0.080	80
R95-208-C-South	5(1337)	0.079	59
R95-208-C-South	6(1338)**	0.069	69

Note:

Columns initially crushed to minus 1½inch. All columns were later crushed to minus ¾ inch.

13.2

1998 Rayrock Column Tests – Trench Samples

A second Rayrock internal memorandum reports results of column tests conducted on surface samples taken from backhoe trenches (Laney, 1998b). Trench locations and the sample compositing methodology were not recorded.

Two sample composites and four column tests were conducted, with two subsets of each composite conducted with different cyanide solution strengths (1/3 lb/st and 1 lb/st), and two material sizes (“as-is” and crushed to minus ¾ inch). Average head grades were reported to be 0.030 oz/st Au to 0.033 oz/st Au. The leach cycle had an elapsed time of 56 days which included two rest periods that totalled 21 days. Campaign results are shown in Table 13.2.

13.3

2007 McClelland Bottle Roll Tests

During 2007, 96 hr bottle roll tests were conducted on RC drill cuttings (nominally 10 mesh) from nine different drill holes. Efforts were made to spatially select the sample intervals across the deposit with respect to elevation (shallow, deep, etc.) as well as area (east, west, etc.). However, the northern deposit area was not represented in the selected samples.

Results of this program are shown in Table 13.3. The respective recovery curves are shown in Figure 13.1.

In the samples tested, the average gold recovery was 70.3%, reagent consumptions were quite low, and it did not appear that there were any significant differences in recovery by location or depth, or in terms of grade versus recovery.

A composite was generated for physical characterization tests. Results showed that the crusher work index (CW_i) is a very low at 3.7 kWh/st. The abrasion index (A_i) of 0.4338 g is moderately high.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

13.4

McClelland 2008 Column Test Campaign

The 2008 program samples were sourced from three drill holes. Four column tests were conducted at a crush size of P₈₀ of ½ inch and one column test (composite 5) was conducted at a crush size of P₈₀ of ¼ inch. In addition, bottle rolls were run on column splits and a separate bottle roll study of size versus recovery was conducted on composite 5. Drain-down data were also measured on the finished column tests.

Sample composite data are presented in Table 13.4 and the drill holes selected are shown in Figure 13.2.

Table 13.2. 1998 Rayrock Surface Trench Column Test Gold Recovery.

Head Grade

#1348

1/3 lb/st CN

“as-is”

#1349

1/3 lb/st CN

Crushed to ¾ inch

#1350

1 lb/st CN

“as-is”

#1351

1 lb/st CN

Crushed to ¾ inch

0.033 oz/st Au

45.80

57.83

65.50

79.31

0.030 oz/st Au

49.51

62.52

70.80

85.74

Table 13.3. 1998 10 Mesh Reverse Circulation Drill Holes Bottle Roll Results.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.1. 1998 10 Mesh Bottle Roll Recovery Curves.

Note:

Figure from Laney, (1998b).

Table 13.4. 2008 McClelland Sample/Drill Hole Composite Information.

Composite Sample	Drill hole	Interval (ft)
1	MC 1	90-120
2	MC 1	150-210
3	MC 3	20-190
4	MC 5	140-190
5	MC 3 MC 5 MC 5 MC 5	20-190 200-210 220-230 340-360

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.2. 2008 McClelland Drill Hole Location Map.

Note: Figure from McClelland (2008).

13.4.1

2008 Column Test Results

A summary of five column test results is provided in Table 13.5. The corresponding gold recovery curves are shown in Figure 13.3.

13.4.2

2008 Bottle Roll Test Results at Crush Size and at 200 Mesh

Figure 13.4 presents the bottle roll results of sample splits from each of the column test materials.

Table 13.6 presents bottle rolls results of column test sample splits ground to P₈₀ of 200 mesh.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.5. 2008 McClelland Summary Column Test Results.

Figure 13.3. 2008 McClelland 10 Gold Recovery Curves – Column Tests.

Note: Figure from McClelland (2008).

Figure 13.4. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Tests Recovery Curves – Splits from Column Tests.

Note: Figure from McClelland (2008).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.6. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Tests – Gold Recovery %.

Sample	P80 ½ inch 72 hr	P80 200 mesh 24 hr
Comp 1	51.6	87.5
Comp 2	35.9	85.7
Comp 3	45.0	88.9
Comp 4	58.3	91.3

13.4.3

2008 Bottle Roll Size versus Recovery on Composite 5

A separate exercise was conducted to establish a size versus gold recovery relation with respect to bottle rolls. This was conducted only on sample composite 5. Results of the different sizes are shown in Table 13.7. Results are plotted in Figure 13.5.

13.4.4

Drain-Down Data

Drain-down data for each of the five column tests are presented in Table 13.8.

13.4.5

Conclusions from 2008 McClelland Program

The average gold recovery for the four ½ inch crush columns is 74.9%. With an applied laboratory to field deduction of 2%, a field recovery of 72.9% could be expected at that crush size.

Only one column test was conducted at P₈₀ of ¼ inch crush size, and that test has the highest laboratory recovery of 82.8%.

The McClelland program concluded that the NaCN consumption would not exceed 1.6 lb/st and the hydrated lime consumption would not exceed 1.8 lb/st. The laboratory tests used hydrated lime.

There does not appear to be any obvious explanation for column test recovery differences with respect to spatial representation, grade, reagents or size distribution of each sample.

13.5

2018 Kappes Cassidy Associates Test Program

The 2018 KCA program consisted of eight column leach tests on four composite samples in duplicate. The program also included pulverized bottle roll tests on each sample, agglomeration and permeability test work on each composite sample, and physical characterization test work. The primary purpose of this program was to confirm the results from the 2008 McClelland test work for gold recovery and reagent requirements at a P₈₀ of ¼ inch crush size.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.7. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Size versus Gold Recovery – Composite 5.

Figure 13.5. 2008 McClelland Bottle Roll Size versus Gold Recovery – Composite 5.

Note: Figure from McClelland (2008).

Table 13.8. 2008 McClelland Drain-Down Data from Column Tests.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

13.5.1

2018 KCA Composite Generation

Composites were generated from core taken from four drill holes including one drill hole at the Gold Ace Zone. Each drill hole was used to make one composite sample and samples were selected to be spatially and grade representative of the mineralization. Drill hole locations for the metallurgical test work are shown in Figure 13.6.

A summary of the head analyses for gold and silver for the composites is shown in Table 13.9. Head analyses for mercury and copper are presented in Table 13.10.

The head analyses for the composites show grades within the expected range for the mineralization and negligible amounts of copper and mercury. Multi-element and whole rock analyses were also completed, and do not show any deleterious elements in significant quantities.

13.5.2

2018 Physical Characterization

Comminution tests, including abrasion and Bond work index tests, were performed by Hazen Research Inc. (Hazen). Results of these tests are presented in Table 13.11.

Bond and abrasion index results show average abrasiveness and hardness.

Bulk density tests were completed on selected samples from each composite (approximately 30 ft intervals and through different rock types). Bulk densities ranged from 144 lb/ft³ to 173 lb/ft³ with an average bulk density of 160 lb/ft³.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.6. 2018 KCA Metallurgical Sample Drill Hole Location Map.

Figure prepared by Lycopodium, 2019.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.9. 2018 KCA Composite Head Screen Analyses – Gold and Silver.

KCA Sample No.	Description	Assay 1 (g/mt Au)	Assay 2 (g/mt Au)	Average Assay (g/mt Au)
80607 A	CRR17-001	0.639	0.648	0.644
80608 A	CRR17-002A	1.083	1.066	1.075
80609 A	CRR17-003	0.682	0.669	0.675
80648 B	CRR18-027	1.755	1.783	1.769
80607 A	CRR17-001	0.62	0.62	0.62
80608 A	CRR17-002A	0.62	0.62	0.62
80609 A	CRR17-003	0.62	0.62	0.62
80648 B	CRR18-027	1.61	1.61	1.61

Table 13.10. 2018 KCA Composite Head Screen Analyses – Mercury and Copper.

KCA Sample No.	Description	Total Mercury (mg/kg)	Total Copper (mg/kg)	Cyanide Soluble Copper¹ (mg/kg)	Cyanide Soluble Copper (%)
80607 A	CRR17-001	<0.02	37	3.92	11
80608 A	CRR17-002A	0.04	26	3.27	13
80609 A	CRR17-003	0.02	21	2.50	12
80648 B	CRR18-027	0.19	<2	1.22	<100

Table 13.11. 2018 Hazen Bond Impact Work and Abrasion Index.

KCA
Sample No.

Description

Abrasion Index

(g)

Bond Impact Work Index
(kWh/mt)

80601

CRR17-001 & CRR17-002A

0.2307

9.5

80602

CRR17-003

0.2825

9.2

13.5.3

2018 KCA Pulverized Bottle Roll Tests

Pulverized bottle roll leach tests were conducted on portions from each composite at a crush size P₁₀₀of 100 mesh (0.150 mm). Bottle roll tests were conducted on four additional high-grade samples at crush sizes P₁₀₀of ⅜ inches and P₁₀₀of 100 mesh to evaluate the effect of grade and overall recovery. The high-grade sample intervals are presented in Table 13.12. A summary of the bottle roll test results is shown in Table 13.13 and shown graphically in Figure 13.7.

Gold recoveries ranged from 91% to 97% with an average recovery of 94% for pulverized bottle roll tests (P₁₀₀of 100 mesh) and 55% to 70% with an average recovery of 60% for coarse bottle roll tests (P₁₀₀of ⅜ inch). The bottle roll test results show that higher recoveries can be achieved at finer crush sizes; however, gold grade does not have an appreciable effect on overall recovery.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Agglomeration and compacted permeability tests were conducted on crushed samples from each composite. For the agglomeration test work, 2 kg portions of each composite were agglomerated with 0, 8, 16 and 20 lb of cement per dry ton of material and placed into a 75 mm diameter column with no compressive load to evaluate the permeability of the material. Compacted permeability tests were conducted on each composite sample with no cement addition with static loads applied to simulate different heap heights. Results for the agglomeration and compacted permeability tests are shown in Table 13.14 and Table 13.15, respectively.

