South Arturo Pfs 25jan2021

Preliminary Feasibility Study
for the South Arturo Mine,

Elko County, NV
Authors:
Prepared for:
Dagny Odell, P.E.
Premier Gold Mines Ltd. Laura Symmes, SME,
1100 Russell Street, Suite 200 Robert Raponi, P. Eng
Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5N2
Effective Date:
Prepared By: December 1, 2020
Practical Mining LLC.
495 Idaho Street, Suite 205 Report Date:
January 25, 2021
Elko, Nevada 89801
Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo
Page ii Mine, Elko County, NV i-80 Gold Corp..
This page intentionally left blank.
Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

i-80 Gold Corp. Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Page iii
Mine, Elko County, NV
Date and Signature Page
The undersigned prepared this Technical Report (TR) report, titled: Preliminary Feasibility Study
for the South Arturo Mine, Elko County, NV, dated the 25th day of January, 2021, with an effective
date of December 1, 2020, in support of the public disclosure of Mineral Resource and Mineral
Reserve estimates for the Arturo Project. The format and content of the Technical Report have
been prepared in accordance with Form 43-101F1 of National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of
Disclosure for Mineral Projects of the Canadian Securities Administrators.
Dated this January 25, 2021
Signed “Dagny Odell” No. 13708, Nevada

Dagny Odell, P.E SME No. 2402150
Practical Mining LLC (Sealed)
495 Idaho Street, Suite 205
Elko, Nevada 89815, USA
(775) 345-3718
Email: dagny@practicalmining.com
Signed “Laura Symmes” SME No. 4196936

Laura Symmes (Sealed)
Practical Mining LLC
Elko, Nevada 89815, USA
(775) 345-3718
Email: laurasymmes@practicalmining.com
Signed “Robert Raponi”

Tommaso Roberto Raponi, P Eng SME No. 2641200
TR Raponi Consulting Ltd. (Sealed)
15-223 Rebecca Street
Oakville, Ontario, CA L6K 3Y2
416-358-8748
Email: robert.raponi@bell.net

Page iv Mine, Elko County, NV i-80 Gold Corp..
Table of Contents
Date and Signature Page ................................................................................................................ iii

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xiii
1. Summary ............................................................................................................................... 14
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 14
Property Description ...................................................................................................... 16
Geology and Mineral Resource ...................................................................................... 16
Mineral Reserves ............................................................................................................ 18
Metallurgical Testing and Processing ............................................................................ 19
Mining, Infrastructure, and Project Schedule................................................................. 19
Economic Analysis ......................................................................................................... 19
Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 20
Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 21
2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 22
Terms of Reference and Purpose of this Technical Report ............................................ 22
Qualification of the Authors ........................................................................................... 22
Sources of Information ................................................................................................... 23
Units of Measure ............................................................................................................ 23
Coordinate Datum .......................................................................................................... 23
3. Reliance on Other Experts .................................................................................................... 24
4. Property Description and Location ....................................................................................... 25
Property Description ...................................................................................................... 25
Status of Mineral Titles .................................................................................................. 26
Royalties ................................................................................................................. 28
Environmental Liabilities ............................................................................................... 29
Permits/Licenses............................................................................................................. 29

i-80 Gold Corp. Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Page v
5. Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography ........................ 30

Accessibility ................................................................................................................... 30
Climate ........................................................................................................................... 30
Local Resources ............................................................................................................. 30
Infrastructure .................................................................................................................. 30
Physiography .................................................................................................................. 31
6. History................................................................................................................................... 32
Previous Owners ............................................................................................................ 32
Historic Exploration ....................................................................................................... 32
Historic Mining .............................................................................................................. 33
7. Geologic Setting and Mineralization .................................................................................... 34
Regional Geology ........................................................................................................... 34
Local Geology ................................................................................................................ 36
Mineralization ................................................................................................................ 39
8. Deposit Types ....................................................................................................................... 41
9. Exploration ............................................................................................................................ 42
10. Drilling .................................................................................................................................. 43
Drilling and Sampling Methods ..................................................................................... 44
Recovery Factors ............................................................................................................ 45
11. Sample Preparation, Analysis and Security .......................................................................... 47
Sample Preparation Procedures ........................................................................... 47
Laboratory Analysis Procedures ......................................................................... 47
Security................................................................................................................ 48
Standards and Blanks .......................................................................................... 48
Duplicate Assays ................................................................................................. 51
12. Data Verification ................................................................................................................... 53
13. Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing ..................................................................... 55
Historical Metallurgical Test Work................................................................................ 55
2017 Metallurgical Samples ........................................................................................... 55
Column Leach Tests ....................................................................................................... 57

Page vi Mine, Elko County, NV i-80 Gold Corp..
CIL Bottle Roll Tests ..................................................................................................... 58

Recovery Estimates ........................................................................................................ 60
Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 61
Recommendations: ......................................................................................................... 61
14. Mineral Resource Estimates ................................................................................................. 62
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 62
Modeling of Lithology and Mineralization .................................................................... 65
Drill Data and Compositing ........................................................................................... 66
Drill Data Set ....................................................................................................... 66
Compositing ........................................................................................................ 67
Density ........................................................................................................................... 67
Statistics and Variography ............................................................................................. 68
Grade Capping................................................................................................................ 70
Block Model ................................................................................................................... 70
Grade Estimation and Resource Classification .............................................................. 72
Mined Depletion and Sterilization ................................................................................. 74
Model Validation............................................................................................................ 74
Model Reconciliation .......................................................................................... 75
Pit Optimization ............................................................................................................. 77
Underground Stope Optimizer ....................................................................................... 78
Mineral Resources .......................................................................................................... 79
15. Mineral Reserve Estimates ................................................................................................... 81
Open Pit .......................................................................................................................... 82
Underground Mineral Reserves ..................................................................................... 83
16. Mining Methods .................................................................................................................... 85
SAJV Past Production .................................................................................................... 85
Open Pit .......................................................................................................................... 85
Material Routing ................................................................................................. 86
Geotechnical ........................................................................................................ 89
Underground................................................................................................................... 92

i-80 Gold Corp. Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Page vii
Mine Development .............................................................................................. 92

Mining Methods .................................................................................................. 92
Ground Support ................................................................................................... 93
Cemented Rock Fill ............................................................................................. 93
Ventilation and Secondary Egress....................................................................... 93
Dewatering ..................................................................................................................... 94
Mine Plan ....................................................................................................................... 94
17. Recovery Methods ................................................................................................................ 95
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 95
ROM Heap Leaching ..................................................................................................... 95
Oxide Milling ................................................................................................................. 96
Roaster............................................................................................................................ 97
Autoclave ....................................................................................................................... 98
18. Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................... 100
Dewatering ................................................................................................................... 100
Electrical Power ........................................................................................................... 100
Water ............................................................................................................................ 100
Underground Mine Facilities ....................................................................................... 100
Surface Mine Facilities................................................................................................. 101
19. Market Studies and Contracts ............................................................................................. 102
Precious Metal Markets ................................................................................................ 102
Contracts....................................................................................................................... 103
20. Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community Impact ............................... 104
Environmental Studies and Issues ................................................................................ 104
Social or Community Impacts ...................................................................................... 104
Permitting ..................................................................................................................... 104
Closure and Reclamation Requirements ...................................................................... 106
21. Capital and Operating Costs ............................................................................................... 108
Capital Costs ................................................................................................................ 108
Operating Costs ............................................................................................................ 108

Page viii Mine, Elko County, NV i-80 Gold Corp..
El Niño Underground Mine............................................................................... 109

Cutoff Grade ................................................................................................................. 109
22. Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................. 111
Sensitivity ..................................................................................................................... 115
23. Adjacent Properties ............................................................................................................. 117
24. Other Relevant Data and Information ................................................................................. 118
25. Interpretation and Conclusions ........................................................................................... 119
26. Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 120
Risks and Opportunities ............................................................................................... 120
Work Program .............................................................................................................. 120
27. References ........................................................................................................................... 122
Certification of Authors .............................................................................................................. 123

i-80 Gold Corp. Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Page ix
List of Tables
Table 1-1 South Arturo Mineral Resources Exclusive of Mineral Reserves Attributable to i-80
(40% Basis) ................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 1-2 South Arturo Mineral Reserves Attributable to i-80 (40% Basis) ............................... 18
Table 1-3 Financial Statistics Attributable to i-80 ........................................................................ 19
Table 2-1 Qualified Professionals ................................................................................................. 22
Table 2-2 Units of Measure .......................................................................................................... 23
Table 4-1 South Arturo JV Unpatented Mining Claims ............................................................... 27
Table 4-2 Franco Nevada USA Leased Claim Royalties.............................................................. 29
Table 6-1 Historic Dee Mine Gold Production ............................................................................. 33
Table 11-1 Gold Blank and Standard Summary Statistics............................................................ 48
Table 13-1 Number of Additional Metallurgical Tests in 2018 ................................................... 57
Table 13-2 Arturo Phase 1 CIL/Leach Tests for Low Grade and High Grade Samples .............. 58
Table 13-3 Arturo Phase 3 CIL/Leach Tests for Low Grade and High Grade Samples .............. 60
Table 14-1 Geology Codes ........................................................................................................... 65
Table 14-2 Indicator Cutoff Values .............................................................................................. 66
Table 14-3 Drill Hole Summary ................................................................................................... 67
Table 14-4 Density ........................................................................................................................ 67
Table 14-5 Search Ellipsoid Parameters- East Deep Underground Zone ..................................... 68
Table 14-6 Search Ellipsoid Parameters - Open Pit Zones ........................................................... 68
Table 14-7 Gold Composite Statistics .......................................................................................... 69
Table 14-8 Composite Grade Capping ......................................................................................... 70
Table 14-9 Block Model Parameters ............................................................................................ 71
Table 14-10 Block Model Variables ............................................................................................. 71
Table 14-11 Estimation Parameters for the Underground Zone ................................................... 72
Table 14-12 Estimation Parameters for the Open Pit Zones......................................................... 73
Table 14-13 South Arturo Underground Classification Conditions ............................................. 73
Table 14-14 South Arturo Open Pit Classification Conditions .................................................... 73
Table 14-15 Estimate Comparison for Au ID3 versus Nearest Neighbor .................................... 74
Table 14-16 Mine to Model Reconciliation .................................................................................. 75
Table 14-17 Mill to Model Reconciliation ................................................................................... 76
Table 14-18 Resource Pit Shells Incremental Statistics ............................................................... 77
Table 14-19 South Arturo Mineral Resources Attributable to i-80 (Exclusive of Reserves) ....... 79
Table 15-1 Mineral Reserves Attributable to i-80 (40%) ............................................................. 81
Table 16-1 South Arturo Joint Venture Gold Recovered (000's oz.) ............................................ 85
Table 16-2 Equipment Requirements ........................................................................................... 85
Table 16-3 Phase 1 Pit Mining and Processing Schedule ............................................................. 86
Table 16-4 Arturo Material Routing ............................................................................................. 87
Page x Mine, Elko County, NV i-80 Gold Corp..
Table 16-5 Recommended Inter-ramp and Overall Slope Designs .............................................. 91

Table 16-6 El Niño Production Schedule ..................................................................................... 94
Table 20-1 Arturo Project Significant Permits ........................................................................... 104
Table 21-1 Project Capital Costs ($M) ....................................................................................... 108
Table 21-2 Unit Operating Costs ................................................................................................ 109
Table 21-3 El Niño Unit Mining Costs ....................................................................................... 109
Table 21-4 Reserve Cutoff Grades by Mine and Process ........................................................... 109
Table 21-5 Resource Cutoff Grades by Mine and Process ......................................................... 110
Table 22-1 Income Statement Attributable to i-80’s 40% Interest ............................................. 112
Table 22-2 Cash Flow Statement Attributable to i-80’s 40% Interest ........................................ 112
Table 22-3 Financial Statistics Attributable to i-80 .................................................................... 113
Table 26-1 Project Risks ............................................................................................................. 120
Table 26-2 Opportunities ............................................................................................................ 120
Table 26-3 South Arturo Work Program .................................................................................... 121

i-80 Gold Corp. Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Page xi
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Project Overview ......................................................................................................... 15

Figure 4-1 Location Map .............................................................................................................. 26
Figure 4-2 South Arturo Joint Venture Property .......................................................................... 28
Figure 7-1 Carlin Trend Geology ................................................................................................. 35
Figure 7-2 South Arturo Geology ................................................................................................. 38
Figure 10-1 Drill Hole Collar Locations ....................................................................................... 43
Figure 10-2 Drill Section at 33500N, Looking North................................................................... 44
Figure 11-1 Blank Assay Results BL-46 ...................................................................................... 50
Figure 11-2 GS-25 Standard Reference Material Results............................................................. 50
Figure 11-3 BCH-OX-06 Standard Reference Material Results .................................................. 51
Figure 11-4 821 Prep Duplicates - ALS Method AA23 ............................................................... 52
Figure 11-5 488 Prep Duplicates - ALS Method AuCN AA13 .................................................... 52
Figure 13-1 South Arturo Phase 1 and Phase 3 Pit Metallurgical Drill Hole Locations .............. 56
Figure 14-1 South Arturo Block Model Extents ........................................................................... 64
Figure 14-2 Medium and High Grade Shells with Faults and Lithology at 33500N, looking North
....................................................................................................................................................... 66
Figure 14-3 Underground Zone Variaograms............................................................................... 68
Figure 14-4 Open Pit Variograms ................................................................................................. 69
Figure 14-5 Section View Displaying Block and Drill Grades at 33500N, looking North .......... 75
Figure 14-6 El Niño Mill to Model Reconciliation ...................................................................... 76
Figure 14-7 Pit Optimization Summary........................................................................................ 77
Figure 14-8 South Arturo Resource Pit Limit............................................................................... 78
Figure 14-9 El Niño Stope Optimizer Results .............................................................................. 79
Figure 15-1 Mineral Reserve Pit ................................................................................................... 83
Figure 15-2 Isometric View of El Niño Underground Mine and Reserve Excavations ............... 84
Figure 16-1 Arturo Ore Control Flow Chart ................................................................................. 88
Figure 16-2 Pit Wall Sectors ......................................................................................................... 90
Figure 16-3 El Niño Plan View Showing Portals and Main Ramp .............................................. 92
Figure 17-1 Proposed Heap Leach Flowsheet .............................................................................. 96
Figure 17-2 NGM Cortez Flowsheet for Oxide Ore Processing................................................... 97
Figure 17-3 Goldstrike Roaster Simplified Flowsheet ................................................................. 98
Figure 17-4 Goldstrike Pressure Oxidation Simplified CaTS-RIL Flowsheet ............................. 99
Figure 18-1 El Niño Facilities Layout ........................................................................................ 101
Figure 19-1 Historical Monthly Average Gold and Silver Prices and 36 Month Trailing Average
..................................................................................................................................................... 102
Figure 20-1 Permitted Disturbance ............................................................................................. 107
Figure 22-1 Gold Production and Unit Costs ............................................................................. 111
Page xii Mine, Elko County, NV i-80 Gold Corp..
Figure 22-2 Cash Flow Waterfall Chart...................................................................................... 114

Figure 22-3 Gold Price Sensitivity ............................................................................................. 115
Figure 22-4 Operating Cost Sensitivity ...................................................................................... 116
Figure 22-5 Capital Cost Sensitivity ........................................................................................... 116

i-80 Gold Corp. Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Page xiii
List of Abbreviations
A Ampere kCFM thousand cubic feet per minute

AA atomic absorption assay Kg Kilograms
A/m2 amperes per square meter km kilometer
AGP Acid Generation Potential km2 square kilometer
Ag Silver kWh/t kilowatt-hour per ton
ANFO ammonium nitrate fuel oil LoM Life-of-Mine
ANP Acid Neutralization Potential m meter
Au Gold m2 square meter
AuEq gold equivalent m3 cubic meter
btu British Thermal Unit masl meters above sea level
°C degrees Celsius mg/L milligrams/liter
CCD counter-current decantation mm millimeter
CIL carbon-in-leach mm2 square millimeter
CoG Cut off grade mm3 cubic millimeter
cm centimeter MME Mine & Mill Engineering
cm2 square centimeter Moz million troy ounces
cm3 cubic centimeter Mt million tonnes
cfm cubic feet per minute MTW measured true width
ConfC confidence code MW million watts
CRec core recovery m.y. million years
CSS closed-side setting NGO non-governmental organization
CTW calculated true width NI 43-101 Canadian National Instrument 43-101
° degree (degrees) oz Troy Ounce
dia. diameter opt Troy Ounce per short ton
EA Environmental Assesment oz/ton Troy Ounce per short ton
EIS Environmental Impact Statement % percent
EMP Environmental Management Plan PLC Programmable Logic Controller
FA fire assay PLS Pregnant Leach Solution
Ft Foot PMF probable maximum flood
Ft2 Square foot POO Plan of Operations
Ft3 Cubic foot ppb parts per billion
g Gram ppm parts per million
g/L gram per liter QAQC Quality Assurance/Quality Control
g-mol gram-mole RC reverse circulation drilling
g/t grams per metric tonne ROM Run-of-Mine
ha hectares RQD Rock Quality Description
HDPE Height Density Polyethylene SEC U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
HTW horizontal true width Sec second
ICP induced couple plasma SG specific gravity
ID2 inverse-distance squared SPT Standard penetration test
ID3 inverse-distance cubed ton US Short Ton
ILS Intermediate Leach Solution tonne Metric Tonne
LOI Loss On Ignition tpd US Short Tons per day
kA kiloamperes

Page 14 Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South i-80 Gold Corp.
Arturo Mine, Elko County, NV
1. Summary
Introduction
Practical Mining LLC (“Practical” or “PM”) was engaged by Premier Gold Mines USA Inc., a
subsidiary of Premier Gold Mines Limited (collectively “Premier” or “the Company”) to prepare
a Preliminary Feasibility Study (PFS) on the South Arturo Project in Elko and Eureka Counties,
Nevada. This Technical Report (TR) is the initial statement of Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves for i-80 Gold Corporation (“i-80”). This TR has been prepared in accordance with
National Instrument 43-101 (NI43-101) of the Canadian Security Administrators and follows the
“CIM Estimation of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserves Best Practices” guidelines (CIM
2019). Mineral Resources classifications are in accordance with the “CIM Standards on Mineral
Resources and Reserves: Definition and Guidelines” (CIM 2014).
The South Arturo project (the "South Arturo Project") is a joint venture (the "SAJV") in respect
of the South Arturo mine (the "South Arturo Mine") located in Nevada, U.S.A between Nevada
Gold Mines LLC ("NGM"), 60% owner and operator, and Goldcorp Dee LLC ("Goldcorp
Dee"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Premier, 40% owner. NGM is a Delaware Limited Liability
Company that is a joint venture combining the Nevada assets of Newmont Mining Corporation
("Newmont") and Barrick Gold Corporation ("Barrick"). The South Arturo Project includes the
completed east lobe Phase 2 (Button Hill) open pit and the active El Niño underground mine at the
bottom of the Phase 2 pit. The northern and southern lobes of the ultimate pit are the Phase 1 (Dee)
and Phase 3 (Arturo) respectively. Mineral Reserves are limited to refractory mineralization from
the Phase 1 pit and El Niño underground. A small portion of the Mineralization extends north from
the Phase 1 pit onto the Barrick Rossi property (Figure 1-1).
The creation of NGM has resulted in a surplus of mineralization for processing at the refractory
facilities. The Goldstrike Roaster Facility is prioritizing high grade underground mineralization
from all NGM underground mines and therefore mining of the South Arturo Phase 1 pit can been
delayed until 2025.

i-80 Gold Corp Summary Page 15
Figure 1-1 Project Overview
This TR dated the 25th day of January, 2021 with an effective date of December 1, 2020 is the
initial statement of Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources for i-80 Gold Corp.’s 40% interest in
the South Arturo Joint Venture.
Cautionary Notes:
1. The financial analysis contains certain information that may constitute "forward-looking information"
under applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking information includes, but is not
limited to, statements regarding the Company’s achievement of the full-year projections for ounce
production, production costs, AISC costs per ounce, cash cost per ounce and realized gold/silver price
per ounce, the Company’s ability to meet annual operations estimates, and statements about strategic
plans, including future operations, future work programs, capital expenditures, discovery and
production of minerals, price of gold and currency exchange rates, timing of geological reports and
corporate and technical objectives. Forward-looking information is necessarily based upon a number
of assumptions that, while considered reasonable, are subject to known and unknown risks,
uncertainties, and other factors which may cause the actual results and future events to differ
materially from those expressed or implied by such forward looking information, including the risks
inherent to the mining industry, adverse economic and market developments and the risks identified
in Premier's annual information form under the heading "Risk Factors". There can be no assurance

that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ
materially from those anticipated in such information. Accordingly, readers should not place undue
reliance on forward-looking information. All forward-looking information contained in this
Presentation is given as of the date hereof and is based upon the opinions and estimates of
management and information available to management as at the date hereof. Premier disclaims any
intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of
new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law;
Property Description
The South Arturo Project is comprised of unpatented mining claims owned by Goldcorp Dee LLC
(Dee), a wholly owned subsidiary of Premier, and unpatented mining claims leased from Franco-
Nevada Corp. The property encompasses 4,909 acres including the previously mined Dee Pit. The
project is at the northern extent of the Carlin Trend and is approximately four miles from NGM’s
Goldstrike operation.
Geology and Mineral Resource
The South Arturo deposits are sedimentary rock and intrusive hosted gold and silver deposits
hosted mainly in silicified breccias. Oxide gold mineralization in the existing Dee pit mine area is
structurally controlled, dominantly paralleling the north-south striking Dee Fault Zone. Gold was
emplaced by several pulses of silica alteration, which converted mineralized wall rocks into
massive silica or silica breccia. Enriched zones are found where the Dee Fault Zone intersects
northwest trending faults. Minor gold mineralization can be traced along northwest, northeast and
east-west structures trending away from the Dee Fault Zone.
Mineral Resources as of December 1, 2020 are presented in Table 1-1. Open pit and stockpile
Mineral Resources include oxide mineralization amenable to CIL milling or heap leaching along
with refractory roaster material. Underground Mineral Resources are entirely refractory roaster
material.

