8-K - PZG - Equibles

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Date of Report (date of earliest event reported): September 8, 2023

Paramount Gold Nevada Corp.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Nevada	001-36908	98-0138393
(State or other jurisdiction<br> <br>of incorporation)	(Commission<br> <br>File No.)	(IRS Employer<br> <br>Identification No.)

665 Anderson Street

Winnemucca, Nevada 89445

(Address of principal executive offices)

(775) 625-3600

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

N/A

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (see General Instruction A.2. below):

☐	Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
☐	Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
---	---
☐	Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
---	---
☐	Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))
---	---

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class	Trading<br> <br>Symbol(s)	Name of each exchange<br> <br>on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share	PZG	NYSE American

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§ 230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§ 240.12b-2 of this chapter).

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. ☐

Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure

On September 8, 2023, Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (the “Company”) issued a press release titled “Paramount Gold completes an updated S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary for the Sleeper Gold Project”. The information set forth under this Item 7.01, including Exhibit 99.1, shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.

Item 8.01 Other Events

On September 8, 2023, Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (the “Company”) issued a technical report summary for its Sleeper Gold Project (the “Report”). The Report is filed as Exhibit 96.1 to this Current Report on Form 8-K and is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(d) Exhibits.

Exhibit<br>Number	Description
23.1	Consent of Qualified Person - RESPEC Company LLC
23.2	Consent of Qualified Person - Woods Process Services LLC
96.1	Technical Report Summary for the Sleeper Gold Project effective June 30, 2023.
99.1	Press release titled “Paramount Gold completes an updated S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary for the Sleeper Gold Project”
104	Cover Page Interactive Data File (embedded within the Inline XBRL document).

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, hereunto duly authorized.

PARAMOUNT GOLD NEVADA CORP.
By:	/s/ Carlo Buffone
Name:	Carlo Buffone
Title:	Chief Financial Officer

Dated: September 8, 2023

EX-23.1

Exhibit 23.1

LOGO

LOGO

210 SOUTH ROCK BOULEVARD RENO, NV 89502 775.056.5700 LOGO

respec.com

Consent of RESPEC Company LLC In connection with the Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”), the undersigned consents to: i. the filing of the technical report summary titled "Technical Report Summary for the Sleeper Gold-Silver Project, Humboldt County, Nevada, USA" (the "TRS"), with an effective date of June 30, 2023, as an exhibit to and referenced in the Form 8-K; ii. the incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 (the "Form 10-K"), and in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (333-238803) and Form S-8 (No. 333-205024 and No. 333- 262857) (the "Registration Statements"); m. the use of and references to our name in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and iv. the information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by us, that we supervised the preparation of, and/or that was reviewed and approved by us, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements. RESPEC Company, LLC, is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, the following Sections of the TRS: All sections of the report excluding section 1.4, section 10.0 and section 14.0 Dated 8^th^ day of September, 2023 By: /s/ RESPEC Company, LLC Name: /s/ Thomas L. Dyer RSl(RNO)-M0144.21001REVS CategoryC

EX-23.2

Exhibit 23.2

Woods Process Services LLC

PO Box 51047,

Sparks NV 89435

Consent of Jeffrey L Woods, SME MMSA .

In connection with the Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”), the undersigned consents to:

i.	the filing of the technical report summary titled “Technical Report Summary for the Sleeper Gold-Silver<br>Project, Humboldt County, Nevada, USA.” (the “TRS”), with an effective date of June 30, 2023, as an exhibit to and referenced in the Form 8-K;
ii.	the incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form<br>10-K for Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 (the “Form 10-K”), and in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (333-238803) and Form S-8 (No. 333-205024 and<br>No. 333-262857) (the “Registration Statements”);
---	---
iii.	the use of and references to our name in connection with the TRS, Form<br>8-K, Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and
---	---
iv.	the information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared<br>by us, that we supervised the preparation of, and/or that was reviewed and approved by us, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.
---	---

Woods Process Services LLC. is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, the following Sections of the TRS: 1.4, 10.0, 14.0 etc

Dated September 8, 2023

By: Woods Process Services LLC

Name: /s/ Jeffrey L Woods SME MMSA

EX-96.1

Exhibit 96.1

TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY FOR THE

SLEEPER GOLD-SILVER PROJECT,

HUMBOLDT COUNTY, NEVADA, USA

LOGO

TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY FOR THE SLEEPER GOLD-SILVER PROJECT,

HUMBOLDT COUNTY, NEVADA, USA

SK1300 REPORT RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 7

LOGO

PREPARED FOR

Paramount Gold Nevada

665 Anderson Street

Winnemucca, Nevada, USA 89445

PREPARED BY

RESPEC

210 South Rock Boulevard

Reno, Nevada, USA 89502

EFFECTIVE DATE:JUNE 30, 2023<br> <br><br> <br>REPORT DATE:AUGUST 31, 2023<br> <br><br> <br>Project Number M0144.21001<br><br><br><br> <br>RESPEC.COM

LOGO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY			1
	1.1	Property Description and Ownership		1
	1.2	Geology and Mineralization		1
	1.3	Status of Exploration, Development and Operations		2
	1.4	Metallurgical Testing and Mineral Processing		2
	1.5	Mineral Resource Estimate		4
	1.6	Conclusions and Recommendations		5
2.0	INTRODUCTION			6
	2.1	Sources of Information		6
	2.2	Personal Inspections		6
	2.3	Effective Date		7
	2.4	Units of Measure and Frequently Used Acronyms		7
3.0	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION			10
	3.1	Property Location		10
	3.2	Property Area and Claim Types		11
	3.3	Mineral Rights		11
	3.4	Significant Encumbrances and Permitting		12
	3.5	Royalties		13
	3.6	Significant Factors and Risks		14
4.0	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY			15
	4.1	Topography, Elevation and Vegetation		15
	4.2	Access to the Property		15
	4.3	Climate and Length of Operating Season		15
	4.4	Infrastructure		15
5.0	HISTORY			16
	5.1	Historical Production		16
		5.1.1	Early mining: 1914 to 1982	16
		5.1.2	AMAX: 1982 to 1996	16
	5.2	Historical Exploration		17
		5.2.1	AMAX 1982 - 1998	21
		5.2.2	X-Cal Resources Ltd 1993 - 1997	21
		5.2.3	Placer Dome 1997	22
		5.2.4	X-Cal 1998 - 2003	22
		5.2.5	New Sleeper Gold 2004 - 2006	23
		5.2.6	X-Cal 2006-2010	24
		5.2.7	Evolving Gold 2007 - 2008	27
i<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

		5.2.8	Montezuma Mines 2009-2012	28
		5.2.9	Paramount Gold and Silver Corp. Acquisition 2010	28
	5.3	Historical Mineral Resource Estimates		28
6.0	GEOLOGIC SETTING, DEPOSIT TYPE, AND MINERALIZATION			30
	6.1	Regional Geologic Setting		30
	6.2	District and Local Geology		30
	6.3	Mineralization		37
	6.4	Deposit Types		39
7.0	EXPLORATION			41
	7.1	Paramount Geophysical Surveys 2010 - 2013		41
		7.1.1	2012 Gravity 2012	41
		7.1.2	Induced Polarization Survey 2012	42
		7.1.3	Airborne Magnetic Survey 2015	42
	7.2	Paramount Drilling 2010 - 2013		43
		7.2.1	2010-2011 Paramount Drill program	44
		7.2.2	2012-2013 Paramount Drill program	45
		7.2.3	2021 Paramount Drilling	45
	7.3	Paramount Exploration Assessment 2020		46
	7.4	Hydrogeology		46
	7.5	Geotechnical Data		46
8.0	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, AND SECURITY			47
	8.1	Historical Sample Preparation, Analysis, Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures and<br>Historical Sample Security		47
		8.1.1	AMAX, Placer DOME, and X-Cal 1983 - 2002	47
		8.1.2	New Sleeper Gold 2004 - 2005	48
		8.1.3	X-Cal 2003 - 2007	49
		8.1.4	Evolving Gold 2009	51
		8.1.5	Montezuma Mines 2011 - 2012	51
	8.2	Paramount Sample Preparation, Analyses, Sample Security and Quality Assurance/Quality Control<br>Procedures		51
	8.3	Quality Assurance/Quality Control Results		54
		8.3.1	X-Cal Historical Quality Assurance/Quality Results	58
			8.3.1.1 CRMs 2003-2007	58
			8.3.1.2 Blanks 2003 - 2007	58
			8.3.1.3 Duplicates 2003 - 2007	59
		8.3.2	Paramount Quality Assurance/Quality Control Results	63
			8.3.2.1 CRMs 2010-2013	63
			8.3.2.2 Blanks 2010-2013	66
			8.3.2.3 Paramount Duplicates	67
	8.4	Adequacy of Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security		69
ii<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

9.0	DATA VERIFICATION			70
	9.1	Site Visit		70
	9.2	Drilling Database Verification		70
		9.2.1	Phase 1 – Logic Tests	70
		9.2.2	Phase 2 – Collar, Survey and assay Verification	71
			9.2.2.1 Drill Collar Locations	71
			9.2.2.2 Down-Hole Surveys	71
			9.2.2.3 Drilling Assay Database	71
		9.2.3	Resampling Programs	72
		9.2.4	Down-Hole Contamination	73
		9.2.5	Geologic Data	74
	9.3	Adequacy of Data		74
10.0	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING			75
	10.1	Parmount Metallurgical Tests		75
		10.1.1	Test Series #1	75
		10.1.2	Test Series #2	76
	10.2	Discussion		79
		10.2.1	Test Series #1	79
		10.2.2	Test Series #2	85
	10.3	Conclusion and Recommendations		93
		10.3.1	Test Series #1	93
		10.3.2	Test Series #2	94
		10.3.3	Recovery Projections	95
		10.3.4	Hybrid Process Recommendations	95
	10.4	Summary Statement for Paramount Metallurgical testing		95
11.0	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES			96
	11.1	Introduction		96
	11.2	Database		97
		11.2.1	Drill hole Database	97
		11.2.2	Topography	98
	11.3	Deposit Modeling Relevant to Resource Estimation		98
	11.4	Geologic Modeling		99
	11.5	Oxidation Modeling		100
	11.6	Density Modeling		100
	11.7	Gold and Silver Modeling		101
		11.7.1	Mineral Domains	101
		11.7.2	Assay Coding, Capping, and Compositing	107
		11.7.3	Block Model Coding	112
		11.7.4	Grade Interpolation	113
iii<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

	11.8	Mineral Resources		115
		11.8.1	Classification	122
	11.9	Discussion of Resources		123
12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES				125
13.0 MINING METHODS				126
14.0 PROCESSING AND RECOVERY METHODS				127
15.0 INFRASTRUCTURE				128
16.0 MARKET STUDIES				129
17.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS ORGROUPS				130
18.0 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS				131
19.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS				132
20.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES				133
21.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION				134
22.0 INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS				135
	22.1	Adequecy of the data used in Estimating the project Mineral Resources		135
	22.2	Geology and Mineralization		135
	22.3	Metallurgy and Processing		136
	22.4	Mineral Resources, Mining Methods, and Mine Planning		136
	22.5	Exploration Potential		136
23.0 RECOMMENDATIONS				137
	23.1	Resource Update and Preliminary Economic Analysis		137
	23.2	Infill Drilling Program		137
	23.3	Metallurgical Test Work		137
	23.4	Pre-Feasibility Study		138
24.0 REFERENCES				139
25.0 RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT				142
APPENDIX A LIST OF UNPATENTED LODE MINING CLAIMS OF THE SLEEPER PROPERTY				1
iv<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE	PAGE
Table 1-1 Sleeper Total In-Pit<br>Gold and Silver Resources – Measured & Indicated	4
Table 1-2. Cost Estimate for the Recommended Program	5
Table 2-1. List of Units, Acronyms, and Abbreviations	7
Table 3-1. Summary of Annual Property Holding Costs	12
Table 5-1. Summary of Sleeper Deposit Drilling in RESPEC<br>Database	18
Table 5-2. Geophysical Surveys Conducted at the Sleeper<br>Property	20
Table 5-3. 2004 and 2005 Drill Footage Summary	23
Table 5-4. Summary of Historical Mineral Resource Estimates, Sleeper<br>Property	29
Table 7-1. Paramount Drilling in 2010 - 2013	43
Table 8-1. Paramount Blank Materials for 2010-2013	53
Table 8-2. Summary Counts of Sleeper QA/QC Analyses	56
Table 8-3: Summary of Results for<br>X-Cal Historical and Paramount Field Duplicates	57
Table 8-4. Summary of Results for Blanks 2003 - 2013	58
Table 8-5. X-Cal Blank<br>Failures and Preceding Samples 2003-2007	58
Table 8-6: CRMs used by Paramount	63
Table 8-7. Summary of Sleeper Gold Results for Certified Reference<br>Materials 2010-2013	64
Table 8-8. Gold Failures in the 2010-2013 Drill<br>Program	64
Table 8-9. Summary of Sleeper Silver Results for Certified Reference<br>Materials, 2010-2013	66
Table 10-1. Waste Dump Composite<br>Make-Up Information	79
Table 10-2. Summary Metallurgical Results, Agitated Cyanidation Tests,<br>Sleeper Waste Dump Composites, P80 19mm
Feeds	80
Table 10-3. Summary Metallurgical Results, Bulk Sulfide Flotation<br>Tests (for Ro. Concs.), North Waste Dump
Composites, P80 75µm Feeds	80
Table 10-4. West Wood and Facilities Composite Make-Up Information	81
Table 10-5. Summary Metallurgical Results, Agitated Cyanidation Tests,<br>Westwood and Facilities Core Composites,
P80 19mm Feeds and<br>P80 75µm Feeds	82
Table 10-6. Summary Metallurgical Results, Bulk Sulfide Flotation<br>Tests (for Ro. Concs.), Westwood and Facilities Core
Composites, P80 75µm Feeds	83
Table 10-7. Summary Column Percolation Leach Test<br>Results,	85
Table 10-8. Sleeper Project Composite<br>Make-Up Information	86
Table 10-9. Metallurgical Scope of Work Summary, Sleeper Project Core<br>Composites	87
Table 10-10. Summary Metallurgical Results, Bottle Roll Tests, Sleeper<br>Project Core Composites, Varied Feed Sizes	87
Table 10-11. Summary Metallurgical Results, Column Leach Tests,<br>Sleeper Project Core Composites, P80 37.5 and P80
19mm Feeds (BT Results Included for<br>Comparison)	89
v<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Table 10-12. Summary Metallurgical Results, Cyanidation (CIL) Tests,<br>Sleeper Drill Core Composites, 80%-45µm Feed
Size	90
Table 10-13. Summary Metallurgical Results, Continuous Column Leach<br>Tests, Sleeper Drill Core Composites	91
Table 11-1. Summary of Drilling in the Database for the Sleeper<br>Deposit Resource Estimate	97
Table 11-2. Descriptive Statistics of Sample Assays in Sleeper Drill<br>hole Database	98
Table 11-3. Sleeper Deposit Applied Densities and Tonnage<br>Factors	100
Table 11-4. Approximate Grade Ranges of Gold and Silver<br>Domains	101
Table 11-5. Sleeper Gold and Silver Assay Caps by<br>Domain	107
Table 11-6. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Coded Gold<br>Assays	107
Table 11-7. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Coded Silver<br>Assays	109
Table 11-8. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Gold<br>Composites	111
Table 11-9. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Silver<br>Composites	112
Table 11-10. Sleeper Search-Ellipse Orientations and Maximum Search<br>Distances by Estimation Area	113
Table 11-11. Sleeper Estimation Parameters	114
Table 11-12. Pit Optimization Parameters	115
Table 11-13. Sleeper Gold and Silver Mineral Resources	117
Table 23-1 Paramount’s Recommended Work Program	137
vi<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE	PAGE
Figure 3-1. Location Map for the Sleeper Property	10
Figure 3-2: Sleeper Property Location Map	12
Figure 3-3. Map of Sleeper Property Subject to Applicable Production<br>Royalties	14
Figure 5-1: Map of Historical Drilling Locations	19
Figure 6-1: Regional Geologic Map of the Sleeper Project<br>Area	32
Figure 6-2: Stratigraphic Column for the Sleeper<br>Property	34
Figure 6-3: Geologic Map of the Sleeper Volcanic<br>Center	36
Figure 6-4: Cross-Section looking North through the Sleeper mine<br>area	37
Figure 6-5: Schematic Cross-Section Model of the Sleeper<br>Deposit	39
Figure 6-6: Schematic Model of Low-Sulfidation Epithermal<br>Precious-Metal Systems	40
Figure 7-1: Map of Drill Holes Within the Sleeper<br>Deposit	44
Figure 7-2: Map of 2021 Drill Collar Locations	46
Figure 8-1: X-Cal Gold in<br>Blanks and Preceding Samples 2003-2007	59
Figure 8-2: X-Cal Gold Core<br>Preparation Duplicates, Relative Differences 2003-2007	60
Figure 8-3: X-Cal Gold Core<br>Preparation Duplicates, Relative Differences 2003-2007	60
Figure 8-4: X-Cal Gold RC<br>Field Duplicates, Relative Differences 2003-2007	61
Figure 8-5: X-Cal Gold RC<br>Field Duplicates, Absolute Values of the Relative Differences 2003-2007	62
Figure 8-6. Gold Control Chart for<br>MEG-Au.09.02	65
Figure 8-7 Gold Values of Paramount Coarse Blanks and Preceding<br>Samples	67
Figure 8-8: Paramount Gold RC Field Duplicates, Relative Differences<br>2010-2013	68
Figure 8-9: Paramount Gold Core Field Duplicates, Relative Differences<br>2010-2013	68
Figure 11-1. East-West Cross-Section 4575545N Showing Gold Domains and<br>Geology	103
Figure 11-2. East-West Cross-Section 4575545N Showing Silver Domains<br>and Geology	104
Figure 11-3. East-West Cross-Section 45756175N Showing Gold Domains<br>and Geology	105
Figure 11-4.. East-West Cross-Section 45756175N Showing Silver Domains<br>and Geology	106
Figure 11-5. East-West Cross-Section 4575545N Showing Gold Grades in<br>the Block Model	118
Figure 11-6. East-West Cross-Section 4575545N Showing Silver Grades in<br>the Block Model	119
Figure 11-7. East-West Cross-Section 4576175N Showing Gold Grades in<br>the Block Model	120
Figure 11-8. East-West Cross-Section 4576175N Showing Silver Grades in<br>the Block Model	121
vii<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

RESPEC Company LLC (“RESPEC”) has prepared this technical report summary on the Sleeper gold-silver project at the request of Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (“Paramount”), a United States (“U.S.”) listed company (PZG: NYSE American) based in Winnemucca, Nevada. The Sleeper gold-silver project is located in Humboldt County, Nevada, and was the site of historical open pit mining from 1986 to 1996 when a total of approximately 1.66 million ounces of gold and 2.3 million ounces of silver were produced. This report provides a technical summary and a current estimate of gold and silver mineral resources for the project under the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Regulation S-K.

1.1	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND OWNERSHIP

The Sleeper property consists of 2,474 unpatented Federal lode mining claims covering approximately 18,177 hectares in parts of Sections 3 to 11, 14 to 23 and 26 to 36, inclusive, in Township 40 North, Range 35 East, Sections 1 to 12 15 to 21 and 29-33, Township 39 North, Range 35 East, Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12, Township 38 North, Range 34 East, Sections 2, 4, 8, 16 and 28, Township 37 North, Range 35 East, Sections 24 and 36, Township 37 North, Range 34 East, and Section 2, Township 36 North, Range 34 East, inclusive, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, Humboldt County, Nevada. The main historical mine workings are centered at Lat: 41° 20’ N, Long: 118° 03’ W.

Paramount and two 100%-owned subsidiaries, Sleeper Mining LLC and New Sleeper LLC., own 100% of the mining claims comprising the Sleeper property. Ownership of the unpatented mining claims is in the name of the holder (locator), subject to the overall title of the United States of America. Under the Mining Law of 1872, the locator has the right to explore, develop, and mine minerals on unpatented mining claims without payments of production royalties to the U.S. government. The 2,474 unpatented lode claims include rights to all locatable subsurface minerals. Currently, annual claim-maintenance fees of $165 per claim are the only federal payments related to unpatented mining claims. As of the effective date of this report, these fees have been paid in full to September 1, 2024.

1.2	GEOLOGY AND MINERALIZATION

The Sleeper gold-silver deposit was discovered by AMAX Gold Inc. (“AMAX”) in late 1984. The Sleeper mine was constructed by AMAX in the mid-1980s as an open pit operation that produced approximately 1.658 million ounces of gold from 1986 to the end of production in 1996. Silver production totaled approximately 2.3 million ounces.

The deposit is located on the western flank of the Slumbering Hills and is largely covered by Quaternary gravels, alluvium, colluvium, and a surficial sequence of eolian sand. Gold-silver mineralization is situated nearly entirely in the hanging wall of a major, northwest-trending, west-dipping range-bounding normal fault that separates Mesozoic metasedimentary rocks of the Auld Lang Syne Group in the footwall from middle Miocene lavas, flow breccia, and lesser

LOGO

RESPEC.COM	RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

epiclastic and tuffaceous rocks in the hanging wall. The principal host rocks for the deposit are a sequence of middle Miocene basalt and rhyolite lavas, domes, and small-volume tuffs.

Prior to mining, the Sleeper deposit consisted of four spatially overlapping types of gold-silver mineralization: a) banded quartz-adularia-electrum-(sericite) veins; b) silica-pyrite-marcasite cemented breccias; c) quartz-pyrite-marcasite stockworks; and d) alluvial gold-silver placers in Pliocene gravels.

The Sleeper veins generally dip to the west at moderate to high angles, but some secondary hanging-wall offshoots of the principal vein structures dip steeply to the east. Significant zones of mineralization at Sleeper extended for about 1,500 meters along strike, about 600 meters of width, and from near the pre-mining surface to depths of more than 610 meters. At least eleven veins with bonanza grades were mined historically. The Sleeper Main vein produced more than 0.5 Moz of gold from a single bonanza ore shoot, which had a strike length of 850 meters and width ranging from 0.3 to 4.6 meters. Most discrete bonanza zones consisted of a series of sheeted chalcedonic quartz veins distributed over cumulative widths of 10 to 25 meters. Individual veins ranged in thickness from a few centimeters to locally 5 meters.

The post-mining Sleeper deposit is predominantly characterized by extensive, low-grade stockwork mineralization hosted within the Sleeper rhyolite and underlying basalts. The stockwork mineralization has numerous, randomly oriented quartz-pyrite-marcasite veinlets peripheral to mid- to high- grade veins and breccias. The mid-grade mineralization consists of clast-supported breccias and narrow veins which extend down-dip from previously mined high-grade veins. These mid-grade narrow veins typically assay between 3 and 34 g Au/t, whereas the stockwork assays usually result in grades less than 3 g Au/t.

The West Wood area to the southwest of the Sleeper pit contains high-grade mineralization within a hydrothermal breccia body associated with faults and a felsic porphyritic intrusive. This zone likely represents a down-faulted block that was continuous or parallel to the West vein mined in the pit. The West Wood breccia is highly silicified with abundant sulfides, but localized veins within the breccia can exceed 100 g Au/t.

1.3	STATUS OF EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS

Paramount is not engaged in development or operations at the Sleeper project as of the effective date of this report. Exploration conducted by Paramount from 2010 through 2013, and in 2021, is summarized in Section 7.0.

1.4	METALLURGICAL TESTING AND MINERAL PROCESSING

The oxide and transition materials of the various Sleeper areas are amenable to heap leach processing with an expected recovery:

2<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Material Type	****	Heap Leach Recovery
	Au		Ag
Alluvium		72%		8%
Mine Dumps		72%		43%
Facilities		79%		8%
Mixed		68%		20%
Sleeper		85%		10%
Westwood		72%		9%

For the refractory ore types, a hybrid processing method is recommended. This methos involves grinding the material suitable for froth flotation to generate a flotation concentrate. Treatment of the concentrate by biooxidation followed by cyanidation is expected to recover 75% of the gold and 48% of the silver. Cyanide leaching of the flotation tailings is expected to recover an additional 15 % and 22 % of the gold and silver respectively, for an overall recovery of 90% of gold and 70% of silver of the flotation feed material.

Process	Au Recovery	Ag Recovery
Flotation Rec	80%	60%
Concentrate<br><br><br>Biox/Leach	94%	80%
Net Flot/Biox/Leach	75%	48%
Flot Tails to Leach	20%	40%
Flot Tails Leach Rec	75%	55%
Net Flot Tails Lech Rec	15%	22%
Combined Flot<br><br><br>Con/Tails Rec	90%	70%
3<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

1.5	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

Measured and Indicated resources, effective June 30, 2023, consist of a total of 163,239,000 tonnes with an average gold grade of 0.361 g Au/t and an average silver grade of 4.05 g Ag/t, for 1,897,000 contained ounces of gold and 21,231,000 contained ounces of silver. The resources are constrained within an optimized pit, reflecting the potential for open pit mining and heap-leach processing of the present Sleeper deposit. The in-pit resources are reported at cutoffs of 0.14 g Au/t for oxide and mixed materials, and 0.17 g Au/t for sulfide material. The cutoff for unoxidized materials reflects the potential for flotation with biooxidation processing.

Table 1-1 Sleeper Total In-Pit Gold and Silver Resources – Measured, Indicated & Inferred

(Metric units)

	Cutoff
	g Au/T	K Tonnes	g Au/T	K oz Au	g Ag/T	K oz Ag
Measured	Variable	4,902	0.537	85	3.61	570
Indicated	Variable	158,337	0.356	1,812	4.06	20,661
Inferred	Variable	119,909	0.315	1,214	2.45	9,454

(Imperial units)

	Cutoff
	Oz Au/t	K tons	Oz Au/t	K oz Au	Oz Ag/t	K oz Ag
Measured	Variable	5,403	0.016	85	0.105	570
Indicated	Variable	174,535	0.010	1,812	0.118	20,661
Inferred	Variable	132,176	0.009	1,214	0.071	9,454

Notes:

•	The estimate of mineral resources was done by RESPEC in metric tonnes.
•	Mineral Resources comprised all model blocks at a 0.14 g Au/t<br>cut-off for Oxide and Mixed, 0.17 g Au/t for Sulfide within an optimized pit and 0.14 g Au/t for dumps.
---	---
•	The average grades of the Mineral Resources are comprised of the weighted average of Oxide,<br>Mixed, Sulfide, and dumps mineral resources. Alluvium mineralized materials are not included in the mineral resources.
---	---
•	Mineral Resources within the optimized pit are block-diluted tabulations. Dumps mineral resources<br>are undiluted tabulations.
---	---
•	Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
---	---
•	Mineral Resources potentially amenable to open pit mining methods are reported using a gold price<br>of US$1,800/oz, a silver price ofUS$22/oz, a throughput rate of 30,000 tonnes/day, assumed metallurgical recoveries of 84.6% for Au and 52.3% for Ag, mining costs of US$2.40/tonne mined, heap leach processing costs of US$3.08/tonne processed,<br>flotation with biooxidation processing costs of US$8.52/tonne processed, general and administrative costs of $0.46/tonne processed. Gold and silver commodity prices were selected based on analysis of the three-year running average at the end of July<br>2023.
---	---
•	The effective date of the estimate is June 30, 2023.
---	---
•	Rounding may result in apparent discrepancies between tonnes, grade, and contained metal content.
---	---
4<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

1.6	CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The current Sleeper mineral resources are principally comprised of the substantial volumes of the lower-grade mineralization that envelops the Sleeper veins both vertically and laterally. This lower-grade envelope is dominated by stockwork mineralization, but moderate- to high-grade mineralization within it includes the down-dip extensions of the mined-out Sleeper high-grade veins as well as other secondary and tertiary structural zones that host hydrothermal breccias of moderate grades. The unmined West Wood occurrence also lies within the low-grade halo mineralization. West Wood is comprised of mid- to high-grade gold mineralization hosted within an easterly dipping, sulfidic hydrothermal breccia that is related to a felsic porphyritic intrusion, and it lies to the southwest of the AMAX pit limits.

It is recommended to advance the current technical report summary to an initial assessment (“IA”) to assess the preliminary project economics. If the results of the recommended IA are favorable, an infill drill program of approximately 7,600 meters of drilling is recommended. However, RESPEC recommends that core drilling be substituted for a portion of the RC drilling due to the emerging understanding of the importance of narrow high-grade veins and steeply dipping structural controls to the remaining higher-grade mineralization, and to avoid the demonstrated down-hole contamination that has occurred below the water table. Core drilling would also provide opportunities to collect information regarding geotechnical data, hydrology, metallurgical testing, and validate historical RC drilling. Increased drill density is required in some areas to provide confidence needed to potentially upgrade Inferred resources to Measured and Indicated classifications.

Table 1-2. Cost Estimate for the Recommended Program

Category	Estimated Cost ($)
Initial Assessment	$150,000
Infill RC Drilling (7,600 meters at $132/m)	$1,000,000
Metallurgy including biooxidation test work	$250,000
Pre-Feasibility Study	$2,500,000
Total	$3,900,000
5<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

2.0	INTRODUCTION

RESPEC Company LLC (“RESPEC”) has prepared this technical report summary on the Sleeper gold-silver project at the request of Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (“Paramount”), a United States (“U.S.”) listed company (PZG: NYSE American) based in Winnemucca, Nevada. The Sleeper gold-silver project is located in the Awakening mining district of Humboldt County, Nevada, and was the site of historical open pit mining from 1986 to 1996 when a total of approximately 1.66 million ounces of gold and 2.3 million ounces of silver were produced.

The purpose of this report is to provide a technical summary and an updated, current estimate of gold and silver mineral resources for the project in support of Paramount’s regulatory obligations under the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and Code of Federal Regulations subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K (“S-K 1300”). The Sleeper property is considered a material property under S-K 1300. This technical report summary supersedes the most recent technical reports and estimated resources for the Sleeper project prepared for Paramount by RESPEC in 2022.

2.1	SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The scope of this technical report summary included a review of pertinent technical reports and data provided to RESPEC by Paramount relative to the general setting, geology, project history, exploration activities and results, methodology, quality assurance, interpretations, drilling programs, and metallurgy. RESPEC has fully relied on the data and information provided by Paramount for the completion of this report, drawing most significantly on the reports of Wilson et al. (2015) and Wilson et al. (2017), as well as other sources of information cited specifically in portions of this technical report summary and listed in Section 24 References. RESPEC has also utilized information derived from work done by Paramount’s predecessor operators of the project, and on observations made by RESPEC geologists during their site visits. RESPEC has reviewed much of the available data and has made judgments about the general reliability of the underlying data. Where deemed either inadequate or unreliable, the data was either eliminated from use or procedures were modified to account for lack of confidence in that specific information. RESPEC has made such investigations as deemed necessary in their professional judgment to be able to reasonably present the conclusions discussed herein.

2.2	PERSONAL INSPECTIONS

RESPEC conducted multiple site visits to the Sleeper project guided by Mr. Glen Van Treek, Mr. Michael McGinnis, and/or other representatives of Paramount on five separate occasions: April 19 and November 18, 2021, March 2 and May 11, 2022, and August 14, 2023. RESPEC examined the property infrastructure, reviewed representative drill core and RC cuttings, evaluated the status of drill sample pulps stored on site, and measured the coordinates of selected drillhole collar locations. The geology of the Sleeper deposit was reviewed through an examination of drill core from selected drill holes and printouts of Paramount’s cross-sections.

6<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

2.3	EFFECTIVE DATE

The effective date of the current mineral resources is June 30, 2023, and the effective date of this technical report summary is August 31, 2023. In this report, measurements are generally reported in metric units. Where information was originally reported in Imperial units (U.S. customary units), RESPEC has made the conversions as shown below. Units of measure, and conversion factors used in this report include:

2.4	UNITS OF MEASURE AND FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS
Linear Measure
---	---	---
1 centimeter	= 0.3937 inch
1 meter	= 3.2808 feet	= 1.0936 yard
1 kilometer	= 0.6214 mile
Area Measure
1 hectare	= 2.471 acres	= 0.0039 square mile
Capacity Measure (liquid)
1 liter	= 0.2642 US gallons
Weight
1 tonne (metric)	= 1.1023 short tons	= 2,205 pounds
1 kilogram	= 2.205 pounds
1 troy ounce (oz)	=31.1034768 grams

Currency: Unless otherwise indicated, all references to dollars ($) in this report refer to currency of the United States.