The results show that cement agglomeration is not required for heap heights up to 262 ft.

Table 13.12. 2018 High-Grade Sample Intervals.

Drill Hole	Description	Interval (ft)
Drill Hole	Description	Interval (ft)
CRR17-001	W083565	283-288
CRR17-002A	V663939	58-63
CR17-002A	V663945	83-86
CR17-002A	V663221	179-183

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.13. 2018 KCA Bottle Roll Test Results.

KCA Sample No.	Description	Target Crush Size (mm)	Calculated Head (g/mt Au)	Avg. Tails (g/mt Au)	Au Extracted (%)	Leach Time (hr)	Consumption NaCN (kg/mt)	Additional Ca(OH)₂ (kg/mt)
80607 A	CRR17-001	0.150	0.572	0.043	93	96	0.24	1.50
80608 A	CRR17-002A	0.150	0.862	0.062	93	96	0.30	1.25
80609 A	CRR17-003	0.150	0.655	0.053	92	96	0.19	1.00
80648 B	CRR18-027	0.150	0.936	0.027	97	96	0.07	1.75
80614 A	W083565	9.5	4.905	2.152	56	240	0.21	1.25
80614 A	W083565	0.150	5.712	0.423	93	96	0.15	1.25
80615 A	V663939	9.5	8.203	2.441	70	240	0.20	0.75
80615 A	V663939	0.150	8.205	0.399	95	96	0.17	1.00
80616 A	V663945	9.5	3.836	1.527	60	240	0.24	0.75
80616 A	V663945	0.150	4.131	0.221	95	96	0.15	1.00
80617 A	V663221	9.5	2.420	1.092	55	240	0.33	0.75
80617 A	V663221	0.150	2.131	0.192	91	96	0.17	1.00
80607 A	CRR17-001	0.150	0.63	0.41	34	96	0.24	1.50
80608 A	CRR17-002A	0.150	0.63	0.41	35	96	0.30	1.25
80609 A	CRR17-003	0.150	0.58	0.41	29	96	0.19	1.00
80648 B	CRR18-027	0.150	1.54	0.99	36	96	0.07	1.75
80614 A	W083565	9.5	2.57	2.09	19	240	0.21	1.25
80614 A	W083565	0.150	2.59	1.71	34	96	0.15	1.25
80615 A	V663939	9.5	2.66	1.99	25	240	0.20	0.75
80615 A	V663939	0.150	2.50	1.30	48	96	0.17	1.00
80616 A	V663945	9.5	1.65	1.30	21	240	0.24	0.75
80616 A	V663945	0.150	1.56	0.99	36	96	0.15	1.00
80617 A	V663221	9.5	1.15	0.99	13	240	0.33	0.75
80617 A	V663221	0.150	1.16	0.79	32	96	0.17	1.00

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.7. 2018 KCA Bottle Roll Test Results.

Note: Figure prepared by KCA, 2018.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.14. KCA 2018 Preliminary Agglomeration Test Work.

KCA Sample No.	Description	Cement (kg/mt) _{dry ore}	Water Added (ml)	Initial Height (cm)	Final Height (cm)	pH on Day 3	pH Comment	% Slump	Apparent Bulk Density (mt_dry/m³)	Flow Out (l/h/m²)	Visual Estimate of % Pellet breakdown	Pellet Result	Out Flow Solution Color and Clarity	Overall Test Result
80607 A	CRR17-001	0	0.0	30.80	30.16	8.1	Low	2%	1.42	26,937	N/A	N/A	Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80607 A	CRR17-001	4	191.0	28.89	28.89	11.2	Good	0%	1.52	33,515	<3	Pass	Light Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80607 A	CRR17-001	8	197.0	28.89	28.89	11.7	High	0%	1.52	25,588	<3	Pass	Light Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80607 A	CRR17-001	10	202.0	28.89	28.89	11.8	High	0%	1.52	31,781	<3	Pass	Milky & Cloudy	Pass
80608 A	CRR17-002A	0	0.0	31.75	31.12	8.3	Low	2%	1.38	23,625	N/A	N/A	Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80608 A	CRR17-002A	4	159.0	27.94	27.94	11.5	High	0%	1.57	23,883	3	Pass	Light Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80608 A	CRR17-002A	8	163.0	28.89	28.89	11.9	High	0%	1.52	26,627	3	Pass	Light Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80608 A	CRR17-002A	10	160.5	29.21	29.21	12.0	High	0%	1.50	26,376	3	Pass	Milky & Cloudy	Pass
80609 A	CRR17-003	0	0.0	30.48	29.85	8.3	Low	2%	1.44	14,203	N/A	N/A	Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80609 A	CRR17-003	4	151.0	31.12	31.12	11.6	High	0%	1.41	25,976	3	Pass	Milky & Cloudy	Pass
80609 A	CRR17-003	8	154.5	30.16	30.16	11.9	High	0%	1.45	25,538	<3	Pass	Milky & Cloudy	Pass
80609 A	CRR17-003	10	161.5	31.43	31.43	12.0	High	0%	1.40	29,229	<3	Pass	Colorless & Clear	Pass
80648 B	CRR17-027	0	0	23.18	23.18	8.9	Low	0%	1.89	19,454	N/A	N/A	Light Brown & Cloudy	Pass
80648 B	CRR17-027	4	83.0	25.40	25.08	12.3	High	1%	1.73	28,279	<3	Pass	Colorless & Clear	Pass
80648 B	CRR17-027	8	87.5	25.40	25.40	12.5	High	0%	1.73	27,172	<3	Pass	Colorless & Clear	Pass
80648 B	CRR17-027	10	91.0	25.72	25.72	12.6	High	0%	1.71	32,876	<3	Pass	Colorless & Clear	Pass

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.15. KCA 2018 Compacted Permeability Tests.

KCA Sample No.	KCA Test No.	Sample Description	Crush Size (mm)	Material Type	Test Phase	Cement Added, (kg/mt)	Effective Height (m)	Flow Rate, (l/h/m²)	Flow Result Pass/Fail	Saturated Permeability (cm/sec)	Incremental Slump (%)	Cum. Slump % Slump	Slump Result Pass/Fail	Overall Pass/Fail
80607 A	80623 A	CRR17-001	9.5	Feed	Primary	0	20	2,126	Pass	5.9E-02	3	3	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	1,528	Pass	4.2E-02	3	6	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	875	Pass	2.4E-02	4	10	Pass	Pass
80624	80672 A	CRR17-001	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	3,008	Pass	8.4E-02	1	1	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	776	Pass	2.2E-02	3	4	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	480	Pass	1.3E-02	3	7	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	328	Pass	9.1E-03	2	9	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		100	208	Pass	5.8E-03	2	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		120	125	Pass	3.5E-03	1	12	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		140	80	Fail	2.2E-03	1	13	Fail	Fail
80627	80680 A	CRR17-001	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	6,779	Pass	1.9E-01	0	0	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	4,244	Pass	1.2E-01	2	2	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	2,447	Pass	6.9E-02	3	5	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	2,063	Pass	5.7E-02	1	6	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		100	1,290	Pass	3.6E-02	2	8	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		120	1,136	Pass	3.2E-02	2	10	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		140	958	Pass	2.7E-02	1	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		160	714	Pass	2.0E-02	1	12	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		180	535	Pass	1.5E-02	1	13	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		200	367	Pass	1.0E-02	0	13	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		220	263	Pass	7.3E-02	2	15	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		240	186	Pass	5.2E-02	0	15	Fail	Fail
80608 A	80623 B	CRR17-002 A	9.5	Feed	Primary	0	20	2,763	Pass	7.7E-02	2	2	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	2,128	Pass	5.9E-02	3	5	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	1,288	Pass	3.6E-02	3	8	Pass	Pass
80630	80673 A	CRR17-002 A	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	7,515	Pass	2.1E-01	0	0	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	6,748	Pass	1.9E-01	2	2	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	6,028	Pass	1.7E-01	3	5	Pass	Pass

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

KCA Sample No.	KCA Test No.	Sample Description	Crush Size (mm)	Material Type	Test Phase	Cement Added, (kg/mt)	Effective Height (m)	Flow Rate, (l/h/m²)	Flow Result Pass/Fail	Saturated Permeability (cm/sec)	Incremental Slump (%)	Cum. Slump % Slump	Slump Result Pass/Fail	Overall Pass/Fail

					Stage Load		100	4,207	Pass	1.2E-01	1	7	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		120	3,325	Pass	9.2E-02	2	9	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		140	2,548	Pass	7.1E-02	1	10	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		160	1,904	Pass	5.3E-02	1	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		180	1,389	Pass	3.9E-02	1	12	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		200	977	Pass	2.7E-02	2	14	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		220	705	Pass	2.0E-02	0	14	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		240	503	Pass	1.4E-02	1	15	Fail	Fail
80633	80681A	CRR17-002 A	9.5	Column Tail	Primary		20	6,868	Pass	1.9E-01	1	1	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	6,291	Pass	1.7E-01	3	4	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	5,269	Pass	1.5E-01	1	5	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	4,111	Pass	1.1E-01	2	7	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		100	3,158	Pass	8.8E-02	1	8	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		120	2,331	Pass	6.5E-02	2	10	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		140	1,732	Pass	4.8E-02	1	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		160	1,299	Pass	3.6E-02	0	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		180	906	Pass	2.5E-02	2	13	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		200	675	Pass	1.9E-02	1	14	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		220	509	Pass	1.4E-02	0	14	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		240	359	Pass	1.0E-02	1	15	Fail	Fail
80636		CRR17-003	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	4,540	Pass	1.3E-01	0	0	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	2,207	Pass	6.1E-02	3	3	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	1,996	Pass	5.5E-02	1	4	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	2,137	Pass	5.9E-02	2	6	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		100	1,802	Pass	5.0E-02	1	7	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		120	1,519	Pass	4.2E-02	2	9	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		140	1,162	Pass	3.2E-02	1	10	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		160	938	Pass	2.6E-02	1	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		180	754	Pass	2.1E-02	1	12	Fail	Fail