Table 1-1 South Arturo Mineral Resources Exclusive of Mineral Reserves Attributable
to i-80 (40% Basis)
Tons Tonnes Au Au Ag Ag Au ozs Ag ozs
Process (000’s) (000’s) (opt) (g/t) (opt) (g/t) (000’s) (000’s)
Measured
Open Pit 5,117 4,642 0.035 1.21 0.220 7.56 180.6 1,128
Stockpile 783 710 0.016 0.55 0.013 0.44 12.4 10
Underground 18 16 0.518 17.77 0.400 13.72 9.1 7
Measured 5,917 5,368 0.034 1.17 0.193 6.63 200.2 1,145
Indicated
Open Pit 16,073 14,581 0.034 1.17 0.176 6.02 548.6 2,824
Stockpile - - - - - - - -
Underground 47 43 0.374 12.83 0.168 5.77 17.5 8
Indicated 16,120 14,624 0.035 1.20 0.176 6.02 566.1 2,832
Measured and Indicated
Open Pit 21,190 19,223 0.034 1.18 0.186 6.39 729.2 3,952
Stockpile 783 710 0.016 0.55 0.013 0.44 12.4 10
Underground 64 58 0.414 14.18 0.232 7.94 26.7 15
Measured and 22.037 19,992 0.035 1.20 0.180 6.19 768.3 3,977`
Indicated
Inferred
Open Pit 11,092 10,063 0.028 0.95 0.160 5.47 307.5 1,770
Stockpile - - - - - - - -
Underground 60 55 0.247 8.46 0.148 5.08 14.9 9
Inferred 11,153 10,117 0.029 0.99 0.159 5.47 322.4 1,779
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are exclusive of Mineral Reserves;
2. Mineral Recourses are stated as of December 1, 2020;
3. Mineral Resources are estimated using variable cutoff grades that are dependent upon recovery and
processing method;
4. Open Pit Mineral Resources are constrained within a pit shell generated using a gold price of $1,500 per
ounce and a silver price of $15 per ounce;
5. Underground Mineral Resources are constrained by Mine Stope Optimizer shapes generated using a gold
price of $1,500 per ounce and a silver price of $15 per ounce;
6. Modifying mill to model factors for tons and contained metal have not been applied to the open pit
Mineral Resources;
7. Underground Mineral Resources include modifying mill to model reconciliation factors of 1.025 and –
0.901 applied to tons and contained metal respectively;

8. A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of solid 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 eventual
economic extraction. The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological
characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological
evidence and knowledge, including sampling;
9. An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality
are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient
to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a
lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted
to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be
upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration; and
10. The reference point for mineral resources is in situ.
Mineral Reserves
Mineral reserves are reported only for the Phase 1 pit and El Niño underground and only for
material amenable to roasting. Mineral Reserves are summarized in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2 South Arturo Mineral Reserves Attributable to i-80 (40% Basis)
(000’s) (000’s) (opt) g/t (opt) (g/t) (000’s) (000’s)
Proven
Open Pit 2,617 2,374 0.089 3.05 0.500 17.15 233 1,309
Stockpile 220 200 0.074 2.54 0.129 4.44 16 29
Underground 66 60 0.186 6.38 0.135 4.62 12 9
Proven 2,904 2,634 0.090 3.09 0.464 15.90 261.5 1,347
Probable
Open Pit 1,212 1,100 0.063 2.16 0.419 14.37 76.4 508
Stockpile - - - - - - - -
Underground 72 66 0.175 6.00 0.131 4.50 12.7 10
Probable 1,285 1,166 0.069 2.38 0.403 13.81 89.1 518
Proven and Probable
Open Pit 3,829 3,474 0.081 2.77 0.475 16.27 309.1 1,817
Stockpile 220 200 0.074 2.54 0.129 4.44 16.4 29
Underground 139 126 0.180 6.18 0.133 4.56 25.0 18
Proven and Probable 4,189 3,800 0.084 2.87 0.445 15.23 350.5 1,864
Notes:
1. Mineral Reserves are stated as of December 1, 2020;
2. Mineral Reserves are estimated using variable cutoff grades that are dependent upon recovery and
processing method;
3. Mineral Reserves have been estimated at a gold price of $1,200 per troy ounce and a silver price of $15
per ounce;

4. The base case economic analysis is presented at a gold price of $1,400 per ounce and a silver price of
$15 per ounce;
5. Underground Mineral Reserves include modifying mill to model reconciliation factors of 1.14 and – 0.96
applied to tons and contained metal respectively;
6. Modifying factors for tons and contained metal have not been applied to open pit Mineral Reserves; and,
Metallurgical Testing and Processing
The metallurgical test results determined that sulfide ore and ore containing preg-robbing organic
carbon above the target cut-off gold grade would be roasted and oxide ore above the target cut-off
gold grade would be processed via ROM heap leach. Mill grade oxide ore could be processed via
CIL processing. Mineralized material containing preg-robbing organic carbon below the cut-off
gold grade for roasting will be considered waste. The mill recovery ranges from 48% to 92%
depending on the process employed. Column leach tests on Phase 1 low grade oxide samples
showed poor gold recoveries (average of 31%) while Phase 3 samples had higher recoveries
averaging 62%. Column leach test recoveries are factored to estimate ROM recoveries.
Mining, Infrastructure, and Project Schedule
South Arturo is being mined by both open pit and underground methods. All work is performed
by and supported by NGM’s Goldstrike operation. A qualified contractor has been retained to
complete underground mining. All required infrastructure is in place.
Underground mining is from the bottom of the Phase 2 pit and is currently producing
approximately 600 tpd of roaster material. All mineralization is mined using underhand drift and
fill methods.
Open pit mining is a conventional shovel truck operation using large electric or hydraulic shovels
and 320-ton capacity haul trucks. The open pit mining rate is approximately 135,000 tpd.
Economic Analysis
Table 1-3 Financial Statistics Attributable to i-80

Parameter El Niño UG Phase 1 Pit Combined
Gold price - base case (US$/oz) $1,400 $1,400 $1,400
Silver price - base case (US$/oz) $15 $15 $15
Mine life (years) 2.0 18 18
Mining Rate (tons/day) 600 135,000 N/A
Average grade (oz/t Au) 0.180 0.081 0.084
Average gold recovery (roaster %) 88.5% 80.8% 81.4%
Average annual gold production (koz) 12 15 16
Total recovered gold (koz) 23.5 265.6 289.1


Capital (M$) $- $29.7 $29.7
Cash cost (US$/oz)1 $1,028 $622 $655
All-in sustaining cost (US$/oz)1,3 $1,066 $845 $863
All in Costs (US$/oz)1,4 $1,066 $845 $863
Project after-tax NPV5% (M$) $7.2 $76.4 $83.7
Project after-tax IRR NA 54% NA
Payback Period NA 7.0 5.9
Profitability Index 5%2 NA 4.3 4.6
Notes:
1. Net of byproduct sales;
2. Profitability index (PI), is the ratio of payoff to investment of a proposed project. It is a useful tool for
ranking projects because it allows you to quantify the amount of value created per unit of investment. A
profitability index of 1 indicates breakeven;
3. Excludes, construction capital, exploration, corporate G&A, interest on debt, and corporate taxes; and
4. Excludes exploration, corporate G&A, interest on debt, and corporate taxes; and,
plans, including future operations, future work programs, capital expenditures, discovery and production
of minerals, price of gold and currency exchange rates, timing of geological reports and corporate and
technical objectives. Forward-looking information is necessarily based upon a number of assumptions
that, while considered reasonable, are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other
factors which may cause the actual results and future events to differ materially from those expressed or
implied by such forward looking information, including the risks inherent to the mining industry, adverse
economic and market developments and the risks identified in Premier's annual information form under
the heading "Risk Factors". There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate,
as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information.
Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. All forward-
looking information contained in this Presentation is given as of the date hereof and is based upon the
opinions and estimates of management and information available to management as at the date hereof.
Premier disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information,
whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Conclusions
Resource Delineation and Exploration
1. Multiple zones of mineralization are open along strike and down dip from previous
mineralization intercepts;
2. The geology at South Arturo is well understood;
3. Drilling and data management procedures are adequate; and,
4. Mineral resource modelling follows generally acceptable practices.
Processing and Metallurgical Testing

1. The Goldstrike Roaster will not be available for processing South Arturo open pit
refractory mineralization before 2026 and it will take 12 years to complete processing of
South Arturo refractory production from the Phase 1 pit;
2. Previous bottle roll and column leach tests from Phase 1 composites achieved poor
recoveries. These composites may not be representative of shallower oxide mineralization;
3. Phase 3 sample column leach tests gold recoveries averaging 62%; and,
4. Mineral Reserves include only mineralization amenable to roasting.
Mining and Infrastructure
1. The South Arturo open pit will be mined at 135,000 tons per day using facilities and
equipment from NGM’s Goldstrike operations; and,
2. Underground drift and fill mining is successfully extracting mineralization below the Phase
2 Pit.
Financials
1. Financial analysis of the South Arturo Project indicates i-80’s 40% interest has a net
present value at a 5% discount rate of US$83.7M; and,
2. The open pit and underground mines are independent, profitable, stand-alone operations.
Recommendations
1. Drill untested targets on trend with existing mineralization intercepts.
Metallurgical Testing
1. Expedite bottle roll and column leach tests from Phase 1 composites taken from shallower
oxide mineralization.
Mining
1. Develop mineral resources down dip from current El Niño underground workings; and,
2. If positive metallurgical testing results are achieved, accelerate construction of the leach
pad and mining of the Phase 1 pit targeting oxide mineralization.

2. Introduction
Terms of Reference and Purpose of this Technical Report
Premier Gold Mines Ltd, and Premier Gold Mines USA Inc. (collectively “Premier”) has spun off
its Nevada assets in the formation of i-80 Gold Corporation (i-80), a newly created public
company. This TR was prepared in accordance with the requirements of NI 43-101 and Form 43-
101F1 (43-101F1) for technical reports and is the initial statement of Mineral Reserves and
Mineral Resources for i-80 at the South Arturo Project for i-80.
Mineral resource and mineral reserve definitions are set forth in “Canadian Institute of Mining,
Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) – Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves adopted by CIM Council on May 10, 2014.”
Qualification of the Authors
This TR includes technical evaluations from three independent consultants. The consultants are
specialists in the fields of geology, exploration, metallurgy, open pit and underground mining.
None of the Qualified Professionals (QPs) has any beneficial interest in Premier or i-80 or any of
its subsidiaries, or in the assets of Premier or i-80 or any of its subsidiaries or in any property near
the South Arturo Mine. Similarly, the QPs do not have any beneficial interest in Barrick Gold
Corp., Newmont Mining Corp. or Nevada Gold Mines LLC or any of their subsidiaries. The QPs
will be paid a fee for this work in accordance with normal professional consulting practices.
The QP’s and the sections of this report each contributed to are listed in Table 2-1. QP’s Odell and
Symmes personally inspected the El Niño underground, underground infrastructure, and Arturo
open pits. They also interviewed NGM personnel responsible for exploration, geology, resource
modelling, database management, cost accounting and mine engineering. QP Raponi resides in
Canada and international travel restrictions related to the Covid-19 pandemic prevented him from
making a personal inspection of the project. However, QP Raponi conducted a remote interview
with the NGM metallurgist responsible for Arturo. The Certificates of Qualifications for each are
provided in at the end of this report.
Table 2-1 Qualified Professionals

Company Most Recent
QP Title Discipline Personal Inspection Responsible Sections
Dagny Odell Manager Mining, Mineral 1.1 – 1.4, 1.6 - 1.9, 2 – 6, 11,
Resources and June 25, 2020 14 – 16, 18 - 26
Mineral Reserves

i-80 Gold Corp Introduction Page 23
Company Most Recent

QP Title Discipline Personal Inspection Responsible Sections
Laura Symmes Sr. Geologist Geology and June 25, 2020 7 - 10, 12, 14
Mineral Resources
Raponi Engineering
T. Raponi President Metallurgy None 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, 13, 17, 25, 26
Sources of Information
Information sources are documented either within the text and cited in references or are cited in
references only. The authors believe the information provided by Premier and NGM to be accurate
based on their work at the project. NGM provided the resource block model and mining plans.
Geotechnical pit wall design was prepared by Piteau and Associates, the Joint Venture’s
geotechnical consultant (Piteau 2010).
Units of Measure
U.S. Imperial units of measure are used throughout this document unless otherwise noted.
US/Metric conversion factors are listed in Table 2-2. Currency is expressed as United States
Dollars unless otherwise noted.
Table 2-2 Units of Measure

US Imperial to Metric Conversions
Linear Measure Weight
1 inch = 2.54 cm 1 short ton = 2,000 lbs = 0.9071 metric tons
1 foot = 0.3048 m 1 lb = 0.454 kg = 14.5833 troy oz.
1 mile = 1.6 km Assay values
Area Measure 1 ounce per short ton = 34.2857 g/t
1 acre = 0.4047 ha 1 part per million = 0.0292 opt
1 square mile = 640 acres = 259 ha 1 troy oz. = 31.10348 g
Coordinate Datum
Spatial data utilized in analysis presented in this TR are projected in the NGM local mine grid.

3. Reliance on Other Experts
Mining claim and land holding status is reliant on information provided by Erwin Thompson and
Faillers, Premier legal counsel. Permitting and environmental status was provided by Premier and
NGM.

i-80 Gold Corp Property Description and Location Page 25
4. Property Description and Location
Property Description
The South Arturo Joint Venture (SAJV) is located 34 miles north west of Carlin, Nevada at 21°27’
N and 116°26’ W. (Figure 4-1). Parties to the Joint Venture are Nevada Gold Mines LLC (NGM),
a Delaware Limited Liability Company, 60% interest and operator and Goldcorp Dee LLC (GD)
a Nevada Limited Liability Company, 40% interest. Goldcorp Dee LLC is a wholly owned
subsidiary of i-80 Gold Corporation (i-80).
The Project encompasses 4,909 acres of federal land administered by the Bureau of Land
Management.

Figure 4-1 Location Map
(BLM 2012)
Status of Mineral Titles
The Project comprises 217 unpatented mining claims leased from Franco-Nevada U.S.
Corporation (Franco) and 171 unpatented mining claims owned by Goldcorp Dee LLC (Dee). A

summary of leased and owned claims is provided in Table 4-1. Nevada Gold Mines LLC (NGM)
holds a 60% interest and is the operator of the SAJV. Dee holds the remaining 40%.
Table 4-1 South Arturo JV Unpatented Mining Claims

Claim Group Claim Type County Owner of Record Number
ANT Lode Elko/Eureka Goldcorp Dee LLC 20
B.E. Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 2
Bart Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 45
BC Lode Elko/Eureka Goldcorp Dee LLC 40
BS Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 13
DEE Millsite Elko Goldcorp Dee LLC 102
JAG Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 62
KCH Lode Elko/Eureka Goldcorp Dee LLC 4
LUKE Lode Elko Goldcorp Dee LLC 5
PAG Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 4
RUSS Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 90
RUSS Fraction Lode Elko Franco-Nevada USA 1
(Erwin, et al 2020)
On June 2, 2015 Premier completed the acquisition of 100% interest in Goldcorp Dee LLC
(“Dee”), a Nevada Limited Liability Company, from Goldcorp Inc., an Ontario Corporation and
Goldcorp USA, a Nevada Corporation (collectively “Goldcorp”). Sale terms included base cash
consideration of $20,000,000, reasonable development and construction costs of $15,690,917, and
cash contributions of $986,648.40 made by Goldcorp to the South Arturo Joint Venture (“SAJV”).
Non-cash consideration included the transfer of 5% of Premier’s interest in the Rahill-Bonanza
Joint venture in Ontario, Canada to Goldcorp. Premier also granted Goldcorp the Right of First
Refusal (“Cove ROFR”) on any proposed third-party joint ventures or third-party sales of
Premier’s 100% owned McCoy-Cove Project in Lander County, Nevada. Within 30 days of
closing Goldcorp contributed C$12,500,000 in exchange for securities of Premier in a financing
to be completed by Premier (Goldcorp et al., 2015).
On December 16, 2020 Premier Gold Mines announced that it has entered into an agreement with
Equinox Gold whereby Equinox Gold would acquire all the outstanding shares of Premier. At
closing, Premier will spin-out its 40% interest in the SAJV to i-80 Gold Corporation (i-80).

Figure 4-2 South Arturo Joint Venture Property
Royalties
Royalties on the Franco leased claims vary from 4% to 8% depending on gold grade and process
type. Details of the royalty schedule are shown in Table 4-2.

Table 4-2 Franco Nevada USA Leased Claim Royalties

Gold Assay 0 < 𝐴𝑢 𝑜𝑝𝑡 ≤ 0.13 0.13 < 𝐴𝑢 𝑜𝑝𝑡 ≤ 0.26 0.26 < 𝐴𝑢 𝑜𝑝𝑡
Oxide 4% 6% 8%
Refractory 6% 6% 6%
Environmental Liabilities
At completion of operations the SAJV is required to reclaim the project site as specified in the
Nevada Division of Environmental Quality Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation
(BMRR) approved reclamation plan. Closure requirements include reclamation of waste rock
storage facilities, heap leach pad, roads, removal of all facilities, revegetation and monitoring of
vegetation regrowth and water quality. The SAJV has in place a $32,512,581 reclamation bond
with the state of Nevada (NDEPBMRR 2020).
Pit lakes are anticipated to begin forming 100 years from the end of NGM’s dewatering program
at the Goldstrike operation and reach an elevation of 5093 feet amsl 250 years later. The South
Arturo Pit lake is modeled to act as a groundwater sink with a pH of 7 – 7.8 and total dissolved
solids ranging from 1,400 to 1,500 mg/l (BLM 2014).
Permits/Licenses
The SAJV has multiple active permits from the Bureau of Land Management and State of Nevada,
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) for the storage and use of explosives and
numerous minor permits and licenses with county, state and federal agencies. Significant permits
are discussed in Section 20.

5. Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and

Physiography
Accessibility
Access to the Project area is via State Highway 766 north 18.9 miles from the town of Carlin, and
then 14.5 miles north west on Nevada Gold Mines access road. Alternatively, west on i-80 for 26.3
miles to Dunphy exit 254, then north on the T-S / Boulder Valley Road for 26.9 miles to the project
site.
Climate
The climate in Elko and Eureka Counties is typical of the high-desert environment. Average July
temperatures range between 65°F and 75°F in the lower valleys and cooler in the higher elevations.
Summer highs in the valleys are approximately the mid-90°F, with temperatures in the range of
50°F or 60°F at night. Winter temperatures average between 20°F and 30°F in the valleys with
the possibility of frost from early September through June.
Average rainfall is 10 in to 15 in, with less than 10 in of rain in the lowest areas and up to 20 in
occurring in the mountains. The majority of precipitation falls between November and May, with
the possibility of summer thunderstorms.
Mining operations operate year-round with infrequent weather delays.
Local Resources
The Carlin Trend has a long history of mining activity, and mining suppliers and contractors are
locally available. Both experienced and general labor is readily available from the towns of Elko,
Carlin and Spring Creek in Elko County and Battle Mountain in Lander County.
Infrastructure
Site facilities and infrastructure include:
• Access roads;
• Waste rock disposal facilities;
• Electrical substation supplied from the NV energy grid;
• Electrical distribution lines;
• Explosives storage;
• 1 MM gallon water storage tank;
• Underground backfill plant, shop, offices and staging area;

i-80 Gold Corp Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, Page 31
and Physiography
• Storm water control structures; and

• Perimeter fencing.
Physiography
The Project lies in the Basin and Range Province, a structural and physiographic province
comprised of generally north to north-northeast trending, fault bounded mountain ranges separated
by alluvial filled valleys. The Mine is situated within an area of low, broad, northwest-southeast
trending ridges. The elevations in the area range from 5,300 to 6,200 feet amsl. Within the Mine
area, there are several ephemeral stream drainages. Common vegetation found in the area includes
cheat grass, foxtail chess, mustard grass, shadscale, green rabbitbrush, sagebrush, western
wheatgrass, and sedge.

6. History
Previous Owners
Mining activities at Dee were initiated by Rayrock Mines Ltd. (Rayrock) and its subsidiary Dee
Gold Mining Co. (Dee Gold) in 1994.
The Barrick Dee Mining Venture (BDMV) was formed in 1997 through an exploration agreement
between Barrick Gold Exploration Inc. and Dee Gold to explore areas outside of the active mining
area. Barrick was the operator and 60% owner of BDMV and Dee Gold held 40%. Rayrock was
acquired by Glamis in 1999. In 2007 Glamis was acquired by Marigold Mining Company
(Marigold), a wholly owned subsidiary of Goldcorp. Premier acquired Goldcorp’s 40% interest in
BDMV on June 2, 2015.
Drilling by Barrick in July 2005 led to the discovery of the South Arturo deposit beneath the Dee
Gold waste rock facilities.
Historic Exploration
Exploration of the Carlin Trend has been ongoing since the early 1900’s. Exploration for barite
and gold began on the property in 1975. Between 1981 – 1983 the property was explored by
Cordex Exploration Company and two gold deposits were identified. Subsequent exploration work
on the property has been performed by FMC Gold/Meridian, Dee Gold, Glamis and Barrick.
The majority of the South Arturo deposit lies on the BDMV property with a minor portion
extending north onto the Rossi property.
Exploration work conducted by Barrick includes:
• Re-evaluation and assembling pertinent data from both properties into a combined data set;
• Property wide detailed geologic mapping at a scale of 1:2400;
• Geologic mapping of the Dee open pit at a scale of 1:1200;
• Geologic mapping at 1:600 and sampling of approximately 12,000 m of trenches;
• Geologic mapping at 1:1200 and sampling the Queen and Sagehen Barite open pits;
• Geologic mapping of the Dee and Storm underground workings at 1:240;
• Acquisition and evaluation of 210-line km of magnetotelluric and Induced Polarization
(MT/IP) data (property wide survey) on lines spaced 300 m apart;
• Acquisition and evaluation of 140-line km of ground magnetics;
• Acquisition and evaluation of 27-line km of Controlled Source Audio-frequency
Magnetotelluric (CSAMT) data, a frequency-based electromagnetic sounding geophysical
survey technique that uses a remote synchronous signal source;
i-80 Gold Corp History Page 33
• Collection of 1,035 gravity stations on a 150 m x 150 m survey;

• Collection and analysis of more than 2,500 soil samples on various grid spacings;
• Completion of a 3D Vulcan/Geocad property wide geologic model;
• Reprocessing and detailed Geophysical analysis of property wide geophysical data;
• Detailed geochemical analysis of property wide geochemical data; and
• More than 338,473 m of combined RC, mud rotary, sonic, and core drilling.
Historic Mining
Production from the Dee open pit initiated in 1984 and the Dee Deep North underground mine
began producing in 1999. Both operations ceased in December 2000 due to low gold prices. Gold
production during this period is detailed in Table 6-1.
Table 6-1 Historic Dee Mine Gold Production

Year Mill (oz) Heap Leach (oz) Total (oz)
1984 6,388 - 6,388
1985 42,613 7,019 49,632
1986 43,351 7,682 51,033
1987 43,657 9,377 53,034
1988 43,698 6,090 49,788
1989 35,193 10,467 45,660
1990 37,035 11,029 48,064
1991 37,058 4,988 42,046
1992 29,900 8,918 38,818
1993 6,568 19,204 25,772
1994 9,083 16,541 25,634
1995 28,829 14,954 43,782
1996 28,829 9,789 38,618
1997 33,977 5,655 39,632
1998 25,070 3,453 28,523
1999 17,224 841 18,065
Total 468,482 136,006 604.488
Reclamation and closure activity began in 2000 on the historic Dee leach pads, tailings
impoundment and waste rock disposal areas. All surface facilities except electrical supply and
water supply system were removed. NGM began resloping off the Phase 2 East Waste Rock
Storage Facility in 2019.

7. Geologic Setting and Mineralization
Regional Geology
The South Arturo Mine is located within the northern Carlin Trend in the Basin and Range
physiographic province in northeastern Nevada. Late Devonian-Mississippian continental arc
collision (Antler Orogeny) juxtaposed a siliceous deep-water assemblage over the favorable shelf
and slope facies carbonate assemblage. A sequence of compressional and extensional tectonic
events has transformed the district into large scale, north-northwest trending folds, and northwest
to northeast trending faults, which exposed “windows” of the lower plate rocks within the upper
plate. The northern Carlin Trend is defined by a north-northwest trending alignment of gold
deposits in a series of these windows. The windows in the Carlin Trend from south to north are
the Railroad, Rain, Maggie Creek, Carlin, Lynn, and Bootstrap. The South Arturo Mine is located
within the Bootstrap Window (Figure 7-1).
Igneous activity along the Carlin Trend has occurred periodically from the Jurassic through the
Tertiary with the emplacement of medium size diorite stocks, diorite, dacite, and lamprophyre
dikes and sills, and a very large deep-seated intrusion at Mary’s Mountain. A two-mile-wide
northwest trending lamprophyre dike swarm defines the overall axis of the Carlin Trend.

i-80 Gold Corp Geologic Setting and Mineralization Page 35
Figure 7-1 Carlin Trend Geology

Local Geology
In general, the South Arturo deposits are sedimentary rock and intrusive hosted gold and silver
deposits hosted mainly in silicified breccias. Oxide gold mineralization in the existing Dee pit
mine area is structurally controlled, dominantly paralleling the north-south striking Dee Fault
Zone. Gold was emplaced simultaneous to several pulses of silica alteration, which converted
mineralized wall rocks into massive silica or silica breccia. Enriched zones are found where the
Dee Fault Zone intersects northwest trending faults. Minor gold mineralization can be traced along
northwest, northeast and east-west structures trending away from the Dee Fault Zone.
The oldest formation known near the South Arturo Mine is the Ordovician Hanson Creek dolomite,
intersected in a deep drill hole west of the deposit. A 700-foot-thick section of the Silurian-
Devonian Roberts Mountains limestone occurs above the Hanson Creek dolomite. There is a
gradational contact between the Roberts Mountains formation and the overlying Silurian-
Devonian Bootstrap limestone. The Bootstrap limestone is a grey, massive limestone deposited in
a reef margin environment. The thickness of the Bootstrap limestone ranges from less than 200
feet to more than 400 feet along a north-northwest trend. West of the reef margin is a full section
of Devonian Popovich Formation slope-facies carbonates. East of the reef margin, the Popovich
carbonates thin to less than 100 feet above the Bootstrap limestone. The upper contact of the
Popovich Formation grades conformably into the Devonian Rodeo Creek siliceous argillite and
mudstone sequence, which ranges in thickness from 200 feet to 2,500 feet north of the Mine. The
stratigraphic section west of the Mine is consistent with the type section described by Newmont
Mining Corporation (Newmont) at Bootstrap/Capstone/Tara and with the Popovich section
described by Barrick at Rodeo/Goldstrike. The stratigraphic section east of the Mine is consistent
with the type section described by Barrick at Meikle (Barrick, 2009).
Upper plate rocks at the South Arturo Mine consist of a sequence of mudstone, argillite, and
bedded cherts of the Vinini, Elder, and Slaven Chert formations. The Tertiary Carlin Formation, a
sequence of tuffaceous sedimentary rocks and air-fall tuff, fills channels and depressions in the
Dee Mine area.
At least three generations of dikes occur at South Arturo. The most notable zone is a 1.5 mile wide
northwest trending lamprophyre dike swarm that includes the Jurassic Arturo dike. Other, possibly
Tertiary, intrusive rocks include a quartz-bearing biotite dacite dike in the Dee fault and an andesite
dike along the northeast Flower structure.
North-south striking Basin and Range faulting is prominent throughout the deposit. The Dee Fault
Zone controls mineralization in the Dee area (Phase 1). Northeast and northwest striking faults act
as secondary controls on mineralization. The Hinge fault controls mineralization in the Hinge

zone; West Button Hill mineralization is coincident with mapped structures encountered in the
Phase 2 mining (Figure 7-2).

Figure 7-2 South Arturo Geology

Mineralization
The South Arturo gold-silver deposits can be divided into five mineralized areas. These areas are
the South Arturo, West Button Hill, Southwest Dee pit, Deep North, and Hinge. The majority of
these deposits are classified as “Meikle Type” breccia hosted Carlin type deposits. A complex set
of breccias occur at the upper contact of the Bootstrap limestone. These breccias can be generalized
into four basic types: silicified heterolithic breccias, silica-Sulfide breccia, dolomite breccia, and
cavity-fill breccias.
While mineralization is widespread throughout the South Arturo Mine area, localized high-grade
gold mineralization drives the economics and mine locations.
South Arturo
The northern extent of South Arturo mineralization lies approximately 200 feet southeast of the
Dee pit and under 600 feet of waste rock. An overall north-south orientation to mineralization is
inferred from the grade thickness contours, which define an area 1,700 feet in a north-south
direction by 300 feet to 350 feet wide in an east-west direction. The mineralization and Tertiary
contact dip 15° to 20° to the south. Drilling has shown that rocks are oxidized to a depth of up to
2,000 feet. Paleozoic rocks host the mineralization mainly in multi-stage, multi-lithic breccias with
gold values ranging from 0.006 opt Au. These breccias are commonly formed by karsting or
dissolution of carbonate rock and subsequent collapse and cavity fill. In general, decalcification is
followed by weak to strong silicification with local argillization. Silver to gold ratios are generally
1:1 at grades of greater than 0.06 opt Au but increase to 5:1 at lower gold grade values.
Dee Deep North
Dee Deep North is a north-northeast trending pod of mineralization that plunges slightly north and
is approximately 600 feet long, 150 feet wide, and 150 feet thick. The majority of high-grade
refractory mineralization is in silica-Sulfide breccia within a flat to west-dipping silicified, multi-
lithic breccia body above the Bootstrap limestone between 4,900 FASL and 5,100 FASL. The
principal controls are the north-northeast trending high angle EB fault and southwest dipping low
angle structures.
Southwest Dee
The Southwest Dee pit mineralization is along the north-northeast trending, west dipping Dee Fault
Zone. The mineralization is carbonaceous, partially oxidized, variably silicified mudstone/
siltstone breccia approximately 300 feet in a north-south strike length, 100 feet wide, and 150 feet
in thickness. The mineralization sits between 4,900 FASL and 5,100 FASL, with a small portion
exposed along the southwest high wall at the bottom of the Dee pit.
West Button Hill
The West Button Hill mineralization trends north-northeast for over 2,000 feet in strike length, in
pods that vary up to 600 feet wide and 50 feet thick. The majority of high-grade refractory
mineralization is in the lower Rodeo Creek Formation and multi-lithic breccias above the
Bootstrap limestone. The principal controls are the north-northeast and north-south trending high
angle structures and favorable host rocks. The mineralization has been shown to extend 1,230 feet
below pre-mining surface elevation, as it is offset on the northeast striking, down-to-the-east Tara
West fault.
Hinge
The Hinge zone is a north-south striking zone that lies between the Arturo zone to the south west
and West Button Hill to the northeast and is due east relative to the existing Dee pit. It is
approximately 1,400 feet long and up to approximately 300 feet wide, lying between elevations of
4,750 FASL and 5,250 FASL at depths from 330 feet to 900 feet below surface. Mineralization is
hosted in the lower portion of the Rodeo Creek Formation and silicified breccias of the Basal
Rodeo Creek and Popovich Upper Mud units. Breccia bodies drape the Bootstrap limestone.
Mineralization in the Hinge zone is controlled by the Hinge fault, a steeply east dipping north-
south structure that appears to be a northerly extension of faults in Newmont’s Bootstrap pit to the
south. Intersecting faults that influence mineralization have not been clearly identified. Much of
the mineralization is partially to completely oxidized, even in the more deeply buried zones.

i-80 Gold Corp Deposit Types Page 41
8. Deposit Types
The South Arturo Mine is located in the northern end of the Carlin Trend, a 40 mile long north-
northwest alignment of sedimentary rock-hosted gold deposits. These deposits are generally
known as Carlin-type deposits named after the Carlin deposit. More than 50 million ounces of gold
have been mined from the Carlin Trend since 1980. Characteristically, the gold mineralization in
the Carlin-type gold deposits is dispersed, micron-sized, and found commonly on the rims of pyrite
grains in predominately carbonate-bearing host rocks. Decalcification, silicification, and
dolomitization are the most dominant alteration features. Generally, there is negligible base metal
content, low silver to gold ratios, and a geochemical enrichment in arsenic, antimony and mercury.
Carlin-type gold deposits represent a spectrum of deposit types including the classic stratigraphic
hosted deposit end member, collapse breccia hosted deposit end member, and structurally
controlled deposit end member. Most, if not all, of these deposit types contain individual
components of the end members. Most of the South Arturo gold mineralization is considered to be
of the breccia hosted Carlin-type with structural controls, similar to Barrick’s Meikle deposit
located approximately 4 miles to the southeast.

9. Exploration
Premier has not conducted exploration at South Arturo. Exploration conducted by Nevada Gold
Mines and previous operators is summarized in Section 6 History and Section 10 Drilling.

i-80 Gold Corp Drilling Page 43
10. Drilling
Drilling has been carried out over the 50-year history of the Carlin complex by several operators
including Nevada Gold Mines, Barrick, Glamis (Dee Gold), Haliburton and Meridian. Premier has
not drilled holes on the property. A number of drilling techniques have been used, including
reverse circulation (RC), core, conventional air rotary, and conventional air mud. Currently, only
RC above the water table and core drilling are used. Figure 10-1 shows the location of holes drilled
in the South Arturo area, which total more than 3,280 holes.
Figure 10-1 Drill Hole Collar Locations

Drilling and Sampling Methods
Drill holes are planned to intersect mineralization as near to perpendicular as available drill
platforms allow. The style of mineralization at South Arturo is well understood, which allows for
reasonable interpretation of mineralized intervals in conjunction with close drill spacing. Figure
10-2 shows a representative drill section at 33500 N.
Figure 10-2 Drill Section at 33500N, Looking North
Drilling is carried out by contract drill companies and supervised by Nevada Gold Mines
personnel. Core drilling typically uses HQ and NQ diameter core. PQ core is used for obtaining
samples for metallurgical testing. Core is placed in labelled cardboard boxes. Drillers mark each
drill run by placing a wooden block in the core box. Length of the run and length of sample
recovered are recorded on each block by the driller. Core boxes are transported to the Goldstrike
core shed by Nevada Gold Mines personnel; geologists and geotechnicians then photograph, log,
and sample the core.
Geologists log data digitally using a standardized set of descriptive options. Data cells are filled
by selecting from drop-down lists to complete several data fields including rock quality description
(RQD), structure, lithology, alteration, and mineralization. Sample intervals are chosen by the
geologist to best characterize mineralization. Core sample lengths are nominally five feet, ranging
from two feet to seven feet. Sampling is completed by geotechnicians. Depending on the purpose
of the drill hole the entire core may be placed in the sample bag or the core may be cut
longitudinally with a water-cooled diamond blade saw. If the core is cut, the remaining half is
returned to the original core box and stored on-property. When the core is too fragmented to be

i-80 Gold Corp Drilling Page 45
cut with a saw, the sampler scoops the sample from the core box, taking half longitudinally as best
they can. The sampler inserts QAQC samples in the sample stream as instructed by the geologist.
The samples are then transferred to an outside assay lab by NGM personnel. Occasionally samples
are assayed in the onsite lab if external backlogs would significantly impact the timing of results.
RC samples are normally collected on five-foot intervals. Samples pass from the drill through a
rotary wet splitter into the sample bag. Rotary splitters are typically fitted with multiple sample
outlets to allow for collection of duplicate samples. A small fraction of each five-foot sample is
caught with a sieve and placed in chip trays to be logged by geologists. The driller maintains
appropriate sample size by regularly monitoring and adjusting the splitter. The splitter is rinsed,
and the driller pauses drilling and cleans the hole between each sample. QAQC samples are
typically inserted at pre-determined intervals. The samples are transferred to the selected assay lab
by NGM personnel. Chip trays are transferred to geologists, who log lithology, alteration, and
mineralization data using the same software used to log core.
Drill hole collar locations are surveyed by NGM or contract surveyors. On occasion it was not
possible to complete the collar survey so planned coordinates were used. Downhole surveys of
surface holes are typically completed by a contractor using a conventional gyroscopic instrument.
Underground holes are surveyed using a Reflex EZ-Trac or FlexIT.
Recovery Factors
Recovery statistics are not available for South Arturo drill data. Core sample recovery is measured
by the driller and geologist. The data is used for rock quality description (RQD), but it has not
been applied in any way in relation to the reliability of the assay value of the sample interval. RC
sample recovery is measured indirectly by the assay lab, which weighs the sample on arrival and
after drying. This is not a direct measurement of sample recovery because sample volume is not
measured, a specific expected sample weight is not defined, sample density is variable, and
multiple factors affect proportion of material routed into the sample bag. Although the assay lab
sample mass data exists, it has not been applied in any way to geological analysis or in relation to
the reliability of the assay value of the sample interval. Sample recovery only directly applies to
assay reliability to the extent that where no sample was recovered, or the volume of sample
recovered was too small to perform an assay, no assay exists to represent the interval. This is an
inherent difficulty associated with drill data. Less than complete recovery of drill samples is
generally attributable to factors also associated with mineralization, such as fragmented or low
strength rock mass. It is generally accepted that mineralization is likely to be under-represented in
a poor recovery sample. This provides a level of safety in resource estimation because it is more
likely to result in under estimation than over estimation.