Frequently used acronyms and abbreviations are listed in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1. List ofUnits, Acronyms, and Abbreviations

AA	atomic<br>absorption spectrometry
Ag	silver
Ai	abrasion<br>index
Au	gold
AV	absolute<br>value
BWi	bond<br>ball mill work index
cm	centimeters
CBA	complete<br>bouguer anomaly
core	diamond<br>core-drilling method
CRMs	certified reference material
^o^C	degrees<br>centigrade
°F	degrees Fahrenheit
7<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Table 2.1. List of Units, Acronyms, and Abbreviations (continued)

ft	foot or<br>feet
g Au/t	grams<br>per tonne
g/cm^3^	grams<br>per cubic centimeter
g/cc	grams<br>per cubic centimeter
gpm	gallons<br>per minute
hp	horsepower
Hz	Hertz
ICP	inductively coupled plasma analytical method
ICP-AES	inductively coupled plasma - atomic emission spectroscopy method
ICP-OES	inductively coupled plasma - optical emission spectroscopy method
ICP-MS	inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry method
ID	inverse<br>distance
IP	induced<br>polarization
in	inch or<br>inches
kg	kilograms
km	kilometers
kv	kilovolt
kW	kilowatt
lbs	pounds
LCL	lower<br>control limit
LSL	lower<br>specification limit
µm	micron
m	meters
Ma	million<br>years old
mi	mile or<br>miles
mm	millimeters
Moz	million<br>troy ounces
MT	magnetotelluric
NN	nearest<br>neighbor
NSR	net<br>smelter return
oz	troy<br>ounce
oz Au/ton	troy<br>ounce per imperial short ton
opt	troy<br>ounce per imperial short ton
8<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Table 2.1. List of Units, Acronyms, and Abbreviations (continued)

P80	nominal<br>size at 80 percent
ppm	parts<br>per million
QA/QC	quality<br>assurance and quality control
R or Res	resistivity
RC	reverse-circulation drilling method
Resource Pit	optimized pit shell for the Sleeper Deposit Resources
RPD	relative<br>percent difference
RQD	rock-quality designation
RTK	real-time kinematic
RTP	reduced<br>to the pole
SWIR	short-wave infrared
t	metric<br>tonne or tonnes
T	imperial<br>short ton (2,000lb)
Tph	imperial<br>short ton per hour
UCL	upper<br>control limit
USL	upper<br>specification limit
VD	vertical derivative
9<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

3.0	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

RESPEC is not an expert regarding legal, environmental, and social matters such as the validity of mining claims and agreements and environmental permitting. RESPEC has relied fully on Paramount for the information in Section 3.1 through Section 3.6 as summarized in Section 25.0.

3.1	PROPERTY LOCATION

The Sleeper property is located in Desert Valley and the adjoining Slumbering Hills in Humboldt County, Nevada, U.S.A. The claims cover parts of Sections 3 to 11, 14 to 23 and 26 to 36, inclusive, in Township 40 North, Range 35 East, Sections 1 to 12 15 to 21 and 29-33, Township 39 North, Range 35 East, Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12, Township 38 North, Range 34 East, Sections 2, 4, 8, 16 and 28, Township 37 North, Range 35 East, Sections 24 and 36, Township 37 North, Range 34 East, and Section 2, Township 36 North, Range 34 East, inclusive, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, Humboldt County, Nevada, U.S.A. The property location is shown on Figure 3-1. The main historical mine workings are centered at Lat: 41° 20’ N, Long: 118° 03’ W (Figure 3-2).

LOGO

Figure 3-1. Location Map for the Sleeper Property

(from Gustin and Fleming, 2004)

10<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

3.2	PROPERTY AREA AND CLAIM TYPES

The Sleeper property (Figure 3-2) comprises 2,474 unpatented Federal lode mining claims covering approximately 18,177 hectares. This includes 152 unpatented mining claims identified as the RO and SH group of claims, located 5.6 kilometers southwest of the main Sleeper pit, acquired by Paramount on March 31, 2021. Appendix A contains a list of the individual lode claims that comprise the Sleeper property.

Paramount’s ownership of the Sleeper project commenced in 2010 when a predecessor company known then as Paramount Gold and Silver acquired X-Cal Resources Ltd. (“X-Cal”), which held portions of the Sleeper property. In 2011, Paramount Gold and Silver acquired ICN’s land package in the area south of the Sleeper deposit, and in 2012 Paramount Gold and Silver staked additional claims. In connection with a merger agreement between Paramount Gold and Silver, Coeur Mining, Inc. and Hollywood Merger Sub, Inc., Paramount Gold and Silver spun-off Paramount as a separate, publicly traded company owning 100% of two subsidiaries, Sleeper Mining LLC and New Sleeper LLC., that together with Paramount own 100% of the mining claims comprising the Sleeper property.

3.3	MINERAL RIGHTS

Ownership of the unpatented mining claims is in the name of the holder (locator), subject to the overall title of the United States of America, under the administration of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”). Under the Mining Law of 1872, which governs the location of unpatented mining claims on federal lands, the locator has the right to explore, develop, and mine minerals on unpatented mining claims without payments of production royalties to the U.S. government, and subject to the surface management regulation of the BLM. The 2,474 unpatented lode claims include rights to all locatable subsurface minerals. Currently, annual claim-maintenance fees of $165 per claim are the only federal payments related to unpatented mining claims. As of the effective date of this report, these fees have been paid in full to September 1, 2024. The annual property holding costs, including claim fees and county recording fees total an estimated $447,705 (Table 3-1).

Surface rights sufficient to explore, develop, and mine minerals on the unpatented mining claims are inherent to the claims as long as the claims are maintained in good standing. The surface rights are subject to all applicable state and federal environmental regulations.

11<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 3-2: Sleeper Property Location Map

(from Paramount, 2022; red lines show outlines of Paramount claim blocks and third-party inliers.)

Table 3-1. Summary of Annual PropertyHolding Costs

Type	Annual Claim Fees	Annual County Recording<br>Fees	Total Annual Costs
Unpatented Lode Claims	$417,945	$29,760	$447,705
3.4	SIGNIFICANT ENCUMBRANCES AND PERMITTING
---	---

The Sleeper property is owned 100% by Paramount with no significant encumbrances or agreements such as leases, options, or purchase payments known to RESPEC. The project is currently operated as an advanced exploration project. Key BLM and State permits associated with these activities and in place as of the effective date of this report include:

12<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

•	Exploration Reclamation Permit #0219
•	Exploration Plan of Operations #NVN077104
---	---
•	The Sleeper Mine #NVN064100
---	---
•	Class II Air Quality Operating Permit Surface Area Disturbance #AP1041-2831
---	---
•	The reclamation bonds associated with the above activities are:
---	---
•	Exploration Bond #NVB000444 current obligation -$345,044
---	---
•	Reclamation Bond #NVB000330 current obligation $3,966,373-
---	---

There are also numerous other permits in place that are maintained from previous mining activities. These are maintained for ease in updating should a decision be made to reinitiate production at the site. Maintenance of these permits includes monthly, quarterly, and annual monitoring and reporting. These permits include:

•	Mine Reclamation Permit #0037
•	Water Pollution Control Permit #NEV50006
---	---
•	Ground Water Appropriation Permit #53228, #53231 and #53236
---	---
•	Hazardous Materials Permit #30473 FDID #08250 Facility #1168-2326
---	---
•	Class III Solid Waste Landfill Waiver #SWMI-08-10
---	---
•	Industrial Artificial Pond Permit #S34480
---	---
•	Mine Plan of Operations #N64100
---	---

The BLM Nevada State Office currently holds BLM bond number NVB00330 with Sleeper Mining Company LLC, as principal, in the amount of $3,966,373; and BLM bond number NVB00444 with New Sleeper Gold LLC, as principal, in the amount of $345,044. The bonds provide surface reclamation coverage for operations conducted by the principal on NVN064100, the Sleeper Mine, and NVN077104, the Sleeper Gold Exploration Plan, respectively. The current obligation was approved 10/09/2020 and is reviewed every 3 years. Paramount is currently in compliance with all issued permits and is in the process of renewing those permits that require renewal.

3.5	ROYALTIES

A total of five separate Net Smelter Return (“NSR”) royalties apply to future production from the Sleeper property as follows:

The Snyder Syndicate, a private company, holds a one percent (1%) NSR royalty on 1,044 claims in a mining scenario;

Franco-Nevada U.S. Corporation (“Franco”) holds a two percent (2%) NSR royalty on minerals produced from 2,474 mining claims;

Evolving Gold/Quinton Hennigh holds a 2% NSR royalty;

Dry Lake Placer Association holds a 3% NSR royalty; and

ICN holds a 0.5% NSR royalty on the “SS” and “SP” mining claims as well as a 1.5% NSR royalty on the Blue mining claims.

13<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 3-3. Map of Sleeper Property Subject toApplicable Production Royalties

3.6	SIGNIFICANT FACTORS AND RISKS

RESPEC is not aware of any significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the property other than those described in Sections 3.1 through 3.5.

14<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

4.0	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY
4.1	TOPOGRAPHY, ELEVATION AND VEGETATION
---	---

The Sleeper gold-silver property is located approximately 50 kilometers northwest of Winnemucca, Nevada on the western flank of the Slumbering Hills. The property covers flat to hilly, grass- and shrub-covered desert, with a few trees present at higher elevations. Elevations range from1,250 meters along the western valley side of the property to 1,646 meters on a hilltop in the southeastern portion of the property.

4.2	ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY

Access to the Sleeper gold-silver property is via Interstate Highway 80 to Winnemucca, north on Highway 95 for 51.5 kilometers, west on Highway 140 for 22.5 kilometers, and then south on the maintained gravel Sod House Road for 10 kilometers to the project site.

4.3	CLIMATE AND LENGTH OF OPERATING SEASON

The climate in the Sleeper property area is semi-arid, with temperatures that are cool to cold during the winter, with occasional moderate snowfalls, and warm during the summer with cool nights. The area is dry, with infrequent rains during the summer. Exploration and mining activities can be conducted year-round.

4.4	INFRASTRUCTURE

An office building, a maintenance building plus assorted equipment are present at the Sleeper project site and are in use for exploration offices, core logging, storage and to support drilling programs. Necessary supplies, equipment, and services to carry out full sequence exploration and mining development projects are available in Winnemucca, Reno, and Elko, Nevada. A trained mining-industrial workforce is available in Winnemucca and other nearby communities. The Sleeper property area is uninhabited. The overall subdued topography that characterizes much of the Sleeper property provides ample ground for the siting of mine facilities, tailings, waste dumps and heap leach facilities.

15<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

5.0	HISTORY

The information summarized in this section is taken largely from Redfern and Rowe (2003), Gustin and Fleming (2004), Thomason et al. (2006), Giroux et al. (2009), Wilson et al. (2015), and Ressel et al. (2020). RESPEC has reviewed this information and believes it is suitable for use in this report.

The Sleeper gold-silver project is located in the Awakening district which has been active since the early 1900s. Early production of gold was associated with gold-bearing quartz veins and the district was significantly revitalized with the discovery of the Sleeper deposit by AMAX in 1982, and subsequent open pit mining from 1986 through 1996. This section summarizes historical mining operations, operators, and exploration and development work undertaken by previous owners and operators.

5.1	HISTORICAL PRODUCTION
5.1.1	EARLY MINING: 1914 TO 1982
---	---

Early production of gold in the Slumbering Hills (Awakening district), first recorded in 1914, was associated with gold-bearing quartz veins in Mesozoic metasedimentary rocks. Production increased beginning in 1936 with development of the Jumbo and Alma mines (Nash et al., 1995). Narrow quartz-adularia veins within folded metasedimentary rocks were exploited for gold at the Jumbo mine located approximately six kilometers southeast of the Sleeper mine by open pit and underground methods (Nash et al., 1995). Workings include several shafts, adits, and numerous prospects located within 2 kilometers of the eventual Sleeper mine. These old workings, probably from the 1930s, are in or adjacent to altered and veined Tertiary volcanic rocks. The Sleeper mill was constructed atop one of the historical shafts (Nash, et al., 1995). Willden (1964) tabulated a total of 26,262 ounces of gold produced from the Awakening district between 1932 and 1958.

5.1.2	AMAX: 1982 TO 1996

The post-1950s mining history of the Sleeper property, as summarized in Wood and Hamilton (1991), began in 1982 when John Wood, an exploration geologist with AMAX Gold Inc. (“AMAX”), observed iron oxide minerals in a scarp east of what became the Sleeper mine during an aerial geological reconnaissance. AMAX conducted surface geological and geochemical work over the next two years and a drilling program that identified gold mineralization that averaged approximately 1.4 g Au/t. In late 1984, AMAX’s thirty-fourth drillhole stepped out to the west of the previous drilling and intersected 102 meters of silicified breccia with an average grade of 27.8 g Au/t and 61.7 g Ag/t, including one very high-grade quartz vein containing abundant visible gold (Nash et al., 1995).

In February 1985, AMAX formally announced the discovery of the Sleeper gold deposit. Mining began in January 1986 and mill commissioning began the following month. On March 26, 1986, AMAX poured its first gold bar. Although the mine plan called for production of about 40,000 ounces in 1986, the mine produced 126,000 ounces of gold during the year at an average cost of less than $60 per ounce, making it one of the lowest cost gold mines in the world at the time.

16<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

AMAX’s initial capital investment was recouped in the first six months of operation. During the first nine months the head grade was 25.7 g Au/t, or more than twice the expected grade, owing to bonanza grades in the Sleeper vein (Redfern and Rowe, 2003). In September 1986, AMAX began processing low-grade material in a heap leach circuit. Production increased to 159,000 ounces in 1987 (the first full year of production) and to 230,000 ounces in 1988 at an average cost of $103 per ounce (Proteus, 2002). Armed guards were hired to protect the high-grade, visible gold in the pit. In 1993, annual production declined to 100,000 ounces of gold at a cash cost of $317 per ounce. Cyprus Minerals and AMAX Inc. merged to form Cyprus AMAX Minerals Co. in 1994. AMAX suspended mining operations at Sleeper in 1996.

The Sleeper operation was designed to treat oxide mineralization by both milling and heap leaching. There was no flotation circuit in the mill to recover gold bearing sulfides. The early pit mill feed was oxide material, but zones of sulfide mineralization were present in the pit. Reported total gold production was 1,219,880 ounces from the mill and 438,609 ounces from heap leaching (Zoutomou, 2007). Silver production totaled approximately 2.3 million ounces.

After production ceased, groundwater infiltrated into the open pit, forming a pit lake. The pit lake surface is within 34 meters below the crest of the original pit limits. The mill and crushing facilities have been removed and the mill area has been reclaimed.

5.2	HISTORICAL EXPLORATION

The Sleeper deposit was largely overlain by alluvial deposits and was discovered by drilling through only a few meters of unconsolidated post-mineral cover. Over the past 40 years, there have been more than 4,400 exploration holes drilled in and around the Sleeper property by AMAX and numerous other companies. Historical drilling from 1983 through 2012 is summarized in Table 5-1. The majority of drilling has been done with reverse-circulation rotary (“RC”) methods which account for 95% of the holes and 93% of the meters drilled on the property. A map showing historical drill collar locations, to the extent known, is shown in Figure 5-1.

Sleeper exploration data includes more than 2,600 rock-chip geochemical samples, more than 11,300 soil geochemical samples, and at least 21 geophysical surveys within the current project landholdings (Ressel et al., 2020). The historical geophysical surveys included gravity, airborne magnetics, ground magnetics, induced polarization(“IP”)/resistivity(“R”), magnetotelluric (“MT”), and seismic studies, as listed in Table 5-2. Surveys completed for Paramount are described in Section 7.1.

Exploration work carried out by historical operators is summarized chronologically below.

17<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 5-1. Summary of Sleeper Deposit Drilling inRESPEC Database

Year	Company	Core<br><br><br>Holes	Core<br><br><br>Meters	RC Holes	RC Meters	RC + Core<br><br><br>Tail Holes	RC + Core<br><br><br>Tail Meters	Sonic<br> <br>Holes	Sonic<br> <br>Meters	?? Holes	?? Meters	Total Holes	Total<br> <br>Meters
1983 – 1995	AMAX			3,670	494,789							3,670	494,789
1989	NGM			9	438							9	438
1986 – 1987	X-Cal			140	27,600							140	27,600
1997	Placer Dome			30	6,721	11	4,243			6	2,204	47	13,168
2002	X-Cal							83	N/A			83	N/A
2003 – 2007	X-Cal	30	9,027	132	35,545	8	2,776			1	N/A	171	47,347
2004 – 2005	New Sleeper<br> <br>Gold	20	8,783	45	8,541					4	717	69	18,041
2008	Evolving Gold^			34	6,636							34	6,636
2011 – 2012	Montezuma<br><br><br>Mines*	11	1,940									11	1,940
2010 – 2013	Paramount	39	14,251	100	12,201	1	296	9	360			149	27,107
1983 – 2010	Unknown	0		20	781	—		—		—		20	781
** Total Drilling**		100	34,001	4,180	593,251	20	7,315	92	360	11	2,920	4,403	637,847
?? Signifies unknown hole type; N/A Signifies data not available or not in RESPEC database as of effective date of thisreport
^ Uncertain drill type, probably RC; southern part of Sleeper property*

**Paramount drilling is described in Section7.2; locations of 2009 and 2011-2012 drilling by Evolving Gold and Montezuma Mines, respectively, have not been compiled and are not in the RESPEC drilling database as of the effective date of this report.

18<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 5-1: Map of Historical Drilling Locations

Note: locations of 2009 and 2011-2012 drilling by Evolving Gold and Montezuma Mines, respectively, have not been compiled and are not in the RESPEC drilling database as of the effective date of this report.

19<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 5-2. Geophysical Surveys Conducted at theSleeper Property

(from Ressel et al., 2020; Paramount surveys are discussed in Section 7.1)

Company	Year	Geophysical Survey
AMAX Gold	1987	IP/resistivity
Placer-Dome	1997	Airborne<br>magnetics
X-Cal Resources	2003	Gravity
X-Cal Resources	2004	Gravity
X-Cal Resources	2004	IP/resistivity
X-Cal Resources	2005	Magnetotellurics (“Titan”)
X-Cal Resources	2005	IP/resistivity
Evolving Gold	2007	Gravity
Evolving Gold	2007	IP/resistivity
Evolving Gold	2007	Ground<br>magnetics
Montezuma Mines	2009	Ground<br>magnetics
Signal Exploration	2010	Seismic
Northgate	2010	IP/resistivity
Montezuma Mines	2010	Ground<br>magnetics
Montezuma Mines	2011	Gravity
Montezuma Mines	2011	Ground<br>magnetics
Montezuma Mines	2011	IP/resistivity
Montezuma Mines	2011	IP/resistivity
Montezuma Mines	2012	Gravity
Paramount	2012	Gravity
Paramount	2012	IP/resistivity
Paramount	2015	Airborne<br>magnetics
Paramount	2015	Airborne<br>radiometrics
20<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

5.2.1	AMAX 1982 - 1998

Exploration efforts by AMAX leading to and following production included surface mapping and geochemical sampling, drilling, and geophysical surveys (e.g., Nash et al., 1995; Wood, 1988; Wood and Hamilton, 1991). From 1983 through 1995, AMAX drilled a total of 494,789 meters in 3,670 RC holes. RESPEC has no information about AMAX’s drilling contractors, specific rig types, sample collection methods, or collar and down-hole surveys.

In May 1984, a time-domain IP survey was conducted by DMW Geophysics for AMAX. AMAX used these IP survey data to delineate conductive rock units such as sulfidic or clay-rich zones locally present, and resistive rock units, such as veined areas with silicification (Wood and Hamilton, 1991). In general, the IP survey showed that sulfidic mineralization in the Sleeper pit area could be correlated with IP highs. An IP high was also present along the Range Front fault east of the open pit.

Paramount’s drilling data compiled by RESPEC for this report includes nine RC holes drilled in 1989 by “NGM”. RESPEC is not aware of the actual name of NGM or its relationship to AMAX. RESPEC has no information about NGM’s drilling contractors, specific rig types, sample collection methods, or collar and down-hole surveys.

AMAX merged with Cyprus Minerals to form Cyprus AMAX Minerals Co. (“Cyprus-AMAX”) in 1994. Mining operations at Sleeper were suspended in 1996 and in 1998 Cyprus-AMAX merged with Kinross Gold Corporation (“Kinross”).

5.2.2	X-CAL RESOURCES LTD 1993 -1997

In 1993, X-Cal acquired property around the Alma underground mine in the Awakening District, southeast of the Sleeper pit. X-Cal acquired additional land in 1994 and 1995, extending its holdings to the limit of the AMAX Sleeper property boundary. In April 1996, X-Cal and AMAX formed a joint venture to explore the Sleeper property, which included the land holdings of both X-Cal and AMAX. Upon entry into the district, X-Cal carried out exploration work progressing from comprehensive compilation of all data, analysis of satellite imagery and low-level aerial photography, detailed geologic and structural mapping, surface geochemical sampling, and ground-generated and airborne geophysical surveys.

From 1993 through 1997, a total of 7,599 soil samples and 2,480 rock chip samples were collected from the Sleeper property by X-Cal (Redfern and Rowe, 2003). RESPEC is not aware of the methods and procedures used for these exploration surveys nor the results.

The database compiled by RESPEC from Paramount’s drilling files indicates X-Cal drilled a total of 27,600 meters in 140 holes during 1996 and 1997 (Table 5-1). All of X-Cal’s drilling during this time was done with RC methods. Details of the drilling methods and procedures were summarized in Kornze et al. (2006), but RESPEC is not aware of X-Cal’s drilling contractors, rig types, or how collar and down-hole surveys were conducted. Although X-Cal was a reputable exploration company, this lack of information imparts risk and affects the classification of the current mineral resources presented in Section 11.

21<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

5.2.3	PLACER DOME 1997

In 1997, X-Cal entered into an option agreement with Placer Dome US Inc. (“Placer Dome”) that granted Placer Dome the right to earn a 50% interest in the Sleeper project. During 1997, Placer Dome reviewed the Sleeper property data in detail, completed a detailed aeromagnetic survey, and drilled a total of 13,168 meters in 47 holes (Table 5-1). The RESPEC database includes six holes of unknown type for 2,204 meters, as well as 11 holes initiated with RC and finished with core tails. The 1997 drilling was an effort to extend known mineralization as well as discover new zones of mineralization. RESPEC has no information about Placer Dome’s drilling contractors, rig types, sample collection methods, or how collar and down-hole surveys were conducted. Although Placer Dome was a reputable exploration company, this lack of information imparts risk and affects the classification of the current mineral resources presented in Section 11.

Pediment and Range Front areas and approximately 60% of other target areas were covered by a detailed airborne magnetic survey completed for Placer Dome. The survey comprised E-W and N-S lines spaced 50 meters apart, with magnetometer recordings every two meters along lines. Local aeromagnetic highs were thought to be associated with volcanic, hypabyssal, or metasedimentary rock units (White, 2003). Placer Dome declined to exercise the option and the property reverted to X-Cal.

In 1997 Mineral Resources Development Inc (”MRDI”) implemented studies of the Sleeper mine tailings and heap leach pads for X-Cal. Six auger holes, approximately 7.6 to 10.7 meters deep, were drilled into the tailings. The depth and degree of oxidation was delineated utilizing data from drill samples. A metallurgical study of the heap leach pads included completion of two RC holes and three auger holes in the heap leach pads. The RESPEC drilling database does not include the 1997 auger drill holes as of the effective date of this report and are not included in Table 5-1.

5.2.4	X-CAL 1998 - 2003

Commencing in 1998, X-Cal negotiated a series of options to purchase the Kinross interest in Sleeper. In January 1999, X-Cal carried out a sampling and metallurgical test program on the Sleeper mine tailings (KCA,1999). Ten auger holes (15.2 centimeter in diameter) were drilled in the southeastern end of the tailings pond and samples were obtained from depths of 2.7 to 4.6 meters for metallurgical testing. The RESPEC drilling database does not include the 1999 auger drill holes as of the effective date of this report and are not included in Table 5-1.

In 2002, X-Cal carried out a sampling project to further test the Sleeper mine tailings impoundments. X-Cal drilled 83 sonic drill holes (3.2 to 5.1 centimeters in diameter) to depths of 9.1 to 10.7 meters (the average thickness of the tailings was estimated to range from 12.2 to 13.7 meters). The holes were sampled at intervals of 1.52 meters.

In 2003 a gravity survey was carried out at the Sleeper property by Geophysical and Geodetic Associates Inc. of Reno, Nevada for X-Cal. The survey comprised east-west and north-south lines spaced 500 meters apart with gravity measurements every 200 meters along lines. Interpretations were refined following additional gravity surveys for New Sleeper Gold in 2004 as described in the next section.

22<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

5.2.5 NEW	SLEEPER GOLD 2004 - 2006

In January of 2004, New Sleeper Gold Corp. (“New Sleeper”) formed a 50/50 joint venture with X-Cal Resources by acquiring Kinross Gold’s 50% interest in the Sleeper property. New Sleeper assumed management of the Sleeper property as the “Sleeper JV”. RESPEC’s drilling database attributes a total of 18,041 meters of drilling to New Sleeper in 2004 and 2005. The drilling included 20 core holes, 45 RC holes, and four holes of unknown type. According to Giroux et al. (2009), the New Sleeper drilling also included 688.8 meters of sonic drilling, presumably in the waste dumps or tailings impoundment. The data for this sonic drilling has either been lost or has not been compiled by Paramount. Further uncertainty stems from Giroux et al. (2009), who stated:

“The Sleeper JV drilled a total of 122 holes at Sleeper in 2004 and 2005. Core drilling, reverse circulation drilling and sonic drilling were completed. Table 13.1A below provides footage details of each type of drilling by the Sleeper JV.”

Table 5-3. 2004 and 2005 Drill Footage Summary

(from Giroux et al., 2009)

Type of Drilling	Number of Holes	Footage
Core Drilling	57	70,841
RC Drilling	48	29,978
Sonic Drilling	17	2,260
Total	122	103,019

RESPEC is unaware of the drilling contractors, rig types, sample collection methods, or how collar and down-hole surveys were conducted in the drilling by New Sleeper. RESPEC recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate this information, to the extent it is available.

New Sleeper conducted trenching, electrical geophysical surveys (both IP and MT), ground gravity surveys, ‘Quicksilver’ mercury soil gas surveys, O2/CO2 soil gas surveys, geological mapping, extensive soil geochemical sampling, and aerial photography (Giroux et al., 2009).

Results from the gravity surveys of 2003 (X-Cal) and 2004 showed significant density contrast between the local basement composed of Mesozoic metasedimentary rocks, and the combined package of pediment and Tertiary volcanic rocks, providing depth to basement determinations (Thomason et al., 2006). Additional detailed gravity work in 2005 resulted in improved definition of structures and understanding of the Sleeper deposit. Wright (2005) interpreted residual gravity results to reflect a complex structure involving three primary orientations: north-south, northwest, and northeast. The Sleeper deposit appeared to be located at the intersection of northwest and northeast structural corridors, proximal to a major north-south oriented basement feature.

A natural source MT survey was conducted over the “NW and SW Pediment areas” by Quantech who also modeled results. Additional modeling of these data by Wright (2005) yielded preliminary interpretations of subsurface geology, structure, and possible alteration.

23<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

From 2004 through 2006, approximately 55 line-kilometer IP and resistivity surveys were completed by Zonge Geosciences Inc. (“Zonge”) and Quantech Consulting Inc. (“Quantec”). Zonge and Quantech processed their respective data, and calculated 2D model inversions of the results. The inversions were forwarded to Jim Wright for geophysical interpretation (Thomason et al., 2006).

Wilson et al. (2015) stated:

“In 2004 New Sleeper completed 17 sonic drill holes (13 vertical) for a total of 641.6 meters in Leach Pad 1. All holes terminated at least 6.1 meters above the leach pad liner as required by State of Nevada regulations.”

The above is not consistent with the drilling data received from Paramount, or possibly Paramount has not compiled the New Sleeper drilling data completely.

In 1997, Placer Dome conducted a pilot clay mineralogy study on 49 drill holes using Terra Spec ASD short-wave infrared (“SWIR”) spectral analyses. The study identified a strong association between gold mineralization and ammonia minerals including NH4-illite and buddingtonite. In 2004, New Sleeper Gold expanded on Placer Dome’s pilot clay mineralogy study and gathered spectral data from approximately 250 drill holes, but RESPEC is not aware of the results or significance of this work.

Between 2004 and 2005, a variety of surface geochemical surveys were carried out. Two phases of mercury vapor surveys were completed in 2004 and 2005 as a reconnaissance tool to detect possible mineralization beneath the pediment surface. The surveys covered the entire pediment area of the Sleeper property west of and overlapping the interpreted Range Front fault. Rock chip and soil samples were collected during this period, and results were added to existing databases; as of 2006 the databases included a total of 1,762 rock chip samples and 9,866 soil samples from the property area. RESPEC has not evaluated these data and is not aware of the results.

Under the management of New Sleeper, the mill and crusher facilities were removed and the sites where these facilities formerly stood were reclaimed. New Sleeper and X-Cal equally funded work at Sleeper from August 2005 to May 2006, at which time X-Cal purchased New Sleeper’s 50% interest in the project for a combination of cash and X-Cal common stock. The Sleeper property was then consolidated 100% into X-Cal until August 2010.

5.2.6	X-CAL 2006-2010

According to Giroux et al. (2009), core drilling procedures used by X-Cal during 2007 were as follows:

“Core was collected by a truck mounted Atlas Copco CS3001 core rig capable of drill depths in excess of 2,000 feet. The drill equipment was owned and operated by EMM Core Drilling of Winnemucca, Nevada. Corrugated waxed cardboard core boxes were provided by the core contractor. Wooden blocks or plastic depth indicators were labeled and placed by the core contractors at the appropriate measured drill depths.

Preferred core size was HQ. Adverse drilling conditions preventing advancement of the HQ tools were remedied by casing the hole down to the problem zone. Occasionally a reduction to NQ tools was needed to continue the drill hole to targeted depth.

24<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Core holes drilled in the West Wood target were pre-collared and cased to bedrock (approximately 160-210 feet) using the RCD rig. Angle and vertical drill hole collar sites were pre-surveyed using a portable GPS positioning device.

Completion of each core hole was preceded by down hole surveys conducted by International Directional Services of Battle Mountain, Nevada. After the completion of the drill hole and down hole survey the hole was abandoned by pumping a bentonite slurry from the bottom of the drill hole to within 10 feet of the surface. The remaining surface plug was ten feet of Portland cement. Desert Mountain Surveying of Winnemucca, Nevada, conducted surface collar surveys for each core hole.

Core boxes filled with core were neatly stacked upon pallets and tarped at the drill site until the full pallet was transported to the core processing facility. The core was washed, geologically logged and sample intervals selected and labeled by the core geologist.

The next procedure was digitally photographing the core in place utilizing scale bars to easily position the exact down hole location within each individual core box. The core boxes were then positioned next to the sheds that contain self-feeding core saws.

Each piece of silicified or hard core is placed in a confinement jig. The maximum length is one foot. The jig positions the core’s central axis producing two nearly exact volumetric halves after the core has been cut. One core half is returned to its origin box and the remaining half is placed into a pre-marked 16”X19” sample bag. The more clay rich core intervals are hand chiseled into halves by the core technician or by a geologist.

The sampling technician independently logged the core sample intervals. Copies of the sample intervals are submitted to the assay lab and a copy is archived into individual core hole folders. In addition, the folders contain copies of the geologic log, down hole survey, assays, hole abandonment sheets and surface collar surveys.”

Giroux et al. (2009) stated that X-Cal’s RC drilling procedures in 2007 were as follows:

“The reverse circulation drilling (RC) programs for both late 2006 and 2007 have utilized a Schramm 685, capable of drill depths in excess of 2,500 feet. The Schramm rig is owned and operated by DeLong Drilling and Construction of Winnemucca, Nevada. The crew consists of one driller and two driller’s helpers. The driller’s helpers have multiple tasks in addition to their mechanical drilling duties which include sample bag numbering (including duplicates), chip tray numbering, sample and chip collection and sample storage at the drill site. All drill hands are responsible for a safe, clean and organized drill site.

The preferred RC drill hole diameter is 5 ^3^⁄4 inches produced by a pneumatic hammer and carbide button bit. If water volumes exceed capacities that prevent the advancement of the hammer tool or adverse conditions warrant the use of a tricone tool, the hammer tool is tripped out of the hole and the appropriate tri-cone diameter is returned to the bottom of the hole.

25<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Occasionally a reduction to a smaller diameter of tri-cone is needed to complete the proposed drill hole.

Depths to bedrock vary according to target location. Shallow bedrock depths (less than 20 feet) require only one 20-foot length of 6 inch inside diameter thick-walled casing. Moderate depths to bedrock (over 20 feet and under 250 feet) are cased using a conventional (weld, hammer drive, weld) casing technique. After recent sediments (sands, basin fill sand and gravels) reach accumulations in excess of 250 feet casing depth is dependent upon the sediment’s integrity (adhesive, cementation and porosity properties) and water volumes encountered. All drill holes drilled atop of mine dumps or other areas previously used as staging areas for ore (crusher sites, mill site, etc.) are cased through the mine dump fill material into bedrock at least 10 feet.

RC samples are collected from the surface every 5 feet. Provided an area has previous drilling results that warrant the over burden not to be sampled, an appropriate estimate to sample depth is provided to the driller. Duplicate samples are collected from the rotary splitter every 150 feet.

The rotary wet splitter (splitter) is attached to the rear passenger side of the Schramm. The splitter is washed down after each completed drill hole. Once surface casing is completed water and on demand drilling mud and hole conditioners are injected to suppress silica dust exposure and maintain the integrity of the drill hole.

The splitter has removable pie shaped platelets that are removed or added to maintain a consistent 20:1 volumetric split product at the exit end of the sample collection port. The sample exits the port straight downward into a 5-gallon plastic bucket. Once the 5 feet drill interval has been completed another clean bucket is placed under the exit port. The sample bucket is poured into a pre-labeled 15 inch by 17-inch sample bag. The sample bucket is rinsed once with fresh water and contents poured into the sample bag. The bag is tied and placed into a collection crib or crate that has been provided to the project by American Assay. The crib provides an additional assurance against contamination by ground exposure. The duplicates taken every 150 feet are collected by similar procedure and placed upon a black plastic sheet for drill site storage.