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

KCA Sample No.	KCA Test No.	Sample Description	Crush Size (mm)	Material Type	Test Phase	Cement Added, (kg/mt)	Effective Height (m)	Flow Rate, (l/h/m²)	Flow Result Pass/Fail	Saturated Permeability (cm/sec)	Incremental Slump (%)	Cum. Slump % Slump	Slump Result Pass/Fail	Overall Pass/Fail
					Stage Load		200	630	Pass	1.8E-02	1	13	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		220	476	Pass	1.3E-02	0	13	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		240	379	Pass	1.1E-02	1	14	Fail	Fail
80674 A	80682 A	CRR17-003	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	5,885	Pass	1.6E-01	0	0	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	3,393	Pass	9.4E-02	2	2	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	3,132	Pass	8.7E-02	2	4	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	3,275	Pass	9.1E-02	1	5	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		100	3,105	Pass	8.6E-02	1	6	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		120	2,614	Pass	7.3E-02	2	8	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		140	2,235	Pass	6.2E-02	1	9	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		160	1,787	Pass	5.0E-02	1	10	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		180	1,550	Pass	4.3E-02	1	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		200	1,293	Pass	3.6E-02	0	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		220	1,051	Pass	2.9E-02	1	12	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		240	856	Pass	2.4E-02	1	13	Fail	Fail
80653	80683 A	CRR18-027	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	6,742	Pass	1.9E-01	0	0	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	6,006	Pass	1.7E-01	2	2	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	5,042	Pass	1.4E-01	2	4	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		80	4,337	Pass	1.2E-01	1	5	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		100	3,547	Pass	9.9E-02	2	7	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		120	3,056	Pass	8.5E-02	1	8	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		140	2,525	Pass	7.0E-02	1	9	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		160	2,126	Pass	5.9E-02	1	10	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		180	1,730	Pass	4.8E-02	1	11	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		200	1,421	Pass	3.9E-02	1	12	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		220	1,173	Pass	3.3E-02	0	12	Fail	Fail
					Stage Load		240	985	Pass	2.7E-02	1	13	Fail	Fail
80656	80684 A	CRR18-027	9.5	Column Tail	Primary	0	20	7,608	Pass	2.1E-01	0	0	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		40	7,312	Pass	2.0E-01	2	2	Pass	Pass
					Stage Load		60	7,030	Pass	2.0E-01	2	4	Pass	Pass

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

KCA

Sample

No.

KCA
Test

No.

Sample
Description

Crush

Size

(mm)

Material

Type

Test
Phase

Cement

Added,
(kg/mt)

Effective

Height

(m)

Flow

Rate,
(l/h/m²)

Flow
Result
Pass/Fail

Saturated

Permeability

(cm/sec)

Incremental

Slump

(%)

Cum.
Slump
% Slump

Slump
Result
Pass/Fail

Overall
Pass/Fail

Stage Load

6,711

Pass

1.9E-01

Pass

Stage Load

100

6,181

Pass

1.7E-01

Pass

Stage Load

120

5,847

Pass

1.6E-01

Pass

Stage Load

140

5,415

Pass

1.5E-01

Pass

Stage Load

160

4,920

Pass

1.4E-01

Pass

Stage Load

180

4,446

Pass

1.2E-01

Pass

Stage Load

200

3,969

Pass

1.1E-01

Fail

Stage Load

220

3,573

Pass

9.9E-02

Fail

Stage Load

240

3,221

Pass

8.9E-02

Fail

Note:

Primary Pass/Fail Criteria

In KCA’s compacted agglomeration tests, a slump of over 10% is generally an indication of failure. One item also examined is the consistency of results with regard to slump. If things worked perfectly, a lower slump with higher cement levels could be expected.

A typical heap leach solution application rate of 10 to 12 liters per hour per square meter is utilized when examining the agglomeration data. When examining results from this type of agglomeration test a measured flow of ten times (10X) the heap design rate is considered a “pass”. A measured flow less than 10X the heap design flow is not necessarily a failure. If there are enough tests with enough consistency between tests, and all other points indicate a “pass,” and then sometimes a test will pass with less than the 10X flow. However, a test will not likely pass at 1X and probably not at 4X.

In examining the pellet breakdown, about 10% is marginally acceptable and anything higher is a failure. In general, a higher range is allowable in pellet breakdown as this is a subjective value based on the visual observation of the pellets after the test by the technicians performing the test. When the samples tested are not agglomerated using cement, this test is not applicable.

Solution color and clarity typically is an indicator of agglomerate failure and fines migration. This information is utilized in coordination with both slump as well as pellet breakdown to determine if the test passes.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

13.5.4

KCA 2018 Column Leach Tests

Duplicate column leach tests were performed on each composite at a crush size of P₁₀₀ of 9.5 mm. The columns were leached for 120 days. After 120 days, one column from each duplicate set from the Good Hope Deposit was taken off-line and the other column was allowed to continue leaching for an additional 34 days. Both duplicate Gold Ace Zone columns were leached for 121 days before being taken off-line. Results from the column leach tests are presented in Table 13.16. Column leach recovery curves based on carbon assays are shown in Figure 13.8 and based on tonnes of solution per tonne of ore in Figure 13.9.

Results of the column tests for the Good Hope Deposit confirm the results from the 2008 McClelland program. Gold recoveries ranged from 78% to 83% with an average recovery of 81%. Gold recoveries on the composite from the Gold Ace Zone were significantly lower, averaging 60.5%. Reagent consumptions for the Good Hope Deposit were low to moderate averaging 3.06 lb/st for NaCN and 2.18 lbs/t for lime. Gold Ace Zone reagent consumptions averaged 2.18 lb/st for NaCN and 3.52 lb/st for lime.

Based on the leach curves, most of the columns were still leaching when the columns were terminated. Additional leaching may be realized during secondary leaching from higher lifts or from heap rinsing.

Figure 13.8. KCA 2018 Column Leach Curves – Carbon Assays.

Note: Figure prepared by KCA, 2018.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 13.16. KCA 2018 Column Leach Tests.

Description	Avg. Head Assay (g/mt Au)	Wt. Avg. Screen Head (g/mt Au)	Calculated Head (g/mt Au)	GAC Extracted (g/mt Au)	Weighted Avg. Tails, (g/mt Au)	Extracted % Au	Calculated Tail p80 Size (mm)	Days of Leach	Consumption NaCN (kg/mt)	Addition Ca(OH)₂ (kg/mt)
CRR17-001	0.644	0.632	0.656	0.529	0.127	81	6.24	120	1.53	1.29
CRR17-001	0.644	0.632	0.653	0.507	0.146	78	6.69	154	1.98	1.26
CRR17-002A	1.075	1.070	0.992	0.820	0.172	83	6.23	120	1.44	1.00
CRR17-002A	1.075	1.070	1.072	0.835	0.237	78	6.24	154	1.54	1.00
CRR17-003	0.675	0.668	0.677	0.556	0.121	82	6.13	120	1.14	1.01
CRR17-003	0.675	0.668	0.654	0.539	0.115	82	6.60	154	1.53	0.99
CRR18-027	1.769	1.578	1.134	0.685	0.449	60	6.52	121	1.10	1.76
CRR18-027	1.769	1.578	1.113	0.676	0.437	61	6.36	121	1.07	1.76
CRR17-001	0.62	0.51	0.54	0.16	0.38	30	6.24	120	1.53	1.29
CRR17-001	0.62	0.51	0.56	0.19	0.37	34	6.69	154	1.98	1.26
CRR17-002A	0.62	0.55	0.62	0.22	0.40	36	6.23	120	1.44	1.00
CRR17-002A	0.62	0.55	0.62	0.24	0.38	39	6.24	154	1.54	1.00
CRR17-003	0.62	0.53	0.56	0.20	0.36	35	6.13	120	1.14	1.01
CRR17-003	0.62	0.53	0.57	0.21	0.36	37	6.60	154	1.53	0.99
CRR18-027	1.61	1.61	1.66	0.46	1.20	28	6.52	121	1.10	1.76
CRR18-027	1.61	1.61	1.70	0.44	1.26	26	6.36	121	1.07	1.76

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.9. KCA 2018 Column Leach Curves – Tonnes Solution per Tonne Ore.

Note: Figure prepared by KCA, 2018.

13.5.5

2018 KCA Program Conclusions

Results from the KCA 2018 program were consistent with results observed during the 2008 McClelland program with gold recoveries for the main ore body at P₈₀ of ¼ inch (P₁₀₀ of ⅜ inch) averaging 81% without field deduction. Reagent consumptions were also low to moderate with cyanide consumptions averaging 3.06 lb/st for NaCN and 2.18 lb/st for lime. Results from the program also show no significant variations in recovery or reagent consumptions based on material grade or spatial representation for the Good Hope Deposit. Cement agglomeration is not required for heap heights up to 262 ft.

Recoveries for the Gold Ace Zone were significantly lower, averaging 60.5% for gold and reagent consumptions averaging 2.18 lb/st for NaCN and 3.52 lb/st for lime.

13.6

Analysis and Discussion

Metallurgical samples from historical and recent KCA test programs appear to be spatially representative for the Good Hope Deposit.

Only limited data are available for the Gold Ace Zone, which includes two column leach tests on duplicate samples and one pulverized bottle roll test.

13.6.1

Crush Size and Grade versus Recovery

A plot of size versus recovery for all column and bottle roll tests completed by McClelland and KCA is presented in Figure 13.10.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 13.10. Size versus Recovery – 2018 KCA and 2008 McClelland Test Data.

Note: Figure prepared by KCA, 2019.

Figure 13.10 shows a strong correlation between crush size and recovery with recoveries generally decreasing with coarser crush sizes. Based on the graph of all crush size data, the expected laboratory recovery for gold at a crush size of P₈₀ of ¼ inch would be approximately 79%; however, relying on the consistent results from the 2018 KCA and 2008 McClelland column leach tests, KCA believes the average laboratory recovery of 81% is the best estimate of that crush size. Including a 2% field recovery deduction, KCA recommends a 79% field recovery for gold for the Good Hope Deposit.

Only limited data is available for the Gold Ace Zone, including one bottle roll and two duplicate column leach tests. Although the bottle roll results at P₁₀₀ of 150 µm are consistent with the results of the Good Hope Deposit, column leach tests were significantly lower, averaging 60.5%. It is unclear why the Gold Ace recoveries are at variance with the Good Hope Deposit, given the proximity and similar makeup of the material; however, preliminary mineralogy results suggest the gold in the Gold Ace Zone is finely disseminated while the Good Hope mineralization is coarser, allowing for more adequate liberation at coarser crush sizes. Although not confirmed, KCA suspects there may be some silica encapsulation of the gold in the Gold Ace mineralization. Based on data available, KCA recommends a field recovery of 58.5% for the Gold Ace mineralization, including field deduct.

As presented in Figure 13.7, gold grade does not appear to have any appreciable impact on overall gold recoveries.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

100

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

13.6.2

Leach Cycle

The leach cycle has been estimated based on column test work at P₈₀of ¼ inch, including six column tests by KCA in 2018, and one column test from McClelland, completed in 2008. Columns for the Gold Ace Zone are not included in this evaluation.

The leach cycle considers tonne of solution per tonne ore as well as the total time required to reach the ultimate recovery in the column leach tests. Based on this data, the estimated leach cycle is 125 days.

13.6.3

Reagent Consumptions

13.6.3.1

Cyanide

Cyanide consumptions are based on the column test data at P₈₀of ¼ inch. The average laboratory cyanide consumption is estimated at 2.92 lb/st. KCA typically estimates field consumption of cyanide to be 25% to 33% of the laboratory cyanide consumption observed in column tests. The higher end of the spectrum (33%) is used when silver and/or other metals are present in above average quantities or when the observed laboratory consumption is unusually low. If the observed consumption is “average” and the ore is “clean”, i.e., a gold only ore, 25% is used. In the case of the Good Hope material, the observed laboratory cyanide consumption is quite low, so the field cyanide consumption is estimated at 25% of laboratory consumption.

13.6.3.2

Lime

Lime is required for pH control during leaching. Since hydrated lime was used for the laboratory leach tests, the laboratory lime consumptions are adjusted to accurately predict the consumption of quick lime (CaO at 100% purity) in the field. Lime consumptions are based on the column test data at P₈₀of ¼ inch with an estimated field consumption of 1.53 lb/st. Lime consumption from the 2008 McClelland column at P₈₀of ¼ inch is not considered in this calculation as it is significantly lower than the other tests and does not appear to be representative.

13.6.4

Conclusions and Key Design Parameters

Key design parameters from the metallurgical test work for the Good Hope Deposit include:

•

Crush size P₈₀ of ¼ inch.

•

Estimated gold field recovery of 79% including 2% field deduction. Based on column tests it is possible additional ounces may be realized during secondary leaching from leaching upper lifts and during heap rinsing, as it appears most columns were still slowly leaching at column termination.

•

Design leach cycle of 125 days.

•

Average field sodium cyanide consumption of 0.73 lb/st.

•

Average field lime consumption of 1.53 lb/st based on 100% CaO purity.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

101

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

•

Cement agglomeration not required up to heap heights of 262 ft.

Key design parameters from the metallurgical test work for the Gold Ace Zone are include:

•

Crush size P₈₀ of ¼ inch.

•

Estimated gold recovery of 58.5% including 2% field deduction. Based on column tests, it is possible additional ounces may be realized during secondary leaching from leaching upper lifts and during heap rinsing as it appears most columns were still slowly leaching at column termination.

•

Design leach cycle of 125 days.

•

Average field sodium cyanide consumption of 0.72 lb/st.

•

Average field lime consumption of 2.46 lb/st based on 100% CaO purity.

•

Cement agglomeration not required up to heap heights of 262 ft.

13.6.5

Qualified Person’s Opinion

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

102

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Mineral Resource Estimates

Several prior NI 43-101 Mineral Resource estimates for the Project are outlined by Barnard et al. (2012). The Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for this study is based upon historic drilling and drilling conducted by CR Reward during 2017 and 2018 and this estimate supersedes all prior resource estimates.

The MRE was undertaken by APEX personnel of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. The Mineral Resource estimate was completed by Mr. Warren Black, M.Sc., P.Geo. and Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG under the direct supervision of Mr. Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P.Geol., P.Geo., all of whom are independent qualified persons employed by APEX. Mr. Dufresne takes responsibility for the for MRE herein.

Definitions used in this section are consistent with those adopted by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum ("CIM") Council in “Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines” dated November 29^th, 2019 and “Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” dated May 10^th, 2014, and prescribed by the Canadian Securities Administrators' NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects and the standards of SK 1300. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

14.1

Introduction

Statistical analysis, three-dimensional (3D) modelling and resource estimation were completed by Mr. Warren Black with assistance from Mr. Steven Nicholls. The workflow implemented for the estimate was completed using the commercially available Micromine (v 18.0) software. The workflow implemented for the evaluation of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction was completed using the Datamine Studio MaxiPit (v1.3.43.0) optimization software. The Anaconda Python distribution (Continuum Analytics, 2017) and contributions made by Mr. Black to the Python package pygeostat (CCG, 2016) were used for supplemental data analysis.

CR Reward provided APEX with a drill hole database that consisted of analytical, geological, density, and collar survey information; initial estimation domains for both the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone; and a geological model for the mineralization that contains a stratigraphic and structural 3D interpretation. APEX thoroughly reviewed the provided data from late 2017 to 2018 data to ensure the database was in good shape and considered suitable for resource estimation. However, APEX personnel did not conduct a detailed validation of the data provided. The initial data and project review conducted in the fall of 2017 was, in part, the reason for additional drilling conducted by CR Reward. In the opinion of the QP, the current Reward drill hole database is suitable for use in resource estimation.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

103

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

APEX personnel conducted resource modelling in local grid coordinate space in feet relative to the North American Datum (NAD) of 1927 (Zone 11). The database comprises 376 drill holes completed in the period 1987 to 2018 of which 264 were used in the Good Hope and Gold Ace resource modelling. APEX and CR Reward personnel constructed estimation domains using a combination of gold grade, silica alteration, and quartz veining (Figure 14.1). The domains were used to subdivide the deposit into volumes of rock and the measured sample intervals within those volumes for geostatistical analysis.

The MRE was prepared using a block model size of 20 ft (X) by 20 ft (Y) by 20 ft (Z). APEX personnel estimated the gold grade for each block using ordinary kriging (OK) with locally varying anisotropy to ensure grade continuity in various directions is reproduced in the block model. The block model was diluted by estimating a waste grade for the outer blocks using composites within a transition zone along the outer edge of the mineralized estimation domain that was then proportionately combined with the estimated grade for the portion of the block within the mineralized domain.

Figure 14.1. Mineral Resource Estimate Mineralized Domain Outlines.

Note: Figure prepared by APEX, 2019.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

104

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.2

Data

14.2.1

Drill Hole Data

The Reward drill hole database utilized by APEX for resource estimation, including the recently completed 2017-2018 drill holes, consists of 143,465 ft (43,728 m) in 376 holes, including 348 historic drill holes. The database includes 130,032 ft (39,634 m) in 341 historic RC holes, 2,137 ft (651 m) in 7 core holes, and 11,296 ft (3,443 m) in 28 core holes completed during late 2017 to early 2018. The 2017 – 2018 core holes combined with the historic core holes represent 9.3% of the drill hole population by number of holes and footage. The historic drill holes were completed between 1987 and 2013, with 276 holes completed between 1987 and 1999, 72 holes between 2000 and 2013.

The drill hole assay database consists of 26,092 sample/interval entries with 336 intervals with a value of -9 and 80 blank assay intervals. The bulk of the blank and -9 intervals are generally top of hole casing intervals that were not sampled, top of hole waste not sampled, or poor recovery intervals. The 2017 – 2018 drill hole database is comprised of 2,356 sample intervals. The holes contain 28 blank assay intervals that are mostly top of hole casing intervals with a few poor recovery intervals.

Within the provided DHDB, a total of 264 drill holes intersect the Good Hope or the Gold Ace mineralized domains, including 33 core holes and 231 RC holes. A total of 179 reverse circulation (RC) and 24 diamond drill holes (DDH) intercept the Good Hope estimation domains with 9 core and 52 RC holes intercepting the Gold Ace estimation domain.

Within the Good Hope Zone database, 34 samples have a value if -9 or have no value and are within the Good Hope estimation domains, of which, are indicated as “not assayed” or “not sampled.” Therefore, the 34 samples are assigned a value of 0.0025 ppm Au (0.0001 oz/st).

Within the Gold Ace Zone database, 14 samples have a value if -9 or have no value and are within the Gold Ace estimation domain, all of which have a “Sample_Au_Assay” value of -99, NA or NS. Within the provided “2018_Reward_Code_Sheet.xlsx” spreadsheet, “-99” indicates “Not samples, Not assayed, no log”; “NA” indicates “not assayed;” and “NS” indicated “not sampled.” Therefore, the 14 samples are assigned a value of 0.0025 ppm Au (0.0001 oz/st).

Histograms, cumulative frequency plots and summary statistics for the Reward project un-composited samples that are situated within the interpreted mineralized lodes are presented in Figure 14.2 to Figure 14.4 and tabulated in Table 14.1. The Reward gold samples generally exhibit a single population of assay data. Due to the single population present, linear estimation techniques are suitable for statistical estimation use for the Good Hope and Gold Ace Deposits.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

105

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.2. Histogram of the Raw Gold Assay Values of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope and Gold Ace Estimation Domains.