The authors recommend that the database should be complete and organized in such a way as to
allow the calculation of recovery statistics for core holes. The authors believe drilling is carried
out in accordance with industry standards, and the South Arturo drill data is suitable for use in
resource estimation.

i-80 Gold Corp Sample Preparation, Analysis and Security Page 47
11. Sample Preparation, Analysis and Security
PM regards the sample preparation, security, and analytical procedures as adequate to support the
estimation of Mineral Resources.
Sample Preparation Procedures
Samples have been analyzed by several laboratories over the years, all of which were reputable.
The majority of analysis has been provided by ALS Minerals, American Assay Laboratory (AAL),
and internal NGM laboratories. Multiple assay methods are employed during different phases of
exploration and development, including fire assay, acid digestion, and cyanide leaching. Only fire
assay results are used for resource estimation. The general process of sample preparation for fire
assay is as follows: Samples are received by the lab, catalogued, dried and weighed. Each sample
is crushed to a specified fineness, then split down to a specified weight. The collected fraction of
sample is then pulverized to a specified fineness and placed in an envelope to be sent to the assay
facility. The prepared sample is called a pulp. The specific volume and fineness of the pulp depends
on the particular fire assay method selected. An example of a typical pulp is 100 grams of sample
pulverized to 85% passing 75 microns. A larger pulp may be prepared if multiple analyses or a
larger sample is desired, and pulverization may be adjusted depending on the geochemistry of the
sample.
Laboratory Analysis Procedures
The general process of fire assay is as follows: Pulps are received. Crucibles are placed in trays
and charged with flux formulated to the geochemistry of the sample. The purpose of the flux is to
help achieve complete melting of the sample in the assay furnace. Flux typically includes borax,
sodium carbonate, silica and lead. A specified amount of pulp is measured from the envelope and
placed in the crucible with the flux. The trays are placed in the assay furnace until the samples are
melted, or “fused”. The trays are removed from the furnace and the molten samples are poured
into molds and allowed to cool. As the slag hardens, the sample fractionates. The hardened slag is
removed from the mold and tapped with a hammer to separate the lead button (containing the
precious metals) from the lighter fraction of sample. The lead button is placed in a clay crucible
called a Cupel. Cupels absorb molten lead. The tray of cupels is placed in a cupellation furnace
and heated to the boiling point of lead, then allowed to cool. The bead of Au +- Ag remaining in
the cupel, called a prill, may then be placed in a parting cup and heated with a nitric acid solution
to dissolve the silver away from the gold. The remaining gold dore bead may then be processed
for measurement by either of two methods: Atomic absorption finish, which involves dissolving
the bead in aqua regia and analyzing the solution for gold content using an atomic absorption
spectroscopy machine; or gravimetric finish, where the bead is physically weighed on a
microbalance. The preferred method of finish depends on the grade of the sample. Gravimetric
finish provides better accuracy above a certain grade threshold, when the bead is more easily
visible to the assay technician and heavy enough to be sensed by the microbalance. For lower grade
samples spectroscopy is more accurate.
Security
Security at NGM sites is tightly controlled. Access to the site is staffed round the clock and all
persons entering or leaving are logged. Samples are bagged and tagged with Arturo generated
barcodes, tied and picked up at the beginning of each shift by NGM geotechnicians. Samples are
stored at the core shed for logging and core preparation. The commercial lab will pick up samples
on site and generate the chain of custody paperwork that is filed and kept on site.
Standards and Blanks
Blank materials used since 1990 have been sourced at a gravel pit near Maggie Creek. Blanks are
inserted at intervals of 50-feet for RC drilling and 200-feet for core. The resulting insertion rate is
2-5%.
Each sample batch contains from three to seven check samples. Project geologists review assay
results and periodically request a batch re-run and /or entire hole based on expected verses actual
results. Analysis beyond two standard deviations will require a rerun of the batch. The geologists
are responsible for the QAQC program.
Large batches of standard material are collected from NGM sites. Each batch is sent to an outside
laboratory for preparation. Each batch is tested for homogeneity against certified reference
materials (CRM) prior to being returned to NGM.
PM reviewed the results from 2,093 blank and standard reference assays submitted with South
Arturo samples. These are listed in Table 11-1 and shown graphically for selected standards in
Figure 11-1 through Figure 11-3. Most of the failures for BL-46 occurred near the end of 2017 and
results since that time have improved. GS-25 is a high-grade standard with most of the out of limit
values being below the acceptable limit.
Table 11-1 Gold Blank and Standard Summary Statistics

Lab Mean Out of Limit Std. Value
ID Count PPM Lab Std Dev Rate PPM
BL-43 37 0.012 0.018 2.7% 0.0025
BL-44 120 0.006 0.011 0.8% 0.0025
BL-45 150 0.009 0.023 2.7% 0.0025
BL-46 487 0.063 0.716 8.0% 0.000
BL-47 9 0.003 0.000 0.0% 0.000

Lab Mean Out of Limit Std. Value

ID Count PPM Lab Std Dev Rate PPM
BCH-DR-01 7 1.163 0.046 0.0% 1.140
BCH-DR-02 32 7.494 0.927 9.4% 7.760
BCH-OX-01 60 0.216 0.009 0.0% 0.214
BCH-OX-02 51 0.349 0.012 2.0% 0.338
BCH-OX-03 98 2.330 0.088 0.0% 2.260
BCH-OX-04 85 6.387 0.188 3.5% 6.450
BCH-OX-06 137 0.323 0.248 5.1% 0.283
BCH-SR-02 20 4.193 0.107 5.0% 4.250
BCH-SR-03 42 16.180 0.221 0.0% 15.980
BCH-SR-05 125 2.059 0.193 4.0% 2.080
BCH-SR-06 111 4.126 0.096 0.9% 4.130
CDN-GS-1V 64 1.033 0.077 3.1% 1.022
CDN-GS-2T 65 1.776 0.119 10.8% 1.749
CDN-GS-8C 20 8.600 0.185 0.0% 8.589
GS-20A 6 21.098 0.917 0.0% 8.530
GS-25 93 24.390 5.099 17.2% 21.120
GS-3S 5 3.495 0.176 0.0% 25.601
GS-4E 86 4.122 0.372 11.6% 3.579
GS-P5E 30 0.602 0.165 26.7% 4.190
GS-P6B 34 0.738 0.613 26.5% 0.655
ME-1708 69 6.686 1.149 4.3% 0.624
SJ80 6 2.255 0.558 33.3% 6.967
SK78 15 4.053 0.114 0.0% 2.656
SP73 10 17.590 0.582 10.0% 4.134
2,093 6.0%

Figure 11-1 Blank Assay Results BL-46
Figure 11-2 GS-25 Standard Reference Material Results

Figure 11-3 BCH-OX-06 Standard Reference Material Results
Duplicate Assays
PM reviewed the results of 1,356 South Arturo duplicate assays performed at ALS. The review
included four assay methods for gold. Data from two of these are displayed graphically in Figure
11-4 and Figure 11-5.

Figure 11-4 821 Prep Duplicates - ALS Method AA23
Figure 11-5 488 Prep Duplicates - ALS Method AuCN AA13

i-80 Gold Corp Data Verification Page 53
12. Data Verification
The authors have not conducted an independent review of the drill database. A significant
proportion of the drill holes in the South Arturo area are historic. Raw data certificates are not
easily available. Significant economic production has occurred in the South Arturo area, so mine
production data sets are available for reconciliation with mineral resource models. The data
reconcile fairly well, which is a strong indication that the drill data are accurate.
All project data is stored in a GeoScience database on SQL Database server, current database
structure is acQuire. Drill hole data was converted to acQuire™ software beginning in 2008 from
in-house databases. The exploration and underground databases were used until 2017 when these
were combined with the Arturo database to form a single Goldstrike site-wide database. Assay
data is imported directly from laboratory certificates or direct laboratory SSIS packages for internal
labs. Data is validated and checked upon import by the data management group. Data must be
approved by project geologists before it is available for export for use in mineral resource
modeling.
Nevada Gold Mines utilizes integrated sub-programs called “Triggers” and “Constraints” that
automatically validates data whenever new information is added to, or changed within, the
database. These sub-programs perform calculations, validation, verification, and range bound
checks on the data to ensure that data errors are flagged and kept out of the data sets. Data
extractions are accomplished using the acQuire export object and checked against previous exports
to ensure data is not being altered and that exports are exporting the same historical data. Assays
are ranked based on lab quality, assay method, and date assayed.
Database administrators perform occasional random checks to ensure that imported data matches
lab certificates. External audits have previously occurred. Lynda Bloom of Analytical Solutions
Ltd. reviewed Barrick’s Storm Resource Area QAQC results for 1999 through 2004. Her report
was not available for review. RPA 2018 noted that Bloom found no evidence of serious issues with
accuracy, bias or analytical procedures. In 2018, Todd Wakefield of Mine Technical Services Ltd,
reviewed QAQC results for South Arturo control samples submitted from April 7, 2014 through
March 5, 2018. Wakefield identified one set of blanks with an elevated failure rate and
recommended more careful sourcing of blank material. An external audit by Golder in September
2018 identified moderate risk associated with the use of conventional and non-down-hole surveyed
data (Wakefield, 2018).
The authors interviewed site personnel to gain a basic understanding of data management
procedures. The authors have reviewed QAQC data for 2017 through 2019 as reported in Section
11. Holes were checked for overlapping intervals using Vulcan, and there were none. Hole traces
were viewed in Vulcan to confirm there were no extreme downhole survey deviations.
Underground collar locations were observed to conform with mine as-built surveys. Surface collar
locations correspond with topographic surfaces where contemporary data are available, although
surface displacement has occurred since many of the holes were drilled. Lithology and mineralogy
data correspond reasonably between adjacent holes, which supports accurate hole location.
Lithology was viewed in Vulcan to confirm that the geology model conforms to the geology data.
In summary, the authors rely on positive reconciliation results, visual checks, and basic Vulcan
checks to conclude the drill data is suitable for use in the resource estimation.

i-80 Gold Corp Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing Page 55
13. Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing
Historical Metallurgical Test Work
Metallurgical testing dates to 2006 with initial testing to determine heap leach characteristics via
column tests. Further testing was completed in 2012 and 2013 as part of the BDMV, South Arturo
Project Feasibility Study. Additional testing included conventional grinding and leaching as well
as roasting and leaching tests for refractory samples.
McClelland Labs Inc. (McClelland) in Sparks, Nevada, performed column leach tests to estimate
the heap leaching performance, and Barrick’s Goldstrike Metallurgical Lab performed carbon-in-
leach (CIL) and roaster/CIL tests to estimate the CIL and roaster/CIL recovery for the South Arturo
deposit.
The metallurgical test results determined the following:
• Sulfide ore and ore containing preg-robbing organic carbon above the target cut-off gold
grade would be roasted.
• Oxide ore above the target cut-off gold grade would be processed via ROM heap leach.
• Ore containing preg-robbing organic carbon below the cut-off grade gold grade for roasting
will be considered waste.
The mill recovery ranges from 48% to 92% depending on the process employed. Recovery may
be higher than predicted if the ore is ground finer than 80% passing 200 mesh (74 µm). Previous
gold deportment studies and metallurgical test results indicated that a large portion of the gold is
most likely encapsulated in silica.
2017 Metallurgical Samples
Metallurgical tests were completed on Arturo Phase 1 and Phase 3 Pit samples that were drilled in
2017. Phase 1 holes were identified as BD17-01, BD17-02, BD17-03, BD17-04, BD17-05, BD17-
06, and BD17-07. Phase 3 holes were identified as ART17-01, ART17-02, ART17-03, ART17-
04, ART17-06, and ART17-07. Drill hole locations are shown in Figure 13-1.
Column tests were completed at McClelland Laboratories in Reno, Nevada while the standard
leach tests and bench top roasting tests were completed at Barrick Goldstrike Metallurgical
Laboratories.

Figure 13-1 South Arturo Phase 1 and Phase 3 Pit Metallurgical Drill Hole Locations
(Nevada Gold Mines 2020)
Phase 1 drill holes had a total of 408 samples, with 187 of those samples classified as heap leach
for the purposes of the testing program, had a head grades between 0.003 to 0.030 oz./ton; thirty-
six (36) samples, classified as mill grade, had head grades higher than 0.030 oz./ton. All remaining
samples were classified as waste and not tested.
Phase 3 drill holes had a total of 426 samples. Two hundred and thirty-nine (239) of those samples,
were classified as heap leach with head grade between 0.003 to 0.030 oz./ton; one hundred and
thirty-nine (139) samples, classified as mill grade with head grades above 0.030 oz./ton with
remaining classified as waste and not tested.

Nine of the Phase 3 samples with sulfide grades above 0.2% were subjected to bench top roaster
(BTR) tests. This included both heap leach grade and mill grade samples.
Composites for the column tests were compiled based on preliminary mining plans. Where
possible mining separation could occur, mill grade material was eliminated from the composite.
Five Phase 1 composite samples and eight Phase 3 composite samples were assembled for the
column testing program.
Gold recovery via cyanide leaching processes, i.e., heap leaching or CIL, is commonly a function
of cyanide solubility of the gold. Gold assaying using cyanide solubility assays (AA) and fire assay
(FA) methods are performed on drill core intervals. From these assays, the cyanide solubility ratio
(AA/FA) is used to estimate gold recovery for all ore samples. In the case of the South Arturo
Mine, gold recovery via cyanide leaching appears to be a function of both the cyanide solubility
ratio and the amount of silica contained in the samples based on data generated from early
metallurgical testing. The roaster recovery has been previously shown to be a function of only the
silica concentration. However, earlier BTR on monthly composites from West Button Hill ore did
not shown a strong correlation between gold recovery and silica, but the recovery continues to be
a function of the head grade.
Table 13-1 Number of Additional Metallurgical Tests in 2018

Test ID Phase 1 Phase 3
Bottle Rolls Leach Tests (-200 mesh) 223 378
Coarse Bottle Rolls Leach Tests (-6 mesh) 223 378
Column Tests (3/4) 5 8
Coarse Bottle Rolls Leach Tests (-10 mesh) 5 8
BTR 0 9
Column Leach Tests
Thirteen column leach tests and coarse bottle roll tests were performed at McClelland in 2018.
The Phase 1 sample results generally showed poor amenability to coarse particle size leaching at
both 80%-10 mesh (2 mm) and 80%-3/4” (19.1 mm). Gold recoveries ranged from 17% to 50%
and 17% to 39% respectively at 10 mesh and -3/4”. The -3/4” average gold recovery was 31%.
Silver recoveries in the column leach tests is very low, ranging from 3% to 25% and 6% to 10%
respectively at 10 mesh and -3/4” respectively.
The Phase 3 sample results generally showed better amenability to coarse particle size leaching at
both 80%-10 mesh and 80%-3/4”. Gold recoveries ranged from 38% to 80% and 18% to 92%
respectively at 10 mesh and -3/4”. The -3/4” average gold recovery was 62%. Silver recoveries in
the column leach tests is very low, ranging from 5% to 33% and 2% to 50% respectively at 10
mesh and 3/4” respectively.
CIL Bottle Roll Tests
The CIL bottle roll test work was performed at Barrick’s Goldstrike Metallurgical Lab in 2017 and
2018 using targeted grinds of 80% passing 6 mesh (3.35 mm) and 200 mesh (74 µm). Composites
for bottle roll tests at Goldstrike’s Metallurgical Laboratory were assembled within each drill hole
to test leaching parameters at silica and carbonate geological designations. Gold generally was
found to occur within high silica areas, but recovery seemed to be more affected by sulfide
concentration.
The Phase 1 results are shown in Table 13-2 segregated by the two grade ranges (<0.03 oz./ton to
heap leach; >0.030 oz./ton for mill processing). Phase 1 mill material leached at 80% passing 200
mesh shows that recovery can range from 67 to 84%, averaging 74%. The low-grade samples
leached at 6 mesh, showed recoveries ranging from 22% to 62%, averaging 46%. The low
recoveries for some samples indicate that heap leaching processing may not be economic.
Table 13-2 Arturo Phase 1 CIL/Leach Tests for Low Grade and High Grade Samples
Leach Tests Feed Assays
Calculate -200 -6 Mesh Calculate
d Head mesh CIL Leach d Head
Process No. of (oz./ton Recovery Recovery "Sulfide No. of (oz./ton
Route Composite Samples Au) (% Au) (% Au) Sulfur Samples Au)
BD17-01 Comp-2 18 0.021 71.7 - 0.15 4.85 0.08
BD17-01 Comp-3 12 0.020 60.7 - 0.14 1.65 0.11
BD17-02 Comp-1 3 0.003 67.1 50.0 0.05 50.36 0.02
BD17-03 Comp-1 6 0.010 79.1 38.9 0.15 8.94 0.04
BD17-03 Comp-2 5 0.012 75.9 38.2 0.14 19.83 0.05
Heap Leach Grade (<0.030 oz./ton)
BD17-03 Comp-3 6 0.015 73.3 34.9 0.34 15.44 0.05

BD17-04 Comp-1 11 0.006 67.2 32.5 0.06 0.25 0.11
BD17-04 Comp-2 4 0.009 55.4 24.8 1.40 0.50 0.03
BD17-04 Comp-3 8 0.005 51.9 42.9 0.41 5.85 0.05
BD17-05 Comp-1 16 0.016 81.4 62.1 0.13 4.00 0.03
BD17-05 Comp-2 16 0.014 71.4 35.9 0.17 4.50 0.05
BD17-05 Comp-3 26 0.010 71.3 36.7 0.15 6.20 0.07
BD17-06 Comp-1 18 0.011 65.0 26.1 0.29 37.87 0.02
BD17-06 Comp-2 4 0.010 69.7 33.0 0.33 21.38 0.03
BD17-06 Comp-3 6 0.023 70.2 27.8 0.28 6.44 0.05
BD17-06 Comp-4 11 0.019 68.3 21.6 0.13 6.79 0.13
BD17-07 Comp-1 13 0.018 77.7 35.7 0.02 15.69 0.03
BD17-07 Comp-2 4 0.013 84.7 37.5 0.05 17.34 0.02
Totals and Averages 187 0.013 70.1 36.2


BD17-01 Comp-1 9 0.075 67.0 - 0.22 1.85 0.05
BD17-04 Comp-4 5 0.063 76.3 23.9 0.04 0.20 0.08
Mill Grade (>0.030
BD17-05 Comp-4 2 0.161 79.2 42.3 0.01 0.20 0.02

oz./ton)
BD17-06 Comp-5 3 0.057 69.4 28.3 0.18 8.24 0.04

BD17-06 Comp-6 2 0.046 69.6 31.4 0.15 2.25 0.13
BD17-06 Comp-7 6 0.090 71.8 29.7 0.09 0.90 0.06
BD17-07 Comp-3 3 0.051 84.4 40.2 0.02 3.60 0.02
The Phase 3 results are shown in Table 13-3 segregated by the two grade ranges (<0.03 oz./ton to
heap leach; >0.030 oz./ton for mill processing). Phase 3 mill grade samples leached at 80% passing
200 mesh shows that recovery can range from 73% to 93%, averaging 82% without roasting. The
low-grade samples leached at 6 mesh, showed recoveries ranging from 22% to 80%, averaging
43%. The low recoveries for some of these samples indicate that heap leaching processing may
not be economic.
Select low grade and mill grade samples were selected for bench-top roasting prior to CIL testing.
Samples were selected if sulfide concentration exceeded 0.2%. Two samples were selected outside
of the parameter. When the minimum sulfide grade was above the threshold, approximately 6%
recovery improvement was seen.