Drill rod changes have long been suspected for down the hole contamination during RCD drilling on other projects. At Sleeper the end of the 20 feet drill rod cycle is used to ream, clean, and dress the walls of the last 20 feet drilled. The process takes a few moments but is vital in maintaining a clean drill hole. Once the new rod for the next 20 feet is positioned, the rotation is started and down the hole pressures and water levels are allowed to stabilize. A screen is placed at the exit of the splitter and checked for debris that may have its origin from up hole. The sample bucket is re-positioned under the sample port only after the driller observes a clean return in the screen. This method takes additional time and has been proven to be a very effective method in minimizing down the hole contamination.

26<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Completion of each RCD hole was preceded by down hole surveys conducted by International Directional Services of Battle Mountain, Nevada. After the completion of the drill hole and down hole survey the hole was abandoned by pumping a bentonite slurry from the bottom of the drill hole to within 10 feet of the surface. The remaining surface plug was ten feet of Portland cement. Desert Mountain Surveying of Winnemucca, Nevada, conducted surface collar surveys for each RCD and core hole.

Compartmental chip trays (20 compartments) were used to archive drilled material from each 5 feet of drill advancement. Each compartment’s content was pre-washed prior to filling the compartment with the aid of a fitted funnel. The process minimizes any contamination from other 5 feet samples. Prior to completion of an RCD hole, the chip trays were stored and secured by the drillers at the rig site after drilling hours. All chip trays were collected after completion of each specific RCD hole. Note: The fenced compound is locked after day shift ends and remains locked until day shift resumes the following day. During the day period the electric gate is unlocked and accessible to entry only through Sleeper personnel.

All chip tray intervals are reviewed by at least one geologist and logged for geologic attributes. The chip trays are archived by drill hole number and placed upon steel shelves located in closed buildings for later additional reviewing.”

5.2.7 EVOLVING GOLD 2007 - 2008

In 2008, Evolving Gold completed an extensive exploration and drilling program over an area to the south of the Sleeper deposit entirely covered by unconsolidated alluvium and lake sediments (Ressel et al., 2020). According to a press release, the program was designed to test targets with relatively shallow cover and decreased magnetic response. Evolving Gold drilled 34 RC holes for a total of about 6,636 meters, although there are several collar files with inconsistent information (Ressel et al., 2020). Four holes failed to reach bedrock; the other holes terminated in basalt, volcaniclastic sediments, Mesozoic metasedimentary rocks, or Mesozoic granite (Ressel et al., 2020). The Evolving drilling program was not successful. There were a few drill holes with gold in the tens of ppb – not worth following up. Paramount has not compiled and evaluated this information and none of the Evolving Gold drill holes are included in the RESPEC database as of the effective date of this report. RESPEC is not aware of the drilling contractors, rig type or methods and procedures used by Evolving Gold. RESPEC recommends that Paramount compile and fully evaluate the Evolving Gold drill data for future studies of the Sleeper property.

Evolving Gold contracted a significant quantity of geophysical surveys, including seven lines of IP, two blocks of ground magnetics, and 396 gravity stations. This data was all provided to Paramount and evaluated by Mr. James Wright. Evolving Gold was exploring for another Sleeper deposit, targeting areas with shallower bedrock cover and reduced magnetic signature, which was interpreted to be from magnetite-destructive alteration.

27<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

5.2.8 MONTEZUMA	MINES 2009-2012

Ressel et al. (2020) reported:

“Paramount has recently acquired a property explored by Montezuma Mines and most recently held by South Sleeper Resources LLC. The property consists of 152 unpatented lode mining claims (60 RO claims and 92 SH claims) that cover an area of about 12.6 square kilometers located about 2 km south of, and extending into, the Paramount property position.

The entire property is located to the west of the Slumbering Hills with no outcrop. In their exploration of the property, Montezuma Mines completed IP/Resistivity surveys, ground magnetic surveys, and extensive soil and soil gas geochemistry. The company drilled 11 holes for a total of 6,366 feet of core in 2011 and 2012. The core was analyzed for multielement geochemistry, with clay characterization by reflectance spectroscopy.”

Paramount has not compiled the Montezuma Mines drilling data and the 2011-2012 drilling is not included in the RESPEC drilling database as of the effective date of this report. RESPEC recommends that Paramount compile and fully evaluate the Montezuma Mines drill data for future studies of the Sleeper property.

5.2.9 PARAMOUNT GOLD AND SILVER CORP. ACQUISITION 2010

Paramount Gold and Silver Corp. acquired all the issued and outstanding shares of X-Cal in August 2010 by plan of arrangement. In 2013, X-Cal changed its name to Paramount Nevada Gold Corp. which was merged into Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. in early 2015. In December 2014 Paramount Gold and Silver Corp. entered into a merger agreement with Coeur Mining, Inc. (“Coeur”), Hollywood Merger Sub, Inc., and Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. pursuant to which Coeur acquired Paramount Gold and Silver after the spin-off of Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (Paramount) owning 100% of Sleeper Mining LLC and New Sleeper LLC. Paramount’s exploration from 2010 through the effective date of this report is summarized in Section 7.0.

5.3	HISTORICAL MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

Several estimates of mineral resources at the Sleeper property were completed between 1985 and Paramount’s acquisition of the property beginning in 2010. The sources of these historical estimates are summarized in Table 5-4. The citations for historical resource and reserve estimates in this section are presented as an item of historical interest only and should not be considered representative of actual mineral resources or mineral reserves currently present at the Sleeper property. The current mineral resources for the Sleeper deposit are discussed in Section 11 of this report.

28<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 5-4. Summary ofHistorical Mineral Resource Estimates, Sleeper Property

Company	Year	Reference
AMAX	1985	Wood and Hamilton, 1991
AMAX	1989	Wood and Hamilton, 1991
Placer Dome<br><br><br>and X-Cal<br><br><br>Resources	1997	Mineral Resources Development, Inc. (“MRDI”), 1997
X-Cal<br><br><br>Resources	1999	Sierra Mining and & Engineering LLC (“Sierra”),<br>1999
X-Cal<br><br><br>Resources	2009	Giroux et al., 2009
29<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

6.0	GEOLOGIC SETTING, DEPOSIT TYPE, AND MINERALIZATION
6.1	REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING
---	---

The Sleeper project area is situated along the western Slumbering Hills within the western northern Nevada rift, a northwest-trending geologic province extending from southeastern Oregon to southeastern Nevada. The northern Nevada rift is a narrow region of mid-Miocene-age bimodal basalt-rhyolite volcanism, rifting, and widespread low-sulfidation epithermal mineralization (John, 2001).

In general, pre-Miocene rocks in the Slumbering Hills consist of metasedimentary rocks of the Auld Lang Syne Group and granitic intrusions. Metasediments of the Auld Lang Syne Group were part of an early Mesozoic back-arc basin sequence deformed and metamorphosed to greenschist facies during late Jurassic contraction related to the Luning-Fencemaker east-directed thrust belt (Willden, 1964; Burke and Silberling, 1973; Oldow, 1984; Wyld et al., 2002). In the central part of the Slumbering Hills, a granodioritic to monzonitic pluton was emplaced during the Cretaceous (Willden, 1964).

Tertiary volcanic rocks and intercalated sedimentary rocks unconformably overlie and intrude rocks of the Auld Lang Syne Group in the northern and eastern parts of the Slumbering Hills. Many of the Tertiary volcanic units are thought to be outflow facies of the McDermitt volcanic field and related calderas to the north, with the volcanic rocks that host the Sleeper deposit originating from a local volcanic complex (Nash et al., 1995). Quaternary pediment gravels and eolian sands lie to the west of the Slumbering Hills and cover much of the Sleeper project area.

Basin and Range extension was first manifested in lacustrine and alluvial volcaniclastic materials deposited prior to 17 Ma, and in numerous high-angle normal faults with northerly to northeasterly strikes. Although Auld Lang Syne rocks are significantly deformed at small scales, district-wide tilts in the northern Slumbering Hills suggest the principal structure is a northeast-trending arch or anticline with a southeast-dipping east limb and a northwest-dipping west limb (Nash et al., 1995).

6.2	DISTRICT AND LOCAL GEOLOGY

The Sleeper project is located on the western flank of the northern Slumbering Hills and sits largely within the adjacent Desert Valley to the west. The project area encompasses more than 180 square kilometers (Figure 3-2). Quaternary gravels, alluvium, colluvium, and a surficial sequence of eolian sand infilled the Desert Valley and covered much of the Sleeper deposit.

The Sleeper project straddles a major west-dipping range-front normal fault along the northern Slumbering Hills (Wood, 1988; Nash and Trudel, 1996). This principal fault (the “range-bounding fault”) has a total displacement up to 1,000 meters in the western Desert Valley hanging wall (Hudson, 2014b) and the Sleeper gold-silver mineralization is situated nearly entirely in the hanging wall. In the deposit area, this main range-bounding fault is interpreted by Hudson (2013a, 2013b) to dip at approximately 45° West and to separate Mesozoic metasedimentary rocks of the Auld Lang Syne Group in the footwall from middle Miocene lavas, flow breccia, and lesser epiclastic and tuffaceous rocks in the hanging wall. Previous workers (e.g., Wood, 1988; Nash et al., 1991; 1995; Nash and Trudel, 1996) interpreted an approximately 45° West depositional contact between basement Auld Lang Syne and the overlying

30<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Miocene volcanic rocks, which were cut dominoes-style by numerous steep (>70°) west-dipping normal faults including the range-bounding fault. The current Sleeper geological model uses the interpretation of Hudson (2013a, 2013b; 2014a, 2014b).

Basement rocks of the Auld Lang Syne Group in the Sleeper area are subdivided into a basal calcareous phyllite, a middle unit of argillite and phyllite, and an upper unit of fine- to coarse-grained quartzite with lesser phyllite (Ferdock et al., 2005). These rocks exhibit pervasive slaty cleavage and contain abundant muscovite from recrystallization during regional metamorphism. The Auld Lang Syne Group has a structural thickness of well over one kilometer near the Sleeper project. Rocks of the Auld Lang Syne Group host the gold-bearing quartz-adularia veins that were exploited at the Jumbo and Alma mines.

31<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 6-1: Regional Geologic Map of the SleeperProject Area

(modified from Nash et al., 1995 and Ressel et al., 2020)

32<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Tertiary volcanic rocks (Nash et al., 1985) unconformably overlie and intrude Auld Lang Syne metasediments in the northern and eastern parts of the Slumbering Hills. The basal unit is a sequence of volcaniclastic rocks and local volcanic flow strata of intermediate composition up to 200 meters in thickness. The age of this unit is uncertain, but pre-dates a 17.3 Ma quartz-adularia vein cutting this unit at the Jumbo mine to the southeast of the Sleeper mine (Conrad et al., 1993).

A sequence of intermediate volcanic flows and dacitic to basaltic flow breccias overlying the basal volcaniclastic unit is approximately 150 meters in thickness. The Sleeper rhyolite, the main host of gold mineralization within the Sleeper pit, overlies the basalt unit. The Sleeper rhyolite is a sequence of flows, dikes, sills, and flow domes of quartz-eye rhyolite with sanidine phenocrysts and local biotite. The age of the Sleeper rhyolite is approximately 17 Ma, but there are no direct age dates (Nash et al., 1995). Rhyolite to quartz latite dikes and sills of similar appearance are found to the east and southeast of the Sleeper mine in the Slumbering Hills.

The Sleeper rhyolite is overlain by significant volumes of peralkaline rhyolite ash flow tuff erupted at approximately 16.2 to 16.1 Ma (Conrad et al., 1993). This strongly welded outflow unit originated from the McDermitt caldera area about 80 kilometers to the north; outcrops can be seen in the northern Slumbering Hills where it is up to about 75 meters thick. Southeast of the Sleeper mine, the Awakening rhyolite of approximately 13.6 Ma (Conrad et al., 1993) appears to have formed several flow domes along normal faults with thicknesses of up to approximately 180 meters. These rocks are generally unaltered, in contrast to the strongly altered flows of the Sleeper rhyolite (Nash et al., 1995). Some silicified but unmineralized intrusive dikes of Awakening rhyolite occur near the flow domes.

The middle Miocene basalt and rhyolite lavas, domes, and small-volume tuffs of the Slumbering Hills and Desert Valley are collectively referred to as the Sleeper volcanic center (“SVC”), which has a known extent of approximately 40 square kilometers. The SVC is spatially and genetically linked to epithermal deposits in the Slumbering Hills, which include the Sleeper deposit and deposits exploited at the Jumbo, Alma, and Mohawk mines to the southeast (Figure 6-3). Sleeper mineralization is closely associated with rhyolitic dikes and domes of the SVC.

Pliocene basalt dikes occur locally southeast of the Sleeper mine and represent the youngest igneous unit recognized in the Slumbering Hills. Older alluvium (Pliocene to Quaternary; Nash et al., 1995) occurs in the Sleeper project area. This includes gravels containing weathered quartz veins and visible gold covering the Sleeper deposit. Airfall tuff dated at 2.1 Ma locally overlies the Pliocene alluvium (Conrad et al., 1993). Younger Quaternary pediment gravels, alluvium, and colluvium overlie the Pliocene tuff and occur along the flanks of the Slumbering Hills and as infill within Desert Valley. A capping of eolian sand covers much of the Desert Valley and adjoining hills.

In 2013, Paramount initiated a re-logging program of drill core and RC chips. Based on their work, the following descriptions reflect the current interpretation of the lithologic and structural setting at Sleeper. A stratigraphic column based on that interpretation for the property area is shown in Figure 6-2.

33<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 6-2: Stratigraphic Column for the SleeperProperty

(from Wilson et al., 2015)

The following descriptions summarize the stratigraphic column in Figure 6-2:

●	Qal: Includes alluvium (sand and gravel) and waste dumps. Gravel of both volcanic and<br>metasediments dominate near the bedrock contact. These are interbedded with eolian sand towards the surface. Near the Range Front fault, metasediments dominate the gravels. This alluvial unit varies from less than 1 meter to >200 meters in<br>thickness southwest of the Sleeper pit.
●	Tr: Includes the Sleeper rhyolite and possible younger rhyolite flows. Includes vitric and<br>non-vitric rhyolite or dacite with up to 20% plagioclase phenocrysts ranging from <2 millimeters and rarely up to 9 millimeters; trace sanidine and quartz phenocrysts. Contains 3 to 5% (rarely up to 15%)<br>mafic phenocrysts, usually ranging from <1 millimeter and rarely up to 2 millimeters; typically obscured by alteration. In the least-altered rocks, orthopyroxene is slightly more abundant than biotite.
---	---
●	Tif: Felsic intrusions similar to the Sleeper rhyolite, but usually with fewer<br>phenocrysts; may lack quartz phenocrysts. Forms numerous dikes; some intrusions develop into sills or possibly laccoliths.
---	---
●	Tb: This unit is dominantly comprised of basalt flows to basaltic andesite. Individual<br>flows vary from a few meters to up to 100 meters thick. Most tops of flows are highly vesicular and commonly display aa-style textures. Few flows do not contain vesicles. Rocks are aphanitic or contain rare,<br>small phenocrysts. Some flows have up to 7% mafic phenocrysts of augite and/or
---	---
34<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

olivine <0.5 millimeters in size. Others may have up to 5% plagioclase phenocrysts <1 millimeter in size. Near the top of the mafic sequence of flows is a distinctive andesite or dacite<br>with about 10% highly elongate, small plagioclase phenocrysts. Interbedded with the flows are typically discontinuous volcanic wacke typically less than 20 meters thick. There are also debris flows of mafic material and rare mafic tuffs. The entire<br>sequence likely exceeds 300 meters in thickness.
●	Tim: Mafic dikes (basalt to basaltic andesite), usually aphyric to aphanitic. These<br>intrude the Sleeper rhyolite, but many are probably older. At deeper levels, particularly in the metasedimentary units, these dikes appear as fine-grained diabase to gabbro with augite and olivine.
---	---
●	Tvs: Wacke, usually fine-grained and rarely laminated. The upper part is a volcanic wacke.<br>With depth, thin, flat clasts of Mesozoic Auld Lang Syne metasediments become intermixed, usually as distinctive fine-grained conglomerate beds; the unit becomes more quartz-rich near the base. In the north-central part of the Sleeper pit, this unit<br>may exceed 150 meters in thickness, but elsewhere is tens of meters thick. Underlying the wacke is a unit of breccia up to 50 meters thick of Auld Lang Syne clasts, which may contain interbedded wacke; this breccia unit overlies the Auld Lang Syne<br>Group in the northeastern part of the Sleeper pit.
---	---
●	Tc: Breccia containing angular clasts of Auld Lang Syne metasediments up to 1 meter in<br>size. Rarely contains interbedded basaltic wacke. Thickness ranges between 0 to 50 meters.
---	---
●	Mz: Weakly-metamorphosed carbonaceous, phyllitic, siltstones and fine-grained, arkose to<br>quartz arenite of the Auld Lang Syne Group. Very rarely carbonaceous, silty; limestone is locally interbedded and usually intensely folded. Intruded by Mesozoic mafic to felsic dikes and sills.
---	---

A geologic map of the SVC and a cross-section through the Sleeper mine area are shown in Figure 6-3 and Figure 6-4, respectively.

35<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 6-3: Geologic Map of the Sleeper VolcanicCenter

(from Nash et al., 1995)

36<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 6-4: Cross-Section looking North through theSleeper mine area

(from Wilson et al., 2015)

6.3	MINERALIZATION

Gold-silver mineralization in the Sleeper deposit occurs within a zone of relatively large displacement normal faults adjacent to and west of the Range Front fault. The Sleeper deposit consists of four spatially overlapping types of gold-silver mineralization (Nash et al., 1995; Kornze and Phinisey, 2002):

●	Banded quartz-adularia-electrum-(sericite) veins;
●	Silica-pyrite-marcasite cemented breccias;
---	---
●	Quartz-pyrite-marcasite stockworks; and
---	---
●	Alluvial gold-silver placers in Pliocene gravels.
---	---

A network of low-displacement faults extends approximately 1,000 meters west in the hanging wall of the principal Range Front fault. This array of faults cuts and displaces stratigraphy within the Sleeper deposit; some faults host ore and other faults truncate ore zones. The Sleeper veins generally dip to the west at moderate to high angles, but some secondary hanging wall offshoots of the principal vein structures dip steeply to the east. The Sleeper deposit is draped by several meters of unconsolidated post-mineralization cover and is generally not exposed in outcrop.

Prior to mining, significant zones of mineralization at Sleeper extend for about 1,500 meters along strike and about 600 meters of width (Wood, 1988). Mineralization persists from near the pre-mining surface to depths of more than 610 meters (Hedenquist, 2005). At least eleven veins with bonanza grades were mined historically. By far the most productive were the “Sleeper Main”, “East” (i.e., “Wood”), “West”, and “Office Pit” veins. The Sleeper Main vein produced more than 0.5 Moz of gold from a single bonanza ore shoot, which had a strike length of 850 meters and width ranging from 0.3 to 4.6 meters. Level plans of bonanza-grade veins show they collectively encompass an area approximately 1,200 meters long by 450 meters wide. Most discrete bonanza zones consisted of a series of sheeted chalcedonic quartz veins distributed over cumulative widths of 10 to 25 meters. Individual veins ranged in thickness from a few

37<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

centimeters to locally 5 meters. The bonanza part of the Sleeper Main vein (34 g Au/t) extended from near the top of bedrock to depths of about 213 meters; below that, the vein irregularly contains grades of as much as 8 g Au/t to depths of about 460 meters. Higher-grade vein- and breccia-hosted mineralization are localized at and near structural intersections and flexures in fault orientation.

Gold-silver mineralization is associated with marcasite and occurs as electrum and as visible particles within banded quartz veins. Antimony minerals including stibnite and kermesite are commonly identified proximal to and within more anomalous gold zones. Auriferous, banded quartz veins occur and are predominantly easterly dipping and crosscut quartz-sulfide altered volcanic strata. The banding texture is derived from multiple stages of fluid transport saturated with silica and sulfides. Commonly, bands of dark sulfides and framboidal marcasite are parallel to the microcrystalline quartz bands.

Quartz veins with high gold-silver grades at Sleeper extended up to the unconformity with overlying gravels, indicating significant post-mineralization erosion. Concentrations of alluvial gold on the down gradient or west side of the Sleeper deposit also indicate erosion of the top of the Sleeper veins. Alluvial gold is generally most abundant near the base of the alluvial cover, but at least locally may occur more than 200 meters above the bedrock unconformity.

The Sleeper deposit occurs within a large volume of highly altered rock characterized by magnetite-destructive alteration and abundant clay. Prior to mining, the Sleeper rhyolite was the principal host rock (Nash et al., 1991). The vesicular character and high iron contents of the Miocene basalt promoted the precipitation of pyrite and marcasite through sulfidation reactions. This rendered the basalt receptive to sulfide-breccia-style mineralization. The brittle and less permeable character of the Sleeper rhyolite rendered it favorable for high-grade vein mineralization.

Comprehensive reviews of the Sleeper deposit by Jackson (2006) and Jackson and Chevillon (2007) documented the chemical and alteration zonation within and immediately surrounding the Sleeper deposit. These reviews indicate the presence of a cluster of hydrothermal foci within the Sleeper deposit footprint surrounded by large, encompassing haloes of hydrothermal alteration, which are greater than 2 kilometers in diameter.

Age determinations from adularia indicate precious-metal mineralization at Sleeper formed between about 13.7 and 16.1 Ma (Conrad et al., 1993), similar to, but also much younger than, the16.3 Ma Sleeper rhyolite and underlying basaltic host rocks. A simplified cross-section model of the ore controls, mineralization, and alteration in the Sleeper deposit is shown in Figure 6-5.

38<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

West Wood breccia is highly silicified with abundant sulfides, but localized veins within the breccia can exceed 100 g Au/t.

Figure 6-5: Schematic Cross-Section Model of the Sleeper Deposit

(modified from Ressel et. al., 2020. Not to scale. Volcanic occurrences shown to the east in the Slumbering Hills may be more

vertically extensive than shown.)

6.4	DEPOSIT TYPES

Sleeper and other occurrences of gold-silver mineralization in the Slumbering Hills (e.g., Jumbo, Alma, and Mohawk) (Figure 6-3) have long been considered examples of epithermal precious-metal deposits (Wood, 1988; Nash et al., 1991; Conrad et al., 1993) that are now classified as the “low-sulfidation” type (e.g. White and Hedenquist, 1995; Hedenquist et al. 2000; Cooke and Simmons, 2000; Sillitoe and Hedenquist, 2003). Sleeper and other low-sulfidation deposits in the region are broadly related to middle Miocene (~17-15 Ma) bimodal basalt-rhyolite volcanism of the SVC associated with the northern Nevada rift (John, 2001). Epithermal deposits are important sources of gold and silver that form at shallow depths (<1.5 kilometers), at temperatures less than 300°C, and in hydrothermal systems commonly developed in association with calc-alkaline to alkaline, as well as continental tholeiitic (i.e., bimodal), magmatism (Simmons et al, 2005). Such deposits can have substantial precious-metal production (e.g., many deposits produce >5 Moz gold and >250 Moz silver) and are particularly known for the spectacular bonanza grades of some deposits (Cooke and Simmons, 2000).

Minerals associated with precious-metals in low-sulfidation systems include pyrite, sphalerite, arsenopyrite, gold-silver sulfosalts, electrum, and gold. Common gangue includes quartz, opal-CT, adularia, calcite, illite, and barite (White and Hedenquist, 1995). Gold typically occurs as electrum in association with silver sulfosalts, base-metal sulfides, and pyrite. (Cooke and Simmons, 2000). The geochemistry of low-sulfidation epithermal deposits is characterized by anomalously high concentrations of Au, Ag, As, Sb, Hg, Zn, Pb, Se, and K.

39<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 6-6 is a schematic model of a low-sulfidation epithermal mineralizing system modified from White and Hedenquist (1995), Hedenquist et al. (2000), Cooke and Simmons (2000), and Sillitoe and Hedenquist (2003). The geological setting of the Sleeper project is somewhat more complex than the simplified model in the figure, but the overall geometry and association of features are similar.

LOGO

Figure 6-6: Schematic Model of Low-Sulfidation Epithermal Precious-Metal Systems

The schematic section shows geologic relationships in typical low-sulfidation epithermal precious-metal deposits. Meteoric water circulates to depths as deep as 5 kilometers through convection driven by heat from an underlying crystallizing magma (or from heated fluids accessed through crustal extension). At depths of 1-2 kilometers below the water table, within the upflow zone, maximum temperature-pressure gradients are close to boiling conditions. At shallower levels, the local hydraulic gradient may cause rising fluids to move laterally to form outflow zones. Separated vapor with CO2 and H2S may condense in the vadose zone to form steam-heated acidic waters.

Other low-sulfidation epithermal gold-silver deposits that formed in similar bimodal volcanic settings and exhibit similar characteristics include the Hollister, Buckskin-National, Jarbidge, Rosebud, Midas, Fire Creek, Sandman, and Mule Canyon deposits in northern Nevada, as well as the Grassy Mountain deposit in Oregon and the DeLamar district of Idaho. The deposits are linked spatially and temporally to near-source volcanic rocks erupted within a discrete period in the middle Miocene from approximately 17 and 15 Ma.

40<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

7.0	EXPLORATION

Exploration conducted by Paramount commenced in 2010 and has included soil sampling, geophysical surveys and drilling as summarized below.

7.1	PARAMOUNT GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS 2010 - 2013

Paramount has completed three geophysical surveys since acquiring Sleeper in 2010 and contracted James Wright, J.L. Wright Geophysics Inc. to evaluate and interpret all of the Paramount and historical geophysical surveys. The following subsections summarize geophysical surveys conducted on the southern portion of the subject property between 2012 and 2015 for Paramount based on reports prepared by Mr. Wright who performed data processing and interpretation (Wright, 2012a; 2012b; 2015).

7.1.1 2012 GRAVITY 2012

In 2012, Paramount contracted Magee Geophysical Services LLC (“Magee”) to conduct a gravity survey south of the historical Sleeper pit. Magee conducted a gravity survey over the southern portion of the property between March 28, 2012, and April 12, 2012. The objectives of the survey were to delineate structures, lithologies, and possible alteration related to gold mineralization (Wright, 2012a). Additionally, this survey aimed to fill in areas adjacent to a previous gravity study from 2005. Magee acquired a total of 1,019 gravity stations on a 100-meter grid, a 200-meter grid, and additional, widely spaced reconnaissance stations, which were added to the previous survey database. Relative gravity measurements were made with LaCoste & Romberg Model-G gravity meters. The gravity survey was tied to the gravity base at the Winnemucca Airport (DoD reference number 0474-1). Topographic surveying was performed with Trimble Real-Time Kinematic (“RTK”) and Fast-Static GPS at the same time as gravity data acquisition. All gravity stations were surveyed for easting, northing, and elevation using the RTK GPS method or, where not possible, by Fast-Static method (Wright 2012) and tied to a GPS base station. Terrain corrections were calculated to 167 kilometers for each gravity station using various procedures for three radii around each station including 0-10 meters, 10-200 meters, and 2-167 kilometers. The gravity data were processed by Magee using the Xcelleration Gravity module of Oasis montaj (version 7.0) to Complete Bouguer Anomaly (“CBA”) over a range of densities from 2.00 g/cc to 3.0 g/cc at steps of 0.05 g/cc.

Magee provided Mr. Wright with gravity data corrected to the CBA stage. Previous work by Mr. Wright at the Sleeper property indicated that a density of 2.35 g/cc was representative of the rock types in the survey area (Wright 2012a). Mr. Wright gridded the data with a kriging algorithm using a spacing of 50 meters with additional processing to produce regional, residual, and horizontal gradient grids. All four grids were contoured for import to MAPINFO and ARCGIS.

Mr. Wright concluded that the gravity data reflected three major north-south structures extending south from the Sleeper deposit for more than 30 kilometers. The structures bound a perched basin and horst block extending along the west side of the Slumbering Hills. The basin appeared to be detached from the Sleeper deposit by a major northwest structure, locally called the “Awakening Structure”. Right lateral offset along the Awakening Structure accommodated basin and range extension and isolated the deposit area. North-South and northwest trending structures control mineralization at the Sleeper deposit with

41<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

high-grade gold associated with their intersections. Mr. Wright indicated that three major north-south structures defined by the gravity survey should be considered as corridors of interest. Reconnaissance IP surveys were also recommended for certain areas within the project boundary to identify areas of elevated sulfide concentrations (Wright 2012a).

7.1.2 INDUCED POLARIZATION SURVEY 2012

Zonge International, Inc. (“Zonge”) performed a gradient array induced polarization and resistivity (“IP/Res”) survey on the southern extent of the property during July and August 2012. The purpose of the survey was to further clarify two areas of structural complexity identified as potential extensions of the Sleeper deposit during interpretation of the gravity survey conducted in March and April of 2012 by Mr. Wright. The gradient array IP/Res data were acquired along lines oriented N90° East using 50-meter receiver dipoles with 200-meter line spacing for approximately 62.7 line-kilometers of coverage. Zonge personnel used a Trimble PRO-XR GPS receiver that utilizes the integrated real-time DGPS beacon for position corrections. Each transmitting electrode consisted of three, four-foot diameter pits lined with aluminum foil and soaked with salt water. The electrode pits connected to the transmitter with 14-gauge wire. Measurements were made at 0.125 Hz. Each receiver spread consisted of six potential dipoles, comprising 300 meters of coverage per receiver set up (Zonge, 2012).

Measurement instrumentation consisted of Zonge model GPD-32^II^ multiple purpose receivers. The electric field was measured at the receiver site using non-polarizing ceramic porous-pot electrodes connected to the receiver with insulated 14-gauge wire. The signal source was a Zonge GGT-30 transmitter- a constant-current 30 kW transmitter controlled by an XMT-32 transmitter-controller. Power was provided by a Zonge AMG-30DL motor-generator equipped with an internal voltage regulator. Transmitter-receiver synchronization was maintained with identical crystal oscillators, synchronized before data acquisition. A minimum of three measurements were saved for each data point, with outlying values accounting for extraneous noise sources (such as lightening discharges and man-made electrical currents) removed from the data set. Zonge produced an average value for chargeability and resistivity for each data point.

Mr. Wright performed data processing and interpretation (Wright, 2012b). Mr. Wright processed the data with a kriging algorithm using a spacing of 50 meters with additional processing to produce regional, residual, and horizontal gradient grids. All four grids were contoured for import to MAPINFO and ARCGIS. Mr. Wright concluded that the north-south and northwest oriented structures interpreted from the 2012 gravity survey showed excellent correlation with the resistivity data. Mr. Wright also compared the resistivity and chargeability data to earlier IP and magnetic data. Good agreement was found between all the data sets. The data showed weak chargeability anomalies in both survey areas, relative to structures.

Mr. Wright proposed drilling six holes to further test the anomalies identified. The holes were proposed in areas with chargeability highs in geologic settings similar to that found at the Sleeper deposit and with interpreted structural connections to the deposit.

7.1.3 AIRBORNE MAGNETIC SURVEY 2015

Precision GeoSurveys of Vancouver, British Columbia performed an airborne magnetic survey of the southern portion of the Sleeper property on June 22-23, 2015. A total of 1,024 line-kilometers was

42<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

surveyed on lines spaced 100 meters apart, and on an east-west orientation, with north-south tie lines every 1,000 meters. The survey lines were flown with a helicopter with a laser altimeter on board and the magnetometer attached to a boom extending from the front of the aircraft. The laser altimeter was used to measure the height of the magnetometer over the terrain (Wright, 2015).

The data was processed by Mr. Wright who merged the 2015 airborne magnetic survey with one flown in 1997 by Placer over the northern portion of the property, which included the Sleeper deposit. The surveys overlapped in the central portion of the property to allow level shifting of the 1997 survey to match that of the 2015 survey. Once the earlier survey data were corrected, Mr. Wright processed the combined data with a kriging algorithm at a spacing of 25 meters. The gridded field data was then reduced to the pole (“RTP”) with a USGS algorithm. The RTP was further processed to produce a first vertical derivative (“VD”). All three of the processed datasets were then contoured as MAPINFO and ARCGIS files and used for interpretation (Wright, 2015).

Mr. Wright overlayed the interpreted magnetic data from the 2012 survey over the combined gravity data. Mr. Wright’s interpretation included delineation of a large Jurassic intrusive body located south of the Sleeper deposit, which is bounded by two north-south structures to form a perched basin. A ridge to the west of the basin is composed of the Jurassic intrusion and is offset by a group of northwest oriented structures. Drilling by Paramount and earlier operators confirms that much of the southern portion of the subject property is underlain by the Jurassic intrusion and potentially mafic dikes.

7.2	PARAMOUNT DRILLING 2010 - 2013

Paramount commenced drilling at Sleeper in October of 2010 and continued through spring 2013. A total of 27,107 meters were drilled in 149 holes as summarized in Table 7-1. Approximately 67% of the holes and 45% of the meters were drilled with RC methods, including 65 shallow RC holes to sample historical waste dumps in the mine area. Nine holes in the waste dumps were drilled using sonic methods. Conventional wireline core drilling methods were used for 26% of the holes and 54% of the meters drilled by Paramount, including one hole started with RC and finished with a core tail. Paramount’s drill hole collar locations are shown in Figure 7-1.