Figure 14.3. Cumulative Frequency Plot of Raw Gold Assay Values of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope Zone Estimation Domains.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

106

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.4. Cumulative Frequency Plot of Raw Gold Assay Values of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Gold Ace Estimation Domain.

Table 14.1. Summary Statistics of Raw Gold Assays (in ppm) of Sample Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope and Gold Ace Estimation Domains.

	Global	Good Hope	Gold Ace
count	7,340	6,747	593
mean	0.798	0.774	1.067
std	1.701	1.262	4.203
var	2.894	1.592	17.666
CV	2.133	1.630	3.939
min	0.002	0.003	0.002
25%	0.137	0.140	0.103
50%	0.375	0.377	0.309
75%	0.891	0.891	0.823
max	83.300	37.890	83.300

14.2.2

APEX Micromine Database Validation

The Micromine software has a set of verification tools to evaluate drill hole data. These tools were run on the data when initially received in 2017, and again when the data for the 2017–2018 drill holes were added. The verification returned 260 warnings, all indicating that there were samples in the assay database that were greater than 10 feet in length. It appeared that portions of, or all of, drill holes 88-01 to 88-09 used 15 ft as a standard sampling length protocol. With the 15 ft samples removed from the 88-01 to 88-09 drill holes, the warnings dropped to a total of 139 samples which had sample lengths ranging from 15 ft to 300 ft. A total of 83 of these intervals start from the collar and represent overburden or disturbed material at the top of the drill hole, or rock that was considered unmineralized at the top of the drill holes. The remaining 55 sample intervals likely represent composite sampling of material that was initially considered to be unmineralized in the older drill holes

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

107

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Based upon the validation and review of the drill hole database performed by APEX, the drill hole database, Mr. Dufresne considers the drill hole database acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation.

14.3

Geological Model and Domains

CR Reward provided APEX with a structural and formation model that was created to support resource modelling. The area of the Good Hope fault zone has greatest density of available drill data. A total of 171 geologic logs and four geotechnical logs were used to create the models using east–west-oriented, hand-interpreted, paper cross-sections that were translated into a 3D geological model in Micromine including lithology/stratigraphy and faults. APEX did not directly use the lithological model when creating estimation domains. However, it was, in addition to the structural model, used to guide the orientation of structural controls on gold mineralization when modelling the estimation domains.

CR Reward also provided preliminary solids for alteration zones at Good Hope and Gold Ace. The solids consisted of low silica and high silica shapes. These solids were initially prepared and reviewed in late 2017. The shapes were modified and reviewed after the results of the 2017 and 2018 drilling campaigns were available.

Gold mineralization at the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone are both geographically and geologically distinct and require separate treatment. Three estimation domains were used. The estimation domains are 3D wireframes modelled using a sectional approach that considers all available subsurface geological data pertinent to gold mineralization. CR Reward provided APEX with a low-grade (LG) gold mineralization estimation domain for the Good Hope Deposit. APEX created a high-grade (HG) domain for the Good Hope Deposit and generated an estimation domain for the Gold Ace Zone.

14.3.1

Good Hope Deposit

APEX interpreted two primary mineralization orientations in the Good Hope Deposit:

•

Fault-controlled mineralization generally striking north to north-northwest that dips steeply to the east.

•

Stratigraphic-controlled mineralization generally striking north-northeast that dips moderately to the east.

Two estimation domains were created to ensure that the spatially restricted HG zone and the peripheral LG mineralization could not unreasonably influence each other during estimation. The final estimation domains used during the calculation of the resource estimate for the Good Hope Zone are illustrated in Figure 14.5.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

108

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.5. Orthogonal View of LG (Blue) and HG (Orange) Estimation Domains, Good Hope Deposit.

Note: Figure prepared by APEX, 2019.

14.3.1.1

Low-Grade Alteration Domain (LG)

CR Reward created the LG domain for the Good Hope Deposit using the following criteria:

•

Assay greater than or equal to 0.002 oz/st Au with logged quartz veining and/or any intensity of silica alteration.

•

Assay values greater than or equal to 0.005 oz/st Au.

The LG domain was interpreted using east–west sections at 50 ft spacing. APEX edited the interpretations to ensure that the domain did not extend into areas with no drill support or into zones of waste without silica alteration or veining.

14.3.1.2

High Grade Gold Shell (HG)

APEX modelled a HG gold grade shell using an assay value of greater than 0.015 oz/st Au. While constructing the HG domain, the structural and lithological interpretation provided by CR Reward were used as guides in addition to the trend of the Good Hope LG domain. The interpretation was completed using east-west drill sections spaced at approximately 100 ft intervals and is restricted to the extents of the LG domain.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

109

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.3.2

Gold Ace Zone

APEX observed one primary orientation of mineralization in the Good Ace zone, consisting of stratigraphically controlled mineralization generally striking north-northeast that dips moderately to the east. The Gold Ace Zone was remodelled several times by CR Reward and APEX geologists and, in general, was too thin and discontinuous to model a HG zone within the LG estimation domain. As a result, only a LG domain was used in estimation. The final estimation domain used during the calculation of the resource estimate for the Good Hope Zone are illustrated in Figure 14.6.

Figure 14.6. Orthogonal View of the LG (Solid Orange) Estimation Domain, Gold Ace Zone.

Note: Figure prepared by APEX, 2019.

14.4

Drill Hole Flagging and Compositing

14.4.1

Sample Width Analysis

Downhole sample width analysis shows that the drill hole samples ranged from 0.5 ft to 25 ft with the dominant sample length being 5 ft. A composite length of 10 ft was selected as it provides adequate resolution for mining purposes and is equal to or larger in length than 99.9 % of the drill hole samples (Figure 14.7). Length-weighted composites were calculated using all raw gold assays with interval centroids within the estimation domains for both the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone.

The compositing process started from the drill hole collar and ended at the bottom of the hole. However, when the Good Hope HG estimation domain was intersected, composites within the domain began at the first point of intersection between the drill hole and the estimation domain wireframe and stopped upon exiting the wireframe. In this case, the composite before the first intersection of the HG estimation domain was truncated at the upper contact and composites after exiting the HG estimation domain wireframe began at the lower contact. The centroids of the resulting composites were flagged as lying within either the LG or HG estimation domain.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

110

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.7. Histogram of Sample Lengths within Estimation Domains for both the Good Hope and Gold Ace Zones.

14.4.2

Remnant Analysis

The distributions of the composites with and without remnant intervals (composites with a length of less than 10 ft) were examined to determine if there is any noticeable bias in gold grade during the compositing process. Composites equal to 10 ft, greater than or equal to 5 ft, and 10 ft composites with all remnants were evaluated. Summary statistics for this analysis are provided in Table 14.2. While the decrease in mean is not favourable, the exclusion of remnants greater than or equal to 5 ft decreases the number of composites by 11.4%. Their removal would significantly increase the error in the estimated Mineral Resource as the amount of available conditioning data would be reduced; therefore, they are included as conditioning data. The 31 samples that are less than 5 ft in length were excluded.

Remnant analysis for the Good Hope composites showed a decrease in the mean of approximately 0.001 oz/st Au when remnants are included, compared to composites that are equal to 10 ft as shown in Table 14.2. Figure 14.8 illustrates that there is little difference between the distributions of composited gold grades with the various composite length scenarios.

Remnant analysis for the Gold Ace Zone composites reveals an increase in the mean of approximately 0.002 oz/st Au when orphans are included, compared to composites that are equal to 10 ft (refer to Table 14.2). Figure 14.9 illustrates little difference between the distribution of composited gold grade with the various composite length scenarios. A significant drop in mean is observed when compositing raw samples at the Gold Ace Zone as there are numerous large intervals (e.g., 150 ft) in the drill hole database that are not sampled and assigned a value of 0.0001 oz/st Au. During the composite process, these samples are split into multiple composites, leading to a lower but more representative mean value. The exclusion of remnants greater than or equal to 5 ft decreases the number of composites by 9.1%. As their removal would significantly increase error in the estimated Mineral Resource, they are included as conditioning data. The six samples that are less than 5 ft in length were excluded.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

111

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.2. Remnant Analysis comparing the Gold Statistics (in ppm) of Raw Assays and Uncapped Composite Samples with and without Orphans.

	Good Hope				Gold Ace
	Raw Assays	Comps with Orphans	Comps 10 ft Only	Comps ≥ 5 ft	Raw Assays	Comps with Orphans	Comps 10 ft Only	Comps ≥ 5 ft
count	6,747	3,577	3,164	3,546	593	327	293	321
mean	0.774	0.756	0.789	0.756	1.067	0.956	0.903	0.856
std	1.262	1.061	1.101	1.062	4.203	2.455	1.848	1.776
var	1.592	1.125	1.212	1.128	17.666	6.028	3.416	3.155
CV	1.630	1.403	1.396	1.404	3.939	2.568	2.047	2.075
min	0.003	0.003	0.003	0.003	0.002	0.003	0.003	0.003
25%	0.140	0.171	0.178	0.171	0.103	0.120	0.120	0.120
50%	0.377	0.397	0.411	0.397	0.309	0.334	0.360	0.343
75%	0.891	0.925	0.983	0.926	0.823	0.913	1.011	0.909
max	37.890	19.107	19.107	19.107	83.300	31.346	22.834	22.834

Figure 14.8. Remnant Analysis Illustrating the Gold Distribution of Calculated Composite within the Good Hope Deposit.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

112

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.9. Orphan Analysis Illustrating the Gold Distribution of Calculated Composite within the Gold Ace Zone.

14.5

Capping

To ensure gold grade is not over-estimated by including outlier values during estimation, composites were capped to a specified maximum value. Probability plots illustrating all values were used to identify outlier values that appear higher than expected relative to the estimation domain’s gold composite population.

The probability plot of composited gold grades within the Good Hope Deposit (Figure 14.10) suggests there are five outlier composites that have gold values greater than 0.292 oz/st Au. Visual inspection of the potential outliers in Micromine revealed that they have no spatial continuity with each other. Therefore, a capping level of 0.292 oz/st Au was applied. The resulting gold grade distribution of the capped composites is illustrated in Figure 14.11 and summary statistics are detailed in Table 14.3.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

113

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.10. Probability Plot of the Composited Gold Grade at the Good Hope Zone before Capping

Figure 14.11. Cumulative Frequency Plots of the Composited and Capped Gold Grade within the Good Hope Zone Estimation Domains

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

114

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

The probability plot of composited gold grades within the Gold Ace Zone (Figure 14.12) suggests there are eight outlier composites that have gold values greater than 0.146 oz/st Au. Visual inspection of the potential outliers reveal they have no spatial continuity with each other. Therefore, a capping level of 0.146 oz/st Au was applied to composites used to calculate the Gold Ace Zone resource estimate. The resulting gold grade distribution of the capped composites is illustrated in Figure 14.13 and summary statistics are detailed in Table 14.3.

Figure 14.12. Probability Plot of the Composited Gold Grade at the Gold Ace Zone before Capping.

Figure 14.13. Cumulative Frequency Plot of the Composited and Capped Gold Grade within Gold Ace Zone Estimation Domain.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

115

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.3. Summary Statistics of Gold Grade (in ppm) of Capped Composite Intervals Flagged within the Good Hope and Gold Ace Estimation Domains.

	Global	Good Hope Uncapped	Good Hope Capped	Gold Ace Uncapped	Gold Ace Capped
count	3,867	3546	3,546	321	321
mean	0.753	0.756	0.753	0.856	0.756
std	1.015	1.1062	1.014	1.776	1.021
var	1.030	1.212	1.029	3.155	1.042
CV	1.348	1.404	1.348	2.075	1.349
min	0.003	0.003	0.003	0.003	0.003
25%	0.169	0.171	0.171	0.12	0.120
50%	0.394	0.397	0.397	0.343	0.343
75%	0.926	0.926	0.926	0.909	0.909
max	10.000	19.107	10.000	22.834	5.000

14.6

Variography and Grade Continuity

APEX calculated and modelled semi-variograms for gold using the 10 ft composites flagged within the estimation domains. Experimental semi-variograms for each zone were calculated along the major, minor, and vertical principle directions of continuity that are defined by three Euler angles. Euler angles describe the orientation of anisotropy as a series of rotations (using a left-hand rule) that are as follows:

A rotation about the Z-axis (azimuth) with positive angles being clockwise rotation and negative representing counter-clockwise rotation;

A rotation about the X-axis (dip) with positive angles being counter-clockwise rotation and negative representing clockwise rotation; and

A rotation about the Y-axis (tilt) with positive angles being clockwise rotation and negative representing counter-clockwise rotation.

Parameters of the modelled semi-variograms are documented in Table 14.4 and the calculated experimental semi-variogram and models used for resource estimation are illustrated in Figure 14.14and Figure 14.15 respectively.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

116

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.4. Gold Variogram Model Parameters.

Zone	C0	Sill	Azm	Dip	Tilt	Structure 1					Structure 2
						Type	C1	Ranges (ft)			Type	C2	Ranges (ft)
						Type	C1	Major	Minor	Vertical	Type	C2	Major	Minor	Vertical
Good Hope	0.370	1.027	176	-16	-34	sph	0.411	80	140	60	exp	0.246	250	140	60
Gold Ace	0.261	0.622	137	-10	-15	sph	0.124	220	120	30	exp	0.236	220	120	30

Note:

azm: azimuth, sph: spherical, exp: exponential; C0: nugget effect; C1: covariance contribution of structure 1; C2: covariance contribution of structure 2.

Figure 14.14. Calculated and Modelled Semi-Variogram of Gold within the Good Hope Zone. Dip Direction and Dip for each Principle Direction is in each Subplot Title.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

117

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.15. Calculated and Modelled Semi-Variogram of Gold within the Gold Ace Zone. Dip Direction and Dip for each Principle Direction is in each Subplot Title.

14.7

Bulk Density

To determine what bulk densities should be applied to the block model, APEX completed EDA on the available density data. The database contains 464 bulk density measurements, of which 134 are from the Good Hope Deposit, 32 are from the Gold Ace Zone and 298 are from waste rock. The centroids of intervals that were selected for bulk density measurements were flagged using the estimation domain and stratigraphic wireframes are discussed in Section 14.3. All measurements were flagged with the stratigraphic unit they lie in and the estimation domain the sample is from, if it is not classed as waste.

At the Good Hope Deposit, little variation in the mean and median values were observed between bulk density measurements flagged within either the HG or LG estimation domains or individually (Table 14.5).

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

118

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.5. Bulk Density Measurements (g/cm³), Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone.

	Good Hope					Gold Ace			Waste
	HG+LG	HG	LG	Zwc	Zsj	LG	Zss	Zsm	Zsb	Zsj	Zsm	Zss	Zwc
count	134	76	58	121	13	32	7	24	5	21	13	45	145
mean	2.58	2.58	2.59	2.59	2.55	2.69	2.61	2.71	2.59	2.58	2.65	2.59	2.62
std	0.14	0.16	0.11	0.14	0.05	0.16	0.18	0.16	0.11	0.04	0.12	0.11	0.12
min	1.62	1.62	2.35	1.62	2.46	2.31	2.31	2.32	2.48	2.48	2.29	2.40	2.23
25%	2.53	2.54	2.52	2.54	2.51	2.58	2.53	2.60	2.49	2.56	2.63	2.51	2.56
50%	2.59	2.59	2.59	2.60	2.54	2.70	2.61	2.72	2.59	2.58	2.69	2.57	2.63
75%	2.64	2.64	2.66	2.66	2.59	2.80	2.71	2.82	2.69	2.60	2.72	2.68	2.71
max	2.97	2.97	2.79	2.97	2.66	3.04	2.86	3.04	2.70	2.64	2.76	2.84	2.89
CV	0.02	0.03	0.04	0.02	0.20	0.08	0.37	0.11	0.52	0.12	0.20	0.06	0.02

The blocks within the Good Hope Deposit are predominantly classed as Wood Canyon Formation with nearly equal amounts of Juhl Member and Sutton Member of the Stirling Formation (Table 14.6). There is a slight decrease in bulk density when comparing measurements within the Wood Canyon Formation lithologies and the Juhl Member, both inside and outside of the Good Hope estimation domains (Table 14.5; Figure 14.6). It is hard to determine with certainty if there is a relationship between gold grade and bulk density with the current dataset (Figure 14.17).

Figure 14.16. Bulk Density Box Plots, Good Hope Deposit.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

119

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.17. Bulk Density Scatter Plots Showing 3D Solids vs. Gold Grade, Good Hope Deposit.

As there are no discrepancies in the median (50th percentile) values of bulk density measurements within the Good Hope estimation domains, a bulk density value of 2.59 g/cm³ was applied to all blocks within the Good Hope mineralized zone.

At the Gold Ace Zone, there is a change in bulk density between lithological units (Table 14.5). The blocks within the Gold Ace Zone are predominantly Morris Member with most other blocks being within the Sutton Member (Table 14.6). There is a decrease in bulk density when comparing bulk density measurements within the Morris Member and Sutton Member, both inside and outside of the Gold Ace estimation domain (Table 14.5, Figure 14.18). It is hard to determine with certainty if there is a relationship between gold grade and bulk density with the current dataset (Figure 14.19). As there is evidence for the need for a higher bulk density value for blocks flagged within the Morris Member, these blocks are assigned a value of 2.70 g/cm³. However, as there is an insufficient number of bulk density measurements of the Sutton Member within the Gold Ace estimation domain, all other blocks at the Gold Ace Zone were assigned a bulk density value of 2.59 g/cm³.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

120

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.6. Percentage of Blocks Flagged within each Formation for the Good Hope and Gold Ace Zones.

Formation	Good Hope %	Gold Ace %
Qal	1	4
Zwc	75	0
Zsj	13	0
Zss	11	16
Zsm	0	79
Zsb	0	1

Figure 14.18. Bulk Density Box Plots, Gold Ace Zone.

Figure 14.19. Bulk Density Scatter Plots Showing 3D Solids vs. Gold Grade, Gold Ace Zone.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

121

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.8

Block Model

14.8.1

Block Model Parameters

The block model used fully encapsulates the estimation domains. When determining block model parameters, data spacing is the primary consideration in addition to ensuring the volume of the 3D estimation domain wireframes are adequately captured, and that potential mining equipment parameters are considered.

The data spacing of irregularly spaced drilling can be approximated by calculating the 90th percentile of a high-resolution block model of the distance from each block’s centroid to the nearest sample. Estimation errors are introduced when kriging is used to estimate a grade for blocks with a size larger than 25% of the data spacing. As illustrated in Figure 14.20 and Figure 14.21, the 90th percentile is 98 ft and 83 ft for the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone respectively.

Figure 14.20. Cumulative Frequency Plot Illustrating the Distance from each Block Centroid to the nearest Composite Sample within the Good Hope Zone.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

122

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.21. Cumulative Frequency Plot Illustrating the Distance from each Block Centroid to the nearest Composite Sample within the Gold Ace Zone.

The previous resource estimate completed for the Project (CR Reward, 2017) used a parent block size of 20 by 20 by 20 ft that is less than 25% of the approximated data spacing for both the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone. This size is a fairly standard mining unit size selected by many open pits in Nevada and is considered acceptable for use in the current estimate. The final block model is 4,920 ft long in the east-west direction, 5,480 ft long in the north-south direction and 1,900 ft deep (Table 14.7).

Table 14.7. Project Block Model Size and Extents.

Axis	Number of Blocks	Block Size (ft)	Minimum Extent (ft)	Maximum Extent (ft)
X (Easting)	246	20	62,460	67,380
Y (Northing)	274	20	1,690	7,170
Z (Elevation)	95	20	3,040	4,940

A block factor that represents the percentage of each blocks volume that lies within each estimation domain is calculated for all three domains. The block factor is used to:

•

Flag which estimation domain each block belongs.