Table 13-3 Arturo Phase 3 CIL/Leach Tests for Low Grade and High Grade Samples
ART17-03 Comp 4 17 0.010 90.4 41.7 0.10 49.01 0.04
ART17-07 Comp 1 11 0.006 51.9 40.0 0.01 0.10 0.05
Heap Leach Grade (<0.030 oz./ton)
ART17-01 Comp 3 14 0.008 75.1 57.1 0.01 0.15 0.11

ART17-03 Comp 1 27 0.020 84.6 40.8 0.11 0.60 0.05
ART17-06 Comp 1 21 0.009 66.7 25.0 0.03 0.20 0.03
ART17-02 Comp 1 50 0.013 84.7 80.1 0.06 2.70 0.05
ART17-03 Comp 2 17 0.021 81.0 30.0 0.65 5.15 0.13
ART17-04 Comp 5 5 0.011 56.0 25.0 0.18 47.41 0.03
ART17-01 Comp 4 22 0.020 84.2 70.3 0.25 0.30 0.16
ART17-02 Comp 5 12 0.018 59.3 30.8 0.19 25.78 0.07
ART17-02 Comp 3 8 0.018 55.5 22.4 0.13 0.20 0.14
ART17-03 Comp 3 26 0.031 72.8 37.6 0.54 6.15 0.08
ART17-01 Comp 5 9 0.029 72.3 54.3 0.47 0.20 0.31
ART17-01 Comp 6 23 0.046 74.0 54.3 0.51 0.10 0.18
Mill Grade (>0.030 oz./ton)
ART17-04 Comp 3 13 0.060 83.4 52.2 0.05 5.25 0.06

ART17-01 Comp 2 15 0.073 93.9 76.6 0.01 0.20 0.05
ART17-02 Comp 4 7 0.091 72.5 34.1 0.18 0.15 0.07
ART17-02 Comp 2 14 0.118 78.8 52.9 0.31 1.00 0.08
ART17-04 Comp 4 13 0.130 85.0 55.2 0.10 7.84 0.04
ART17-04 Comp 1 16 0.168 74.4 43.0 0.35 0.15 0.07
ART17-04 Comp 2 16 0.247 85.5 59.4 0.08 2.95 0.05
ART17-01 Comp 1 22 0.343 93.3 67.3 0.03 0.15 0.03
Recovery Estimates
Currently Arturo ore that meets the grade requirements is sent to NGM’s Goldstrike roaster for
processing. Other ore mined is stockpiled for future processing. In general, the following recovery
estimates are applied to Arturo ores:
• The LOM contains the addition of the Arturo heap leach in which metallurgical testing and
characterization is being conducted. Recovery from initial testwork has been applied and
averages 52.5%.
• The current roaster LOM has an average recovery of 88%.
• The autoclave with parallel calcium thiosulphate (CaTS) leaching-resin in leach circuits
provide a possible destination for Arturo ore. The current autoclave LOM has an average
recovery of 50% when running solely alkaline ore (one SAG-Ball Mill circuit and 3

autoclaves to process 3.6 Mtpa) and an average of 73% expected after converting the RIL
circuit to CIL and running single refractory ore.
Conclusions
The metallurgical test results determined the following:
• Column tests on Phase 1 composite samples showed gold recoveries of 17% to 39%,
averaging 31% at 80% -0.75”. At 80% passing 10 mesh, gold recoveries ranged from 17%
to 50%.
• Column tests on Phase 3 composite samples showed gold recoveries of 38% to 92%,
averaging 62% at 80% -0.75”. At 80% passing 10 mesh, gold recoveries ranged from 38%
to 85%.
• BTR results on the West Button Hill monthly composites showed a good correlation
between head grade and gold recovery – similar to the predictive model used for estimating
Goldstrike Roaster gold recovery performance. Silica encapsulation was not found to
negatively influence recovery results.
• The average gold recovery for the Phase 1 heap leach samples at 80% passing 6 mesh is
36% with a range of 22% to 62%. Mill grade average gold recovery at 80% passing 200
mesh is 74% with a range of 67% to 84%.
• Phase 3 samples showed average gold recoveries for heap leach samples at 80% passing 6
mesh of 43% with a range of 22% to 80%. Mill grade samples showed average recoveries
at 80% passing 200 mesh of 82% with a range of 73% to 94%.
• The Phase 3 high sulfide samples (>0.2%) showed an average 10% recovery improvement
over standard CIL leach at grind of 80% passing 200 mesh.
Recommendations:
• Sulphide ore and ore containing preg-robbing organic carbon above the target cut-off gold
grade is currently roasted.
• Oxide ore above the target cut-off gold grade would be processed via ROM heap leach,
when constructed.
• Ore containing preg-robbing organic carbon below the cut-off gold grade for roasting will
be considered waste.
• Additional testing should be completed in Phase 3 to quantify sufficient reserves to support
the construction of the heap leach pad.

14. Mineral Resource Estimates
Introduction
The mineral resource estimate presented herein has been prepared following the guidelines of the
Canadian Securities Administrators’ National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 (Canadian
Securities Administrators, 2011) and in conformity with generally accepted “CIM Estimation of
Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserves Best Practices” guidelines (Canadian Instirute of Mining,
Metallurgy, and Petroleum, 2019). Mineral resources have been classified in accordance with the
“CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves: Definition and Guidelines” (Canadian
Institute of Mining Metallurgy and Petroleum, 2014 B)
• Measured Mineral Resource: “A ‘Measured Mineral Resource’ is that part of a mineral

resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are so
well established that they can be estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate
application of technical and economic parameters, to support production planning and evaluation
of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration,
sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as
outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill-holes that are spaced closely enough to confirm both
geological and grade continuity.”
• Indicated Mineral Resource: “An ‘Indicated Mineral Resource’ is that part of a mineral
resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics, can be
estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical
and economic parameters, to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of
the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration and testing information
gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings
and drill-holes that are spaced closely enough for geological and grade continuity to be reasonably
assumed.”
• Inferred Mineral Resource: “An ‘Inferred Mineral Resource’ is that part of a mineral
resource for which quantity and grade or quality can be estimated on the basis of geological
evidence and limited sampling and reasonably assumed, but not verified, geological and grade
continuity. The estimate is based on limited information and sampling gathered through
appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill-holes.”
Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be converted into mineral
reserve. Confidence in the estimate of Inferred Mineral Resources is insufficient to allow the

i-80 Gold Corp Mineral Resource Estimates Page 63
meaningful application of technical and economic parameters or to enable an evaluation of

economic viability worthy of public disclosure.
All mineral resource estimation work reported herein was carried out by Nevada Gold Mines
personnel.
The effective date of this mineral resource estimate is November 20, 2019. All data coordinates
are in local mine grid and quantities are given in imperial units unless indicated otherwise.
The gold and silver mineralization at the Project was estimated using Vulcan modeling software
using the Inverse Distance Cubed (ID3) estimation method with dynamic anisotropy. Multiple
estimation passes were completed. Figure 14-1 shows the block model extents.

Figure 14-1 South Arturo Block Model Extents

Modeling of Lithology and Mineralization
Modeled geological surfaces and solids were generated using Leapfrog Geo software. Data were
sourced from the drill hole database and geological mapping of the surface, pits and underground
mine areas. The cutoff date for geology data was July 31, 2019, and geology modeling work was
completed September 3, 2019. Each deposit was sub-domained into separate zones based on
multiple geological characteristics including mineralization, alteration, lithology, structure, grade
orientation and grade population data. Waste rock characterization models were also developed.
Digitized surfaces representing faults and contacts of lithological units were created by
interpolating between known points observed in drill holes and maps. Interpretation of the data
involved some editing and local smoothing to maintain sensible continuity of surfaces. The lower
surface of each lithologic unit was smoothed and clipped to ensure the interpreted sequence was
logically maintained. The lithology surfaces that were modeled are listed in Table 14-1 along with
the corresponding numeric code used in the block model.
Table 14-1 Geology Codes

Formation Name Code
Tertiary Carlin Formation 2000
Undifferentiated Tertiary Volcanics 2500
Vinini Formation 3600
Rodeo Creek Formation 4000
Popovich Formation 4200
Roberts Mountains Formation 4400
Undifferentiated Breccia 8000
Mineralization was constrained using an indicator run at low, medium and high-grade cutoffs in
Vulcan. A combination of stratigraphic unit surfaces and faults were used to define search
orientations and create directional domains. Two sets of directions were estimated into the model.
One set used fault surfaces only and the other used a blend of stratigraphic units and fault surfaces.
The fault directional set was prioritized for blocks within 100 feet of a modeled fault surface for
the medium and high-grade indicator runs. For the low-grade indicator run, only the blended
directional set was used. The indicator cutoff grades are listed in Table 14-2 along with codes for
the directional domains.

Table 14-2 Indicator Cutoff Values

Fault Blend (fault and
Indicator Cutoff
directional stratigraphic)
(opt)
code directional code
0.1 13 23
0.01 12 22
0.003 11 21
Figure 14-2 shows the medium and high-grade shells along with faults and lithology used to define
search orientations and create directional domains.
Figure 14-2 Medium and High Grade Shells with Faults and Lithology at 33500N,
looking North
Drill Data and Compositing
Drill Data Set
All project data is stored in a GeoScience database on SQL Database server. The current database
structure is acQuire. Database managers export the data to be used in resource modeling as CSV
files and deliver it to the modeling group. The modeling group imports the data from the CSV files
into a Vulcan ISIS drillhole database. The drill data set used for the resource estimation contains
3,168 drill holes totaling 1,779,091 feet of drilling (Table 14-3).

Table 14-3 Drill Hole Summary

2019 year-end
cutoff totals
Number of Holes 3,168
Number of Samples 279,926
Total Length (ft) 1,779,091
Compositing
Both 20-foot and 10-foot composite lengths were used at South Arturo. The 10- foot composites
were used in the mineralized area defined by a 0.003 opt Au opt indicator grade shell. The 20-foot
composites were used for estimation in the parent size blocks (40ft x 40ft x 20ft) outside of the
mineralized area. Modified length weighted compositing is used, so there is a soft boundary across
the low-grade indicator shell.
Density
A sizeable density data set for lithologies of the Carlin Trend has been amassed over the years by
various operators. The densities calculated for each rock type mined at South Arturo are listed in
Table 14-4. Adjustments are applied for non-insitu overburden such as backfill and dumps.
Tonnage estimates are completed on a dry basis. All samples are dried before specific gravity (SG)
determinations occur using various methods by on-site and off-site labs including but not limited
to submerging in water or mercury, wax and water submersion, or Zonge’s method. Zonge’s
method entails saturating samples with tap water under a vacuum, then weighing the sample in air
and water, calculating volume, drying the sample, determining dry weight then dividing dry weight
by volume to obtain bulk density.
Table 14-4 Density
Zone Density (ton/ft3)

Upper Tertiary Formation 0.0625
Non-Highly Silicified Rocks 0.0730
Highly Silicified Rocks (mostly breccia) 0.0787
Roberts Mountain Formation 0.0833

Statistics and Variography
EDA and variography were conducted by site personnel using JMP statistical software, Vulcan,
Excel, and in-house software. Variography was used to analyze the spatial continuity and relation
within each of the main domains to determine appropriate search strategies and estimation
parameters. Underground variogram properties are listed in Table 14-5 and shown in Figure 14-3
and variograms for the open pit are shown in Figure 14-4 and properties are listed in Table 14-6.
Table 14-5 Search Ellipsoid Parameters- East Deep Underground Zone

Sill Major Range Semi Range
Minor Range (ft)
(Gamma) (ft) (ft)
0.8 48 34 38
0.9 72 50 56
1 200 145 56
Figure 14-3 Underground Zone Variaograms
Table 14-6 Search Ellipsoid Parameters - Open Pit Zones

Sill Major Range Semi Range
Minor Range (ft)
(Gamma) (ft) (ft)
0.8 90 90 20/40
0.9 140 140 20/40
1 210 210 20/40

Figure 14-4 Open Pit Variograms
Multifactor data analysis was completed on each separate geological domain with the aim of
identifying any grade outliers, assess capping values, and validate data. General gold composite
statistics are listed in Table 14-7.
Table 14-7 Gold Composite Statistics

AuFA
Rock AuFA Std AuFA Max Coefficient of
Rock Description Mean
Code Dev (opt) (opt) Variation
(opt)
Tertiary Carlin Formation 2000 0.001 0.008 0.364 0.570
Undifferentiated Tertiary Volcanics 2500 0.001 0.003 0.079 0.522
Vinini Formation 3600 0.004 0.034 5.965 0.822
Rodeo Creek Formation 4000 0.030 0.114 5.338 0.376

AuFA
Rock AuFA Std AuFA Max Coefficient of
Rock Description Mean
Code Dev (opt) (opt) Variation
(opt)
Popovich Formation 4200 0.001 0.021 0.572 1.414
Roberts Mountain Formation 4400 0.015 0.057 1.750 0.379
Undifferentiated Breccia 8000 0.059 0.170 5.367 0.291
Grade Capping
Exploratory data analysis (EDA) was completed on each separate geological domain with the aim
of identifying any grade outliers and to choose an optimum top cut value for each of the orientation
domains. The analysis tools applied include histogram plot, log probability plot, mean and CV
curve to look for the stability point, top 7.5% metal impact, and visual checking. Table 14-8 shows
the capping/top cut statistics and value chosen for each mineralized rock type. Grades were capped
after compositing.
Table 14-8 Composite Grade Capping

AUFA AUFA Capping
Rock Sample Samples Capped
Rock Description (Max) (capped) value
Code Count capped %
(opt) max (opt) (opt)
Tertiary Carlin
2000 0.364 0.2 0.2 15879 4 0.0003
Formation
Undifferentiated
2500 0.079 0.079 0.2 2470 0 0
Tertiary Volcanics
Vinini Formation 3600 5.965 0.9 0.9 74249 8 0.0001
Rodeo Creek Formation 4000 5.338 2 2 95159 35 0.0004
Popovich Formation 4200 0.572 0.572 2 742 0 0
Roberts Mountain
4400 1.75 1.75 2 36502 0 0
Formation
Undifferentiated
8000 5.367 2 2 49043 61 0.0012
Breccia
Block Model
Estimation was completed using Inverse Distance 3 with Dynamic Anisotropy (DA). South Arturo
has utilized dynamic anisotropy to allow for a localized change in strike, dip and plunge of the
mineralization. Future model updates for other deposits will review whether the application of
dynamic anisotropy is warranted.

The block model origin was set at coordinate 0, 0, 0 with bearing 90°. The plunge and dip were
both set to zero. The model extends 12,000 feet to the north, 9,600 feet to the east, and is 3,300
feet thick. The parent block size is 40 ft x 40 ft x 20 ft with a sub block size of 10 ft x 10 ft x 10 ft
inside 0.003 opt low grade indicator cutoff areas. Underground mine depletion uses 2.5 ft x 2.5 ft
x 2.5 ft blocks which are applied after grade estimation is completed. The block model parameters
are listed in Table 14-9.
Table 14-9 Block Model Parameters

Minimum (ft)
Origin Start offset End offset Parent Block Minimum
Axis Low Grade
(ft) (ft) (ft) Size (ft) (ft) Mined
Indicator
North / Y 0 25200 37200 40 10 2.5
East / X 0 -7600 2000 40 10 2.5
RL / Z 0 3000 6300 20 10 2.5
Volume comparisons between the block model and the ore wireframes as well as comparison to
equipment selectivity and historic knowledge have shown, overall, that an appropriate block size
and/or sub-blocking procedure is in place.
The block model variables are listed in Table 14-10.
Table 14-10 Block Model Variables

Default
Variable Data Type Description
Value
aurat Float (Real * 4) -99 cyanide solubility ratio for gold
agfa Float (Real * 4) -99 estimated silver adjusted for backfill in subblock
aufa Float (Real * 4) -99 estimated gold adjusted for backfill in subblock
auaa Float (Real * 4) -99 estimated aucn adjusted for backfill in subblock
density_rock Float (Real * 4) -99 density new adjusted to mined
ncv Float (Real * 4) -99 block net carbonate value
prclc Float (Real * 4) -99 block pregrob pct
redox Float (Real * 4) -99 block estimated redox
s2 Float (Real * 4) -99 Sulfide sulphur
s2c Float (Real * 4) -99 block s2 to co3 ratio
silica Float (Real * 4) -99 block alteration silicification
btons Float (Real * 4) 0 block tons calculated from density_2 (old method
- pre MY2019)
btons_rock Float (Real * 4) 0 adjust block tons for mined and filled
aufa_orig Float (Real * 4) -99 idw estimated gold grade

Default
Variable Data Type Description
Value
rock Integer (Integer * 0 modified modeled strat unit and lith combined
4)
cat Integer (Integer * 0 block classification modified
4)
zone_ug Integer (Integer * 0 storm ug without pit = 1, elnino ug without pit = 2
4)
ug_block Integer (Integer * 0 inserted ug area
4)
tg_tons Double (Real * 8) -99 Tim's ton calc
tg_zone Integer (Integer * 0 Tim's slope zone
4)
tg_silica Integer (Integer * 0 silica from JH new shape
4)
tg_redox Integer (Integer * 0 oxide from JH's new shape
4)
mined Float (Real * 4) -99 Tim's mined variable (surface only)
pit_hl_oxm_nif Integer (Integer * 99 Tim's pit optimization
4)
th_zone Integer (Integer * 0 Tyler Blue Sky Zones
4)
Grade Estimation and Resource Classification
Grade variables in the block model were estimated using inverse distance cubed (ID3) and nearest
neighbor methods. Several metallurgical variables were also estimated. Dynamic anisotropy
allows for dynamic orientation of the search ellipse to account for localized changes in strike, dip
and plunge. Directional data defined by fault and lithology surfaces are contained in a Vulcan
database structure referenced by the estimation utility. Search ellipse parameters are listed in Table
14-11 and Table 14-12.
Table 14-11 Estimation Parameters for the Underground Zone

SAMPLE
Estimation Major Axis Semi-Major Minor Axis SAMPLE SAMPLE
PER HOLE
Pass (ft) Axis (ft) (ft) (MIN) (MAX)
(MAX)
PASS 2000 48 34 38 2 3 1
PASS 3000 72 50 56 2 3 1
PASS 4000 200 146 56 2 3 1
PASS 5000 300 219 56 1 3 1

Table 14-12 Estimation Parameters for the Open Pit Zones

SAMPLE
Estimation Major Axis Semi-Major Minor Axis SAMPLE SAMPLE
PER HOLE
Pass (ft) Axis (ft) (ft) (MIN) (MAX)
(MAX)
PASS 2000 90 90 20 2 3 1
PASS 3000 140 140 20 2 3 1
PASS 4000 210 210 20 2 3 1
PASS 5000 300 300 20 1 3 1
Resource classification criteria are listed in Table 14-13 and Table 14-14. Mineral Resources are
classified as Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Resources based on a combination of drilling
density, geological continuity, and the variogram range continuity. All blocks that have an
estimated gold grade are subsequently classified based on the confidence in the estimation.
Table 14-13 South Arturo Underground Classification Conditions

Estimation Sample distance
Pass (ft) No. of holes Category Classification
PASS 2000 0 - 35 >= 3 1 Measured
PASS 2000 0 - 35 >= 2 2 Indicated
PASS 2000 0 - 70 >= 3 2 Indicated
PASS 2000 3 Inferred
PASS 3000 0 - 35 >= 2 2 Indicated
PASS 3000 0 - 70 >= 2 3 Inferred
PASS 3000 0 - 140 >= 3 3 Inferred
PASS 3000 4 Inventory
PASS 4000 0 - 50 >= 2 3 Inferred
PASS 4000 0 -105 >= 2 4 Inferred
PASS 5000 0 -105 >= 2 4 Inventory
Table 14-14 South Arturo Open Pit Classification Conditions

Estimation Sample distance
Pass (ft) No. of holes Category Classification
PASS 2000 0 - 40 >= 3 1 Measured
PASS 2000 2 Indicated
PASS 3000 0 - 70 >= 3 2 Indicated
PASS 3000 3 Inferred
PASS 4000 0 - 105 >= 2 3 Inferred


PASS 5000 0 - 150 >= 2 4 Inventory
Mined Depletion and Sterilization
The block model was depleted against the current open pit surface as-built and underground mined
asbuilts as of the end of September 2019. The surface as-builts are based on 3-meter topography
contours created from bi-annual third-party manned aerial surveys and updated with point cloud
surfaces with sub 1-meter accuracy created monthly from aerial drones and photogrammetry. The
as-builts of underground excavations are three-dimensional solids created from point cloud data
gathered by total stations and cavity monitoring system (CMS) laser scanners. Mined area density
and gold value were updated to reflect material removed or filled.
Model Validation
Validation procedures are undertaken on the estimations. Block coding is visually inspected after
each estimation step. Statistics of assay, composite and block model values are compared.
Estimated grades are compared to nearest neighbor grades. Block grades are visually compared to
composite grades in plan and section. Estimated ounces are compared to mined reconciliation for
mined areas. Results of the new model are compared with the previous model.
The ID3 grades were compared to nearest neighbor grades modeled in Vulcan and in-house
software. The comparison is presented in Table 14-15. The ID3 estimate is lower than the nearest
neighbor.
Table 14-15 Estimate Comparison for Au ID3 versus Nearest Neighbor

Mean Mean Std Dev Std Dev Max Max CV CV
domain_dir (est_au) (aunn) (est_au) (aunn) (est_au) (aunn) (est_au) (aunn)
opt opt opt opt opt opt opt opt
12 0.045 0.043 0.061 0.072 2 2 0.135 0.168
13 0.257 0.247 0.226 0.259 2 2 0.088 0.105
21 0.012 0.012 0.019 0.031 1.497 2 0.154 0.248
22 0.042 0.041 0.051 0.062 1.872 2 0.122 0.154
23 0.242 0.233 0.192 0.221 1.995 2 0.079 0.095

The model can be visually checked by comparing estimated block grades to assay grades. Figure
14-5 shows a typical cross section where the block and drill color schemes match and the data
compare well.
Figure 14-5 Section View Displaying Block and Drill Grades at 33500N, looking North
Model Reconciliation
Mill to model reconciliation of the El Niño mine from inception to date shows a tonnage variance
of 2.4% and an ounce variance of -10.9% resulting in a -13.7% grade variance. Open pit mining
has historically outperformed the resource model. The Phase 2 pit ended with a positive ounce
variance of 10%. Early benches in the Phase 1 pit show an 118 % increase in tons, an 86% increase
in ounces and 15% decrease in grade. This variance is in heap leach material located at the upper
margins of the model. Additional drilling is planned this year to define the extents of the additional
mineralization (Table 14-16, Table 14-17, and Figure 14-6).
Table 14-16 Mine to Model Reconciliation