The initial drill campaign focused on two mine area zones (West Wood and Facilities areas) with the twin goals of validating the 2009 resource block model, and to demonstrate continuity/strike extension. Several holes were drilled to obtain samples for metallurgical testing.

Table 7-1. Paramount Drilling in 2010 - 2013

Year	Core<br><br><br>Holes	Core<br><br><br>Meters	RC<br><br><br>Holes	RC<br><br><br>Meters	RC + CoreTail Holes	RC + CoreTail Meters	SonicHoles	SonicMeters	TotalHoles	TotalMeters
2010	5	1,408.8	8	2,418.6	1	296.0			14	4,123.4
2011	10	2,348.6	74	6,283.5			9	359.66	93	9,027.8
2012	14	6,009.4	18	3,499.1					32	9,508.6
2013	10	4,447.7							10	4,447.7
Totals	39	14,250.5	100	12,201.2	1	296.00	9	359.66	149	27,107.4
43<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Figure 7-1: Map of Drill Holes Withinthe Sleeper Deposit

LOGO

7.2.1 2010-2011 PARAMOUNT DRILL PROGRAM

During 2010 and 2011, Paramount drilled 15 core holes, 82 RC holes, nine sonic holes and one RC with core tail hole for a total of 13,151 meters. All drill hole locations were surveyed by hand-held GPS devices. The azimuth was marked on the ground to align the drill rig, whereas the angle was determined by the driller and checked by the site geologist when possible.

The RC drilling was carried out by DeLong Drilling and Envirotech Drilling, both of Winnemucca, Nevada. Some of the holes were drilled with a Schramm T685W truck-mounted rig. The equipment included an 11.4-centimeter pipe and a face-return bit. The holes were drilled with a combination of a hammer bit at shallow depths and a tricone or rock bit once the hammer could no longer progress. The holes were drilled with water injection in the upper portion of the hole and with groundwater below the water table. The drill rig was equipped with a rotary splitter. The drillers were allowed to use bentonite to stabilize the holes when needed. The RC sample interval was 1.52 meters (5.0 feet). Each sample was collected in a cloth bag inside an 18.9-liter bucket to assure that adequate coarse and fine material was collected.

44<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Each drill hole was surveyed down-hole by International Directional Services (“IDS”) to measure deviation. RESPEC is unaware of the instrumentation, methods and procedures used by IDS.

The sonic drilling was conducted by Boart Longyear with an LS600 Sonic drill that utilized a combination of various sonic frequencies, rotation, core barrel, and borehole casing to collect samples in the unconsolidated mill tailings. The samples are retrieved directly from the core barrel and put into plastic bags the size of the core and labeled by the driller with the end depth of the sample interval.

The core drilling was carried out by Redcor Drilling of Winnemucca Nevada and American Drilling Corp. of Spokane, Washington. RESPEC is unaware of the rig type(s), methods and procedures used for the core drilling.

7.2.2 2012-2013 PARAMOUNT DRILL PROGRAM

Paramount drilled a total of 13,956 meters in 42 holes in 2012 and 2013 (Table 7-1). RESPEC’s drilling database includes 24 core and 18 RC holes drilled by Paramount in 2012. It appears that similar down-hole survey methods and drilling methods and procedures from the 2011 program were used for the 2012 and 2013 RC and core holes, however RESPEC is unaware of the contractors and rig types used.

The Paramount drilling in 2010 through 2013 provided infill and added confidence to some of the historical drilling results within the “Facilities” and “West Wood” areas of the remaining, unmined portions of the Sleeper gold-silver deposit. No new mineralization was discovered with the Paramount drilling, but this drilling resulted in validation of earlier historical results and the core drilling provided samples for metallurgical testing as discussed in Section 10. Representative drill hole cross-sections showing the drilling results are provided in Section 11.0.

7.2.3 2021 PARAMOUNT DRILLING

After the effective date of the drilling database for the current mineral resources presented in Section 11.0, RESPEC was made aware of nine RC holes for more than 2,265 meters drilled in 2021 near the Sleeper open pit and the “Range Front” areas (Figure 7-2). Three of these holes were intended to be finished with core tails but were not completed to the planned RC depths and no core drilling was done. Assays, drill logs, and down-hole surveys have not been received for the 2021 drill holes and RESPEC has not verified the 2021 drill data and results.

45<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 7-2: Map of 2021 Drill Collar Locations

(from Paramount, 2021)

7.3	PARAMOUNT EXPLORATION ASSESSMENT 2020

In 2020, Paramount conducted a target generation exercise for the Sleeper project with the assistance of RESPEC geologists. The exploration potential of the Sleeper project is discussed in Section 23.5.

7.4	HYDROGEOLOGY

The authors are not aware of any relevant hydrogeology data obtained by Paramount. RESPEC recommends that Paramount compile and evaluate any relevant historical hydrogeology data to the extent it may be available.

7.5	GEOTECHNICAL DATA

The authors are not aware of any relevant geotechnical data obtained by Paramount. RESPEC recommends that Paramount compile and evaluate any relevant historical geotechnical data to the extent it may be available.

46<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

8.0	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, AND SECURITY

This section summarizes all information known to RESPEC relating to sample preparation, analysis, security, and quality assurance/quality control (“QA/QC”) procedures that pertain to the Sleeper project. The information has either been compiled by RESPEC from historical records or provided by Paramount. Much of this section has been extracted and modified from Gustin and Fleming (2004), Giroux et al. (2009) and Wilson et al. (2015, 2017).

The historical records of sample preparation, analysis, security, and QA/QC procedures summarized below are incomplete and have not been fully compiled and evaluated by Paramount. RESPEC recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate the existing historical information to the extent it is available.

8.1	HISTORICAL SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES ANDHISTORICAL SAMPLE SECURITY
8.1.1	AMAX, PLACER DOME, AND X-CAL 1983 - 2002
---	---

Available information was summarized by Gustin and Fleming (2004) who stated:

“The authors do not have any documentation for sample preparation, bagging, security, and transportation practices used by Amax and Placer Dome. However, summary data sheets and summary reports prepared by these companies, their employees and geological consultants, and the analytical laboratories are available. The sampling done prior to X-Cal was handled by geological and engineering employees of and consultants to large, professional Canadian and American mining companies. It is not unreasonable to expect that these persons used sampling techniques in accordance with industry-accepted protocols. These organizations reportedly used accredited commercial laboratories in addition to in-house laboratories.

X-Cal has established and maintained a strict regimen of quality control and quality assurance procedures in the handling, bagging, transportation, security, preparation, and analysis of exploration samples taken from the Sleeper project. According to information made available to the authors, X-Cal used Bondar Clegg and Chemex for all of their assaying. Bondar Clegg is now wholly owned by Chemex, which is ISO 9002 registered and certified by KPMG in Canada and the U.S.A.

X-Cal’s sample handling, analysis and security procedures are described below. X-Cal’s exploration samples were protected from contamination or disturbance from third parties by storage on plastic sheeting inside a guarded perimeter fence at the sample storage sites. No samples were collected by officers or directors of the company or any associate of the issuer. The samples were drilled, collected, transported, and processed by independent contractors.

For samples submitted to Chemex, the procedures are described below. Chemex picked up the samples and transported them directly to its sample preparation facility in Elko, Nevada, using chain-of-custody identification and tracking procedures. Chemex prepared the samples

47<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

for assay and geochemical analysis. If the samples were wet, they were dried in low temperature ovens. Then, depending on the type of analysis requested, the samples were split, sieved, crushed, and pulverized. Finally, Chemex shipped the pulps to its laboratory in Vancouver, British Columbia for final chemical analysis, maintaining custody of the samples the entire time. The authors do not know procedures used for samples submitted to Bondar-Clegg. X-Cal has used a variety of quality control procedures in its verification of assay values reported by Chemex. Two kinds of check assays were completed. Duplicate samples were selected by X-Cal personnel and analyzed by Chemex. In addition, assay “standard” samples, which have a verified known, measured content of minor and trace elements, were sent to Chemex along with regular samples in each given shipping batch. Where higher gold values were encountered in the drilling or the presence of visible gold is suspected by visual geologic logging and/or the panning-sluicing of samples, X-Cal requested a screen fire Metallic assay. All samples were sent to Chemex in Elko, Nevada. X-Cal’s routine procedures involved submitting blanks and standards with each batch of samples. Duplicate samples were sent to American Assay Laboratories in Reno. The sampling and assaying procedures utilized by X-Cal on its Sleeper project appear to have been professional and consistent with industry practice.”

Bondar-Clegg and Chemex were commercial analytical laboratories independent from X-Cal. RESPEC is unaware of the specific laboratory certifications held by Bondar-Clegg and Chemex at the time of analysis of the X-Cal samples.

Records of laboratory sample preparation and analytical methods used by AMAX, Placer Dome, and X-Cal prior to 2003 are incomplete but to some extent exist in the files of Paramount. RESPEC recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate this data.

8.1.2	NEW SLEEPER GOLD 2004 - 2005

The methods and procedures used by the New Sleeper Gold joint venture for sample preparation, sample security and analysis of the 2004 and 2005 RC drilling samples have been summarized by Kornze et al. (2006) as follows:

”New Sleeper followed the regimen of quality control and quality assurance procedures in the handling, bagging, transportation, security, preparation, and analysis of exploration samples taken from the Sleeper Gold Property as defined in the written QA/QC protocol. New Sleeper used American Assay Laboratories and ALS Chemex for all of its assaying. Both laboratories are based in Reno.

New Sleeper’s sample handling, analysis and security procedures followed generally accepted industry standards. Samples were protected from contamination or disturbance from third parties by storage on plastic sheeting inside a guarded perimeter fence and/or at the core logging and storage facility at Sleeper inside the perimeter fence. During the exploration drilling campaigns in 2004 and 2005 persons were present at the Sleeper site on a seven-day basis and at night the access gate was locked. This ensured security of samples. No samples were collected by directors of the company or any associate of the issuer. The samples were drilled, collected, transported, and processed by independent contractors.

48<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Most drill samples were processed by American Assay Laboratories. American Assay picked up the samples from the core shed at Sleeper and transported them directly to its sample preparation facility in Sparks, Reno, Nevada, using chain-of-custody identification and tracking procedures. American Assay prepared the samples for assay and geochemical analysis. If the samples were wet, they were dried in low temperature ovens. Then, depending on the type of analysis requested, the samples were split, sieved, crushed, pulverized, and analyzed at Sparks. American Assay laboratories thus maintained custody of the samples the entire time. Finally, American Assay laboratories shipped the pulps back to Sleeper where they have been stored in secure steel containers.

New Sleeper used a variety of quality control procedures in its verification of assay values reported by American Assay Laboratories. Duplicate samples were collected from RC holes and included in each batch dispatched from the Sleeper Gold Property site. In addition, assay “standard” samples, which have a verified known, measured content of gold and silver, were sent to American Assay Laboratories along with regular samples in each given shipping batch. Standard samples were submitted with all drill sample consignments irrespective of drilling method. Generally, 1 in 20 samples was a “standard”. Where higher gold values were encountered in the drilling or the presence of visible gold is suspected by visual geologic logging New Sleeper’s protocol required a screen fire Metallic assay. Selected drill samples were also submitted to a third party for check assay following completion of the primary analysis by American Assay Laboratories. These samples representing approximately1 in 20 were in sent to ALS Chemex.”

RESPEC is unaware of the laboratory sample preparation and analytical methods used by New Sleeper Gold. RESPEC believes that this information likely exists in the files maintained by Paramount and recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate this information to the extent it is available.

RESPEC is unaware of the actual QA/QC procedures used by New Sleeper Gold, or the results of analyses of QA/QC samples that may have been used by New Sleeper Gold. RESPEC believes significant QA/QC information from New Sleeper Gold has not been compiled or evaluated by Paramount. RESPEC recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate the New Sleeper Gold QA/QC procedures and results to the extent they are available.

8.1.3	X-CAL 2003 - 2007

According to Giroux et al. (2009), X-Cal’s procedures for core and RC samples were as follows:

”American Assay Laboratories were scheduled to pick up the sample “cribs” near the end of a 10-day drilling shift. Predominantly one drill hole was placed in the shipping crib. If additional crib room is needed to ship a few samples from another drill hole, a plastic liner separates the two sample sets. This procedure helps the lab personnel sort the core or RCD samples after delivery to the Sparks, Nevada prep facilities and prevents co-mingling of drill holes located in different target areas. Duplicate RCD samples were collected from every drill hole on 150 feet increments. Example: drill hole FAC-07-55, sample interval 145-150 feet would have a duplicate split collected at the wet splitter and labeled 145-150 D. The duplicate RCD samples were temporarily stored on plastic liners near the geology office. The duplicate samples for

49<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

each individual drill hole once air-dried were placed in larger shipping bags labeled with drill hole numbers and intervals.

The duplicate samples were stored at Sleeper mine site until a shipment quantity “batch” would be ready for transport. The samples would be hand delivered by Sleeper personnel to the ALS Chemex’s prep facilities located in Winnemucca, Nevada. Assay submittal sheets and standards accompanied the samples and copies of the submittals were retained by X-Cal for archive.

Duplicate samples were collected at the RCD rig every 150 feet (45 meters) and identified by a letter “D” following the footage designation. Duplicate samples of specific core intervals were selected from sample rejects after the principle [sic] lab preparation and assays were completed. Commercial standards of various gold concentrations (pre-packaged pulps) were introduced into the analytical lab’s sample stream at the pulp stage.”

American Assay Laboratories (“AAL”) and ALS Chemex (“Chemex” or “ALS”) were commercial analytical laboratories independent of X-Cal. RESPEC is unaware of the specific laboratory certifications held by AAL and Chemex during 2003 through 2007.

During 2003 at Chemex, gold was determined by fire-assay fusion of a 50-gram aliquot followed by an atomic adsorption (“AA”) finish. In some cases, gold was also determined by fire-assay fusion of a 50-gram aliquot followed by a gravimetric finish. Silver was determined by AA and inductively coupled plasma optical-emission spectrometry (“ICP-OES” or “ICP”) after a 4-acid digestion. In some cases, silver was determined by fire-assay fusion followed by a gravimetric finish.

At AAL during 2003, gold was determined by fire-assay fusion followed by a gravimetric finish. Silver was determined by AA after a 2-acid digestion and in some cases by fire-assay fusion with a gravimetric finish.

The same analytical methods were used at ALS and AAL for drill samples analyzed during 2004 -2006. In addition, some samples were analyzed for gold by both labs using a 50-gram fire-assay fusion followed by an ICP finish. Some samples were also analyzed at AAL using a “metallic screen” fire-assay fusion procedure. In 2006, ALS determined silver by ICP-OES after an aqua regia digestion and gold was determined by fire-assay fusion followed by an ICP finish. Beginning in 2007 and continuing in 2008, gold and silver were determined at AAL and ALS in some cases using a 30-gram fire-assay fusion with either an AA or gravimetric finish.

The X-Cal QA/QC program in 2007 was described by Giroux et al. (2009) as follows:

”The assay quality control program used during 2007 was industry standard and included collection of field duplicate samples, insertion of reference samples (standards), and regular submission of samples to a second laboratory for check analyses. The principal laboratory was American Assay Laboratories (AAL) in Reno, Nevada, and the check laboratory was ALS-Chemex (ALS) in Reno, Nevada Prior to submitting samples to AAL, X-Cal had a stipulation protocol that drill samples submitted for assay would require an automatic check assay by AAL if gold values reported were greater than 3 grams and or silver values were greater than 60

50<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

grams. In addition, drill intervals that were inspected by the supervisory geologist and visually contained geologic features that accompany higher-grade mineralization, including but not limited to banded veins, dark sulphide bearing breccias, antimony sulphides or visible gold were reported to the lab prior to assay analysis. The principle [sic] lab preps the indicated higher-grade zone. Between each of the individual samples that have been highlighted by the supervisory geologist, 5 feet for RCD and 2 ^1^⁄2 feet for core, a barren silica sand flush was used to clean the grinding equipment.

A total of 565 samples were assayed as check samples (565 samples to AAL and 565 duplicates to ALS). The standards inserted into the sample stream totaled 359. Results of the assay quality control program show generally acceptable gold assaying. For future drilling programs, additional check assaying is recommended. Field duplicates were collected while drilling for the reverse circulation drill holes. Core duplicates were collected from processed core rejects that were returned to the Sleeper mine site by the principle [sic] laboratory (AAL) and then the same reject was sent to the secondary lab (ALS) for check analysis.”

According to historical records reviewed by RESPEC, X-Cal also inserted coarse blanks into the 2003-2007 drill sample stream. The blanks were reportedly created in-house, but the origin of the blank materials and other details are not known.

RESPEC’s evaluation of the X-Cal QA/QC information as summarized in Section 8.3.

8.1.4	EVOLVING GOLD 2009

Evolving Gold’s drilling, sample preparation and laboratory analytical methods have not been compiled by Paramount. RESPEC is unaware of the methods and procedures used and recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate the Evolving Gold drill data for consideration in future studies of the Sleeper project.

8.1.5	MONTEZUMA MINES 2011 - 2012

Montezuma Mines’ drilling, sample preparation and laboratory analytical methods have not been compiled by Paramount. RESPEC is unaware of the methods and procedures used and recommends that Paramount fully compile and evaluate the Montezuma Mines drill data for consideration in future studies of the Sleeper project.

8.2	PARAMOUNT SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, SAMPLE SECURITY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROLPROCEDURES

Samples from Paramount’s drilling in 2010-2013 were transported by drill contractors from drill sites to the Paramount shop at the Sleeper site facilities outside of Winnemucca, Nevada. Drill core was placed in core boxes and marked with wooden blocks, in feet, by the drilling contractor. The core was transported to the shop logging facility at site daily to have the wooden blocks converted to meters. At the logging facility, each box was photographed and placed on a core logging table or a pallet. The core was then logged by a Paramount geologist who recorded lithological, alteration, mineralization, and

51<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

structural information, including the angle of intersection of faults with the core, fault lineations, fractures, veins, and bedding. The entire length of core was then prepared for sampling.

Sample intervals were based on the geological logs in an effort to separate different lithologies and styles of mineralization and alteration. Sample length generally did not exceed 1.52 meters (5.0 feet) and, where possible, correlates to the drilling runs. If any significant veins, veinlets, healed breccias, or other potentially mineralized planar features were present, the geologist marked a line down the length of the core where the core should be sawed or split to ensure a representative sample was taken by the sampler. After logging was completed, sample intervals were marked and assigned a unique sample identification (sample tag), with the sample tag stapled inside of the box at the end of each sample interval. A duplicate sample tag for each interval was placed inside the sample bag, and the sample number was recorded in the sample tag booklet. Sample numbers were numeric and did not identify the drill hole, depth, or any other indication of sample location.

The core boxes were then moved to the sampling station where a technician cut competent core in half with a diamond-blade core saw, while highly broken core was split by hand directly from the box using a brush and spoon in an effort to take a representative half-core sample. One half of the core was placed into a cloth sample bag labeled with the sample number. The other half was placed back into the core box for future reference. The responsible technician filled out a core cutting/splitting form recording the sample number, the starting and ending footage of the sample interval, and the date. The sample bags were tied off and stored in the secure shop facility until the sample batch was ready to be shipped.

When the core samples were prepared for shipment, they were laid out in order (including quality assurance/quality control samples) at the Paramount logging facility at site. A complete sample inventory was filled out and maintained. Drill core sample bags were placed into rice bags, and each rice bag was sealed with a numbered security seal. Only samples from a single drill hole were included in a shipment. A sample submittal form was prepared with the shipment number, security seal numbers, the sample numbers, the type of analyses requested, and a list of samples to be duplicated. A hard copy of the submittal form was included with the sample shipment and an electronic copy was emailed to the lab.

No core duplicates were collected. A coarse reject (or preparation) duplicate for every 20 samples, and a pulp-duplicate analysis of every 20^th^ pulp was requested from the laboratory. Additionally, one sample in every batch of 20 samples was to be quartered and both quarters submitted to the lab as duplicates with different sample numbers. Control blanks and reference standards accompanied each 20-sample batch to the laboratory. The labs were instructed to run samples in numerical sequence to ensure that field QA/QC samples were assayed in each batch.

RC samples were collected in a cloth bag inside a five-gallon bucket to assure that adequate coarse and fine material was collected. All sample bags were labeled with a unique sample number only with careful record kept with the corresponding depth/interval/ hole number. All samples were tied and put into sample crates, which were then picked up from the drill site or from behind the locked gates of the mine site by ALS. The date and the number of samples transported were recorded on a sample handling form. The samples were arranged in a manner to ensure that all samples, blanks, and standards were accounted for, and were photographed prior to shipment for analysis.

52<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

RC rig-duplicate samples were collected at the drill rig as described in Section 7.2. For RC sampling one sample in every batch of 20 samples was quartered and both quarters submitted to the lab as duplicates with different sample numbers. Control blanks (barren material) and certified reference materials (“CRMs”) accompanied each 20-sample batch to the laboratory. The duplicates were delivered to Inspectorate, a secondary laboratory, as a check on ALS the primary laboratory. The labs were instructed to run samples in sample number numerical sequence to ensure that standard reference samples and coarse blanks were assayed in order in each batch.

During the 2010-2013 drilling programs, commercially prepared CRMs obtained from MEG and RockLabs were inserted into the sample sequence for the purpose of QA/QC. To meet Paramount’s QA/QC protocols, the standards needed to assay within three standard deviations of the recommended gold value furnished from MEG, RockLabs, and CDN. Two of the CRMs have certified silver values as well. If any samples assayed outside the three standard deviation limits, the sample previous to and after the failed sample were examined for accuracy and for cohesiveness with geology and mineralization. Any failures and surrounding samples that were thought out of the ordinary after this examination were re-assayed.

The blank materials used by Paramount are shown in Table 8-1.

Table 8-1. Paramount Blank Materials for 2010-2013

Blank ID	Certified Value	Type	Origin
AuBlank40	<0.002 ppm	coarse	MEG Labs
MEG-<br>Blank.11.01	<0.005 ppm	pulp	MEG Labs
Blank	<0.005 ppm	coarse	commercial crushed<br>white marble

Sonic drilling samples were taken directly from the drill pipe and put into plastic bags the size of the core and labeled by the contractor with the “ending” footage and an arrow. The samples were picked up from site, delivered to the shop facility and placed on the core logging tables in order. The geologist logged the samples and measured off meters. Each one-meter sample was then placed in one or two 45.7 by 61-centimeter plastic bags and closed for shipping. The samples were placed in samples bins and transported to McClelland Laboratories (“McClelland”) by DeLong Construction and Drilling Company in a large transport truck. Lids were nailed onto the sample bins to keep them secure. The samples were delivered to the laboratory the same day they were picked up from Sleeper.

The samples were logged into McClelland and adequate material for analysis was split from each one-meter sample. The samples were coarsely crushed at McClelland and then delivered to ALS for determination of gold by fire-assay fusion with an AA finish and silver by ICP analysis. CRMs were inserted between every 20 samples.

53<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

ALS crushed the samples to 75% passing a six-millimeter mesh and then split off 250-gram subsamples for pulverization to 85% at -<75 microns (200 mesh). Cleaner sand was run through the crusher every five samples or at any color change in the sample noticed by ALS technicians. Cleaner sand was pulverized between every sample in the pulverizing step. ALS was independent from Paramount and maintained an ISO 9001:2008 accreditation for quality management and ISO/IEC17025:2005 accreditation for gold assay methods.

In 2011 and 2012, silver was analyzed at ALS by ICP following a 3-acid digestion, and, in some cases, by 50-gram fire-assay fusion with a gravimetric finish. Gold was determined at ALS by both 30-gram and 50-gram fire-assay fusion with either an AA or gravimetric finish.

During 2011 and 2012, samples were also analyzed at Inspectorate in Sparks, Nevada. Silver was determined by either AA after a 4-acid digestion, or by ICP following an aqua regia digestion. Gold was determined by 30-gram and 50-gram fire-assay fusion with either an AA or gravimetric finish. Inspectorate was a commercial analytical laboratory independent from Paramount. RESPEC is unaware of the certifications held by Inspectorate in 2011 and 2012.

During 2013, all drill samples were analyzed at ALS. Gold was determined by 30-gram or 50-gram fire-assay fusion with either an AA or a gravimetric finish. Silver was determined by AA, ICP and fire-assay fusion with a gravimetric finish.

Pulps were split to separate a 30-gram aliquot for determining gold by fire assay with AA finish (ALS code Au-AA23). A separate five-gram aliquot was used for ICP-AES determination of silver and 32 major, minor, and trace elements following a four-acid digestion (ALS code ME-ICP61). Further aliquots were taken from the same pulp for fire assay with gravimetric finish (ALS code Au-GRA21) if the original gold assay exceeded the 10.0 g Au/t upper limit of detection. Samples that assayed greater than 100 g Ag/t were reanalyzed using a 10-gram aliquot with a four-acid digestion for silver and an AA finish (ALS code AG-OG62). Samples that assayed greater than 1,500 g Ag/t were reanalyzed using a 30-gram fire assay with a gravimetric finish (ALS code Ag-GRA21).

Paramount compiled an electronic database containing all historical and 2010-2013 drilling information. This database is maintained using SQL software and is housed by an off-site remote server that is controlled by a third-party database expert. All database inquiries and data requests are routed through this third-party expert. All data are controlled by Paramount’s designated data manager and this third-party expert to prevent any unauthorized changes to the Paramount database. Paramount has established QA/QC protocols for data management, verification, validation, and data screening. These protocols consist of primary and secondary checks on electronic entry of field data, drill hole data, sample information, assays, and geochemistry. All information is verified and cross-checked by Paramount and the third-party database expert to ensure accuracy.

8.3	QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS

RESPEC has compiled and evaluated QA/QC results from X-Cal’s 2003 to 2007 and Paramount’s 2010 to 2013 drilling programs that have been found as of the date of this report. Efforts are ongoing to uncover additional data where possible. Analyses of certified reference materials (“CRMs” or “standards”), blanks,

54<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

field duplicates, preparation, and pulp duplicates have been identified, and where possible, compiled and discussed in this section.

The CRMs, blanks, and field duplicates were inserted into the primary drill sample streams that were submitted to the primary lab, and the preparation and pulp duplicates were created at the primary lab. All of the QA/QC samples discussed herein were analyzed by the primary lab, with the exception of X-Cal’s core preparation duplicates.

The QA/QC sample types are described as follows.

CRMs. CRMs used in mineral exploration are usually powders comprised of rock-forming minerals that include metal(s) of interest in known concentrations, and they are used to assess analytical accuracy. CRMs analyses are evaluated using criteria for passing or failing. CRMs are usually obtained from commercial suppliers, and these suppliers provide specifications that include the average of many analyses of the CRMs by multiple labs, which is referred to as the certified value, as well as the standard deviation of the analyses from which the certified value is determined.

A typical criterion for accepting the analyses of CRMs in the mineral industry is that they should fall within a range determined by the certified (or “expected”) value ± three standard deviations.

Blanks. Blanks are samples determined to have metal concentrations less than the applicable detection limits of the metals of interest. There are two types of blanks used in the minerals industry, coarse blanks and analytical (or pulp) blanks, both of which are used to monitor for potential laboratory contamination. Analytical blanks are pulps of barren materials, and as such, can only identify contamination at the analytical stage. Since analytical contamination is rare, these blanks are of limited usefulness. Coarse blanks must be of sufficient particle size to require them to be subjected to all sample preparation stages that are required for the associated primary drill samples. Coarse blanks are used to provide information relevant as to possible laboratory contamination during sample preparation (crushing and pulverizing). The source of the cross contamination, if present, is usually attributable to the sample(s) immediately preceding the contaminated blank. Blanks yielding values over five times the detection limit are considered to be failures.

Pulp Duplicates (or Replicate Analyses). Pulp Duplicates are second analyses of the original pulps that are often performed routinely by the primary analytical laboratory. These duplicates can be used to evaluate the precision of the subsampling of the pulp and of the analysis.

Preparation Duplicates. Preparation duplicates are new pulps prepared from secondary splits of the original coarse rejects created during the first crushing and splitting stage of the primary drill samples. These samples provide information about the subsampling variance introduced during the sample preparation process, as well as to assess the representativity of the sample splitting of the coarse rejects at the laboratory.

Field Duplicates. Field (or rig) duplicates are secondary splits of drill core or RC cuttings taken at the drill rig, or in the case of core, later from the core box at the core logging and sampling site. Field duplicates

55<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

can be useful in the identification of problems in sample splitting, as well as to assess sampling variance experienced in the field.

The analytical labs and analytical techniques used for the primary drill samples and QA/QC samples, as well as the reported QA/QC insertion rates and other details, are discussed in 8.2 and Sections 8.3.2.

Table 8-2 summarizes the quantities of QA/QC data RESPEC has been able to compile as of the effective date of this report for the X-Cal and Paramount drilling, which are generally less than indicated by the reported insertion rates.

Table 8-2. Summary Countsof Sleeper QA/QC Analyses

	2003-2007		2011-2013
QA/QC Type	Au	Ag	Au	Ag
Standard (CRM):
Number in Use	N/A	N/A	12	6
Number of Analyses	N/A	N/A	387	16
Number of Failures	N/A	N/A	13	0
Duplicate:
Field Duplicate	822	875	200	199
Preparation Duplicate	642	309	0	0
Pulp Duplicate	1610	2451	0	42
Lab Preparation Duplicate	0	64	0	6
Lab Pulp Duplicate	162	11	0	0
Blank:
Pulp Blank	0	0	56	0
Coarse Blank	42	35	231	230
Lab Prep Blanks	0	0	8	10
Drill hole Samples:	51325	44980	10134	10137
Total Insertion Percent:	5.00	4.93	8.11	4.42

Table 8-3 shows summary data for the field duplicate pairs for both X-Cal and Paramount’s 2011 to 2013 (RESPEC found no QA/QC data from Paramount’s five-hole drilling program in 2010).

56<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 8-3: Summary of Results for X-Cal Historical and Paramount Field Duplicates

Laboratory	DuplicateType	DrillType(s)	Element	Period	Counts			RMA Regression	Averages as Percent
					All	Used	Outliers	y = Duplicate<br>x =<br>Original	Rel Pct Diff	Abs Rel Pct Diff
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Field Dup	R/C	Au	2003-2007	822	757	65	Y = 1.0047x + 0.0027	3.56	31.12
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Prep Dup	Core	Au	2003-2007	642	618	24	Y = 1.0229x - 0.0238	-0.97	33.64
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Field Dup	R/C<br>Core	Au	2011-2013	200	192	8	y = 0.8866x + 0.0126	8.02	31.38
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Field Dup	R/C	Au	2011-2013	137	132	5	Y = 1.5165x – 0.0439	16.60	31.78
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Field Dup	Core	Au	2011-2013	63	60	3	Y = 1.037x – 0.0107	-9.26	30.44
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Field Dup	R/C<br>Core	Ag	2003-2007	875	870	5	Y= 0.992x + 0.126	0.3	54.2
ALS Minerals <br>Inspectorate <br>ACME Labs	Field Dup	R/C<br>Core	Ag	2011-2013	225	224	1	Y = 1.063x + 0.241	-27.2	66.5
57<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

8.3.1	X-CAL HISTORICAL QUALITYASSURANCE/QUALITY RESULTS
8.3.1.1	CRMS 2003 -2007
---	---

Although RESPEC confirmed that X-Cal’s 2003 to 2007 drilling program included the use of CRMs, the documentation of the CRMs has not been found, so the CRMs could not be evaluated.

8.3.1.2	BLANKS 2003 - 2007

Table 8-4 summarizes the blanks inserted by X-Cal in 2003 through 2007.

Table 8-4. Summary of Results for Blanks 2003 - 2013

Blank ID	DrillProgram	Elem	Counts		Maximum	Dates of Analyses
			All	Above Warn	(ppm)	Start	End
Coarse Blank	2003-07	Au	38	4	0.1710	23/Mar/04	20/Jun/05
Coarse Blank	2003-07	Ag	35	1	5.3000	23/Mar/04	20/Jun/05

A total of 38 coarse blanks were found from the X-Cal drilling and these blanks were analyzed for both gold and 35 for silver with detection limits of 0.005 ppm and 0.2 ppm, respectively. This undoubtably represents a small subset of the blanks analyzed, the bulk of which were either not described in enough detail to determine the type of blank or not reported in the data evaluated by RESPEC.

Four failures for gold and a single failure for silver were identified using failure limits of five times the detection limit for gold and twice the detection limit for silver. Silver was handled differently than the normal five times detection limit since the detection limit was relatively high. Table 8-5 shows the blank failures:

Table 8-5. X-Cal Blank Failures and Preceding Samples 2003-2007

Blank	Certificate	Elem	Method	Preceding		Blank		5xDetLimit<br> <br>(ppm)
				Sample	Value<br> <br>(ppm)	Sample	Value (ppm)
Blank	SP065348	Au	ICP	27805	1.2260	27806	0.0280	0.025
Blank	SP065582	Au	F50/ICP	28127	1.6200	28128	0.0500	0.025
Blank	SP065732	Au	F50/ICP	28248	0.6720	28249	0.0300	0.025
Blank	SP068824	Au	F50/ICP	WW39-05 34018	0.0110	WW39-05 34019	0.1710	0.025
Blank	SP068894	Ag	AA	NS-01-05 30854	0.6000	NS-01-05 30855	5.3000	1.000

Three of the four blank failures are preceded by samples with higher grade gold or silver values Figure 8-1. This indicates there are likely to have been intermittent issues with the crushing circuit at AAL

58<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

between May 2004 and April 2005 that led to cross-contamination. The other failure may have been due to a mislabeled sample.

LOGO

Figure 8-1:X-Cal Gold in Blanks and Preceding Samples 2003-2007

8.3.1.3	DUPLICATES 2003 - 2007

RESPEC evaluated the various types of duplicate pairs through scatterplots showing RMA regressions, quantile/quantile plots, relative-percent difference (“RPD”) plots, and plots of the absolute value of the RPD. Two types of RPD plots were used, the maximum of the pair and mean of the pair plots, with the relative differences calculated as follows:

RPD(max) = 100 x ((Duplicate – Original))/(Lesser of (Duplicate, Original))

The relative percent difference of the mean of the pair is expressed as follows:

RPD(mean) = 100 x ((Duplicate – Original))/(Mean of (Duplicate ,Original))

The RPD(max) method yields higher magnitude relative differences as compared to the RPD(mean) calculation.

Outlier pairs were discarded from scatterplots based on visual analysis, while pairs with absolute values greater than 2000% were removed from the RPD plots. While the outliers were removed to avoid statistical anomalies, many are nonetheless relevant and should be considered as part of an overall evaluation. Only pairs with misidentified sample numbers or sample origins are irrelevant. The causes of the extreme variations therefore require further review.

Pulp Duplicates. Pulp duplicates have been found but remain in the process of compilation.

Preparation Duplicates. Giroux et al. (2009) noted that core duplicates were collected from core coarse rejects that were returned by AAL to the Sleeper mine site. Selected samples of the coarse rejects were then sent to ALS for sample preparation and analysis. These samples were therefore preparation duplicates of core drill samples, although instead of having these prepped and analyzed by the primary lab (AAL), as RESPEC recommends, they were sent to ALS. Figure 8-2 shows an RPD for the core preparation duplicates for gold.

59<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 8-2:X-Cal Gold Core Preparation Duplicates, Relative Differences 2003-2007

At relevant grades (>~0.1 g Au/t), the majority of the duplicate pairs lie between the RPD limits of +50% to -50%, most within +/-25% limits. The small percentage of pairs with much higher RPDs indicate significantly higher variability between the original sample gold analysis and the duplicate analysis. No bias is evident in the data, although the higher-variability pairs cause the red moving-average line to deflect from 0% RPD to varying extents (data that have RPDs that average ~0% exhibit no bias).

Figure 8-5 is an RPD chart that plots the absolute value (“AV”) of the RPD for each gold sample pair. This type of chart is used to show the magnitude of variability in a duplicate dataset.

LOGO

Figure 8-3:X-Cal Gold Core Preparation Duplicates, Relative Differences 2003-2007

60<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Field Duplicates. Figure 8-4 shows the RPDs of the X-Cal RC gold field duplicates.

LOGO

Figure 8-4:X-Cal Gold RC Field Duplicates, Relative Differences 2003-2007

While the moving-average line in this dataset is overly influenced by extreme outliers, which limits its usefulness, statistical analyses of the dataset indicate there is a high bias in the gold analyses of the duplicates relative to the original sample assays. However, this bias is not present if the 16% of the sample pairs are removed that have AVs of the RPDs exceeding 100%, which means the high bias is entirely caused by the 16% of the pairs that have very high variability. The silver RC field duplicates show similar relationships, which is expected as both gold and silver are reported to occur primarily within electrum.

The average AV of the RPDs is 24% for sample pairs with AVs less than or equal to 100%, which is to say most of the sample pairs within this AV range are less than 50%, a level not unusual for field duplicates. This issue is with the number of pairs having AVs of the RPDs in excess of 100% (high variability), as well as these pairs tending to have duplicates with higher grades, on average, than the original samples. It is important to note that high variability at low-grade ranges is expected, due to lower precision in analyses at these grades and higher RPDs because percentage differentials are exaggerated for low values.

Absent sample mix-ups and other data related problems, the most likely cause of the greater than 100% AV of the RPDs that cause the high bias in the RC duplicate samples is unrepresentative splitting of the RC sample cuttings at the drill rig. The best-case scenario would be that this unrepresentative splitting occurred only during the sampling of drill intervals for which the second (duplicate) was collected. This could happen if the RC sampling protocols were different for the duplicate sampling intervals versus drill intervals that only original samples were collected, which while poor practice that yields useless data, RESPEC has seen at certain projects over the years. Absent this scenario, the routine RC sample splitting was not representative approximately 15% to 20% of the time.

61<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

To illustrate the degree of variability in the X-Cal field duplicates, Figure 8-5 shows the absolute values of the relative percent differences (based on RPD(max)) for the RC duplicate pairs. Note that the pairs exceeding AVs of the RPDs of 500% are indicated by the blue lines without points at their apices, which are truncated at the top of the plot.

LOGO

Figure 8-5:X-Cal Gold RC Field Duplicates, Absolute Values of the Relative Differences 2003-2007

Field duplicates incorporate the inherent variability of the mineralization as well as the variability imparted by all other subsampling stages, including: (i) subsampling of the coarse rejects to obtain material to be pulverized; (ii) subsampling the pulverized material to obtain an assay pulp; (iii) subsampling of the assay pulp to obtain an aliquot for analysis, and (iv) the variability in the sample analyses. All variability imparted prior to the splitting of field duplicates is incorporated into the preparation duplicates.

In the case of the Sleeper duplicate datasets, approximately half of the variability seen in the RC field duplicates is evident in the core preparation duplicates. While the core preparation duplicates were not assayed at the same lab as the RC field duplicates, which is not ideal, the lack of bias in the core duplicates suggests that comparing the two datasets to evaluate variability has value.

Similar to the RC field duplicates, the core preparation duplicates are characterized by very high variability pairs at relevant gold grades, but the proportion of these pairs is less than that in the RC dataset, and the core high variability pairs are not causing bias. This supports the conclusion that there may have been RC splitting issues at the rig in the X-Cal 2003 to 2007 drilling programs.

The very highly variable pairs should be investigated to be sure of the validity of the pairs, and if valid, possible causes/nature of the variability (e.g., are they more numerous in certain time periods or in certain locations).

62<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

High variability pairs are expected due to the nugget effect imparted by the well documented occurrence of gold and silver in electrum in the Sleeper deposit. Irrespective of possible splitting issues, this inherent variability adds risk to the estimation of resources and must therefore be carefully considered in the choice of estimation methodologies.

8.3.2	PARAMOUNT QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS
8.3.2.1	CRMS 2010 -2013
---	---

Paramount used four CRMs obtained from MEG of Reno, Nevada and eight from RockLabs of Perth, Western Australia. All 12 CRMs were certified for gold, with some listing silver values, but these values were not certified. Based on available data compiled by RESPEC, the CRM insertion rate for the 2010-2013 drilling was about 4% for gold and less than 1% for silver. The lower silver insertion numbers were because not all the CRMs had listed values for silver and not every drill sample was analyzed for silver. Table 8-6 summarizes the CRMs used by Paramount that were compiled by RESPEC.

Table 8-6: CRMs used by Paramount

Standard ID	Drill<br><br><br>Years	Insertion<br><br><br>Count	Certified<br><br><br>Au ppm	Au<br><br><br>Std Dev ppm	Listed<br><br><br>Ag ppm
MEG S107005X	2011-13	32	1.347	0.0850	9.00
MEG S107006X	2011-13	34	2.850	0.3640	8.00
MEG S107010X	2011-13	17	6.405	0.3020	18.00
MEG-Au.09.02	2011-13	35	0.185	0.0190	0.10
OxA89	2011-13	29	0.084	0.0080
OxC30	2011-13	18	0.200	0.0050
OxD87	2011-13	59	0.417	0.0130
Si25	2011-13	44	1.801	0.0440	33.25
Si42	2011-13	40	1.761	0.0540
SJ63	2011-13	31	2.632	0.0550
SL61	2011-13	30	5.931	0.1770
SN16	2011-13	18	8.367	0.2170	17.64

RESPEC identified three high failures and ten low failures in the ALS analyses for gold that would be subject to further review. Three of the four CRMs from MEG had slight negative biases, as did five out of eight from RockLabs. Three CRM pulps listed on three certificates from this time frame were sent to Inspectorate in Reno, Nevada. Because so few of the samples were sent to Inspectorate, and the gold detection limits were the same, the two labs were evaluated together. Results for the CRM gold analysis are summarized in Table 8-7, and the failures are detailed in Table 8-8.

63<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 8-7. Summary of Sleeper GoldResults for Certified Reference Materials 2010-2013

Standard ID	Grades in Au ppm					Dates Used		Failure Counts		Biaspct
	Target	Ave	Max	Min		First	Last	High	Low
MEG S107005X	1.347	1.336	1.490	1.130	32	7/9/2011	8/26/2012	0	0	-0.8
MEG S107006X	2.850	3.001	3.350	2.150	34	7/13/2011	8/31/2012	0	0	5.3
MEG S107010X	6.405	5.899	6.450	5.080	17	7/9/2011	8/26/2012	0	2	-7.9
MEG-Au.09.02	0.185	0.172	0.198	0.124	35	7/9/2011	8/26/2012	0	1	-6.9
OxA89	0.084	0.080	0.089	0.073	29	9/20/2012	6/8/2013	0	0	-4.8
OxC30	0.200	0.366	3.250	0.181	18	7/9/2011	9/20/2012	1	2	83.2
OxD87	0.417	0.410	0.431	0.392	59	7/26/2012	6/8/2013	0	0	-1.8
Si25	1.801	1.796	1.915	1.395	44	7/9/2011	4/26/2013	0	1	-0.3
Si42	1.761	1.802	1.875	1.750	40	10/5/2012	6/8/2013	0	0	2.3
SJ63	2.632	2.653	2.790	2.540	31	9/20/2012	6/8/2013	0	0	0.8
SL61	5.931	5.808	6.270	4.800	30	7/26/2012	6/3/2013	0	1	-2.1
SN16	8.367	8.087	9.603	4.610	18	7/9/2011	1/30/2012	2	3	-3.4

Table 8-8 provides further details of the gold failures.

Table 8-8. Gold Failures in the 2010-2013 Drill Program

Standard<br> <br>ID	Hole ID	Values in Au ppm				SampleNumber	Certificate
		Target forStd	Fail Type	Fail Limit	Failed<br><br><br>Value
MEG S107010X	PGC-11-007	6.405	Low	5.499	5.33	613065	RE11131983
MEG S107010X	PGC-11-014	6.405	Low	5.499	5.08	613897	WN11189542
MEG-Au.09.02	PGC-11-007	0.185	Low	0.128	0.124	613075	RE11131983
OxC30	PGC-12-021	0.200	High	0.215	3.250	616935	WN12209477
OxC30	NDRC-11-041	0.200	Low	0.185	0.181	612271	11-338-10754-01
OxC30	SDRC-11-051	0.200	Low	0.185	0.183	612548	11-338-10755-01
Si25	PGR-11-015	1.801	Low	1.700	1.395	609960	WN11114096
64<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Standard<br> <br>ID	Hole ID	<br> <br>Values in Auppm<br> <br>				Sample<br> <br>Number	Certificate
		**<br><br><br>Target for<br> <br>Std**	Fail Type	Fail Limit	**<br><br><br>Failed<br> <br>Value**
SL61	PGC-12-016	5.931	Low	5.400	4.800	614254	WN12152755
SN16	NDRC-11-041	8.367	High	9.018	9.603	612436	11-338-10754-01
SN16	NDRC-12-061	8.367	High	9.018	9.117	612745	12-338-00257-01
SN16	PGR-11-013	8.367	Low	7.716	5.330	609511A	WN11114451
SN16	PGR-11-014	8.367	Low	7.716	4.610	609762A	WN11112727
SN16	PGC-11-011	8.367	Low	7.716	7.620	613501	WN11164001

Two of the failures were from certificate RE11131983. One of the failures (sample 616935) is likely to have been a mislabeled sample, as the MEG S107006X standard is in that range and was in use at that time. Four of the failures were very close to the failure limit, and with the negative bias, these are more the result of the bias than failures. Also, it is important to note that the CRMs were analyzed by ALS using AA fire assay finish as compared to the gravimetric methods used in the standard.

Figure 8-6 shows the control chart for the CRM MEG-Au.09.02, which shows the single low side failure. A consistent low bias in the ALS analyses of this CRM is also evident. The apparent failure, adjusted for this bias, is not actually a failure.

LOGO

Figure 8-6. Gold Control Chart for MEG-Au.09.02

65<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Explanation for Figure 8-6
Items Obtained from Certificate for CRM
USL	Upper Specification Limit	Target + 3 Std Dev<br>(CRM)
Target	Expected Value (CRM)
LSL	Lower Specification Limit	Target - 3 Std Dev<br>(CRM)
Items Calculated using Paramount Data
UCL	Upper Control Limit	Avg + 3 Std Dev<br>(Population)
Avg	Mean Value (Population)
LCL	Lower Control Limit	Avg - 3 Std Dev (Population)

For silver, only six of the CRMs had a listed, uncertified value. All silver analyses were run at ALS using a three-acid digestion with an ICP finish and a detection limit of less than 0.5 ppm. The sixteen CRM analyses performed at Inspectorate for silver were run with an aqua regia digestion and an AA finish. To deal with the listed values not having a standard deviation, the LCL/UCL control limits of the sample population were used to evaluate the silver CRMs. The following table shows the details, with no failures for silver in the 2011-2013 drill program. The low-side bias on three of the CRMs (MEG S107006X, MEG S107010X, and SN16) is most likely a difference in analytical methods used.

Table 8-9. Summary of Sleeper Silver Results for Certified Reference Materials, 2010-2013

Standard ID	Grades in Ag ppm					Dates Used		Failure Counts		Bias pct
	Target	Ave	Max	Min		First	Last	High	Low
MEG S107005X	9.00	8.87	9.60	8.40	3	1/18/2012	1/23/2012	0	0	-1.5
MEG S107006X	8.00	7.15	7.20	7.10	2	1/18/2012	1/18/2012	0	0	-10.6
MEG S107010X	18.00	9.80	9.80	9.80	1	1/30/2012	1/30/2012	0	0	-45.6
OxC30	0.10	0.10	0.10	0.10	2	1/18/2012	1/30/2012	0	0	0.0
Si25	33.25	31.67	34.30	28.40	3	1/23/2012	1/30/2012	0	0	-4.8
SN16	17.64	15.72	17.60	14.00	5	1/18/2012	1/30/2012	0	0	-10.9
8.3.2.2	BLANKS 2010 -2013
---	---

Coarse blanks, including two from MEG and one created by Paramount using commercially available crushed rock, and analytical (pulp) blanks were also inserted into the drill sample stream. Based on the data compiled by RESPEC, Paramount inserted blanks at a rate of about one blank for every 30 samples. Any lab assay value greater than five times the detection limit was considered to be a failure that should be evaluated further.

A total of 231 coarse blanks were submitted with the drill samples and analyzed for gold and 230 for silver. No failures were returned. A total of 56 pulp blanks were submitted and analyzed for gold with no failures. RESPEC was also provided with a compilation of some ALS internal lab coarse blank results, comprised of eight blanks analyzed for gold and 10 for silver, and again no issues were found.

66<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 8-7 shows the gold values of the coarse blanks plotted with the preceding values. Notice that some of the higher blank gold values, while not failures, are often associated with high preceding drill sample values, which indicates an immaterial amount of cross-contamination from the prior sample into the drill sample.

LOGO

Figure 8-7 Gold Values of Paramount Coarse Blanks andPreceding Samples

8.3.2.3	PARAMOUNT DUPLICATES

Pulp Duplicates and Preparation Duplicates. Paramount’s pulp and preparation duplicate data were in the process of final compilation and subsequent analysis as of the date of this report.

Field Duplicates. A total of 137 RC field duplicates were compiled from Paramount’s 2011 to 2013 drill program. Figure 8-8 shows an RPD plot of the 121 of the field duplicate pairs; pairs in which both the original and duplicate analyses are less than the detection limit were excluded.

67<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 8-8: Paramount Gold RC Field Duplicates,Relative Differences 2010-2013

No bias at relevant grades (≥ 0.1 g Au/t) is evident. Five of the 51 pairs that have a mean-of-the-pairs ≥ 0.1 ppm exceed an AV of the RPD of 100%, and these five pairs are among the highest-grade pairs of this limited dataset, ranging from 1.1 to 2.2 ppm.

There are even fewer core field-duplicate pairs in which at least one of the duplicate and original analyses are greater than the detection limit (Figure 8-9). In this case, the available data show a consistent low bias, in which the duplicate analyses tend to be lower than the original drill sample assays. More data are needed to confirm this bias, however. Three of the 26 pairs with mean-of-the-pairs ≥ 0.1 g Au/t have AVs of the RPDs in excess of 100%.

LOGO

Figure 8-9: Paramount Gold Core Field Duplicates,Relative Differences 2010-2013

68<br> <br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

8.4	ADEQUACY OF SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY

The sample preparation, analytical, and security procedures implemented by Paramount and historical operators were all within conventional industry norms. While the documentation of the QA/QC programs of the historical operators reviewed by RESPEC to date is not complete, Paramount and RESPEC continue to review historical information and compile relevant data. Even the compilation, verification, and evaluation of Paramount QA/QC information remains ongoing. Irrespective of the ongoing evaluation, based on the information RESPEC has reviewed to date, there is little evidence of what, if any, actions were taken by historical operators to address QAQC failures that may have been identified.

As of the date of this report, potential RC sample-splitting issues in the 2003-2007 X-Cal drilling have been identified and require further evaluation to ascertain whether the problem was restricted to certain periods of drilling and/or specific areas of the deposit. It is important to note that, to the extent there is an issue, the effect is that a relatively small portion of X-Cal’s RC drill sample gold values may be understated.

The most significant issue identified is the high variability that is an inherent characteristic of the Sleeper gold-silver mineralization. As discussed, while this variability is expected due to the nature of the Sleeper mineralization, it must be addressed throughout the entire process of resource modeling.

It is the opinion of RESPEC that the sample preparation, analyses, and security of the Sleeper project operators resulted in data that is adequate as used in this report, most importantly to support the estimation of Inferred gold and silver resources.

69<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

9.0	DATA VERIFICATION

The current Sleeper drill hole database, which forms the basis for the Sleeper resource estimation, is comprised of information derived from 4,261 holes. A total of 3,994 of these holes were drilled in the general area of the Sleeper resources, including 132 Paramount holes and 3,862 historical holes. This database was then subjected to the data verification procedures discussed below and corrections were made as appropriate.

9.1	SITE VISIT

RESPEC visited the project site on five separate occasions: April 19 and November 18, 2021; March 2 and May 11, 2022, and August 14, 2023. During these visits, RESPEC inspected altered and mineralized drill core samples from several drill holes from the Sleeper deposit area and reviewed all project procedures related to logging, sampling, and data capture completed by Paramount. RESPEC inspected the conditions of sample storage at site and if historical pulps were in suitable condition for resampling. Several drill hole locations were visited while in the field and GPS coordinates were collected to compare collar coordinates in the database. Part of the visit also included time at the Winnemucca office reviewing the status and condition of the historical drill logs, assay certificates, and other paper records. RESPEC reviewed the cross-sectional geological modeling generated by Paramount geologists and consultant Don Hudson that was eventually used as a base for resource modeling.

9.2	DRILLING DATABASE VERIFICATION

Data verification is the process of confirming that data have been generated with proper procedures, have been accurately transcribed from the original sources and are suitable to be used. Additional confirmation of the drill data’s reliability is based on the evaluations of the Sleeper drill project QA/QC procedures and results, as described previously, and in general working with the data. No separate evaluations of QA/QC procedures and results were done on data from drilling outside the mineral resource areas.

Paramount’s database was from drill-collar coordinates, down-hole survey data, and assays provided in Excel spreadsheets. Beginning in May 2022, RESPEC conducted verification of Paramount’s spreadsheet database in two phases: Phase 1 involved running a series of logical tests against the current modeling database to test for data integrity issues, and correction/explanation of and documentation of any issues. For Phase 2, collar coordinates, down-hole surveys and assays were compared to original certificates or proxy data files.

Paramount also conducted a resampling program of core and pulps to verify the representativity of historical assays. RESPEC evaluated these data as well.

9.2.1	PHASE 1 – LOGIC TESTS

The initial phase logical tests of the database included a series of queries to validate the modeling database (Sleeper project Excel database). The following validation tests were conducted to identify:

●	Collars: identify collars with missing depths, collars with missing coordinates, switched or duplicated coordinates,<br>drill holes without assay intervals or intervals without assays, drill holes
70<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

<br>without collar survey information, drill holes without geology, and drill holes with illogical geotechnical information (core holes only);
●	Surveys: identify survey depths greater than total depth, survey points missing azimuth or dip values, surveys with<br>azimuth readings above 360° or below 0°, surveys with positive or flat dip angles (< ~ -45°), or outside -90° to +90°; and
---	---
●	Assays: identify illogical or incorrect ‘from’ and ‘to’ intervals; excessively large or small assay<br>or geologic intervals, assay, geologic or geotechnical intervals that are greater than collar total depth, gaps and overlaps in assay, geologic or geotechnical intervals.
---	---

When minor data integrity issues were found, they were evaluated and if warranted, corrected in the modeling database. Data issues were resolved using the data repository supplied by Paramount.

9.2.2	PHASE 2 – COLLAR, SURVEY AND ASSAY VERIFICATION
9.2.2.1	DRILL COLLAR LOCATIONS
---	---

Since the initial exploration during the early-1980s of the Sleeper Gold Property AMAX established a local grid coordinate system using a truncated state plane, NAD27, Western Nevada Zone system in feet: local X of 0 = State Plane X of 640,000; local Y of 0 = State Plane Y of 2,390,000. This local coordinate system remained in use for all data systems through to August of 2004. As of the end of August 2004, X-Cal converted all pertinent data, including the drill hole coordinates, to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) NAD1927, Zone 11 coordinate projection system in meters: local Mine Grid X of 0 = UTM X of 410,125.39; local Mine Grid Y of 0 = UTM Y of 4,573,808.38. All holes from subsequent drilling programs were surveyed in UTM coordinates.

The Paramount drilling programs have been surveyed in UTM coordinates. Paramount has not resurveyed any historical drill hole collars because they were either mined out as part of operation or reclaimed as part of mine closure. An audit of the collar data determined that most of the historical drill hole collar coordinates had been transcribed into electronic files by X-Cal as part of the update to a UTM projection system and the most prominent original source of historical collar data was found recorded onto drill logs. The vast majority of the UTM coordinates from electronic source material and mine grid coordinates on drill logs are in agreement with the coordinates found within the database.

9.2.2.2	DOWN-HOLE SURVEYS

Down-hole survey data was received as composited digital files from Paramount. An audit of records from survey logs collected by X-Cal and Paramount are consistent with surveys recorded in Paramount’s database. A preponderance of historical drill holes are lacking down-hole survey records, making it difficult to verify actual sample locations. RESPEC was unable to determine whether down-hole surveying was conducted on a consistent basis during operation by AMAX.

9.2.2.3	DRILLING ASSAY DATABASE

The second phase of the data validation was the most comprehensive, comparing the Sleeper project database to original assay certificates acquired from Paramount in both pdf and csv form. All certificates were reportedly obtained by Paramount directly from ALS Minerals (Chemex Labs), American Assay, Inspectorate Labs, or ACME Labs. None of the certificates were downloaded directly from the laboratory by RESPEC. Of the 4,330 certificates received, 674 were in digital csv form and compiled directly into

71<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

GeoSequel for comparison to Paramount’s database. The remaining 3,656 certificates were pdf scans of originals, and a portion was compared to Paramount’s database manually.

A digital audit was performed on 100% of the 47,832 records for gold and silver data against certificates received in csv format. The drill campaigns represented include all of Paramount’s drilling (NDRC-, PGC-, PGR-, SDRC- and WDRC-series), all XCAL holes (BC-, BCP-, FW-, NE-, RF-, RLIP-, SS-, WW-, XC-XR-, XW- and ZJ-series), and New Sleeper Gold (AM-, BCP-, DM-, FAC-, MC-, MV-, NS-, NWS-, OP-, SD- and SS-series). After accounting for the discrepancies related to assays below detection limits, 541 and 675 differences existed for gold and silver, respectively. These were evaluated to determine the nature of the differences, and to apply the appropriate values in the database. For the gold differences, 409 were associated with samples with multiple assays and assay types, for example, metallic screen fire, gravimetric, ICP and standard fire assays, as well as duplicates, repeats and re-runs. The prioritization of assays used in the database was normalized, with metallic screen and gravimetric assays taking precedence over original fire assays, and original assays used preferentially over duplicates, repeats and re-runs. Minor rounding differences due to inconstant conversions between oz Au/ton and g Au/t accounted for 120 of the gold differences, and the remainder were typographical or sourcing errors. For the silver differences, 333 were conversion issues, 264 were prioritization issues, and 78 were typographical errors. All errors and inconsistencies were evaluated and corrected.

Additional work was undertaken to verify historical assays in Paramount’s database, which were compared to scans of hard copy assay certificates stored at the Winnemucca office. The audit focused on all M-, S- and PPW-series holes drilled by AMAX. The most common discrepancies found were an increase in significant digits in the assay values due to conversion from imperial to metric units. These differences were not viewed as statistically significant, however, and were not considered errors. Appropriate levels of precision have been applied in the historical data for these assay values.

To perform the manual audit, a random list of 10% of the AMAX holes was generated. Scanned assay certificates were not available for many of the holes, such that 5.6% (12,999 data rows) of the total of 231,227 records from the M-, S- and PPW-series holes was ultimately performed. After the minor rounding differences were accounted for, 136 records had gold and silver values that significantly differed from Paramount’s database records. This yields an acceptable error rate of 1.0%. A majority were typographical errors that likely occurred during data entry. Some were series of assays that were shifted up or down one interval in a drill hole. All errors and inconsistencies were evaluated and corrected as needed.

No documentation was available for AMAX’s D-, EP-, G-, OH-, PFW-, TM- and WD- series holes, which are predominantly located west of PPW holes, and were assigned confidence codes of 0. These define some low-grade mineralization along the west side of the Sleeper pit but are generally located west of modeled domains.

9.2.3	RESAMPLING PROGRAMS

A resampling program of half core and pulps was completed for holes drilled by AMAX and X-Cal to test that the original samples were representative. There were 195 sample pairs for the half core with at least one of the resample or original assay greater than detection limit. There is an apparent small bias (resample assay > original assay) indicated on the chart, and the variability is generally within 75%.

72<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

(Figure 9-1). There are 15 pairs with mean-of-pairs ≥ 0.1 g Au/t have Absolute values (“AV”) of the Relative Percent Differences (“RPD”) in excess of 100%.

LOGO

There were 277 sample pairs from the pulp test (Figure 9-2). The pulps were visually inspected for moisture and contamination before being re-homogenized for analysis. The pulp resample data show less variability at about 25% to 50% in the mean-of-pairs as compared to the core assay pairs. However, there is a low bias (resample assay > original assay) indicated on the chart. Only three of the mean-of-pairs ≥ 0.1 g Au/t have AVs of the RPDs in excess of 100%.

LOGO

9.2.4	DOWN-HOLE CONTAMINATION

73<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

in post-mineral units), by comparison with adjacent core holes, and by examination of down-hole grade patterns (e.g., cyclic assay patterns related to drill-rod changes). Contaminated intervals identified during modeling were added to the drill-hole database. Ultimately, 14,800 assay intervals were removed from use in resource estimation.

9.2.5	GEOLOGIC DATA

Paramount geologists and consultant Don Hudson relogged and reinterpreted numerous historical drill holes in 2013. From the reinterpretation program a lithologic, oxidation, and structural sectional model was built using east-west oriented vertical sections, spaced every 50 meters in the central portion of the deposit, and spaced every 100 meters at the north and south ends of the deposit. Three-dimensional lithologic solids were generated from the polygonal modeling done on section, respecting drill-hole intercepts, and were used in the coding of the resource model.

Comparing the three-dimensional lithologic and structural model to the historical drill logs proved to be difficult due to vague or missing rock descriptions. The quality of drill logs varies considerably; some drill holes are described well enough to determine lithologic boundaries whereas others could only be used to define a bedrock-alluvium contact.

When evaluating the oxidation model, it was apparent that the logged data for the oxide zone had been exchanged with the sulfide logging in a significant portion of the database. Historical mining records produced by AMAX are in conflict with the redox data, providing additional evidence of the issue. RESPEC strongly recommends that Paramount investigate this logged data and modify the database as needed.

9.3	ADEQUACY OF DATA

RESPEC has verified a majority of historical and all of Paramount’s collar, down-hole survey and assay data against original certificates. Digital assay certificates for 100% of Paramount’s drilling were compared to the database, and a manual audit using scanned assay certificates was conducted on roughly 10% of most historical drilling programs. If no assay certificates were available to verify the assays of a given historical drilling campaign, lower confidence codes were assigned to drill-hole intervals and applied in the classification of resources (Section 11.8.1). Some data was removed from use in resource estimation based on down-hole contamination noted on drill logs, conflicting geology, or assay cyclicity.

The results of the core and pulp resampling program for holes drilled by AMAX and X-Cal indicate there is some bias between original and resample assays. The bias could be due to inconsistencies caused by unequal sample splits or related to differences between the assaying laboratories over time. Variability was moderate and was higher in core resamples. The exercise was not undertaken to test the accuracy of the historical assay data, rather, it provides some verification of the assays associated with their respective drilling campaigns.

In consideration of the information summarized in Sections 5 through 9 and 11 of this report data are acceptable to use to support estimation of the mineral resources. Some data was excluded based on down-hole contamination issues, and resource classification in Section 11.8.1 reflects the results of the assay audit.

74<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

10.0	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

This section has been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Jeffrey L. Woods, of Woods Process Services LLC. The information presented below was received from Paramount and sources as cited. Mr. Woods has reviewed this information and believes it to be materially accurate.

10.1	PARMOUNT METALLURGICAL TESTS

This section summarizes metallurgical test work performed by McClelland Laboratories, Inc. (MLI) of Sparks, Nevada on Sleeper drill hole samples. Specifically, this report is a summary of the following reports:

●	Report #1: Phase 2 Metallurgical Evaluation – Waste Dump, Westwood, and Facilities Composites (“bench”<br>scale tests); MLI Job No. 3486-01; January 27, 2012
●	Report #2: Heap Leach Amenability Study – Sleeper Waste Rock Composites (5) and Facilities Oxide Core<br>Composites (2); MLI Job No. 3486-01; August 16, 2012
---	---
●	Report #3: Metallurgical Tests and Analyses on 12 Sleeper Project Core Composites; MLI Job No. 3775;<br>July 28, 2014
---	---
●	Report #4: Biooxidation and Pressure Oxidation Testing – Sleeper Drill Core Composites; MLI Job<br>No. 3775; May 26, 2015 (includes Gold Deportment Mineralogical Study on 3 Samples; SGS Project 14322-001; February 10, 2014)
---	---

This report presents a summary of the test results of the four reports listed above, and this report is not intended to present all of the details contained in the reports. The purpose is to bring the results of these reports into one compiled summary.

The summary of results presented herein is organized in two parts, Test Series 1 and Test Series 2. Test Series 1 includes the tests reported in Reports #1 and #2. Test Series 2 includes the tests reported in Reports #3 and #4.

10.1.1	TEST SERIES #1

Waste Dump Sonic Drill Samples

Test results show that waste dump material is generally amenable to agitated cyanidation treatment at P80 19mm (3/4”) crush size. Gold recoveries ranged from 49.0% to 89.7%, averaging 69.7% with 96 hours of cyanidation. Silver recoveries were lower and ranged from 18.2% to 52.1%. Average Ag recovery was 34.5%. Cyanide consumptions were high for the south waste dump composites but relatively low for the west and north waste dump composites. Lime requirements were relatively high (>3kg/mt), especially for the north waste dump composites.

Flotation tests on waste dump material showed very high mass pulls to concentrate (43.3% and 49.5%). Gold recoveries were 67.1% and 69.2%. Silver recoveries were 67.2% and <61.7%.

75<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Column percolation leach tests on waste dump composite samples were performed at P80 19mm feed size. Gold recoveries were 63.6% and 75.9% for the south dump composites. Gold recoveries were somewhat higher (81.0% and 81.8%) for the west dump composites. Gold recovery for the north dump (HG) sample was 79.0%. Leaching was relatively fast, with gold extraction substantially complete in twenty (20) days. Cyanide (NaCN) and cement consumptions were moderate to high for the south dump and west dump samples. The cement requirement for the north dump sample was exceptionally high. No lime addition was used in these column leach tests.

Westwoodand Facilities Core Drill Samples

Westwood core composites (WAS, argillic silicic and WSS, strong silicic) had low direct cyanidation metal recoveries at P80 19mm and P80 75µm feed sizes (5.9% to 36.5% gold recovery). Flotation recoveries were better, but further work would be required to optimize performance to achieve acceptable metallurgical results. Concentrate regrinding, and possibly ultrafine grinding may be viable options to improve metallurgical performance.

Bond comminution tests were performed on two (2) Westwood composites. The make-up of these composites was not clearly stated, but it is assumed these were sulfide composites. Bond ball mill work index (BWi) results were 18.55 and 20.53 kWH/st. These results classified this material as hard. Abrasion index (Ai) results were 0.1894 and 0.1391. These results showed the material had moderate abrasiveness.

Facilities core composites (both oxide and sulfide) were amenable to direct cyanidation (bottle roll tests) at P80 19mm feed sizes. Sulfide composites were tested at P80 75µm, and the reduced feed size improved metal recoveries noticeably. Oxide composites were not subjected to cyanidation tests at the P80 75µm feed size.

Bond ball mill work index (BWi) results on Facilities sulfide composites were 7.53 and 8.73 kWH/st. These results classified this material as soft. Abrasion index (Ai) results were 0.0011 and 0.0060. These results showed the material had light abrasiveness.

Column percolation leach tests on Facilities oxide composite samples were performed at P80 19mm feed size. Gold recoveries were 83.1% and 84.6%. Leaching was relatively fast, with gold extraction substantially complete in twenty (20) days. Cyanide (NaCN), cement and lime consumptions were moderate. Despite the relatively high gold recoveries obtained in the bottle roll leach tests, column leach tests were not performed on the Facilities sulfide composite samples.

10.1.2	TEST SERIES #2

Results show that Facilities mixed ore was amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at P80 37.5mm (1-1/2”) and P80 19mm (3/4”) crush sizes. Gold recoveries were 71.3% and 74.2%, respectively. Facilities sulfide ore was not amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at either of the crush sizes (~25% gold recovery), which is significantly different than the results obtained in Test Series 1. In Test Series 1, gold recoveries for Facilities sulfide composites were 92.8% and 80.4% for the P80 19mm bottle roll tests.

76<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Lower grade West Wood oxide ore was amenable to bottle roll cyanidation. Gold recovery at P80 19mm was 76.4%. Gold recovery at P80 75µm was 80.7%.

Higher grade West Wood oxide ore was marginally amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at P80 19mm crush size. Gold recovery was 53.6%. Gold recovery increased to 82.8% for the ground P80 75µm feed. It is important to note that the column leach test gold recovery for this composite, at P80 19mm crush size, was significantly better (70.8% gold recovery).

Sleeper oxide ore was readily amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at P80 19mm crush size. Gold recovery was 93.9%. No other feed sizes were tested on this composite because Sleeper oxide ore was nearly “mined out” during previous commercial heap leach operation.

The West Wood, Sleeper and South Sleeper sulfide composites were not amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at P80 75µm grind size. Gold recoveries were ~29% for West Wood, ~40% for Sleeper and <23% for South Sleeper.

Wood sulfide ore was not amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at P80 19mm crush size (12.9% gold recovery). Grinding the ore to P80 75µm did not increase cyanidation recovery to acceptable levels (48.5% gold recovery).

For the above bottle roll tests, NaCN consumptions were low for mixed and oxide ore composites (<0.05 to 0.18 kg/mt ore) and generally high for sulfide ore composites (>0.5 kg/mt ore). Lime requirements (lime added) were generally high (>3 kg/mt ore) for all ore composites.

Facilities mixed ore was amenable to heap leach cyanidation at P80 37.5mm and P80 19mm crush sizes. Gold recoveries were 77.1% and 71.3%, respectively, suggesting the finer crush size had no benefit.

West Wood oxide ores were amenable to heap leach cyanidation treatment at P80 19mm crush size. Gold recoveries were 70.8% (higher grade composite) and 82.1% (lower grade composite). These recoveries were achieved in 139 and 67 days of leaching and rinsing, respectively.

Facilities sulfide ore was not amenable to heap leach cyanidation. Column leach test gold recovery was 12.9% in 88 days of leaching and rinsing.

For the column leach tests above, NaCN consumption was high. Typically, NaCN consumption in commercial heap leaching is substantially lower. Lime requirement (lime added) was moderate to high. Lime added before leaching was sufficient to maintain leach pH above 10.

Pursuant to the bottle roll and column leach tests performed above, preliminary stirred tank biooxidation and pressure oxidation (POX) tests were conducted on three refractory sulfide drill core composites from the Wood and West Wood areas of the project. The purpose of these tests was to determine if gold recovery could be improved by oxidative pretreatment of the ore. Biooxidation testing consisted of batch stirred tank biooxidation tests, at P80 45µm grind size, followed by carbon-in-leach/cyanidation

77<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

(CIL) of the biooxidized residues. POX testing consisted of a single batch POX test, at P80 80µm grind size, followed by CIL of the POX residue.

All three composites responded very well to batch stirred tank biooxidation treatment. Gold recoveries obtained by CIL were significantly improved (90.6% to 96.0%) after 21 to 28 days of biooxidation. CIL reagent consumptions for the biooxidized residues were moderate.

Biooxidation rates were rapid for the West Wood composites. Biooxidation rate was slower for the Wood composite, but not unusually slow for batch stirred tank biooxidation tests. Relatively high levels of sulfide oxidation (>90%) were achieved for all three composites.

A single batch POX test was conducted by Hazen Research, under the direction of MLI, on each of the three composites. All three composites responded well to POX processing. Gold recoveries ranged from 85.9% to 92.5%. Reagent consumptions were higher than for batch biooxidation tests, but not considered unusually high for such preliminary testing. Sulfide sulfur oxidation obtained by POX pretreatment ranged from 77% to 82%. Optimization of grind size and POX process conditions could result in higher levels of sulfide oxidation and gold recovery.

Although the results from preliminary stirred tank biooxidation and POX tests showed good technical potential for processing the Sleeper refractory ore types tested, the grade range of the composites tested (1.1 to 3.1 g Au/mt ore) did not appear sufficiently high to offset the high capital and operating costs associated with these process methods. Accordingly, evaluation of these ore types by heap biooxidation processing was performed on three (3) sulfide composites. The composites were from the Westwood, Wood, and Facilities areas of the project.

Simulated heap biooxidation pretreatment was effective in significantly improving gold recovery by cyanidation. Baseline gold recoveries obtained from the three composites, at both P80 12.5mm (1/2”) and P80 6.3mm (1/4”) feed sizes, ranged from 11.9% to 20.6%, in 67 to 109 days of leaching and rinsing. Gold recoveries obtained from cyanidation of the biooxidized residues, at the 12.5mm feed size, ranged from 65.4% to 71.9%, in 85 to 92 days of leaching and rinsing. Gold recoveries from the P80 6.3mm biooxidized residues ranged from 68.7% to 81.0%, in 87 to 93 days of leaching and rinsing.

Cyanidation gold recovery rates were relatively rapid. Biooxidation was terminated for these tests after 235 days, and sulfide sulfur analysis of the biooxidized residues indicated sulfide oxidation ranged from 22.0% to 54.9%. Further analysis of the data from the sacrificial column tests run in this test program indicated that an adequate biooxidation cycle time could be significantly less than 235 days. Further testing would be required to confirm that observation. At some point, a large scale biooxidation test would need to be performed to properly assess this process option.

Cyanide consumptions for the biooxidized residues were high (2.50 to 3.55 kg NaCN/mt ore). Lime required to maintain pH during cyanidation of the biooxidized residues was very high (12.7 to 37.7 kg/mt ore). It is important to note that this lime requirement does not include the lime or limestone that would be required for neutralizing acid generated during biooxidation pretreatment in a commercial circuit. The global base requirement is probably best estimated based on the sulfide sulfur grade, mineralogy of the feed, and the levels of oxidation required.

78<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Solution percolation problems were observed during biooxidation pretreatment of all three composites, at the P80 6.3mm feed size. Those problems ranged from minor to relatively severe. In general, no significant solution percolation problems were encountered during biooxidation of the P80 12.5mm feeds. The notable exception was the Facilities composite, which displayed moderate solution percolation problems in the P80 12.5mm test. All cyanidation column charges (baseline and biooxidized residues) were agglomerated, using the lime required for pH control, before leaching. No solution percolation problems were encountered during cyanide leaching. No geotechnical (load/permeability) testing was conducted on the biooxidized residues or cyanide leached agglomerates, to evaluate permeability expected during commercial heap biooxidation and leaching. It is expected that load/permeability testing will be required, and that testing may lead to additional optimization of crush size and agglomerating conditions.

10.2	DISCUSSION
10.2.1	TEST SERIES #1
---	---

Report #1 – Waste Dump Test Program

Report #1 presents results of metallurgical tests performed on composite samples prepared from sonic drill hole intervals from three waste dumps. The waste dumps were designated as North, South and West Waste Dumps. There were three sonic drill holes from each of the three waste dumps resulting in nine total holes used in the waste dump test program. Table 10-1 below summarizes the composite make-up information.

Table 10-1. Waste Dump CompositeMake-Up Information

AREA	COMPOSITE ID	HOLE	FROM	TO	COMMENTS
South Waste Dump	WDS-11-1	WDS-11-1	0	39.3	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
South Waste Dump	WDS-11-2	WDS-11-2	0	37.8	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
South Waste Dump	WDS-11-3	WDS-11-3	0	25	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
West Waste Dump	WDW-11-4	WDW-11-4	0	21	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
West Waste Dump	WDW-11-5	WDW-11-5	0	16	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
West Waste Dump	WDW-11-6	WDW-11-6	0	18.3	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
North Waste Dump	WDN-11-9 HG	WDN-11-9	0	20	from/to in meters, sonic drill hole
North Waste Dump	WDN-11-7,8+9	WDN-11-7<br><br><br>WDN-11-8<br> <br>WDN-11-9	0<br><br><br>0<br> <br>0	43<br><br><br>27.4<br> <br>33.5	from/to in meters, sonic drill holes

A review of the sonic drill hole locations shows the holes listed above were significantly spaced apart (for example, 300 to 400 meters in the north dump). Accordingly, it is questionable as to how well the small number of samples represent the metallurgical performance of the entirety of waste dump material. There were a significant number of sonic drill holes put into the waste dumps, which were not tested. If material is still available, it may be possible to perform variability bottle roll tests and correlate those results to the test results reported herein.

79<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

The tests performed on waste dump composite samples were as follows:

•	Bottle roll cyanidation tests (BRTs) at P80 19mm (3/4”)<br>feed size [all eight composites]
•	Bulk sulfide flotation tests on two North Waste Dump composites (WDN-11-9 HG and WDN-11-7,8+9)
---	---

Table 10-2 below summarizes the results of the P80 19mm BRTs.

Table 10-2. Summary Metallurgical Results, Agitated Cyanidation Tests, Sleeper Waste Dump Composites, P80 19mm Feeds

Hole		Au	gAu/mt ore			Ag	gAg/mt ore			Reagent Consumption,
Composite	Interval,	Rec.,			Calc.	Rec.,			Calc.	kg/mt ore
I.D.	Meters	%	Extracted	Tail	Head	%	Extracted	Tail	Head	NaCN Cons.	Lime (Added)
WDS-11-1	0-39	73.4	0.1388	0.0503	0.1891	52.1	1.087	1.000	2.087	0.79	9.6
WDS-11-2	0-37.8	55.4	0.1599	0.1253	0.2812	35.0	1.078	2.000	3.078	1.42	13.0
WDS-11-3	0-25	49.0	0.1183	0.1233	0.2416	36.8	1.165	2.000	3.165	0.91	7.4
WDW-11-4	0-21	66.5	0.1223	0.0617	0.184	18.2	0.296	1.333	1.629	0.23	2.9
WDW-11-5	0-16	89.7	0.24	0.0277	0.2677	35.2	0.544	1.000	1.544	0.08	3.3
WDW-11-6	0-18.3	85.4	0.22	0.0377	0.2577	30.9	0.447	1.000	1.447	0.08	3.4
WDN-11-HG	0-20	78.8	0.3833	0.103	0.4863	38.6	1.680	2.667	4.397	0.23	42.9
WDN-11 Master	N/A^1)^	59.2	0.2554	0.1757	0.4311	29.0	1.634	4.000	5.634	0.38	29.5
1) Master composite prepared on a weighted basis from all drill intervals from sonic drill holes<br>WDN-11-7,8 and 9.

Gold recovery ranged from 49.0% to 89.7%, with an average of 69.7%. Silver recovery ranged from 18.2% to 52.1%, with an average of 34.5%. The waste dump material is generally amenable to bottle roll cyanidation at 19mm feed size. Cyanide consumptions were high for the WDS composites, but relatively low for the WDW and WDN composites. Lime consumptions were high for the WDS composites, typical for the WDW composites and exceptionally high for the WDN composites.

Table 10-3 below summarizes the results of the bulk sulfide flotation tests (75µm grind size).

Table 10-3. Summary Metallurgical Results, Bulk Sulfide Flotation Tests (for Ro. Concs.), North Waste Dump Composites, P80 75µm Feeds

			Ro. Conc.
Comp.		Weight,	Assays, g/mt		Recovery, percent
I.D.	Product	percent	Au	Ag	Au	Ag
WDN-11-9 HG	Ro. Conc.	43.31	0.826	8.03	67.1	67.2
WDN-11 Master	Ro. Conc.	49.48	0.439	<4.39	69.2	<61.7

Flotation performance was not good. The mass pulls to concentrate were very high (+40%), and the metal recoveries a little under 70%.

Report #1 – Core Drill Hole Test Program

In addition to the tests on waste dump samples, Report #1 presents results of metallurgical tests performed on composite samples prepared from core drill hole intervals from the West Wood and Facilities Areas of the project. Eight (8) core drill holes were used in the core test program. Table 10-4 below summarizes the composite make-up information.

80<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-4. West Wood and Facilities Composite Make-Up Information

AREA	COMPOSITE ID	HOLE	FROM	TO	COMMENTS
West Wood	WAS1	PGC-10-004	633	673	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WAS2	PGC-10-002	339.2	364	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WAS3	PGC-10-003	864.5	893	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WAS4	PGC-10-001	483	513	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WSS1	PGC-10-003	710.5	767.5	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WSS2	PGC-10-001	615.5	743	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WSS3	PGC-10-001	773	796	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WSS4	PGC-10-002	646	659	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Facilities	FOX-001	PGC-11-007<br><br><br>PGC-11-009	0<br><br><br>68.9	149.9<br><br><br>167.3	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Facilities	FOX-002	CFAC-01-04<br><br><br>PGC-11-010	85<br><br><br>104.99	150<br><br><br>249.34	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Facilities	FSUF-001	PGC-11-007	115.18	194.88	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Facilities	FSUF-002	PGC-11-007<br><br><br>PGC-11-009	194.88<br><br><br>200.1	214.89<br><br><br>232.9	from/to in feet, core drill hole

For comments regarding the location of these, and other core drill holes used for metallurgical testing, please refer to the discussion following Table 10-8.

The tests performed on core composite samples were as follows:

●	Bottle roll cyanidation tests (BRTs) at P80 19mm (3/4”)<br>feed size [all twelve (12) composites]
●	Bottle roll cyanidation tests (BRTs) at P80 75µm feed<br>size [ten (10) composites, Facilities oxide composites tested at P80 19mm only]
---	---
●	Bulk sulfide flotation tests, P80 75µm feed size [all<br>twelve (12) composites]
---	---
●	Cyanidation tests (BRTs) on select bulk rougher flotation tailing samples
---	---
●	Bond ball mill work index (BWi) and abrasion index (Ai) determinations on Westwood and Facilities composites<br>
---	---

Table 10-5 below summarizes the results of the P80 19mm BRTs.

81<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-5. Summary Metallurgical Results, Agitated Cyanidation Tests,Westwood, and Facilities Core Composites, P80 19mm Feeds and P80 75µm Feeds

Hole		Au	gAu/mt ore			Ag	gAg/mt ore			Reagent Consumption,
Composite	Interval,	Rec.,			Calc.	Rec.,			Calc.	kg/mt ore
I.D.	Meters	%	Extracted	Tail	Head	%	Extracted	Tail	Head	NaCN Cons.	Lime (Added)
WAS1	19mm	5.9	0.0505	0.8170	0.8612	5.8	1.11	18.00	19.11	0.25	2.0
WAS1	75µm	9.8	0.0715	0.6567	0.7282	30.4	5.67	13.00	18.67	0.23	1.8
WAS2	19mm	15.4	0.2745	1.5117	1.7862	7.8	0.17	2.00	2.17	0.45	5.5
WAS2	75µm	58.3	0.9858	0.7063	1.6921	47.4	0.90	1.00	1.90	0.15	7.0
WAS3	19mm	36.5	0.3645	0.6330	0.9975	29.9	1.28	3.00	4.28	0.92	8.9
WAS3	75µm	48.9	0.6340	0.6727	1.3157	31.5	1.38	3.00	4.38	0.30	7.5
WAS4	19mm	9.1	0.0341	0.3420	0.3761	0.0	0.00	0.67	0.67	0.20	3.4
WAS4	75µm	31.1	0.1394	0.3083	0.4477	6.9	0.05	0.67	0.72	0.33	5.0
WSS1	19mm	25.3	0.3412	1.0083	1.3495	19.4	0.24	1.00	1.24	0.60	3.6
WSS1	75µm	37.0	0.4548	0.7730	1.2278	18.0	0.22	1.00	1.22	0.29	3.1
WSS2	19mm	16.8	0.1034	0.5133	0.6167	7.4	0.08	1.00	1.08	0.35	2.8
WSS2	75µm	12.2	0.0878	0.6317	0.7195	44.6	1.07	1.33	2.40	0.15	6.3
WSS3	19mm	28.8	0.2765	0.6820	0.9585	47.4	1.80	2.00	3.80	0.61	4.2
WSS3	75µm	23.6	0.1970	0.6360	0.8330	46.7	1.75	2.00	3.75	0.45	3.0
WSS4	19mm	20.3	0.4813	1.8883	2.3696	25.0	2.00	6.00	8.00	0.67	3.4
WSS4	75µm	21.2	0.4850	1.7983	2.2833	26.6	1.69	4.67	6.36	0.45	4.0
FSUF-001	19mm	92.8	1.2441	0.0963	1.3404	27.5	0.76	2.00	2.76	0.36	6.1
FSUF-001	75µm	93.2	1.2359	0.0907	1.3266	33.3	1.00	2.00	3.00	0.20	5.8
FSUF-002	19mm	80.4	0.9862	0.2410	1.2272	43.5	0.77	1.00	1.77	0.65	6.1
FSUF-002	75µm	84.6	0.8620	0.1570	1.0190	55.0	0.82	0.67	1.49	0.47	4.2
FOX-001	19mm	80.7	0.4850	0.1160	0.6010	11.3	0.34	2.67	3.01	<0.03	4.5
FOX-002	19mm	81.1	0.7260	0.1690	0.8950	16.7	0.40	2.00	2.40	<0.03	3.7

The results show WAS (Westwood, argillic silicic) and WSS (Westwood, strong silicic) composites were not amenable to cyanidation at P80 19mm. Reducing feed size to P80 75µm did not improve metal recoveries to acceptable levels. Cyanide consumptions were low to moderate, and lime consumptions were generally high.

Facilities oxide composites were amenable to cyanidation at the P80 19mm feed size. Gold recoveries were 80.7% and 81.1%. However, silver recoveries were low (<20%). Cyanide consumption was low and lime consumption was moderately high.

Facilities sulfide composites were amenable to cyanidation at the P80 19mm feed size; gold recoveries were 92.8% and 80.4%. This is noteworthy. The high gold recoveries were not expected for sulfide material. Reducing particle size increased gold recoveries noticeably to 93.2% and 84.6%, respectively. Silver recoveries at the P80 19mm feed size were 27.5% and 43.5%. Reducing particle size increased silvery recovery significantly to 33.3% and 55.0%. Cyanide consumption was low to moderate, and lime consumption was high.

Table 10-6 below summarizes the results of the bulk sulfide flotation tests (P80 75µm grind size).

82<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-6. Summary Metallurgical Results, Bulk Sulfide Flotation Tests (for Ro. Concs.), Westwood and Facilities Core Composites, P80 75µm Feeds

Comp.<br>I.D.	Product	Weight,<br>percent	Ro. Conc.<br>Assays, g/mt		Recovery, percent
			Au	Ag	Au	Ag
WAS1	Ro. Conc.	23.9	2.322	60.52	79.7	76.0
WAS2	Ro. Conc.	27.0	3.487	4.32	57.7	26.9
WAS3	Ro. Conc.	25.2	3.139	13.76	72.1	69.8
WAS4	Ro. Conc.	18.7	1.591	5.25	73.5	>54.7
WSS1	Ro. Conc.	24.2	2.710	3.97	65.0	55.9
WSS2	Ro. Conc.	23.9	2.394	7.43	80.5	70.0
WSS3	Ro. Conc.	25.4	2.186	9.59	70.0	52.2
WSS4	Ro. Conc.	51.9	3.436	14.27	84.9	90.2
FSUF-001	Ro. Conc.	34.2	2.023	<4.29	70.7	<48.8
FSUF-002	Ro. Conc.	17.0	4.560	3.78	91.2	43.6
FOX-001	Ro. Conc.	24.3	1.748	4.38	62.7	29.7
FOX-002	Ro. Conc.	23.3	1.927	2.70	60.8	<21.5

The report noted that cleaner flotation recoveries were generally poor. Therefore, only rougher flotation data was presented. It should be noted that the flotation tests performed were scoping in nature and no attempt was made to optimize parameters. It may be possible to improve flotation performance by optimizing parameters.

Mass pulls to concentrate were high for the WAS and WSS composites. Excluding WSS4, which had an exceptionally high mass pull (51.9%), mass pulls to concentrate generally ranged from 18% to 27%. Except for WAS2, which had a gold recovery of 57.7%, WAS gold recoveries ranged from 72.1% to 79.7%. Silver recoveries for WAS composites ranged from 26.9% (WAS2) to 76.0% (WAS1).

Gold recoveries for WSS composites ranged from 65.0% to 84.9%, and silver recoveries ranged from 52.2% to 90.2%.

Mass pulls to concentrate for Facilities sulfide composites were 34.2% and 17.0%. Gold recoveries were 70.7% and 91.2%. Silver recoveries were <48.8% and 43.6%. It is interesting to note that the lower mass pull corresponded with the higher gold recovery.

Mass pulls to concentrate for the Facilities oxide composites were 23.3% and 24.3%. Gold recoveries were 62.7% and 60.8%. Silver recoveries were 29.7% and <21.5%.

Cyanidation tests were performed on select Westwood and Facilities rougher flotation tailing samples (WAS2, WAS3, WSS1, WSS3, WSS4 and FSUF-001). For Westwood composites, gold recoveries were low and ranged from 22.9% (WAS3) to 59.4% (WAS2), averaging 37.8%. The Facilities rougher tail gold recovery was relatively high (86.5%).

83<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Bond ball mill work index (BWi) and abrasion index (Ai) tests were performed on samples identified in the Phillips Enterprises, LLC (PE) report (dated January 16, 2012) as W-01, W-02, FSU-001 and FSU-002. The PE report identifies these as waste dump sonic samples, which is incorrect. Report #1 states these samples are core samples from the Westwood and Facilities areas of the project, but Report #1 does not clearly identify the make-up of the composites sent to PE. It is assumed the four (4) samples are sulfide composites. The BWi (75µm close size) and Ai results were as follows:

● W-01:	BWi = 20.53 kWH/st (22.63 kWH/mt),	Ai = 0.1894
● W-02:	BWi = 18.55 kWH/st (20.45 kWH/mt),	Ai = 0.1391
● FSU-001:	BWi = 7.53 kWH/st (8.31 kWH/mt),	Ai = 0.0011
● FSU-002:	BWi = 8.73 kWH/st (9.63 kWH/mt),	Ai = 0.0060

The Bond ball mill work indices for Westwood composites indicated hard milling material. The abrasion indices indicated moderate abrasiveness.

The Bond ball mill work indices for Facilities composites indicated soft milling material. The abrasion indices indicated light abrasiveness.

Report #2 – Column Leach Tests

Report #2 presents column percolation cyanidation test results that were completed after Report #1 was issued. The column leach tests were performed on five (5) Sleeper Waste Dump composites and two (2) Sleeper core composites. Specifically, the composites tested were:

● WDS-11-1
● WDS-11-2+3
● WDW-11-4
● WDW-11-5+6
● WDN-11-9 HG
● FOX-001
● FOX-002

The composite make-up information for these composites is summarized earlier in this report.

Note: Composite WDW-11-2+3 was created on a weighted basis from WDW-11-2 and WDW-11-3, and composite WDW-11-5+6 was created on a weighted basis from WDW-11-5 and WDW-11-6.

Table 10-7 below shows the results of the column leach tests (P80 19mm crush size).

84<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-7. Summary Column Percolation Leach Test Results,

Sleeper Waste Dump and Facilities Oxide Core Composites, P80 19mmFeeds

	gAu/mt ore			Au	Reagent Requirements,
			Calc.	Recovery,	kg/mt ore
Composite I.D.	Extracted	Tail	Head	%	NaCN Cons.	Cement/Lime
WDS-11-1	0.173	0.055	0.228	75.9	1.44	10.0
WDS-11-2+3	0.164	0.094	0.258	63.6	1.74	10.0
WDW-11-4	0.108	0.024	0.132	81.8	0.94	3.5
WDW-11-5+6	0.204	0.048	0.252	81.0	0.83	3.5
WDN-11-9 HG	0.392	0.104	0.496	79.0	1.09	40.0
FOX-001	0.587	0.107	0.694	84.6	0.84	5.0/4.5
FOX-002	0.719	0.146	0.865	83.1	0.88	4.0/3.7

The results show the Waste Dump and Facilities oxide composites were amenable to agglomeration-heap leach cyanidation processing at a P80 19mm crush size. Gold recoveries were somewhat lower for the South Waste Dump (WDS) composites. Gold recovery was relatively fast; extraction was substantially complete in 20 days of leaching. NaCN consumption was high, but commercial consumption should be lower. For waste dump composites, cement requirements for agglomeration and pH control during leaching were moderate (WDW) to high (WDS). Cement requirement was extremely high for WDN-11-9 HG, mostly for pH control. For Facilities composites, lime was used in addition to cement, and consumptions of both were moderate.

It was stated in Report #2 that, “Because of the low-grade nature of the Waste Dump composites, even though Au recoveries were relatively high, heap leach processing may not be economically feasible unless waste dumps have to be moved to facilitate new planned production activity.” This is a fair statement, but given higher current metal prices, the value of waste dump material may have increased enough to be viable, especially if used for heap leach pad overliner material.

10.2.2 TEST SERIES #2

Report #3

Whole core from eight (8) drill holes was received for interval preparation and assay. Subsequent to assay results, twelve (12) composite samples were prepared from intervals from seven (7) of the holes (PGC-13-034 was not used). Table 10-8 below shows the composite make-up information.

85<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-8. Sleeper Project Composite Make-Up Information

AREA	COMPOSITE ID	HOLE	FROM	TO	COMMENTS
Facilities	FMX-13-1	PGC-12-028<br><br><br>PGC-13-031	162<br><br><br>20.2	234<br><br><br>200	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Facilities	FSU-13-1	PGC-12-028	435	745	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Sleeper	SOX-13-1	PGC-13-032	76.5	172.5	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Sleeper	SSU-13-1	PGC-12-029	1450	1575	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Sleeper	SSU-13-2	PGC-12-029	1180	1355	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WWO-13-1	PGC-12-030	200	265	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WWO-13-2	PGC-12-033	290	420	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WWS-13-1	PGC-12-033	815	1060	from/to in feet, core drill hole
West Wood	WWS-13-2	PGC-12-033	625	681.5	from/to in feet, core drill hole
Wood	WOS-13-1	PGC-12-027	640	690	from/to in feet, core drill hole
South Sleeper	SSS-13-1	PGC-12-024<br><br><br>PGC-12-025<br> <br>PGC-12-035	480<br><br><br>755<br> <br>585	535<br><br><br>805<br> <br>635	from/to in feet, core drill hole
South Sleeper	SSS-13-2	PGC-12-018<br><br><br>PGC-12-020<br> <br>PGC-12-038	920<br><br><br>1050<br> <br>1130	935<br><br><br>1125<br> <br>1155	from/to in feet, core drill hole

A review of the core drill hole locations shows the holes listed above, and those listed in Table 4, provide reasonable coverage of the resource areas located beyond the historic Sleeper pit boundary (i.e., horizontally beyond). In general, the resource areas that lie beneath the historic Sleeper pit are not represented by the metallurgical testing reported herein. It is understood that obtaining core drill samples from the areas beneath the pit lake is not feasible and that historic mill metallurgical performance will have to be used for a PEA level report.

Table 10-9 below outlines the scope of work in this test program.

86<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-9. Metallurgical Scope of Work Summary,Sleeper Project Core Composites

		Bottle Roll		Head Screen		Column Test & Tail Screen
Composite	P80 Feed Size			P80 Feed Size		P80 Feed Size
I.D.	37.5mm	19mm	75µm	37.5mm	19mm	37.5mm	19mm
FMX-13-1	X	X		X	X	X	X
FSU-13-1	X	X		X	X		X
SOX-13-1		X
SSU-13-1			X		X
SSU-13-2			X		X
WWO-13-1		X	X		X		X
WWO-13-2		X	X		X		X
WWS-13-1			X
WWS-13-2			X
WOS-13-1		X	X		X
SSS-13-1			X
SSS-13-2			X
Total	2	6	9	2	7	1	4

Table 10-10 below shows the results of the bottle roll cyanidation tests performed at various feed sizes.

Table 10-10. Summary MetallurgicalResults, Bottle Roll Tests, Sleeper Project Core Composites, Varied Feed Sizes

	Feed		gAu/mt ore					Reagent Requirements,		FinaI
	Size,	Au Rec.,			Calc’d	Avg.^1)^	Ag Ext’d,	kg/mt ore		Leach
Composite	P80	%	Ext’d	Tail	Head	Head	g/mt ore	NaCN Cons.	Lime Added	pH
FMX-13-1	37.5mm	71.3	0.3024	0.1217	0.4241	0.470	0.70	0.15	3.1	10.5
FMX-13-1	19mm	74.2	0.3257	0.1133	0.4390	0.470	0.74	0.08	4.8	10.9
FSU-13-1	37.5mm	26.3	0.0633	0.2053	0.2686	0.376	0.33	0.38	3.2	10.9
FSU-13-1	19mm	23.7	0.0644	0.2137	0.2801	0.376	0.32	0.44	3.8	11.0
SOX-13-1	19mm	93.9	0.1888	0.0123	0.2011	0.218	0.09	0.24	6.3	11.0
WOS-13-1	19mm	12.9	0.1501	1.0130	1.1631	1.548	6.00	0.90	4.4	10.5
WOS-13-1	75µm	48.5	0.8264	0.8773	1.7037	1.548	8.69	0.63	3.1	10.8
WWO-13-1	19mm	76.4	0.2605	0.0803	0.3408	0.312	0.00	<0.05	5.7	11.0
WWO-13-1	75µm	80.7	0.3047	0.0730	0.3777	0.312	0.07	0.17	6.7	10.7
WWO-13-2	19mm	53.6	0.5839	0.5063	1.0922	1.024	1.78	<0.05	3.2	11.0
WWO-13-2	75µm	82.8	0.8956	0.1860	1.0816	1.024	23.72	0.18	5.0	10.8
WWS-13-1	75µm	28.9	0.9855	2.4233	3.4088	3.272	4.55	1.36	4.5	10.9
WWS-13-2	75µm	28.6	0.3822	0.9550	1.3372	1.285	1.45	0.60	3.8	10.9
SSU-13-1	75µm	44.9	0.5349	0.6563	1.1912	1.057	0.82	1.00	4.9	10.9
SSU-13-2	75µm	36.0	0.1715	0.3053	0.4768	0.485	0.41	0.73	3.8	10.8
SSS-13-1	75µm	0.0	0	0.3693	0.3693	0.352	0.91	0.08	2.5	10.7
SSS-13-2	75µm	22.8	0.0700	0.2370	0.3070	0.295	7.44	0.30	3.6	10.8
1) Average of all head grade determinations.
87<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

The results show Facilities mixed ore (FMX-13-1) was amenable to cyanidation at the two crush sizes tested [P80 37.5mm (1-1/2”) and P80 19mm (3/4”)]. Gold recovery was improved slightly at the smaller crush size.

In this series of tests, Facilities sulfide ore (FSU-13-1) was not amenable to cyanidation at the two crush sizes evaluated, which differed from the previous series of tests. In the previous series of tests, Facilities sulfide composites had relatively high gold recoveries (92.8% and 80.4%) at the P80 19mm feed size. However, head grades were significantly higher in Series 1 (1.34 and 1.23 g Au/mt), versus 0.27 and 0.28 g Au/mt in this series, and higher recovery associated with higher head grade is not surprising. The comparison of results suggests there may be an opportunity to heap leach higher grade Facilities sulfide material if milling Facilities sulfide material is not economic.

Sleeper oxide ore (SOX-13-1) was readily amenable to cyanidation at the P80 19mm crush size. No other tests were conducted on this composite as Sleeper oxide ore was nearly “mined out” during previous commercial heap leach operation.