•

Calculate the percentage of mineralized material and waste for each block.

•

Calculate the volume of mineralized material of each block when undertaking the Mineral Resource estimate.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

123

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.8.2

Volumetric Checks

A comparison of wireframe volume versus block model volume was performed to ensure there is no considerable over or understating of tonnages (Table 14.8). The calculated block factor for each block was used to scale its volume when calculating the total volume of the block model.

Table 14.8. Wireframe versus Block Model Volume Comparison.

Wireframe	Wireframe Volume (ft³)	Block Model Volume with Block Factor (ft³)	Volume Difference (%)
Good Hope	264,316,535	264,345,000	0.01
Gold Ace	20,694,986	20,687,500	-0.04
Total	285,011,521	285,032,500	0.01

14.9

Grade Estimation

14.9.1

Estimation Methodology

Ordinary kriging was used to estimate gold grade for the Good Hope and Gold Ace block models. Grade estimates are only calculated for blocks that contain more than 1.56% mineralized material by volume. A block discretization of 2 (X) by 2 (Y) by 2 (Z) was applied to all blocks during estimation.

A two-pass method was employed that uses two different variogram model, search ellipsoid, and kriging parameter configurations (Table 14.9). A minimum of two drill holes was required for the first pass to ensure there are sufficient data when calculating the mean value used by OK. Volume-variance corrections were enforced by restricting the maximum number of conditioning data to 15 and the maximum number of composites from each drill hole to three. These restrictions were implemented to ensure the estimated models were not over smoothed which would lead to inaccurate estimation of global tonnage and grade. These corrections caused local conditional bias but ensured that the global estimate of grade and tonnage is accurately estimated.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

124

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.9. Estimation Search and Kriging Parameters (LV – locally varying).

Pass	Variogram and Search Orientations (Dip Dir/Dip)			Max Variogram and Search Range			Min No. Holes	Max Comps Per Hole	Min No. Comps	Max No. Comps
Pass	Major	Minor	Vertical	Major	Minor	Vertical	Min No. Holes	Max Comps Per Hole	Min No. Comps	Max No. Comps
Good Hope Zone
1	LV	LV	LV	250	140	60	2	3	2	15
2	LV	LV	LV	500	280	120	1	3	1	15

Gold Ace Zone
1	137/-10	044/-15	260/-72	220	120	30	2	3	2	15
2	137/-10	044/-15	260/-72	440	240	60	1	3	1	15

Estimation of the Good Hope block model was completed with locally varying anisotropy which uses different rotation angles to define the principal directions of the variogram model and search ellipsoid on a per-block basis. Blocks within the estimation domains were assigned rotation angles using a trend surface wireframe. This method allowed structural complexities to be reproduced in the estimated block model. Variogram and search ranges were defined by the variogram model described in Section 0 and Table 14.4.

The Gold Ace Zone block model was calculated using a single variogram and search orientation configuration as described in Section 0 and Table 14.4.

The Good Hope HG and LG estimation domains were separately estimated. To ensure the nature of the boundary between the two estimation domains was reproduced, the centroids of blocks within a specified window of the HG and LG contact were flagged as transitional. Contact analysis was performed to understand the behaviour of gold grades at the boundary and to determine the window used to flag blocks as transitional. As illustrated in Figure 14.22, gold behaves in a statistically semi-soft manner, where the grade of the composites flagged within the LG or HG estimation domains transitions over a short window from a mean of 0.267 ppm Au (0.0078 oz/st Au) to a mean of 1.32 ppm Au (0.0385 oz/st Au). A window of 1 ft into the LG estimation domain from the contact to 5 ft into the HG estimation domain from the contact was used to flag block centroids as transition. Block centroids flagged within the LG or HG estimation domains are estimated using composites flagged within each respective domain in addition to composites flagged within the transition window. Blocks flagged as transition were estimated using only composites flagged within the transition window.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

125

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.22. Gold Grade Contact Plot Analysis, Good Hope LG and HG Grade Domain Contacts.

Note:

The dashed line represents the mean of composites within each domain. Samples within the LG estimation domain are assigned a negative distance value, and samples within the HG estimation domain are assigned a positive distance value.

Blocks that contain more than or equal to 1.56% waste by volume were diluted by estimating a waste gold value that was volume-weight averaged with the estimated gold grade. Similar to the transition methodology used along the HG and LG contact at the Good Hope Zone, the intention was to reproduce the gold grade along the estimation domain/waste domain boundary. The nature of gold mineralization at the mineralized/waste contact was evaluated and used to determine a window to flag composites that were used to condition a waste gold estimate for blocks containing waste material. As illustrated in Figure 14.23, gold behaves in a statistically soft manner, where the grade of the composite centroids flagged within the Good Hope estimation domain transitions from mineralization to waste over a window of approximately 5 ft into waste and 20 ft into mineralized material. As illustrated in Figure 14.24, gold behaves in a statistically hard manner, where the grade of the composite centroids flagged within the Gold Ace estimation domain abruptly transitions from mineralized material to waste at the contact.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

126

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.23. Contact Plot Analysis, Good Hope Grade and Waste Domain Contacts.

Note:

Figure 14.24. Contact Analysis, Gold Ace Grade and Waste Domain Contacts.

Note:

A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the parameters used to flag composite centroids within the mineralization/waste transition zone. The analysis evaluated various window parameters to flag composites within the mineralization/waste transition zone that were then used to estimate a waste gold value for each block containing waste. A diluted gold value was calculated and the parameters were evaluated by comparing the block models contact analysis profile with the composites profile. Based on the results of the sensitivity analysis, a window of 20 ft into waste and 5 ft into the Good Hope Deposit and a window of 20 ft into waste and 4 ft into the Gold Ace Zone mineralized domains best reproduces the gold profile observed at the mineralization/waste transition zone. Additional discussion regarding the validation of this approach is found in Section 4.12.2.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

127

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.10

Model Validation

14.10.1

Visual Validation

The block models for the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone were visually validated in plan view and in cross-section to compare the estimated gold grade versus the conditioning composites (Figure 14.25 to Figure 14.28). APEX concluded that the model compared well with the composites on an overall basis. There was some local over and under estimation observed, but due to the limited number of conditioning data available for the estimation in those areas, this was an expected result.

Figure 14.25. Cross-Section 6000N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Good Hope Deposit.

Note: Figure prepared by APEX, 2019. The boundary of the HG estimation domain within the LG estimation domain is illustrated by the red polygons

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

128

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.26. Cross-Section 4800N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Good Hope Deposit.

Note:

Figure prepared by APEX, 2019. The boundary of the HG estimation domain within the LG estimation domain is illustrated by the red polygons

Figure 14.27. Cross-Section 4100N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Good Hope Deposit.

Note:

Figure prepared by APEX, 2019. The boundary of the HG estimation domain within the LG estimation domain is illustrated by the red polygons

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

129

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.28. Cross-Section 2700N, Showing Block Gold Estimates at the Gold Ace deposit.

Note: Figure prepared by APEX, 2019.

14.10.2

Statistical Validation

Swath plots were used to verify that directional trends were honoured in the estimated block model and to identify potential areas of over or under estimation. They were generated by calculating the average gold grade of composites and estimated block models within directional slices. A window of 100 ft was used in east-west slices, 180 ft in north-south slices and 20 ft in vertical slices.

There are minor instances of localized over estimation; however, APEX believes this is a product of a lack of conditioning data in those areas and the smoothing effect of kriging. Overall, trends observed in the composites in all three directions were adequately reproduced in the block model.

Swath plots for the Good Hope and Gold Ace Zones are illustrated in Figure 14.29 and Figure 14.30, respectively.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

130

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.29. Swath Plots Showing Composite versus Estimated Gold Grade, Good Hope.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

131

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.30. Swath Plots Showing Composite versus Estimated, Gold Grade Gold Ace.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

132

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Volume-variance corrections were used to ensure the estimated models were not over-smoothed, which would lead to inaccurate estimation of global tonnage and grade. To verify that the correct level of smoothing was achieved, theoretical histograms that indicated the anticipated variance and distribution of gold grade at the selected block model size were calculated and plotted against estimated final block model for the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone. These are shown in Figure 14.31 and Figure 14.32 respectively. Some smoothing is observed; however, in APEX’s opinion, further restrictions to the estimation search strategy would result in an unacceptable increase in estimation error.

Figure 14.31. Volume Variance Check, Good Hope.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

133

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.32. Volume Variance Check, Gold Ace.

Blocks within the Good Hope and Gold Ace block models that contained more than or equal to 1.56% waste by volume were diluted using the estimated waste gold and ore gold values. Ideally, the nature of gold mineralization at the ore/waste contact observed in the composites is reproduced in the block model. Contact analysis plots checking contact profile reproduction for the Good Hope Deposit and Gold Ace Zone are illustrated in Figure 14.33 and Figure 14.34, respectively. APEX personnel and the QP considers that the mineralization/waste contact profile at the Good Hope Deposit is adequately reproduced with a slight over estimation into waste. The mineralization/waste contact profile at the Gold Ace Zone is abrupt (hard) when evaluating composites; however, this cannot be perfectly reproduced with a block model, as each block can only have a single value. Considering this, the contact profile observed in the Gold Ace block model is considered by APEX personnel and the QP to be an adequate reproduction of the profile observed in the conditioning data.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

134

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Figure 14.33. Contact Analysis, Good Hope Grade and Waste Domain Boundary.

Figure 14.34. Contact Analysis, Gold Ace Grade and Waste Domain Boundary.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

135

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.11

Mineral Resource Classification

14.11.1

2019 CIM and SK 1300 Definitions

The Reward Project MRE discussed in this report has been classified in accordance with guidelines established by the CIM “Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines” dated November 29^th, 2019 and CIM “Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” dated May 14^th, 2014 and the standards of SK 1300. Due to the substantial similarity in the CIM and SK 1300 standards, application of both standards produced the same MRE classification.

CIM Definitions

A Measured Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the application of Modifying Factors to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to confirm geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation. A Measured Mineral Resource has a higher level of confidence than that applying to either an Indicated Mineral Resource or an Inferred Mineral Resource. It may be converted to a Proven Mineral Reserve or to a Probable Mineral Reserve.

An Indicated Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of Modifying Factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation. An Indicated Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to a Measured Mineral Resource and may only be converted to a Probable Mineral Reserve.

An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.

SK 1300 Definitions

An Indicated Mineral Resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with an indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because an indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource, an indicated mineral resource may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

136

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. Because an inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability, an inferred mineral resource may not be considered when assessing the economic viability of a mining project, and may not be converted to a mineral reserve.

A Measured Mineral Resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because a measured mineral resource has a higher level of confidence than the level of confidence of either an indicated mineral resource or an inferred mineral resource, a measured mineral resource may be converted to a proven mineral reserve or to a probable mineral reserve.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

137

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.11.2

Classification Criteria

The classification of the Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Mineral Resources was based on a combination of geological confidence, data quality, and grade continuity. The most relevant factors used in the classification process were as follows:

•

Density of conditioning data.

•

Level of confidence in the geological interpretation, which is a result of the extensive re-logging of drill chips. The observed stratigraphic horizons are easily identifiable along strike and across the deposit, which provides confidence in the geological and mineralization continuity.

•

Continuity of mineralization.

Resource classification was determined using a multiple-pass strategy that consisted of a sequence of runs that flagged each block, when a block first met the search restrictions of that run. With each subsequent pass, the search restrictions were decreased, and therefore, represented a decrease in confidence and classification from the previous run. During each run, a search ellipsoid centred and orientated as described in Section 4.8 had its ranges modified (Table 14.10) and the number of composites and drill holes found within the run were used to determine if the restrictions described in Table 14.10 for that run were met. The runs were executed in sequence from Run 1 to Run 3. Classification was then determined by relating the run number that each block is flagged to: Measured (Run 1), Indicated (Run 2) and Inferred (Run 3).

Table 14.10. Interpolation Search Restrictions.

Zone	Run No.	Classification	Min No. Holes	Min No. Comp	Search Ellipsoid Range Multiplier	Major Range	Minor Range	Vertical Range
Good Hope	Run 1	Measured	3	12	2/3	165	95	40
	Run 2	Indicated	2	2	1	250	140	60
	Run 3	Inferred	1	1	2	500	280	120
Gold Ace	Run 2	Indicated	3	12	1	220	120	30
Gold Ace	Run 3	Inferred	1	1	2	440	240	60

APEX personnel visually validated the results and believe them to be reasonable given the drilling density. However, a small portion of blocks at the northern (greater than 6500 N) and southern (less than 2750 N) extents of the Good Hope Deposit were manually adjusted to Inferred as there is insufficient drilling density to justify higher confidence classifications.

14.12

Evaluation of Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction

Reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction assume open pit mining methods and heap leach processing. The unconstrained resource block model was subjected to several pit optimization scenarios to look at the prospects for eventual economic extraction. The criteria in Table 14.11 and the Datamine Studio MaxiPit optimization software were used in creating the conceptual open pit shell.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

138

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.11. Parameters for Pit Optimization for Mineral Resource Estimate.

Parameter	Unit (Imperial)	Cost (Imperial)	Unit (Metric)	Cost (Metric)
Gold Price	US$/oz	1,700	US$/g	54.656
Gold Metallurgical Recovery	%	80	%	80
Pit Wall Angles	°	48-58	°	48-58
Mining Cost	US$/st	2.00	US$/tonne	2.20
Processing Rate	Mst/a	3	Mtonne/a	2.7
Processing Cost	US$/st	$5.50	US$/tonne	$6.06
G & A Cost	US$/st	0.75	US$/tonne	0.80
Cut-off Grade (break even)	oz/st	0.0047	g/tonne	0.158
Royalty	%	3	%	3

Parameter	Unit (Imperial)	Cost (Imperial)	Unit (Metric)	Cost (Metric)
Gold Price	US$/oz	1,700	US$/g	54.656
Gold Metallurgical Recovery	%	80	%	80
Pit Wall Angles	°	48-58	°	48-58
Mining Cost	US$/st	2.00	US$/tonne	2.20
Processing Rate	Mst/a	3	Mtonne/a	2.7
Processing Cost	US$/st	$5.50	US$/tonne	$6.06
G & A Cost	US$/st	0.75	US$/tonne	0.80
Cut-off Grade (break even)	oz/st	0.0047	g/tonne	0.158
Royalty	%	3	%	3

The criteria used in the pit optimizer were considered reasonable for Nevada heap leach deposits. The volume and tonnage for the reported resources within the $1,700/oz optimized pit shell represents approximately 88% of the total volume and tonnage of the unconstrained block model which utilized a lower gold cut-off of 0.2 ppm Au (0.006 oz/st Au) for the Mineral Resource statement.

The MRE was estimated within three-dimensional (3D) solids representing the Low Grade and High Grade mineralized estimation domains. Grade was estimated into a percent style block model with a block size of 20 ft (X) by 20 ft (Y) by 20 ft (Z). Block were assigned density samples for a given formation for the ore and waste blocks. Grade estimation of gold was performed using OK. For the purposes of the pit shell optimization, blocks along the estimation domain boundaries that partially contain waste were diluted by estimating a waste value using composites within a transition zone along the outer boundary of the estimation domains. The final diluted gold grade for the diluted model assigned to each block is a volume-weighted average of the estimated gold and waste grade values. The MRE is reported within that pit shell and using the diluted gold grades.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

139

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

14.13

Mineral Resource Statement

The Reward Project MRE has an effective date of May 31^st, 2022 and is reported in accordance with the CSA’s NI 43-101 rules for disclosure and has been estimated using the CIM “Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines” dated November 29^th, 2019 and CIM “Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” dated May 10^th, 2014 and in accordance with the requirements of SK 1300.

The MRE was estimated by Mr. Warren Black, M.Sc., P.Geo. and audited by Mr. Steven Nicholls, BA.Sc., MAIG, both APEX employees. The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P.Geol., P.Geo.

The Measured and Indicated resources are reported in Table 14.12 using a base case cut-off of 0.2 ppm Au (0.006 oz/st Au). The Inferred resource base case is reported in Table 14.13 using a base case cut-off of 0.2 ppm Au (0.006 oz/st Au). Sensitivity cases ranging from 0.1 ppm Au (0.003 oz/st Au) to 0.5 ppm Au (0.015 oz/st Au) are included in the Table 14.14 and Table 14.15 for Good Hope and in Table 14.16 and Table 14.17 for Gold Ace. Table 14.18 and Table 14.19 provides the sensitivity case for the combined Good Hope and Gold Ace estimates. In each sensitivity table, the 0.2 ppm Au (0.006 oz/st Au) base case is bolded.

Table 14.12. Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement.

Classification	Au Cutoff Grade (g/tonne)	Tonnage (metric tonnes)	Average Au Grade (g/tonne)	Contained Au (troy ounces)
Good Hope Zone
Measured	0.2	6,185,000	0.855	169,900
Indicated	0.2	10,757,000	0.694	240,000
M & I Total	0.2	16,942,000	0.753	409,900
Gold Ace Zone
Indicated	0.2	828,000	0.632	16,800
Reward (Combined Good Hope and Gold Ace)
Measured	0.2	6,185,000	0.855	169,900
Indicated	0.2	11,584,000	0.689	256,800
M & I Total	0.2	17,770,000	0.747	426,700

Notes:

Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,700/oz and a recovery of 80% for Au were utilized.

Gold Price used in the mineral resource estimate was based on a review of the 3 year trailing average.

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.20/tonne.

Processing and general and administration are US$6.06/tonne and US$0.83/tonne per tonne processed respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes and are partially diluted.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

The effective date of the Reward mineral resource estimate is May 31st, 2022.

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

140

Technical Report - Mineral Resource Estimate Reward Project, Nye County, Nevada, USA

Table 14.13. Inferred Mineral Resource Statement.

Classification	Au Cutoff Grade (ppm)	Tonnage (metric tonnes)	Average Au Grade (ppm)	Contained Au (troy ounces)
Good Hope Zone
Inferred	0.2	294,000	0.555	5,300
Gold Ace Zone
Inferred	0.2	931,000	0.729	21,800
Reward (Combined Good Hope and Gold Ace)
Inferred	0.2	1,225,000	0.687	27,100

Notes:

Oxide estimated Mineral Resources are reported within a pit shell using the Lerch Grossman algorithm, a gold price of US$1,700/oz and a recovery of 80% for Au were utilized.

Gold price used in mineral resource estimate was based on a review of the 3 year trailing average.

Mining costs for mineralized material and waste are US$2.20/tonne.

Processing and general and administration are US$6.06/tonne and US$0.83/tonne per tonne processed respectively.

Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute as shown.

Estimated Mineral Resources are stated as in situ dry metric tonnes and are partially diluted.

The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

The effective date of the Reward mineral resource estimate is May 31st, 2022.

Table 14.14. Sensitivity Table, Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Good Hope (base case is bolded).

Classification	Au Cutoff Grade (ppm)	Tonnage (metric tonnes)	Average Au Grade (ppm)	Contained Au (troy ounces)
Measured	0.1	6,672,000	0.804	172,400
	0.2	6,185,000	0.855	169,900
	0.3	5,269,000	0.960	162,500
	0.4	4,446,000	1.073	153,300
	0.5	3,866,000	1.167	145,000
Indicated	0.1	12,063,000	0.636	246,600
	0.2	10,757,000	0.694	240,000
	0.3	8,805,000	0.792	224,300
	0.4	6,988,000	0.907	203,900
	0.5	5,706,000	1.011	185,400
Measured and Indicated	0.1	18,735,000	0.696	419,000
	0.2	16,942,000	0.753	409,900
	0.3	14,074,000	0.855	386,800
	0.4	11,434,000	0.972	357,200
	0.5	9,573,000	1.074	330,500

Effective Date: May 31^st, 2022

141