Mine Model Variance %
Tons (000’s) 1,740.1 796.9 943.1 118%
Phase 1
(2019)
Open
Pit
opt 0.013 0.015 (0.002) (15%)

oz. (000’s) 22.5 12.1 10.4 86%
Tons (000’s) 98.1 98.3 (0.2) -0.2%
(2019)
Niño
El
opt 0.246 0.290 (0.044) -17.9%

oz. (000’s) 26.4 28.5 (2.1) -7.9%

Mine Model Variance %

Tons (000’s) 53.1 53.2 (0.0) 0.0%
(2020)
Niño
El
opt 0.257 0.270 (0.013) -5.1%

oz. (000’s) 16.2 14.4 1.9 11.4%
Tons (000’s) 151.3 151.4 (0.2) -0.1%
(PTD)1
Niño
El
opt 0.282 0.283 -0.001 -0.4%

oz. (000’s) 42.6 42.8 (0.2) -0.6%
1. Through March 31, 2020
Table 14-17 Mill to Model Reconciliation

Mill Model Variance %
Tons (000’s)
Phase 1
(2019)
All mineralization has been stockpiled pending heap leach

Open
Pit
opt
construction.
oz. (000’s)
Tons (000’s) 109.8 98.3 11.5 10.5%
(2019)
Niño
opt 0.246 0.290 (0.044) (18.0%)

El
oz. (000’s) 27.0 28.5 (1.5) (5.6%)

Tons (000’s) 45.4 53.2 (7.8) (17.1%)
(2020)1
Niño
El
opt 0.257 0.270 (0.014) (5.3%)

oz. (000’s) 11.6 14.4 (2.7) (23.3%)
Tons (000’s) 155.2 151.4 3.8 2.4%
(PTD)1
Niño
opt 0.249 0.283 (0.034) (13.7%)

El
oz. (000’s) 38.6 42.8 (4.2) (10.9%)

1. Through March 31, 2020
Figure 14-6 El Niño Mill to Model Reconciliation
Source: Nevada Gold Mines

Pit Optimization
Pit optimization was carried out using the Lerch Grossman algorithm and Vulcan mine design
software. Input parameters used are the mining costs, processing costs, material routing and
variable metal recoveries, as discussed in the respective sections of this report. Pit shells in $100
increments from $600 - $1,500 were created. These are summarized in Figure 14-7 and Table
14-18. Open pit Mineral Resources are constrained by the $1,500 pit limit shown in Figure 14-8.
Figure 14-7 Pit Optimization Summary
Table 14-18 Resource Pit Shells Incremental Statistics

Resource Pit $600 $700 $800 $900 $1000 $1100 $1200 $1300 $1400 $1500 Total
Mt 32.5 5.8 4.1 12.9 4.2 2.6 4.1 11.7 1.1 2.5 81.5
Process Au opt 0.048 0.035 0.041 0.050 0.033 0.028 0.030 0.034 0.023 0.024 0.041
Total Au Moz 1.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.1 3.4
Au Moz. Prod. 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.6
Recovery 78.9% 73.3% 74.5% 77.5% 70.3% 68.6% 68.9% 69.2% 65.8% 64.0% 75.7%
Mt 8.4 1.0 1.1 3.9 1.0 0.4 0.7 1.9 0.2 0.3 19.2
Roaster Au opt 0.121 0.098 0.086 0.102 0.064 0.066 0.068 0.080 0.056 0.061 0.102
Au Moz 1.022 0.097 0.098 0.402 0.067 0.029 0.050 0.152 0.013 0.020 1.9
Mt 3.4 0.8 0.6 2.4 0.7 0.3 0.6 2.1 0.1 0.2 11.5

CIL Au opt 0.061 0.055 0.052 0.055 0.048 0.050 0.047 0.052 0.037 0.044 0.055
Mill Au Moz 0.210 0.046 0.033 0.134 0.034 0.016 0.030 0.110 0.003 0.011 0.6
ROM Mt 20.6 4.0 2.3 6.6 2.5 1.8 2.7 7.7 0.8 2.0 50.9
Heap Au opt 0.016 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.017 0.012 0.015 0.016
Leach Au Moz 0.319 0.060 0.038 0.108 0.039 0.028 0.041 0.130 0.009 0.029 0.8
Waste Mt 197 25 30 158 27 17 34 133 7 21 650.2
Strip Ratio 6.1 4.4 7.3 12.2 6.5 6.6 8.2 11.4 6.9 8.4 8.0
Cash Flow $M $1170 $125 $91 $324 $54 $23 $29 $69 $2 $2 $1890
Figure 14-8 South Arturo Resource Pit Limit
Underground Stope Optimizer
The stope optimizer creates an excavation design everywhere the minimum stope dimensions
exceed the cutoff grade. The El N iño dimension criteria is 15x15x5 feet and the resource cutoff
grade is 0.141 opt. Stope optimizer results are shown in Figure 14-9.

Figure 14-9 El Niño Stope Optimizer Results
Mineral Resources
Table 14-19 South Arturo Mineral Resources Attributable to i-80 (Exclusive of

Reserves)
Measured
Open Pit 5,117 4,642 0.035 1.21 0.220 7.56 180.6 1,128
Stockpile 783 710 0.016 0.55 0.013 0.44 12.4 10
Underground 18 16 0.518 17.77 0.400 13.72 9.1 7
Measured 5,917 5,368 0.034 1.17 0.193 6.63 200.2 1,145
Indicated
Open Pit 16,073 14,581 0.034 1.17 0.176 6.02 548.6 2,824
Stockpile - - - - - - - -
Underground 47 43 0.374 12.83 0.168 5.77 17.5 8


Indicated 16,120 14,624 0.035 1.20 0.176 6.02 566.1 2,832
Measured and Indicated
Open Pit 21,190 19,223 0.034 1.18 0.186 6.39 729.2 3,952
Stockpile 783 710 0.016 0.55 0.013 0.44 12.4 10
Underground 64 58 0.414 14.18 0.232 7.94 26.7 15
Measured and 22.037 19,992 0.035 1.20 0.180 6.19 768.3 3,977`
Indicated
Inferred
Open Pit 11,092 10,063 0.028 0.95 0.160 5.47 307.5 1,770
Stockpile - - - - - - - -
Underground 60 55 0.247 8.46 0.148 5.08 14.9 9
Inferred 11,153 10,117 0.029 0.99 0.159 5.47 322.4 1,779
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are exclusive of Mineral Reserves;
2. Mineral Recourses are stated as of December 1, 2020;
3. Mineral Resources are estimated using variable cutoff grades that are dependent upon recovery and
processing method;
4. Open Pit Mineral Resources are constrained within a pit shell generated using a gold price of $1,500 per
ounce and a silver price of $15 per ounce;
5. Underground Mineral Resources are constrained by Mine Stope Optimizer shapes generated using a gold
price of $1,500 per ounce and a silver price of $15 per ounce;
6. Modifying mill to model factors for tons and contained metal have not been applied to the open pit
Mineral Resources;
7. Underground Mineral Resources include modifying mill to model reconciliation f0actors of 1.025 and –
0.901 applied to tons and contained metal respectively;
8. A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of solid 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 eventual
economic extraction. The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological
characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological
evidence and knowledge, including sampling;
9. An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality
are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient
to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a
lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted
to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be
upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration; and,

i-80 Gold Corp Mineral Reserve Estimates Page 81
15. Mineral Reserve Estimates
Mineral Reserves attributable to i-80 are listed in Table 15-1. Reserves in stockpile are from the
Phase 1 and Phase II pits.
Table 15-1 Mineral Reserves Attributable to i-80 (40%)

(000’s) (000’s) (opt) g/t (opt) (g/t) (000’s) (000’s)
Proven
Open Pit 2,617 2,374 0.089 3.05 0.500 17.15 233 1,309
Stockpile 220 200 0.074 2.54 0.129 4.44 16 29
Underground 66 60 0.186 6.38 0.135 4.62 12 9
Proven 2,904 2,634 0.090 3.09 0.464 15.90 261.5 1,347
Probable
Open Pit 1,212 1,100 0.063 2.16 0.419 14.37 76.4 508
Stockpile - - - - - - - -
Underground 72 66 0.175 6.00 0.131 4.50 12.7 10
Probable 1,285 1,166 0.069 2.38 0.403 13.81 89.1 518
Proven and Probable
Open Pit 3,829 3,474 0.081 2.77 0.475 16.27 309.1 1,817
Stockpile 220 200 0.074 2.54 0.129 4.44 16.4 29
Underground 139 126 0.180 6.18 0.133 4.56 25.0 18
Proven and 4,189 3,800 0.084 2.87 0.445 15.23 350.5 1,864
Probable
Notes:
1. Mineral Reserves are stated as of December 1, 2020;
2. Mineral Reserves are estimated using variable cutoff grades that are dependent upon recovery and
processing method;
3. Mineral Reserves have been estimated at a gold price of $1,200 per troy ounce and a silver price of $15
per ounce;
4. The base case economic analysis is presented at a gold price of $1,400 per ounce and a silver price of
$15 per ounce;
5. Underground Mineral Reserves include modifying mill to model reconciliation factors of 1.14 and – 0.96
applied to tons and contained metal respectively;
6. Modifying factors for tons and contained metal have not been applied to open pit Mineral Reserves, and,
7. The reference point for mineral reserves is in situ.

Open Pit
Open pit Mineral Reserves are contained within the Phase 1 pit shown in Figure 15-1. The majority
of mineralization is on Joint Venture claims with only a minor amount extending to the north onto
NGM’s Rossi Property. Only mineralization amenable to roasting is included in Mineral Reserves.
Based on historical reconciliations at South Arturo and the diluting material incorporated in the
large 40x40x20-foot selective mining unit, no additional modifying factor for dilution is required.
Historical reconciliations for contained metal also indicate no additional modifying factor should
be applied to mining recovery. This experience is similar to that at adjacent mines on the Carlin
Trend.

i-80 Gold Corp Mineral Reserve Estimates Page 83
Figure 15-1 Mineral Reserve Pit
Underground Mineral Reserves
Excavations for underground Mineral Reserves are fully designed including necessary waste
development (Figure 15-2). The cash flow of all sequences of excavations was evaluated and
sequences with negative cash flow were removed from the reserves mine plan. Underground
reserves are refractory and are processed at the Goldstrike roaster as they are mined.

Figure 15-2 Isometric View of El Niño Underground Mine and Reserve Excavations

i-80 Gold Corp Mining Methods Page 85
16. Mining Methods
SAJV Past Production
Gold production to date under the joint venture totals 456,400 oz. The majority is from the Phase
2 (West Button Hill) pit, completed in 2017. Production from El Niño and the Phase 1 pit began
in 2019 (Table 16-1). Mining of the Phase 1 pit was suspended in December 2019 and will resume
when roasting capacity is available.
Table 16-1 South Arturo Joint Venture Gold Recovered (000's oz.)
Source 2016 2017 2018 2019 20201 Total
Phase 1 Pit - - -- 1.0 - 1.0
Phase 2 Pit 223.1 142.8 52.5 5.3 - 423.8
El Niño UG - - - 14.9 51.6 66.5
Total 223.1 142.8 52.5 21.2 51.6 491.2
1. Through December 1, 2020.
2. 100% Basis
Open Pit
The open pits are mined with a conventional shovel/truck operation. The mining equipment fleet
and support infrastructure is shared with Goldstrike. Shovel/truck requirements for the South
Arturo Phase 1 pit are listed in Table 16-2. Support equipment includes dozers, road graders, water
trucks, blast hole drills and explosives trucks.
Table 16-2 Equipment Requirements

Description Capacity Quantity
P&H 4100 Electric Shovel 80 yd3 1
Hitachi EX5500 Hydraulic Shovel 35 yd3 1
Komatsu 930 E Haul Trucks 302 ton 18-20
.
Mining benches are 20-feet high in mineralized areas and 40 feet in waste. Haulage ramps have a
maximum gradient of +/-10% and are 140-feet wide including the safety berm. Single lane ramps
are 80-feet wide and are planned for the very lowest benches. The minimum mining width is 350-
feet.
The mine operates 24 hours per day 7 days a week. Total material moved per day averages 135,000
tons with both shovels operating. The start of mining is delayed to 2025 to coincide material

delivery with roaster availability. The complete mining and processing schedule is shown in Table
16-3.
Table 16-3 Phase 1 Pit Mining and Processing Schedule

2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Proven and Probable Reserves Mined
Tons (000’s) 526 4,447 1,751 2,849 - - - -
Au (opt) 0.045 0.079 0.086 0.086 - - - -
Au (000’s oz) 23.9 352.2 151.4 245.3 - - - -
Waste Tons (000’s) 48,750 44,737 22,796 1,492 - - - -
Strip Ratio 92.64 10.06 13.02 0.52 - - - -
Roaster Processing
Tons (000’s) 12 557 204 333 439 451 619 -
Au opt 0.211 0.248 0.237 0.213 0.110 0.108 0.108 -
Au oz Recovered (000’s oz.) 2.2 125.2 43.7 63.5 40.1 40.3 55.3 -
2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Total
Proven and Probable Reserves Mined
Tons (000’s) - - - - - - - 9,574
Au (opt) - - - - - - - 0.081
Au (000’s oz) - - - - - - - 772.8
Waste Tons (000’s) - - - - - - - 117,775
Strip Ratio - - - - - - - 12.30
Roaster Processing
Tons (000’s) - - - 524 2,369 4,830 - 10,338
Au opt - - - 0.107 0.064 0.039 - 0.079
Au oz Recovered (000’s oz.) - - - 46.6 114.8 132.2 - 663.9
100% Basis.
Material Routing
Material is routed to the process that yields the highest net income within Leco Assay constraints.
Preg-robbing assays for heap leach material must be less than 15 and S2 less than 1.5%. CIL mill
material preg-robbing values cannot exceed 40. South Arturo material with preg-robbing values
exceeding 40 is considered refractory and sent to the appropriate roaster stockpile designation
providing the grade and recovery return a positive process net income (Table 16-4 and Figure
16-1). These criteria have been successfully used on the Carlin Trend for many years.
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑁𝐼 = (𝐴𝑢𝐹𝐴 × 𝐴𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 × (𝐴𝑢 𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 − 𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡)

+ (𝐴𝑔𝐹𝐴 × 𝐴𝑔 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 × 𝐴𝑔 𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 )) × (1 − 𝑅𝑜𝑦𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦) − 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡

Table 16-4 Arturo Material Routing

Route AuAA/ Preg
Facility Name Code AuFA AuAA AuFA TCM S2 Rob NCV
AOL 50 0.005 – 0.015
< 0.5%
0.015 – 0.035
Leach
AOLH 54
Heap
≥ 0.35 < 15
ASL 51 0.005 – 0.015
< 1.5%
ASLH 55 0.015 – 0.035
AOML 52 0.035 – 0.05
Mill
CIL
≥ 0.80 < 40
AOMH 53 0.05 – 0 .125
AR10 10 0.05 – 0.08 < 1.0%
AR11 11 0.08-0.15 < 1.0%
AR24 24 > 0.085 > 1.0%
AR25 25 > 0.15 < 1.0%
Roaster
ARSO- 17 0.027 – 0.085 >0

CO3
ARSO- 19 0.027 – 0.085 <0
PAG
AMW 49 0.022 – 0.027 < 1.0%
Inert 40 < 0.3% >1
Waste
PAG 41 > 0.3% <1

Inert 42 Carlin Formation < 0.3% >1

Figure 16-1 Arturo Ore Control Flow Chart

HL
NPIHL >=NPICIL
TRUE and TRUE TRUE A OLH
PREG CA LC < 15 NPIHL>=NPIROAST A ufa>=0.015 TRUE S2 < 0.5%
and (54)
NPI HL> 0
FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE A SLH

S2 < 0.5% A OL S2 < 1.5%
(55)
FALSE FALSE
S2 < 1.5%
TRUE
A SL
`
FALSE
CIL
TRUE NPICIL >=NPIROAST TRUE TRUE
PREG CA LC < 40 and A ufa>=0.05 A OMH
NPICIL >0
FALSE FALSE FALSE
Phase 1A
A OML
Roaster
TRUE TRUE TRUE
NPIRO A ST >0 TCM <1.0% A ufa >= 0.15 A R25
FALSE FALSE
FAL
TRUE
A ufa >= 0.08 A R11
FALSE
TRUE
A ufa >= 0.05 A R10
FALSE
TRUE
A ufa >= 0.085 A R24
FALSE
TRUE TRUE
ARSO
A ufa >= 0.027 NCV> 0% CO3 (17)
FALSE FALSE
ARSO
PAG (19)
TRUE
TCM <1.0% A MW
Waste
TRUE TRUE TRUE
Carlin
NCV > 1% S2 < 0.3% Rock = Carlin
Wast e
FALSE FALSE
FAL
PAG Waste
Wast e

Geotechnical
Hydrogeological conditions in the Dee Pit are fully drained by NGM’s Goldstrike dewatering
program. Eight vibrating wire piezometers were installed in the area of the South Arturo/Phase 3
pit to investigate the potential of perched water in the clay rich substrate of the Carlin formation.
The piezometers indicate perched heads of 4 to 174 feet, and two perched groundwater tables were
interpreted in the upper and lower clay ash units.
Piteau and Associates analyzed structural data collected from a nine-hole geotechnical drill
program in 2007 and mapping of the Dee Pit by Call and Nicholous in 1995. The drilling program
included oriented core, acoustic televiewer logging and optical televiewer logging. Laboratory
analyzed core samples for intact rock strength, friction angle and cohesion. Figure 16-2 shows the
pit wall slope sectors and the design recommendations for each are given in (Piteau 2010).

Figure 16-2 Pit Wall Sectors
(Piteau 2010)

Table 16-5 Recommended Inter-ramp and Overall Slope Designs

Bench Design Inter-ramp/Overall Slope Design
Catch Toe
Bench Bench Bench Max Inter-ramp Pushback
Design Domains Dip Height Width Face Inter-ramp Slope Slope Height Distance
Pit Sector (Lithology) Direction (feet) (feet) Angle Angle (feet) Ramp/Stepout Width (feet) (feet)
30.0 46 340
I Vinini 345 – 165 65
38.7 42 420
Rodeo
II 285 - 165 30.0 65 46 420
Creek/Bootstrap
North Deep Pit
32.0 45 240
III Vinini 165 - 195 65
Phase 1
38.6 42 420
60 105 n/a
Rodeo
IV. 165 – 195 29.7 60 43 420
Creek/Bootstrap
V Vinini 195 – 315 36.9 60 40 420
Rodeo
VI 195 – 285 36.9 60 40 420
Creek/Bootstrap
VII Carlin 285 – 060 48.8 60 38 240
VIII Breccia/Bootstrap 315 – 165 30.0 65 46 420
IX Breccia/Bootstrap 165 – 225 32.0 65 45 420
X Breccia/Bootstrap 225 285 60 36.9 60 40 420 105 n/a
073 – 253
XI Carlin 48.8 65 38 240
South Arturo Pit
Above 5560
Phase 338 Be
073 – 253 Slope orientation not recommended in Carlin and should be developed in bedrock
XII Carlin
Below 5560
253 - 282 34 (above 5020) 120 (above 5200) 105 (3 ramps/stepouts)
XIII Carlin 60 48.8 65 38 (below 5020) 180 (5080 – 5200) n/a
044 – 073 240 (Below 5080) 105 (4 – 5 ramps/stepouts)
37 (above 5020) 120 (above 5200)

175 ft. south
XIV Carlin 282 - 044 60 48.8 65 180 (5020 – 5200) 105 (3 – 4 ramps/stepouts)
38 (below 5020) 240 (below 5200)

Underground
Mine Development
16.3.1.1. Access Development
Access to the El Niño underground mine is through 2 portals located in the bottom of the phase 2
open pit. Dimensions of the major access development drifts are 16-feet wide x 17-feet high. Major
access drift gradients do not exceed +/-15%.
Figure 16-3 El Niño Plan View Showing Portals and Main Ramp
Mining Methods
Underhand drift and fill mining is the preferred mining method at El Niño. Attack ramps and
production drift dimensions are 15-feet x 15-feet. Attack ramps are driven from the main
development to the mineralization boundary. Attack ramps may have a gradient of +/-15%,
however, production drifts are preferred level. Once completed, a drift is backfilled with cemented
rock fill (CRF) allowing the adjacent drift to be excavated. This process of drifting and backfilling
is repeated until all economic mineralization has been mined in a 15-foot thick vertical horizon.
Sample drilling the ribs helps define the boundaries. Where the remining mineralization does not
justify the excavation of another drift the ribs may be slabbed to recover the mineralization before
backfilling.
To initiate the next drift and fill horizon either a new attack ramp is driven, or the sill of the
previous attack ramp is mined to reach the next drift and fill level elevation. Drifts under or
alongside fill require less ground support than drifts entirely surrounded by rock. Drifts under fill
can be widened to widths up to 20-feet.
Ground Support
The ground conditions at El Niño are typical of the northern Nevada extensional tectonic
environment. Joint spacing varies from a few inches to a foot or more. Primary ground support
includes 6-gauge 3-inch x 3-inch wire mesh, and 8-foot expandable rock bolts installed on a 4-foot
x 4-foot pattern. Intersections are supplemented with 12-foot heavy duty expandable bolts installed
on a 6-foot x 6-foot pattern. Development excavations have one or two coats of shotcrete applied
at 2-inches thick per coat. Shotcrete is applied to production excavations as needed.
Cemented Rock Fill
Cemented rock fill (CRF) is mixed on the surface and hauled underground in the same trucks used
to haul broken rock to the surface. A truck will dump its load of CRF in the drift being filled and
a load haul dump (LHD) or dozer fitted with a “Jammer” attachment will push the CRF tight to
the back and ribs eliminating all void spaces. Mining alongside fill can occur as early as seven
days following its placement and usually less than 28 days to mine underneath.
A backfill plant located on the surface near the portals produces a cement slurry at a specified
water cement ratio. Commercial cement admixtures can be added if desired. Once the slurry is
fully mixed it is sprayed into a pit containing the required volume of aggregate to achieve the
desired cement content of the final product. A rubber-tired loader then mixes the slurry and
aggregate to achieve a uniform product before loading a haul truck for transport underground.
Aggregate is crushed and screened at a plant near the Meikle Mine and trucked to El Niño. The
aggregate is combined with 8% Portland cement by weight to reach a target strength of 800 psi in
28 days. Standard 6-inch x 12-inch concrete test cylinders are prepared each shift at regular
intervals. Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests are completed after the required curing
and the results cross-referenced to the corresponding backfill location. If the results indicate
substandard fill strength additional precautions are implemented prior to mining underneath. To
date, the UCS test results are well above the target strength.
Ventilation and Secondary Egress
Just inside the eastern portal the main access drift splits in two. The right-hand drift contains the
main fans installed in a bulkhead. The left drift comprises an airlock. Both drifts merge just below
the airlock. The east portal acts as intake and primary escape, and the north as exhaust and
secondary escape.

Auxiliary fans intake air from the main access drift and blow through rigid or flexible ventilation
ducting to the face. Air from the face returns to the main access drift.
Dewatering
South Arturo is within the Goldstrike dewatering operations cone of depression. No dewatering is
performed on the South Arturo property.
Mine Plan
All mining at the El Niño Mine is conducted by a qualified underground mining contractor. The
mine operates 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The production schedule is shown in Table 16-6.
Table 16-6 El Niño Production Schedule

Calendar Year 2021 2022 2024 Total
Proven and Probable
Reserves
Mined (000's
229 119 - 347
Tons)
Gold Grade
0.186 0.169 - 0.180
(Ounce/Ton)
Contained
Gold (000's 42.5 20.1 - 62.5
Ounces)
Development
- - - -
Footage
Waster Mined
6 1 - 21
(000’s tons)
Roaster
Processed
229 136 - 364
(000's Tons)
Gold Grade
0.186 0.177 - 0.183
(Ounce/Ton)
Recovered
Gold (000's 38 21 - 59
Ounces)
(100% Basis)

i-80 Gold Corp Recovery Methods Page 95
17. Recovery Methods
Introduction
Ore from South Arturo could be processed via one of three possible routes: ROM heap leaching
(possible in the future if economics warrant), milling and CIL, or roasting and CIL. Metallurgical
testing and mineralogical study work were conducted on various samples taken from South Arturo
to support a Feasibility Study (Barrick, 2012). The most recent metallurgical testing is described
in Section 13 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing.
The majority of the precious metal production will come from ore that will be trucked to existing
NGM processing circuits located approximately eight miles (12.9) km away over mine haul roads.
Ores are classified based on gold grade, level of oxidation and refractory characteristics (e.g.
presence of preg-robbing components in ore, refractory sulfide components) which contribute to
recovery at processing facilities and is routed based on an integrated process production plan that
is devised for maximum economic returns. Generally, ores grading >0.080 oz./ton are routed to
the Goldstrike roaster.
ROM Heap Leaching
Run-of-Mine (ROM) material is segregated for future possible heap leach process if economics
justify its construction. ROM material will be placed on a permanent leach pad by haul trucks.
Cyanide solution will be applied by drip emitters. The pregnant solution will then be collected in
the pregnant solution pond and pumped to a carbon-in-column (CIC) circuit for gold recovery. The
cyanide concentration and pH of the barren solution will be adjusted prior to pumping to the heap
leach pads. Loaded carbon will be periodically removed and trucked to the Goldstrike central
carbon processing circuit for stripping and refining to recover the precious metals. Regenerated
carbon is transported to the CIC circuit at South Arturo for reuse. The possible process flowsheet
is shown in Figure 17-1. Heap Leach gold recovery is dependent on grade and cyanide solubility
ratio. Gold and silver recoveries are given by the following equations.
𝐴𝑢𝐴𝐴
𝐴𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 = (0.6805 × − 0.1207 × 𝑆𝑖 + 0.1734
𝐴𝑢𝐹𝐴
𝐴𝑔 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 = 0.07

Figure 17-1 Proposed Heap Leach Flowsheet
Oxide Milling
The Cortez Mill could process the oxide mill grade South Arturo ore on a campaign basis. The
process flowsheet is shown in Figure 17-2. The flowsheet includes crushing, semi-autogenous
grinding (SAG), ball milling, grind thickening, carbon-in-column (CIC) circuit for the grind
thickener overflow solution, CIL circuit, tailings countercurrent decantation (CCD) wash thickener
circuit, carbon stripping and reactivation circuits, and a refinery to produce gold doré. CIL mill
recovery is dependent on cyanide solubility and silica content. Gold and silver recoveries are given
by the following.
𝐴𝑢𝐴𝐴
𝐴𝑢 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 = 0.509 𝑥 − 0.027 𝑆𝑖 + 0.482
𝐴𝑢𝑓𝑎

𝐴𝑔𝐴𝐴
𝐴𝑔 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 = 0.080 𝑥 + 0.298
𝐴𝑔𝐹𝐴
Figure 17-2 NGM Cortez Flowsheet for Oxide Ore Processing
Roaster
The Goldstrike roaster processes 5.0 to 6.1 million tons per year and consists of primary and
secondary crushing, two parallel dry grinding circuits, two parallel dual stage fluidized bed
roasters, off-gas handling, mercury recovery systems, a slurry neutralization circuit, a carbon-in-
leach (CIL) circuit with carbon stripping, cyanide detoxification circuit, and electrowinning for
gold recovery.

Gold recovery estimates are based on both test work and operational history at both facilities with
curves utilized for both depending on operating strategy and ore characteristics. Roaster recovery
is given by the equation below.
𝐴𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 = (92.027536 − 37.35906𝑒 −(12.94386 𝑥 𝐴𝑢𝐹𝐴) )/100
𝐴𝑔 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 = 0.10
South Arturo ore has been processed through the Goldstrike roaster circuit co-mingled with other
ores to optimize recoveries and throughput. The simplified Goldstrike Roaster process flowsheet
is shown in Figure 17-3.
Figure 17-3 Goldstrike Roaster Simplified Flowsheet
Autoclave
The Goldstrike autoclave circuit processes 4 - 5 million tons per year and consists of primary
crushing, two parallel semi-autogenous grinding (SAG) Mill-Ball Mill grinding circuits with
pebble crushing, five parallel autoclaves capable of acid pressure oxidation (POX) and three of
which are capable of alkaline POX, two parallel calcium thiosulphate (CaTS) leaching circuits

with resin-in-leach (RIL), electrowinning for gold recovery, and a refinery producing doré bullion
from both autoclave and roaster circuits.
Gold recovery estimates are based on both test work and operational history at both facilities with
curves utilized for both depending on operating strategy and ore characteristics.
The current autoclave LOM has an average recovery of 50% when running solely alkaline ore (one
SAG-Ball Mill circuit and 3 autoclaves to process 4.0 million tons per year) and an average of
73% after converting the RIL circuit to CIL and running single refractory ore. The average LOM
gold recovery is 65%. The simplified Goldstrike POX flowsheet is shown in Figure 17-4.
Figure 17-4 Goldstrike Pressure Oxidation Simplified CaTS-RIL Flowsheet

18. Infrastructure
Dewatering
Dewatering facilities are located at the Goldstrike operation. South Arturo mineralization is above
the cone of depression created by dewatering at Goldstrike and Meikle.
Electrical Power
Electrical power is supplied to the site from the NVEnergy grid. Site facilities include a 120kv to
13.8 kv substation and 13.8 kv distribution lines.
Water
Water is supplied by truck from Goldstrike and transferred to a 1,000,000-gallon storage tank
above the mine. A new supply well will be required if a heap leach facility is constructed.
Underground Mine Facilities
The location of the El Niño surface facilities is shown in Figure 18-1. Portal facilities include:
• Contractors office;
• Mobile equipment maintenance shop;
• Backfill mixing plant;
• Electrical distribution;
• Lined mined material storage pads;
• Storm water collection ponds; and
• Supply storage Conex containers.
Facilities located near the Meikle mine include the backfill aggregate plant and change room for
the contractor.

i-80 Gold Corp Infrastructure Page 101
Figure 18-1 El Niño Facilities Layout
Surface Mine Facilities
Facilities in support of open pit mining located at South Arturo include:
• Fenced explosive storage with two 100-ton bins;

• Site communications systems;
• Security badge operated access gates;
• Mined mineralized material stockpile areas;
• Waste rock disposal facilities;
• Storm water control facilities; and
• Mine access and haulage roads.
Additional support and maintenance facilities for surface mining equipment are located at
Goldstrike.

19. Market Studies and Contracts
Precious Metal Markets
Gold and silver are fungible commodities with reputable smelters and refiners located throughout
the world. In 2019 gold prices began increasing after several years of stagnation. Gold prices
increased from $1,292 per ounce in January 2019 to $1,968 per ounce in August 2020. As of
December 2020, the 36-month trailing average gold price was $1,477 per ounce while the average
price during that same month was $1,857 per ounce. The silver price trend shows similar behavior
prior to 2019 with the price trend remaining flat through the early 2020. The 36-month trailing
average silver price is $17.47. Historical plots for both are shown in Figure 19-1.
Figure 19-1 Historical Monthly Average Gold and Silver Prices and 36 Month Trailing
Average

i-80 Gold Corp Market Studies and Contracts Page 103
Contracts
NGM has entered into a mine development and production agreement with a reputable
underground mining contractor. Practical Mining has reviewed this agreement and found it to meet
generally acceptable terms, conditions and unit costs for underground mining in northeast Nevada.
Through the normal course of business NGM will contract for services and supplies for the South
Arturo project. These activities include exploration drilling, assaying, reclamation and other
services. These are customary practices in the area.

20. Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community Impact
The Mine has developed an Environmental Management System (EMS) for operation.
ISO14001:2015 standards have been implemented for the Mine as part of the Goldstrike EMS.
The system was certified under the ISO14001:2015 standard in October 2017.
Environmental Studies and Issues
Potential impacts on water quality will be mitigated in accordance with an approved plan.
Mitigating measures include water quality monitoring, treatment of unsuitable water quality prior
to discharge, and re-assessment of forecasted water quality conditions every five years. To date,
the most significant environmental impact is anticipated to be the pit lake water quality after
mining ceases.
Social or Community Impacts
NGM’s partners have operated in the community since 1961 and are committed to involving local
organizations and community groups in discussions regarding the impact of operations on the
community. South Arturo will provide mining employment for the area and negative impacts to
the community are not foreseen
Permitting
NGM’s environmental group is responsible for permitting activities. Activities are coordinated
through the Elko Bureau of Land Management (BLM) office and Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection (NDEP) in Carson City. BLM issued its record of decision on the South
Arturo environmental impact study in 2014 and all required permits for the operation are in place.
Major permits are listed in Table 20-1.
Table 20-1 Arturo Project Significant Permits

Permit Name Number Agency Description
Plan of Operations is required for all mining and processing
NVN- activities and exploration exceeding 5 acres of surface
087946 disturbance on public lands managed by the BLM. The BLM
NVN- approves the plan and determines the required environmental
Plan of Operations BLM
070250 studies, usually an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an
NVN- Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) based on the
071216 requirements outlined in the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA).
DOI- A Record of Decision (ROD) in the United States is the formal
National
BLM-NV- decision on an EIS document that the BLM issues to disclose
Environmental
E020- BLM potential impacts to the environment with applicable mitigation
Policy Act -
2011- measures to prevent undue and unnecessary degradation to public
Environmental
0039-EIS lands.

i-80 Gold Corp Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Page 105
Community Impact
Assessment
Decision Record
NEV2013
NDEP, BMRR
Water Pollution 101,
- Regulation Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP)
Control Permits 0050005,
Branch
2004109
Water rights are issued by the Nevada Division of Water

Resources and State Engineer based on Nevada water law which
allocated rights based on appropriation and beneficial use within
the water basin. Prior appropriation (also known as "first in time,
80341/803
Water Rights NDWR first in right") allows for the orderly use of the state's water
42
resources by granting priority to parties with senior water rights.
This concept ensures the senior uses are protected, even as new
uses for water are allocated. Mining water rights are considered
temporary in nature.
The BMRR Reclamation Branch works in coordination with the

BLM for projects on public land to establish reclamation
guidelines and a reclamation cost estimate to support project
bonding. This permit and associated bond ensures land disturbed
by mining activities are reclaimed to safe and stable conditions to
Nevada NDEP, BMRR
#355, 118, promote safe and stable post-mining land use. A permit is
Reclamation - Reclamation
142 required for any disturbance over 5 acres. The reclamation cost
Permit Branch
estimate (RCE) is financially secured with a posted security. The
posted surety amount provides assurance that reclamation will be
pursuant to the approved reclamation plan in the event that the
State has to perform reclamation or is held until reclamation has
been successfully conducted.
An owner or operator of any proposed stationary source must

submit an application for and obtain an appropriate operating
permit before commencing construction or operation. Class II
Air Quality AP1041-
NDEP, BAPC Air Permit - Typically for facilities that emit less than 100 tons
Operation Permit 3155
per year for any one regulated pollutant and emit less than 25
tons per year of total Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP’s) and emit
less than 10 tons per year of any one HAP.
Storm water runoff from waste rock piles, haul roads, milling
NDEP Bureau
NVR3000 facilities and other mine areas that have not mixed with process
Storm Water of Water
00- MSW- solutions or other contaminant sources. Typical pollutants
Control Permit Pollution
39602 include suspended and dissolved solids and minerals eroded from
Control
exposed surfaces.

Closure and Reclamation Requirements
The reclamation plan has been approved by NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation
(BMRR). Requirements include the removal of all facilities, recontouring waste rock facilities,
removal of roads and revegetation of disturbed areas and monitoring of water quality and
revegetation growth.
The most current Reclamation Cost Estimate (RCE) was approved by BMRR in February 2020 in
the amount of $32,512,581. Surety for the full amount has been secured and NGM has filed with
it with the State and BLM.

i-80 Gold Corp Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Page 107
Community Impact
Figure 20-1 Permitted Disturbance
(Barrick 2019)

21. Capital and Operating Costs
Capital Costs
South Arturo is an ongoing satellite operation to NGM’s Goldstrike mine and process facilities.
The Goldstrike roaster is a 5M ton per year fully operational facility and will process all of the
current reserves from South Arturo. Open pit mining will draw from the existing Goldstrike
equipment fleet and will be supported by the Goldstrike facilities and infrastructure. Table 21-1
shows capital expenditures required for the reserve mine plans. Underground development unit
costs of $1,867 per foot are taken from the underground mining contract currently in force.
Definition drilling costs are from the 2020 SAJV budget and pre-stripping unit costs are based on
budgeted mining costs.
Table 21-1 Project Capital Costs ($M)

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total
Phase 1 Definition Drilling (0.2) - - - - - (0.2)
Phase 1 Pre-stripping - - - - (29.5) - (29.5)
Underground Development - - - - - - -
Total (0.2) - - - (29.5) - (29.7
1. Attributable to Premier;
Operating Costs
Open Pit
Operating costs were provided by NGM. NGM allocates all costs to each site monthly based on
tons. Cost allocations include all direct, indirect and sustaining capital costs. Not included in these
costs is the 1.5% joint venture management fee charged to Premier by NGM. PM has reviewed
these costs and found them to be reasonable.

i-80 Gold Corp Capital and Operating Costs Page 109
Table 21-2 Unit Operating Costs

Item Unit Cost Units
Phase 1 Pit
Mining $ 1.54 $/ ton
Rehabilitation $ 0.08 $/ton
Processing
Arturo ROM Heap Leach $ 2.34 $ /ton
Cortex Oxide Mill
Direct Processing $ 6.55 $ /ton
General and Administrative $ 2.19 $ /ton
Over the Road Trucking $ 13.80 $ /ton
Total $ 22.54 $ /ton
Goldstrike Roaster $ 20.92 $ /ton
Refining and Sales $ 0.77 $ /ounce Au
El Niño Underground Mine
The unit mining costs presented in Table 21-3 were provided by Premier and NGM and are based
on actual costs to date and the underground mining contract. Not included in these costs is the
1.5% joint venture management fee charged to Premier by NGM.
Table 21-3 El Niño Unit Mining Costs

Item Unit Cost Units
El Niño Underground
Direct Mining $ 108.61 $/ton
Roasting $ 19.66 $/ton
Mine G&A $ 12.79 $/ton
Electrical Power $ 7.32 $/ton
El Niño Total $ 148.37 $/ton
Cutoff Grade
Cutoff grades based on the costs presented above and metallurgical recovery equations are
presented for Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources in the Table 21-4 and Table 21-5
respectively.
Table 21-4 Reserve Cutoff Grades by Mine and Process

Open Pit Roaster Underground Roaster
Gold Price ($/oz) $1,200
Refining and Sales ($/oz) $0.77
Royalty 6% 6%
Recovery1 65.8% 88.0%

Open Pit Roaster Underground Roaster

Operating Costs ($/ton) $20.92 $148.37
Dilution Modifier - 12.1%
Sustaining Capital Included in Operating
Cutoff Grade (opt) 0.027 0.168
Roaster recovery is a function of head grade.
Table 21-5 Resource Cutoff Grades by Mine and Process

Open Pit
Open Pit ROM Heap Underground
Open Pit Roaster CIL Mill Leach Roaster
Gold Price ($/oz) $1,500
Refining and Sales ($/oz) $0.77
Royalty 6% 4% 4% 6%
Recovery1 64.1% 80% 60% 86.0%
Operating Costs ($/ton) $20.92 $22.54 2.34 $148.37
Dilution Modifier - - 12.1%
Sustaining Capital Included in Operating
Cutoff Grade (opt) 0.022 0.020 0.003 0.137
Roaster recovery is a function of head grade. CIL and Heap Leach Recovery is a function of cyanide soluble gold
and silica content.

i-80 Gold Corp Economic Analysis Page 111
22. Economic Analysis
Constant dollar cash flow analysis is presented in Table 22-1 through Table 22-3 and graphically
in Figure 22-1 and Figure 22-2. The reserve mine plans include only roaster processing at the
Goldstrike facility. The Franco royalty is applied at the appropriate rate. Federal income taxes of
21% apply to taxable income after appropriate deductions for depreciation and depletion. The gold
percentage depletion rate is 15%.
Figure 22-1 Gold Production and Unit Costs

Table 22-1 Income Statement Attributable to i-80’s 40% Interest

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Gold Sales $21 $12 $0 $0 $1 $68 $24 $34 $22 $22
Silver Sales $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Revenue $21 $12 $0 $0 $1 $70 $25 $36 $23 $23
Operating Cost ($14) ($8) $0 $0 ($1) ($35) ($17) ($5) ($4) ($4)
Refining and Sales ($0) ($0) $0 $0 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0)
Royalties ($1) ($1) $0 $0 ($0) ($4) ($1) ($2) ($1) ($1)
Nevada Net ($0) ($0) $0 $0 $0 ($1) ($0) ($1) ($1) ($1)
Proceeds
Total Cash Cost ($16) ($8) $0 $0 ($1) ($41) ($19) ($9) ($6) ($6)
Cash Cost per $1,044 $999 $0 $0 $1,228 $816 $1,067 $353 $356 $358
Ounce1 ($/oz)
EBITA $5 $3 $0 $0 $0 $29 $6 $27 $17 $17
Reclamation $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2) ($2) ($1) ($0) $0 $0
Accrual
Depreciation ($0) ($0) $0 $0 ($0) ($6) ($2) ($3) ($2) ($2)
Total Cost ($16) ($8) $0 $0 ($3) ($48) ($21) ($12) ($8) ($8)
Income Tax ($1) ($0) $0 $0 $0 ($3) ($0) ($4) ($2) ($2)
Net Income $5 $3 $0 $0 ($1) $20 $3 $20 $12 $13
AISC $1,092 $1042 $0 $0 $36,119 $899 $1,129 $512 $510 $512
2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Total
Gold Sales $31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26 $64 $74 $0 $405
Silver Sales $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1 $1 $0 $3
Total Revenue $30 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26 $65 $75 $0 $408
Operating Cost ($5) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($4) ($19) ($40) $0 ($156)
Refining and Sales ($0) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($0) ($0) ($0) $0 ($0)
Royalties ($2) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2) ($4) ($5) $0 ($25)
Nevada Net ($1) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1) ($2) ($1) $0 ($11)
Proceeds
Total Cash Cost ($8) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($7) ($25) ($46) $0 ($192)
Cash Cost per $358 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357 $539 $845 $0 $655
Ounce1 ($/oz)
EBITA $23 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19 $40 $29 $0 $215
Reclamation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($4)
Accrual
Depreciation ($2) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2) ($5) ($6) $0 ($30)
Total Cost ($11) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($9) ($31) ($52) $0 ($226)
Income Tax ($3) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($3) ($5) ($3) $0 ($27)
Net Income $17 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14 $29 $21 $0 $155
AISC $512 $0 $0 $0 $0 $511 $654 $1,007 $0 $863
1. Net of Byproduct Sales

2. AISC Exclusive of Corporate Costs
Table 22-2 Cash Flow Statement Attributable to i-80’s 40% Interest

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Net Income $5 $3 $0 $0 ($1) $20 $3 $20 $12 $13
Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6 $2 $3 $2 $2
Reclamation $0 $0 $0 $0 $2 $2 $1 $0 ($1) ($1)

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Working Capital ($2) $1 $1 $0 ($0) ($5) $3 $1 $0 ($0)
Oper. Cash Flow $3 $4 $1 $0 ($0) $22 $8 $24 $13 $13
Total Capital ($0) $0 $0 $0 ($29) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Net Cash Flow $3 $4 $1 $0 ($29) $22 $8 $24 $13 $13
Disc. CF @ 5.0% $2.7 $3.5 $0.8 $0.0 ($22.8) $15.2 $5.2 $15.5 $8.3 $7.7
Cumulative $2.7 $6.2 $7.0 $7.0 ($15.7 $0.8 $6.58 $22.6 $31.3 $39.3
Disc.CF @ 5.0%
2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Total
Net Income $17 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14 $29 $21 $0 $155
Depreciation $2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2 $5 $6 $0 $30
Reclamation ($1) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($0) $0 $0
Working Capital ($0) $1 $0 $0 $0 ($1) ($2) ($2) $5 $0
Oper. Cash Flow $18 $1 $0 $0 $0 $16 $32 $24 $5 $85
Total Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($29.7)
Net Cash Flow $18 $1 $0 $0 $0 $16 $32 $24 $5 $155
Disc. CF @ 5.0% $10.2 $0.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $6.9 $13.3 $9.1 $2.1 $83.3
Cumulative $50.0 $50.5 $50.5 $50.5 $50.5 $57.7 $71.7 $81.6 $83.7
Disc.CF @ 5.0%
Table 22-3 Financial Statistics Attributable to i-80

Gold price - base case (US$/oz) $1,400 $1,400 $1,400
Silver price - base case (US$/oz) $15 $15 $15
Mine life (years) 2.0 18 18
Mining Rate (tons/day) 600 135,000 N/A
Average grade (oz/t Au) 0.180 0.081 0.084
Average gold recovery (roaster %) 88.5% 80.8% 81.4%
Average annual gold production (koz) 12 15 16
Total recovered gold (koz) 23.5 265.6 289.1
Capital (M$) $- $29.7 $29.7
Cash cost (US$/oz)1 $1,028 $622 $655
All-in sustaining cost (US$/oz)1,3 $1,066 $845 $863
All in Costs (US$/oz)1,4 $1,066 $845 $863
Project after-tax NPV5% (M$) $7.2 $76.4 $83.7
Project after-tax IRR NA 54% NA
Payback Period NA 7.0 5.9
Profitability Index 5%2 NA 4.3 4.6
Notes
1. Net of byproduct sales;
2. Profitability index (PI), is the ratio of payoff to investment of a proposed project. It is a useful tool for
ranking projects because it allows you to quantify the amount of value created per unit of investment. A
profitability index of 1 indicates breakeven;
3. Excludes, construction capital, exploration, corporate G&A, interest on debt, and corporate taxes; and
4. Excludes exploration, corporate G&A, interest on debt, and corporate taxes; and,

plans, including future operations, future work programs, capital expenditures, discovery and production
of minerals, price of gold and currency exchange rates, timing of geological reports and corporate and
technical objectives. Forward-looking information is necessarily based upon a number of assumptions
that, while considered reasonable, are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other
factors which may cause the actual results and future events to differ materially from those expressed or
implied by such forward looking information, including the risks inherent to the mining industry, adverse
economic and market developments and the risks identified in Premier's annual information form under
the heading "Risk Factors". There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate,
as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information.
Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. All forward-
looking information contained in this Presentation is given as of the date hereof and is based upon the
opinions and estimates of management and information available to management as at the date hereof.
Premier disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information,
whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
The El Niño mine provides positive cash flow from 2021 – 2024. The only year of negative cash
flow occurs in 2025 when Phase 1 pit pre-stripping occurs. Positive cash flows resume in 2026
and continue until 2031, while high-grade mineralization is processed. The final period of positive
cash flow begins in 2036, when low-grade stockpiles are processed. (Figure 22-2).
Figure 22-2 Cash Flow Waterfall Chart

Sensitivity
The South Arturo project is a producing asset with low capital requirements, operating costs and
robust economics. The breakeven gold price at a 5% discount rate is $811/oz. The project remains
economic with 40% increases in capital or operating costs. The project’s sensitivity to variations
in gold prices, operating and capital costs is presented in Figure 22-3 through Figure 22-5.
Figure 22-3 Gold Price Sensitivity

Figure 22-4 Operating Cost Sensitivity
Figure 22-5 Capital Cost Sensitivity

i-80 Gold Corp Adjacent Properties Page 117
23. Adjacent Properties
South Arturo is located 4-½ miles north west from NGM’s Goldstrike operations. Goldstrike
includes roaster and autoclave processing facilities, open pit mine, underground mines and
complete support facilities. South Arturo is operated as a satellite mine to Goldstrike.
The Storm Mine on the adjacent Rossi property was accessed through portals in the Dee Pit.

24. Other Relevant Data and Information
The authors are not aware of any other relevant technical data or information pertaining to the
South Arturo Project necessary to make this Technical Report understandable and not misleading.

i-80 Gold Corp Interpretation and Conclusions Page 119
25. Interpretation and Conclusions
1. Multiple zones of mineralization are open along strike and down dip from previous
mineralization intercepts.
Processing and Metallurgical Testing
1. The Goldstrike Roaster will not be available for processing South Arturo open pit
refractory mineralization before 2026 and it will take approximately another 12 years to
complete processing of South Arturo refractory production.
2. Previous bottle roll and column leach tests from phase 1 composites achieved poor
recoveries. These composites were not representative of shallower oxide mineralization.
Mining and Infrastructure
1. The South Arturo open pit will be mined at 135,000 tons per day using facilities and
equipment from NGM’s Goldstrike operations.
2. Underground drift and fill mining is successfully extracting mineralization below the Phase
2 Pit.
Financials
1. Financial analysis of the South Arturo Project indicates i-80’s 40% interest has a net
present value at a 5% discount rate of US$83.7M.
2. The open pit and underground mines are independent, profitable, stand-alone operations.

26. Recommendations
1. Drill untested targets on trend with existing mineralization intercepts.
Metallurgical Testing
1. Expedite bottle roll and column leach tests from Phase 1 composites taken from shallower
oxide mineralization.
Mining
1. Develop mineral resources down dip from current El Niño underground workings.
2. If positive metallurgical testing results are achieved, accelerate construction of the leach
pad and mining of the Phase 1 pit targeting oxide mineralization.
Risks and Opportunities
The authors have identified the following risks and opportunities for the project.
Table 26-1 Project Risks

Risks Impact Mitigation Measure
Roaster availability may be Project delays Pursue heap leach and CIL
delayed mill opportunities
Pit slopes require flattening Increased waste stripping Reduce planned pit depth
Table 26-2 Opportunities

Opportunities Impact
Drill targets near current Mineral Resources Increased Mineral Resources
Improved heap leach and CIL recoveries in Earlier processing and revenue stream,
Phase 1 Pit reserve growth, increased revenue,
Underground resource conversion Reserve growth, mine expansion
Work Program
The authors recommend the following work program be adopted. The goals of the program are to:
1. Complete column and bottle roll tests on near surface Phase 1 mineralization;

i-80 Gold Corp Recommendations Page 121
2. If positive results are returned from step 1 modify the Phase 1 plan to achieve earlier cash
flow from heap leach and CIL material;
3. Reduce the risk of pit wall instability in phase 3;
4. Convert near mine resources to reserves; and
5. Extend mineralization along trend where it is not closed off by drilling or other geologic
constraints.
Table 26-3 South Arturo Work Program

Estimated
Description 2021 H1 2022 H2 2022 2023 Costs (US$M)
Metallurgical Testing $ 0.2 $- $- $- $ 0.2
Phase 3 Geotechnical Study $- $ 0.1 $ 0.1 $- $ 0.2
Phase 1 Drilling $ 0.7 $ 0.4 $ 0.4 $ 0.8 $ 2.3
Phase 3 Drilling $- $- $ 0.5 $ 1.0 $ 1.5
El Nino Drilling $ 1.0 $ 0.5 $ 0.6 $ 1.1 $ 3.2
Total $ 1.9 $ 1.0 $ 1.6 $ 2.9 $ 7.4
i-80 40% attributable share

27. References
Barrick Goldstrike Mines Inc., Amendment to the Arturo Mine Plan of Operations and Reclamation Plan: 2019 Waste
Rock Disposal Facility Modification and Reconciliation, March 2019
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Arturo Mine Project, December
2012.
Bureau of Land Management Arturo Mine Project Final Environmental Impact Statement, 2014.
Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and
Mineral Reserves, adopted by the CIM Council on May 10, 2014.
Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral
Reserves Best Practice Guidelines, adopted by the CIM Council on November 29, 2019
Erwin Thomson Faillers, Mineral Title Status Report, March 4, 2020.
Goldcorp Inc, Goldcorp USA Inc. and Premier Gold Mines Ltd, Purchase and Sale Agreement, June 2, 2015.
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation, Reclamation Permit
#0355, Feb. 18, 2020.
Piteau Associates USA, Recommended Feasibility Open Pit Slope Designs for the Arturo Project, March 8, 2010
RPA Inc, Technical Report on the South Arturo Mine, Elko County, State of Nevada, U.S.A., March 26, 2018.
Wakefield, Todd, Goldstrike Database Audit Summary, December 10, 2018

i-80 Gold Corp Certification of Authors Page 123
Certification of Authors

Mineral Resource Professionals
CERTIFICATE of QUALIFIED PERSON
Re: Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Mine, Elko County, NV, dated the 25th day of
January, 2021, with an effective date of December 1, 2020 (the “Technical Report”):
I, Dagny Odell, P.E., do hereby certify that:
As of January 25, 2021, I am a consulting mining engineer at:

Elko, Nevada 89801
775-345-3718
1) I am a Registered Professional Mining Engineer in the State of Nevada (# 13708), and a Registered
Member (#2402150) of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration (SME).
2) I graduated from The Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado with a Bachelor of Science
Degree in Mining Engineering in 1985. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1985.
3) Since 1985, I have held the positions of mine engineer, chief engineer, mine superintendent,
technical services manager and mine manager at underground and surface metal and coal mines in
the western United States. The past 12 years, I have worked as a self-employed mining consultant
with clients located in North America, Asia and Africa. My responsibilities have included the
preparation of detailed mine plans, geotechnical engineering, reserve and resource estimation,
preparation of capital and operating budgets and the economic evaluation of mineral deposits.
4) I have read the definition of “qualified person” set out in National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”)
and certify that by reason of my experience and qualifications and good standing with proper
designation within a recognized professional organization fully meet the criteria as a Qualified
Person as defined under NI 43-101.
5) I am a contract consulting engineer for Premier Gold Mines Ltd. and last inspected the Arturo
Project on June 25, 2020.
6) I am responsible for preparation of Sections 1 – 6, 11, 14-16, & 18-26 of this Technical Report.
7) I am independent of the Issuer within the meaning of Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.
8) I was paid a daily rate for consulting services performed in evaluation of the Arturo Project for
Premier Gold Mines Ltd. and do not have any other interests relating to the project. I do not have
any interest in adjoining properties in the Cove area.
9) I have read NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the sections of the Technical Report for which I
am responsible have been prepared in accordance with that instrument and form.
495 Idaho Street, Suite 205 Elko, Nevada 89801
(775) 345-3718 Fax (775) 778-9722
10) I consent to the filing of the Technical Report with any stock exchange and other regulatory
authority and any publication by them for regulatory purposes, including electronic publication in
the public company files on their websites accessible by the public, of the Technical Report.
11) As at the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information and
belief, the Technical Report contains all the scientific and technical information that is required to
be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.
Dated this 25th day of January, 2021,
“Signed” Dagny Odell

___________________________
Dagny Odell, P.E.
dagny@practicalmining.com

(775) 345-3718 Fax (775) 778-9722
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR
Re: Preliminary Feasibility Study for the South Arturo Mine, Elko County, NV, dated the 25th day of
January, 2021, with an effective date of December 1, 2020 (the “Technical Report”).
I, Laura M. Symmes, SME, do hereby certify that:
As of January 25, 2021, I am a geologist at:

Practical Mining, LLC
Elko, NV 89801
1) I graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in Geology from Utah State University in 2003.
2) I am a registered member of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (SME) #4196936.
3) I have worked as a geologist for a total of 17 years since my 2003 graduation from university. My
experience has been focused on exploration and production of gold deposits, including planning
and supervision of drill projects, generating data from drilled materials and making geologic
interpretations, data organization, geologic mapping, building digital models of geologic features
and mineral resources, and grade control of deposits in production.
4) I have read the definition of “qualified person” set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101)
and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined
in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a “qualified
person” for the Purposes on NI 43-101.
5) I am a contract consulting geologist for Premier Gold Mines Limited.
6) I am responsible for sections 7 - 10, 12 and 14 of this Technical Report. I last visited the
Arturo Project on June 25, 2020.
7) I am independent of Premier Gold Mines Ltd.. within the meaning of Section 1.5 of National
Instrument 43-101.
8) I was paid a daily rate for consulting services performed in evaluation of the Cove Project and do
not have any other interests relating to the project. I do not have any interest in adjoining
properties in the Cove area.
9) I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the Technical Report has been
prepared in compliance with that instrument and form.

(775) 345-3718 Fax (775) 778-9722
10) I consent to the filing of the Technical Report with any stock exchange and other regulatory
authority and any publication by them for regulatory purposes, including electronic publication in
the public company files on their websites accessible by the public, of the Technical Report.
11) As of the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information and
belief, the Technical Report contains all the scientific and technical information that is required to
be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.
Dated this 25th day of January, 2021,
“Signed” Laura M. Symmes

________________________________
Laura M. Symmes, SME SME No. 4196936

Elko, NV 89801
775-345-3718
Fax: (501) 638-9162
laurasymmes@practicalmining.com

(775) 345-3718 Fax (775) 778-9722
TR Raponi Consulting Ltd.
I, Tommaso Robero Raponi, P. Eng., do hereby certify that:
1. This certificate applies to the Technical Report entitled “Preliminary Feasibility Study for the
South Arturo Mine, Elko County, NV, dated the 25th day of January, 2021, with an effective
date of December 1, 2020 (the “Technical Report”):
2. I am currently employed as President of TR Raponi Consulting Ltd. (Ontario Certificate of

Authorization No. 100505108) with an office at 15-223 Rebecca Street, Oakville, Ontario,
L6K 3Y2;
3. I am a graduate of the University of Toronto with a BASc. in Geological Engineering, 1984. I

have practiced my profession continuously since 1984;
4. I am registered as a Professional Engineer in the Province of Ontario (Reg. No. 90225970)

and the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (Reg. No. 23536). I
am a Professional Member (reg. No. 02641200) of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy and
Exploration (SME). I have worked as an independent consultant since 2016.
5. My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is in the development, design,
commissioning and operation of mineral processing plants in Canada, United States, Mexico,
Brazil, Venezuela, Surinam, Chile, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. I have
worked primarily with gold projects and operations.
6. I have read the definition of "qualified person" set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-
101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as
defined in NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a
"qualified person" for the purposes of NI 43-101. I am independent of the Issuer and related
companies applying all of the tests in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101;
7. I have not conducted a site visit for this project;
8. I am responsible for Sections 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, 13, 17 and 25 - 26 of this Technical Report;
9. I am independent of the Issuer and related companies applying all of the tests in Section 1.5
of the NI 43-101;
10. I have had no prior involvement with the property that is the subject of this Technical Report;
11. As of the effective date of this Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information and
belief, this Technical Report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to
be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading; and
12. I have read NI 43-101, and the Technical Report has been prepared in accordance with NI 43-
101 and Form 43-101F1.
TR Raponi Consulting Ltd.
Effective Date: December 1, 2020
Signing Date: 25th day of January, 2021,
“Signed” Tommaso Roberto Raponi
Tommaso Roberto Raponi, P. Eng.

South Arturo Pfs 25jan2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

South Arturo Pfs 25jan2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preliminary Feasibility Study

for the South Arturo Mine,

This page intentionally left blank.

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Date and Signature Page

Dated this January 25, 2021

Signed “Dagny Odell” No. 13708, Nevada

Signed “Laura Symmes” SME No. 4196936

Signed “Robert Raponi”

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Date and Signature Page ................................................................................................................ iii

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

5. Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography ........................ 30

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

CIL Bottle Roll Tests ..................................................................................................... 58

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Mine Development .............................................................................................. 92

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

El Niño Underground Mine............................................................................... 109

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Table 16-5 Recommended Inter-ramp and Overall Slope Designs .............................................. 91

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Figure 1-1 Project Overview ......................................................................................................... 15

Figure 22-2 Cash Flow Waterfall Chart...................................................................................... 114

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

A Ampere kCFM thousand cubic feet per minute

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Figure 1-1 Project Overview

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Geology and Mineral Resource

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

8. A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Metallurgical Testing and Processing

Mining, Infrastructure, and Project Schedule

Table 1-3 Financial Statistics Attributable to i-80

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Parameter El Niño UG Phase 1 Pit Combined

Resource Delineation and Exploration

Processing and Metallurgical Testing

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Mining and Infrastructure

Resource Delineation and Exploration

1. Drill untested targets on trend with existing mineralization intercepts.

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Terms of Reference and Purpose of this Technical Report

Qualification of the Authors

Table 2-1 Qualified Professionals

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Company Most Recent

Table 2-2 Units of Measure

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

3. Reliance on Other Experts

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

4. Property Description and Location

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Figure 4-1 Location Map

Status of Mineral Titles

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Table 4-1 South Arturo JV Unpatented Mining Claims

Practical Mining LLC January 25, 2021

Figure 4-2 South Arturo Joint Venture Property