Wood sulfide ore (WOS-13-1) was not amenable to cyanidation at the P80 19mm crush size. Grinding the ore to P80 75µm improved gold recovery significantly, but recovery remained below a viable level.

The lower grade West Wood oxide ore (WWO-13-1) was amenable to cyanidation and grinding to P80 75µm improved gold recovery from 76.4% to 80.7%. The higher-grade West Wood oxide ore (WWO-13-2) was marginally amenable to cyanidation at the P80 19mm crush size (53.6% gold recovery). At P80 75µm, gold recovery increased significantly to 82.8%. It is worthwhile to note the column percolation leach test recovery for the WWO-13-2 (P80 19mm crushed feed size, discussed below) was higher (70.8%) than this P80 19mm bottle roll leach test.

The Wood, West Wood, Sleeper, and South Sleeper sulfide composites were not amenable to cyanidation at the P80 75µm grind size.

Cyanide consumptions were low for mixed and oxide ore composites (<0.05 to 0.18 kg/mt ore) but were generally high for sulfide ore composites (>0.5 kg/mt ore). Lime requirements (lime added) were generally high (>3 kg/mt ore) for all ore composites.

Table 10-11 below shows the results of the column leach tests (CT) performed on select samples. The bottle roll leach test (BT) results are included for comparison.

88<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-11. Summary Metallurgical Results, ColumnLeach Tests, Sleeper Project Core Composites, P80 37.5 and P80 19mm Feeds (BT Results Included for Comparison)

Composite	Test<br> <br><br><br><br>Type	Feed<br><br><br><br> <br>Size<br><br><br><br> <br>P80	Au Rec.,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	gAu/ mt ore				Ag Ext’d,<br><br><br><br> <br>g/mt ore	Reagent Requirements,<br><br><br><br> <br>kg/mt ore		Final<br> <br><br><br><br>Leach<br> <br><br><br><br>pH
					Tail	Calc’d<br><br><br><br>Head	Avg.^1)^<br><br><br> <br>Head		NaCN Cons.	Lime Added
				Ext’d
FMX-13-1	CT	37.5mm	77.1	0.4070	0.1210	0.5280	0.470	0.67	1.03	3.5	10.2
FMX-13-1	BT	37.5mm	71.3	0.3024	0.1217	0.4241	0.470	0.70	0.15	3.1	10.5
FMX-13-1	CT	19mm	71.3	0.3570	0.1440	0.5010	0.470	0.88	1.25	5.0	10.1
FMX-13-1	BT	19mm	74.2	0.3257	0.1133	0.4390	0.470	0.74	0.08	4.8	10.9
FSU-13-1	CT	19mm	12.9	0.0580	0.3900	0.4480	0.376	0.37	1.41	4.0	10.1
FSU-13-1	BT	19mm	23.7	0.0664	0.2137	0.2801	0.376	0.32	0.44	3.8	11.0
WWO-13-1	CT	19mm	82.1	0.2660	0.0580	0.3240	0.312	0.01	0.69	5.0	10.1
WWO-13-1	BT	19mm	76.4	0.2605	0.0803	0.3408	0.312	0	<0.05	5.7	11.0
WWO-13-2	CT	19mm	70.8	0.7720	0.3190	1.0910	1.024	4.12	1.47	3.0	10.4
WWO-13-2	BT	19mm	53.6	0.5859	0.5063	1.0922	1.024	1.78	<0.05	3.2	11.0
1) Average of all head grade determinations.

The Facilities mixed composite (FMX-13-1) was amenable to heap leach cyanidation treatment at the feed sizes tested. Gold recoveries were 77.1% [P80 37.5mm (1-1/2”)] and 71.3% [P80 19mm (3/4”)].

The West Wood oxide composites (WWO-13-1 and WWO-13-2) were amenable to heap leach cyanidation treatment at the feed size tested (P80 19mm). Gold recoveries were 82.1% and 70.8%.

Gold extraction from the Facilities and West Wood oxide composite samples was achieved in 67 to 139 days of leaching and rinsing.

Facilities sulfide ore was not amenable to heap leach cyanidation, and gold recovery was only 12.9% in 88 days of leaching and rinsing.

Cyanide consumption was high, but consumption should be substantially lower during commercial heap leaching. Lime requirements (lime added) were moderate to high. Lime added before leaching was sufficient to maintain leach pH at above pH 10.

Report #4

Report #4 presents stirred tank biooxidation amenability, pressure oxidation and biooxidation column test results performed on three (3) sulfide core composite samples created for the previous test program (i.e., Report #3 phase of tests). Namely, the composites tested were: WWS-13-1, WWS-13-2, and WOS-13-1. Composite make-up information is outlined above in the previous section of this report.

Table 10-12 below shows the results of the stirred tank biooxidation amenability tests (P80 45µm grind size).

89<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 10-12. Summary Metallurgical Results,Cyanidation (CIL) Tests, Sleeper Drill Core Composites, 80%-45µm Feed Size

Composite	Amenability<br> <br><br><br><br>Test<br> <br><br><br><br>No.	Bioox.<br> <br><br><br><br>Time,<br> <br><br><br><br>days	Estimated<br> <br><br><br><br>Oxidation,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	Au<br> <br><br><br><br>Rec.,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	gAu/mt BR			gAu/mt<br> <br><br><br><br>ore		Ag<br> <br><br><br><br>Rec.,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	gAg/mt BR			gAg/mt<br> <br><br><br><br>ore		Reagent Req.,<br> <br><br><br><br>kg/mt BR
					Ext’d.	Tail	Calc’d.<br><br><br><br> <br>Head	Calc’d.<br><br><br><br> <br>Head^1)^	Head<br><br><br><br> <br>Assay		Ext’d.	Tail	Calc’d.<br><br><br><br> <br>Head	Calc’d.<br><br><br><br> <br>Head^1)^	Head<br><br><br><br> <br>Assay	NaCN<br><br><br><br> <br>Cons.	Lime<br><br><br><br> <br>Added
WWS-13-1	Baseline	0	0	38.6	1.30	2.07	3.37	3.37	3.13	30.6	1.9	4.3	6.2	6.2	10.3	1.56	6.3
WWS 13-1	AM-14	5	1.7	81.3	3.08	0.71	3.79	3.77	3.13	51.4	5.5	5.2	10.7	10.7	10.3	1.12	14.8
WWS-13-1	AM-1	8	53.3	94.3	3.61	0.22	3.83	3.59	3.13	64.6	8.4	4.6	13.0	12.2	10.3	1.39	6.4
WWS-13-1	AM-2	21	79.5	96.0	3.63	0.15	3.78	3.46	3.13	68.1	7.9	3.7	11.6	10.6	10.3	1.36	7.5
WWS-13-2	Baseline	0	0	30.2	0.39	0.90	1.29	1.29	1.19	45.2	1.4	1.7	3.1	3.1	2.8	0.75	4.4
WWS 13-2	AM-13	5	2.6	62.1	0.82	0.50	1.32	1.32	1.19	75.0	3.6	1.2	4.8	4.8	2.8	0.89	7.4
WWS-13-2	AM-5	7	60.8	88.7	1.10	0.14	1.24	1.20	1.19	90.6	2.9	0.3	3.2	3.1	2.8	1.27	6.9
WWS-13-2	AM-6	21	78.6	91.1	1.23	0.12	1.35	1.33	1.19	93.4	5.7	0.4	6.1	6.0	2.8	1.19	7.6
WOS-13-1	Baseline	0	0	51.5	0.85	0.80	1.65	1.65	1.49	64.3	9.2	5.1	14.3	14.3	14.7	0.82	3.8
WOS-13-1	AM-9	5	5.8	64.0	1.10	0.62	1.72	1.66	1.49	73.8	13.5	4.8	18.3	17.6	14.7	0.59	5.5
WOS-13-1	AM-10	8	24.2	72.5	1.24	0.47	1.71	1.67	1.49	72.2	10.9	4.2	15.1	14.7	14.7	0.85	9.5
WOS-13-1	AM-11	21	60.3	83.4	1.36	0.27	1.63	1.52	1.49	83.1	11.3	2.3	13.6	12.8	14.7	1.00	5.0
WOS-13-1	AM-12	28	85.1	90.6	1.55	0.16	1.71	1.66	1.49	86.6	12.9	2.0	14.9	14.4	14.7	1.16	5.0
1) Adjusted for weight lost<br>during biooxidation.<br> <br>Note: BR denotes biooxidized residue.

All three (3) composites responded very well to batch stirred tank biooxidation treatment. Gold recovery obtained by CIL bottle roll testing of the biooxidation residues was>90%. Without oxidative pretreatment, gold recovery ranged from ~30% to ~50%. Biooxidation times ranged from 21 to 28 days. Reagent consumptions for the biooxidized residues were moderate.

Biooxidation rates were rapid for the WWS composites. Biooxidation rate was slower for the WOS composite, but not unusually slow for batch stirred tank biooxidation tests. Relatively high levels of sulfide oxidation (>90%) were achieved for all three composites.

A single batch POX test (P80 80µm) was conducted by Hazen Research, under the direction of MLI, on each of the three composites. Results showed that all three composites responded well to POX processing. Gold recoveries obtained from the WWS-13-1, WWS-13-2, and WOS-13-1 composites, by CIL of the POX residues, were 92.5%, 90.0% and 85.9%, respectively. Reagent consumptions were higher than for batch biooxidation tests, but not considered unusually high for such preliminary testing. Sulfide sulfur oxidation obtained by POX pretreatment ranged from 77% to 82%. Higher levels of sulfide oxidation and gold recovery may be achievable through optimization of grind size and/or POX processing conditions.

Overall, preliminary test results showed good technical potential for processing the Sleeper refractory materials tested, either by biooxidation or POX pretreatment, followed by cyanidation. It was questionable, however, whether the grade range of the composites tested (1.1 to 3.1 g Au/mt ore) was sufficiently high to offset the high capital and operating cost associated with these process options. Considering the results, and the grade of the material tested, evaluation of heap biooxidation processing of these ore types was tested.

Due to constraints in sample availability, three different composites were selected for the heap biooxidation testing program. The composites tested were WWS-13-MC (master composite), WOS-MC (master composite) and FSU-13-1. The WWS-13-MC composite was created from available rejects from previously prepared composites WWS-13-1 and WWS-13-2. The WOS-MC composite was created from available rejects from WOS-13-1 and drill core intervals from lower in core drill hole PGC-12-033 that were not previously used.

90<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 13 below shows the results from the heap biooxidation tests [P80 12.5mm (1/2”) and P80 6.3mm (1/4”) feed sizes].

Table 10-13. Summary Metallurgical Results, Continuous Column Leach Tests, Sleeper Drill CoreComposites

Composite	Feed<br> <br><br><br><br>Size,<br> <br><br><br><br>P80	Test<br> <br><br><br><br>Type	Estimated<br> <br><br><br><br>Sulfide<br> <br><br><br><br>Oxidation,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	Leach/Rinse<br> <br><br><br><br>Time,<br> <br><br><br><br>days	Au<br> <br><br><br><br>Rec.,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	gAu/mt ore			Ag<br> <br><br><br><br>Rec.,<br> <br><br><br><br>%	gAg/mt ore			Reagent Req.,<br> <br><br><br><br>kg/mt ore
						Ext’d.	Tail<br><br><br><br> <br>Screen	Calc’d.<br><br><br><br> <br>Head		Ext’d.	Tail<br><br><br><br> <br>Screen	Calc’d.<br><br><br><br> <br>Head	NaCN<br><br><br><br> <br>Cons.	Lime<br><br><br><br> <br>Added
WWS-13-MC	12.5mm	BL	0	109	19.5	0.54	2.23	2.77	33.8	2.2	4.3	6.5	2.62	6.60
WWS-13-MC	12.5mm	BR	22.9	92	65.4	1.76	0.93	2.69	44.6	3.3	4.1	7.4	3.55	21.10
WWS-13-MC	6.3mm	BL	0	109	20.6	0.56	2.16	2.72	33.3	2.6	5.2	7.8	2.78	6.60
WWS-13-MC	6.3mm	BR	22.0	92	68.7	1.80	0.82	2.62	45.0	3.6	4.4	8.0	3.40	26.10
WOS-MC	12.5mm	BL	0	109	14.8	0.57	3.27	3.84	39.9	23.6	35.6	59.2	2.61	6.20
WOS-MC	12.5mm	BR	33.8	92	71.9	2.94	1.15	4.09	41.8	23.7	33.0	56.7	3.37	12.70
WOS-MC	6.3mm	BL	0	109	14.4	0.59	3.50	4.09	36.4	23.2	40.5	63.7	2.83	5.40
WOS-MC	6.3mm	BR	23.9	93	77.9	3.07	0.87	3.94	43.9	25.4	32.4	57.8	2.85	13.80
FSU-13-1	12.5mm	BL	0	67	14.3	0.05	0.30	0.35	19.0	0.4	1.7	2.1	1.65	3.40
FSU-13-1	12.5mm	BR	44.4	85	70.7	0.29	0.12	0.41	41.7	1.0	1.4	2.4	2.73	30.80
FSU-13-1	6.3mm	BL	0	67	11.9	0.05	0.37	0.42	16.7	0.4	2.0	2.4	1.55	5.50
FSU-13-1	6.3mm	BR	54.9	87	81.0	0.34	0.08	0.42	38.5	1.0	1.6	2.6	2.50	37.70
Note: BL denotes baseline. BR denotes cyanidation of a column biooxidized<br>residue.

The baseline (BL) column leach tests were performed on untreated composite materials. The BR tests refer to bottle roll cyanidation of the biooxidation column residues. Column leach tests were not performed on the biooxidation column residues.

It is worthwhile to note that sacrificial biooxidation columns were run concurrently with the continuous columns (reported above in Table 13) to determine the biooxidation time required. Based on the sacrificial column results, the continuous biooxidation column tests ended after 235 days of pretreatment.

Gold recoveries for the BL tests ranged from 11.9% to 20.6%. Gold recoveries for the BR tests ranged from 65.4% to 81.0%. These results indicated that gold recovery was significantly improved by simulated heap biooxidation followed by column leach cyanidation of the biooxidation column residues. Comparatively, the P80 6.3mm feed size tests produced higher gold recoveries than the P80 12.5mm feed size tests, in some cases significantly.

Cyanidation gold recovery rates were relatively rapid. Because the continuous biooxidation columns were operated without interruption during biooxidation, biooxidation rate data was not available. Sulfide sulfur oxidation ranged from 22.0% to 54.9%. Further analysis of the data from the sacrificial column tests indicated that a biooxidation cycle of significantly less time than 235 days may have been sufficient for obtaining the reported gold recoveries by cyanidation. The data suggests that decreased biooxidation time may be possible as well. Further testing would be required to confirm these observations, and at some point, large scale testing of heap biooxidation would be required to properly assess this process option.

Cyanide consumptions for the baseline column leach tests were high (1.55 to 2.83 kg NaCN/mt ore). Cyanide consumptions for the biooxidized residues were higher (2.50 to 3.55 kg NaCN/mt ore).

91<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Cyanide consumptions for the baseline column leach tests were high (1.55 to 2.83 kg NaCN/mt ore). Cyanide consumptions for the biooxidized residues were higher (2.50 to 3.55 kg NaCN/mt ore). Lime requirements for the baseline tests ranged from 3.4 to 6.6 kg/mt ore. Lime required to maintain pH during cyanidation of the biooxidized residues were substantially higher (12.7 to 37.7 kg/mt ore). It is important to note that these lime requirements do not include the quantities of lime or limestone that will be required for neutralizing acid generated during biooxidation pretreatment in a commercial circuit. The global base requirement is probably best estimated based on the sulfide sulfur grade and mineralogy of the feed, and the levels of oxidation required.

All baseline cyanidation test column charges were agglomerated, using the lime required for pH control, before leaching, and no solution percolation problems were encountered during cyanide leaching. No geotechnical (load/permeability) testing was conducted on the biooxidized residues or cyanide leached agglomerates to evaluate permeability expected during commercial heap biooxidation and leaching. It is expected that load/permeability testing will be required, and that testing may lead to additional optimization of crush size and agglomerating conditions.

Report #3/#4 – SGS Mineralogy Report

As part of the Series 2 phase of tests, samples of West Wood and Wood sulfide composites were sent to SGS for mineralogy and gold deportment analyses. Specifically, the composites analyzed were WWS-13-1, WWS-13-2, and WOS-13-1. The SGS report is included in Report #4 appendix.

Rapid mineral scan results showed composites contained the following:

●	27% to 39% quartz
●	4.8% to 8.6% kaolinite, plus 26% to 32% other clays
---	---
●	13% to 21% K-spar
---	---
●	4.2% to 7.2% pyrite
---	---
●	Minor amounts of arsenopyrite and stibnite
---	---

Gold mineralogy/deportment showed the following:

●	Gold particles typically contained a significant amount of silver, and there was a significant amount of electrum<br>(Ag:Au > 25%) present.
●	Pyrite contained trace amounts of arsenopyrite, and arsenopyrite contained a trace amount of stibnite – both<br>observations suggest potential for sub-microscopic gold.
---	---
●	Gold grains in the West Wood composites were predominantly <10µm (>71% and >89%). Approximately 24%<br>were between 10µm and 30µm. <5% were >30µm.
---	---
●	Gold grains in the Wood composite were predominantly <5µm (>75%). Approximately 25% were between<br>5µm and 10µm. There were no grains observed >10µm.
---	---
92<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

●	For West Wood composites, 30 grains were observed. 10 grains were liberated, 2 grains were exposed, and 18 grains<br>were locked. The majority of the locked and exposed gold grains were associated with pyrite/quartz complexes or pyrite/silicate complexes. Exposed grains associated with pyrite ranged from only a few grains<br>(WWS-13-1) to ~23% (WWS-13-2). A few grains observed in WWS-13-1 were associated with miargyrite (AgSbS2).
●	For the Wood composite, 20 grains were observed. 8 grains were liberated, 3 grains were exposed, and 9 grains were<br>locked. Almost all of the locked and exposed gold grains were associated with quartz complexes. Only a few grains were associated with pyrite.
---	---
10.3	CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
---	---
10.3.1	TEST SERIES #1
---	---

Conclusions, observations, and recommendations for this series of tests are summarized as follows:

●	Waste Dump materials are generally amenable to cyanidation processing at P80 19mm crush size. Reagent requirements are generally moderate to high (except for WDW dump composites).
●	Facilities Sulfide and Oxide core composites were amenable to cyanidation treatment at P80 19mm crush size. NaCN consumptions were generally low, but lime requirements were generally high.
---	---
●	In contrast to the above, Facilities sulfide gold recoveries obtained in Test Series 2 were low. An investigation into<br>the causes of this variance should be made. Was it simply an ore classification issue, or is it more complex? The Test Series 2 head grades were significantly lower – was it simply due to grade vs. recovery? If some Facilities sulfide material<br>can be heap leached, that likely would result in added value. Tests on sulfide materials should include CN:FA determinations and carbon/sulfur speciation.
---	---
●	Column leach test gold recoveries from Facilities Oxide core samples were high (86.4% and 83.1%). Silver<br>recoveries were poor.
---	---
●	Westwood Sulfide core composites were not amenable to agitated cyanidation treatment at P80 19mm or P80 75µm feed sizes. Reagent requirements were generally moderate to high.
---	---
●	Westwood Sulfide core composites responded reasonably well to rougher flotation. There is potential to improve<br>metallurgical response through optimization of grind size and flotation parameters.
---	---
●	Flotation response was variable, and different flotation schemes may be required for sulfide materials form different<br>areas.
---	---
●	Sleeper Waste Dump composites were amenable to agglomeration-heap leaching treatment at P80 19mm crush size. The feeds were, however, low-grade and crushing, agglomerating and heap leaching may not be economic unless waste dumps must be moved<br>to facilitate new commercial production plans at site.
---	---
●	Facilities Oxide ore represented by these core composites are amenable to heap leaching treatment at a P80 19mm crush size and may be amenable at a coarser crush size.
---	---
●	Agglomeration pretreatment was required for all column leach test feeds because of high fines/clay<br>content. Cement/lime requirements were reasonably high. NaCN consumption was high but should be less in commercial production.
---	---
93<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

●	Fines content was high (>20% -106µm material) for all composites used<br>for column leach tests. Agglomeration is required, and conditions should be optimized.
●	Bond ball mill work index tests on Westwood samples (assume sulfide) showed the material was hard. Abrasion tests<br>showed it had moderate abrasiveness.
---	---
●	Bond ball mill work index tests on Facilities sulfide samples showed the material was soft. Abrasion tests showed<br>it had light abrasiveness.
---	---
10.3.2	TEST SERIES #2
---	---

Conclusions, observations, and recommendations for this series of tests are summarized as follows:

●	Facilities mixed, Sleeper oxide and West Wood oxide core composite samples were amenable to heap leach<br>cyanidation.
●	Facilities, Sleeper, West Wood, and South Sleeper sulfide core composite samples were not amenable to heap cyanidation<br>or milling cyanidation processing. Sulfide ores will require oxidation (bio or pressure oxidation) to improve cyanidation recoveries to acceptable levels. Ultrafine grinding should be considered as well.
---	---
●	Heap leach reagent requirements were moderate to high.
---	---
●	As mentioned earlier in this section of the report, the recovery variance for Facilities sulfide materials should be<br>investigated.
---	---
●	In the heap biooxidation phase of this series of tests, the sulfide drill core composites tested (from West Wood, Wood,<br>and Facilities areas of the project) were refractory to direct cyanidation treatment, at feed sizes ranging from P80 12.5mm (1/2”) to<br>P80 45µm.
---	---
●	The most likely cause for the low gold recoveries was the locking of gold in sulfide mineral<br>grains.
---	---
●	All six composites tested responded very well to biooxidation and POX pretreatment for oxidation of contained sulfide<br>minerals, resulting in an improvement in gold recovery by cyanidation treatment.
---	---
●	Gold recoveries of 90% or greater were obtained by simulated whole ore stirred tank biooxidation, followed by agitated<br>cyanidation, at P80 45µm feed size (3 composites tested).
---	---
●	Gold recoveries of 86% to 93% were obtained by whole ore POX pretreatment followed by agitated cyanidation, at an 80%-80µm feed size.
---	---
●	Gold recoveries of 65% to 81% were obtained by simulated heap biooxidation pretreatment, followed by simulated heap<br>leach cyanidation treatment, at P80 12.5mm and P80 6.3mm feed sizes.
---	---
●	Solution percolation/solution ponding problems were encountered during simulated heap biooxidation pretreatment,<br>particularly at the 6.3mm feed size. Further optimization of heap biooxidation feed size and biooxidation cycle time will be required if this process is to be considered further. Reagent requirements were high, under conditions not yet<br>optimized.
---	---
●	Testing should be conducted to optimize rinsing and neutralization of the biooxidation residues before cyanidation<br>treatment. This testing should include evaluation of biooxidation solution treatment/neutralization and recycling in the biooxidation circuit and in a rinsing circuit. Proper assessments of acid neutralization costs are<br>needed.
---	---
94<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

10.3.3	RECOVERY PROJECTIONS

The following table presents recovery projects for typical processing methods of the Sleeper material types using conventional heap leach processing.

Material Type	****	Heap Leach Recovery				****
	Au			Ag
Alluvium		72	%		8	%
Mine Dumps		72	%		43	%
Facilities		79	%		8	%
Mixed		68	%		20	%
Sleeper		85	%		10	%
Westwood		72	%		9	%

For the refractory ore types, a hybrid processing method is recommended. This method involves grinding the material suitable for froth flotation to generate a flotation concentrate. Treatment of the concentrate by biooxidation followed by cyanidation is expected to recover 75% of the gold and 48% of the silver. Cyanide leaching of the flotation tailings is expected to recover an additional 15 % and 22 % of the gold and silver respectively, for an overall recovery of 90% of gold and 70% of silver of the flotation feed material.

Process	Au Recovery	****	Ag Recovery	****
Flotation Rec	80	%	60	%
Concentrate BIOX/Leach	94	%	80	%
Net Flot/Biox/Leach	75	%	48	%
Flot Tails to Leach	20	%	40	%
Flot Tails Leach Rec	75	%	55	%
Net Flot Tails Lech Rec	15	%	22	%
Combined Flot Con/Tails Rec	90	%	70	%
10.3.4	HYBRID PROCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
---	---

Additional metallurgical testing is required to further develop the process and define metallurgical performance, process flow sheet, and mass balance. The test work includes:

●	Additional flotation optimization,
●	Biooxidation optimization
---	---
●	Biooxidation product neutralization
---	---
●	Cyanidation parameter optimization
---	---
10.4	SUMMARY STATEMENT FOR PARAMOUNT METALLURGICAL TESTING
---	---

The information presented above was received from Paramount and sources as cited. Mr. Woods has reviewed this information and believes it to be materially accurate.

95<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

11.1	INTRODUCTION

The mineral resource estimates presented herein were completed by RESPEC.

These estimated mineral resources were classified in order of increasing geological and quantitative confidence into Measured, Indicated, and Inferred categories in accordance with the New Mining Rules. SEC mineral resource definitions are given below:

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.

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.

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 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.

RESPEC reports resources at cutoffs that are reasonable for deposits of this nature given anticipated mining methods and plant processing costs, while also considering economic conditions, according to the regulatory requirements that a resource exists “in such form, grade or quality, and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for economicextraction.”

96<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

The Sleeper gold and silver mineral resource estimate is reported herein with an effective date of July 31, 2023, based on data derived from drilling performed through 2013. The drill hole database on which this estimate is based was received from Paramount in May of 2023. The database underwent auditing, and the last minor changes to collar, survey, and assay data were made on June 29, 2023. The block model is oriented due North, and the blocks are 10 meters by 10 meters by 10 meters.

11.2	DATABASE

Mineral resources were estimated using data generated by Paramount and the historical operators discussed in Section 5 and Section 7. These data were provided to RESPEC by Paramount.

11.2.1	DRILL HOLE DATABASE

The drill hole data are in UTM Zone 11 NAD27 coordinates in US Feet. The database includes information from a total of 4,258 drill holes; a total of 3,994 of these holes contribute assay data that are directly used in the estimation of the project resources.

Paramount provided RESPEC with a project drill hole database prior to the 2021 drilling program. As discussed in Section 9.1, RESPEC audited these historical drill data and made corrections to the database as appropriate. RESPEC then periodically updated the database with the information acquired during Paramount’s drilling programs, including gold and silver assay data received directly from the analytical laboratory. RESPEC also audited and incorporated the historical data compiled by Paramount from assay certificates in 2023. Table 11-1 provides a summary of the drill hole database used for modeling and resource estimation.

Table 11-1. Summary of Drilling in the Database for the Sleeper Deposit Resource Estimate

Type of hole	Count	Drilled meter
Core	86	30,904
RC	3,870	538,374
RC/ Core tail	20	7,315
Sonic	9	360
Unknown	9	2,658
Total	3,994	579,611

Table 11.2 presents descriptive statistics of all audited and accepted Sleeper Deposit drill hole analytical and geotechnical data imported into MinePlan 3D© software (v. 13.0). Data from rejected samples have been excluded from the table. Trace-element and whole-rock geochemical data represents a small portion of the data.

97<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 11-2. Descriptive Statistics of Sample Assays in Sleeper Drill hole Database

	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
FROM	326,327					0	765	m
-TO-	326,327					0	767	m
-AI-	326,327	1.520	1.795			0	314	m
Au ppm	290,080	0.0759	0.875	34.720	39.684	0.001	14,983.400	g Au/t
Capped Au	290,080	0.0759	0.859	34.244	39.871	0.001	14,983.400	g Au/t
Ag ppm	305,430	0.701	3.929	26.094	6.641	0.005	6,632.520	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	305,430	0.701	3.868	25.793	6.668	0.005	6,632.520	g Ag/t
Density	2,548	2.330	2.329	0.194	0.083	0.060	3.830	g/cm3

Of the 4,261 drill holes in the GeoSequel database, 199 holes in the drill-collar file were excluded from use in resource estimation. Notations indicating contamination from historical logs were entered in the assay database by interval. Additional intervals with possible down-hole contamination were identified during modeling of gold and silver domains. Down-hole contamination can be detected by inspection of the RC drill assay results in the context of the geology (e.g., anomalous to significant gold assays returned in post-mineral units), by comparison with adjacent core holes, and by examination of down-hole grade patterns (e.g., cyclic assay patterns related to drill-rod changes). Contaminated intervals identified during modeling were added to the drill-hole database. Ultimately, 14,800 assay intervals were removed from use in resource estimation.

11.2.2	TOPOGRAPHY

Paramount provided RESPEC with topographic data for the current project topography, the mined Sleeper pit topography, and the pre-mine topography. RESPEC does not know how the surfaces were generated, however, the extent of the Sleeper pit aligns with the blasthole database, and drill hole collar locations correlate well with current and past topography. Minor differences between surfaces are apparent, and are attributed to disturbance that occurred during mining, post-mining reclamation of the Sleeper pit, and discrepancies that commonly occur between surveys.

11.3	DEPOSIT MODELING RELEVANT TO RESOURCE ESTIMATION

The Sleeper gold-silver deposit is hosted by Tertiary Sleeper Rhyolites and Tertiary Sleeper Basalts. As presently drilled, the core of the known mineralization extends 1,675 meters along strike of the higher-grade mineralization (015° to 020° to the Northeast), approximately 100 meters perpendicular to the strike, and 150 meters in the vertical direction. The deposit is comprised of a core zone characterized by the mined-out Sleeper vein that lies within a broad envelope of lower-grade mineralization. The lower-grade envelope is the primary subject of the resource estimates discussed in following sections of the report.

The low-grade mineralization has extents of approximately 2,000 meters east-west, about 1,250 meters north-south, and up to 600 meters in the vertical direction. Sub-horizontal and sub-vertical veins and breccia bodies of the mid- and high-grade mineralization extend outward into the lower-grade envelope,

98<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

likely due to stratigraphic and structural controls. The base of the Sleeper vein core zone is sharp, marked by a distinct decrease in the precious-metal grades.

High-grade mineralization (>8 g Au/t) within the core zone related to the Sleeper vein and its stratigraphic and structural extensions has been documented to have been most frequently associated with thin (<5 centimeters), often banded, typically steeply dipping chalcedonic quartz + adularia veins/veinlets. It is important to note that there are examples of high-grade mineralization that have no obvious association with veins, and the presence of veins does not guarantee high grades. In addition, the Sleeper fault has been hypothesized to be the primary controlling feature in the formation of the deposit, and there is evidence of an association between high-angle structural zones and increases in vein density and grades. The distribution of high-grade mineralization distal to the Sleeper vein is somewhat erratic but is locally systematic. For example, the high-grade mineralization at West Wood and the Office areas is related to hydrothermal brecciation.

Stratigraphic control of moderate-grade mineralization is expressed by lenses of generally concordant mineralization that extend outward from the margins of higher-grade mineralization along the hanging wall and footwall of the Sleeper vein.

The Sleeper gold- and silver-bearing hydrothermal fluids are interpreted to have been introduced into the Sleeper Rhyolite and Basalt units along a series of northeast-striking, steeply dipping (primarily to the northwest) structural zones, within the core zone of the deposit. The planar base of this zone and the abrupt change to weakly mineralized and altered rocks below likely reflect the elevation at which boiling of the ascending hydrothermal fluids and deposition of high-grade mineralization was initiated. Outside of the core zone of the Sleeper deposit, deposition of high-grade mineralization is more erratic, which suggests that fluid flow was less focused along poorly defined structural zones. The waning stages of the mineralizing system appear to be manifested as “multi-stage hydrothermal breccias”. These primarily clast-supported breccias contain rotated fragments and some mineralized quartz veinlets. The breccias are cemented primarily by silica, contain pyrite, marcasite and adularia and are almost entirely post-mineral.

Post-mineral faulting has resulted in a slight tilting of the Sleeper deposit and its host stratigraphy to the west.

It is within the above-described context of geology that the gold and silver resource modeling was undertaken.

11.4	GEOLOGIC MODELING

99<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Paramount supplied RESPEC with a set of detailed cross-sectional lithological and structural interpretations that cover most of the Sleeper deposit. RESPEC’s modeling of gold and silver mineralization was based on these cross-sectional interpretations. The structural interpretations were particularly important to the gold and silver mineral-domain modeling discussed in Section 11.3. RESPEC made minor modifications to Paramount’s structural interpretations.

11.5	OXIDATION MODELING

Cross-sectional interpretations of oxidation were used to model zones of oxide, mixed (oxide + sulfide), and sulfide mineralization, and both cross-sections and solids were provided to RESPEC by Paramount. The remaining unmined material is primarily within the mixed and sulfide zones. The most significant portion of remaining oxide zone occurs at shallow depths in the Facility area.

11.6	DENSITY MODELING

A total of 2,546 measurements of bulk density have been conducted by X-Cal and Paramount. All density data were obtained using the water-immersion method on samples of drill core; it is not known if samples were coated as part of the testing. The density data were examined collectively and individually by rock type and oxidation. The combined X-Cal and Paramount Sleeper densities (in g/cm^3^) and tonnage factors (in ft^3^/ton) grouped by lithology and oxidation is summarized in Table 11-3.

Table 11-3. Sleeper Deposit Applied Densities and Tonnage Factors

Formation	Redox<br><br><br>Domain	Number of<br><br><br>Samples	Min Density<br><br><br>(g/cm^3^)	Max Density<br><br><br>(g/cm^3^)	Density<br><br><br>(g/cm^3^)	Tonnage<br> <br>Factor (ft^3^/ton)
Dumps/Fill	All	0			1.90	16.87
Quaternary Alluvium	All	7	1.76	2.42	1.90	16.87
West Wood Breccia	All	20	2.04	2.56	2.35	13.64
Breccia	All	1	2.42	2.42	2.42	13.24
Tertiary Intrusive Felsic	All	398	0.06	2.90	2.36	13.58
Tertiary Intrusive Mafic *	All	0			2.30	13.94
Tertiary Sleeper Rhyolite	Oxide	115	1.86	3.11	2.18	14.70
Tertiary Sleeper Rhyolite	Mixed	84	1.68	2.42	2.18	14.70
Tertiary Sleeper Rhyolite	Sulfide	970	1.39	3.83	2.33	13.76
100<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Formation	Redox<br><br><br>Domain	Number of<br><br><br>Samples	Min Density<br><br><br>(g/cm^3^)	Max Density<br><br><br>(g/cm^3^)	Density<br><br><br>(g/cm^3^)	Tonnage<br> <br>Factor (ft^3^/ton)
Tertiary Sleeper Basalt	Oxide	28	1.88	2.48	2.24	14.31
Tertiary Sleeper Basalt	Mixed	51	1.91	2.65	2.33	13.76
Tertiary Sleeper Basalt	Sulfide	800	1.58	3.74	2.33	13.76
Tertiary Sleeper Volcanic Sediment	All	26	2.06	2.80	2.46	13.03
Mesozoic Basement	All	46	2.32	3.24	2.64	12.14
Tonnage Factor = 2000 / (Density * 62.4)
*Default Density 2.30 g/cm3
11.7	GOLD AND SILVER MODELING
---	---
11.7.1	MINERAL DOMAINS
---	---

A mineral domain encompasses a volume of rock that ideally is characterized by a single, natural, grade population of a metal or metals that occurs within a specific geologic environment. In order to define the mineral domains at Sleeper, the natural gold and silver populations were first identified on population-distribution graphs that plot the gold- and silver-grade distributions of all of the drillhole assays, as well as distribution plots using only analyses from core samples. This analysis led to the identification of 3 populations for both gold and silver. Ideally, each of these populations can then be correlated with specific geologic characteristics that are captured in the project database, which can be used in conjunction with the grade populations to interpret the bounds of each of the gold and silver mineral domains. The approximate grade ranges of the low-grade (domain 100), mid-grade (domain 200), and high-grade (domain 300) domains that were modeled for gold and silver are listed in Table 11-4.

Table 11-4. Approximate Grade Ranges of Gold and Silver Domains

Domain	g Au/ t	g Ag/t
100	0.1 to 1.0	1.80 to 10.0
200	1.0 to 8.0	10.0 to 20.0
300	> 8.0	> 20.0

The gold and silver mineralization was modeled by first interpreting gold and silver mineral domain polygons individually on a set of vertical, 30-meter spaced, north-looking cross-sections that span the extents of the deposit. The mineral domains were interpreted using the gold and silver drill-hole assay data and associated alteration and mineralization codes, as well as sectional lithological and structural interpretations provided by Paramount. This information was used to discern the stratigraphic and structural controls of the mineralization and to model the domains accordingly. Gold was modeled first, and the sectional gold-domain polygons were then used as additional guides for defining the silver domains.

The mid- and high-grade mineralization within the deposit appears to have a discontinuous distribution. To represent this lack of continuity in the model, the boundaries of the mid- and high-grade domains were

101<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

modeled as gradational contacts within the respective zones. The high-grade gold population (>8.0 g Au/t) is the most readily identifiable grade population in drill core, as it strongly correlates with the presence of thin, often banded, quartz–chalcedony veins and veinlets and/or breccias. Visible gold is sometimes present as well. Drill hole orientations and angles to core axes indicate the high-grade veinlets are most commonly steeply dipping.

The boundary between the low- and mid-grade domains was largely determined by grade. The geologic characteristics of the low- and mid-grade domains were not evident in core and logging. Although the grade change across this domain boundary is generally sharp, it is locally gradational. The grade change across the sub-horizontal base of the mid-grade domain is usually sharp. This basal contact of the mid-grade domain is likely indicative of the elevation at which boiling of the ascending fluids and significant gold deposition initially occurred in the Sleeper hydrothermal system.

The mineralization modeled within the low-grade domain is much less variable than in the two higher-grade domains. This mineralization is distal from the zone of boiling, its related brecciation, and its distribution exhibits strong stratigraphic controls.

The cross-sectional gold and silver mid- and high-grade mineral domains were projected horizontally to the drill data in each 30-m sectional window, and these three-dimensional polygons were then sliced horizontally along 10-meter planes at midblock locations. These slices, along with the lithologic solids and structural surfaces, were used to guide the final rectification of the metal mineral domains on the 10-meter-spaced midblock levels. The low-grade domain solid was generated from a geologically constrained indicator interpolation using Leapfrog software. The domain solids within the Quaternary alluvium and the Sleeper dumps were modeled independently and were generated from a geologically constrained indicator interpolation using Leapfrog software within their respective geologic solids.

Examples of cross-sections of the geology, and gold and silver mineral domains in the central portion of the Sleeper deposit are shown in Figure 11.1 to Figure 11-4.

102<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-1. East-West Cross-Section 4575545N Showing Gold Domains and Geology.

103<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-2. East-West Cross-Section 4575545N Showing Silver Domains and Geology

104<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-3. East-West Cross-Section 45756175N Showing Gold Domains and Geology.

105<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-4.. East-West Cross-Section 45756175N Showing Silver Domains and Geology.

106<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

11.7.2	ASSAY CODING, CAPPING, AND COMPOSITING

Drill hole assays were coded to the gold and silver mineral domains using the mid- and high-grade cross-sectional polygons and the low-grade solid. Assay caps (Table 11-5) were determined by the inspection of population distribution plots of the coded assays by domain, to identify high-grade outliers that might be appropriate for capping. The plots were also evaluated for the possible presence of multiple grade populations within each of the modeled metal domains. Evaluation of descriptive statistics of the coded assays by domain, and visual reviews of the spatial relationships of the possible outliers with respect to potential impacts during grade interpolation, were also considered in the determination of the assay caps.

Table 11-5. Sleeper Gold and Silver Assay Caps by Domain

Domain	Number Capped	g Au/t	Number Capped	g Ag/t
Outside	19	6	76	20
Low-grade	107	3	154	35
Mid-grade	0	N/A	8	65
High-grade	0	N/A	0	N/A
Alluvium	23	5	0	N/A
Dumps	0	N/A	0	N/A

Each model block was coded with the volume percentage of each of the five modeled domains for both gold and silver. For model blocks that are not entirely within a combination of the low-, mid- and high-grade domains and the Quaternary alluvium and dump domains, a percentage was calculated for the portions outside modeled domain volumes of the blocks. If a majority of the blocks are outside modeled domains, it was assigned as domain 0 and estimated using assays lying outside of the modeled domains. The domain 0 assays used in this dilutionary estimate were also capped as shown in Table 11-5.

Descriptive statistics of the capped and uncapped coded gold and silver assays are provided in Table 11-6 and Table 11-7, respectively.

Table 11-6. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Coded Gold Assays

Low-Grade Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	79,942					0	741	m
To	79,942					2	742	m
Length	79,942	1.519	1.516			0	24	m
Au ppm	77,005	0.226	0.301	0.409	1.356	0.002	61.371	g Au/t
Capped Au	77,005	0.222	0.297	0.264	0.889	0.002	3.000	g Au/t
Density	1,080	2.330	2.332	0.181	0.077	0.060	3.741	g/cm3
107<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Mid-Grade Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	6,717					0	512	m
To	6,717					2	514	m
Length	6,717	1.519	1.421			0	3	m
Au ppm	6,706	1.428	1.886	1.346	0.713	0.013	27.634	g Au/t
Capped Au	6,706	1.445	1.886	1.346	0.713	0.013	27.634	g Au/t
Density	489	2.400	2.381	0.174	0.073	1.600	2.980	g/cm3
High-Grade Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	362					23	464	m
To	362					24	466	m
Length	362	1.519	1.195			0	3	m
Au ppm	362	10.143	20.646	39.244	1.901	1.047	468.788	g Au/t
Capped Au	362	10.158	20.646	39.244	1.901	1.047	468.788	g Au/t
Density	66	2.420	2.436	0.202	0.083	1.940	3.286	g/cm3
Qal Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	385					0	105	m
To	385					2	107	m
Length	385	1.519	1.535			0	6	m
Au ppm	367	0.677	1.499	3.050	2.035	0.101	29.760	g Au/t
Capped Au	367	0.690	1.140	1.283	1.125	0.101	5.000	g Au/t
Density	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	g/cm3
108<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Dumps Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	797					0	38	m
To	797					2	40	m
Length	797	1.519	1.528			1	4	m
Au ppm	761	0.226	0.330	0.378	1.147	0.003	3.695	g Au/t
Capped Au	761	0.222	0.330	0.378	1.147	0.003	3.695	g Au/t
Density	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	g/cm3
Outside Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	120,121					0	764	m
To	120,121					1	767	m
Length	120,121	1.519	1.646			0	305	m
Au ppm	98,299	0.046	0.086	9.587	111.953	0.002	3,005.000	g Au/t
Capped Au	98,299	0.040	0.054	0.144	2.668	0.002	6.000	g Au/t
Density	911	2.280	2.288	0.209	0.091	1.390	3.830	g/cm3

Table 11-7. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Coded Silver Assays

Low-Grade SilverDomain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	47,386					0	742	m
To	47,386					2	744	m
Length	47,386	1.519	1.508			0	24	m
Ag ppm	45,126	3.169	4.191	8.832	2.108	0.010	949.697	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	45,126	3.169	3.967	3.419	0.862	0.010	35.000	g Ag/t
Density	648	2.380	2.361	0.192	0.081	1.580	3.741	g/cm3
Mid-Grade SilverDomain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	4,195					0	497	m
To	4,195					2	498	m
Length	4,195	1.519	1.517			0	20	m
Ag ppm	4,114	13.209	14.161	11.645	0.822	0.325	442.286	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	4,114	13.209	13.875	4.729	0.341	0.325	65.000	g Ag/t
Density	93	2.440	2.441	0.195	0.080	1.830	3.286	g/cm3
109<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

High-Grade Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	2,789					0	499	m
To	2,789					2	500	m
Length	2,789	1.519	1.464			0	3	m
Ag ppm	2,767	33.918	62.494	116.554	1.865	0.100	2,563.470	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	2,767	33.918	62.494	116.554	1.865	0.100	2,563.470	g Ag/t
Density	91	2.460	2.453	0.149	0.061	2.040	2.880	g/cm3
Qal Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	121					17	72	m
To	121					18	73	m
Length	121	1.519	1.550			0	6	m
Ag ppm	95	6.097	6.354	3.364	0.530	1.817	16.191	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	95	6.097	6.354	3.364	0.530	1.817	16.191	g Ag/t
Density	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	g/cm3
Dumps Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	244					0	38	m
To	244					2	40	m
Length	244	1.519	1.534			2	3	m
Ag ppm	244	3.483	4.364	3.949	0.905	0.200	41.000	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	244	3.483	4.364	3.949	0.905	0.200	41.000	g Ag/t
Density	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	g/cm3
Outside Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
From	153,589					0	764	m
To	153,589					1	767	m
Length	153,589	1.519	1.616			0	305	m
Ag ppm	144,708	0.293	0.612	2.317	3.786	0.005	320.000	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	144,708	0.293	0.589	1.063	1.805	0.005	20.000	g Ag/t
Density	1,714	2.300	2.304	0.191	0.083	0.060	3.830	g/cm3

The capped assays were composited at 3.05-meters down-hole intervals that respect the mineral domain boundaries. This minimal compositing was chosen to better represent the variability of the Sleeper mineralization in the resource estimation. The odd composite length was chosen to more precisely honor the data that has been converted from the original five-foot drill intervals. Descriptive statistics of Sleeper composites are shown in Table 11-8 and Table 11-9 for gold and silver, respectively.

110<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 11-8. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Gold Composites

Low-Grade Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	42,314	3.05	2.76			0	3.05	m
Au	40,610	0.238	0.302	0.331	1.099	0.002	34.003	g Au/t
Capped Au	40,610	0.238	0.297	0.233	0.783	0.002	3.000	g Au/t
Mid-Grade Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	3,983	3.05	2.40			0	3.05	m
Au	3,957	1.462	1.843	1.164	0.632	0.013	27.634	g Au/t
Capped Au	3,957	1.462	1.843	1.164	0.632	0.013	27.634	g Au/t
High-Grade Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	243	1.53	1.78			0	3.05	m
Au	237	11.015	19.519	31.331	1.605	1.119	297.726	g Au/t
Capped Au	237	11.015	19.519	31.331	1.605	1.119	297.726	g Au/t
Qal Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	231	3.05	2.45			0	3.05	m
Au	221	0.709	1.426	2.253	1.580	0.103	15.227	g Au/t
Capped Au	221	0.709	1.104	1.111	1.007	0.103	5.000	g Au/t
Dumps Gold Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	441	3.05	2.64			0	3.05	m
Au	410	0.219	0.326	0.326	1.000	0.005	3.242	g Au/t
Capped Au	410	0.219	0.326	0.326	1.000	0.005	3.242	g Au/t
Outside Gold Domains
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	83,462	3.05	1.80			0	3.05	m
Au	53,521	0.030	0.086	6.477	75.732	0.002	1,497.580	g Au/t
Capped Au	53,521	0.030	0.056	0.131	2.345	0.002	6.000	g Au/t
111<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Table 11-9. Descriptive Statistics of Sleeper Silver Composites

Low-Grade SilverDomain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	25,565	3.05	2.66			0	3.05	m
Ag	24,233	3.328	4.236	7.337	1.732	0.010	478.011	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	24,233	3.328	4.018	3.070	0.764	0.010	35.000	g Ag/t
Mid-Grade SilverDomain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	3,165	1.53	1.96			0	3.05	m
Ag	3,094	13.311	14.055	10.752	0.765	0.686	402.728	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	3,094	13.311	13.805	4.166	0.302	0.686	65.000	g Ag/t
High-Grade Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	1,918	1.53	2.11			0	3.05	m
Ag	1,898	33.432	55.174	90.935	1.648	0.250	1,683.410	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	1,898	33.432	55.174	90.935	1.648	0.250	1,683.410	g Ag/t
Qal Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	71	3.05	2.09			0	3.05	m
Ag	58	5.935	6.318	2.810	0.445	1.817	13.029	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	58	5.935	6.318	2.810	0.445	1.817	13.029	g Ag/t
Dumps Silver Domain
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	131	3.05	2.86			0	3.05	m
Ag	131	3.589	4.290	2.959	0.690	0.250	22.444	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	131	3.589	4.290	2.959	0.690	0.250	22.444	g Ag/t
Outside Silver Domains
	Valid	Median	Mean	Std Dev	CV	Minimum	Maximum	Units
Length	100,104	3.05	2.19			0	3.05	m
Ag	75,965	0.305	0.626	2.436	3.892	0.005	274.697	g Ag/t
Capped Ag	75,965	0.305	0.595	0.979	1.647	0.005	20.000	g Ag/t
11.7.3	BLOCK MODEL CODING
---	---

RESPEC created a three-dimensional block model comprised of 10 x 10 x 10-meter blocks (model x, y, z); the block model is not rotated with a bearing of 0°. The block size was chosen in consideration of the open pit mining scenario that would be the likely mining method for the Sleeper deposit. The mid- and high-grade mineral domain mid-bench polygons, in conjunction with low-grade domain, Quaternary

112<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

alluvium and dump solids, were used to code partial volume percentages of each gold and silver domain into their respective model blocks. The block model was also coded using the digital topographic surfaces described in Section 11.2.2, and the geology and oxidation solids discussed in Section 11.4 and 11.5, respectfully.

The bulk density values discussed in Section11.6 were assigned based on lithology and redox codes as given in Table 11-3 for each block in the model.

Due to the combination of sub-vertical structural controls and sub-horizontal lithological controls, the orientation of modeled mineralization varies throughout the deposit. To properly represent these orientations, nine estimation areas were coded in the block model. Most of the Sleeper deposit mineralization is controlled by the stratigraphic host rocks that dip shallowly at approximately 45° West and is enclosed by estimation area 1. As shown in Table 11-10, the lower-grade gold and silver domains, as well as domain 0, were entirely estimated using search ellipses that reflect these stratigraphic orientations. Estimation areas 2, 3, 4 and 5 encompass steeply dipping mineralization where the dips of the veins and faults range between 60° -75°. Estimation area 6 encompasses steeply dipping mineralization with subvertical to vertical vein and fault orientations.

Table 11-10. Sleeper Search-Ellipse Orientations and Maximum Search Distances by Estimation Area

Estimation<br> <br>Area	Search Ellipse Orientation			Maximum Search Distance (ft)
	Azimuth<br>(degrees)	Dip<br>(degrees)	Rotation<br>(degrees)	Low-Grade	Mid-Grade	High-<br>Grade	Outside<br>Domains
1	0	0	45	150	150	150	50
2	0	0	67.5	150	150	150	50
3	45	0	67.5	150	150	150	50
4	0	0	-67.5	150	150	150	50
5	120	0	67.5	150	150	150	50
6	0	0	90	150	150	150	50
7	0	0	45	75	75	75
Qal	0	0	0	150
Dumps	0	0	0	150

Note: Semi-major search distance = major search distance ÷ 1, 1.5 or 2, and the vertical search distance = major search distance ÷ 4

11.7.4	GRADE INTERPOLATION

Gold and silver grades were interpolated using inverse distance (“ID”), ordinary kriging (“OK”), and nearest-neighbor (“NN”) methods. The Mineral Resources reported herein were estimated using inverse distance to the third power (“ID^3”^) for mid- and high-grade domains and inverse distance to the second power (“ID^2”^) for low-grade domains. The ID method at the given powers produced results that were judged to represent the geology and drill data most closely. The OK and NN estimations were completed only as a check on the ID interpolations. The parameters applied to the gold and silver estimations at Sleeper are summarized in Table 11-2.

113<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 11-11. Sleeper Estimation Parameters

Description	Parameter
Low-Grade Shell Domain
Samples: minimum/maximum/maximum per hole	1 / 12 / 3
Search anisotropies (ft): major/semimajor/minor (vertical)	1 / 1 / 0.5
Inverse distance power	2
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Au/t, distance in m)	1.6 / 75
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Ag/t, distance in m)	10.5 / 75
Mid-Grade Domain
Samples: minimum/maximum/maximum per hole	1 / 12 / 3
Search anisotropies (ft): major/semimajor/minor (vertical)	1 / 1 / 0.33
Inverse distance power	3
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Au/t, distance in m)	8.0 / 75
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Ag/t, distance in m)	30 / 75
High-Grade Domain
Samples: minimum/maximum/maximum per hole	1 / 12 / 4
Search anisotropies (ft): major/semimajor/minor (vertical)	1 / 1 / 0.33
Inverse distance power	3
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Au/t, distance in m)	100.0 / 75
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Ag/t, distance in m)	290 / 75
Outside Modeled Domains
Samples: minimum/maximum/maximum per hole	2 / 12 / 3
Search anisotropies (ft): major/semimajor/minor (vertical)	1 / 1 / 0.5
Inverse distance power	2
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Au/t, distance in m)	1.1 / 20
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Ag/t, distance in m)	11 / 20
Qal Domain
Samples: minimum/maximum/maximum per hole	1 / 9 / 3
Search anisotropies (ft): major/semimajor/minor (vertical)	1 / 1 / 0.5
Inverse distance power	3
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Au/t, distance in m)	1.5 / 20
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Ag/t, distance in m)	11 / 20
Dumps Domain
Samples: minimum/maximum/maximum per hole	1 / 9 / 3
Search anisotropies (ft): major/semimajor/minor (vertical)	1 / 1 / 0.5
Inverse distance power	3
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Au/t, distance in m)	1.1 / 20
High-grade restrictions (grade in g Ag/t, distance in m)	11 / 20
114<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5
---

LOGO

Statistical analyses of coded assays and composites, including coefficients of variation and population-distribution plots, indicate that multiple sample populations were modeled in the various grade domains of both gold and silver. Evaluation of the distribution of grade within the mid- and high-grade domains indicated that the projection of the high grades in the model was excessive and warranted the application of restricted search distances within some domains. The grade and distance of search restrictions were determined using population-distribution plots for each domain. Visual inspection of the higher-grade populations within the model was conducted in a similar manner to capping to determine the potential impact of the higher-grades and the necessary magnitude of the restrictions. Before final search-restriction parameters were derived, multiple interpolation iterations that employed various search-restriction parameters were run to determine the sensitivities of the restrictions on the model.

Estimation passes were performed independently for each of the mineral domains, so that only composites coded to a particular domain were used to estimate grade into blocks coded by that domain. The estimated grades and partial percentages of the mineral domains were used to calculate the weight-averaged gold and silver grades for each block. Grades and percentages outside modeled domains were included in the calculations to produce fully block-diluted grades.

11.8	MINERAL RESOURCES

The Sleeper deposit has the potential to be mined by open pit methods. The Mineral Resources were tabulated to reflect potential open pit mining and heap leach and biooxidation extraction as the primary scenario. To meet the requirement of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, a pit optimization was run using the parameters summarized in Table 11-11.

Table 11-12. Pit Optimization Parameters

Item	Value	Unit
Mining cost	2.40	$/tonne
Heap Leach Processing cost	3.08	$/tonne processed
Flot/Bio/Leach Processing cost	8.52	$/tonne processed
Process rate	30,000	tonnes-per-day processed
General and Administrative cost	0.46	$/tonne processed
Au price	1,800	$/oz
Ag price	22	$/oz
Au recovery	84.6	percent
Ag recovery	52.3	percent

The pit shell created by the optimization was used to constrain the mineral resources, which are reported at a cut-off grade of 0.14 g Au/t for oxide and mixed materials, whereas the sulfide material is reported at a cut-off grade of 0.17 g Au/t. The gold cut-off grade was calculated using the processing, general and administrative costs, gold price, recovery, and refining cost provided in Table 11-12. The mining cost is not included in the determination of the cut-off grade, as all material in the conceptual pit would potentially be mined as either ore or waste. The reference point at which the mineral resources are

115<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

defined is therefore at the top rim of the pit, where material equal to or greater than the cut-off grade would be processed.

The metal prices used in the pit optimization and the determination of the gold cut-off grade are derived roughly from three-year moving-average prices as of July 2023 ($1,800/oz and $22/oz for gold and silver, respectively).

The open pit resource estimates are based on a 30,000 tonnes per day oxide and transitional leaching process rate, and 30,000 tonnes per day of Sulfide Flotation/Bi Oxidation.

The Sleeper mineral resources are presented in Table 11-13 Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

In addition to the mineral resources reported in this summary, there is considerable mineralized material located within the alluvium above and adjacent to the optimized pit. An ID^3^ estimation was performed on these mineralized materials and determined to contain approximately 18,000 oz Au. Although not reported as resources in Table 11-13, mining taking place through these mineralized materials to access mineralization in basement rock could potentially contribute to gold and silver production.

116<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Table 11-13. Sleeper Gold and Silver MineralResources

	Resources			Cut-off Grades<br><br><br>(g Au/t)	Metallurgical<br><br><br>Recovery
	Tonnes	Average Grades
		g Au/t	g Ag/t
Measured mineral resources - Oxide	698,000	0.330	2.76	0.14	82% Au / 9% Ag
Indicated mineral resources - Oxide	19,502,000	0.277	2.92	0.14	82% Au / 9% Ag
Inferred mineral resources - Oxide	17,153,000	0.283	1.51	0.14	82% Au / 9% Ag
Measured mineral resources - Mixed	1,021,000	0.404	3.34	0.14	67.5% Au / 20% Ag
Indicated mineral resources - Mixed	39,260,000	0.309	4.37	0.14	67.5% Au / 20% Ag
Inferred mineral resources - Mixed	14,402,000	0.290	2.62	0.14	67.5% Au / 20% Ag
Measured mineral resources - Sulfide	3,183,000	0.625	3.89	0.17	90% Au / 70% Ag
Indicated mineral resources - Sulfide	99,575,000	0.390	4.16	0.17	90% Au / 70% Ag
Inferred mineral resources - Sulfide	88,354,000	0.325	2.61	0.17	90% Au / 70% Ag
Inferred mineral resources - Dumps	15,800,000	0.319	2.08	0.14	72 % Au / 42.5% Ag

Notes:

•	The estimate of mineral resources was done by RESPEC in metric tonnes.
•	Mineral Resources comprised all model blocks at a 0.14 g Au/t cut-off for Oxide<br>and Mixed, 0.17 g Au/t for Sulfide within an optimized pit and 0.14 g Au/t for dumps.
---	---
•	The average grades of the Mineral Resources are comprised of the weighted average of Oxide, Mixed, Sulfide, and dumps<br>mineral resources. Alluvium mineralized materials are not included in the mineral resources.
---	---
•	Mineral Resources within the optimized pit are block-diluted tabulations. Dumps mineral resources are undiluted<br>tabulations.
---	---
•	Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
---	---
•	Mineral Resources potentially amenable to open pit mining methods are reported using a gold price of US$1,800/oz, a<br>silver price ofUS$22/oz, a throughput rate of 30,000 tonnes/day, assumed metallurgical recoveries of 84.6% for Au and 52.3% for Ag, mining costs of US$2.40/tonne mined, heap leach processing costs of US$3.08/tonne processed, flotation with<br>biooxidation processing costs of US$8.52/tonne processed, general and administrative costs of $0.46/tonne processed. Gold and silver commodity prices were selected based on analysis of the three-year running average at the end of July 2023.<br>
---	---
•	The effective date of the estimate is June 30, 2023.
---	---
•	Rounding may result in apparent discrepancies between tonnes, grade, and contained metal content.<br>
---	---

Figure 11-5 through Figure 11-8 are cross-sections through the central portion of the Sleeper deposit that show estimated block-model gold and silver grades. These figures correspond to the mineral-domain cross-sections presented in Figure 11-1 to Figure 11-4.

117<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-5. East-WestCross-Section 4575545N Showing Gold Grades in the Block Model

118<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-6. East-WestCross-Section 4575545N Showing Silver Grades in the Block Model

119<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-7. East-WestCross-Section 4576175N Showing Gold Grades in the Block Model

120<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

Figure 11-8. East-WestCross-Section 4576175N Showing Silver Grades in the Block Model

121<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

11.8.1	CLASSIFICATION

The Sleeper resources are classified as Measured, Indicated, and Inferred. Classification was based on parameters layering the number of samples, proximity of samples, and the verification status of drill-hole data within each estimation area (Table 11.14). Uncertainties considered in resource classification include: (i) the preponderance of vertical RC holes drilled and assayed by historical operators; (ii) the sample quality due to contamination in some portions of the RC holes; and (iii) the adequacy of the drill hole spacing in the higher-grade core zone of the deposit where variability in the highest-grade gold population is high.

Table 11-14. Sleeper Classification Parameters

Sleeper Classification Parameters
Measured
In modeled domain, and
*Drill-hole confidence code ≥ 0.9, and
Number of samples ≥ 7, and closest distance ≤ 10 m
Indicated
In modeled domain, and
*Drill-hole confidence code ≥ 0.55, and
Number of samples ≥ 7 and closest distance ≤ 22 m;
Or
In modelled domain, and
*Drill-hole confidence code ≥ 0.55, and
Number of samples ≥ 2 and closest distance ≤ 10 m
Inferred
In modeled domain that is not Measured or<br>Indicated;
Or
*Drill-hole confidence code ≥ 0.5, and
Number of samples ≥ 1 and closest distance ≤ 10 m
*Confidence codes were assigned by drillingprogram based on availability of supporting documentation for data verification. A code of ‘1’ - available for all data; ‘0.9’ – data available for all assays and majority of down-hole surveys; ‘0.75’ – dataavailable for assays but not down-hole surveys; ‘0.5’ - limited supporting documentation; and ‘0’ - no documentation.

Confidence codes between 0 (no confidence) and 1 (highest confidence) were assigned to assays by campaign based on the amount of supporting documentation available for auditing, as well as the performance, or lack thereof, of down-hole surveys. Codes of 0.75 to 1.0 were assigned to the M-, S- and Paramount-series holes, the majority of which were supported with assay certificates and were down-hole surveyed. Fewer quantities of certificates were available for the PPW-series holes, but since down-hole surveys were not done on these holes, confidence codes of 0.5 were assigned. The PPW holes were drilled along the west side of the pit and define primarily low-grade mineralization. No documentation was available for AMAX’s D-, EP-, G-, OH-, PFW-, TM- and WD- series holes, which are predominantly located west of PPW holes, and were assigned confidence codes of ‘0’. These define

122<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

some low-grade mineralization but are generally west of modeled domains. The confidence codes were estimated into the block model using the same search ellipse orientations search distances as for gold and silver estimates, so that distance weighting was applied. The estimated confidence code was applied to classification according to Table 11.14.

AMAX drilled 3,480 holes that were used in grade estimation for the current mineral resources. The majority of these were vertical. Due to the emerging understanding of the importance of narrow high-grade veins and steeply dipping structural controls to the higher-grade mineralization, subsequent operators, including Paramount, emphasized angled core holes in their drilling programs. A total of 100 core holes, including 39 drilled by Paramount, support the current resource estimates, and enhanced the geological understanding of the Sleeper deposit. The Paramount drilling decreased uncertainties in the resource estimation related to the historical paucity of angled core holes.

RESPEC identified 13,511 assay intervals with demonstrable down-hole contamination, and 2,576 assay intervals flagged with high-rate of water flow and down-hole contamination of precious-metals values. These samples were excluded from use in the resource estimation. The evaluations have been completed, however there is potential for additional down-hole contamination that was not identifiable. This represents an inherent source of uncertainty since the historical data is primarily associated with RC drilling below the water table.

The higher-grade zones contain the majority of the metal content in the deposit and are critical to the potential economic viability of a potential mining operation at the Sleeper project. However, the deposit has predominantly been drilled at hole spacings of about 30 meters. Even at this tight drill density, the highest-grade gold mineralization (> 1,050 g Au/t) could not be confidently correlated from drill hole to drill hole. As a result, this mineralization was included within the high-grade domain that contains grades greater than approximately 8.0 g Au/t. The estimation of the highest-grade population within the bimodal high-grade domain was controlled using search restrictions in an attempt to properly represent continuity and grade distribution in the model. However, the bimodal character of the domain and the inability to model the highest-grade population (8.0 g Au/t) increases grade variability and thereby adds uncertainty to the model.

11.9	DISCUSSION OF RESOURCES

RESPEC is not an expert with respect to environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political, or other relevant factors not discussed in this report. RESPEC is not aware of any issues related to these factors that could materially affect the Mineral Resource estimates as of the effective date of the report.

The block size (10 x 10 x 10 m) of the Sleeper block model was chosen in consideration of potential exploitation by open pit mining and heap leach and biooxidation extraction, and resources were reported within a pit optimized using current economic parameters. However, all modeling processes and inputs that were used to estimate the gold and silver resources, including the mineral domain modeling, grade capping, grade estimation, and density assignment, were completed independent of potential mining methods.

123<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

The risks to the reported mineral resources are primarily associated with the high variability and lack of continuity of the highest grades within the deposit and lower confidence associated with some historical datasets. The high-grade mineralization demonstrates an erratic distribution, which made correlation of these highest-grade samples from drill hole to drill hole difficult at the current drill spacing. The domain boundaries between the low- and mid-grade domains were largely determined by grade because the geologic characteristics that distinguish those domains were not evident in core or logging. In some cases, relatively high-grade samples were included in lower-grade domains because of the lack of continuity and inability to model the higher grades. There is the possibility that these included higher grades influence more volume than would actually be expected due to the lack of proper domain constraints, however, high-grade search restrictions were applied in attempt to mitigate the risk. The mineralization modeled within the low-grade domain is much less variable than the mid- and high-grade mineralization, which is indicative of more stratigraphic controls on the distribution.

The uncertainty of grade variability and grade location is minimized in an open pit mining scenario. However, properly oriented, closely spaced drilling is needed to fully delineate the mid- and high-grade domain mineralization in the resource models which would increase confidence in the location and extent of the mineralization. Oriented core drilling would also allow for refinement of the geotechnical model for pit slope designs.

The majority of data that was used to estimate the mineral resources in the Sleeper deposit are historical RC drill holes. A majority of the drilling data associated with these holes were able to be verified with respect to assay certificates and other supporting documentation as of the effective date of the reported resources. There remain some uncertainties in the data, such as the inherent risk associated with RC drilling with respect to down-hole contamination of samples, especially below the water table. A total of 13,511 samples with demonstrated contamination were identified and removed from use in resource estimation; there is risk that there is additional down-hole contamination that could not be identified that could materially affect future mineral resource estimates.

RESPEC believes that any risk factors that would likely influence the prospect of economic extraction could be resolved by further drilling and validation of the historical dataset. Contamination issues below the water table could be avoided by drilling more core, and closely spaced drilling at an angle would allow for refinement of the mid- and high-grade domain models.

124<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

There are no current mineral reserves at the Sleeper project.

125<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <br><br> <br>RSI(RNO)-M0144.21001 REV 5

LOGO

13.0 MINING METHODS