Mineral Resources
Cactus Mine Project
Cactus Project Total Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource
| Material Type |
Tons kt |
Grade CuT % |
Grade Cu Tsol % |
Contained Total Cu (k lbs) |
Contained Cu Tsol (k lbs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Measured | |||||
| Total Leachable | 55,200 | 0.94 | 0.79 | 1,032,200 | 873,800 |
| Total Primary | 12,300 | 0.51 | 0.05 | 124,400 | 13,400 |
| Total Measured | 67,500 | 0.86 | 0.66 | 1,156,500 | 887,200 |
| Indicated | |||||
| Total Leachable | 414,800 | 0.60 | 0.53 | 4,965,000 | 4,365,700 |
| Total Primary | 150,400 | 0.39 | 0.04 | 1,173,300 | 126,000 |
| Total Indicated | 565,200 | 0.54 | 0.40 | 6,138,200 | 4,491,700 |
| M&I | |||||
| Total Leachable | 470,000 | 0.64 | 0.56 | 5.997,200 | 5,239,500 |
| Total Primary | 162,700 | 0.40 | 0.04 | 1,297,600 | 139,400 |
| Total M&I | 632,600 | 0.58 | 0.43 | 7,294,800 | 5,378,900 |
| Inferred | |||||
| Total Leachable | 299,600 | 0.43 | 0.38 | 2,572,400 | 2,262,800 |
| Total Primary | 174,500 | 0.36 | 0.04 | 1,267,500 | 124,700 |
| Total Inferred | 474,000 | 0.41 | 0.25 | 3,839,900 | 2,387,500 |
NOTES:
1. Total soluble copper grades (Cu TSol) are reported using sequential assaying to calculate the soluble copper grade. Tons are reported as short tons.
2. Stockpile resource estimates have an effective date of 1st March, 2022, Cactus mineral resource estimates have an effective date of 29th April, 2022, Parks/Salyer-MainSpring mineral resource estimates have an effective date of 11th July, 2024. All mineral resources use a copper price of US$3.75/lb.
3. Technical and economic parameters defining mineral resource pit shells: mining cost US$2.43/t; G&A US$0.55/t, 10% dilution, and 44°-46° pit slope angle.
4. Technical and economic parameters defining underground mineral resource: mining cost US$27.62/t, G&A US$0.55/t, and 5% dilution. Underground mineral resources are only reported for material located outside of the open pit mineral resource shells. Designation as open pit or underground mineral resources are not confirmatory of the mining method that may be employed at the mine design stage.
5. Technical and economic parameters defining processing: Oxide heap leach (HL) processing cost of US$2.24/t assuming 86.3% recoveries, enriched HL processing cost of US$2.13/t assuming 90.5% recoveries, sulphide mill processing cost of US$8.50/t assuming 92% recoveries. HL selling cost of US$0.27/lb; Mill selling cost of US$0.62/lb.
6. Royalties of 3.18% and 2.5% apply to the ASCU properties and state land respectively. No royalties apply to the MainSpring property.
7. Variable cut-off grades were reported depending on material type, potential mining method, potential processing method, and applicable royalties. For ASCU properties - Oxide open pit or underground material = 0.099% or 0.549% TSol respectively; enriched open pit or underground material = 0.092% or 0.522% TSol respectively; primary open pit or underground material = 0.226% or 0.691% CuT respectively. For state land property – Oxide open pit or underground material = 0.098 % or 0.545% TSol respectively; enriched open pit or underground material = 0.092% or 0.518% TSol respectively; primary openpit or underground material = 0.225% or 0.686% CuT respectively. For MainSpring properties – Oxide openpit or underground material = 0.096% or 0.532% TSol respectively; enriched open pit or underground material = 0.089% or 0.505% TSol respectively; primary open pit or underground material = 0.219% or 0.669% CuT respectively. Stockpile cutoff = 0.095% TSol.
8. Mineral resources, which are not mineral reserves, do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, sociopolitical, marketing, or other relevant factors.
9. The quantity and grade of reported inferred mineral resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there is insufficient exploration to define these inferred mineral resources as an indicated or measured mineral resource; it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an indicated or measured classification.
10. Totals may not add up due to rounding.
Quality Assurance / Quality Control
Drilling completed on the project between 2020 and 2024 was supervised by on-site ASCU personnel who prepared core samples for assay and implemented a full QA/QC program using blanks, standards, and duplicates to monitor analytical accuracy and precision. The samples were sealed on site and shipped to Skyline Laboratories in Tucson AZ for analysis. Skyline’s quality control system complies with global certifications for Quality ISO9001:2008.
Scientific and technical information contained herein has been reviewed and verified by Allan Schappert – CPG #11758, who is a qualified person as defined by National Instrument 43-101– Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects.